Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting either of the amendments from the Greens. I'll go into further detail if required, but the basis for this is that the legislation must match the legislation in the states and the territories for it to be properly founded. That makes the referral of powers valid and ensures that the legislation is constitutional. The legislation already passed in Queensland earlier this year. So, as a matter of process, that means that the government is unable to support that amendment. However, on the substance, we believe that Australians should have housing choices. If Australians want to live next to a train station close to the city or on a farm in the bush, that's their choice. It's not a choice for government.

In relation to the second amendment, we have the same objection—that is, the legislation has already been passed in Queensland, and the government wants to ensure that the referral of powers is valid and constitutional.

However, on the substance of the proposition that sits behind the amendment, it is a matter for ministerial program directions, not the legislation before the Senate right now. The program directions make it very clear that, if a participant earns above the income caps and cannot pay the government's share, they won't be required to. But, if someone can—for example, if someone earns a million dollars—we should expect them to start to pay back the taxpayer and expect this money to be recycled through the scheme to support other low- and middle-income Australians. Section 36(11) of the program directions notes that 'Housing Australia may not seek payment in certain circumstances' after considering 'the participant's personal circumstance and financial capacity'.