Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

What a dysfunctional government we have on display here again today! Here we are, ticking down to four in the afternoon, almost a full hour after question time finished, and we have a government that cannot keep control of the legislative agenda. They can't run this chamber; how can they possibly run the country? Well, they've proven over the last two years that they cannot run the country.

My goodness, gracious me! We have seen in here—and in the media—again today how the Greens tail is wagging this dog of a government. I'll remind the members of the government that the Greens have already said they don't want to have any agreement with us going into government, and we accept that. We wouldn't do a deal with the Greens to get government. But what did we hear from the current government when they were asked about that in question time today? We heard mealy-mouthed words. We heard obfuscation. We heard an unwillingness to decisively commit to things like negative gearing, because they know, in the back of their minds, they secretly want to do a deal with the Greens to retain power in this country. And they will do that deal. Everybody knows it; all of Australia knows that Labor will do that deal with the Greens to retain power, because that is all that matters to them, no matter how far it drags them to the Left. No matter how much the tail wags the dog, they will do that deal, and it will be to the enormous detriment of Australia, particularly to the detriment of my home state of Western Australia.

We've seen it. We've seen it, Senator O'Sullivan, in the last few days. We've had Minister Plibersek say she's talking to the Greens about the Nature Positive Plan and putting forward climate triggers. Then the Prime Minister said: 'No, no, no. We couldn't possibly talk to the Greens about something like that.' And then Minister Plibersek goes back out and says, 'No, we are talking to the Greens about exactly that.' The chaos and dysfunction between the Labor Party and the Greens and between ministers within the Labor government have been starkly on display. And who's going to suffer? It will be all of Australia but particularly my home state of Western Australia.

We saw it again in the disastrous decision on the McPhillamys mine by Minister Plibersek, a decision driven by ideology, not by good sense. She has refused to provide a statement of reasons. She has refused to justify her decision to shut down a project worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the local community in royalties, jobs and taxation revenue. What do we get from the government? Silence and an unwillingness to justify their ideologically driven decisions. That is why we know Labor will get into bed with the Greens, if they can, after the next election. We know and every Australian knows that Labor will get into bed with the Greens to retain government, no matter what they ask. The tail will keep wagging the dog. For this dog of a Labor government, the tail will keep wagging the dog if it is allowed to.

There's one way the Australian people can prevent that—one way the Australian people can prevent the Greens tail wagging the Labor dog—and that is to ensure that a Peter Dutton led coalition government is elected to run Australia again. We need to see that. We see the fear of Peter Dutton on display on the other side every question time. Getting personal, the focus on the man not the policy—that's all you know. We know the fear campaigns that are coming from your side. We know how Labor operates. And the Australian people know how Labor operates. They know you'll get into bed with the Greens. They know you'll attack Peter Dutton at every opportunity. They know you'll go low. They know you'll be destructive and that you'll run the negative fear campaigns. But the Australian people have woken up to what a truly rotten government you are.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, Senator Brockman talks about 'getting into bed with the Greens'. These are not words I would have chosen in taking note of answers from question time today, but those were the words chosen by Senator Brockman. So, exactly who has been getting into bed with the Greens today and all of this week? It is the coalition who has been uniting with the Greens today and uniting with the Greens all week. The coalition and the Greens have been on a unity ticket in the chamber today and in the parliament this week, and what this unity ticket is about really matters. It is about blocking access to affordable homes for Australians. That is what the coalition and the Greens have been uniting about in the chamber today and in the chamber this week. They are on a unity ticket to block access to affordable homes for Australians who need access to those homes.

On this side of the chamber, our government want Australians to have a place to call home that they can afford. That's what we're talking about this week—the $32 billion pipeline that we have created of private and social affordable places for Australians to call home. On our side, we know that supplying more homes is what is going to get Australians into more homes and help them find that affordable home. But, yet again, the coalition and the Greens are uniting to block affordable homes for Australians, just as last year they delayed the Housing Australia Future Fund for six months. Can you believe that the coalition and the Greens wanted to block the construction of 30,000 social and affordable homes for Australians, including women and children fleeing domestic violence?

This week we've been able to announce that we are investing, through the Housing Australia Future Fund, in the construction of 13,700 social and affordable homes. Imagine if this chamber had not united to block that bill for six months. Those homes would be on the ground faster for the people who need them, for the women and children who are fleeing domestic violence and need those homes, for the low-income Australians who need those homes. And now we're seeing that the old team is getting back together; the coalition and the Greens are getting back together and voting against access for 40,000 Australians who want to buy a home through the Help to Buy scheme. That is the legislation that is in front of the parliament. That is what we've been talking about today.

This is a program to give people a leg-up to buy their first home with a two per cent deposit and smaller mortgage repayments. Who could hate that? Those opposite, the coalition, are teaming up with their new besties, the Greens, to vote against 40,000 actual people who could benefit from this scheme. The hint is in the name: help to buy. Why are you joining with the Greens to vote against the opportunity for 40,000 Australians to have Help to Buy? Only you can explain that. We expect you to vote against build-to-rent as well.

This is a scheme to build more apartments for Australians to live in, to boost supply, because, again, on this side of the chamber we know that the answer to housing affordability is to build more homes. On that side, you do not have a single policy to build a single home in this country—not a single policy to build a single home in this country. All you have is a policy, courtesy of our colleague Senator Bragg, for people to raid their own super in order to push house prices up, making housing even less affordable, and then to retire on the age pension. What a vision you have for Australians!

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of answers provided in question time today. To paraphrase William Shakespeare, methinks the government doth protest too much. I'm not sure that's exactly my best iambic pentameter, but it is relevant to this debate this afternoon all the same, because those in this government are so tetchy whenever anyone starts talking about their cozy relationship with the Greens. They will come into this place and suggest that there's nothing to see here and that there's no way that they would ever entertain a power-sharing arrangement with the Greens in the minority parliament that it looks like we could be heading for. But Australians know better. Australians remember the dark days of Labor-Greens minority government between 2010 and 2013.

Indeed, people in my home state of Tasmania know exactly what our state was like the last time at a state level Labor was in a governing relationship with the Greens. Unemployment goes through the roof when Labor governs with the Greens. That's no surprise, because in that situation the Greens use their leverage with their Labor counterparts to shut down industries that their inner-city voters want to see shut down, such as the forestry industry and the aquaculture industry—job-creating industries that contribute so much to our regional economies, particularly in my home state of Tasmania. The Greens want to see those industries shut down, and when they are in a power-sharing relationship with Labor, when they are in government with Labor, they are the first industries on the chopping block. The first element of the deal that Labor will strike with the Greens is to shut down these industries.

It is a crying shame, and I don't ever want to see our country go back to a situation where this is occurring left, right and centre. I don't want to see a return to the bad old days of 2010, 2011 and 2012, at both the state and federal level—in Tasmania, at least—with Labor and the Greens working together to decimate our economy and destroy regional jobs. I don't think that there is any question in my mind that they didn't have the best interests of Australians at heart.

I note that earlier today, during two-minute statements, almost all of the government contributions were insisting that there was nothing to see here and that there is no relationship with the Greens. Members of the government will come in here and insist on this time and time again, but I guarantee you that, after the next election, if there is minority government then it will be Labor doing a deal with the Greens to be able to continue to govern.

It's frankly time that the government was more upfront with Australians about those intentions. As my colleague Senator Brockman said, we heard ministers trying not to address the question of what is going to happen after the next election in terms of the relationship between Labor and the Greens. It's time for the government to be upfront with Australians, but, realistically, can we expect them to be upfront with Australians? Can we expect them to not break a promise that they might make during an election campaign or indeed during this term of government?

The reason I say that is that we saw during the last election many promises made by this government that have not been kept. They promised to reduce power bills by $275. They promised it numerous times during the election campaign and failed to mention it now because they know that they broke that promise to Australians. They promised that families would be better off. They promised that mortgages would be cheaper. But we know that interest rates have gone up on average every second month of this term of the government. There is no doubt that this government made many promises to Australians at the last election that they have since broken. Even if they promise to not get into bed with the Greens if we're in a minority parliament situation after the next election, I frankly don't think that they can be trusted to stick to that promise either.

Jana Stewart (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is really quite laughable that, after we've just been in a division where the opposition have teamed up with the Greens and One Nation, they then come in here and accuse us of doing dirty deals with the Greens, when they have just blocked a vote coming to this chamber so their absolute hypocrisy is not on display. They have stopped a vote coming to this chamber so they don't have to reveal their dirty deal that they've done with the Greens to block our Help to Buy scheme. They are absolutely getting into bed with the Greens on this issue—absolutely. For them to come in here accusing us of that, they must not own a mirror amongst them. They must not own a mirror amongst them. It is an absolute joke—an absolute joke.

The Greens have shown absolute hypocrisy during question time. We've been offered on this side of the chamber—we've been invited to the table with the Greens—to negotiate on our Help to Buy scheme. I'm just curious whether this is the same table where the member for Griffith is supporting the Queensland Greens to campaign against almost 3,000 social or affordable inner-city homes as part of the Woolloongabba priority development area. Is this the same table where the Greens member for Ryan is campaigning against a plan to subdivide a chicken farm—a chicken farm!—to build 91 new homes, on the basis that 'it would diminish the natural character of the site'? The Greens have supported more chickens into homes than they have Australians, on that basis. I don't know that I want to be at that table. I don't know that I want to be at that table, actually. I'm pretty confident that I want to support 40,000 low- and middle-income earners into social and affordable housing, because that's what the Help to Buy Bill does. You can support more chickens into homes; we'll support more Australians into homes. I don't know that I want to be at that table with the Greens, thank you very much.

I'm really keen to get on the record what it is that the broader community is saying about Labor's Help to Buy scheme. It feels like we've got lots of experts in this chamber who have views about it. But what are people outside this chamber saying? The Grattan institute are saying:

The government's Help to Buy Bill will establish a national shared-equity scheme that would help level the playing field when it comes to accessing home ownership.

'Level the playing field'—imagine that. The privilege of owning your own home, like many people in this place do, is being blocked by the very same people. You are the types of people in this place that have reached that goal of owning your own home and are now pulling up the ladder behind you. Absolute shame on you. Absolute shame on you, because that's what you are doing. You're ripping that dream out of Australians' hands—particularly for young people. That is what you are doing by blocking this bill.

The Master Builders Association says:

Help to Buy is a sensible policy approach that looks at lifting housing affordability pressures while not negatively impacting the investment market.

The Housing Industry Association said:

HIA has indicated our support from the outset, on the announcement of the scheme. Our support centres around this scheme being one of a range of measures that could assist first-home buyers and other people who may be struggling to secure a deposit on a home to get into homeownership.

It is incredible that the opposition have teamed up with the Greens and One Nation to block this. That's exactly what they've done. For you and for your children after you, they're blocking that for your families. It is an absolute disgrace that we see that on display here.

The Greens are more interested in building their own social media profile than they are on building homes. That's the hypocrisy that we have seen on display in this place. And, with the opposition and the Greens teaming up, they are giving the middle finger to every single person who wants to achieve the dream of homeownership in this country. Shame on you!

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of the answers given to questions by coalition senators. This being a Senate-only week, we do have slightly more people in the gallery than we normally do over here in the Senate. It is also broadcasting day. For those up in the gallery: when the lights are on, that means we're being broadcast around the nation. You might be wondering what this debate is about. We are taking note of the answers that were given in question time. There are three speeches apiece: three on that side and three on this side. We take turns in examining the answers that were given.

What we're seeing here is a display by those opposite of obfuscation. They are coming in here and trying to deflect the reality of what is actually going on on that side of the chamber. Consider the absurdity of the suggestion that we are in bed with the Greens! The only party that has proven time and time and time again over decades to be in lock step with the Greens is, of course, the Australian Labor Party, and no-one is closer to the Australian Greens than the Prime Minister of this country. The Prime Minister has in recent times had an opportunity, when he's been asked about it by journalists, to rule out a power-sharing deal with the Greens if they were to be in minority government, which is what, at this point in time, the polls are saying will be the case. The Prime Minister will not rule it out. The only leader of a major party who has ever ruled that out absolutely—without any shadow of a doubt, without any weasel words and without any shrinking away from the substance of the question—is, of course, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Dutton. He's the only one who has ruled out a deal with the Greens.

Senator Birmingham asked a question of Senator Wong about what plans the government has in relation to negative gearing. We know that the Australian Greens have in their manifesto and in their election commitments—as they have done over many elections—said, in the words of Mr Bandt, 'We want to wind back those tax breaks for wealthy property investors.' It's just one of the crazy conditions that the Leader of the Greens has put on a power-sharing deal. If they're in a position where the Prime Minister wants to hold on to the power of leadership and keep the keys to the Lodge, he's going to have to do a deal with the Greens, and we know that they want to wind back negative gearing. So the question was put by Senator Birmingham to Senator Wong, representing the Prime Minister in this place: 'Will you rule it out?' Of course, we didn't get that. What we got was weasel words.

You know that a politician is not able to fully tell you exactly what's going on when they say words like, 'It's not in our plans,' or 'We have no current plans for that.' The only way that you can actually definitively rule it out is to say, 'We will never do that,' or 'We won't do that.' But, no, they're saying, 'We have no plans.' What that means is that they have no plans until they do have plans—until their plans actually change. We know that following the election, with a secret power-sharing deal that's been done with the Greens, that's exactly what they will do. They will succumb to those needs and wants and—guess what?—their plans will change. If you want to see an impact on housing, that's one way to see downward pressure, particularly on rental properties and other investment properties, because we know that investors will have to walk away from that. They'll put the money into other areas because of these sorts of crazy deals.

The Prime Minister and Senator Wong in this place had an opportunity today, and have had many opportunities, to rule out both a power-sharing deal and the implementation of negative gearing changes. This will send shudders right through the economy, and what is ahead of this nation if we see a Greens and Labor government is dangerous.

Question agreed to.