John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister has declared that there has never been a more exciting time to be an Australian. Jobs and growth, driven by innovation, is the positive and optimistic mantra. However, the sad truth is that this is a world away from how our country's politics has actually played out in recent times. The political contest now is one of constant negativity. It is a race to the bottom where if you are not the biggest loser then you are the winner. It is negative politics triumphing over the positive development of policy, but at what cost? Australians now, justifiably so, are uninspired and disappointed by our major parties and are deserting us by the legion. A report on the weekend showed that up to one-in-four supporters have left us. We are at breaking point.

What seems to be dominating is unilateral, top-down policymaking, as opposed to evidence-based policy development via public inquiries that are instigated by members of parliament after consulting with their communities. I have had thousands of conversations with my constituents in my six years as the member for Bennelong, and the most common topic of concern for them is housing affordability. Bennelong's housing costs have skyrocketed 74 per cent in the last three years—the fastest in Australia. I am happy to see that we are finally having discussions on how to fix our housing problems, but movement is coming too slow and too late, delayed by politicians playing politics. Home ownership builds a sense of pride, establishes more stable families and communities, and encourages a reliable workforce. It gives security, independence and a real meaning to commonwealth. The higher the level of home ownership, the more stable the real estate market. Scrapping negative gearing and taking the investors out of the market would destroy one of the foundation stones that establishes the value of real estate in Australia. It would come crashing down, hurting all property owners—investors and home owners alike. What is needed is a nuanced policy to calm this volatile market. I suspect there are members opposite who also share this concern.

Here lies my inherent issue with how politics is playing out currently, and I aim this criticism at both parties: we are creating policy based on staunch, unflinching philosophy and sticking with it to the bitter end—an inflexible rod to beat the other side with. For many months, many on this side of the House have repeated the same inflexible conviction that the only issue here is one of supply—something which is patently wrong for reasons I have explained before. As with all things, the truth lies within these extremes. People are being put off by the major parties because of our inflexible ideologies as much as because of the vitriol in our interactions with each other. In politics, policy should be king. Policy development must be pre-eminent.

A suite of policies must address four key issues. Control of investor-driven inflation, counterbalanced with the empowerment of first homebuyers, to manage the transition from a speculative-investor-driven market to one dominated by home owners will have a permanent stabilising effect, protecting the assets of all current home owners and investors. These key policies live in the sensible centre between the extremes found in the positions taken by both parties to the last election. They involve a lever to control investor-driven inflation—a lever administrated by regulators installed to calibrate the level of LVRs. This must be aligned to deductibility. Once the market has stabilised and investment is controlled in this way it will allow for measures to assist homebuyers into the market. The use of super should only be considered on the proviso that the home remains the property of the super fund. It would, therefore, become an assessable asset. This will get more people into homes earlier and reduce many people's reliance on the age pension. Strategic decentralisation to reinvigorate regional areas to unlock their potential and boost affordable supply demonstrates beyond any argument the purpose of high-speed rail in Australia. These are sound, well-worked-through plans, developed through public inquiries with expert, verified evidence—a product of constructive bipartisan engagement.

This issue of home ownership is an opportunity to commence a contest of vision, ideas and policy development that will allow all Australians the chance to fulfil their dreams. The greatest challenge our major parties must now address is to recognise that their ceaseless negativity—(Time expired)