Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for her question. She is very bold to say that coalition policies work when it comes to housing, because, for most of the time they were in office, they didn't even bother to have a housing minister. We on this side of the House have a $43 billion Homes for Australia plan, almost every element of which wasn't just opposed by those opposite and the Greens members for a period of time in what I dubbed the 'no-alition'; they continued to oppose it and they continue to oppose the announcements that we made over the weekend and again this morning. They continue to oppose them. Tonight, indeed, the Senate is debating a coalition motion to abolish the build-to-rent program. That is a program to support increased private rentals, with some 80,000 being built. It's been developed with the Property Council, but those opposite hate it so much they're moving a disallowance motion on it.

We know they opposed the Housing Australia Future Fund. Housing Australia Future Fund projects are being contracted and some are already underway. The fund was delayed, of course, by those opposite. In the electorate of Farrer, 54 homes have been built in Thurgoona; in Canning, 40 homes in Golden Bay; in Lindsay, 135 homes in Penrith; in Page, 32 homes in South Grafton and nine in Casino; in Moncrieff, 213 homes in Southport; in Goldstein, 37 homes in Hampton East; in Berowra, 48 homes in Thornleigh and 10 in Pennant Hills; and, in Herbert, 81 homes in Cranbrook. Right around the country people are benefiting from the Housing Australia Future Fund, which will build social and affordable homes. But they opposed it, like they opposed the Help to Buy program, which is about shared equity schemes. Of course, on the increase to homeownership with a five per cent deposit, this is what Andrew Bragg, the shadow minister for housing, has had to say: 'We will work to try to stop these crazy ideas coming into existence.' That is what he had to say, and then they asked a question, saying that it's their policy. If it's their policy, not only in the last term did we see them oppose everything that we put forward, but now they're opposing, according to themselves, their own policy as well.

See this speech in context