Madonna Jarrett (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Leader of the House. How has the Albanese Labor government used parliament to deliver more homes for Australians? And is there anything before parliament that puts these homes at risk?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Brisbane for the question. It's good to know that we now have a member for Brisbane who will always support the building of more homes for Australians. When that importance of supply is talked about, there are claims across the chamber that we agree on supply. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition and shadow minister for industry, skills and training, in the previous term, actually, said that supply was the key. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said only last week, 'Boosting housing supply is the closest thing we have to a silver bullet'—'a silver bullet'. So it's worth having a look at, when that silver bullet has been in front of the House, how people have dealt with it, as to whether they've actually tried to boost supply. When the Housing Australia Future Fund was introduced, there were 30,000 homes at stake. When it was introduced in February 2023, the coalition voted against it and the Greens ran out of the room. In May of that year, the coalition and the Greens teamed up in the Senate to delay it. In June, the coalition and the Greens again teamed up in the Senate to delay it. In September of that year, it finally passed, with the coalition still opposed to 30,000 homes.

But that wasn't the only measure to come before parliament. Help to Buy was another that came before parliament. For that, it wasn't 30,000 homes; 40,000 homes were at stake. Maybe then those opposite would be interested in the silver bullet. What did they do in November 2023? When it was introduced, the coalition and the Greens teamed up in the Senate to delay it by two months. In February the following year, the coalition and the Greens in this chamber voted against it, but it was passed. In September of that year, nearly a year after it was introduced, the coalition and the Greens again voted to delay 40,000 homes, and only in November of last year was it finally passed, with the coalition still voting no.

But then build to rent comes up—80,000 homes. Maybe they'll be interested in the silver bullet now. In July of last year, the coalition and the Greens voted in the Senate to split the bill and delay it. In November of last year, it finally passed, the coalition still voting against. But you think: 'Oh, maybe that was last term. Maybe now they're doing a reset.' There is in the Senate today a disallowance on build to rent, the very scheme to provide 80,000 homes. To this day, those opposite, when they see a chance for people to have a home, vote against.