Nicolette Boele (Bradfield, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know we have a housing affordability crisis, and I know this as acutely as anyone. Despite our relatively strong position on socioeconomic scales, my electorate is one of Australia's most unaffordable. Out doorknocking, at pop-up offices or attending local events, I hear how hard it is for people to live close by where they work, in residential aged care, in our hospitals and our schools, and how hard it is for small businesses to find people to work in the cafes, on worksites or in GP practices. So my team and I have, in earnest, been researching the availability of affordable housing options. Surely there must be some in our area of Sydney—but apparently not.

Then this happened last week. The Australian Council of Social Service, or ACOSS, laid bare a remarkable statistic: the federal government is spending more on tax breaks for property investors than on social housing, homelessness services and rental assistance combined.

As everyone knows, one of the biggest crises facing this country, and one of the most significant causes of growing intergenerational inequity, is the unaffordability of housing. In my own electorate of Bradfield, a mere 0.9 per cent of a total 67,000 private homes are social housing, either state housing authority or community housing provider homes. This is compared to a national average of 3.8 per cent during that same period.

Over a third of renters are in housing stress—in other words, they're paying more than 30 per cent of their household income on rent. Nationwide, that position is also dire. Last week the Productivity Commission released its report on government services which showed that social housing makes up only 3.6 per cent of all dwellings, down from 5.7 per cent in the 1980s; 41 per cent of public housing waitlists is made up of households that are homeless or at risk of homelessness, up from 26 per cent in 2015; and 18.3 per cent of Commonwealth rent assistance households are in severe rental stress—that means they're paying more than 50 per cent of their income on rent—and that's up from 8.1 per cent in 2004.

Housing insecurity brings with it a raft of other social and economic problems, including a higher risk of mental illness, chronic ill health and difficulty finding and holding down a job. If we want people to have the opportunity to lead fruitful, productive lives, and if we want to genuinely help people to lift themselves out of difficult circumstances and contribute to a harmonious society and a productive economy, we must address housing insecurity.

This government would say that it has done more than any other government before to address the housing crisis. It would reel off a list, including the social housing accelerator program, the Housing Australia Future Fund, the increase to Commonwealth rent assistance, the build to rent scheme and the first home supply program, but the fact remains: it is not increasing the supply of social housing fast enough. Last year, the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, in its State of the Housing System report, recommended boosting social housing to six per cent, with a long-term target of all homes to be 10 per cent.

Mary Aldred (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the Attorney-General.