Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

We're opposing this suspension of standing orders and, if the suspension is successful, we'll be opposing the motion, by leave. Let's have a look at some of the considerations. The first part of Senator Wong's motion, 1(a), is wrong. But, if it is 'the most significant government investment in social and affordable homes', then it needs proper debate and scrutiny. We haven't had that. The second part, 1(b), is spurious. Again, we need a full debate. Part 1(c), again, is spurious. We need a full debate. Part 1(e) says:

at a time when Australians are facing significant housing pressures, the progress on the bills should be expedited by the Senate.

The Labor budget is inflationary and will hurt housing in this country. Housing prices will escalate because they're bringing in 400,000 new immigrants. Who the hell is going to house them? Plus these bills are littered with wastage and huge increases in bureaucracy. Bureaucrats do not build houses; they frustrate the building of houses. They increase the cost of building houses. We need to let the free market get on with the job, let tradies get on with the job of building houses. Then, at (1)(f), is:

recognising the significance of this legislation, there is a need that these bills be considered today

We need thorough debate on these bills. They're significant. We need to get back to basics.

The $10 billion fund is not Monopoly money; it's taxpayers' money. We need to debate how to spend that wisely and properly, so we will be opposing this. I make the point, in this debate in the Senate, as it happens so often, labels are the refuge of the ignorant, the dishonest and the fearful. People using labels in this parliament, decide for yourselves which of those apply to you. Is it ignorance, dishonesty or fear?