Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In respect of Minister Ayres's explanation relating to the order for the production of documents concerning the Housing Australia Future Fund, I move:

That the Senate take note of the explanation.

The minister's explanation reveals two major problems this nation has: (1) it has a government which is engaging in maladministration when it comes to its housing programs, and (2) it has a government which is committed deeply to secrecy. This explanation is more evidence that the government will not provide the basic information that the Senate has requested through the orders for the production of documents in relation to the massive expenditure of taxpayer funds. But we should not be surprised, because this government, according to Centre for Public Integrity, has the worst record on transparency and secrecy since the Keating government by virtue of metering its compliance with orders of the Senate and by virtue of measuring its compliance with freedom-of-information requests. This week, we see the government wants to gut the freedom-of-information laws to ensure that Australians cannot get basic information about the functioning of the government that they pay for.

Malcolm Fraser was very clear when he introduced these laws that the government performs better if Australians are informed about the activities of the government. Basic transparency and accountability are not much to ask for when you are committing $10 billion of taxpayer funds which, over the last two years of operation, has built only a few houses. These orders for the production of documents—which go back to February this year—are about providing the information about the expenditure of taxpayer funds through round 1 of the Housing Australia Future Fund. Back in February we requested the information. In July we received a slew of documents—2,000 pages, many of which are blacked out. There are more blacked-out pages than there are pages with information.

The information germane to the taxpayer is who is getting the money? How much money are they receiving? I take the minister's explanation when he gives two principal points. He says, 'We can't tell you where the houses are,' and the problem with that is that the people who signed up to get access to public funds already said in their contracts that they were okay with the government disclosing the location. Do you know why? Every time you see Minister O'Neill talking about housing, she's on one of the sites, so the idea this has to be kept secret is ridiculous. It is offensive. Do you think we are all stupid?

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Maybe.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I take the interjection—maybe we are, because the people who have signed these contracts to get taxpayer funds for public housing or social and affordable housing have already said that they're okay with the locations being known. This is not protecting people. Pretty soon, you will see ministers tripping over television cords on all these sites.

Secondly, the minister's justification for why the government won't say how much money has gone to these providers is unbelievable to me. The government are going to dish out taxpayer funds to private organisations and won't say how much they are getting in availability payments. I'm afraid that is not how our system works. If the government are spending taxpayer funds, they need to say how much money is going to these organisations. I'm afraid that we don't live in a country where these things are allowed to be secret. Everyone will need to find out.

I'll say it again. The country has two massive problems in this space. There is maladministration in the program's delivery. It's been going for two years. It's only built a handful of houses. Clearly the tender processes have been a disaster. Secondly, the secrecy is intolerable. Maybe this is all part of the plan, when you're proposing to never respond properly to Senate orders and every FOI is covered up in black ink—and now you're proposing to destroy the FOI Act. Maybe that's all okay, but it's not good enough for the Australian people. They expect their government to be honest and transparent.

We will never let up. I call on the crossbench to continue to hold the government to account. They think that they have unfettered power, but that is totally unreasonable in a democracy like this, which has the Senate— (Time expired)

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support Senator Bragg, not just in relation to this OPD but also in relation to his advocacy in relation to the Housing Australia Future Fund. Whenever I hear someone say, 'This information is commercial; it will prejudice our future negotiations et cetera,' that is a licence for the executive to basically refuse to disclose any document that's got a number in it. That's the impact. I really do question whether or not the process that was undergone by the government in looking at these documents was a bona fide process to genuinely consider whether or not the commercial interests of the Commonwealth would be genuinely compromised by the disclosure of the documents in accordance with the order passed by this Senate.

A majority of the senators in this place from a majority of the states representing a majority of the Australian people have called for the production of these documents. Why? Because it's part of our obligation as a house of review, a house of scrutiny, to scrutinise and review the performance of the Housing Australia Future Fund. So I'm very concerned by Senator Ayres's response on behalf of the government, on behalf of the minister, to Senator Bragg's OPD. I'm always very concerned and somewhat sceptical when the 'Not for publication, for commercial reasons' card is played because invariably it is a card that's overplayed. It is a card that's overplayed and it's a card that's being played in circumstances where I believe the interests of the Senate in this case demand the production of these documents so we can scrutinise the performance of this future fund.

I commend Senator Bragg for his endeavours. I call upon the government to deeply reflect on whether or not this information is truly commercially sensitive to such an extent that it couldn't be disclosed to the Senate. Of course, no-one wants to receive personal information in relation to people in vulnerable situations. The opposition isn't calling for that. We're calling for the release of information which this place genuinely needs to properly discharge its functions as a house of scrutiny and a house of review.

Barbara Pocock (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the minister's explanation in relation to housing. The minister's explanation is entirely unsatisfactory. Australia is in the grip of a housing crisis. Homeownership is slipping out of reach for too many, rents are sky-rocketing, and secure, affordable housing feels like a distant dream. The housing crisis is turbocharging inequality, and yet the government's housing strategy is timid. It is shrouded in secrecy and many of its elements lack parliamentary oversight.

Australians are being left in the dark about the detail of this government's housing policies and funding. Take the case of the Housing Australia Future Fund, the chosen vehicle for the government on affordable housing. The details are hidden. Australians deserve to know what is being built, how much is being spent and who is spending it. Australians deserve to know where their money is going. Who is profiting from these investments? That's not all. It gets worse. Labor is intentionally keeping Australia in the dark on its other minor housing interventions. What little reform they've made has been done through delegated legislation, most of which is not disallowable.

Take the Help to Buy scheme. The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation was scathing when assessing the recent Help to Buy Program Directions 2025. Crucially, the directions set out significant elements of the regulatory framework for the Help to Buy program in delegated rather than primary legislation. That is, the parliament has no real say. It cannot scrutinise. This is of real concern. Not only that, but the committee, chaired by Labor, raised the following six issues with this regulation: its compliance with legislative requirements, severely wanting; the scope of its administrative powers; the adequacy of explanatory materials; its treatment of personal rights and liberties; the availability of independent review; and its inappropriate exemption from disallowance and from sunsetting. When Labor's own senators are questioning their over-reliance on delegated legislation, there is a very serious problem.

This absence of scrutiny is not just a procedural issue; it has real-world consequences. These changes are being shaped without democratic overview. Meanwhile, these policies are pushing prices up. The Home Guarantee Scheme is supposed to help first-home buyers but, by boosting demand without building enough homes or dampening down the tax fuelled demand, it just makes houses more expensive, more out of reach for first-home buyers. So, those first-home buyers end up paying more, borrowing more and sinking deeper into debt, and the rate of homeownership falls.

The scheme is stacking the deck against the very people it's meant to help, and no amount of social media cavorting can put lipstick on this pig. Instead of easing the burden, these policies are deepening the crisis, and Labor knows this, which is why they are running scared from basic scrutiny. This isn't just about numbers and policies; it's about trust. When decisions about public resources are made behind closed doors, when they are covered in black ink, as we have seen just now, resources are not allocated with proper oversight. Trust in our institutions begins to erode, and people see their housing hopes dashed while the rules benefit very wealthy property investors and developers.

That's why transparency isn't optional; it's essential. Australians deserve better. They deserve to know what is being built, how much money is being spent and who is benefiting from these investments. They deserve policies that address the root cause and size of the housing crisis, not just temporary, minor fixes with details that aren't made clear or transparent and solutions that too often perpetuate the problem—make it worse—rather than really face up to the solutions.

This government lacks ambition on housing, and it lacks transparency about what it's up to. Labor campaigned on integrity and transparency in parliament. Well, I'm yet to see it. They are denying the capacity of this parliament to decide on and judge their decisions. Their goal is clear: to avoid scrutiny from this parliament. Transparency was a very core promise, yet they treat public scrutiny like a threat. That's not leadership; that's cowardice. It's time for a housing strategy that is open, is honest and truly works for all Australians and is open to their scrutiny and examination, as it should be if it's going to work.

Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The housing crisis gripping Australia under this Labor government is nothing short of a national disgrace, a festering wound on the dreams of an entire generation. The minister's response is totally unacceptable for the government of transparency. Young Australians, the backbone of our future, are being crushed under the weight of housing markets spiralling into madness. The average price of a home has skyrocketed past $1 million, a figure that flies in the face of hardworking families and young people. Owning a home, once a mainstay of the Australian dream, is now a cruel mirage, receding further with every government failure. Labor's response? A master class in incompetence, a parade of excuses and a betrayal of the very people they claim to represent.

When they were pressed for answers on their so-called strategy to tackle this crisis, what did we get? No transparency, no accountability, but a smokescreen of excuses. We're getting no answers on the Housing Australia Future Fund, a supposed lifeline for affordable housing. Millions of dollars are being funnelled into this black hole, with billions more to spend. The result so far is 17 houses. That's it. When Australians demand transparency, when they ask where these availability payments are going, Labor slams the door shut. They have the audacity to claim that disclosing this information would be contrary to the public interest. Let's take that to the public, shall we? Let's ask the young couples scraping by in overpriced rentals, the single parents priced out of the market or the workers commuting for hours because they can't afford to live near their jobs. Ask them if they want to know where their tax dollars are going.

How about the people that the HAFF doesn't cover? The HAFF guarantees returns for developers of affordable housing, but guaranteed returns mean that these developers can afford to drag tradies out of the private housing market, inflating the price of building homes and extending build times for young families who are working themselves to death just to get a toe on the ladder. Don't you think it's in their interest to see how and where these HAFF houses are being built? The public interest is crystal clear—Australians deserve to know their government is failing them. Whatever happened to the government of transparency that Labor promised? Where is the openness, the accountability and the commitment to truth?

Just this week the government introduced a bill, the Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025, to further shut down the public's access to freedom-of-information requests. This is the same government that is granting only 25 per cent of freedom-of-information requests in full, down from 59 per cent in 2012. The government of transparency is shutting out Australia. This government hides behind vague platitudes while the housing crisis deepens, leaving Australians to bear the cost of this government's own cowardice and incompetence.

Then there's the unbelievable revelation that Labor is in deep talks with India's commerce and industry minister to build one million homes in Australia, a project worth $500 billion. Half a trillion dollars—it sounds ambitious, doesn't it? But, when you peel back the layers, you see it for what it is: an outsourced $500 billion project funded by the UAE that would train foreign tradespeople up to Australian standards while Australian tradies, builders and labourers are left on the sidelines. This isn't a housing plan; it's an economic surrender, a slap in the face to every Australian worker struggling to make ends meet.

To make matters worse, India is right now rubbing shoulders with some of the world's most antagonistic regimes. They're currently in talks with Russia, China, Iran and North Korea to explore economic cooperation. Who's tagging along? None other than Labor's own Dan Andrews and Bob Carr, gleefully attending the party. This is the company Labor keeps—governments that clash with Australia's values and interests. Meanwhile, Mr Albanese can't even secure a meeting with Donald Trump, the leader of one of our closest and oldest allies. The United States, a partner we've relied on for decades, has lost faith in this government's leadership, and who can blame them? When Labor prioritises doing photo-ops with adversarial nations over strengthening ties with our allies, it's no wonder our international standing is crumbling.

This housing crisis isn't just a policy failure; it's a moral one. If the HAFF is producing the housing that Labor would have us believe it is, show us the proof. But Labor continues to hide. They hide behind excuses and dodge accountability—if only Labor were as transparent as the Prime Minister's glass jaw.

Question agreed to.