Interview with Greg Jennett on ABC Afternoon Briefing

Subjects: Home Ownership, Super for Housing, Planning and Zoning

E&OE………

Greg Jennett

Andrew Bragg, welcome back to the program, this time flying solo in the format today. You've given a speech with a few ideas on housing, which are always welcome in the debate. Why don't we start out with you backing in, once again, the Coalition's policy taken to the last election, which is to dip into super savings for houses. Now, I suppose whether this is viewed as a good or bad financial idea probably depends on rate of return or growth from money held in either super or in a home's value increase. What data is there to suggest into the future that returns from housing will actually be greater than in super?

Senator Bragg

Well, g'day, Greg. There are many different components needed to fix the nation's housing crisis. But one piece that can help level the playing field for first home buyers is utilising super. The key determinant of someone's success in retirement, financial success that is, is not going to be their superannuation balance. It will be their home ownership status. What we're seeing now is millennials and Gen Zs on the wrong trajectory, and they're not going to own a house. And so super can fill that role for people who want to get into the first-home ownership ladder. But there are more than just economic factors at play here. We believe that a home ownership is a crucial part of Australian life, that Darryl Kerrigan was in fact right when he said that it's more than just a house. There are economic, but there are also cultural reasons why we want Australians to have access to a home.

Greg Jennett

All right, well, let's talk about some of those. You've gone to planning restrictions, again acknowledging that housing is a multi-headed problem. You've looked at, or I think you're attracted to the idea of Granny Flats, not only building them in a backyard, but then, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, permanently subdividing the property, so the bit of a block with a granny flat on it has its own separate title. How does that fit into the cultural and amenity aspect of housing, particularly in our suburbs?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think we need to liberalise planning and zoning laws so that we can have more houses built. In the last year alone, you've seen 700,000 people come into the country with only 180,000 houses being built. So we have a major issue here where we need to quickly build, and Granny Flats will be one solution. But it's just an example of planning laws holding back new supply. You can't solve the housing crisis without building more homes. So I think we ought to be creative in how we go about doing that. And from the Commonwealth's point of view, we should be in a position to punish the States if they have planning laws which are damaging supply.

Greg Jennett

And how would that be done? What form of punishment?

Senator Bragg

Well, I mean, there's no reason you couldn't hold back funding. I don't think that Mr Albanese's plan of 1.2 million houses is ever going to materialise. Effectively, Chris Minns has killed his plan stone cold dead just from a New South Wales perspective. Mr Albanese is offering to pay the States to build houses, and they won't build them. So the reality is you need to look for coercion measures rather than incentives, I believe.

Greg Jennett

A broader question about the quality of housing. Do you say that becomes less significant in the scramble to establish more dwellings? Because I think your speech also included references to caravans and a recent decision made in New South Wales to limit their use in private dwellings or in suburban blocks, if you like. Do you acknowledge there is a necessary quality of living consideration to be put over some of these arguments?

Senator Bragg

We would never compromise on safety, but I think we want there to be more choices. If someone wants to live in a portable house, they should be able to do that without the government taking away that judgement for them. Equally, in the scramble to get more supply, we can look at the airspace that exists above houses. In other cities around the world, that's been utilised quite effectively. So we need to look at every measure that's available to us to increase supply. But of course, we will never compromise on safety.

Greg Jennett

All right. Well, let's come to the question of what other measures the Coalition might propose in the countdown to the next election. You've already, in our discussion here today Andrew Bragg, criticised the 1.2 million homes over five years target of the Albanese government. Will the Dutton Coalition take any target for housing construction to the next election?

Senator Bragg

The housing crisis is so much worse under the Labor Party, and the 1.2 million house plan is dead. There's no way that Labor will ever meet those targets. That is so disappointing because this is one of the few levers the Commonwealth actually has here. It can state a policy, an objective, but it has no chance of meeting that. If we were going to do that, I think we would be very careful that it would actually be achievable.

Greg Jennett

Just finally Andrew Bragg, on shared equity, you've been, again, critical of the government's Help to Buy scheme, which is stuck in the Senate. For those not familiar with it, it allows the government to take an ownership stake of up to 40% in a limited number of homes. You've called it nationalisation, but then gone on to say that it's underwhelming because it is limited to 10,000 homes a year. There are almost 11 million dwellings in Australia, so a government stake in 10,000 a year would hardly amount to nationalisation, would it?

Senator Bragg

Well, Labor has waved the white flag and has given up on home ownership. And in giving up on home ownership, they have opted for a government model where the government would own 40% of people's houses. And this is a model which has not been popular at the State level. Most of the States and Territories have these schemes, and no one, very few people, want to use them. I think this is the wrong priority. It costs eye-watering $5.5 billion for 10,000 places. We think that there are better ways to use our scarce resources to promote individual home ownership rather than co-ownership with government.

Greg Jennett

All right. Well, as we said at the outset, there are a few ideas, and the germs of new ones are right there in the speech. Andrew Bragg, no doubt, we'll be discussing this again on future occasions. Thanks for joining the program once again.

Senator Bragg

Thanks, Greg.

[Ends]