Posts

Defence generals tell me that, despite a large number of troops being relocated to Townsville during a housing crisis, there’s no problem with finding accommodation for our diggers. This claim comes despite Townsville having a “dangerously low” rental vacancy rate of just 1%.

If you or your family are experiencing difficulties in finding accommodation after being directed to move to Townsville, please email my office as I’d like to hear from you.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: How many extra people have been moved to Townsville? What numbers will Townsville increase by and are there adequate homes in Townsville?  

Senator McAllister: I think, as part of your answer, Lieutenant General Stuart, you might respond to the first part of the senator’s question, which was about making diggers homeless. You may wish to include a response to that in your answer.  

Lt Gen. Stuart: That’s just not a factually correct statement. We’re not making soldiers homeless. We have a plan that’s been worked through with our team mates in the Security and Estate Group, who are our liaison with Defence Housing, and manage the on-base accommodation. And, of course, we have a very strong relationship with local government in Townsville. It’s a staged plan, over the next three career management cycles, the first of which is—  

Senator ROBERTS: What’s a management cycle—how long?  

Lt Gen. Stuart: It’s a posting cycle—every 12 months. The moves occur roughly between December, January and February. This coming posting cycle will see the first of those soldiers that have volunteered, or have been asked to, go to Townsville to have those skills that we are building in the brigade there. To go to your point about shortages in some of our numbers, we are well under our authorised strength in Townsville. So the additional numbers don’t actually fall above the authorised strength in the next two years. That is notwithstanding the fact that the rental market in Townsville is quite tight.  

Senator ROBERTS: It’s tight all over Australia—almost at record levels because of massive immigration. Immigration has doubled the previous records, so I understand the dilemma. So what you’re saying is that you understand the housing pressures, but you’re managing that?  

Lt Gen. Stuart: Yes. 

Australians are sleeping on the street because they can’t afford rent or their mortgage. Meanwhile, a record 2.4 million “temporary” visa holders are in the country, competing with Australians for housing.

Transcript

Chris Smith: I think it’s fair to say to Malcolm that Australia’s immigration program is now officially out of control, and the worst it has ever been. 

Senator ROBERTS: Without a doubt. Completely agree with you. We have more than 2.4 million residents, excluding tourist, residents who are not citizens. Excluding tourists. Rent is up 52% in five years. Now, just remember that the Albanese promised, after the last financial year where we got 518,000 net immigrants, by far the largest ever, almost double the previous record, Albanese commented – yeah, yeah, yeah, we’ll cut it. Well the rate Immigration is coming in this year is higher than the record from last year. Higher. These people are just telling lies after lies. Lies. And the thing is they’re hiding over a per person per capita recession. They don’t want to be the government that was in place when the recession occurred. They would rather see people sleeping under bridges, in tents, in cars. I mean, working families Chris are going home at night to their kids and sleeping in cars. Where do they shower? Where do they toilet? I mean, we got the richest state in the world, potentially in Queensland, and we got people living under bridges, families, working families. Because the government just wants to look good by lifting up GDP to make sure we don’t have a recession. We would be in a recession now without large scale immigration fudging the numbers. 

Chris Smith: Fudging the numbers, that’s exactly what large scale immigration does. It’s terrific to have you on the program. Senator Malcolm Roberts, thank you for your time. 

I informed the Senate that it had lost its way by focussing way too much on international conflicts and spending over a billion dollars on Ukraine while neglecting to fund essential healthcare and hospitals in Queensland and other parts of Australia.

This obsession in providing international aid is misplaced when our own homeless and vulnerable citizens are struggling to access the basic necessities needed for survival.

Australian families are living in tents, children are going hungry and those in power are failing to protect them. Charity should always begin at home.  Politicians must prioritise the needs of Australians before considering assistance to anyone else. We have a national housing crisis and are already in a per capita recession.

It’s time to put Australians first.

Transcript

It’s time for politicians to focus on fixing the problems here in Australia before getting involved in foreign conflict. Last night, yet another motion appeared in the nightly Senate notices from some senators calling for stronger measures to support Ukraine. This Senate only just dealt with a matter relating to Taiwan. The Israel-Palestine war continues to feature in our Senate processes, along with the Uighurs in China and the Rohingya in Bangladesh. Among Greens senators, there seem to be more supporters for terrorist Hamas than for Australia—and that’s my point.

We live in a time when small businesses are closing at record rates—the hopes and dreams of those hard-working Australians broken in a vice of rising costs and falling sales. It’s a disaster arising from deliberate government policy. Supermarkets, traditionally the least profitable of businesses because of the social contract to not rip people off on the necessities of life, no longer honour their social contract.

Parents in Queensland are travelling up to 800 kilometres to access specialist maternity care because parliament has found a billion dollars for Ukraine yet cannot find a cent for Yeppoon, Bowen and the 33 other Queensland towns that have lost their maternity wards. Hospitals in many Queensland rural centres are still called hospitals, yet only offer the services of a GP clinic.

Australian families are living in the tent cities appearing right across our beautiful country. I’ve visited many of these in Queensland, and the sense of betrayal is palpable—and people should feel betrayed. The Senate, as the house of review, has betrayed the very people who trusted us with their vote and who trusted us to have their best interests at heart. Although our Senate does have foreign affairs powers, convention dictates the Senate stays out of foreign affairs and concentrates on domestic matters. It’s time to make that convention great again. Let’s spend our time driving the government to do better to look after Australians. Let’s look after all Australians— all who are here—first.

The Greens’ and Labor’s net zero policies are a large part of why we have high inflation. By replacing low cost coal with expensive industrial wind and solar, power prices rise, which then drives up prices across the board.

The Motion from Greens’ Senator McKim to introduce price controls to combat inflation is an example of “feel good” politics. Price controls often lead to companies withdrawing from the supply chain, leading to inevitable shortages and black markets.

In what was once the “lucky country,” this would be a tragedy!

Transcript

Inflation is out of control across the Australian economy. It’s disgraceful though for the Greens to leverage this human disaster to advance their green communist ideology. Advocating price controls is the economics of wishful thinking—a victory of feelings over facts, common sense, historical experience and basic economics. Price controls don’t work. They have never worked and will never work, and they make things worse. 

The price of an item is not some magical creature with a life of its own that government can control. Price is an outcome of other factors—material costs, input costs and retailer margins, to name a few. In recent times, the Greens have talked about the lack of competition in retailing, especially in food retailing, but they have missed the point. The answer to poor competition is not price controls; it’s more competition. It is Harris Farm Markets opening new concept stores that rival Coles and Woolworths. It’s the Reject Shop, which increasingly undercuts Coles and Woolies by significant amounts. It’s your local butcher or produce store, which now sell products cheaper than Coles and Woolies. 

To a degree, the Greens are using misdirection. They’re asking Australians to look over here at profiteering instead of looking at the root cause of inflation, which is the increasing cost of business inputs, starting with the Greens’ own net zero energy policies. Net zero fairytale power is pushing up power prices, and, if power goes up, everything goes up. Farmers need power to run their coolrooms, they need diesel to run their farm equipment and they need fertiliser, which is made from natural gas. Manufacturers and wholesalers need electricity, gas and diesel for every aspect of their operations, yet the Greens are over there on my left—on everyone’s left, really—advocating for no new oil or gas projects. Scarcity causes the price to rise. Their own net zero policies are a major cause of inflation. Now the Greens want to fix that with price controls. Controlling the price causes producers, wholesalers and retailers to go broke as their input costs exceed their selling price. To stay in business, these companies will most likely stop selling anything they sell at a loss. 

This is exactly what happened in Venezuela and Sri Lanka, where price controls led to food shortages and black markets appearing for food staples. Criminal gangs moved into those black markets. I know Coles and Woolies are bad, but I would take them over criminal gangs. Sri Lanka is especially relevant here. Their food crisis was caused by forcing farmers to abandon the use of hydrocarbon fertilisers and pesticides in the name of net zero—inhuman. Farm productivity fell and prices rose, as farmers tried to make enough money to feed their families. The government intervened with price controls. The result was food shortages, starvation and then rioting that forced the government to back down and, once again, allow modern production techniques to feed the people. Another problem with price controls is that investment moves away from industries that are rendered unprofitable with price controls. Investment in buildings, equipment, software and staff training will fall in price-controlled industries. That is fact that has been proven repeatedly throughout history. This leaves long-term supply deficits that will keep prices higher for longer and hurt everyday citizens. 

Unlike the Greens’ policies, One Nation’s policies will solve the cost-of-living and housing crisis without making either problem worse. We will do the opposite of the Greens, which is always a good policy. We will reduce red, green and blue tape. We will reduce new arrivals until the market can fairly provide for those who are already here. In housing, we will prevent homes being owned by those outside of Australia and allow councils to impose penalty rates on vacant homes or on those being used for casual letting which conflicts with the zoning. We will review the federal government housing code, which imposes unnecessary requirements, including making every house wheelchair friendly despite there being no wheelchair users in the house. I understand that that adds about $40,000 to the price of every new house. We will allow Australians to use their super to invest in their own home. We will create a people’s bank to provide mortgages at five per cent interest over 30 years on a five per cent deposit and allow a HECS debt to be rolled into the mortgage so that people can get a home loan. This policy means that an Australian with a good job, even if they have a HECS debt, will be able to afford their own home now and start paying it off. 

There are many, many ways to solve the humanitarian disaster that the policies of successive Liberal and Labor governments have created. Price controls and green policies on housing, immigration, the environment, mining and farming are the exact opposite. One Nation wants to free up the people and free up our markets. 

The government says less than 1% of houses are bought by foreigners. I don’t believe them. State governments say it’s at least double that, real estate agents say it’s 10%!

I have been asking for detailed data on how they get to that number for 9 months now without answers. 

The government is hiding the true extent of foreign ownership from Australians while we’re in the middle of a housing crisis.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. Overwhelmingly, Australians don’t believe foreigners should be allowed to own residential property in our country. I first asked at Senate estimates in November last year how many potential foreign buyers the ATO is detecting through its data-matching program? The government failed to answer. In February, Senator Bragg asked and was given no answer. In June estimates, I asked again and did not get an answer. Answers to my questions on notice for how many potential foreign buyers are detected are now overdue, again. Minister, why is your government hiding from the Australian people the data on potential foreign buyers of residential property? And when will you actually answer the question I’ve been asking for nine months?

Senator GALLAGHER: I recall you asking these questions, Senator Roberts, and I understood they were answered at the time by officials when I was sitting at the desk. If there have been follow-up questions you have asked notice that have not been answered, I can certainly follow that up. I think the evidence we gave during Senate estimates was that foreign investment plays an important role in bolstering Australia’s housing stock and creating additional jobs in the construction industry. But it is monitored very closely for good reason. It is tightly regulated, with foreign persons generally requiring foreign investment approval before acquiring an interest in residential land, regardless of its value, with a few exceptions. Foreign investors make up a very small proportion of the total Australian residential property market, accounting for approximately 0.93 per cent of new and established dwelling purchase transactions in 2022-23. Out of 479,257 transactions, based on ATO data from 2022-23 only 4,463 transactions were by foreign investors. It is a very small component—less than one per cent—of new and established dwelling purchase transactions in the 2022-23 financial year. I think senators have raised this through estimates as something they are interested in—raising concerns about foreign investors squeezing out local residents from being able to purchase housing. But the evidence would show that it’s a very small component of the residential property market in the transactions that are being monitored, as was explained in estimates by the ATO. (Time expired)

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: The New South Wales state government reported more than twice the number of overseas purchases of property that the Foreign Investment Review Board recorded in 2021. The board claims foreigners buy less than one per cent of residential property—and you just confirmed that. Yet in the first quarter NAB property survey, real estate agents say they’re selling 10 per cent of Australian housing to foreigners. Minister, if you have confidence in the Foreign Investment Review Board, why won’t you hand over the data?

Senator GALLAGHER: Again, I’m not sure which part of the data hasn’t been answered. I was sitting at estimates when you were given figures, Senator Roberts, so I’m not sure which data is the data you’re seeking. The ATO data I just read out—and I can provide this in writing to you—shows that it is 0.93 per cent for the 2022-23 financial year, and that it has come down, as I understand it, from a peak in 2015-16. The ATO do residential real estate compliance investigations—so they follow this up and check that people are compliant with the requirements of foreign ownership of residential property. They identified 428 properties for compliance, they did 410 investigations and found 145 properties in breach, and 55 of those resulted in— (Time expired)

The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary?

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, you want foreign investment, yet foreign ownership is against Australians’ interests. Minister, this country is in a housing crisis. When will you ban foreign ownership of residential real estate and put Australians in Australian houses first?

Senator GALLAGHER: We’re not going to do that, Senator Roberts. The numbers show we need good strong rules around it, and there are strong rules around it. We need compliance with those rules, and there are good compliance processes. It’s less than one per cent, and this country has benefited from foreign investment. We benefit in terms of our economy and in terms of jobs—

Senator Whish-Wilson interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Whish-Wilson, order! Please continue, Minister.

Senator GALLAGHER: So it isn’t something we are seeking to ban. It would help if some of our housing programs, which are currently stalled in the Senate, were given approval by the Senate because then we could build more supply, which is the actual issue. I know there wants to be a lot of distractions about who’s to blame, and it’s easy to blame foreign ownership. The statistics don’t support that. I say to the Senate that there are a couple of bills that are stuck in this chamber that would help people into home-ownership and help increase the supply of housing in this country, and I say: let’s get on with that job

Questions on notice from 17 June 2024. Still unanswered and overdue as of 21 August 2024

This is YOUR chance to have your voice heard! Bring your questions, share your concerns, and hear directly from Brenda Turner, who is seeking to be your representative in the Queensland parliament after this election.  Let’s dive into the key issues shaping Queensland and Australia, and other matters of concern.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

Margaret Mead, American cultural anthropologist, author and speaker

📅 Thursday, 5 September 2024  

🕒 6 pm to 8 pm

📍 Ravenshoe Hotel, 34 Grigg Street, Ravenshoe

👉RSVP today and secure your spot! https://qld.onenation.org.au/q-a-in-ravenshoe

Plan on dining in? Please book your meals direct with the Ravenshoe Hotel on (07) 4097 6136

Since November, I have been trying to get a very simple answer out of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO): How many potential foreign buyers are they detecting?

The ATO runs a data matching program that checks the details of more than 2.4 million sellers and buyers to detect if they might be foreign.

The ATO claims only 1% of purchases are foreign, but they won’t tell me how many of those 2.4 million matches they get are flagged as potentially foreign. Watch as they again refuse to tell me how many foreigners they identify in the 2.4 million records.

They claim to have manually checked over 230,000 records every year that can’t be automatically matched to confirm whether they are Australian. With other evidence like the NAB property survey indicating up to 11% of new housing stock is purchased by foreigners, I believe the ATO figures are completely understating the level of foreign buying in the country.

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for appearing again tonight, and congratulations to you, Mr Heferen. I don’t think we’ve seen you since your appointment. My first question is about foreign buyers of real estate. Radio 2GB reported in April that foreign buyers accounted for 11 per cent of newly built homes in the final quarter of last year. This is a disaster for Australian homebuyers. Can you please provide that data for each quarter over the previous 12 months—the proportion of newly built homes bought by foreigners?

Mr Thompson: I think the 2GB article would have been using the National Australia Bank—

Senator ROBERTS: That’s my understanding.

Mr Thompson: As I think I’ve talked about at the committee before, there are a number of differences between the National Australia Bank survey and our data. So the National Australia Bank’s data is from a survey,
so it asks real estate and other real estate professionals to estimate. I think the exact question in that survey is about overseas buyers. Our numbers are coming from state and territory land title offices, which are matched
against Home Affairs data and Australia Electoral Commission data. There is a very significant gap between the numbers that appear in that survey and the numbers that we get. Our numbers are based on the definition of a foreigner under the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act. I think last week we released the 2022-23 numbers, which would put the estimate at around one per cent.

Senator ROBERTS: Moving onto the first home super saver scheme, I’m quoting from the eligibility requirements in guidance note 2018/1: There is no requirement for you to be an Australian citizen, Australian resident or an Australian resident for taxation purposes. Why are we allowing foreigners—not even residents for taxation purposes—access to this scheme, which is meant to be for getting Australians into their first home?

Mr Heferen: That would be a policy question for our colleagues at the Treasury.

Ms Brown: It is a policy question for Treasury, but the appropriate group for it to be directed to is markets group. That is administered by our Retirement, Advice and Investment Division in markets group. We can take it on notice and have them provide a reply.

Senator ROBERTS: I want to come back to foreign ownership again. I refer to table 3 of the answer to question on notice SBE106 from the November estimates. Through the Department of Home Affairs visa data-
matching program, how many of the real property transfer report entities records that are automatically matched to ATO records are foreign?

Mr Thompson: As we’ve answered previously, we’re not able to—the question was, ‘How many do we automatically match?’ and ‘How many do we have to go away and do additional things to match?’

Senator ROBERTS: I’m coming to that.

Mr Thompson: If you think about it coming through the system: if it’s an exact match, that’s all automated. There would be a range of circumstances where we don’t get an automatic match. It could be that the date of
birth’s the wrong way. It could be a maiden name. In those circumstances, we have additional processes to match. We work down through every record. In the automatic matches, there will be some foreigners. In the ones we can’t automatically match, there will be some foreigners.

Senator ROBERTS: What percentage?

Mr Thompson: At that point—

Senator ROBERTS: You can’t tell us?

Mr Thompson: The numbers in that answer to the question on notice were addressing how many we automatically match versus how many we perform additional—

Senator ROBERTS: Correct. How many that were matched were foreigners?

Mr Thompson: If the question is about the compliance results that we get, they’re published—

Senator ROBERTS: My question is: what percentage of buyers are foreigners?

Mr Thompson: One per cent.

Senator ROBERTS: Could you provide to me on notice the numbers of foreign buyers for the last five years.

Mr Thompson: We publish that. I’ve got the latest public—

Senator ROBERTS: Okay, if you could take it on notice for the last five years.

Mr Thompson: I’ll take it on notice.

Senator ROBERTS: From table 4, immediately below that from the same question on notice from November estimates, how many of the entity records that were not able to be automatically matched to ATO records remain unverified or unresolved?

Mr Thompson: None.

Senator ROBERTS: How many unmatched records from the data-matching program remain unresolved from 2018 to date?

Mr Thompson: I think that’s the same question.

Senator ROBERTS: I want to go right back to 2018.

Mr Thompson: I’ll take that one on notice.

Senator ROBERTS: How many residential properties in Australia are owned by foreigners today?

Mr Thompson: I think that is the question around the register.

Senator ROBERTS: I just want to know how many foreigners own real estate. We’ve got a housing crisis. We’ve got people in Brisbane and all up and down the east coast of Queensland in major provincial cities sleeping under bridges and in cars, taking families home.

Senator Gallagher: Yes, but I think it’s very simplistic to say that that housing shortage is a result of foreign investment in residential housing. We’ve had a number of hearings where you’ve been told how relatively low that level is in comparison to non-foreign owned.

Senator ROBERTS: I’d like the exact numbers.

Senator Gallagher: And we’ll provide that number to you, but the link that you are saying—that foreign ownership of properties equals some of what you’ve been talking about and is a real issue in Brisbane—is not
right. The issue is supply. We’ve got to build more houses for people, not blame foreigners for it.

Senator ROBERTS: I’ve never said it’s entirely due to foreigners, but that is one—

Senator Gallagher: We need to make sure that the rules are tight, that there are restrictions in place, which there are, so that that arrangement works properly. But it’s not fair to say that the housing crisis is because we’ve got some small foreign-owned investments.

Senator ROBERTS: I didn’t say that. I said that’s one contributing factor.

CHAIR: I’ll just do some committee administration here. I’ll table three documents—the three articles referenced by Senator O’Neill earlier. The committee has agreed to a time management plan to conclude
questions, so last question, Senator Roberts.

Senator ROBERTS: I’d like to make the point that the witnesses have provided answers so late, in the past, that they’ve been distributed at 8 pm on the day before they appear in Senate estimates, 100 days after the last
hearing, and failing to raise any public interest immunity claims on answers they don’t give. That’s a clear frustration of the committee’s work.

Senator Gallagher: We will try and do better, Senator Roberts. We have had a long discussion about the number of questions on notice which are coming in and having to be managed by departments, but I agree: it’s an important accountability measure, and departments should work to meet the timeframes.

Senator ROBERTS: When it’s 100 days, it’s way late, and then it suddenly comes in at 8 pm on the night before.

Senator Gallagher: Yes. I understand your frustration.

Daily Telegraph Article: Foreigners buying homes at twice the rate claimed in official figures, according to real estate agents and state tax data

Foreigners buying homes at twice the rate claimed in official figures, say real estate agents and state tax data | Daily Telegraph

Answers to Previous Questions on Notice

Australians are sleeping on the street and the Government doesn’t care.

Hundreds of thousands of arrivals are flowing into the country while we don’t have houses for the Australians that are here. 

Rent prices are up 40% and house prices are 10x the average income, completely out of reach for most of Australians. We need to cut immigration, ban foreign ownership, give Australians more savings, introduce some competition to the banking cartel and open up construction as well. 

Australians deserve their own home, One Nation will make sure they get one.

Transcript

The housing and rent crisis is a national tragedy. In Australia, one of the richest countries in the world for resources, we have working families homeless, sleeping in their cars or under bridges. In August 2020, the national average rent was $437 a week. It’s now $627, an increase of 40 per cent in just a few years. The national rental vacancy rate is just one per cent—actually slightly under that—far below the three per cent rate that’s considered a healthy market. House prices are out of control. In 1987, the average house cost 2.8 times the average income.

Today, a house costs 9.7 times the average income. This is why there are hardworking Australians sleeping on the street—families on the street. People under 30 have given up hope of ever owning a home, yet we oldies are meant to hand our young people a better life than we had. 

One Nation promises to fix this housing crisis for all Australians. We will make the tough decisions that the Liberal and Labor uniparty won’t. Two point eight million temporary visa holders are in the country today, up from 2.3 million pre COVID. That’s an additional 200,000 homes needed for these new arrivals. While Australians can’t afford roofs over their heads, we need some of these people on visas to leave. An Australian can’t buy a house in China, yet foreign investors can buy both new and existing houses here.

One Nation would ban all foreign ownership of residential housing. Australians must come first. We would allow people to use some superannuation to invest in their homes. After all, it’s your money. We will ditch Labor’s facade, its pathetic, bureaucratic Housing Australia programs. Instead, we’ll use the same funds to create cheap 30-year mortgages fixed at five per cent interest to get Australians into homes. 

The housing supply and affordability crisis is upon us and debating how we arrived here won’t help.

One Nation’s housing policy ‘looks to the future,’ offering common-sense solutions to help more Australians purchase their own home, while at the same time, reducing rent.  

Overview

  • Lower immigration to sustainable levels to reduce housing demand. 
  • Ban foreign ownership of residential property to increase housing supply. 
  • Allow a portion of your superannuation to be invested in a home purchase. 
  • Ditch Labor’s Housing Future Fund and invest those funds into creating a new People’s Mortgage Scheme, offering 5% deposit and 5% interest rate. 
  • Allow people with a HECS debt to roll their debt into a People’s Mortgage account, improving their ability to obtain and service a housing loan. 
  • Implement a 5-year moratorium on charging GST for new home construction, which will make new homes more affordable. 

The Role of Interest Rates in the Housing Crisis

The Reserve Bank understands that slowing down construction is an effective tool in reducing inflation and is doing so knowing it will make the housing crisis.  

This is what I mean when I say the Government is “stepping on the accelerator with handouts and government-sponsored construction,” at the same time the Reserve Bank is tightening the reins with higher interest rates. 

The result is a shambolic government from Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers. 

A shortage of home construction firms is also contributing to the problem. As of May 2024, there have been 2,500 building company bankruptcies | May of 2024 financial year

These failures are a result of rising material costs, approval delays, high interest rates affecting both the builder and the customer and a shortage of skilled labour.  Our immigration policy has brought millions of people into the country, however only a fraction of those migrants are qualified in construction trades.  

The Government’s answer involves a set of measures that “promise” many new homes, yet so far, only a few thousand have been delivered and they are mostly homes that were already in the pipeline. 

In other words, the Albanese’ Government’s efforts have made no meaningful impact on the crisis. 

One Nation’s approach will tackle inflation without relying on interest rate rises.  Refer to our inflation policy. 

The Role of Immigration in the Housing Crisis 

One Nation’s policy to address the housing shortage involves reducing immigration until the housing market stabilises.  

This strategy is grounded in logic that if we already have a limited supply of houses and we increase demand faster than new homes can be constructed, it will only lead to a worse housing shortage.  Even those who support high immigration should recognise that this approach makes sense. 

Anthony Albanese has overseen the arrival of 2.4 million new residents in just the last 2 years, creating a demand for 700,000 homes.  With home approvals at just 160,000 per annum, our housing shortage continues to get worse.  In turn, the worsening shortage will cause higher rents and higher home prices, putting home ownership or rentals out of reach for many everyday Australians.  

Rent controls discourages construction, making the problem worse. 

The graph below illustrates new housing approvals against population growth. Under Anthony Albanese’s Labor/Greens government, the number of home approvals has decreased while new arrivals have increased. This trend suggests that without the implementation of One Nation’s housing policy, the problem is going to get significantly worse for everyone currently living here. 

The Role of Foreign Buyers in the Housing Crisis 

During COVID, with immigration at such low levels, there was an opportunity for a “’catchup” – a period of construction without the pressure of increased demand.   

Despite this opportunity, no significant catch-up occurred, yet new homes were built.  So where did these homes end up?  

Part of the answer can be found in the August 2021 Census, which revealed that one million of Australia’s 10.8 million homes were empty on Census night. 

One Nation believes that part of the issues stems from foreign buyers purchasing new housing stock and locking it up, so that it can be sold as “brand new” when values rise. Much of the construction during this COVID period was removed from the market in this manner. The Greens also highlighted this issue: read here.  

One Nation’s housing policy includes measures to end foreign ownership of residential and agricultural property, aiming to help Australians secure homes. 

Another contributing factor are owners that decide tenants are too troublesome and choose to forgo rental income. This problem would likely be more common among foreign or corporate investors who view real estate as a speculative investment – focusing on fast capital appreciation rather than rental returns. 

Why wouldn’t foreign investors pour capital into Australian real estate, given how fast property prices are increasing?

 

Rising Australian real estate prices were an irresistible target for international and local capital. Additionally, superannuation firms are increasingly investing in residential property, potentially adding to the demand and contributing to rising prices.  

Is Short-stay Accommodation Contributing to the Housing Crisis? 

The short-stay rental market, such as Airbnb, is often highlighted in discussions about housing. There are approximately 100,000 short-stay properties in Australia, which adds to the 280,000 rooms available in the conventional accommodation sector. 

In comparison, Australia’s total housing stock comprises 10.8 million homes, meaning short-stay properties represent less than 1% of the overall market. 

The short-stay rental market caters to people seeking holiday or business rentals and is an industry with a finite growth curve.  Many short-stay rentals are not stand-alone units.  Often, they are converted spaces like garages or spare rooms. These types of properties would not typically qualify as permanent rental accommodation under existing planning regulations.  

Many of these properties have always been used for short-stay purposes. In the past, these properties would have been managed by local real estate agents and legacy websites like Stayz. Therefore, the actual number of rental properties removed from the market for short-stay use in the past 5 years, is much less than the 100,000 figure suggests. 

While some on the left are fixated on short-stay rentals, it appears to be more an ideological abhorrence of Australians that use entrepreneurship to get ahead. 

We Need a People’s Mortgage Scheme! 

The Housing Future Fund (HFF) is an Albanese Government initiative to create a fund that invests in mortgages. Currently valued at $10 billion, it is expected to be increased to $20 billion. However, this scheme has not delivered a single new home and is limited to just a few thousand properties per year.  

One Nation proposes to turn this scheme into a low-deposit, low-interest Government-backed mortgage scheme for Australians, especially those with a HECS debt.  This proposal would help people secure homes years sooner. 

One Nation will convert the HFF into a mortgage fund, offering government-backed loans to Australians who fail to meet traditional banking criteria. This is aimed primarily at the three million HECS debt holders in Australia.  These individuals, HECS repayments can restrict their ability to buy a home, manage a mortgage or save for a deposit, as their HECS debt impacts their income. 

We propose offering People’s Mortgages with fixed terms of up to 25 years at a 5% interest rate, with the option for early repayment, and requiring only a 5% deposit. This is in line with the Government’s own low-income deposit scheme. 

Applicants will also have the option to use up to one-third of their superannuation for the deposit, with the condition that the funds must be repaid when the home is sold. 

For Australians who have been employed for several years, have a reasonable income and superannuation balance, and qualifies for the first home buyers grant, it’s likely that no cash deposit will be required for an entry level property.  Additionally, the mortgage repayments will be comparable to current rent payments. 

People’s Mortgages for HECS Debt Holders 

One Nation will offer HECS debt holders a simple and straightforward choice: 

  1. Continue paying off your HECS debt while managing a mortgage as you do now; or 
  1. Roll your HECS debt into your mortgage, extending the repayment period over a longer period.  This option allows you to secure a mortgage sooner if your income and eligibility for a First Home-Owner’s grant, along with a superannuation top-up, support it.  While this option increases the total cost of your HECS debt over time, it enables you to purchase a home much earlier. 

Mortgages will only be issued if the applicant meets the lending criteria, including the ability to make the repayments through gainful employment or a self-owned business.  

These mortgages will be administered through an Authorised Deposit-taking Institution (ADI) or approved intermediary, such as mortgage brokers. 

Case study: Blake has the average HECS debt of $25,000 and is paying that off over the average duration of 9.5 years. The debt increases every year with indexation, Blake will most likely repay a total of $29885 at $300p/m before being eligible for a home loan. Under One Nation’s low deposit mortgage, Blake can roll the $25,000 debt into their mortgage and pay the debt off over 25 years at 5% interest for a total repayment of $43,800. This will add $146 per month to the mortgage, a much more manageable figure.

For more details on how One Nation plans to make HECS fairer, refer to our HECS Policy. 

Suspend Charging of GST to Buyers 

According to the Australian, government fees, charges and taxes account for 50% of the cost of a home in Sydney and 32% in Queensland.  Housing has become a cash cow to maintain bureaucratic empires and social agendas, making it increasingly difficult for everyday Australians to afford to build their own home. 

One Nation policy will strip away red, green and blue tape, allowing tradies to get on with the job. 

I have requested the Parliamentary Budget Office cost our proposal to suspend collection of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on new home construction. The policy is straighforward – builders will be able to claim back the GST on all building materials they used in the construction of the homes, rather than passing the GST cost onto home buyers. 

This measure will cost $1.4 billion over 5 years and will lead to a corresponding reduction in the purchase price of new homes. 

Since GST revenue is collected on behalf of the states, the Federal Government will compensate the States for the reduced GST revenue.  This practical measure provides direct assistance and rewards the completion of new, ready-to-sell homes.

Addressing Building Materials Shortages 

Amid discussions about building houses, the Prime Minister is ignoring a critical issue: the availability of building materials. 

At the same time the Prime Minister is trying to build homes, the Greens and the Prime Minister’s own Net-Zero cabal are obstructing essential industries.  These groups are targeting forestry for timber, steel production for frames and supports, and cement manufacturing.  Of note, a major ingredient in cement is fly ash, a byproduct from burning of coal for power.  Therefore, eliminating coal power will also decimate Australia’s cement industry. 

One Nation’s Strategy to Tackle the Building Materials Shortage 

  • Approve the harvesting of plantation timber for the domestic construction industry, with conditions for adequate replanting and regeneration. 
  • Building new, clean steel plants at Abbot Point and Port Hedland to capitalise on Australia’s competitive advantage in steel production. This will lower costs, improve the quality and increase the availability of steel for the construction industry. 
  • Utilise steel mills to provide fly ash for cement production and provide heat for production of ceramic tiles and other building materials. 
  • Promote the development of an Australian hemp industry to produce hemp-based particle board, building bricks and insulation. 

The government’s lies about how many foreigners are buying houses during a housing crisis are coming back to haunt them.

Firstly, the government claims ‘foreign buyers are barely making a dent in the market’. The truth? 11% of new houses in Australia were bought by foreigners (Q4 2023). Secondly, ‘foreign buyers only go for luxury homes’. Reality: the average price of a home bought by foreigners is almost the exact same as the average house price across capital cities. That means foreign buyers are directly outbidding average Australians for an average house. Thirdly, despite saying the don’t make an impact on the housing crisis, the government is now implementing small fines for vacant homes.

Why does the government go through all of this deflection and lying when they could just take One Nation’s policy: BAN Foreign Ownership completely.

That’s just the problems with foreign ownership of housing! Never mind the next topic I asked about: letting a foreign company takeover Australia’s military warship builder…

Does this government understand anything about putting Australians first?

Transcript

Senator ROBERTS: I’d like to table the transcript of a broadcast by Ben Fordham. Reporting from radio station 2GB indicates that foreign buyers bought 11 per cent of all new housing stock in this country. How are you letting this many foreign buyers snap up houses out of the hands of Australian homebuyers?

Ms Kelley: As we’ve talked about previously, our latest statistics show that foreign investors purchased around 5,360 houses in the 2022-23 financial year.

Senator ROBERTS: It’s been claimed by some that foreign buyers don’t make a material impact on the average Aussie because they’re only buying trophy homes—$30 million mansions down at Point Piper and so on. Looking at the $5.3 billion for 4,700 properties purchased by foreigners, according to these figures, that’s an average price of $1.1 million. The combined capital cities average median house price is $1 million. Those foreign buyers are actually directly competing in the middle of the market, aren’t they?

Ms Kelley: I should note again that the level of foreign investment in residential real estate is under one per cent of the total purchases that occur in Australia. In terms of residential properties with values under $1 million, that accounted for about 78 per cent of the purchases.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, your government is increasing the fines and fees for foreign buyers of Australian houses. You’re acknowledging that it needs to be controlled. Why don’t you just stop fiddling around and ban foreign ownership of Australian houses altogether, like we’ve advocated, like the Canadians are now doing and like the Kiwis are now doing?

Senator Gallagher: We welcome foreign investment in our country. It plays an important role across our economy. But those changes we have announced to foreign investment, both for the application fees and double vacancy fees, are about ensuring foreign investment aligns with our agenda to lift housing supply. It’s aligning it with the other work we’ve been talking about this morning in Homes for Australia.

Senator ROBERTS: Working families who are returning home at night to sleep in their car won’t be encouraged by that. But let’s move on. How does the Foreign Investment Review Board treat defence-related companies in its approvals? If a company is producing a defence-related product, how is it treated?

Ms Kelley: The foreign investment review framework takes a case-by-case risk based approach. On 1 May the Treasurer announced a range of reforms to the framework. Under that framework we were very clear about the areas we would scrutinise more strongly. The government has made some decisions around those areas, and we are now actively implementing them.

Senator ROBERTS: It doesn’t sound like being a part of the defence industry enlivens a specific criterion in your approval process.

Mr Tinning: Yes. If it’s a national security business, which includes defence industries, then it’s subject to a zero-dollar threshold under our framework. So all foreign investment approvals—

Senator ROBERTS: So shipbuilding would be part of that, if they’re building defence vessels?

Mr Tinning: Correct. That’s right.

Senator ROBERTS: Do the current rules ever allow you to approve the sale of a sovereign defence industry asset to a foreign buyer?

Ms Kelley: That would depend.

Mr Tinning: As Ms Kelley said, it’s on a case-by-case basis, so we would need to see a specific application.

Senator ROBERTS: Why would we ever allow that?

Ms Kelley: As the minister has said, foreign investment is essential to our domestic economy and has been for decades. What the framework does is—we assess every foreign investment application in terms of our national interest and in terms of national security.

Senator ROBERTS: I understand that the potential sale of Austal to a South Korean bidder, Hanwha, had pretty much fallen off the radar. Then Minister Marles reignited it by saying, ‘I don’t see why there’d be any concerns.’ Does the defence minister’s view factor into your assessment at all—that the sale of Austal, the company that builds Australia’s warships, wouldn’t be a problem?

Ms Kelley: We take into account a range of factors when foreign investments are assessed, and the national security aspects are very important. We liaise across government for views on the issues associated with a foreign investment application and then the advice is then put forward to the Treasurer for a final decision.

Senator ROBERTS: Minister, why would the defence minister say that the sale of Austal, the company that builds Australia’s warships, wouldn’t be a problem? He’s the defence minister and he’s looking at selling a maker of some of our warships.

Senator Gallagher: I haven’t seen those comments, but the defence minister would be very well briefed on all matters relating to that.

Senator ROBERTS: I’ll come back to the Treasury after the opposition asks questions.