QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS

Senator SHELDON (New South Wales—Chief Government Whip in the Senate) (15:16): Think of all the issues that the coalition would bring up in question time—and they bring up housing! These are the people that wanted to take tens of billions of dollars out of housing at the last election. These are the people that opposed the HAFF, Help to Buy and Build to Rent.

Actually, it's more than that. Not only are these the people with a policy strategy to take billions of dollars—$29 billion to be exact—out of housing, the ones that starved housing for just over a decade; these are the people that turn around and think this about housing: when asked about the policy on 12 August on ABC Radio National, Liberal shadow Treasurer and spokesperson Tim Wilson said that, in some cases, people could put 'a jumper on in winter rather than spending huge amounts of money' on improving housing quality.

That was in response to Senator Bragg at the National Press Club on 12 August. The Guardian said: The opposition's housing and environment spokesperson, Andrew Bragg, said a Coalition government would cut the National Construction Code from more than 2,000 pages to 80, and strip away all requirements for new homes beyond demanding they were "basic and safe". Well, Senator Bragg, if you did your homework, what you're suggesting is that essential structure, fire safety and health related standards will be retained.

But the fact is that the fire related sections in the existing code run for more than 80 pages. So what's left—the house falls down? That's the policy they have—tens of billions of dollars out of housing and a policy to turn around and put people into hovels.

And, if the hovel's too cold, wear a jumper! Of course, you have on the flip side of the delay for the HAFF, Help to Buy and Build to Rent the Greens, because they also blocked those arrangements—a nearly 12-month delay from getting support to many, many people in need in our community. That's social housing for single parents and people seeking to escape domestic violence.

One thing I do agree with the Greens on, because they agree with us too on this—in actual fact, everybody agrees on this—is that housing was not being built for social housing and affordable housing in this country during the period that the coalition was in power. I'll just say that figure again: it was $29 billion that they wanted to take out of social and affordable housing in this country, when there's such a problem for our kids, our families, our neighbours, our community.

Then they jump to the important issue of questions about rent. So now they're running a rent scare campaign! The opposition and the Greens have been running on this unity ticket for a new housing scare campaign.

I say 'the opposition'—of course, that's One Nation, the Nationals and the Liberals; the coalition to the Right, coming up with these extremist views, thinking that the lowest common denominator is what they should take to the election or what they should fight for to say that they have a place in government. The reality of what people are saying about the rent strategy is—and these are important people.

These are the people who are actually involved in the rent organisations. They're the ones listening to renters. They're the ones actually turning around and saying the policies we've brought in are making a difference.

Organisations which represent renters back the changes we've done on CGT. They back the changes we've done across the board in the announcements that were opposed by those opposite—delayed by those to my right. For example, Everybody's Home said rents have been surging for years, partly because investor tax breaks have been fuelling the housing crisis.

The idea that we should be doing more of the same is an insult to the intelligence— (Time expired)