DOCUMENTS

Senator BRAGG (New South Wales) (12:39): I move: That the Senate take note of the explanation. I rise to again take note of this appalling explanation. I have to restate the objective here.

Our job is to get to the bottom of things and to find out why things have gone wrong. What happened with the five per cent deposits was that, after they were uncapped and all the means testing was removed after the election, they pushed up the house prices at the entry-level point. The cheapest houses skyrocketed in their pricing, and the government have not given the modelling that they relied upon when they changed the scheme.

All the government needs to do is to provide the information without redactions, like we see here. Then this attendance motion will go away, and Minister Ayres won't have to come back and complain about having to do his job. What he is doing is complaining about having to do work.

The work he has to do is to provide the explanations as to why the government took particular policy positions. In this case, they must explain the parameters and the assumptions used when they changed the five per cent deposit scheme, which has had an adverse impact on the Australian people. This five per cent deposit scheme has been a disaster for many Australians, because they are going to be left in negative equity or have paid too much for the price of their house.

All we are trying to do is get to the bottom of things. But apparently that is not something appropriate for this Senate to undertake. I say to the minister: he should go home, and the government should go home, and we should pack this parliament up and forget about it!

The whole point of coming here is to get to the bottom of things and to make things better for the Australian people, but this scheme has been a disaster for many Australians, particularly those who were encouraged to take out 95 per cent loans and then smashed with tax increases which have destroyed the value of their houses and put those Australians into negative equity.

When we ask the government how many people are in negative equity, they haven't got an idea. They haven't got a clue. They haven't got a clue, because almost all the work they do is covered up with redactions and black ink.

We are trying to get to the bottom of this, just like we're trying to get to the bottom of the assumptions underpinning the tax hikes. The government said that $77 billion of new taxes were needed to fix the housing system. What we have seen since the budget is fewer houses, higher rents and fewer mortgages to owner-occupiers.

That is a trifecta of failure if ever there was one. The government say that they want us to have confidence in them and that they are doing the right thing by democracy. Then release the documents, or, as Mr Burns would say, 'Release the hounds!' Show us.

Act with integrity. Let the Australian people inspect the assumptions that you relied upon when you made these judgements to uncap this scheme for five per cent deposits—which you peddled. You peddled it on your social media, and you said the 95 per cent mortgages were fantastic for everyone.

Then you dumped these taxes onto the people, and it's pushed people in hundreds of suburbs, especially in Melbourne, into negative equity. That is the job of this parliament—to get to the bottom of things, and we will never stop doing that. If we do then we're giving up on the Australian people.

Whatever people's political opinions might be, I know that they want one thing. They want effective government and they want an opposition to hold the government to account, because that gives you the best outcomes for the people. For the government to be so arrogant and disgusting—endemic across this government—in their approach to orders of this Senate and in the way that they have treated people who try to get basic information is a disgrace.

They appeal judgements made by the information commissioner through to the courts. They're now trying to impose costs onto people who dare to try and get information. They are darkening this democracy.

All you need to do is to look at the analysis by the Centre for Public Integrity, who remind us that this is the most secretive government since the Keating government. It's the most secretive government, as measured by their responses to Senate orders, as you've seen today. The minister has basically said, 'We're never going to give you the documents,' and he's going to complain about the Liberal Party.

That's how committed he is to democracy! That's how he's going to spend his time. He is paid by the taxpayer to be a minister of the Crown.

He refuses to give the information. All he's got to say is 'the Liberal Party is bad'. That is a disgusting response.

It is an offensive response to people who love this country and just want to see the normal operation of this democracy be undertaken by the participants here in this chamber. That is our job. (Time expired)