Senate Economics Legislation Committee, , 4:17:41 to 4:59:39
Senators question the government's response to the rental crisis and the timeline for the National Housing Plan.
Topics: Social services, Infrastructure, Workplace relations
Speakers: Barbara Pocock, Ben Rimmer, Hon Tim Ayres, Andrew Bragg, Scott Langford, Dr Nerida Hunter, Lisa Darmanin, Malcolm Roberts
want to go to the question of social housing. uh which is currently at record lows and the wait list for public housing is at record highs. Around 190,000 people households are currently are in very severe need. The government's plan is to support at most and affordable homes and only for the next 25 years via a range of different programs. The scale of delivery does not match the scale of demand. In other words, Labor is housing only a fraction
social and affordable housing delivery falls well short of the current
question for the government. >> The the the government has a $45 billion Homes for Australia program. Under the um under that scheme, uh the half is allocated to build and deliver 55,000 social and affordable homes by the end of the decade. We just
heard 40,000 of which 895 have actually
>> So, so 55,000 homes by the end of the decade. 895 very early in the program uh are completed. Uh I'm just searching for the figures here. Um >> we just >> 8,000 8,000 of those in planning, nearly 10,000 under construction. Um, so nearly 900 homes complete, nearly 10,000 under construction, an uh 8,000 homes in planning. So, a
that program that will uh that will
deliver more homes uh from from the Commonwealth support uh than have been delivered for a very very long time.
>> So, we just heard this is not my question. My question was about how your delivery is going to be outrun by the massive growth in in but I just want to check broadly I've heard 40,000 the half is
>> sorry 40,000 is the half's contribution 15,000 from other programs
>> okay >> so how does the treasury have an estimate for how much the public housing weight list will grow over the next 5
>> Senator the Treasury doesn't estimate that number but I don't think there's any disagreement ment with your basic proposition that uh the provision of social housing by states and territories and the support from the Commonwealth towards social housing is having a hard time keeping up with demand for social housing. There's no doubting that uh that
>> so you do no analysis which looks at that growing gap which you acknowledge in Treasury.
>> Well, Senator, that's not what I said. uh we we do a whole range of analysis about the future of of social and affordable housing as you would expect. Uh but we we we don't have uh the specific number that you just asked for.
>> Could you take on notice to have a look at whether you have the capability to produce that analysis?
>> Sure, we can. Senator,
>> thank you. Um I want to turn now to the National Housing and Homelessness Plan. Um this has long been promised uh by your government minister Ayres um it is one of the critical recommendations out of um Paulson Milligan and Yates's book which was launched by the minister late last year a fantastic primmer about what's wrong with the system and what to do about it. Its primary recommendation towards the end is for a concerted strategic plan for housing. No more patchwork of programs which make the problem worse in many cases and don't deal with the quantum or nature of the challenge. So Minister, I'll try again. I asked it last time given this is a matter for government. When will we see the national housing and homelessness plan?
>> So as as I understand it, uh 1,700 participations in that last time on that plan. Well, I I you know reserve my right to >> answer the question. If there's not um an opportunity to answer the question, I'm not sure what the purpose other than than the clicks is to ask it. Right. 17 like a very extensive process. Government is considering uh the uh the the plan, but our focus is on delivery. has indicated 55,000 social and affordable homes. 40,000 of those being delivered through the half, nearly 900 built, people living in them. Um uh 10,000 under construction, 8,000 um in planning. Um that is um that is the Commonwealth's contribution here as Mr. Rimmer has said. Um there is also the work that has been undertaken by the states and territories including a recent announcement in your home state. Um the drivers of um you know we are we are attacking the drivers of homing uh home unaffordability uh by aggressive and ambitious plan to build more homes in the private market. uh and also um you know an absolutely um uh conscious effort to lift wages and spread employment in the economy like these are that we are we have a bold and ambitious program uh for this work. Um it's been unmatched um in living memory.
>> Minister, you have repeated exactly what you said last time I asked this question and we're going to be here. Chair, I'll just give you notice a long time if we get answers that just repeat what we have heard already three times this morning. Can you tell me, Minister, what your expected time is for the delivery of the National Housing and Homelessness Plan?
>> Well, uh the the answer I gave you was true then uh and it's as true now. Our our focus uh is our focus is on uh delivery. There is a careful consideration of a broad ranging uh consultation process around the plan but our focus is on delivery and my answer is not entirely the same as it was last time because the numbers have got bigger
>> question a date when [clears throat] we might expect the national which you've your government has promised yeah >> and which we see as a real priority for fixing I'm just asking when we might expect the outcome of that consultation it's a very simple question
>> and I've given you my answer.
>> You haven't given me any answer at all. No indication of when we might expect that.
>> What the government the government's
>> I'll move on to the NRA
>> cuz people don't live in a plan. You see that like you don't you don't
>> Minister your your government prioritized the plan and I'm asking are you going to follow through on it? It's a perfectly reasonable request.
>> 10,000 8,000 pipeline of homes. That's what we're doing. They don't live in glossy reports. they live in homes.
>> The National Rental Affordability Scheme, NRAS, was designed to provide affordable rentals to people on low incomes, and it's set to end in June 2026. The government's own numbers show that 4,500 affordable homes will exit Enras this year. The final lot of the more than 36,000 affordable homes that have been phased out of the scheme over the past decade. We know we're in a a rental crisis. Two and a half times faster rent rises than wages over the last 5 years. Things are not looking good the year ahead. Falling real wages and probably massively increasing rents of the scar we've seen. And the NRA rentals will take years to be replaced by the 40,000 social and affordable homes set to be built under the half which is as we have seen incredibly complicated very slow. When I've been briefed by people are actually part of this scheme. It's a spaghetti junction whiteboard about the complexity complex nature of the financing for this scheme. So what is the government going to do now about the shortfall of affordable rents created by these gaps in housing policy?
>> Well, well, as you see, and I'll ask officials to answer on the detail. Um, complicated it might be on a whiteboard. I mean, honestly, whiteboards aren't really our specialty. Um but um complicated it might be, it is focused on u making sure that the machinery of government and our partnerships with the states and territories uh and our work with the private sector development community delivers these homes. Um there are no small achievements so far uh on that front. Lots more work to do but a plan to uh to deliver uh in terms of uh you know the work that Mr. Langford is leading a plan to deliver that work um work across uh across more broadly government. We talked about the um Commonwealth rent assistance before um and of course um I heard what you said about um heard what you said about uh wages. We have had consecutive month after month, quarter after quarter of real wage growth because of changes that this government made in the industrial relations system. Uh that means uh in in contradiction to where we were four years ago when when real wages had fallen uh year after year after year after year as a deliberate design feature of our opponent's system that that workers wages are growing and as inflation lifts and falls that means that that they have grown over time. That is a good thing. I want to see that in the bargaining system. Want to see more people in good jobs. Want to see more homes in the private market. Want to see more homes that we're building here. The um the NRA uh scrapped by the last government like that's what that's what they did. It was a sort of less than negative less than zero contribution in terms of uh uh we are focused on delivering those 55,000 homes that we've been talking about in this in this part of the market. But I might leave it to the officials to answer the details you up
on the house on the on the workplace issues and the and the wages issues. There are now 7 million renters. A third of Australians are renters. They are renting way longer than the historic averages. three million households doing that and they have faced two and a half times faster increases in their rental than their wages over the [snorts] last over the five years of your government I'm all in favor of real wage increases but to see that what these 7 million people are copying in terms of rents is a real worry and to see the decline that we uh experience and I admit yeah agree there are a range of people who have to take responsibility here but how are we going to make sure those struggling households get the affordable rental properties when their progress is so slow. So, thank you, Mr. Rimmer, if you're going to pick that up.
>> Senator, just to make two quick points. I mean, the minister's referred to the decision to end uh this program was made um over 10 years ago now uh 20145 budget uh and around 90% of um uh ENRA properties have already exited the scheme. Uh at the same time uh the government uh this government has a plan through programs that you've heard about today to uh rapidly increase supply through other channels of social and affordable housing. 5,500 5,600 of those already delivered and a large number in in the pipeline. Uh so um that that's where the the current state of affairs is at with uh with Enres.
>> Um I'm gonna have to rotate the call, >> Um and I just Yeah. So Senator Bragg.
>> Okay. So um housing Australia. >> Yeah, you're still there. It's good. Um so the so there was an order for production of documents. um which related to board meeting from last year. Who handles that at Housing Australia? >> The OPDS are directed to the ministers. So that goes to you, the department, doesn't it?
>> Yes, senator.
>> So do you deal do you deal with that or you have someone who deals with that?
>> Uh we deal with that. Yes.
>> Yeah. Who does who does does that for
>> Uh Miss Hunter was um
>> Dr. Hunter.
>> Dr. Hunter. I apologize.
>> Okay. So you dealt with that Dr. Hunter.
>> I was on leave. >> The team did uh in my absence. Yes.
>> Okay. Your team looked after. Okay. So the process is that the minister is obliged under the Senate rules to provide documents. You you dig them up and you send them to the minister's
>> Yes, Senator. And we provide advice uh about possible claims for PII along the
way. You make you give advice. Who makes the decision about what's redacted and
>> It's the minister's decision what uh what she wishes to uh put forward to respond to an OPD.
>> Okay. In this particular case, this OPD given to the media some weeks before it was given to the Senate. But that's a judgment that I imagine is out of your
It it's certainly not something that we're part of. Senator,
>> so you just give the documents in their final form to the minister's office and they do the rest.
>> Uh we the normal course of events is that uh we provide the advice and the documentation. Uh we provide that in the form of a letter from the minister to uh minister representing her in the uh senate. Uh uh and then Minister Ayres forwards that in due course to the tableabling office
>> or to the AFR. Yep.
>> And the tableabling office uh make the necessary arrangements to have it in front of the Senate.
>> Okay. But that's I think you've answered my question. I just wanted to know what the process is and it's nothing to do with you that last piece. >> Okay. Um the funding profile, where's the funding person gone?
>> Sorry. So Senator, you asked me about dispersements from the fund. come back to that. >> So, uh, in the life to date of the, um, Housing Australia future fund facility and the National Housing Accord facility,
>> y
>> there has been, uh, 214,654,000 of dispersements for concessional loans and $691,000 of dispersements for availability payments. Um specifically noting that availability payments are only paid from the point that a home is completed and enters what we call operational commencement. That is that somebody starts living in it and therefore the availability payment is doing exactly what it says on the tin. It is being paid in return for that availability of that home for social and affordable
housing. So in my info, page 65 said that the government was reprofiling the housing Australia future fund dispersements and funding to align with the delivery model which combined with additional support is expected to increase payments increase payments by 4.4 billion over the life of round three be expected to decrease payments by 742 million over the four years to 2829. So what does
>> That would be a question for treasury.
Sorry senator. Senator, I can uh answer that. The as you would be aware, there's um money provisioned uh from time to time in contingency reserve uh associated with government commitments, government announcements. Uh that's often done on a fairly preliminary estimate about the profile of dispersements. uh as the policy is developed further and uh becomes more certain uh and the the precise detail about timing of dispersements becomes more apparent. Uh it's often reprofiled across the forward estimates and the medium-term uh in exactly the way that has been done here.
>> Housing Australia's borrowing cap has increased.
>> Yes.
>> Has has it increased from 26 to 44
>> Yes, Senator. that reflects the the as you're aware um a part of Housing Australia's business is in the form of providing loans. Those loans um uh have obligations and guarantees associated with them that require um documentation and acknowledgement through uh the process set up by the the act.
>> So you can you can now borrow an extra 18 billion as a result of these changes.
>> If I may add sort of
>> it's a cap though, right? You don't have to borrow it just it gives you a cap.
>> Yeah. And Senator, if I may, just for absolute clarity, um, so it it's what's referred to in the investment mandate as the liability cap, and it does encompass the where Housing Australia is raising capital for the bond program, um, and the guarantee for that, but it also encompasses the future value of contracts entered into uh, so the availability payments, which are the 25-y year funding arrangements, the primary means of funding, the total nominal value of has to fall within the cap because it's a you
>> got to borrow the money. I get it.
>> It's a it's it's not to borrow the money, Senator. It's to guarantee to third parties that that is a a um a liability that the government will meet um if Housing Australia is unable to
>> But it but I thought that was a cash I thought that was cash, not guarantees.
>> Sorry, Senator. Maybe I'm
>> I thought it was the total borrowing
>> it it's a liability cap.
>> The liability are you?
>> It's the it's the guarantee for Housing Australia. The limit on the guarantee.
>> It's a guaranteed limit. Okay. So it's not necessarily cash.
>> It it's not
>> it's a contingency.
>> It's a guarantee that Housing Australia can enter into arrangements that are guaranteed by the government up to the value.
>> So where does it sit on the balance
>> It's not it's not on the balance sheet of Housing Australia Center. is
>> it's a liability. It's a liability, isn't it? Or is it a contingent
>> Sorry, Senator. Are you talking about from Housing Australia or from the broader government sector?
>> Commonwealth.
>> I defer to my colleagues in Treasury in that respect.
>> Senator, availability payments are reflected in Comworth budget papers. Uh
>> sorry, it's just not clear to me whether this this cap are we talking about a borrowing cap or are we talking about a liability?
>> It's a liability cap.
it's not necessarily borrowings, it's a guarantee.
>> Not necessarily. [clears throat] Yeah.
>> Is that right?
>> Some senator when um so there are two parts of Housing Australia's business that are relevant and Mr. um uh Mr. Langford will correct me if I'm wrong. One part is um housing Australia taking on uh borrowings in order to provide loans to the community housing sector as part of the affordable housing bond aggregator.
>> Okay, even I can understand that. Yes.
>> The second part is housing Australia enters into longdated agreements with market participants.
>> This is a guarantee
>> and and there is a commonwealth guarantee over those longdated commitments.
>> Sorry,
>> you're saying this is amalgam are you?
>> So if I can add to Mr. Rimmer's explanation, Senator, um those longdated contracts are for the payment of cash over the course of 25 years. >> The value of that contract is guaranteed by the Commonwealth by virtue of the liability cap because Housing Australia is a a corporate Commonwealth entity. third third parties are not directly contracting with the Commonwealth and in order for them to have confidence to raise money themselves to go on and build to do things they need to do to deliver housing that they rely on the guarantee as a means to say well if we can look through housing Australia to the Commonwealth and we will know we'll be paid that cash over the course of the next 25 years. So the liability cap is the includes loans we uh are borrowing but also those longdated uh financial commitments for real cash payments that will be made over the course of 25 years.
>> Okay. So we're talking about a $44 which doesn't require legislation.
>> Sorry Senator I'll defer that question
to Treasury. I mean, this is just can be s this some of this stuff is so confusing. Um, I mean, this is the trouble with these offbudget things. I mean, we're just trying to get to plain English explanations of what the taxpayers on the hook for. It's it's unclear to me whether that 44 billion is it sounds like I I actually just want to know what you're doing with it. So are you borrowing money and are you offering guarantees as part of that cap or are or are you borrowing the money or are you only doing guarantees for that amount?
>> So Senator in terms of the uh what enables Housing Australia to do we can borrow money under the affordable housing bond aggregator
>> which is not part of this or is part of
>> is part of this. So the the liability cap is an explicit guarantee to bond holders.
>> Yeah.
>> That in the event that Housing Australia defaults on its obligations to pay those bond holders, the Commonwealth guarantee can be called upon.
>> So that's going you're going to have to explain it again. >> You're almost at time. >> Okay. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this this spaghetti >> rotate again >> situation the government set up. >> So can you just explain it again please in very very simple terms? >> I'll give it a go, Senator. So the question is, can you please explain the breakdown of the $44 billion um $44 billion cap that the government talked about in my EFO? What what is it
>> So the first part is the affordable housing bond aggregator. >> Okay. Affordable >> which has been in existence since 2018. >> And that's a program
>> guarantee scheme.
>> No, Senator, that's sorry. issue bonds >> in order to provide funds that we lend to community housing.
>> How much is that worth at the moment?
>> Uh I'll see if my colleague can just give me the current drawing on uh in terms of how much bond the value of the um that we've we've issued.
>> so we've got that one. Then what's the
next one? So it it the next part of it Senator is the value the total nominal of the contracts that we are entering into under if I may use the short hand for availability payments >> and that is a the value of a nominal value of a 25 year promise to pay
>> y
>> when conditions are met
>> and these are contracts right
>> they're contracts we enter into
>> y
>> that promise to make
>> contracts to pay in the future
>> to to make regular contract contractual payments.
>> That's two. That's second thing. Anything else in that?
>> Uh I believe they're the two main components, Senator. It it that fall under the liability cap. Um and uh I've got the information here currently on issue there are total of seven bonds uh for 2.839 billion. in the process of making additional lending commitments through the affordable housing bond aggregator uh to community housing providers which who may be using that for AFA projects and other projects.
>> But 2.83 billion is not much of 44 Um, so that means a lot of the money, a lot of the availability payments come out of this particular program, don't they? Out of this particular guarantee scheme. It's not a guarantee scheme. It's a promise to pay in the future.
>> It it is a guarantee from the to Housing Australia as an entity that allows third parties to place reliance on it. So that third parties contracting with Housing Australia, if we fail to pay, they could call upon the guarantee.
paper effectively and >> and it's backed by the Commonwealth
>> as it was set up in 2018 as it was then the NIF that that the liability cap exists to give confidence to the bond market and others who are contracting with Housing Australia that the Commonwealth stands behind the credit so to speak of Housing Australia.
Okay, I'm getting there. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, you got it rotated, do you?
>> Yep, I do. Thank you, Senator PCO. I
>> I think this exchange is really illustrating how incredibly difficult it is for people who spend a lot of time thinking about this to understand what is going on. The average person, and you tell me, Minister, they're not watching us, but they're certainly interested in the housing crisis and its solutions. And this is an impossibly complex program. And I just want to have another go a go myself on this. I I want to clarify my understanding of this. Is it correct that dispersements for round three in of the half are still included in the balance of 11.2 billion and that they haven't been moved to the half special account? Is that the case?
>> That is broadly the case. Senator,
>> that's true. Is it correct that dispersements from the half have been and will be used only for grants and availability payments, i.e. not concessional loans.
>> That's correct.
>> Where what pool of money is being used for concessional loans then? Because as I understand it, there's now the doubling of available concessional loans. Have I got that right? To 20%. Okay. So where's that money?
>> The cap amount of
>> that's the capped amount. Where's that coming from? How do we know what's going
on there? So to support um the commitments from housing Australia, government has undertakes a range of funding decisions which I would describe as kind of largely they're complex but they're largely kind of ordinary funding decisions. So the concessional loans um is a separate decision of government. Um in Mayo government announced 2.6 6 billion in concessional loans for community housing. That brings um I think the total commitment to concessional loans to 4.5 billion. So that is appropriated separately from the half future fund arrangements. In addition, government has commitments to um release funds from the half future fund and to pay into the special account. And as Mr. said um a a small number of other acute housing programs. Uh so those the funds that are released from that housing Australia future fund are provided to housing Australia in addition to the concessional loans and then what was announced at budget um in the myo if you read the measure um government also made a commitment to provide new funding for availability payments that will commence in 203738.
>> Can you just tell me new funding? What is that? more money to keep to meet the obligations of the existing 25. Okay. Why has that been necessary?
So at that stage um so the half will make uh so there'll be dispersements from the half um through to housing Australia and then around that period um 2037 our estimate is that with the contracts that housing Australia has at that time um they will require additional supplementation to meet those commitments and so government made a provision for that supplementation um to commence from 2037. 7.
>> So extra um uh
>> 3.1 billion
>> availability payments of 3.1 billion extra and additional access to concessional loans to keep the half afloat additional to what was said. Is that correct? Am I
>> So I wouldn't describe it as to keep the half afloat. I would describe it as >> goals enable housing Australia to meet the commitments that they have >> to and at that point they'll be you know our expectation is 40,000 homes that are receiving an availability payment. But
that 40,000 homes has required within what a year and a bit of its announcement additional top up to meet the availability payments and to sweeten the pot to get community housing providers and their financiers to the table to build these 40,000 homes. Is that a misccharacterization or is that
correct? Senator, without without trying to um fall foul of the um the attack that this is complicated, uh there are a whole range of assumptions built into those forward estimates uh about the rates of return and half about um the timing of uh half availability payments about when uh houses will be complete under half. Uh and all of those will move over time. uh and the current best accounting treatment of those moves is what you've seen reflected in my EFO. Uh and over over time that uh that may change. Uh it's the nature of these longdated commitments uh that um that some some of the assumptions changing over time may cause uh the need for them to be reflected in the budget and accounting treatment.
So I just want to a couple more questions on this. In response to a question on notice SB519, the department confirmed that the social housing accelerator program $2 billion funds a permanent increase in the supply of social housing. So, it's just a straightforward payment. >> Builds houses, not 25 years out payments and a whole lot of unknowns about what it'll actually cost, which are really concerns in an amazingly complex picture that people on this side of the table and possibly a few others in the room struggle to understand. Here we have a program which has built and uh amended uninhabitable houses and made a difference immediately up to 5,000 houses. I understand. Why aren't we doing more of that and less of this complex comp complex stuff which is so budgetary complex but also so slow to
Senators, some of those go to matters of policy that I'm I'm not going to give an opinion on, but the the social housing accelerator program partially meets the obligations that half completely meets uh in many cases uh in the sense that um half uh in the hands of a community housing provider um funds the construction of the home but then the ongoing operation of that home for 25 is the repairs and maintenance that are necessary in year 12, the rental subsidy that's necessary in year 17. The nature of the arrangement with the states under the social housing accelerator program is that they wear the states where um some of the construction cost risks and some of the ongoing operational cost challenges or the community housing sector um meets those. So the
>> they're not apples and apples. They're
not apples and apples,
>> but you also don't end up with a house at the end of a lot of the half programs. They are sold off at the end to make them books work for a lot of these places. So there is a real problem about perpetuity too, isn't there,
>> Senator? The the the half program will result in the transfer of uh billions of dollars of assets into long-term community housing um stewardship. Uh it's uh it's a program that will significantly enhance the balance sheets of community housing providers over time. Uh and uh obviously there's judgments to be made about uh the extent to which cost is incurred now um versus the certainty of the long-term um balance sheet impact for community housing providers. That matters for government, but it it's not the case. Let me re re retrace my steps. It is the case that the Housing Australia future fund program will result in long-term assets in social housing.
>> Can you tell me what proportion of those 40,000 homes will still be in public ownership uh community housing ownership in 25 years? We
>> we can't tell you that right now. Senator,
>> you can't take a guess at that. That's pretty important question. We can't
including including because there's still an active procurement process going on for 21,000 of those homes. >> Uh but um uh but no doubt we'll we'll keep talking about this as as that procurement.
>> Can you give me an estimate for the 21,000 that you have already signed contracts or you have programs a foot to deliver?
>> We can take that on notice and
>> thank you. Is it this is a basic question. Is it correct that the principal $10 billion investment in the HAF will not be spent on social affordable housing as in there is no plan to use this original investment itself on availability payments or any other payment? Have I understood that correctly?
>> That's not correct, Senator, in the way that you've just characterized that.
>> Could you explain to me then how it is
viewed? the the $10 billion original uh capital plus the investment earnings um plus the concessional loans that you've described >> uh all go towards either Housing Australia's delivery of the 40,000 or in a couple of other cases to other acute housing programs that are contemplated in the housing Australia in the in the
half act. So make sure I understand this. At the end of 25 years, there will be nothing left in the bank. The 10 billion are gone. The investment earnings are spent. Is that correct?
>> Depending on a range of matters, including investment performance, the future funds, management of the of the principal, and all of those kinds of things that that uh that corpus will run down over time.
>> Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Jen. Senator
Bragg. >> Okay. So, I think we've dealt with the the financial issues. I think just if you could take on notice just the details you talked about before about the the contents of the $44 billion commitment. Let's call it a commitment. Then that way it covers off those two programs and any others that might fit into it.
>> So if it's helpful I can give you colleagues just give me the numbers here if you'd like it now. >> Okay. Uh so the the forecast uh that goes to the makeup of that is that uh we forecast the affordable housing bond aggregator loans to be 14.6 billion in Uh and the nominal value um of the 25-y year availability payment contracts to be up to 28.7 billion with a contingency amount of 8.7 billion at this time. noting that it's it is not a cash commitment. It's simply backing the uh commitments we're making.
>> But some of them are cash commitments because they're payments to be made in the future.
>> Sorry, the cash commitments we are making. The liability cap is not a cash
>> The liability cap is not a cash commitment. Yes. Okay. Um before we go to the chair and um some other issues, um who does the who does the briefings for the ministers when they're asked housing questions in parliament? Is that a Treasury thing?
>> Treasury supports Minister O'Neil on that matter, Senator.
>> But that's not Housing Australia.
>> No, Senator. Although we we very often collaborate about um material that was required to support the minister in
public events. So if a minister's asked how many houses have been completed by a program that information is provided by the treasury to the minister.
>> Yes senator working closely with the minister's office.
>> Okay. So the housing Australia future fund the evidence was that it's completed 880 odd houses today. That's that was the evidence. Last week I asked Senator Wong how many houses it had completed and she said 5,000. So, I'm just wondering if you could explain the discrepancy between what Senator Wong said, which was 5,000 houses built from the Housing Australia fund, and what Mr. Langford said today, which is 880.
>> Senator, it's 895 in the housing Australia program. >> Talk about the total program.
>> Senator, I haven't seen the transcript of uh of that engagement in the Senate, but the >> uh the the government has a range of social and affordable housing commitments.
>> The question was very clear. I asked the question. It wasn't about other programs. It was about the Housing Australia future fund.
>> Senator, what I can say is that um there are 5,660 social unaffordable homes already delivered >> uh by this government.
>> Yeah, that wasn't the question. >> I could I'm sure that's a talking point that was provided, but it was incorrect. So, that's okay. It's not on you. We'll write to Senator Wong and ask her to >> and misleading the Senate is not a great
>> well approach. >> You know, I'm not going to take your word for it um on that.
>> Well, he just told you 890, not
>> and that is that is the number that I gave you um just uh just a few uh moments ago. Um 5,500 homes delivered across the Commonwealth's housing programs, including those supported by the HAF. That is, I imagine, uh, the answer that Senator Wong gave you. Um, I will, um, I will have a look at the
>> She said 5,000, not 500.
>> Well, I'm I'm saying 5,500. >> Mhm. >> 5,500. So, more, >> not less, more. >> And and and the problem >> the problem with your argument, >> Here we go. >> Right. Is this political speech? >> It's the it's it's you start from a small number and every day it gets
bigger.
>> Every day it gets bigger. And I understand all this is very complicated for you and maybe this is the new Liberal Party. You know, if you don't know, vote no.
>> I've got the timer on. We'll time you.
>> Um if if you don't understand it, you're opposed to it. We'll try and help you understand it. That's what we'll try and
>> Look, I'm happy to be told that I'm stupid, but I really um don't think these political speeches are all that productive. Uh just trying to get to the bottom of things. Transparency is a terrible thing, isn't it? Well, we're
we're we're we're trying to help you, Senator.
>> No, I really appreciate your kindness.
>> well, we're just responding for to our responsibilities. It's not kindness. It's our obligation.
>> I think we'll try and move on now. Can I have
>> And and and and hang on a tick. Hang on a tick. Specifically on what you said, claiming that somebody misled. This is what Senator Wong said. >> 5,000 social and affordable homes have been completed through the Commonwealth programs. A further 25,000 are in construction and planning. And she goes on, have you got that? Was her
>> Why didn't you read the question?
>> That was her That was her answer.
>> Why didn't you read the question?
>> Well, well, she This is the words >> that she said from her mouth. Are you trying to characterize that? No. >> Um, again, in a sort of smear, she said 5,000 social and affordable homes have been completed through Commonwealth programs.
>> I asked her at the Housing Australia Future Fund. know that you get a
question, then you get a supplementary question, then you get another supplementary question. Just use them
>> let's go on for 1 minute and 20 seconds. I'll press pause.
>> I'll add another 1 minute 20 onto your time, Senator Bragg. And I do not know we are under time pressure. We are two and a half hours behind.