Interview with Dave Marchese on JJJ Hack

‍Dave Marchese:

Senator, thank you so much for joining us on Hack.

Senator Bragg:

Dave, how you going?

Dave Marchese:

I'm well, thank you. I mean, you're saying you want to slash the National Construction Code from more than 2,000 pages to 80. What are you going to get rid of?

Senator Bragg:

Well, we're going to get rid of the idea that a young person building a house has to pay for it on the basis, or build it on the basis that they are disabled, and that they want the absolute latest, strongest possible energy efficiency. Now, of course, we all love energy efficiency. I'm a big believer in household electrification myself, but I'm not sure that every single entry-level house needs to have all that additional cabinetry.

Dave Marchese:

Are you compromising standards, though, like saying the cost of getting more homes out there is crappier homes?

Senator Bragg:

It definitely is a trade-off, and I think we should be upfront about that. And I believe that we should live in a country where you can build a cheap house if you want to. Right now, in Australia, it's illegal to build a cheap house if you want to, and I just think that's punitive and unfair, particularly for people who want to buy a house and land package. They have to comply with extremely stringent compliance requirements. So, yeah, there'd be a trade-off. There'd be some houses that don't have as many things in them, but we'd have more houses.

Dave Marchese:

But I guess there is some concern here, like we've heard from the Australian Institute of Building Surveyors, and they've said, look, this cannot come at the expense of amenity, safety, consistency. And they're saying that your idea actually underestimates the complexity of building safety across Australia. What do you say to that?

Senator Bragg:

Well, look, there are a lot of vested interests out there that love the status quo, and what I've observed is that every single interest group that has had any interest in housing has been able to stick its nose into the National Construction Code and make it longer and longer and more and more complex. So, most of the builders I talk to say, look, it's very hard to build a house, it's very expensive. People that want to build a new house just want to do it cheaply, and all the other additional things that are currently in the construction code, you can have, it's just not compulsory.

Dave Marchese:

Are you worried that abolishing stuff like energy efficiency, though, will only entrench disadvantage for low-income people, because that is what some advocacy groups out there are saying today?

Senator Bragg:

No, I'm not worried about that, because I think that the entry-level problem we have is that people can't afford to buy any house. So what we need to do in Australia is have a housing boom. We need to build granny flats, we need to build air space on top of other houses, we need to have more subdivisions, we need to build out the missing middle, we need to have more houses everywhere, and we need to make home building an economic venture.

Dave Marchese:

Doesn't always work out, though, when people are trying to chuck stuff up quickly. We've seen that in Sydney with apartment buildings, we've seen that in other states as well, that sometimes there are major issues that aren't being dealt with.

Senator Bragg:

We're not compromising on safety. The building must be safe, it must not fall over, it must not burn down, it must have basic amenity, but other than that, everything else is additional.

Dave Marchese:

How many new homes would be built under these changes, do you reckon?

Senator Bragg:

Well, it would save at least $70,000 from the cost of a new house, so...

Dave Marchese:

How many new homes?

Senator Bragg:

Well, that's a good question. I mean, that's something that we can look at. I mean, effectively today, what I've tried to do is announce that we're going to move to a basic Australian standard by junking the 2,000 pages of the construction code and going to an 80-page standard like they have in New Zealand.

Dave Marchese:

But if you're announcing this, shouldn't you have an idea of just what the consequence would be? How many extra houses...

Senator Bragg:

The consequence will be $70,000 cheaper for a house on average, but in terms of the number of houses people might like to buy as a result of being able to afford to build them, that's something that we can consult the industry about. But what I wanted to do is show that you could do it. You could cut 2,000 pages down to 80. I accept that not every part of the value chain will love everything because there's always vested interests, as you know, Dave, but that's a good question and that's something that we can do some work on.

Dave Marchese:

Last time you were on the show, Senator, you said house prices should go down so young people can enter the market. You said for entry-level homes, we should be seeing prices drop. We have seen prices cool off quite a bit. Do you think the government's doing a good job, then?

Senator Bragg:

Haha. Well, by that, I meant build more houses, have more supply to create more affordability, not create new taxes, which smash the market, smash confidence.

Dave Marchese:

Prices have gone down, there's less competition at some auctions. There would be a lot of young people who now have a foothold into the housing market because of these changes. Isn't that a good thing?

Senator Bragg:

Oh, I doubt it, Dave, and I think you know that the bank data shows that no one's getting a mortgage, there are fewer first home buyers than there were before. So, I mean, if you want to get affordability, you've got to build more. So what the government have failed to do is they've failed to build houses, they've collapsed housing supply by 30,000 houses a year on average. They've run a migration program out of control simultaneously.

Dave Marchese:

Let's speak about migration, because you made some comments on that today, and you suggested that net migration cuts could be achieved by targeting backpackers, graduated students. Some of your colleagues are pretty annoyed by this. They're saying it's not an agreed opposition policy. Did you go too far with that claim?

Senator Bragg:

So what I said today was that the government has under-built housing, and they have had too many people come into the country. So, effectively, that's created a gap of about 350 to 400,000 people that don't currently have the housing that they need. So if you want to close that gap, you need to have a net overseas migration number somewhere around 180,000 a year. Now, in order to achieve that in an operational sense, you need to look at different visa classes, and that's something that we're still looking at. So the point of today...

Dave Marchese:

But you did say, you did say backpackers and you mentioned students as well. There are others within the Coalition saying "Hey, we didn't—we didn't say this, that's not an agreed policy."

Senator Bragg:

Well, there's visa classes, there's different types of migration, and that's something that we're still working on. I mean, that's the point of today's speech was to say, look, these are the parameters, right? We've got a gap of 350 to 400,000 because of the mismatch between migration and housing. That means we need to have a NOM of about 180,000, and how you actually do that is something that we need to keep on consulting with industry and the community about.

Dave Marchese:

All right, this is Hack, I'm Dave Marchese. I'm speaking with Shadow Housing Minister Andrew Bragg. We're talking about housing, immigration, a lot of issues, and I know I'm getting a lot of messages about the construction code, about building housing, slashing red tape. We're getting callers as well, I'm going to try and get to those in a bit. But first, Senator Bragg, I'll just stick on this for a second. You've previously left the door open to doing a deal with One Nation if the Coalition needs to. Do you still think that's a possibility?

Senator Bragg:

I don't think I've ever left the door open to that. I think when I was asked about this, I said that we...

Dave Marchese:

You didn't rule it out.

Senator Bragg:

Well, I mean, I've never been more confident in the capacity of liberalism to solve the nation's economic problems, right? We're in a terrible, sclerotic, sick economy with low productivity, a busted Budget, and I think pairing back the state and being a truly liberal government which allows people to do what they want to do, maximise personal freedom, maximise economic freedom, is is essential, and that is what I want to achieve for Australia. And historically, that's been that's something we've done with the National Party, and that's how I would hope that we would be able to fix the nation's economic woes.

Dave Marchese:

Could you ever see a deal with One Nation between the Coalition and One Nation? Could you ever envision that?

Senator Bragg:

Well, I mean, as I said at the time, I mean, you don't know where all the votes go, so like we are seeking to have a Coalition government with the National Party, right? We think that a Liberal-led approach would be able to solve the nation's economic woes, and if we didn't have enough seats, for example, then we would obviously look at all the different hypotheticals then.

Dave Marchese:

The reason I'm pressing you on this is because former Prime Minister John Howard has come out and strongly warned the Liberal Party against forming any formal alliance or coalition with Pauline Hanson's One Nation.

Senator Bragg:

Well, I agree with that.

Dave Marchese:

Okay, so you think that John Howard is right and that would be a bad idea.

Senator Bragg:

Yeah.

Dave Marchese:

You do think it would be a bad idea to have any coalition or alliance with One Nation.

Senator Bragg:

Yeah. I don't think anyone thinks that like a formal kind of agreement like Julia Gillard did with the Greens or anything would be good. I don't think anyone is advocating that or ever has advocated that.

Dave Marchese:

Any kind of agreement?

Senator Bragg:

No, I mean, if you need to if you have a minority government situation then you need to try and assemble supply and confidence from independents and crossbenchers and stuff, you mean, you know, you cross that bridge when you come to it. But I mean, the priority we have is to get rid of this terrible government, which has wrecked the economy. That is the priority.

Dave Marchese:

I mean, your support of multiculturalism today was stronger than Angus Taylor's, very different from Liberal Party President Tony Abbott.

Senator Bragg:

Was it? Okay, yeah.

Dave Marchese:

Well, can you confirm that the Coalition is on board with multiculturalism?

Senator Bragg:

We're the party that created modern Australia. I mean, Harold Holt abolished the White Australia policy, Malcolm Fraser was essential to bringing in the Vietnamese refugees and created the SBS. I mean...

Dave Marchese:

Why is it then that some Liberal heavyweights have struggled to really throw their support behind multiculturalism when asked, very directly, to say "Yes, actually, we..."

Senator Bragg:

Well, I just think that's bizarre. Just bizarre…

Dave Marchese:

What's bizarre?

Senator Bragg:

Well, it's just bizarre. I mean, it is what it is. I mean, we have been the most successful child of the West in embracing the traditions of Western civilisation...

Dave Marchese:

Are you saying it's bizarre that Angus Taylor wouldn't agree that multiculturalism is the right path forward?

Senator Bragg:

Oh, no. I just think it's very clear to me that we've been a hugely successful nation, which has blended together an ancient Indigenous heritage, the British foundation or the British institutions, and then this multi-catch this multicultural gift.

Dave Marchese:

So are you annoyed with your colleagues who won't defend it then?

Senator Bragg:

Well, I don't run a commentary on colleagues, as you know, but I mean I'm just giving you my view.

Dave Marchese:

Well, that's the leader of the party and the party president.

Senator Bragg:

Well, I've given you I've been asked about Mr Abbott's comments before and I've given very clear answers about that. I don't agree with his views on those things. And, as I say, Australia is a multicultural society, it's just a fact.

Dave Marchese:

Senator, one last thing. The Government's gambling bill was introduced into the House of Reps today. What kind of amendments would you personally like to see to this to get the Coalition's support?

Senator Bragg:

Oh, I mean, look, I don't want to see children exposed to gambling advertising, but other than that, I think we live...

Dave Marchese:

Should there be a full gambling ban?

Senator Bragg:

No, I mean, we live in a free society. I mean, are we going to tell people you can only have 10 Big Macs a week and you can only have four beers on the weekend? I mean, I sort of think there's this notion of personal responsibility here, which is important. As I said, I think we have too many mandates in this country on things.

Dave Marchese:

Even if the research shows that the majority of Australians support a full ban?

Senator Bragg:

Well, but we also live in a country where leaders have to lead, and I've given you my view about the role of personal responsibility and then the role of the state. I mean, we have all these things which are compulsory in this country, and I just think that we need to roll a lot of it back because mandates, I'm over mandates. I'm over being told what to do by Canberra.

Dave Marchese:

All right, Senator Andrew Bragg, really appreciate you coming on.

Senator Bragg:

Okay, thanks, Dave.

[Ends]

‍