Interview with Tom Connell

‍

Subjects: Strait of Hormuz, Housing supply, National Construction Code, Housing taxes

E&OE.........

Tom Connell

Well, Donald Trump has said he wants help to open the Strait of Hormuz. There are of course negotiations going on with Iran, but the next attempt in the meantime could be with a coalition of the willing, if you like, helping to maintain or to open up the Strait of Hormuz and get oil and other things flowing. Joining me live is Shadow Housing and Shadow Environment Minister Andrew Bragg, for more on this and of course plenty in his portfolio as well. Thank you for your time as ever, Senator. What do you make of this call? Should Australia be willing to put troops in harm's way, or would that be a step too far?

Senator Bragg

Well, good afternoon, Tom. If there have been requests made that have been made through formal channels, I'm not aware, but I would say from a principled point of view, it would be entirely reasonable for Australia to ensure that there is an orderly flow of liquid fuels, particularly given our very embarrassing dependence which has been highlighted in the last few weeks.

Tom Connell

So in terms of any requests, is it fair to say where the Coalition sits is anything we can generally do without direct risk, I suppose, to our troops we should do, and if there is some risk, that's when we'd need to assess it. Is that the default position?

Senator Bragg

Well, Australia has a long history in working with international coalitions to achieve different outcomes. We believe that we have an important role to play in the world in which we live, and if we can help guarantee our dependence isn't as painful as it should be or could be, then we should help.

Tom Connell

What, it's just a straight out we should help regardless of what it involves?

Senator Bragg

No, I said we have a long history of helping on international engagements, working with our allies, recognizing our status as a middle power. But from our own economic and social vantage point, we have to be careful that we protect international shipping lanes and that we are able to get access to liquid fuels because, as you know, what this has highlighted in the last few weeks is that we have a terrible dependence. We are in some ways a very weak and embarrassed nation, and we ought to bear that in mind.

Tom Connell

Let me ask you about housing though. You've given a speech today and you've had another whack at the sort of red tape and so on. There has been an announcement by the Prime Minister today—$70 million—it's about fast-tracking, more fast-track approvals in New South Wales. So the more you can get onto the fast-track path, the quicker it happens. Is this the sort of thing you're after? Is this a good announcement?

Senator Bragg

Well, you've got to focus on what you can control, and the Prime Minister has done nothing to cut red tape in housing. In fact, he's put more red tape on since the economic summit, and the EPBC Act is getting more and more complex by the day with more regulations and more delegated authority and more uncertainty. So, I mean, the scoreboard is the scoreboard. We're getting 30,000 fewer houses than we used to get under the last government, and the spectre of more red tape and more taxes in the budget is going to mean that there will be fewer and fewer houses. So the government have completely failed on the supply side.

Tom Connell

On approval and red tape and that element, I know there's a lot of areas we're sort of terrified of AI. Is this one area we could let it rip? There are just so many steps and it seems like things take a year and there's some tiny change somewhere that someone's requested. Is this an area we could look at to actually let it rip?

Senator Bragg

I think it could help, but I mean the core problem with the federal red tape here is that if you want to build a cheap house in Australia, you can't build a cheap house. It's actually illegal. So you have to have all this gold plating, and I just think we've had a 200-page building document explode to 2,000 pages because all the vested interests have been able to stick their noses into it. And this government has done nothing to fix that. So I want to see a simpler National Construction Code. Whether we can use AI or not, I'm not too fussed, but we can't abrogate our responsibility of giving the Australian people the choice of a cheap house if they want to build a cheap house.

Tom Connell

I was reading a speech about this today; you singled out mandatory grab rails. My understanding from what I looked at in this is that what you have to have is strong enough walls to install a grab rail, but not actually a grab rail itself. Isn't that a sort of logical rule to have in place? So don't put one in but have it so if someone in the future does, with an aging population, they can. What are you saying, that you shouldn't even need strong enough walls to put grab rails in?

Senator Bragg

Well, it's also the width of the thoroughfares, it's the energy efficiency of the buildings, it's the recesses in the bathrooms. This sort of expensive gold plating means that for the average worker, they can't build a cheap house if they want to. So I just think we want to have choice in Australia. If you want to have all those things you can have them, but they should be optional extras.

Tom Connell

So would that go—I know we're sort of in the weeds, but this is what this code is about, right? So what are you saying, get rid of the requirement for a thicker wall so you can put a grab rail in? Go a step further, and then if someone does move in they've got to sort of get into the wall and reinforce it?

Senator Bragg

Yeah, I would. I mean, I just think it's insane. I think it's completely insane. And the building code should be about fire safety, flood coverage, just basic making sure the building doesn't fall over. Everything else should be an optional extra. I mean, we've got a sickness in our brain in this country where we try and make everything compulsory. And I think we have to have more differentiation on these issues. I think I understand when people talk about this uniparty concept that they say that all the parties are the same. I mean, in a sense there is a bit of truth in that, because there should be more differentiation on these core economic things.

Tom Connell

Making sure a house doesn't fall over seems a pretty low bar with a lot of trends toward more energy efficiency, for example, and lower power bills.

Senator Bragg

You are putting words in my mouth. I didn't say that. I said that the house shouldn't fall over, but that should be the main test.

Tom Connell

Making sure they don't fall over as the main test is a pretty low bar. I was not trying to claim you're the Shadow Minister for houses that fall over, but at the same time, isn't that a pretty low bar? So where do you sit on sort of better-designed houses, no longer these heat traps we hear about that are knocked up and then whomever moves into them is doomed to a massive electricity bill? Do you think that's just not something we can worry about right now?

Senator Bragg

I made the point that it's gone from 200 pages to 2,000 pages since 1988, and houses haven't changed that much. So I just think you shouldn't have all these things as compulsory. Let the market work. If people want to have those things they can add them in. But making everything compulsory means that for the average worker, they just can't afford to do things. And I think that's very unfair.

Tom Connell

Okay. All right. I mean, you can't sort of just add in a design of a house to make it cooler, but fair enough if that's your view on what standards should be. Let me ask you this. We'll see what Labor does—let's not bother talking about the specific changes—but on whatever they might be: negative gearing and capital gains tax. We can talk about them at length once we know what they are. But the argument they're making around this being an intergenerational problem and making it fairer. Is that something that could resonate with voters, do you think? Is that going to be difficult to mount an argument against given one of the true markers now of whether you'll have a house is whether your parents had one?

Senator Bragg

Well, I don't know. I mean, Labor seem to be bad at governing and good at politics. If they want to say that this is going to solve the housing crisis, then I invite them to do that. I mean, if Mr. Albanese and Mr. Chalmers or Dr. Chalmers says that he thinks that more taxes will solve the housing crisis, then that is a promise they'll have to make to the Australian people. I don't believe it's a promise they can keep, because more taxes will result in fewer houses and therefore the problem will be worse, not better.

Tom Connell

Andrew Bragg, always appreciate your time. Have a good weekend.

Senator Bragg

Thanks Tom.

[Ends] - Media Contact | 0401 392 624

‍