Michael Sukkar MP

Interview with Michael Rowland – ABC News Breakfast

THE HON MICHAEL SUKKAR MP – SHADOW MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, NDIS, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS

TRANSCRIPT

INTERVIEW WITH MICHAEL ROWLAND – ABC NEWS BREAKFAST

Monday 21 October, 2024

TOPICS: Housing Infrastructure Programme

E&OE

Michael Rowland: Housing very much front and center this morning. So let’s bring in the Federal Opposition’s Shadow Housing Minister, Michael Sukkar to talk about the Opposition’s plan unveiled over the weekend. Good morning to you, Michael. So, $5 billion if the Coalition’s elected on infrastructure for potential housing developments, we’re talking sewerage, water, power. How would that work in practice?

Michael Sukkar: So in practice we would work with local governments, any other consortia that are involved with the development of these sorts of big tracts of land and Greenfields estates. We know from hundreds of meetings we’ve had with councils, Michael, that the biggest barrier to their approvals is this critical infrastructure. It’s not the most exciting in the world. We’re talking sewerage, we’re talking telecommunications, we’re talking access roads. But in essence to make a housing project work, you need to get water in, sewerage out, people in via vehicles, people out. I was out yesterday in Drouin just with an example project, a $4.2 million upgrade to a road that would unlock 5,000 new homes, according to Baw Baw Shire Council. There are hundreds of these projects around the country and a really practical way to make sure that we can elevate and unlock 500,000 new homes.

Michael Rowland: But how can you guarantee that? I mean, where does the money go? Where does the $5 billion go? Is it to developers? Is it to councils to to fast track this sort of stuff?

Michael Sukkar: So typically it would be councils who are the people who undertake the work. So in yesterday’s example that I just spoke, about the money, the $4.2 million would go to Baw Baw Shire Council and they would contract and they’ve told me that they could start the work immediately. They’d contract the civil contractors to upgrade the road. That would then allow them to not only approve 5,000 new homes, but approve the new school, approve a new little shopping strip. So this is catalyst infrastructure that has not been funded to the level it should be in recent years. And that’s why there’s 500,000 homes that can be unlocked pretty quickly.

Michael Rowland: To that point, the Government says you’re simply copying their policy that they’ve put down, according to the government, $1.5 billion doing just this. So, are you copying what Labor’s doing?

Michael Sukkar: Well, given that that’s the greatest argument that they can make against it, I think shows how much widespread support there is for this.

Michael Rowland: Or imitation is the best form of flattery.

Michael Sukkar: Well, their $500 million, not $1.5 billion, their $500 million program at the moment – The first round of it has been funding bureaucrats. It’s been funding increasing the number of planners in local councils, been funding planning and scoping studies and feasibility studies. That’s not infrastructure. So if they want to claim that’s infrastructure, they’re entitled to. Our fund will be limited to pipes, to bitumen, to concrete, the things that actually get houses moving, not the increase to the bureaucracy that the Labor Government’s claiming is an infrastructure fund – it’s not.

Michael Rowland: What do you make of the Business Council’s blueprint this morning? $10 billion to do pretty much what you’re wanting to do, what the government’s wanting to do – fast track housing developments, more Australians get a foothold into the property market?

Michael Sukkar: Well, it’s pretty damning. The Business Council has again today highlighted that Labor’s promise of 1.2 million homes is not worth the paper it’s written on. In fact, most industry bodies believe that they’ll fall, say 300,000-400,000 homes short and the BCA confirms that today. So it’s an indictment on what Labor’s doing. There’s a lot in what the BCA has outlined today that they think has a lot of merit and is very worthy. Some of it we may not agree with, but we’ll work through it. I commend them for the work they’ve done because what they’ve done is highlight that we are in the midst of a housing crisis that’s, to be frank, getting worse under Labor, not getting better.

Michael Rowland: The Victorian Government has unveiled a plan over the weekend to build apartment towers around transport hubs in Melbourne, you represent a Melbourne seat. We had the Premier, Jacinta Allan, on the show earlier saying it’s time to break up the status quo. Yes, there will be opposition but governments need to do this – be bold to ensure the housing crisis is tackled. What do you make of that plan?

Michael Sukkar: Well, I don’t think you have to accept that there will be opposition. I think most Australians and Victorians are pretty fair minded and understand that you need to increase density where it’s appropriate to do so. I think people get very angry when they get up and read on the front page of the newspaper that a 20-storey tower is all of a sudden going up next door to them with no consultation.

Michael Rowland: You know, there is consultation to come.

Michael Sukkar: Well, you don’t announce it on the front page of the paper, and then say we’ll consult with you – consultation is saying we will bring the community with us in the lead up to an announcement, not make the announcement and then consult afterwards. So 20-storey towers in 50 or 60 local suburbs in our area. I think without that consultation and that social license and without the promise of investments of additional infrastructure, because in the end our suburbs are already buckling under the pressure.

Michael Rowland: But the infrastructure is there already is the argument in the inner city areas versus on the outskirts of the city.

Michael Sukkar: If you’re in an area where your infrastructure is buckling and there’ll be people sitting in traffic right now not feeling as though their infrastructure is there, unless you are willing to make those investments, you can’t just dump tens of thousands more people into an area without those investments and without that consultation. So I think this is more of a media strategy than a housing strategy from the state Labor government, which is why, quite frankly, they’ve woefully missed every housing target they’ve put in place because it’s all media, not doing the hard.

Michael Rowland: Jacinta Allan told me that NIMBYism could be seen as one way of describing the backlash to the plan. Does she have a point?

Michael Sukkar: Well, I think she’s being very offensive to Victorians there. I think Victorians are fair minded. In my electorate we’ve got areas and pockets where people are very happy to see density and where you do density correctly, it means you don’t have to story towers in leafy suburbs where people have moved there for a reason. So I think if you consult with people, I think Victorians are fair minded, I don’t think it’s fair to accuse or offend them by calling them NIMBYs. And with that consultation and social license you can get there. But our plan, our housing infrastructure program, will unlock 500,000 new homes and we think would be largely supportive from the communities that would be beneficiaries of that.

Michael Rowland: Michael Sukkar, I really appreciate your time this morning. Thank you.

Michael Sukkar: Thanks, Michael.

Michael Rowland: Michael Sukkar there, the shadow housing minister.

ENDS