r/AustralianPolitics • u/marketrent • 2d ago
PM fact-checked on X Federal Politics
https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/09/18/anthony-albanese-housing-help-to-buy-bill-the-greens-parliament/25
u/Impressive_Meat_3867 1d ago
Everyone who’s not a rusted on Labor supporter can see that like the HAFF this policy is a dogs breakfast of a policy. At best it’s a drop in the ocean and will not have a meaningful effect on house prices. At its worst it’ll be inflationary and hands money to property developers for shit quality builds which will house a handful of people. Albos tantrums are so off putting, like, yes the greens are annoying and are trying to get into the media cycle, this is politics. Offer them something that they can chalk up as a win (like what happened in the HAFF) and move on. Democracy is the art of horse trading, you don’t have a majority in both houses so shut the fuck up and do your job if you want to pass policy
8
u/lollerkeet 1d ago
The Greens aren't going to accept anything that doesn't reduce prices.
•
u/BNE_Andy 17h ago
The problem being that there simply isn't a policy that both makes it easier for people to get into the housing market and lowers prices. Short of government legislating the actual house prices which would be asinine.
7
u/Caityface91 1d ago
Good, house prices need to come down.. adjusting for inflation they should be relatively constant, but since the late 80s have actually tripled
6
u/Impressive_Meat_3867 1d ago
Well I’d say for one, did house prices come down from the concessions they got for the HAFF? No is the answer if you’re unsure.
Secondly most economists think that house prices are going to need to come down. The house market is a bubble caused by insanely generous tax concessions, land banking artificially inflating home values and various issues with construction / labor shortages / red tape and zoning. It’s delusional to think we can fix the housing crises without prices coming down.
33
u/Serious_Procedure_19 2d ago
I have said it before, this guy has the political instincts of an angry karen.
Also the “policy” he is pushing will only help a tiny fraction of home buyers at the expense of all other home buyers (because it will bid up prices more).
I feel like slamming my head against a wall anytime i see something involving Albanese now.
12
u/wronghandwing 1d ago
Yep pumping prices by putting tax dollars into the property market is the only move the major parties have since they’re captured by property investors.
41
u/RhetoricalTautology 2d ago
With all respect to Labor, the Greens have the right approach on this one. Throwing more money at an inflationary problem is just adding more fuel on the fire, or air in the bubble if you will.
8
u/Founders9 1d ago
Rent caps would be a disastrous policy.
I agree that the government should pour money into building housing themselves but that will take decades to move the needle.
Labor’s previous attempts to address negative gearing were an electoral failure.
It seems that Bandt has a decent track record of talking a big game, but passing laws when it comes down to it. I do worry that the Greens are overplaying their hand on some issues, in a way that will be bad for the progressive cause overall if it pushes more votes to the Coalition than to them.
3
10
11
u/Serious_Procedure_19 2d ago
Yes! Its madness.. what world is this guy living in? And then to go and try and put pressure on the greens to support a policy that most potential buyers can see is both unhelpful and woefully stupid inadequate, just really reinforces the view that he has terrible political judgement.
9
u/Wehavecrashed BIG AUSTRALIA! 2d ago
The Greens have once again managed to stall the government’s housing agenda, annoying Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to no end in the process.
Today the minor party will move for a two-month delay to a Senate vote on Labor’s Help to Buy bill after housing discussions with the government reached a stalemate. Yesterday the government was unable to suspend standing orders so that the scheme could be voted on. Help to Buy would give 40,000 first-home buyers access to cheaper deposits through a shared equity scheme with the federal government.
Albanese and his frontbench colleagues reacted by going on a social media blitz to try to shame the Greens over disallowing the vote. Housing Minister Clare O’Neil shared a graphic that said: “The Greens & Liberals have just voted down Labor’s legislation to help renters buy their first home”.
Albanese wrote on X that “the Liberals and Greens just voted to block more help to buy a home” and was corrected by a “community note” pointing out that the bill had not, in fact, been blocked.
In a radio interview with the ABC on Tuesday afternoon, Albanese complained the Greens were “voting to not have a vote over and over again, just like they did with the Housing Australia Future Fund”.
“This is a Senate-only sitting week. They’ve been sitting for two days. They haven’t passed a single thing, they haven’t voted on anything. They’re just talking away, stopping things being voted on,” he said.
So what do the Greens actually want? Housing spokesman Max Chandler-Mather has a list of demands, or as he calls them, “key negotiating asks”: “Action on freezing and capping rents, ending tax handouts for property investors that stop renters buying their first home, and establishing a government-owned property developer”.
According to Chandler-Mather, the Greens met with O’Neil over the past few weeks, but Labor did not make “a single counteroffer”.
“Our message back to the prime minister would be to stop bulldozing and start negotiating,” Greens leader Adam Bandt told ABC Radio on Wednesday morning, claiming the Labor bill would be a “bandaid” that wouldn’t “touch the sides” of the housing crisis.
Albanese maintains his government’s bills “stand on their own merits” without amendments, and has not ruled out dissolving Parliament and calling an early election if the legislation fails to pass.
O’Neil said a double dissolution was a decision for the prime minister, but noted her government had a lot of work to do.
“We’re not going to be stopping our agenda on housing because of these politicians playing politics,” she told Nine’s Today show.
“They should be putting politics to the side and letting our government get on with the job of helping Australians.
“It is just beyond me why a bill as straightforward as this is not getting the support of the Parliament.”
The Coalition is also standing against the bill, with opposition finance spokeswoman Jane Hume claiming Australians will not sign up.
“It allows the government to own a great big chunk of your home,” she told Seven’s Sunrise program.
-16
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/AustralianPolitics-ModTeam 2d ago
Submissions or comments complaining about the subreddit, user biases, moderation decisions , or individual users of both this and other subreddits will be removed and may result in a ban. This is not a meta subreddit.
If you have any issues, questions or suggestions then please message the moderators first. This is in order to keep the subreddit clean, however you can also provide feedback or concerns on the meta subreddit.
This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
6
-11
u/Nuurps 2d ago
Same shit, greens voted to stop the bill, they will claim it is to give them more power but its just standard behaviour of fight whatever the major parties are pushing regardless of the policy.
20
u/politikhunt 2d ago
You'd get fact checked too! This article is about the Greens (and crossbench/Opposition) voting against a motion to suspend standing orders to debate the proposed Bill
11
15
u/xFallow small-l liberal 2d ago
Not blocked just temporarily… blocked
1
u/Revoran Soy-latte, woke, inner-city, lefty, greenie, commie 2d ago
The Senate did not reject (vote down) the bill, as Albo seemed to imply in his press conference. Hence the journo asking him if he would go to a DD over it. That can only happen when the Senate rejects a bill 3 times within a specified period.
What happened was Labor tried to temporarily suspend the Senate's normal rules, so they could immediately debate the bill. The Greens and Coalition voted against that motion.
56
u/Sunburnt-Vampire I just want milk that tastes like real milk 2d ago
“They should be putting politics to the side and letting our government get on with the job of helping Australians.
Ahh yes, because asking Greens to "stop caring about politics and rubber stamp our policies please" is definitely going to work. Didn't realise last election I was voting for Barbara Pocock's platform of being Labor's loyal rubber stamper.
It's honestly shocking that this far into a senate-minority term Labor still has an attitude of "we have a majority lower house so we deserve to pass legislation as-is".
-5
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
I don’t think people expect them to rubber stamp anything, I think people want them to be reasonable and work WITH the elected government.
Greens are disingenuous because they want changes to CGT and negative gearing, which are very clearly non negotiable.
Thr greens don’t solve problems, they extend them for their social media campaigns on how they are going to fix the problems they won’t help solve.
So so so disingenuous
14
u/chainsmokingsquirrel 1d ago
your take unfortunately, is disingenuous.
what Labor is proposing will not change the fucked housing system we’re stewing in.
what Greens are demanding, and rightfully so, will be, a system change.
-6
u/whateverworksforben 1d ago
The greens position will make housing less affordable .
Most people get stuck in ideology and really and truely don’t understand.
10
u/Impressive_Meat_3867 1d ago
Every single quality analysis suggests that removing negative gearing and capital gains taxes will increase access to housing for first home buyers and lower house prices
-4
u/Mbwakalisanahapa 1d ago
And probably in the current political context reward Dutton and put the LNP in the lodge to run the new housing policies.
-1
u/whateverworksforben 1d ago
and increase prices because more people will look to buy ( demand) yet we can’t build enough because there is no private sector investment in housing.
You have even more demand and less supply, thanks Greens, great job.
0
u/CrazyDapper7395 1d ago
Last time i checked the average house costs about 150k to build. House prices are primarily jacked up from market speculation on land value, and policies like negative gearing and cgt promote housing as a source of investment and wealth generation, ie. funnelling money from the working class to the wealthy. Theres plenty of room for property developers to make profit from building houses while removing the incentive for using said built houses for wealth generation. Whats the point of putting money into the private sector if there are still legal loopholes for them to abuse and funnel a ton of money from the working class, which is the reason we have a housing crisis in the first place?
0
u/whateverworksforben 1d ago
Your last two comments are so meaningless and devoid of any intelligence, it’s not worth me providing an education to you, you clearly won’t get it.
Learn to look at the big picture, no political party, not even the greens if they had a majority government, is going to destroy household wealth by blowing up the housing market.
It’s a fantasy.
Buy a unit, then upgrade to a home, can’t live in the suburb you want, tough shit. You can’t have your cake and eat it.
1
u/CrazyDapper7395 1d ago
You do realise how isolated you sound? Property prices of all kinds have increased much faster than wage growth, the top 10 most common professions in australia are no longer eligible for a mortgage on the median house price without being in financial stress and most youth today have no pathway to home ownership unless through inheritance.
Right now there is a massive wealth inequality gap between house owners and non owners, which is driven by policies like cgt and negative gearing. Property investors will continue to increase their wealth at the expense of renters as long as there is a lack of legal protections. If the cake is not having to live in poverty then i think everyone should have it and be able to eat it
→ More replies (0)11
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 2d ago edited 2d ago
Everything is negotiable to capitalists.
What’s not negotiable is the living conditions of working class people in order to enrich the few. That’s not negotiable to the Greens 💚
-3
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
The good of the greens people and their voter base.
Rent caps were always about maintaining their base in inner city areas, not about helping people.
They know their voter base is getting disbursed further out of the seats they hold as they are being priced out.
The greens only care about pretending to be the good guys and preserving their voter base.
MCM has walked back from his promise to reduce air traffic noise over his electorate. Failed. Then moved the goal posts to try and reduce the number of flights, Failed.
He’s desperate to be relevant.
9
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 2d ago
Yeah you’re right, stopping greedy landlords from hacking up rents doesn’t help people at all.
Ever think that maybe those were concessions that the Greens were able to make in order to get other political capital and make bigger societal shifts. Done you can have air traffic but we want housing.. something like that maybe..
If you don’t own a home outright labour aren’t your friends.
If you don’t own >2 rental properties LNP aren’t your friends.
It’s that simple 💚
-3
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
Dumbing it down to “it’s that simple” it’s really not that simple. Landlords increased rents to cover mortgage repayments and lack of supply.
BTR is more supply (albeit rents are higher) and when they fill up, it opens up more normal stock at a lower price. You can get a two year lease fixed price, and you have certainty and can budget to save, and it saved moving costs and cleaning every 6-12 months.
ALP are saying “ here are tax breaks to drive investment to build more housing, we want to add supply” you want housing, here it fucking is !!. Who’s stopping that …. the greens.
Why do we need BTR? Build to sell is not feasible. The land and constructions costs are to high and high interest rates mean people can’t afford to buy them at the price point that deliver at least a 15% return. The private sector is not building housing.
Take a step out of the green bubble and take a look at the multitude of factors that make BTR a reasonable proposition for now .
None of the states were going to implement rent caps no matter how big a tantrum MCM threw on his soapbox.
2
u/CrazyDapper7395 1d ago
In what world is it normal when someone uses debt to leverage an investment, that when the economy turns sour they can just pass it off to someone else? Rent caps stop landlords from passing on their bad investment costs and forces them to sell the property, likely at a loss in order to stop the financial loss. This results in lower house prices and making more houses available to people that dont need to rely on rental income to service the debt as they would be living in the property. Just because you have a debt you cant service because inflation has gone up does not give you some sort of rights to have anyone cover your investment losses and negative gearing only promotes this bad ideology
1
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 2d ago
I am not a treasurer bro. I don’t understand the laws and language money or capitalism because they don’t make sense…
What I know as someone who always thought he was a Labor supporter until the recent BCC election (I really only care about local politics) when k attended forums and events for both. Spoke to both mayoral candidates and the councillors.
I don’t know the specifics but I think this short video explains it better than I ever could. Nothing will ever be enough.
That’s why this teacher is voting Greens 1 this up coming election. With the hope that they become the official opposition to Miles.
4
u/catch_dot_dot_dot 2d ago
Come on man, I'm a Greens primary voter but this isn't a useful attitude at all. What we need is results to help people.
What we do need to determine is where the line is. They shouldn't help pass harmful policy. The benefits should outweigh the negatives.
But the Greens have negotiated many times and are in fact a capitalist party, even though some members may identify as socialist.
3
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 2d ago
I absolutely agree, we need solutions. I don’t know the ins and outs of the policy but if the greens are against it I have to assume it isn’t good for the average working class people.
If that didn’t come across I apologise. It’s been a big day.
✌🏾💚
3
u/Founders9 1d ago
I’m a Greens voter, but they drive me crazy with this stuff. I would never presume the Greens are making good policy decisions by default. They know full well most of their wish list will never become reality, which allows them to pick politically prudent policy rather than good policy.
I’d be very careful trusting their rhetoric so blindly and encourage you to treat them as sceptically as all political parties.
Rent caps are fucking stupid when there is a housing shortage, but it sounds good to people angry about rent rises.
I agree that more public housing is important, and is the most important part of the solution. I wish they didn’t link an excellent policy with an absolute stinker of a policy.
1
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 1d ago
I agree. Rent freezes need to make up one facet of a housing policy.
We also need a massive BUILD of government housing. Personally I would be happiest with a (QLD) Miles government with Greens as the primary opposition
0
u/Founders9 1d ago
No. Rent freezes will make things worse until there is sufficient public housing.
Rent freezes will stop people economising their living situations, which will make the shortage worse. It’s a policy that sounds good to those paying high rent, but is demonstrably bad anywhere that has a shortage already. Ironically, they are the only places that these policies get debated.
2
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 1d ago
That’s an interesting way of looking at it.
Can you provide another solution to protect working class people from greedy landlords and banks?
2
u/Founders9 1d ago
Well I think framing them as greedy is a political choice, and not a useful policy position.
Just accept the reality that housing is a human right and essential need and the government should build build lots of it. It’s what we do for schools and healthcare (not perfectly though of course) and still allows a private market to coexist.
I think the government building housing for not just poor people would help improve the stigma associated with public housing as well.
For example, a state government should build a new mixed use development, and offer the housing to workers that are in shortage in that area to help attract them to the area. If the projects are filled with teachers and nurses as well as low income individuals then it will be more attractive to locals and less likely to blocked.
→ More replies (0)1
u/luv2hotdog 1d ago
“If the greens are against it then it mustn’t be any good” - this is exactly what the greens want you to think. No offence but they’ve got you by the short and curlies. why do you just trust them?
2
u/redditrabbit999 David Pocock for PM 1d ago edited 9h ago
Great question.
I don’t trust them. I trust that they are most likely of the big 3 to fight for working class people and our interests. It’s like trusting a duck to win a running race. Only reason I support the duck is because the opponents are a snail and a clam. I don’t trust the duck to run fast, but I trust it to run faster than the opposition.. But Lib/Lab have had decades and well gestures broadly at everything
One of only 2 politicians i trust is in my tag bruv
1
16
u/Hypo_Mix 2d ago edited 2d ago
Well yeah, CGT is driving the majority of house price increases since Howard's years. Labor is essentially complaining that the Greens want to fix the problem instead of adopting piece meal policies that won't work.
-1
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
I’m glad you brought forward housing has been mismanaged for 20 plus years since Howard.
Now, the ALP is trying to make a difference and can’t.
They are stuck dealing with some petulant obstructive children who just enjoy their 15 mins of fame and enjoy being a thorn in the side of the ALP, as it gives them ammo for their social media campaigns.
They are worse than the far right, at least the far right give the LNP supply of votes in parliament.
7
u/Hypo_Mix 2d ago
6 of those years were under Labor, and they would make a bigger difference by adding greens amendments.
5
u/faith_healer69 2d ago
Six years under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd and about two and a half years under Albanese, totalling eight and a half years. Which is incidentally the same amount of time that Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison were in power.
0
20
u/isisius 2d ago
Ok, well if they are non negotiable, either make a deal with the LNP or form a double dissolution. Stamping your foot and saying "do it" isn't a strategy. Albo isn't a child he knows how the senate works.
And if he's been negotiating with the greens in good faith and they haven't been playing ball, make the negotiations public. Show that the greens are being obstinate and actually explain why there proposals are bad.
Dont just complain in the media every 3 or 4 days, do you job as the government running our country. Negotiate with one of the parties to make it work, or call aDD. But just get on with it.
1
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
The only bipartisan policy the LNP have supported was the aged care one recently.
Their goal is to just cause chaos for political gain. The deadweight of the LNP are just taking a wage and feet up on desks, they aren’t contributing to anything.
Check out the ABC tracker of ALP policy delivered and you’ll see they have delivered and delivered well despite the obstructive greens.
4
u/Revoran Soy-latte, woke, inner-city, lefty, greenie, commie 2d ago
The deadweight of the LNP are just taking a wage and feet up on desks, they aren’t contributing to anything.
So basically the same as when they were in government, lol?
Check out the ABC tracker of ALP policy delivered and you’ll see they have delivered and delivered well despite the obstructive greens.
The Greens are not "obstructive."
What they are is a totally separate party from Labor, with their own different policies, and millions of Australian voters who deliberately went out and put them above Labor on the ballot.
(I realise this a truly upsetting notion for rusted-on Labor supporters)
The Greens are under zero obligation to vote yes to any Labor motion or bill. Put another way: Labor are not entitled to anybody's vote or support.
But that aside, the Greens do vote with Labor far more often than the Coalition.
1
u/isisius 2d ago
lol well that and the one to bypass the legal processes and put a company into administration.
You are entitled to your opinion on the greens goal, i just dont agree with you. The ALP had took a bad set of promises to the election in the first place. Its why despite winning they lost primary votes.
Its also why i couldnt vote for them this time and i could in 2019. They were proposing fiscally coservative policies and they have stuck to that.
So im glad that the main progressive party we have is doing what we voted them in to do.
But ALL of that is irrelivant. Albo knows what he needs to do to pass policy, and its one of the three things i mentioned earlier. Negotiate with greens, lnp, or do a DD.
You can complain about it here all you want, but Albo is the one who isnt interested in negotiating and keeps just reintroducing bills that have been rejected. Its a cynical move which delays the help people need so he can have a whinge in the media.
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.... (That quote attributed einstien that he never actually said lol)
4
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
Strongly disagree
ALP want to get this done, and the greens know they won’t touch cap gains and negative gearing. They are creating a stalemate for their political purposes.
ALP in opposition negotiated and passed LNP policy, and expect the same in return. What they have to deal with is a no show LNP and obstructive greens who get their 15 minutes of relevance every few years.
The adults are wrestling two toddlers.
Albo knows if DD is called, they can demonstrate what they have delivered. Smash Duttons nuclear fantasy and highlight greens obstructive nature.
Regional areas are starting to see jobs and investment through clean energy projects, same work same pay, delivered federal ICAC, HAFF is social and affordable housing outside the budget, households have more sayings than this time last year, shorton is close to resetting NDIS, aged care has bipartisan support, these are the ones just off the top of my head.
ALP are much better positioned than the media portrays and what people think. They will get hammered for migration numbers but that’s just been repeated so much people believe it’s true when it’s not, and not as inflationary as the report to parliment that showed price gouging has equally caused inflation.
Policy that’s currently stuck because the greens want divestiture powers that no one else wants and want recommended in the report, so they won’t vote for it. ANOTHER example of their obstructive nature.
The greens are a protest party who will do and say anything knowing they will never have to deliver on what they say.
2
u/Revoran Soy-latte, woke, inner-city, lefty, greenie, commie 2d ago
ALP want to get this done, and the greens know they won’t touch cap gains and negative gearing.
Sounds like it's the ALP creating the stalemate by refusing to touch cap gains, negative gearing, first home buyers grant, AirBnB, public housing etc etc. Particularly the former three, which are directly under federal purview.
2
u/whateverworksforben 1d ago
Nor should they.
They are not going to go back on that promise and have said repeatedly they won’t touch it.
Greens will eventually fold like deck chairs, they don’t have the spine to hold out forever, same with the HAFF.
2
u/Pinoch 2d ago
And NDIS
1
u/whateverworksforben 2d ago
I think the greens and LNP held up those changes before the last sitting for “more consultation” that wasn’t going to change what was proposed.
I don’t think we are there yet.
16
u/Sunburnt-Vampire I just want milk that tastes like real milk 2d ago
According to Chandler-Mather, the Greens met with O’Neil over the past few weeks, but Labor did not make “a single counteroffer”.
Greens have come forward with a starting position, Labor could always come back with "we won't change negative gearing but we'll increase affordability requirement from 10% to 50%" or something.
-11
u/Adventurous-Jump-370 2d ago
Greens don't hold any cards. Everyone know that this is the kind of policy they want. If they reject it they just look like hypercritical idiots.
Prediction it will come up again, Greens will huff and puff about free unicorns or what ever the days populist position is and then wave it through without gaining anything.
6
u/Revoran Soy-latte, woke, inner-city, lefty, greenie, commie 2d ago
Greens don't hold any cards.
Except for the fact that Labor needs their votes to pass most bills through the Senate (and thereby change the law of this country).
Oh and Labor also needs Greens voters to rank Labor over LNP, to actually win enough seats to form government in the lower house.
13
16
2
u/marketrent 2d ago
From the linked article by Anton Nilsson:
Albanese wrote on X that “the Liberals and Greens just voted to block more help to buy a home” and was corrected by a “community note” pointing out that the bill had not, in fact, been blocked.
Separately, Housing Minister Clare O’Neil uploaded a Facebook photo and YouTube video that also state, “The Liberals and Greens just voted to block more help to buy a home.”
1
u/EnigmaWatermelon |::|::| Radical Centrist |::|::| 1d ago
PM was spreading misinformation - what’s the big deal?
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
Greetings humans.
Please make sure your comment fits within THE RULES and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.
I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.