Wednesday, 11 September 2024

Bills

Short Stay Levy Bill 2024

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Tim BULL (Gippsland East) (15:09): Just before the luncheon break I was about to talk on the impacts of this tax on the disability sector. I started to say that I received an email last week, and then earlier this week I had the opportunity to meet with Ashlee Morton, who is a wheelchair user. She is also general manager of Accessible Accommodation, which provides accommodation support and advice for the disabled community. She is very concerned about the impact that this new tax will have on travellers with disabilities, including her, of course. That is something that I am sure this government, when they were implementing this tax, never even considered – the potential impacts on the disability sector. Ashlee said to me earlier this week when we had a chat that short-term rental properties are essential for ensuring that people with disabilities can travel comfortably, because often they are set up far better than other accommodation houses. Therefore they are often sought after by people in the disability sector. She went on to say that to have this additional tax put on them will then result in people in the disability sector paying much higher fees to access the accommodation that they know better suits them when they go on holidays.

There are very few hotels, she told me, that cater for higher physical needs, and she also said that these short-stay accommodation options allow generally for a slightly cheaper holiday because they often have self-contained cooking facilities, which suits the disability sector. She said this tax poses a serious threat to the availability and affordability of this style of accommodation, which is well sought after, and again expressed concern that these rental costs will be passed by the owners of these properties on to the clientele.

I would urge the government, if they do not adopt the reasoned amendment put forward by the member for Sandringham, to give some consideration between houses to putting some exemptions in place to better support the disability sector. This should have been well and truly thought of and considered well before this bill reached this stage arriving in Parliament. But as has been pointed out by a number from the disability sector, they did not know this was coming and they were not consulted in relation to it. It is a change that will have the net result of them paying more to access their preferred disability accommodation options. I would certainly encourage the government to genuinely consider this plea from the disability sector. We are going to have at least a couple of weeks between houses, and I think that some reasonable amendments at the very minimum could be made to far, far better support this sector and make it fairer on them so that they are not disadvantaged when they choose the accommodation option that they prefer to stay in.

Michaela SETTLE (Eureka) (15:12): I am really pleased to rise to speak on this bill, the Short Stay Levy Bill 2024, and the reason that I am so pleased is because I think this bill speaks to so much more than just the levy itself. What it speaks to are the values of those of us on this side of the house. What this bill is about is making life easier for working people and families. It is not about protecting people who can afford a second home, who probably negative-gear it and who are getting 300 bucks a night to rent it out on Airbnb. They can certainly afford to cover that levy, and we should be here in this place protecting working people and families.

It is an incredibly important bill to me as someone who lives in the regions. As has been pointed out, 50 per cent of these accommodations are situated in the region, and it really highlights an issue that is very close to my heart. My mother actually lives in Anglesea, and it has been extraordinary to watch what has happened to that lovely little town of Anglesea through Airbnbs. A quick google will let you know that there are about 300 to 500 Airbnb properties available in Anglesea, and that constitutes 10 ‍per cent of the entire housing stock. The average price per night in Anglesea is $300. This is creating real issues for local people. It is the healthcare workers that work in Geelong, it is the hospo workers that work at the wonderful surf club there, the Love House. It is those people that are being disadvantaged. Those on the other side would seek to protect the profits of people who own two houses rather than looking out for working people, our essential workers and our families. This bill is not just about policy; it is about our values as a community. It is about ensuring that our local families, our teachers and our essential workers have access to stable housing.

We understand that it is about striking a balance between welcoming visitors and ensuring our residents are not priced out of their own neighbourhoods. I listened to some of the contributions from the other side, and it is extraordinary what short memories those on the other side have. Airbnb and these house-sharing apps have been in existence for about 10 years. Well, guess what, we were all able to go on holidays before that. Indeed, I can remember in the 1970s my mother renting a house in Warrnambool, and we all went and stayed in that house in Warrnambool. What I would point out is that we probably would not have been able to afford that house in Warrnambool if it was on the Airbnb platform at $300 a night. We were certainly able to take holidays before Airbnb came along, and we certainly had thriving tourism industries all along our beautiful natural coastline.

I also really want to point out here that we are talking about houses with an average cost of $300 a night. The other side talk about this notion that we are taking away average people’s family holidays. No, we are not, because average working people cannot afford $300 a night. In fact it is the wealthy friends of those opposite who want their little getaway from Melbourne that are hiring those places. When I went on holidays with my kids, we went camping. There are these extraordinary natural resources that we have across this state. You can go online to VicParks and you can book yourself a spot. Look, they charge. It is about $30 for the entire family to stay, but it is a pretty good option to be out there in the great outdoors. So to the notion that this is in some way taxing the family holiday, I would suggest that those on the other side think of the many, many people who avail themselves of the wonderful caravan parks across our state. It does make me wonder if perhaps it is beneath those on the other side to camp or to stay in a caravan park. They are so quick to cut those things out as options for people to have holidays. Rather, they want to protect an industry where people are charged $300 a night.

I will go back to Anglesea, because I stayed in Anglesea just recently with my mother. I stayed in a street, and every house in that street was empty and dark. People across the road from my mother’s are building mansions solely to put them into this market. They are huge. They are not a good idea on so many levels – for our environment and all of the energy costs that they invoke – but people are investing. Let us not forget, these are people from Melbourne investing into those places so that they can make money through these platforms. I think it is really important that we remember that what we are talking about here is trying to get houses back onto the long-term rental market so that our essential workers, our teachers and our nurses can all have somewhere to live.

Ten years ago the Mornington Peninsula enjoyed a rental vacancy rate of 3 per cent. Today that has plunged to 0.7 per cent. You know, it is easy to talk statistics in this place, but behind every statistic are people and families. The ABC did an interview in 2022 with a young woman called Michelle. She was a local teacher. She taught in Mornington Peninsula and she was unable to find affordable, stable housing. It was a huge issue for her. Those on the other side would prefer to protect the profits of people that can afford to let out their houses. I can only imagine their second houses are negatively geared – undoubtedly. They want to protect the profits of those people over the families in the Mornington Peninsula who can no longer find affordable rental stock.

This government is absolutely committed to addressing the housing crisis in our state, and so much work has been done. I am delighted that part of this levy – 25 per cent of it – will go to housing in the regions. We do need those houses in the regions, because 50 per cent of the Airbnbs are in the regions. They are our houses that are being palmed out so that someone else can make profit. So I am really glad that 25 per cent of that money is going to go into social and affordable housing in my region, along the Surf Coast and in the Mornington Peninsula. This is about housing people who need support, not about protecting your mates’ profits.

So much has been done by this government to look at making a fairer rental market. We have introduced lots of supports for renters, including some really basic ones. I did have someone ring me once and complain about our new rental requirements. He said he could not afford to comply with the windows legislation, so I went and had a look. What we were requiring for windows was that they shut and lock. It did not seem like too much to ask a landlord to work towards. This government is committed to supporting renters. We have shown that through our rental policies, and this is another way that we can show that we are here to support working families, we are here to support people who need and deserve a safe roof over their head. We are not here to protect the profits of people that own at least two houses and that seek to put them on the market for $300 a night.

We had holidays, very joyous holidays, back in the 1970s, and I would ask those on the other side to reflect on their childhoods and where they went for holidays. I do not think that the family holiday is in any way at risk from this policy, because families do not go to places that have $300 a night tickets on their heads. Families are going to places that they can afford. We need to get more of this housing back into the long-term rental market. We need to think that this policy is about protecting people, and while those on the other side can heckle as they like, I would ask them to consider what stands behind this policy. It is working people. It is giving working people a house and a roof over their head rather than protecting their mates’ profits at $300 a night that are negatively geared.

Bridget VALLENCE (Evelyn) (15:22): You know things have gotten drastically bad under this Labor government when they introduce a holiday and tourism tax, because that is precisely what this Short Stay Levy Bill 2024 will do. This tired Labor government – a decade old, 10 years in office, with record debt soaring to nearly $200 billion, a cost-of-living crisis and having already whacked Victorian people and businesses with 54 new taxes – is so devoid of ideas that they decide that their next big move is to tax Victorians more, with this holiday and tourism tax being their 55th new or increased tax, and this is in a time when Victoria already has the highest taxes in the nation.

This is just a bad tax grab that will hurt all Victorians, and it will particularly hurt my region in the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges. That is precisely why we oppose this bad tax. This proposed new tax really exposes the Allan Labor government for their poor population and housing strategies, their dismal ability to tackle the housing crisis that really, let us be honest, has emerged under this government, under their watch, and they have shifted this problem onto Victoria’s tourism industry and the short-stay accommodation sector. What a disgrace to tax an industry that has worked hard to recover after COVID, after the pandemic, after the lockdowns of this government and then to survive a cost-of-living crisis. The tourism industry can least afford another economic blow to its sustainability.

This Labor government likes to claim it is nation leading and world leading – fake headlines, as we know, most of the time – but why on earth would they want to lead Australia into a tourism tax when people will just choose to holiday somewhere else? They will choose to holiday over in South Australia, over in New South Wales.

It is actually going to be damaging for our Victorian tourism industry, because people will choose to holiday somewhere else where this tax does not apply. It will be a disincentive to people looking for a domestic holiday right here in Victoria. Further, why would this Labor government want to be world-leading and have a tourism tax that is the highest rate in the world – of course world-leading when it comes to tax rates. Is it any wonder this Labor government is on the nose now. It just goes to show the parlous state of the state’s finances and the financial incompetence and the financial mismanagement of this Labor government. They just cannot manage money, which is why they have to resort to these ridiculous taxes with such a debt-ridden budget that they are facing.

This tourism tax seeks to take from the tourism industry and give to the construction and housing industry. The government is pulling the wool over Victorians’ eyes by trying to claim the revenue from this holiday tax will go to supporting more social and affordable houses. It will not – it absolutely will not. There is absolutely no guarantee in this bill that it will support improved housing outcomes for Victoria or for our Yarra Ranges region. We know this is the case. We know that it will not support any more housing, because Labor’s Department of Treasury and Finance, despite repeated questions on this issue, could not articulate how many current short-stay accommodations would be withdrawn from the short-stay market for long-term rental, could not articulate how many new homes would be built with the revenue from this tax and could not articulate even how many more new homes would incrementally be added to the housing supply in this state. They just could not answer. We asked multiple times: how many more homes will be built with this tax revenue? They completely failed to answer that very basic question. They have got a headline in the media release that says this tax revenue will be for new houses, but they could not say how many more houses would be built.

Interestingly, in the department briefing they did say that it would go to maintenance, and we all know the current public housing stock is in disrepair. We think that if this tax grab is not going to consolidated revenue, it will probably just go into patching the holes and the mould in all of the current public housing stock under this Labor government. That is because it is a really bad idea – this tax is a really, really bad idea. It is just a lame tax grab that will shore up preferences really from the Greens political party.

The Labor government has poorly consulted industry about this new tax on how it will apply and how it will be collected, dare I say it, calling into question whether it is even constitutional. There is also a complete lack of clarity on how this new short-stay rental tax will address GST. According to the current structure, GST will be paid on the total cost of the short-stay rental and that is then subject to the 7.5 per cent short-stay levy, which according to the bill will also attract additional GST. Under federal requirements, as I understand them, you cannot charge GST on top of GST. That is not clear within this bill, which is why we have sought from the Treasurer and the department legal advice about whether this bill and whether this tax is actually constitutional, because we would argue that perhaps it may not be.

Unbelievably, this bill will allow local governments to also have the ability to create their own rules and their own requirements and levies on short-stay accommodation, which is an absurd outcome of red tape and over-regulation and will only make it more expensive for people wanting to visit my region in the Yarra Ranges for a short-stay holiday. I thank the Yarra Ranges Tourism board for their input on this bill, outlining their concerns for the visitor economy that is so vital for the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges and the damaging consequences this will have for tourism operators – not just the Airbnb hosts but the whole industry: the cleaners, the laundry operators and the garden and property maintenance who rely on these short-stay accommodation providers who employ them.

Often these are women too, so it is going to be damaging for women. It is going to have a disproportionate impact on women in this industry. In a region like the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges, promoting greater patronage of overnight accommodation is crucial to the long-term sustainability of the tourism industry locally. We are there to support businesses and jobs in our region and our local towns, yet this tax will do everything but support the visitor economy in the Yarra Valley.

This new tax will impinge on the Labor government’s own Experience Victoria 2033 strategy, which is all about increasing the length of stay of visitors. Currently two of the biggest deterrents to the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges seeing more overnight stays are the proximity to Melbourne and the supply levels of a diverse range of visitor accommodation, because we have no major commercial hotels and rely on the short-stay rentals. The Yarra Ranges Tourism 2033 destination management plan identified that we have a shortage of some 1400 beds at the current time, and as the region struggles for new infrastructure to meet the demand caused by the growing Melbourne population, which is our primary source for visitors, the reason so many homes have been turned to the short-stay rental market in the Yarra Ranges is because there is a dearth of places for people to stay when they want a holiday in our beautiful region.

A more sophisticated approach to tackling the housing crisis would be to review the current strict planning controls that inhibit the development of larger hotel accommodation projects, because these larger developments, as we know, would have a far greater impact on removing short-stay accommodation stock from the housing supply market than a tax. As I mentioned before, this new tax will tax the tourism industry but provide no benefit back to the tourism sector, particularly in my region in the Yarra Ranges. We have long been concerned that there has been a lack of investment in tourism and infrastructure within the Yarra Ranges. Simply, this new short-stay accommodation tax is not a solution to the housing crisis that has emerged under the watch of this Labor government.

Not only will this tax not deliver more homes to fix Labor’s housing shortage crisis but this new tax will disproportionately impact women. Around 65 per cent of the short-stay accommodation hosts are female, and the short-stay accommodation market provides a revenue source and flexible form of work for these women. It is absolutely astonishing that this Labor government, who talks a big game on women, is putting in a tax on an industry that is dominated by female workers. It is a very bad tax. It is a shameful tax, and we oppose it.

Dylan WIGHT (Tarneit) (15:32): This afternoon I rise to speak in favour of the Short Stay Levy Bill 2024. Housing is an interconnected ecosystem, and every change within that ecosystem reverberates right across the entire system. The rise of the short-stay sector has significantly disrupted this balance, and as representatives we cannot overlook its negative impact anymore.

Luxury and upscale accommodation generated $992.4 million in revenue in 2022–23. Upscale and mid-scale accommodation generated $1.4 billion in the same period, and mid-scale and economy accommodation generated $662 million across that period. We clearly have an incredibly strong accommodation industry here in Victoria. Properties with 10 or more rooms, such as hotels, motels, caravan parks and the like, are clearly capable of servicing Victoria’s fantastic tourism industry. When you stay at a hotel you can usually expect to be greeted by a receptionist. You often receive breakfast prepared by hotel kitchen staff. At a caravan park your site will have been maintained by gardeners. Wherever you stay, you can expect that your room has been cleaned by cleaners before you stay and of course will be cleaned afterwards.

Tourist accommodation creates jobs. It creates solid jobs for workers in Victoria’s tourism industry. It creates economic growth in tourist destinations, supporting local families and regional communities. Outside of that traditional hotel–motel model we see that in Victoria there are around 63,000 short-stay accommodation places; almost 50,000 of these places are entire homes. While there are many hosts who provide fantastic services, the reality is that you do not receive the same experience as you would in a traditional accommodation setting.

Guests are often encouraged to clean up after themselves, restrictions are placed on what you can and cannot do in your accommodation and all communication is done through an app. In previous contributions we have heard those opposite say that this piece of legislation is bad for jobs. Let us be clear: short-stay accommodation effectively eliminates the kinds of jobs that normally come with traditional tourist accommodation. Airbnb is replacing workers with landlords, decimating local jobs and eliminating key workforces in Victorian communities. However, perhaps even more critically, it is also depriving local communities of long-term housing.

To put this into context, Housing Victoria currently manage 64,256 properties around the state. Public housing properties are a key component of the overall housing ecosystem. They reduce homelessness, they have an impact on rental affordability by linking the rent paid to the income received by the household and they provide an opportunity for low-income households to live close to employment opportunities and to access educational and health services. Compare that with the short-stay sector. We have 63,000 houses that are not available for long-term rental. This has a severe and detrimental impact on housing affordability because the entire business model is based on peak pricing. In the short-stay sector every day is a holiday, so housing, that most basic of human needs, is priced as if we are all on holiday 365 days a year. In some cases a landlord can gain over double the income from an Airbnb that they can from a regular, long-term tenant. Ordinary Victorians cannot afford to live that way, and they cannot afford for such a significant proportion of the housing ecosystem to be utilised in such a fashion.

It is my strong view that the proposed levy is a proportionate and reasonable response to the public policy issues raised by the advent of the short-stay sector. As part of the housing statement last year we announced that we would be introducing a levy on short-stay accommodation. The short-stay levy will be set at 7.5 per cent of revenue from the stay. The revenue collected will go to Homes Victoria to support the provision of public and affordable housing right across our state. Again, because housing is an ecosystem, the decision to hypothecate the levy is a significant one. The levy will remain in the housing system to aid the fight against homelessness and to provide affordable housing options for Victorians in need. That is around $60 million per year to support the building and maintenance of public and affordable housing. I cannot wait to talk to Homes Victoria about investing a fair share of that money in Tarneit to combat the current levels of housing stress we are seeing right across my electorate.

One clear area of need is public housing for large families. I would like to see some of this levy invested into the spot purchasing of houses in Tarneit close to transport and close to schools. Spot purchasing properties for public housing is a great way to get immediate results and to surgically respond to an identified need.

Another area where future investment would be welcome is in improving energy efficiency in public housing. We have done a lot of work in this area, but there is always more to be done. This is an installation where we can certainly put this money to good use. In the same vein, if there is still a roof of a public housing unit in Tarneit that does not have solar panels, then this is also a great opportunity to get that fixed.

Let me talk about apartment buildings for just a moment. What I am hearing is that the residents are unhappy. They think they have moved into a residential development only to find that other people think that it is a hotel. I have heard from constituents who cannot sleep on weekends because neighbouring properties tenanted on Airbnb are used regularly as party houses by kids.

One of the main concerns that the long-term residents have is that they will be left with a financial time bomb once the gloss is off that property. That pool that looks so inviting on the Airbnb listing will one day need an overhaul, and long-term residents are worried that they will be stuck with the bill. And we have all heard of the complaints about the loss of amenity that comes with inappropriate and unplanned mixing of residential use and short-stays. Residents are entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their properties, but at the moment many tell me that they would settle for quiet and just hope that the enjoyment looks after itself.

I started this contribution by saying that housing is an ecosystem. I then discussed how housing is a basic human need. I also believe that housing is a basic human right, and in this place, where we often have to balance competing wants and needs and indeed even rights, I think that this bill does a good job in striking a fair balance.

Throughout contributions today we have heard that this is a tax on tourism, which could not be further from the truth. Victoria has a substantial and strong tourism industry and, as the stats in terms of revenue that I reeled off and spoke about at the start of the contribution suggest, a tourism industry that can be sufficiently serviced by your traditional accommodation types. We have also heard throughout many contributions that this legislation will negatively affect jobs in that sector. We heard the member for Nepean come in here and speak in his contribution about the fact that those people maintaining Airbnb properties – cleaning pools and mowing lawns I think are the two examples that he used – would lose their jobs as a result of this legislation. What the member for Nepean fails to recognise is, because of this lever in our housing ecosystem, those people mowing those lawns and cleaning those pools have no capacity to actually live in a property anywhere near where they are doing it, and Airbnbs and short-stay accommodations play a negative role in that. This is fantastic legislation, and I commend it to the house.

Gabrielle DE VIETRI (Richmond) (15:42): In the middle of a housing crisis it is just not right that that there are 48,000 homes, entire homes, on Airbnb alone. This locks out renters from having a home, it keeps first home buyers out of the property market and it drives up the price of property for everyone. Short-stay accommodation distorts the housing market, and while Victorians face soaring prices and near zero rental vacancy rates and while people are sleeping in cars and in tents, property investors are hoarding homes to make exorbitant profits on platforms like Airbnb.

This government talk a lot about supply being the issue in the housing crisis, yet it was only when they were pressed by the Greens and the community that they acknowledged the enormous quantity of homes locked up on the short-stays market. In my electorate in Fitzroy, in Collingwood, in Abbotsford, Clifton Hill, in Richmond, Cremorne and Burnley thousands of homes are listed on Airbnb while most renters absolutely struggle to find a single home in their price range. Constituents tell me about how they spend weeks and days trying to find a rental apartment, trying to find somewhere to live, only to be rejected repeatedly as the market shrinks and the prices soar. Many of my constituents have been forced to move repeatedly as their rental apartments are being turned into Airbnbs, and a Carlton renter shared with me about how three out of five apartments in their building are short-stays. Imagine the kind of noise and turnover and instability that you would feel in a situation like that, where your home is not a community but a hotel.

We know that regional and rural communities are particularly hard hit, with essential workers unable to find housing. Think about communities like those on the Surf Coast or in the Alpine or Hepburn shires, where 10 per cent of homes are in fact caught up on Airbnb, and places like Blairgowrie, where 32 per cent of all homes are listed on Airbnb.

Regulating this industry has been one of the Greens’ top demands for rental and housing reform, so when Labor responded by announcing a 7.5 per cent levy we made it very clear, backed up by independent research, that a levy alone would not be enough to force property investors to give up their Airbnbs so that people could actually live in a home. We pushed for reforms that would actually shift homes off Airbnb and either back onto the market, where property investors sell up to first home buyers, or back to being made available for long-term renters. I am really pleased that after months of negotiations we have secured these reforms. What we are getting is this property investor tax combined with owners corporation and council powers to limit or prohibit short-stays for their communities.

When Airbnb was first launched it was part of the share economy. You know, you might have a spare room or you might go away for a short holiday and want to make a bit of extra cash by putting your home on a short-stay platform and giving visitors a local experience instead of staying in a hotel. But that is not at all what it has become. Most short-stays today are run by commercial-style mega hosts – property investors who buy up multiple properties just to cash in on Airbnb. That is why we have negotiated for hosted residences, where somebody is living or where you just go away for a short time but it is your principal place of residence – homes in those kinds of scenarios will be exempt from the levy and from the owners corporation regulations. Instead it focuses on entire-home short-stay accommodation that is owned by property investors, because these are the short-stays that are forcing up the price of housing and taking homes away from renters and owner-occupiers.

On top of the levy, we have secured the right for owners corporations to ban short-stays in their complexes, because people should be able to choose whether or not they live in a hotel or a community. The Greens have also secured a commitment from the Labor government to explicitly give councils new powers to regulate short-stays in their communities, and that means they can be flexible on how they adapt rules to their community, whether it is the number of nights a property can be on a short-stay platform, imposing amenity or fire safety standards or even banning short-stays altogether in high-pressure zones.

Short-stay platforms and providers will have to register their properties with the State Revenue Office, and that information must be passed on to councils on request so that they can actually enforce those new rules, because for too long there has been a lack of official data to assess short-stay activity and its impact on communities. That is why when we have tried to impose regulations in the past we have been met with this kind of void of information. In fact major providers like Airbnb and Stayz go out of their way to obscure and hinder access to this data. So this will put an end to that and allow governments to regulate it properly with access to that data.

These changes secured by the Greens are further proof that pressure works and that people can demand more from their governments on housing. We have seen it before in the success of our efforts to put the renting crisis on the political agenda, getting a tax on empty homes and securing an inquiry into the rental crisis. In this housing crisis we have to take every opportunity to rebalance our devastatingly inequitable housing system, to change the laws to make housing genuinely affordable and secure and to push property investors to sell up and make their properties available for people to actually live in.

With the changes yet to come we are really pleased that the Treasurer and the Minister for Planning have recognised the need for clarity and agreed to do this in a way that is simple and flexible and does not place a significant administrative or legal burden on councils. I look forward to working further with the government and the Treasurer as this legislation shapes up to be implemented by early 2025.

I would like to acknowledge the Treasurer and his office for negotiating with us in good faith on these reforms. Working together with the Greens means that this legislation will make a real difference. This new package will free up homes for renters, but it is really important that we do not stop here. There is still so much more work to be done.

The rapid growth of short-stays and the negative effect that has had on our communities has not happened in a vacuum. It is a symptom of a deeply embedded backwards culture that has prioritised the commodification of housing and the rights of those seeking to profit over those seeking shelter. Housing is viewed as an asset to collect rather than a basic human right, and that is why the Greens are fighting to save public housing from Labor’s demolition and privatisation – to stop people from being forced out of their homes. We want to protect communities, to maintain existing public housing and to build even more in our communities. That is why the Greens are calling for a rent freeze – to stop unlimited rent rises so every Victorian can afford to have a place that they call home.

Property investments, dodgy developers: your time of unchecked profiteering is coming to an end. Victorians are demanding more from the government on housing, and by working with the Greens in Parliament their demands are being met. We will keep using our power in Parliament to fight for what is right. We will continue to push for reforms that put people before profit, and we will not rest until every Victorian has access to a safe, secure and affordable house.

Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (15:51): As part of last year’s inaugural housing statement for Victoria the government pledged to introduce a levy on short-stay accommodation. This is something that our Allan Labor government came up with, and we are very proud of it. This legislation delivers on Labor’s promise. This is a good Labor policy – a Labor policy, that is correct – that will help put more affordable and decent housing within the reach of more Victorians.

Those opposite are concerned that some renters will put up their rates and that for anyone going on a holiday or booking on Airbnb it will just no longer be feasible for them. But that is simply not the truth. It is obvious to anybody that when you book a holiday, you look at the expenses and the levies that are included.

Just three weeks ago my family and I actually rented a beautiful Airbnb in Launceston – and on that note I should acknowledge the sad passing of my beautiful mother-in-law Judy Gray. Aside from being married to a former Premier of Tasmania, my beloved father-in-law Robin Gray, Judy was a nurse in her working life with a passion and love for people, and that absolutely radiated from her in her twilight years. I am sorry for the relatively short time that I got to know her, but I will always treasure the memories of her. I should also note that the service that we got from the funeral home was absolutely incredible, and also the care that the Launceston General Hospital took of her and her husband Robin was absolutely amazing. As we all know, hospitals are not nice places, but again, another shout-out to our health workers.

Anyway, I do digress, so back to the Short Stay Levy Bill 2024. In Victoria there are around 63,000 ‍short-stay accommodation places, with almost half of these in regional Victoria, and almost 50,000 of those places are entire homes. These are places that are not available for long-term rental. That needs to change and change urgently for the thousands of people and families who have no certainty of a roof over their heads in either the short term or the long term. The policy that the government has landed on will mean that more of these properties are available for long-term rental and will help fund the growth of Victoria’s social and affordable housing stock.

From 1 January next year this levy will apply to all residential properties that are rented out for a short stay or for less than 28 days. The short-stay levy will be set at 7.5 per cent of revenue for the stay. All revenue raised from the levy will go directly to Homes Victoria to support the building and maintenance of social and affordable housing across the state, with 25 per cent of funds to be invested in regional Victoria. The levy will not apply to a home owner or renter leasing out all or part of their principal place of residence for a short stay – for example, when a home owner goes on holiday and puts their place up for someone else to stay in temporarily. It also will not apply to commercial accommodation such as hotels and motels or to a range of other non-commercial accommodation types, such as rooming houses, supported residential services and temporary crisis accommodation. This is because the government considers it appropriate to exempt someone renting out their principal place of residence, such as when they go on a holiday for a few weeks, as applying the levy in these instances would be unlikely to increase the availability of a long-term rental.

What this bill will do, and what this side of the chamber makes no apologies for, is help to open up more social and affordable housing for more people across the state. It will get more supply into the long-term rental market. We are all talking about a levy which is expected to raise around $60 million each year going to making more housing available to Victorians. It will bring much-needed relief to all Victorians.

For short-stay bookings made through platforms such as Airbnb or Booking.com, the platform will be responsible for paying the levy. They will be obliged to register with the State Revenue Office, and normal state tax related penalties will apply. The SRO will have the same compliance and investigation powers as it has in relation to the other levies and taxes, and the same penalties will apply to those not meeting their obligations. This includes extensive data-matching using information from state and federal agencies to detect noncompliance. Where a property owner takes bookings directly, they will be responsible for paying the levy. This is to ensure that property owners cannot avoid the levy by taking direct bookings. It will be up to the platforms if they want to try and push the levy through to property owners or to those booking short-stays and whether they will itemise it. But there is a competitive market operating here, and holiday-makers have plenty of other options. If a property owner or platform is charging more than they are willing to pay, then as the member for Eureka said, there are many other options. Whether it be camping or caravanning, there are many alternatives here in Victoria.

The government has consulted with a number of stakeholders over the past 12 months, including local councils, the short-stay industry and of course the tourism sector. The final policy parameters that we are announcing today stem from those consultations and get the balance right for communities across Victoria. Short-stay rentals are concentrated in certain pockets of the state, and this approach is about striking the right balance for communities across the entire state. It has become clear through the government’s consultation with councils and others that this is an area where it is desirable to leave some space for different regulations in different municipalities depending on the local circumstances. This is why the government is separately making non-legislative changes to the planning system to give local councils additional powers to regulate short-stay accommodation, such as the ability to require a permit for a property to be used for short-stay and attach conditions to that permit subject to the approval of planning scheme amendments. This would be on an opt-in basis for councils. These changes to the planning system will hopefully come in by early 2025. No changes will be made in relation to councils’ ability to raise fees for short-stays.

The government has also heard through its consultation that in a small number of apartment buildings the proliferation of short-stay rentals may lead to a loss of amenity or sense of community. This is why the bill also gives owners corporations the ability to prohibit short-stays in their development, aligning with similar provisions which they have in New South Wales. I know a good friend of mine was living in an apartment building in Footscray, and every weekend without fail there was an absolute party. So these changes will absolutely be accepted and wanted by many. It will, however, require a special resolution, meaning that 75 per cent of owners vote in favour of the prohibition.

Finally, the short-stay levy will allow the State Revenue Office to share data that it collects from administrating the levy with local councils for them to use in regulating short-stays if they so choose to.

I may have only been in this place for a short time, but I can already hear the attack lines from those opposite, as we heard earlier. They are crying out against this reform. They will say that it is just a great big new tax and that it is another impost from a big government on the little people. They need a reality check. The Labor government has cut or abolished taxes and fees 64 times since coming into government. That includes increasing the payroll tax free threshold four times since coming to government so that fewer small to medium-sized businesses pay any payroll tax. And in the last state budget we committed to increasing it twice more, lifting it to $1 million so that 6000 businesses – that is, about 15 per cent of payroll-taxing businesses – will no longer pay a cent in payroll tax. We all know where their priorities opposite lie –

The SPEAKER: Order! The time has come for me to interrupt business for the matter of public importance. The member will have the call when the matter is next before the Chair.

Business interrupted under sessional orders.