Thursday, 17 October 2024
Bills
Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024
Please do not quote
Proof only
Bills
Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024
Second reading
Debate resumed.
Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (15:00): I am pleased to continue speaking on this bill. At the break I was just getting on to the issue of the effective gas ban that is included in this bill, and I do raise my concerns on that from the perspective of the representative of the region that historically has produced virtually all of Victoria’s gas and indeed all of the east coast gas originally. We have been doing so for 55 years in Bass Strait, coming into my electorate, to Longford, which has then provided, as I said, 90 per cent, up until recent years, of the gas.
Danny O’BRIEN: Where does it come from now? It is a fact that gas is running out. Esso expects that within the next 11 or so years the gas in Bass Strait will run out. I do hear a lot of debate in my local community in particular that there is heaps of gas out there, and I believe that is correct. There is heaps of gas out there in Bass Strait. Unfortunately, it is either very deep or very contaminated and therefore very expensive to produce and is not ever likely to be commercial, although at the rate that gas prices are increasing that might change, you never know. But that gas and oil over the decades has been fantastic for our region and has provided very good, very high paying jobs for those working either at the gas plant or offshore. Obviously the offshore component in particular is a very difficult job for people to do, to be away week on, week off – or two weeks on, two weeks off, as most are these days. But there have been fantastic benefits for our region, and I certainly continue to support that industry.
There may well be future opportunities. I know Lakes Blue Energy has reapplied for an exploration permit at its Wombat field onshore down near Sea Spray. As the member for Polwarth indicates, there seems to be a bit of onshore gas in his region. Indeed those opposite like to pretend that there is no onshore gas, but actually in the debate yesterday on the other bill, about gas storage, we pointed out that their own report indicates that there are significant prospective reserves onshore in Victoria.
What I am concerned about with the government’s attempt to ban gas now is that it is premature in the context of the transition to renewables. There are opportunities. They still are a way away, but the notion that we will stop or remove residential and business gas I think is very premature because, firstly, we do not yet know whether those potential onshore and other offshore gas reserves may be discovered and exploited and, secondly, there is the prospect in future of green hydrogen or indeed any hydrogen. I mentioned yesterday the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project in the Latrobe Valley, which has gone through its pilot phase, has been proven to be technically possible and is now under consideration by the Japanese government as to whether it goes to commercial stage. The reason I raised that is that if the government, particularly the Minister for Energy and Resources, would get out of the way of this project and actually allow it to occur, it would give my region and those of the member for Morwell, the member for Gippsland East and even the member for Narracan the opportunity for the development of a hydrogen economy.
As I said yesterday, there is a prospect in the future – and it is only a hypothetical at this stage – that if we had a number of offshore wind farms operating in Bass Strait off Ninety Mile Beach and south of Wilsons Prom, as is currently proposed, particularly at times of low demand in the middle of the day, when the sun is shining and all the solar panels are doing their job, the electricity generated by that offshore wind could in fact be converted to green hydrogen.
The problem with that is it is some way off, and indeed the opportunity to replace some of our energy supplies through offshore wind is also some way off, apart from anything else because the government has messed up where the construction port is going to be for this project. We, under freedom of information, received a ministerial brief that was dated 7 October 2022 asking the then minister for ports to sign off on some funding for the Port of Hastings, and that brief said that it ‘must commence as soon as possible’ and that the development of the Port of Hastings required ‘urgent planning, technical and environmental work’.
Here we are literally two years later, with the federal government having knocked back the Port of Hastings, and the government has done nothing further. There is no clarity as to where the offshore wind sector will be produced. I have always argued that we should be doing more with Barry Beach. I would say again to the government: if you are going to understand that gas is going to be phased out and that we are going to lose jobs in the oil and gas sector in my electorate, then make sure there are some replacement jobs coming with the offshore wind industry and that the jobs that may well be created are not actually going to go to Geelong or to Hastings – or to Tasmania, perish the thought. The government does need to actually do that work and make sure that Gippsland does in fact benefit from this, because we have provided cheap, affordable and reliable power and cheap, affordable and reliable gas, for 50 years in the case of the gas and 100 years in the case of the electricity, and yet we are being left behind by this government because it is not focused on Gippsland and its needs in this area.
We do not oppose the other elements of the bill, but I support the member for Brighton’s reasoned amendment for all the reasons I have outlined. The government should not be seeking to stop people from connecting to gas. That is a premature decision, and that is why we will be opposing this bill.
Josh BULL (Sunbury) (15:06): I am pleased to have the opportunity this afternoon after question time to contribute to the debate on the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024 and to have the opportunity to build on a contribution from earlier this week where we discussed the important, significant and large-scale transition that is occurring within the energy market across our state. We know and understand the importance of the transition in a global context, in terms of reducing our greenhouse gases, and in the context of increasing supply and driving down the cost of energy generation. The bill before the house this afternoon, the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill, makes miscellaneous amendments to the Building Act 1993, the Architects Act 1991 and the Victorian Planning Authority Act 2017, and if time permits I do want to touch on all three amendments relating to those various acts.
I do want to return to the changes around the measures that we are undertaking when it comes to gas and build on the discussion that was had earlier in the week and I think is happening broadly across the state. We know and understand that there has been such a significant transition, and not just in the past 12 months; it has really been one built by this government over a decade. Unfortunately, what we saw was a policy vacuum from those in the federal coalition government for the best part of over nine years. Opportunities were lost I think in that space, not just for our state but for our country. This government has taken measures or steps in the transition to work with industry and to work with the thousands of workers that do incredible work within this space across local communities, many of them in regional Victoria. We are making sure that those steps are taken to provide certainty around solar and around wind, understanding that this is a government that deals in reality and not in myths or the circus that we see from those in the Greens political party. We know and understand that transition takes time and we are a growing population. This state is working very hard to ensure that transition is done in an effectual way, making sure that we are using all of the levers – the technology, the science, the advancement and everything in that space – to create a strong, reliable and secure source of energy. It is something we are very much determined to get on and deliver.
I will leave a lot of the comments from those opposite alone. I do just want to go back to some of the comments we know have been made both within this house and within the public space by the Greens political party. Knowing and understanding that these are real decisions that have implications for energy generation, costs and jobs is something that we remain focused on and having that opportunity to make these changes is something that we take very, very seriously. I want to commend the minister for the work that she has done – strong, sustainable work in this space. Knowing and understanding that these are important measures is something that we are very much focused on.
I will return to those changes that I referenced earlier, the amendments are supporting Victoria’s Gas Substitution Roadmap, enhancing the building surveyor enforcement powers, protecting consumers from losing their right to bring building and plumbing legal actions, making administrative improvements to boost efficiency of building legislation and of course making sure that those steps and measures are done in the most effective way.
When it comes to the Building Act 1993, the amendments are supporting the implementation of the key components of the Gas Substitution Roadmap, ensuring that building surveyors have the necessary powers to issue building orders so that buildings are safe and the building work is compliant, protecting consumers from losing their building or plumbing legal actions in cases where the matter is transferred from VCAT to a court, introducing a new offence in relation to plumbing compliance certificates, clarifying offences relating to the performance of building surveyor functions and making various administrative improvements to boost the effectiveness of the Building Act.
When it comes to the Architects Act 1991, the amendments are requiring architects to renew their registration each year, including a fit and proper person declaration; requiring approved partnerships and companies to renew their approval each year; and improving clarity regarding powers to make regulations for charging fees. Finally, the bill implements the recommendations made by the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission to the Victorian Planning Authority Act 2017.
We are making sure that, as a local member that has seen and will continue to see significant growth within my community over many years, the planning provisions are as robust as we can make them and understanding, Acting Speaker, as I am sure you do and all members of the house do, the need to get the planning reforms right, making sure as we grow and thrive within local communities we are providing access to local services, health, education and transport within growing communities is something that is a deep passion of mine as a member of, as I mentioned before, a fast-growing community. But what is particularly important is that we equip our planning agencies with the powers and the regulations to ensure that all of these changes as we grow are able to be implemented in the most effective way and are protected from rarely but sometimes various threats that may present against them. Many of those are obviously contained within the numerous reports that have been canvassed both within the house and across communities.
What this comes down to is surety – making sure that the amendments contained across those three acts that I mentioned earlier go to the strong and sustained investment from this Allan Labor government ensuring that as we continue to grow communities have all of those provisions that we mentioned before but also, when it comes to energy and the transition, making sure that we have the reserves, but we know what has changed from the past. The opportunity for cheap and plentiful reserves is no longer the case. Having now what is a finite resource, we have got those two levers of change – bringing on new transitional gas supply and storage and supporting Victorian families and businesses that need to get off gas – slashing the power costs and making sure that the opportunities for those provisions are in place.
It all comes down to making sure that we are providing for that certainty and that surety within local communities, because we know that by providing a range of options for our energy generation we are working towards turning that dial of bringing costs down but also having not just a responsibility to the Victorian community and every single person that lives in our country but of course a global responsibility, and that is very, very important.
I go back to what was I think very much a disappointing and lost decade, just about, of lack of federal leadership that we saw from Canberra. Thankfully, now that has changed. We have a strong partner that understands these are really important steps, important measures that need to take place, and I am very pleased to say that I think when you move around local communities and you speak to people about solar panels on roofs, for example, there is obviously a significant positive will within the community to do these things. But the legislation before the house continually needs to be upgraded, and that is why this bill, of course across those three acts, those three changes, is yet another incredibly important bill. We will continue to make sure we support local communities in each and every way, and on this Thursday afternoon I commend this bill to the house.
Richard RIORDAN (Polwarth) (15:16): At last we get to rise, with an hour and a half or so left of the Parliament sitting week, to discuss what is essentially one of the most important pieces of legislation that this government has tried to sneak through in its three terms of government, and when I say ‘sneak through’, I am not joking. Of course we had a debate earlier today when the opposition tried to bring this piece of legislation to the fore so that it could be debated properly. All members, particularly those in the opposition, who actually care about how energy and housing affordability affect Victorians wanted that opportunity to really prosecute some of the cases in this.
What I find most interesting about the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024 is that in the second-reading speech the minister made it clear that this is a set of reforms that the government wants to bring to make affordable, safe and comfortable homes. They talk about the affordability elements of this legislation. They also talk about how this is a piece of legislation that will assist in Victorians having more security and more certainty when they buy a home, renovate a home or build a home. This legislation does anything but for home owners, particularly those in Victoria at the moment suffering cost-of-living pressures and home affordability crisis issues. This bill does nothing of the sort.
What I am referring to specifically is the most egregious element of this bill, which is hidden in clauses 38 and 39 in a fairly wordy bill that has been brought before the Parliament. What it does is it inserts additional regulation-making powers, including powers for prohibiting a person from carrying out plumbing work in connection with certain connections to reticulated gas, extensions to the capacity of existing reticulated gas connections and the installation or replacement of certain reticulated gas appliances. It is unbelievable at a time when the energy transition is so far from complete in this state, at a time when cost of living is going through the roof, when this government has put cost after cost onto home owners and onto rental providers into the housing market. We heard yesterday this government is failing to keep its public housing stock up and it is going out to market. It is hoovering up homes at rates well above inflation and well above the going rate for rental homes in suburbs all over Melbourne. At a time when this government is putting so much pressure on, it is now that this government is going to criminalise the acts of plumbers. Can you believe it? We have got out-of-control crime and we have got youth crime at record highs, and we are now going to spend resources criminally tracking down plumbers who want to put gas appliances into people’s homes. This is outrageous. Not only is it outrageous, but it just shows how disconnected this government is from the lives of average Victorians.
Just to give you one example of a gas appliance: a standard large, reticulated gas central heater, which are in their thousands across households all over Victoria and in regional Victoria as well, is a 130-megajoule appliance, and that is what you need for an average sort of four-bedroom, larger home. To convert that to an electric reverse cycle would require 36 kilowatts of electrical energy. Now, that is all very well and good if you say it quick enough, but the average reverse-cycle unit is somewhere between 6 and 8 kilowatts. Therefore to get the same amount of heat energy into your average Victorian home, you have to replace your one gas central heater with between four, five or six reverse-cycle air conditioner units. That is beyond the capacity of most people, particularly in the cost-of-living crisis at this time.
But, do you know what, that is further exacerbated in so many regional towns. I can quote my own home town of Colac at the moment, where people building new homes in new streets set up by this government, allowed for under the planning provision, guess what, only have 50 kilowatts available to each home installation, because there is not enough power going down the streets of many of our regional towns. That is in communities where they have got three-phase power, and there are plenty of regional communities that are still only on two-phase. This government is legislating disadvantage for people in homes right across Victoria – in regional Victoria and in our bigger cities – to an extent that is just not practical. We are the coldest mainland state. How is this government or any government going to sell to communities that they no longer can have access to technology and to a heating source that is used the world over for no other reason than their ideological push to rush through a transition that they have single-handedly failed to manage and implement in a way that is going to work and be effective and a clear replacement?
We know, for example, that there are so many elements that the renewable electrical transition does not have an equal replacement for, such as large kiln-dried timber plants, which I have in my electorate, which require a large-scale energy source. That is not yet available in electrical. People who live in regional communities do not have access to the amount of kilowatt power required down a powerline to fully allow them to have electric cooking, electric cooktops, electric hot water and electric heating. There is simply not the infrastructure in place. I do not see this bill and I do not see this government standing up and saying, ‘Look, we haven’t got this right yet. This is our ambition – to have a gas-free economy – but we aren’t there yet.’
I also refer to the point that if we are going to allow new subdivisions and new developments to be built without the infrastructure in place, as the member for Gippsland South made really clear before, and the energy transition is far from complete and it is far from over, there is a lot of research the world over going into hydrogen and clean hydrogen, or green hydrogen, hydrogen as a shandy or a substitute for natural gas. This is about as emission free as you can get – if you can get a hydrogen world. What legacy is this government leaving to future developments in Victoria, where whole developments, buildings and whole communities could be left without that as an even more efficient, more clean-and-green option into the future? It does not make sense.
This government has brought this bill to this Parliament this week secretly with an hour and a half left to go, and they do not have a fully thought through energy plan that is going to see Victorians with the best, cheapest, most efficient options to keep their families warm, safe and heated, with hot water and proper cooking facilities. It does not make sense.
The other thing this bill fails to acknowledge is that of course there are many people that also rely on LPG, because LPG – liquid petroleum gas, which is sort of a substitute or an equal to natural gas – is an energy source of choice, particularly for those that do not even have electrical access.
The government has not ruled that out. But the natural consequence of putting this ban in and reducing the demand for natural gas is that those communities and those households and those businesses that do not even have access to proper electrical supply will find that their choices and options on LPG products will naturally decline, because it is natural gas products that create the volumes in manufacturing and demand and most gas appliances, or a significant percentage of gas appliances, here in Victoria are in fact manufactured in Australia. Actually, putting a gas appliance in is more likely to benefit Victorian manufacturing and Australian manufacturing and Australian jobs, whereas the bulk of electrical products are in fact imported from all sorts of other locations.
What is going to happen is those people who are forced to have LPG for their hot water, for their cooking, even for their refrigeration – and I am sure no-one on the government side even realises that there are plenty of people in regional Victoria that rely on gas to provide their refrigeration needs in their homes – will all be in jeopardy when gas manufacturing is clobbered to death by this government in a piece of legislation such as this that is so ill thought out. It is a rush to a government’s ideological point of view to keep their inner-city friends the Greens happy. This is what this bill is about. It is not about what is best for all Victorians, for all households, and it is certainly the last thing this state needs in a cost-of-living crisis, in a housing affordability crisis, to deliver such uncertainty. People have a right to know that they can continue on with their own choices – not forced choices by this government, but their own choices – for what is best for their home, their household and their hip pocket.
Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (15:26): I am sorry this bill is so secretive – I mean, it is actually being debated on the floor of Parliament, and as far as I know it is live streamed. This is not in camera, is it? I think this is actually live streamed. But apparently they are claiming it is secret. Let me say it out loud: Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024. Has everyone heard it, loud and clear? Yes – nothing secret about this. We are actually proud to be debating this bill in Parliament. It is live streamed. Enough of that crap. That is absolute crap, and it is a diversion from the central tenets of this bill.
The ACTING SPEAKER (John Mullahy): Language.
Nina TAYLOR: Sorry, I withdraw that particular word. It was perhaps a little bit unparliamentary, so I will take the lead on that.
Going to the issue of not wanting to lock Victorians in to decades of higher bills – shame on us for not wanting to do that. But – oh, yes – we are leading on this legislation and this reform because we know that gas is getting more and more expensive. Fossil gas has played an important role in powering Victoria’s energy system and economy for many years – this is true. Transition is not an easy thing to do. But rest assured that those opposite are doing everything they can to block the transition, because they do not like clean energy and they are renewable energy phobic. We knew that already. However, recent price increases and declining supply mean it is no longer the cheap and abundant source it once was. We could sit on our hands, do nothing and hope, but that is not what our government is about, because we want to look out for Victorian households and make sure that they are supported into the future in a very logical way, because there are good logical reasons to make an energy transition and to go electric.
I know there are many businesses who are themselves actually taking on the impetus; they are actually taking the initiative. I know that even in my own electric – in my own electorate; I am getting a little bit excited about that word, but for good reason, I will tell you – I visited Equinix with the Minister for Energy and Resources some time back, and I tell you, it is just a sea of solar panels, and they gained the funds to help substantiate those particular solar panels through our Victorian energy upgrades program. This is a private business. And why? Because they knew that if they did not take this initiative, in the future their energy bills were going to get more and more expensive. So they are taking advantage of the Victorian energy upgrades program in order to safeguard their business and their profits into the future – fancy that. But if you listened only to those opposite, you would think that we were the grim reaper coming in, draconian, to harm Victorians and punish them with their energy supply, when it is exactly the opposite. We are supporting our Victorian constituents to transition.
But there is another point I wanted to make, coming back to that issue of being secretive on this matter. Let us just think about what this legislation is actually enabling. The government is doing this through a regulatory impact statement, get this, for public consultation. I am going to repeat that: for public consultation. There is nothing secretive about that. We are speaking to that in this chamber, and it is being live streamed. The regulatory impact statement and exposure draft regulations cannot be published for public consultation without the regulation-making powers in this bill. In fact it is the opposition that is trying to quash the public consultation. How ironic is that? Hence we need this legislation to facilitate the public consultation. Let us do that. That seems a really fair and logical thing to do, and I believe that Victorian constituents deserve that. Don’t they deserve public consultation on this issue so we can be really up-front about it and take them on the journey? No-one is hiding anything here. Otherwise why would we be trying to get the regulations in place to facilitate public consultation? Enough of this nonsense about being secretive and hiding the bill under a table or wherever, as we have apparently done, and let us be real and proper about this and also acknowledge the benefits for the Victorian community.
I should say, just coming back to those Victorians who have already taken the initiative here on the back of the Victorian energy upgrades program, in 2023 more than 506,000 homes and 24,000 businesses received upgrades through the program. More than 2.4 million households and businesses have taken advantage of the program since 2009. I just wonder whether the opposition are sort of flying in the face of all these Victorians. What are they saying about them? Do they not think that they have made a wise decision to become more energy efficient? What really is the signal that they are sending to the Victorian community? I should say when we are looking at investing in cleaner and renewable energy, because we really want Victorians to be able to save on their energy bills, this is not just something that happens in Victoria. I have to commend the Minister for Energy and Resources because she has worked darned hard to advance the legislative framework to facilitate the transition that we are driving hard for in this state, to the extent that we now have the SEC enshrined in the constitution – that says just how serious we are not only about bringing power back to the people but also about facilitating a cheaper, cleaner energy future.
But I should say, yes, it happens not only in Victoria and not only in Australia – although there was a very good point made by my colleague the member for Sunbury, who was saying that we did have a recalcitrant federal government that for nine years sat on its hands and did nothing and this is why Victoria has had to carry a fair whack of the load, but we have been happy to do it because it is the right thing to do. But internationally, when you go overseas, you see wind farms and other things. I should say we are very lucky that we do have freely available sunshine and wind here. We do have a lot of weather conditions that enable a transition to a renewable energy future, and in some other parts of the world which are a lot colder and do not see the same amount of sunshine et cetera, it is certainly a more difficult transition. Nonetheless I do remember seeing wind farms in Copenhagen, and it is pretty cold there, so it is not isolated to our sunny Australia.
Anyway, on average households and businesses that undertake energy efficiency upgrades under the program save $110 and $3700 respectively on their annual energy bills. For us to be condemned for trying to support our Victorian households to save money on their energy bills I find, frankly, galling and also confusing. But anyway, if they want to continue down that rather retrospective track, I guess that is who they are. Get this: even those who do not participate will save on their bills, with households saving $150 and businesses saving $870 due to lower network costs. I do not know why they are not reading the room, because I have to say, frankly, that when I talk to constituents about cleaner energy, using wind and sun et cetera, there is a lot of excitement about that and they are on board with it.
Solar Victoria has supported over 360,000 installations in Victoria. Solar Victoria has supported over 280,000 installations of solar PV in Victoria, 7500 solar PV systems have been installed at rental properties and the program has surpassed an energy-generating capacity of 2 gigawatts – bigger than the Yallourn power station.
That is real action, and you can see that there is actually a really sound purpose to electrifying and to transitioning to cleaner energy. But we can see, obviously, there are thousands of Victorians on board with this, for good reason. I would like to show some faith in fellow Victorians who have made the decision themselves – no-one has forced them. They have made the decision for good, logical reasons. I like to think our Victorian community are pretty sharp. They know what is going on.
Solar Victoria has supported the installation of over 16,200 batteries through rebates and loans. Is that not fantastic? Why are they not excited? I am excited. This is fantastic. This is so great. We have supported the installation –
Nina TAYLOR: Oh, I can do better? Yes, I have actually been to social housing in my electorate, where we have helped them upgrade to two-way aircon. I have seen it myself, because when I have doorknocked and actually talked to people, I have seen where we have helped them to upgrade, just so you know.
Anyway, we have supported the installation of over 30,000 hot-water systems. I am sorry those opposite are not happy about that and the savings that it will bring for 30,000 Victorian households, but I think that is pretty fantastic and I am pretty proud that we are part of supporting them on this magnificent transition.
Matthew GUY (Bulleen) (15:36): I rise to make some comments on the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024. While I note the focus of most people’s contributions on this bill have been around what is obvious – and to me that is gas and the government’s desire to criminalise the installation of gas into homes in Victoria – I note there are a number of other aspects to this bill, which I want to make some comment on. The bill refers to the Building Act 1993, the Architects Act 1991 and the Victorian Planning Authority Act 2017. In referencing those acts it is also referencing the authorities. Some of those authorities have got pretty clear roles and pretty clear objectives, particularly at this time when we are going through a housing affordability crisis. It is important, as we are talking about a potential decrease in housing affordability, or making houses even more unaffordable, by forcing people off gas and onto electricity, that we look at what those authorities have been doing to play their part in bringing homes to market and what the government has been doing with those authorities to bring homes to market, as this bill has outlined, through particularly the Victorian Planning Authority Act 2017. The VPA is an iteration of the Metropolitan Planning Authority, which was an iteration of the Growth Areas Authority, which has had its remit expanded over a period of time and now features in this legislation. It has a very clear objective under part 2 of its establishment legislation, under section 7, ‘Objects’, and subsection (2)(e) ‘to promote the supply of housing’ and (f) ‘to encourage land development’. It is very clear as to what its objectives are.
Let us have a look at what the record of the VPA, and the government through the VPA, has been in terms of doing just that. Sometimes in life you get to utter these four words: ‘I told you so’. When you tax the development industry to death, you do kill it, and when you do kill it, that means there are fewer homes for Victorians to get into – fewer apartments, fewer places in established suburbs and towns and fewer homes in growth areas. That is where we are now. A decade of government that has taxed our development industry to death now cries, ‘We’ve got a housing crisis.’ Well, I am not surprised. Victorians who cannot get into a home and who look back 10 years ago to me as planning minister, who approved more homes than any other minister in Victoria’s history, must wonder, ‘How did we get here?’ We got here through bad government and bad decisions. I will say that again: as minister I approved more homes – high-rise, in density, in urban renewal and on our cities’ and provincial towns’ fringes – than anyone else in the state’s history, in four years. And do not take my word for it – I am sure most would not.
Let us have a look at some of the Charter Keck Cramer report figures. In the financial years ending after the reign of the Liberals – this is apartment launches, not press release launches; this is the actual launch of the towers – and after the effect of the Liberals’ policies of getting people into houses we totalled 69,500 apartments. In the last financial year for the current Labor government it was 2000 across the metropolitan area – 2000! So when you tax an industry to death you do kill it.
Matthew GUY: I say to the member for Footscray that it is funny you are now crying out about how bad new houses are in your electorate. Your Premier got up in question time and rightly said that Victoria does have a housing affordability crisis, so do you want to bag housing or are you in favour of housing? You are the ones who are saying you want to solve housing affordability.
Members interjecting.
Matthew GUY: I did not interject on any of yours, so you come off mine. You want to solve a housing affordability crisis, yet what you are saying is, ‘Not in my backyard.’ You are saying to people over here, ‘You’re the NIMBY, you’re the NIMBY,’ but not in your backyard, hey?
Let us have a look at commencements, shall we? In four years there were 25,000, 16,000, 18,000 and 20,000. What did we get last year? Not even 3000 new apartment commencements. There has been an impact from all of this, and particularly in growth areas, where we have got 119 precinct structure plans. If the minister wanted to, she could bring those structure plans to market at any stage. The minister has the ability to do this. To his great credit, the former member for Essendon Justin Madden realised this, and he started to move fairly quickly to solve this problem. I recognised exactly what he was doing. It was the right policy and turbocharged what he had in fact started, because he recognised that bringing homes to market in those growth areas was the right thing to do – credit to him, a Labor planning minister. But we then had the reign of the former minister Dick Wynne, who said famously to the planning and development industry, ‘I won’t approve anything that I wouldn’t live in.’ It is like saying, ‘I’m banning everyone from holidays. I’m not going to go to Uruguay because I wouldn’t go there, and you can’t either.’ It is ridiculous.
There are 119 precinct structure plans in the Melbourne growth boundary; 75 of those have been completed, and I might add about 40 per cent in the four years that I was the minister. They are homes. They are giving Victorians the chance to rent, to buy and to be in a respectable dwelling of their own. It is the right thing to do to give them a home. We have got record population growth. The state government does not control that, neither Liberal nor Labor. But we have to respond to it, and we have to respond to it fairly and reasonably, and that means getting people into a home. No, it is not always right, but you have got to get people into it. What does the Labor government do apart from putting out a press release? They have under preparation 10 precinct structure plans and the precommitment number is eight, which means there are 18 in the system the minister could approve very, very quickly. She has approved none.
This is a minister who gets up in this chamber and says, ‘We’re all for housing,’ but puts height limits in the Preston market. I lived in Preston for 12 years. She puts height limits across the Preston market site. It is flat. There are no topographical issues and there are no shading issues, but she puts a mandatory height limit there when she could be actually achieving more dwelling numbers in a centre that is changing its density requirements, that has a new railway station, that has the Plenty Road tram, that has the cross-city bus connections as well as connections to the airport and Essendon. The minister puts on for political reasons height limits at that location but then does not at other locations. This is the minister that says, ‘We’re doing all we can to get people into homes.’ No, they are not. This is the responsibility in this legislation of the Victorian Planning Authority. You only actually have to look at things like the number of cranes in the sky of Melbourne to see the level of private activity in this city. Politicians from either side can come in here and boast all they like about what they are doing and gloat about their achievements, but reality is a different story. Melbourne has fewer private cranes in the sky in its CBD than the Gold Coast.
When we were in government Melbourne had nearly 70 per cent of private cranes in the sky in our CBD, Docklands, Southbank area – 70 per cent. Fact. Under Labor there are more in the Gold Coast. This is the government that says that through the VPA in this legislation they are going to have a remit to fix housing affordability. The more homes you put into the market, the more you encourage price stabilisation. It does not help the developer. Go and tell this to the communists down at the Age. It does not help the developer to approve more and more and more developments. What it does is it floods the market and developers have to compete.
When we came to government in 2010 there were only two major developers active in the northern suburban market. By the time we left government there were more than a dozen. Prices stabilise. Who does that help? That helps the consumer. That helps someone who wants to get into a home. That is how the Liberal Party views planning. Not that it is a government problem to make a wild announcement that they are going to build 80,000 government dwellings to 80,000 total dwellings to an indeterminate number that no-one knows because they cannot meet anything. Our view is you encourage the private sector, you give a tax incentive and the beneficiary is going to be the mum, the dad, the kid, the single or the whatever who just wants to get into a home. That is the housing affordability crisis we need to fix that is contained in this bill in relation to the VPA’s responsibility.
It is very simple: Victoria needs to be more proactive in solving this crisis, and the people who can do that are the Premier and the minister. They could act tomorrow. It does not involve a press release. It involves real action, but you cannot doublespeak – you have got to mean it.
Steve McGHIE (Melton) (15:46): I rise to contribute to the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024. I want to commend the Minister for Planning for bringing this bill forward, and there is a lot more to come. As the Premier said in question time, there are many, many announcements to happen very shortly. This government will be delivering on our building plans. These significant reforms to Victoria’s building system will help shape a much more sustainable, affordable and consumer-friendly future for everyone in our state.
The ability to build, to buy or to renovate a home is central to achieving security and comfort. The Victorian government is committed to ensuring that these experiences meet the highest standards. The government is in the process of introducing a series of reforms to ensure that whether you are building your dream home, making renovations or buying property you can do so with the confidence that your investment is safe – that is really important to all of our constituents – that it is affordable and that it will be built to last. These changes will progressively reshape how Victoria’s building system works. We have seen that we need those changes to deliver on our big agenda of building 80,000 houses per year.
The amendments make key changes to existing legislation, specifically the Architects Act 1991 – it was a fantastic year; the mighty Hawks won the premiership – the Building Act 1993 and the Victorian Planning Authority Act 2017, and it creates the capacity to futureproof for further changes as required.
Steve McGHIE: Go Hawks, yes. Member for Morwell, thank you. These amendments will ensure practitioners meet their obligations by modernising gas and energy systems and they support the Gas Substitution Roadmap in transitioning Victoria towards cleaner, more affordable energy sources. I think we all want to make things more affordable for our families, in particular right now when the cost of living is probably the key issue that is affecting all Victorian families. As we say, moving towards cleaner and more affordable energy sources is a key issue in assisting all those families. Certainly streamlining the operations and governance and making legislative processes more efficient supports practitioners and regulators alike. These reforms will support the transition away from gas, as we have heard through many contributions, to more sustainable electric-powered systems in homes and commercial properties. Of course it helps reduce the cost of living, as I have referred to, and it promotes renewable energy.
It also contains a requirement that gas space heating systems at the end of their lives are replaced with efficient, cheaper-to-run electric alternatives. That is hot-water systems, and let us re-emphasise that it is at the end of their lives and they are to be replaced by more efficient and cheaper-to-run electric alternatives. Again, this is at the end of their lives. We are not forcing anyone to replace those systems before the end of their lives. When you get a system that becomes faulty or a hot-water system that starts to leak, you have had it for a number of years and you know that it will probably be more expensive to be repaired, then what is being proposed here is that you replace it with a more efficient, cheaper-to-run electric alternative.
The member for Brighton might choose to ignore important parts of the legislation and generate some sort of disingenuous scare campaign with falsehoods such as banning gas entirely, which of course is a nonsense. We are not doing that. There is no requirement to replace, as I said earlier, gas cooktops with electric ones. There is no requirement for existing commercial buildings to replace gas appliances with electric ones. As I referred to just a moment ago, even for households replacing their systems, it is at the end of their lives. They are not being forced to do so prior to that.
The majority of Victoria’s fossil gas is used for space heating and hot water in residential and commercial buildings. Electrification and energy efficiency offer the most immediate and cheapest opportunities for reducing gas consumption for these users while helping to ease the cost-of-living pressures and reliability risks and making sure that the gas we have goes towards industry – and it is imperative that industry is maintained by having access to gas – and that there is enough for our industries, rather than exhausting it on household consumption, where we know that if gas is replaced by electrification, it is cleaner, it is cheaper and it is utilising renewables. They are the transitional arrangements – again, at the end of life of their particular systems.
It is worth also pointing out that the level of nimbyism coming across the chamber is pretty astounding. The abject denial of climate science and the whole rejection of even the idea of losing your gas stove hob is embarrassing, but we have constantly heard it through a number of contributions from across the aisle. Next year, personally, both my wife and I are going to be starting to build a new home, which I am pleased to say will be all electric, just like the new Melton hospital. We will be starting to build the new Melton hospital before the end of this year, and that will be all electric. We will have solar, and we will have battery storage. I am really proud that I will be building an all-electric home, and I look forward to the commencement of building that home and completing that home next year. I look forward to having all-electric appliances, and I must say that the only gas cooking that I will be doing will be on the barbecue. I quite like cooking on the barbecue, let me tell you, because it gives me an opportunity – and some people in this chamber would know I do not mind a bit of a tipple at times – to stand there at the barbecue and have a couple of glasses of wine.
Richard Riordan: It should be an electric barbecue.
Steve McGHIE: No, I love using the gas barbecue, and I love drinking my red wine. The only other place that I will be using gas will be when I am travelling in the motorhome. It has got gas, so I will be using that when I am camping. But also the motorhome is connected to power. We have got not only gas jets but also electric jets on the stove in the motorhome, so that is great. I know my friend the member for Laverton mentioned her Thermomix, which is interesting, but I can get the same joy out of my barbecue and out of my gas stove in the motorhome. I have no idea what a Thermomix is, but I will look it up and we will see how we go. Can you drink a couple of glasses of wine with a Thermomix? I do not know, but I might try it.
Members interjecting.
Steve McGHIE: I might check with Hastings; it will be in the recipe book. We are supporting Victorian families to get off gas, but that is not just what this bill is about. Clearly, as you know, renewable energies – solar, wind – are really important. We know in the western part of the state we have just opened up the biggest wind farm in the Southern Hemisphere, out near Rokewood, and also there will be a big battery. My understanding is that that wind farm will be able to power up all of the regional households across the state, which is amazing, and we will continue to do that.
Steve McGHIE: Oh, no, we will be right. We have got clear vision here: a building system that is going to be efficient, safe and fit for a sustainable future. These reforms reflect not just a response to current challenges but a proactive effort to build a system that serves future generations, and that is what we have got to think of. Obviously, with the growth – the number of households that need to be built and powering those places – transitioning away from gas and using and growing our renewable energy industry and the jobs that that creates is great for this state. This is a terrific bill. I thank the minister again, and I commend this bill to the house.
Martin CAMERON (Morwell) (15:56): I rise to speak on the Building Legislation Amendment and Other Matters Bill 2024. Strap yourself in for the tradie hour, because I am a former plumber, and the member for Narracan who is to follow me is a builder, and we physically and mentally had to work through this legislation in our jobs. I think in the next little bit we might get a few fun facts that may come out about the building legislation and the other matters.
I would like to jump straight to clause 38. We have had people that have gone to this clause straight away and spoken about it. They were saying that the government is trying to shut down the gas industry, but I take this clause as worse. What they are doing is waging a war against plumbers and gasfitters, because written here in black and white in clause 38, which I will read out shortly, is the end of plumbers and gasfitters being able to do their jobs. I am not sure if the people who came up with this clause have realised that. We talk about unintended consequences that happen inside legislation. Well, one of these two clauses here will stop plumbers from being able to go out and repair or replace gas appliances or extend gas lines in people’s houses, and that is a travesty of justice. It does not matter the colour of your skin, your sexual preference or what religion you follow, if you are a plumber and gasfitter, the government has your days numbered. It is in black and white here, and I will read it out:
Clause 38 inserts new paragraphs (fa) and (fb) into section 221ZZZV(1) of the Building Act 1993, which provides that the Governor in Council may make regulations for or with respect to …
So a Governor will be able to change at any time some of these laws moving forward. The bill states:
(fa) prohibiting a person from connecting reticulated gas, or extending the capacity of an existing reticulated gas connection, to an existing building –
that is, your home, or it might be a shop down the street or a building under construction, or it might be a new house that is being built, a new dwelling for people to move into –
… or to a building in a class of existing building or a class of building under construction …
That is the first one. So you are thinking to yourself, ‘Well, I’m going to be forced, if this comes along, not to have gas at my house, because I’m not going to be able to extend the gas lines, to put new appliances in or to replace appliances if it comes through.’
The member for Melton said before that at the end of life of an appliance you can actually make a choice and get an electric hot-water service. Well, that is fine, but today there would be a couple of hundred hot-water services, gas hot-water services, that would have blown up around the state. If we have these couple of hundred hot-water services blowing up around the state and we are relying on our electricians to come to our house to install the new power supply and put the new hot-water service in, there is going to be a backlog in doing it. So we do need the capacity to be able to replace a gas hot-water service as such if it explodes, because it does make it very hard if people have to wait for the time frame to get an electrician out. As I said, as I read that out, the plumbing and gasfitting industry is going to be under siege because of these amendments from this government.
Paragraph (fb), the second one:
prohibiting a person from carrying out plumbing work …
That would be people like me in connection with installing or replacing reticulated gas appliances. That is that hot-water service that I just spoke about, or your central heater. In the next while, when this comes in after the government has the opportunity to bring in these amendments when we vote on it later on today, it means we will not be able to go and replace your gas central heating unit or your gas oven or your gas hotplates, because it says here:
prohibiting a person from carrying out plumbing work in connection with installing or replacing a reticulated gas appliance or a reticulated gas appliance in a class of … a building under construction or in a building in a class of existing building or a class of building under construction …
It is saying it there in black and white. Why is the government hell-bent on stitching up the poor old plumber and gasfitter? If something goes wrong and your toilet blocks or you have got a blockage, who are you going to ring? You call the plumber, he comes out and you get him to clear that blockage, but when it comes to someone that has spent years learning the gas trade and is specialised in this area, they are fixing them up, and it is just not fair. I am not sure if it is an unintended consequence from the people that come up with the legislation, but that is how it reads, that is really how it reads.
Plumbers and gasfitters jobs are going to be maybe a thing of the past in the gas industry. You have only got to look around. We heard before about businesses in manufacturing that need gas to burn at a high temperature to produce everything that they are producing and is probably going into the Big Build of Melbourne at the moment – to make all the steel cages to go into the foundations. They are relying on the gas-fired burners to actually provide that energy source so they can do it. We need to take a step back and reassess what the government is trying to achieve here.
Who is going to be next? Is it going to be the builders that are going to be picked on next? Because they have started on the poor old plumber, a tradie who is out there trying to do an honest day’s work and do the right thing by his community right around regional Victoria. At the moment most homes rely on gas. I think everybody in the chamber here, if they talk to their constituents around their areas, would know they are relying on gas as an affordable alternative at the moment to keep themselves warm, to be able to have hot water come out of the taps so they can have a shower and also as a cooking source.
As soon as this jumps on and we cannot actually renew some of these gas appliances when they break down or when we cannot extend gas lines to the current appliances, I wonder what happens – and it does happen a lot – when the actual pipes break down and you have a gas leak at your house. You ring up APA and they say, ‘Get yourself a plumber. We’ve come out and it’s the plumber’s role’ and the plumber ascertains, ‘You’ve got a gas leak here, but I need to re-purpose and refit the gas line from the front of the house down to the back of the house. No, no, no – I can’t do that because it says here that you cannot actually extend gas services down to run these gas appliances.’ Where does it lie? It is going to be the plumber whose licence is going to be on the line, who has to sign off with a certificate of compliance. Are we going to be held accountable for saying to the poor old person that needs to have that gas line fixed, ‘Oh, sorry, you’re going to have to ring the electrician and get them to come in and actually redo your whole house,’ because under here, in these amendments, we are not going to be allowed to do that.
It really worries me where it is all going. What about the kids? We talked about barbecues before. What about the poor old kids that want to go to Bunnings or Barbecues Galore to buy their dear old dad the gas barbecue for Father’s Day? Well, I am sorry, kids, the government has got you in the scope too, to not let you go and do that: ‘No, Dad, sorry, you can’t cook your barbecue. We can’t have the sausages out there on a great night.’ The member for Melton and I, sitting back watching the Hawks have another win next year, will not be able to do that with our gas-fired barbecue because it says here in the legislation that we are not going to be able to do that. Here we go – poor old kids, you are under the gun too.
We have got plumbers and gas fitters of all persuasions, people who have worked their backsides off for years to become licensed to do that, in the gun. As a former plumber I am shocked that the government could actually come up with amendments that are going to make their lives harder and harder. I am sure, moving forward, there are going to be other people who are going to come into the gun of the government over this.
It is building legislation. We want to take the gas part out. That is what the member for Brighton has suggested that we do, and I stand with him and say: let us get that gas bit out.
That debate be now adjourned.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.
Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.