Bill Debate · Second Reading

Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024; Second Reading

Senate · Wednesday 30 July 2025

Continued from Thursday 24 July 2025.

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The debate centred on the Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024, which seeks to prohibit the Housing Australia Future Fund from investing in projects financed by Cbus Super due to its links with the CFMEU. Labor opposed the bill, arguing it was an ideological attack on unions and ignored the government's broader housing strategy. One Nation supported the bill but proposed alternative policies, including winding back building codes and deporting visa contraventions. The Liberal Party strongly supported the bill, citing governance failures, the slow delivery of new homes by the Future Fund, and concerns over taxpayer money flowing to entities linked to union misconduct.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Continued the debate

Karen Grogan (SA) (Australian Labor Party) ALP

Grogan opposed the bill, characterising it as an ideological attack on unions rather than a genuine housing solution. Grogan argued that superannuation funds like Cbus are strictly regulated by APRA and that the government is actively addressing the housing crisis through programs like the Housing Australia Future Fund. Grogan contended that the opposition had blocked previous housing initiatives, including the Help to Buy program and build-to-rent laws, and accused them of obstructing progress. Grogan emphasised the need for increased housing supply and secure rentals, asserting that the government’s plan was delivering results while the opposition offered only rhetoric.

Opposition response

Michaelia Cash (WA) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Cash supported the bill, arguing it addressed ethical failures and governance issues within the Housing Australia Future Fund. Cash highlighted that the fund had built only 17 new homes two years after its announcement, far short of the promised 30,000, and had instead acquired 340 existing properties, potentially competing with first-home buyers. Cash criticised the government for failing to meet annual spending mandates, noting that only $223 million of the required $500 million had been spent by March 2025. Cash argued the bill was necessary to prevent taxpayer funds from supporting entities linked to the CFMEU.

Malcolm Roberts (QLD) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation support

Roberts supported the bill as a measure to prevent funds from leaking to the CFMEU, which he described as engaged in misconduct. Roberts proposed alternative policies, including shutting down the Housing Australia Future Fund and rolling back building codes to reduce construction costs by approximately $50,000 per home. Roberts advocated for a people's bank offering fixed-rate mortgages and called for the deportation of individuals on residence visas illegally or in contravention of student visas to reduce housing demand.
Maria Kovacic (NSW) (Liberal Party) Liberal support

Kovacic supported the bill, arguing that allowing Cbus to participate in the Housing Australia Future Fund risked its integrity due to the fund's close ties with the CFMEU. Kovacic cited evidence of payments from Cbus to the CFMEU and allegations of corrupt influence over construction contracts. Kovacic criticised the government for failing to deregister the union and highlighted that the Future Fund had only built 17 homes while acquiring 340 existing ones, which she argued created barriers for young buyers.
Paul Scarr (QLD) (Liberal Party) Liberal support

Scarr supported the bill and expressed concern about the structure of off-balance-sheet funds like the Housing Australia Future Fund. Scarr noted that the fund had built only 17 homes but acquired 340 existing properties, raising questions about transparency and competition with private buyers. Scarr highlighted that the government had spent only $223 million against a mandated $500 million annual commitment, leaving $277 million unaccounted for. Scarr also mentioned bureaucratic delays in approving residential lots in his electorate.
Jonathon Duniam (TAS) (Liberal Party) Liberal support

Duniam supported the bill, commending Scarr’s analysis of the Housing Australia Future Fund’s performance. Duniam argued that housing impediments remained significant despite the election result and that the government had not adequately addressed systemic issues. Duniam referenced coalition policies aimed at reducing red tape and providing infrastructure funding to councils to facilitate housing development.

First speaker today

Karen Grogan (SA) (Australian Labor Party)

ALP

Bill

Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024

Speeches

6 speeches, 4 other contributors

Topics

Housing Immigration Wages & Workplace Relations

Debate Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024; Second Reading Bill Debate, 26 Mar 2026 · Same bill
Debate Housing Investment Probity Bill 2024; Second Reading Bill Debate, 24 Jul 2025 · Same bill
Debate Economy General Debate, 14 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Housing, Immigration
Debate Migration Take Note Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Housing, Immigration
Question Time House Question Time 17 Aug 2026 · Shared topics: Housing, Immigration

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.