❓ Shadow Treasurer Price questions the Treasurer about the Infrastructure Development Fund's impact on housing supply and alternative proposals. The Treasurer defends the fund's success, criticises the Liberal Party's contradictory stance on housing development and red tape.
AnsweredQoN 760Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUND
760. MR S.J. PRICE to the Treasurer:
I refer to the Cook Labor government's
commitment to increasing housing supply in Western Australia.
(1) Can the Treasurer outline to the house how the
government's infrastructure development fund is unlocking new
housing developments across Perth and regional WA?
(2) Can the
Treasurer advise the house whether she is aware of any alternative proposals to
support housing development?
760. MR S.J. PRICE to the Treasurer:
I refer to the Cook Labor government's
commitment to increasing housing supply in Western Australia.
(1) Can the Treasurer outline to the house how the
government's infrastructure development fund is unlocking new
housing developments across Perth and regional WA?
(2) Can the
Treasurer advise the house whether she is aware of any alternative proposals to
support housing development?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question.
(1)–(2) As
the Premier highlighted, we have been looking at all policy measures to support
housing in the state, whether it is converting Airbnbs or vacant properties to
long-term rentals, or building more social and affordable housing and
supporting projects like the rural projects in the city, for example, in
Northbridge. Across the landscape, enormous
policy work has been done to deliver new housing. One of the key measures we introduced was the infrastructure development fund. I take members back to
February 2023 when we announced the infrastructure development fund. It
supported infill development and the cost of providing the headworks for water and energy to support the development of new
apartments. Since that launch in
February 2023, our $80 million fund has supported 80 projects, delivering 5 400
apartments across Perth and nine projects in regional WA, delivering 723
dwellings. We have been out there supporting planning reform and initiatives like this to get more housing out of the ground,
so it was a bit of a shock on the weekend to see what the Liberal Party
announced, particularly because when we announced the infrastructure development fund, I remember that we were criticised
quite heavily. I think the member for Cottesloe
called me a few things in this chamber. The Liberal Party opposed the
infrastructure development fund. It said —
I question how throwing money at
property developers to make infill projects in the inner city areas more
affordable for developers will help those struggling to find a home �
That is an exact quote from the
Liberal Party when we announced our infrastructure development fund, remembering that our fund was for $10 000 for key
infrastructure going to the utilities. Despite the Liberal Party saying that
just over a year ago, what did it announce on Sunday? It announced the
provision of $20 000 that is not attached to infrastructure to go
towards the fees and charges like paying developers' rates.
That is what the Liberal Party
announced on the weekend after criticising the Labor Party for delivering an
infrastructure development fund. What is even more interesting about its
approach to housing is that it wants to put more red tape into the planning
system. It is out there campaigning in all these areas. Many in this house know
that their Liberal opponents are out there saying, ''We want to block
this new housing. We want to block these
apartments.'' On one hand, they are playing politics with housing in
every electorate . For example, in my
electorate, they are blocking a housing subdivision in Brabham for affordable
housing , and they are blocking a new
high school from being planned for that area. The Liberal and National Parties have said that they want to hand power back to councils, away from government.
This is the scenario —
Mr R.S. Love interjected.
Ms R. SAFFIOTI : Pardon?
Mr R.S. Love : You want to
strip all the power away from them; we know that.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Ms R. SAFFIOTI : Do we want
to reduce red tape? Is that what the member is asking? That is what he is saying. Yes, we do want to reduce red tape, and we
want to make it easier to build housing. That is what we are doing. We want to make it easier to build housing and he wants to make it harder. It is
as simple as that. This is the scenario. The Liberal Party is out there saying,
''We want to slow down housing developments in said electorate. We are
creating action groups against housing in said electorate, and, by the way, we
are now going to pay the developer the local government rates.'' It
would slow down housing and then it wants to use state taxpayers' money
to pay the developers' rates because the local government is delaying
its projects. Again, it is absolutely a demonstration of how the Liberal Party
wrecked the state's finances. It does not have a coherent strategy. We
want to reduce red tape and get more housing
developments. That is why the Minister for Planning is pursuing such
significant planning reforms. The Liberal Party wants to make it harder
to deliver housing in this state and then it wants state taxpayers to pay the
local government rates because it is going to take longer to get the housing
up. No wonder it wrecked the finances.
Again,
across the entire state, we are looking at new ways to support housing, making
sure we can support affordable housing and making sure that we can
support housing for rentals. That is something the member for Cottesloe has
very much rallied against. Again, housing near schools is something that the
member for Cottesloe has said that we should not have—remember? We
continue to drive incredible outcomes around the state and will continue to
work to ensure that we increase our housing supply for our growing population.
(1)–(2) As
the Premier highlighted, we have been looking at all policy measures to support
housing in the state, whether it is converting Airbnbs or vacant properties to
long-term rentals, or building more social and affordable housing and
supporting projects like the rural projects in the city, for example, in
Northbridge. Across the landscape, enormous
policy work has been done to deliver new housing. One of the key measures we introduced was the infrastructure development fund. I take members back to
February 2023 when we announced the infrastructure development fund. It
supported infill development and the cost of providing the headworks for water and energy to support the development of new
apartments. Since that launch in
February 2023, our $80 million fund has supported 80 projects, delivering 5 400
apartments across Perth and nine projects in regional WA, delivering 723
dwellings. We have been out there supporting planning reform and initiatives like this to get more housing out of the ground,
so it was a bit of a shock on the weekend to see what the Liberal Party
announced, particularly because when we announced the infrastructure development fund, I remember that we were criticised
quite heavily. I think the member for Cottesloe
called me a few things in this chamber. The Liberal Party opposed the
infrastructure development fund. It said —
I question how throwing money at
property developers to make infill projects in the inner city areas more
affordable for developers will help those struggling to find a home �
That is an exact quote from the
Liberal Party when we announced our infrastructure development fund, remembering that our fund was for $10 000 for key
infrastructure going to the utilities. Despite the Liberal Party saying that
just over a year ago, what did it announce on Sunday? It announced the
provision of $20 000 that is not attached to infrastructure to go
towards the fees and charges like paying developers' rates.
That is what the Liberal Party
announced on the weekend after criticising the Labor Party for delivering an
infrastructure development fund. What is even more interesting about its
approach to housing is that it wants to put more red tape into the planning
system. It is out there campaigning in all these areas. Many in this house know
that their Liberal opponents are out there saying, ''We want to block
this new housing. We want to block these
apartments.'' On one hand, they are playing politics with housing in
every electorate . For example, in my
electorate, they are blocking a housing subdivision in Brabham for affordable
housing , and they are blocking a new
high school from being planned for that area. The Liberal and National Parties have said that they want to hand power back to councils, away from government.
This is the scenario —
Mr R.S. Love interjected.
Ms R. SAFFIOTI : Pardon?
Mr R.S. Love : You want to
strip all the power away from them; we know that.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Ms R. SAFFIOTI : Do we want
to reduce red tape? Is that what the member is asking? That is what he is saying. Yes, we do want to reduce red tape, and we
want to make it easier to build housing. That is what we are doing. We want to make it easier to build housing and he wants to make it harder. It is
as simple as that. This is the scenario. The Liberal Party is out there saying,
''We want to slow down housing developments in said electorate. We are
creating action groups against housing in said electorate, and, by the way, we
are now going to pay the developer the local government rates.'' It
would slow down housing and then it wants to use state taxpayers' money
to pay the developers' rates because the local government is delaying
its projects. Again, it is absolutely a demonstration of how the Liberal Party
wrecked the state's finances. It does not have a coherent strategy. We
want to reduce red tape and get more housing
developments. That is why the Minister for Planning is pursuing such
significant planning reforms. The Liberal Party wants to make it harder
to deliver housing in this state and then it wants state taxpayers to pay the
local government rates because it is going to take longer to get the housing
up. No wonder it wrecked the finances.
Again,
across the entire state, we are looking at new ways to support housing, making
sure we can support affordable housing and making sure that we can
support housing for rentals. That is something the member for Cottesloe has
very much rallied against. Again, housing near schools is something that the
member for Cottesloe has said that we should not have—remember? We
continue to drive incredible outcomes around the state and will continue to
work to ensure that we increase our housing supply for our growing population.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.