Australian government seeks urgent legal advice on double dissolution over housing bill standoff
The Albanese government is seeking urgent advice from the solicitor general about reintroducing the Housing Australia future fund bill, a move that may accelerate its use as a double dissolution trigger.
The fate of the bill establishing the $10bn future fund has been in limbo since the Coalition and Greens voted in the Senate to delay it until 16 October, which the Labor deputy Senate leader, Don Farrell, has said the government regards as a failure to pass it.
On Tuesday Labor piled pressure on the Greens to pass the bill, using question time to go on the attack. The Greens are still holding out for a a freeze or caps on rent rises.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers charged that the Greens were seeking to campaign on the issue rather than boost housing supply, telling parliament they cared “more about retweets than rentals” and “more about TikTok than housing stock”.
Housing minister Julie Collins refused to commit to bring the bill back in October, telling reporters in Canberra the government was “looking at all of the options in terms of delivering on our housing agenda”.
In Labor’s caucus, Anthony Albanese accused the Greens of a “juvenile student politics approach” to the issue. He said that continually deferring a bill is the same as blocking it, and the government is seeking advice on that point.
Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup
Failure to pass a bill is the first step to a double dissolution. If, after three months, the bill passes the House of Representatives and is rejected by the Senate again the government gains the option of using it to trigger a full house and Senate election.
The Greens believe Monday’s decision to defer the bill was not refusal to pass the Haff bill, and that it is fair to wait until October to see further progress on renters’ rights at national cabinet.
The Greens also believe the Senate would have to agree to bring the bill back sooner, with no advantage to be gained by the government because 16 October is the soonest a new version could pass the lower house after the three month gap to establish a double dissolution trigger.
The Haff bill sets up a $10bn future fund to invest and pay out earnings of at least $500m a year to invest in social and affordable housing.
Asked if the government would continue to try to pass the bill, Albanese told ABC Brisbane: “We think this is good policy. It will result in 30,000 additional … affordable or social housing units built over the next five years.”
“And it is quite remarkable that people who say they support increased levels of investment in social housing are blocking this measure, both the Greens party and the Liberal and National parties in the Senate.”
Albanese noted that on Saturday he had announced a further $2bn of direct funding for social housing, a concession welcomed by the Greens, who argued on Monday and Tuesday it proved their stance had been effective.
“We know that a lack of supply is the big issue that needs to be dealt with, but we’re getting advice at the moment from the solicitor general about a reintroduction of the bill on the housing Australia future fund because we think that is also a good policy and very necessary,” Albanese said.
On Monday Greens leader, Adam Bandt, criticised the government’s handling of the bill, telling reporters in Canberra “they’d rather tout this as a double dissolution trigger rather than negotiate and pass their own bill”.
Bandt said despite the double disso
lution threat “the Senate has said it will consider this bill again and there is still time and space to pass this”.
The Greens housing spokesperson, Max Chandler-Mather, said the party could not “turn to a renter and say ‘hey we fought for the $2bn for social housing but when it comes to fighting for you we’re just going to roll over’ – no way”. “No way.”