Mr GREG WARREN (Campbelltown) (16:53): The Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Bill 2025 is ultimately based on one of the greatest social and economic challenges we have in New South Wales and indeed in Australia. It is particularly the case in my beloved home of western and south‑western Sydney, where we have seen significant growth over the years. The reality is that whilst the demand is there, we must build houses. Reduced supply inflates house prices and makes it unaffordable for young people to get into the market, like I did in the '90s. I want my children and my grandchildren to be able to purchase a home—which is about 50 years away, given my youth.
Importantly, the bill will make sure that we continue to have reforms in place. I acknowledge the Minister is in the House. I thank him, his staff and his department, who have inherited one of the greatest challenges in addressing how to supply desperately needed housing into a market where the absence of such policy has flow‑on effects in terms of homelessness and the economy. Of course, we have our challenges in having enough tradespeople in the industry who are well enough equipped, but the reality is we cannot fix this in the rear-vision mirror. We cannot fix the future until we reflect on the past, and the past is not pretty.
The Minister and his team have brought the bill to the House because they inherited a system that is at best opaque and that is also unworkable for industry. We must ask ourselves who is paying the price. It is aspiring home owners in New South Wales, which by and large are young people. Once upon a time the great Australian dream was to own your own home. It is now almost a pipe dream to get a rental, because there has not been enough supply. The nimby approach is flawed for a number of reasons. I am privileged to represent a developing area along with my friends the member for Camden, the member for Wollondilly and the member for Leppington. We have long managed growth by finding a balance between environmental protection and delivering the houses that young families need, like we did as young families once upon a time. But the brakes were put on and a system was set up in which the balance was no longer found.
The reforms in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Bill 2025 are essential. I am delighted that the bill has been brought before the House. But, I will be honest, I wish it was not necessary. If we were not in such a housing supply crisis, we would not have to go through this. I spent eight years in opposition, along with my colleague the member for Wollongong, who is now the Minister—we came in at almost the same time. When it came to any kind of planning and environment reform, we supported the Government. We did not stand in the way. We offered alternate views and we worked with Government members. Why? Because we wanted the solution. That has not changed for us today in government.
This very serious crisis is not about our politics. It is about every person in our community, and particularly our young people who are trying to enter a market that is intrinsically difficult and desperately needs reform. I refer members to a Grattan Institute report that my learned colleague the member for Leppington brought to my attention. It is dated October 2023, so not very long after we came to government, but it goes back to the early 2000s. The very detailed report makes clear that there is largely a failure of housing supply, not housing markets. It reads:
Land-use planning rules in NSW are highly complex and prescriptive, and particularly restrict many medium- and high-density developments in established suburbs.
The report went further:
Reserve Bank researchers estimated that restrictive land-use planning rules add up to 40 per cent to the price of houses in Sydney, up sharply from 15 years ago. Most recent research from the NSW Productivity Commission suggest that planning rules have added over 50 per cent to the cost of a new apartment in Sydney.
The planning system tends to favour existing residents who oppose change due to concerns about extra traffic congestion, parking, and damage to neighbourhood character. But those who live in new housing—if it were to be built—do not get a say.
The specific barriers, which are listed in more detail, stand in the way of new homes. It is a very thorough report, but it draws attention specifically to an issue that was referred to 15 years ago. Time and time again we have seen this from conservative governments. They do not like change, but planning needs to change. If things do not change, the status quo will be maintained, and our young people will pay the price.
