Opposition housing spokesperson Andrew Bragg has pledged to gut Australia's National Construction Code, reducing its over 2,000 pages to a mere 80. This drastic move would strip away mandatory accessibility and energy efficiency standards, reclassifying them as "optional extras" for new homes.
Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday, Senator Bragg declared it "illegal to build a cheap house in Australia" under current regulations, which he claims mandate "gold-plated houses." He asserted that houses under his shorter code "won't be gold plated but it won't fall apart. It will be safe." His proposal includes a federal "pattern book" with approved templates.
Who Profits
This deregulation directly serves the interests of the construction industry and real estate capital. Building groups and the Productivity Commission estimate current regulations add thousands to the cost of each newly built home. A Senate inquiry, chaired by Senator Bragg, found that code changes over the last seven years alone added between $3,600 and $33,000 to the cost of a new house. Removing these "costs" translates directly into increased profit margins for developers and builders, who can then market cheaper, lower-quality housing while maintaining or increasing their surplus extraction.
Who Pays the Price
The working class, the disabled, and those struggling with energy poverty will bear the brunt of these "optional extras." Senator Bragg specifically listed "mandatory ramps" and "flattened shower flooring" as examples of accessibility standards to be scrapped. Recent code changes also mandated a seven-star energy efficiency rating, which would now become optional, locking low-income households into higher utility bills and exacerbating energy poverty.
Labor minister Tim Ayres highlighted the dangers of such deregulation, noting recent code improvements included better waterproofing for balconies. He argued against reversing measures that prevent $2 billion in rectification costs from leaking apartment balconies, calling it a "sensible proposition." The existing code's fire-related sections alone run to more than 80 pages, raising serious questions about the safety of Bragg's proposed 80-page overhaul. The National Construction Code, first established in 1988, expanded from its initial 80 pages to include crucial guidance and broader scope, as explained by ABCB chief executive Adrian Piani. This expansion aimed to provide clear performance requirements and design diagrams, ensuring safer and more functional buildings, a protection now threatened.
The State's Role
The state, far from being a neutral arbiter, actively facilitates this capital accumulation. Treasurer Jim Chalmers stated the current government is also working to "streamline" the code, acknowledging it is "too hard to navigate and it's too costly." Housing Minister Clare O'Neil has met with industry representatives approximately 30 times over the past year to develop a streamlined code, with a final plan expected later this year. Treasury's Inspector-General of Housing, Ben Rimmer, echoed industry concerns, calling the code's complexity a "significant impost on the economy" and a "significant driver of cost," though he attributed much of this to state and territory inconsistencies. This bipartisan focus on "cost" and "streamlining" reveals a unified commitment from both major parties to reducing regulatory burdens on capital, regardless of the human cost.
Senator Bragg also attempts to scapegoat migrant workers, arguing that the Albanese government has allowed net overseas migration to outpace housing construction, creating a shortfall of 130,000 homes. He proposes linking migration to housing completions, aiming to reduce international students, working holiday makers, and post-study work visas. Labor's own plan, currently under cabinet debate, also seeks to restrict working holiday makers and those who fail humanitarian visa applications. Both parties, rather than addressing the systemic failures of housing provision and wage suppression, deflect blame onto vulnerable migrant populations, pitting workers against each other to preserve the existing economic order.