Key facts
- The Coalition plans to remove compulsory energy and accessibility standards for new homes in Australia.
- Advocates warn this will increase energy bills and deepen inequality.
- The proposal aims to reduce building costs by simplifying the National Construction Code.
- Industry groups have previously argued that construction code changes have significantly increased new home costs.
- Government analysis suggests minimum energy rating increases have had minimal impact on building costs.
A proposal by Australia's Coalition to eliminate mandatory energy efficiency and accessibility standards for new homes has drawn sharp criticism from housing and environmental advocates. Coalition spokesperson Andrew Bragg argued that current building regulations are overly complex and costly, stating a Coalition government would reduce the National Construction Code to 80 pages from over 2,000, making energy and accessibility features optional.
Bragg asserted that the current regulations make it "illegal to build a cheap house in Australia" and that his party would "cut building costs." Liberal treasury spokesperson Tim Wilson suggested that residents could simply wear warmer clothing in winter instead of relying on energy-efficient homes. However, the Energy Efficiency Council's chief executive, Luke Menzel, condemned the plan as a "cost-of-living timebomb," emphasizing that minimum standards ensure homes are safe, comfortable, and affordable to run, not mere "extraneous baubles."
Menzel warned that renters, particularly in areas like western Sydney, would face exorbitant energy bills if forced to live in poorly insulated homes. Cassandra Goldie, CEO of the Australian Council of Social Service, echoed these concerns, stating that while unnecessary regulation should be removed, energy performance and accessibility rules are fundamental to health and wellbeing. She argued that removing these standards would shift costs onto households, exacerbate inequality, and create future housing burdens.
Industry groups have previously indicated that changes to the construction code have added significantly to new home costs. However, government analysis and separate findings from the Reserve Bank and CSIRO suggest that increases in minimum energy efficiency requirements have had a minimal, and sometimes negative, impact on construction costs. Bragg defended his position by expressing passion for energy efficiency and electrification but advocating for consumer choice and access to housing, arguing that compulsory standards are punitive for lower-income individuals. He also suggested that states should set their own building codes due to regional climate differences.
Menzel countered that states already have their own rules and that a standardized national approach, which accounts for regional variations across eight climate zones, helps lower industry compliance costs and makes homes cheaper. Treasurer Jim Chalmers indicated that the government is working with states to streamline the building code, acknowledging its current complexity and cost.