Mr KEOGH (Burt—Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel) (16:10): It's an amazing opportunity that the opposition have presented here today in their matter of public importance they raise. They raise the issue of a plan for housing. And they are right: having a plan for housing in this country is vitally important. In fact, our government understands how important it is to make sure that Australians have access to safe and affordable housing. In fact, we understand that it's central to the dignity and the security of all Australians. We have had to bring in, as part of our commitments at the last election, legislation to establish the Housing Australia Future Fund—a $10 billion investment in safe and secure housing for the most needy Australians. And yet—have you heard?—despite the fact it is a matter of public importance to the opposition that we need to have a plan for housing in this country, over in the other place the 'noalition' of the Liberals, Nationals and Greens are opposed to the Housing Australia Future Fund. It is a $10 billion fund that will deliver 30,000 new social and affordable homes over only five years. That's exactly what we need to see in Australia. I take the opportunity—I suspect I'll take it a few times over my speaking time—to call on those in the other chamber to look back and see what they've done just in the last 24 hours. They had the opportunity to support the establishment of that fund. But, instead, this 'noalition' of Liberals, Nationals and Greens decided to gang up in the Senate and remove from the Senate the opportunity to even vote on that legislation this week. They are further deferring, further putting off, the opportunity to establish the fund, to start earning interest on the fund, to start generating the revenue in the fund that would deliver $200 million for the repair, maintenance and improvement of housing in remote Indigenous communities and deliver $100 million for crisis and transitional housing options for women and children impacted by family and domestic violence and for older women that are at risk of homelessness. And they are denying the opportunity for $30 million to build housing and fund specialist services for veterans who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. I make this point because there are nearly 6,000 contemporary veterans that can experience homelessness in any one year here in Australia. That is a national tragedy. It's one that, indeed, the opposition have spoken about. It is one they acknowledge we should be doing something about, to fix it. In fact, it might even be one of the things they're suggesting is a failure in housing policy. Yet, when presented with an opportunity to actually fix this problem, they oppose it going through this parliament. It's curious, and I will tell you all why. In last year's budget reply, the Leader of the Opposition said: The job of an opposition is not to oppose for the sake of it. We don't disagree with everything in this budget, and policy must be judged on its merits. If it's good for you, we will support it. If it's bad for you, we will stand against it. So we commend several good measures in Tuesday's budget: the extension of the childcare subsidy to more Australian families; the commitment to reduce the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme co-payment, to lower the cost of medicines; the support for housing for our veterans … At the last budget reply, the Leader of the Opposition stood at that dispatch box and told this chamber, this parliament and the Australian people that that opposition—the Liberal Party and the National Party—would support the funding for housing for veterans who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This is the funding that would be flowing through the Housing Australia Future Fund and this is the funding that would support the programs that are being proposed by organisations—for example, the Royal Australian Air Force Association of Western Australia, Vasey RSL Care in Victoria and the Tasmanian RSL—which all have proposals that this government could consider for funding that would come through the Housing Australia Future Fund. Some of those proposals are based on the very successful and already existing Andrew Russell Veteran Living centre in South Australia, a model for the Scott Palmer Centre, which we are funding as a government and we committed to at the last election, to be built in Darwin. This is also a great example of how we are already moving in this space, but we need to have further funding to support these additional programs. There are organisations waiting in the wings, complaining, and I know they are calling Liberal and National senators and telling them they should be supporting this legislation to establish the fund. We also have the Queensland RSL doing the work they do with the Salvos to support veterans experiencing homelessness as well. We want to be able to support good proposals coming from good organisations. We can't even assess potential proposals because there's no stream of funding because this opposition, in noalition with the Greens, are not supporting it. I want to make a point about that. When it comes to the approach that has been taken here by this noalition of Liberals, Nationals and Greens, we have been hearing this consistent whine in this chamber. Anyone who pays attention on the social media certainly reads the whine that comes out of the Greens about this housing proposal. Mr Y oung interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Claydon ): How about you wait until I give you the call and then we'll hear the point of order. Member for Longman. Mr Young: The Speaker has already ruled that you cannot use the term 'noalition'. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'm listening very carefully to all the discussion going on here. I will check on that ruling. I think that everybody in this debate should be mindful of being respectful to each other. Mr KEOGH: I would like to inform the member that I used the term advisedly as an adjective to describe a grouping of three parties, not a formal title ascribed to two parties. Coming back to that third party, the Greens, Australia very well knows how the Greens like to try and use an argument about saying that they are going to strive for something better, that things could be better, that we should be doing things better, that we should be doing it the Greens' way. The Greens' way has delivered a decade of inaction on energy policy—that's what they delivered to this country. The Greens' way is now holding up housing funding for women and children fleeing domestic violence, older women who are experiencing homelessness, Indigenous communities that need to have proper housing afforded to them and housing for veterans that are homeless or at risk of homelessness. That is the approach they are taking. If they genuinely held the view that they thought we should be doing more or better—as they would say it—they would support this and continue to push us to do something else. But instead what they do is try and hold all of these people that would benefit from the Housing Australia Future Fund to ransom. How do they get to do that? Because they're in a noalition of the Greens, the National Party and the Liberal Party. It is absolutely shameful. As I mentioned in question time earlier today, for all of the rhetoric you hear out of the Liberal and National parties about supporting our veterans—those people who put themselves on the line for our country—they undermined the Department of Veterans' Affairs, they failed to resource it properly, they talked up the new IT system and they didn't actually give it any funding. When given the opportunity to support funding for veterans experiencing homelessness, the first thing they do is stand at that dispatch box and say, 'We will support funding for housing for our veterans.' Then, in the proceeding nine months, they spend the whole time opposing the legislation that would do that very thing! It is absolutely outrageous and it is hypocritical. You walk in here and try to say that we are the failure when it comes to housing policy. It is your failure! You didn't deliver over nine years, you didn't deliver over your time. You could have done this and then you didn't. We come in to clean up your mess and what do you do? You don't even support it happening! Instead, you try and talk the big talk. You go out and say, 'We're supporting veterans.' But, in reality, when it comes to what you're actually doing in this chamber and in that chamber in the other place, you aren't supporting veterans: you're undermining the support for veterans. And you know it. I know that these organisations are calling you. They're calling their backbenchers and calling their senators. You are the failure for veterans and housing. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I might just remind everyone that the microphones are working perfectly well. I can hear you without you yelling at me!