HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-05-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Bills

Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 23 March 2023.)

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (11:01): I rise to speak on the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023. We all know that housing is currently at a premium, with mortgages ever increasing and a significant shortage of rental properties. The current cost-of-living crisis created by the former federal government and the war in Ukraine is crippling our community, with people prioritising their rent or mortgage payments over essentials such as food, medicines and bills.

Our government is fully aware of the pressures facing South Australians, which is why we are acting to reform the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 to better meet the needs of today's rental housing market, improve protections for renters and ensure landlords can continue to manage properties effectively. Rental reforms have been initiated in all Australian jurisdictions, and the Malinauskas Labor government will ensure that South Australian tenants are not left behind, by implementing regulatory safeguards that protect households.

As part of the reform to the RTA last year, the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs announced a review of the RTA, with the release of a discussion paper marking the start of the most comprehensive review of the RTA since 2014—also initiated by Labor. The Malinauskas government has identified immediate priorities to be introduced now to assist renters with affordability, protect tenants' rights and privacy and improve the housing outcomes for people in South Australia through our recently announced housing package, A Better Housing Future.

The shortage of rental properties has led to rent bidding and a request for tenancy information that exceeds what a tenant would reasonably be expected to provide. These practices are unacceptable and must stop if South Australians are going to have a fairer chance of securing a rental property. This bill addresses the issue of rent bidding and other priorities identified as part of the government's plan for a better housing future. It will also take the first step towards standardising rental application forms and protecting tenant information.

Last year, a young woman I know was required to refill and resubmit an application form for each rental property she sought to secure, despite it being with the same rental agency. This happened time and time again over the 18 months that she was looking for rental accommodation; given the number of properties prospective tenants have to apply for, this is an unnecessary burden. Yet, to really challenge this young woman's privacy, one application required she video herself at her current address—you can hear the alarm bells ringing. This is a shocking breach of privacy and would likely lead to discriminatory behaviour and possibly worse. Others requested a reference from the applicant's employers, handing the power of accessing shelter to their boss.

This bill is one part of the Malinauskas government's plan for a better housing future that provides an immediate response to the challenges being experienced by many South Australian renters. The amendment bill provides for information to be prescribed in the regulations that must not be requested of a prospective tenant. There will be further targeted consultation on the information prescribed, which may potentially include the applicant's rental bond history, a statement from a credit or bank account containing daily transactions and any information about the applicant that relates to a protected attribute under equal opportunity legislation.

We must remember that these people are renting a house and supplying this information to a stranger, not to a government department or other trusted agency. It is therefore appropriate that protections are in place, especially for parents, women, multicultural groups, our queer community and people living with a disability. Imagine: you might be a woman who has escaped a domestic violence situation and is seeking rental property, and you must provide information that may disclose details you would prefer not to disclose in order to maintain your safety. Additionally, remember that you are handing them to a stranger. It would make you feel unsafe.

The Malinauskas government wants to protect tenants but also not disadvantage some of our most vulnerable community members. Following consultation with key stakeholders on the draft bill, based on feedback the state government has received we have included a technical amendment to ensure the exemption under section 47B(2) is intended to apply only to a landlord or agent who is also a housing assistance provider to ensure the prohibition does not interfere with the housing assistance provider requesting information required to determine a tenant's eligibility.

Our government takes discrimination seriously, with the amendment bill proposing that an expiation fee of $1,200 or a maximum penalty of $20,000 apply for these offences. As I mentioned, we need to protect renters' personal information, especially given the cybersecurity incidents we have seen with Optus, Latitude Financial and so many other cases where individuals' personal information has been accessed. The amendment bill contains measures to protect tenant information by prohibiting tenant information from being disclosed without their consent or as required by law, the tenancy agreement, a court or a tribunal.

Tenant information for a successful tenant is required to be destroyed after three years and within 30 days of a tenancy agreement being executed for unsuccessful tenants. However, prospective tenants can consent to their information being held for up to six months to support looking for another tenancy. The amendment bill also regulates the disclosure and destruction of prospective tenant information provided for the purposes of applying for a tenancy. A maximum penalty of $20,000 is proposed to apply, with an expiation fee of $1,200.

Rent bidding is a reprehensible, unfair and dishonest practice that no reputable landlord or real estate agent should be engaged in, but sadly we do know it is regularly reported in South Australia. This amendment bill prohibits rental properties being advertised at a price range and prevents landlords or agents inviting higher rent offers. In addition, third parties, which often include websites facilitating tenant application forms, are prevented from engaging in rent bidding. Provisions relating to third parties are intended to address conduct involving prospective tenants being charged fees for background checks and an assessment or rating of their suitability being provided to the landlord or agent.

There are reports that in some instances prospective tenants paying for the background check and offering higher rent have been afforded a higher rating. This is unfair. The amendment bill prohibits rent bidding by the landlord or agent, prevents a person in trade or commerce from providing an assessment or rating of a prospective tenant that is based on an offer of higher rent and disallows a person from receiving or requiring a prospective tenant to pay for an assessment or rating of their suitability for a tenancy.

The fourth immediate priority announced as part of the Malinauskas plan for a better housing future relates to more affordable residential tenancy bonds, which has been progressed through amendments to the Residential Tenancies Regulations 2010. Due to rent price increases, renters of even moderately priced housing are currently required to provide a six-week rental bond, a significant challenge for those looking for affordable housing.

Currently, landlords can claim residential bonds equivalent to a maximum six weeks' rent when the weekly rent is $250 or greater, with only a four-week bond entitled to be claimed for properties falling below that threshold. However, increasingly fewer properties fall below this threshold, particularly in my electorate of Gibson where the cheapest weekly rent for a three-bedroom family home starts at around $450 a week. During a recent search, I could not find a three-bedroom rental property below $250 per week anywhere in metropolitan Adelaide.

For these reasons the bond threshold will now be raised to $800 to ensure that, for the majority of rental properties in South Australia, only a four-week bond will be required. This change will reduce the amount of up-front costs for tenants by between $500 and $1,600, depending on the amount of rent they are paying. For example, based on the lowest rental price for a house in the Gibson electorate, the current bond amount would be $2,700 and with the changes we have made to the residential bond amount this would be $1,800, a saving for tenants of $900.

The consultation on the RTA review has concluded and Consumer and Business Services is currently preparing a report based on the 5,000 responses and 150 submissions to the government that were received from the YourSAy consultation. The reforms in this bill are the government's immediate priorities, with further consideration and consultation on the broader review of the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 to take place before being introduced to parliament later this year.

I know from the constituents contacting my office that the housing situation is critical in our state, with the number of people calling my office seeking assistance due to financial pressures increasing. These are people who are working but cannot find a suitable rental property, people whose children are having to sleep on the floor and the increasing amount of people living rough. I know, as do my colleagues, that this cannot continue, which is why we have provided practical assistance to South Australians having re-funded services that assist those who are homeless or victims of domestic and family violence that were cruelly cut by those opposite.

We have unveiled a once-in-a-generation housing policy, including the Premier, Treasurer and Minister Champion announcing the single largest release of residential land in the state's history at Concordia, Dry Creek and Sellicks Beach and further announcements made in the last few days. Additionally, we are delivering the first substantial increase to public housing in a generation, including 946 new public homes, the upgrade of 350 and extra maintenance for a further 3,000 properties, while stopping the planned Liberal sell-off of 580 homes.

Labor is about making the lives of South Australians better, investing in the future, undertaking sensible legislative reform and working to ease the pressure on South Australian families. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (11:13): I indicate the opposition's support for the bill, and I indicate also that I am the lead speaker for the opposition. In indicating support for the bill, I highlight that this is perhaps not the occasion for too much grandiose language about solving what is clearly a set of circumstances of high stress in housing across the board, in particular in relation to residential tenancies. That is acknowledged. That is a matter that continues to be at the feet of the government day to day. This bill is certainly not going to be—

The SPEAKER: Member for Heysen, I am informed by the Clerk that there is a record of you already speaking on the bill. We are confirming our records.

Mr TEAGUE: The bill was introduced and the second reading moved by the minister on 8 March, if that assists the Chair, and debate was adjourned on that occasion.

The SPEAKER: To the 23rd.

Mr TEAGUE: That is at page 3286. That is what I have.

The SPEAKER: Yes. I am just conferring with the Clerk, member for Heysen.

Mr TEAGUE: In the event that there was an opportunity, and I have overlooked it, I am grateful—

The SPEAKER: I am reluctant to prevent you from speaking. In fact, I would rather you continued on indulgence in any event until I take further advice from the Clerk.

Mr TEAGUE: With that in mind, I will be as brief as I have indicated in any event.

The SPEAKER: Member for Heysen, the Clerk's formal advice to me is that the record reflects you already speaking and, therefore, your continued remarks are out of order. I regret to provide you with that advice because you are making a useful contribution to the house. Nevertheless, it may be that you turn to another speaker on the opposition's side.

Mr TEAGUE: If that is the case, it is perhaps the result—although entirely my responsibility—of the time that has passed since we were last here. I hope it is of some help to the chamber that I reiterate the opposition's support and, to the extent that the rest of my remarks remain on the Hansard, they might serve some useful purpose. I endorse the bill. I note that there is a necessity to go to committee in due course. The minister has provided filed amendments.

The SPEAKER: Very well. Is there another opposition speaker seeking the call? If not, I turn to the government side. Member for Davenport.

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (11:16): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I, too, rise in support of the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill. It is a timely amendment to an important act, which will protect the rights of tenants as well as assist with alleviating cost-of-living pressures and create a fairer rental market. This legislation is just one element of our government's A Better Housing Future plan, which will:

increase affordable housing;

increase residential land supply;

create a private rental assistance program;

provide support for homebuyers;

increase regional housing;

upgrade Housing SA properties; and

build new Housing SA homes.

One of the key elements of this amendment bill is to protect tenants through the banning of rental bidding and price ranges. Agents and tenants with whom I have spoken in my electorate of Davenport welcome this ban because it creates a fairer and more affordable rental market.

The practice of rental bidding is unfair and, in some situations, underhanded. It forces the property manager to essentially conduct a silent auction between potential tenants and the landlord. It drives the weekly rental price up out of desperation and essentially cuts people with less affordability out of the housing market.

Many people I know and have spoken to in my community say that they arrive at an open of a rental property within their budget feeling excited and feeling hopeful, only to walk in and overhear other potential tenants offering the property manager more than $100 per week over the advertised price. I remember this happening to my husband and I time and time again when we were looking for a rental property. It is disheartening, it is stressful and it is a huge waste of time for busy people trying to find a family home. Every South Australian deserves to have a roof over their head and to be safe and secure in a place that they can call home.

Rental bidding is a greedy practice and, in the current housing climate, unethical. It should be banned in South Australia, like it already is in other states. I know that some landlords may be less excited about this. I have heard some commentary that we should stay out of the business of landlords and that this could be seen as a disincentive for home owners to put their homes on the rental market.

These amendments are not designed to restrict the rights of landlords, nor will they turn the rental market as we know it on its head. Landlords will tell you, rightly, that their rental properties are a means of housing supply, so when New-Age practices start pricing would-be renters out of the market it is time that we take stock.

This is not a war on landlords. This is about ensuring the rental market does what it says on the tin, which is increase housing supply. I hope any home owner serious about placing a property on the rental market is doing so for that reason as well as to achieve their own investment goals. These people, I am sure, will be in support of sensible reform like this.

A ban on rent bidding brings with it 'clarity and transparency for tenants'. Those are the words of Mr Cain Cooke, Real Estate Institute of South Australia CEO. It is evident that there is support from industry for this proposal. There is a strong consumer appetite for reform, and this government is committed to driving the necessary change. Now it is time to get this done.

Another important element of this bill is the proposed changes to rental application forms and the information the potential tenant needs to provide. Under the Equal Opportunity Act it is illegal to discriminate against a person based on personal characteristics, but it happens—we know that it does. I know of families who have lied on application forms about their marital status, their pets and even their children, as they were desperate for a home and worried about discrimination or judgement. I will support anything we can do as a government to remove discrimination and create an even playing field for all people looking for a home.

Disclosing your financial activity and history is deeply personal, and this legislation will provide privacy protections and assurances for tenants around their personal information. For example, a new single mum, perhaps a victim of domestic violence, may have to provide a record of bond history in an attempt to secure a home. If the records from her past are negative and potentially not her responsibility, that information could be held against her as she tries to begin a new chapter and provide a safe place for herself and for her children.

This government is serious about protecting the rights of the individual, in particular one's right to privacy. That is why this amendment bill provides the prescribed information that cannot be requested of a prospective tenant, because wanting a roof over your head should not lay bare your personal affairs.

Nor should applying for a rental property leave an applicant exposed to what remains a concerning increase in cybersecurity incidents. Customers of Optus, Medibank and a host of other businesses know all too well the difficulties a cybersecurity breach can cause. The Malinauskas government is committed to protecting the data of both tenants and prospective renters as best it possibly can.

Clauses contained within the government's proposal require a successful applicant's information to be destroyed after three years. For unsuccessful applicants this requirement is within 30 days of a rental agreement's execution. I am pleased to form part of a government that is tackling the real threat of cybercrime head on. For breaches, penalties of up to $20,000 are proposed.

The A Better Housing Future plan addresses the current housing challenges so many South Australians are facing. Our population grew significantly last year, and we already had a shortage of houses. This increase in population is only expected to grow. Under the Malinauskas Labor government this state is thriving. We have seen unprecedented hotel occupancy in the wake of the Adelaide 500's return, the Fringe, the AFL Gather Round and LIV Golf, key indicators that more people are being drawn to South Australia and more and more people are looking at South Australia as a place to call home.

We want every South Australian to be able to secure a roof over their head. This is why we have committed to a record land release, which is set to deliver more than 23,000 homes. We are already hard at work, with 235 hectares of land at Hackham having been rezoned, creating capacity for at least 2,000 new homes.

New builds are just one lever that we are pulling to address the matter of housing affordability. This government's approach is multifaceted. The Malinauskas government's A Better Housing Future plan includes a variety of commitments in relation to Housing SA property upgrades and new builds as well as residential land releases. It also includes more affordable residential tenancy bonds, which is a crucial element of this legislation.

In response to cost-of-living pressures, tenants will be able to save up to thousands of dollars which would normally be allocated to bond. Increases in rent have seen tenants of even modest properties shell out six-week rental bonds, as opposed to the four weeks that longer time renters would be accustomed to. We know this up-front expense proves a significant barrier to those seeking affordable housing, and that is why we are taking action.

A change in the bond threshold will see a majority of rental properties in South Australia require a bond of four weeks only. This change will drive a reduction in up-front costs and help families facing cost-of-living pressures to get their feet through the door. This new bond amount will apply to any bond paid or payable under an agreement entered into on or after 1 April 2023.

Not only is this a better deal for renters, it is a better deal for South Australia. More money in the tenant's pocket means more money for dinner at the pub, a ticket to a show, or a coffee from the local on a Sunday morning. More money in a renter's pocket improves more than just their quality of life. It gives them an opportunity to spend their hard-earned where they choose, support local business and drive our economy.

For those on lower incomes, this small change becomes all the more dramatic. A reduction in up-front expenses for some will be the difference between a roof over their head and a properly furnished roof over their head. It means that tenants will have extra funds available to set up their home, connect their services and buy the little things that we all take for granted.

This is not what we have grown to expect in an economy as advanced as Australia's, and now we need to right the course. For me, this small change concerning rental bonds is the right start. It is important to note that these matters have been identified as the state government's immediate priorities, with further consideration and consultation of the Residential Tenancies Act to occur throughout the year.

I know that high on the agenda of my constituents is the matter of pets. Those who know me know that I am a huge animal lover and a dog and cat owner. There was a time when I had to find a pet and child-friendly property, which was not easy. Pet-friendly rentals are rare, and tenants with pets often encounter difficulties in finding accommodation. It is a matter raised with me by many in my community, and I absolutely understand their frustrations. Pets provide companionship. They provide joy, and for many our furry family members were critical to our mental health during the past few years of uncertainty. For the vulnerable, the elderly, children and those with special needs, a pet may be their closest family member.

Legislation changes in other states have helped to reduce barriers for pet owners seeking rental properties, and I hope further work on our Residential Tenancies Act will see more pet-friendly rental properties made available to South Australians. Rental reforms are happening all over Australia and it is important to me that South Australian tenants are protected and supported too. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:27): I also rise to support the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023. I think a good starting point is the comments made by the Premier a while back, where he indicated that every South Australian deserves a roof over their head, a secure roof over their head. He did use the term 'home'. Even the term 'home' is interesting, given the nature of the housing market over recent decades, with the financialisation of something that once upon a time represented something basic. That financialisation of the housing market over the years has in a number of ways had a detrimental impact.

Clearly, this bill before us is an amendment to one act, and it will be the first in a series of amendments to this particular act that will be addressed at some point in the future. In coming up with this amendment, there was widespread consultation with a whole range of groups, with peak bodies and with people who look after the most vulnerable in our communities.

As a result of that series of consultations, a number of issues were raised. This is, once again, when we are talking about this particular bill, when we are talking about this particular act. Of course, the Malinauskas government has a layered approach when it comes to what I would call the housing crisis that we face in this state and, indeed, nationally.

This is one element and an important element, but a small element in the overall approach to addressing housing. When it came to the consultation about this particular bill—and, as I said, the amendments to this act that might come before this house in the future—the issues that were raised included renting with pets, which is often very difficult. My daughter has two big dogs and currently lives in Whyalla but will be moving to Adelaide. I said, 'You are going to find it hard in this tight rental market with two big dogs, one of whom is insane, to find a place to live.' That is a challenge that she is going to have. Renting with pets is not addressed with these particular amendments.

A crackdown on the practice of rent bidding is addressed. This is something that has happened in a number of states and so South Australia has fallen into line. It is important that we attempt at least to address rent bidding because of the impact that is having on tenants at the expense of a lot of people, and sometimes incredibly vulnerable people, who are out there in the private rental market at a time of rental shortages.

The other thing that is addressed in this particular bill is the maximum bond amount, something else that is important given the increases in rent and the percentage that is worked out. This increase in bonds is having a major impact. There are a lot of people who are in a position where the bonds that are being asked for now they cannot afford, so they are almost automatically locked out of the market or find it very difficult. Standardising application forms is another thing addressed in this particular bill. That is a sensible and commonsense approach and I think it has widespread support.

There are a number of elements that are not touched upon but might well be in the future: whether there is a minimum notice required for not renewing a fixed-term tenancy agreement and whether that should be increased. One of the peculiarities of the Australian housing market, compared with a lot of housing markets overseas and especially in Europe, is the length of time of the tenancy. It could be six months, it could be a year, and one of the important elements is the need for people to secure a home with some stability. If you cannot do that, it has all sorts of impacts. It has impacts on parents or a parent, it has impacts on children, and it has impacts on single people as well. Housing security is something that is incredibly important.

The other thing that is not touched upon in this bill, and it might well be in future bills, is housing standards. We know that a lot of tenants feel very reluctant to raise issues when it comes to the quality of housing lest they be put in a position where they have no house at the end of the contract. Some of the work that has been done on housing standards in Australia generally indicates, in a lot of cases, very poor standards, especially when it comes to heating and cooling and the energy efficiency of houses, and that can have a direct impact upon people's health. But there is a whole raft of other issues when it comes to standards, things that need to be fixed that are often not fixed and the slowness of that fixing.

I am fortunate to be in a position where I have housing security. I have been, at times, a landlord, and I have to say a pretty good landlord, always quick to respond when something needed to be done. When house rents were going up I kept it very moderate indeed, because I had good tenants, but there is a whole raft of issues that needs to be addressed when it comes to standards. Safety modification is another thing that needs to be looked at. There are general standards, but there are also standards when it comes to the safety of a house. Once again, tenants feel as though they are in a position not to ask for the things that need to be done.

Support for renters who are experiencing domestic violence, which is a scourge—and this is one of the incredibly vulnerable groups in our society when it comes to ensuring some security for people who have been the victims of domestic violence. These are all important elements, some of which are addressed in this particular bill and, as I said, we will be revisiting some of these issues that have come up during the consultation phase to see what can be done to improve the situation further.

I indicated that this is part of a layered approach and that a whole raft of things needs to be done at a state level to address the crisis that we have but, importantly, there needs to be a partnership with the federal government because this is a national crisis. You can track back how we have ended up in this situation. It is interesting just to look around nationally at the number of train wrecks that the federal government have inherited, but you could argue that when it comes to housing the policy antecedents go back many years to the federal government under the Howard government and their approach to the federal-state housing agreements where they, in essence, vacated the field.

It is about how things slowly cascade over the years and then are compounded by other elements that then lead to the position that we are in now. The people who are paying the highest price—whether they are in the public arena, the public housing sector, on a waiting list or in the private rental market—are those vulnerable people who are hit the most, and young people.

Young people, in general, have inherited a bad set of circumstances when it comes to housing and the ongoing crash in the number of young people who are going to be able to move into the private housing market. There are difficulties with rental and then the difficulty with actually buying a house. The thing about Australia is that we did have very high rates of home ownership and, in a lot of ways, that home ownership then fed into how we geared our welfare policies because the assumption was when you retire you are going to have a house to live in.

The other group that has been really caught out and caught out badly when it comes to housing has been older women: women who are 50-plus. That is not old in my view, but anyway at 50-plus are the people who have been caught out and caught out very badly. When you see people living in cars and other incredibly insecure forms of accommodation, if we can call it that, something has gone seriously wrong in this country that at one time was blessed when it came to home ownership.

We need to increase housing affordability and there are a number of elements to that: obviously when it comes to public housing and the capacity to be able to provide someone with a public house that is important. When you look at the numbers, going back to say 1980, you look at the crash in the numbers of people in public housing, you look at the crash over the years when it comes to investment in public housing. At one time—it would probably be back around 1980 or thereabouts—13 per cent of the investment in housing in Australia was in public housing. That has crashed to something like under 3 per cent of the investment—possibly under 2 per cent—that is now in public housing.

When you look at the OECD countries when it comes to the provision of public housing, we are one of the worst performing countries amongst the advanced nations, especially when you look at the European nations. That is something that needs to be addressed, and that is going to take a real partnership between the federal government and the state governments.

One of the things that we have done as part of the layered approach to housing in this state is the release when it comes to lands supply in the north of Adelaide, south of Adelaide and Murray Bridge. When I look at my communities—because there are issues in my communities as well, whether it is Port Augusta, whether it is Whyalla—there are some real issues when it comes to housing.

Supply has been opened up in Adelaide. There is supply in regional communities, but the difficulty in regional communities is getting investors willing to do subdivisions, and there are a range of reasons for that. When they are willing to do it, it is the cost of doing it in regional communities. Of course, we face supply chain issues; we are facing a major issue when it comes to a lack of skilled workers in the construction sector. However, it is important that we do make land available, whether it is subdivisions or whether it is small parcels here, there and everywhere. That is going to be an important element of addressing some of the challenges.

Residential tenancy reform, which I have touched on, is another important element in protecting tenants. It is always a balancing act. You want to do the right thing by landlords as well, because there are a lot of good landlords. There are some arsehole landlords, but there are a lot of good landlords around the place. We have to, in a reasonable way, look after their interests.

Private rental assistance is another important element. I am hoping that the federal budget is going to address part of that, and we are doing what we can in this state to assist. There is support for homebuyers—there are various schemes in place to provide assistance for homebuyers to take that first step into the housing market.

It is good to see that Renewal SA now have a regional agency and a pilot program to look at, initially, housing for essential workers in a number of communities. In my electorate, Port Augusta is one of those communities. It is looking at teacher housing, housing for nurses and housing for police in regional areas. This is an initial, small pilot program, but it will expand. The good thing about the new agency within Renewal SA with a focus on regions is looking at different partnerships and how we address the issue of shortages in regional South Australia.

I was a beneficiary as a child coming from the UK when housing policy in this state was part of industry policy. We came out to Australia and within two or three weeks of being here we had a three-bedroom house. My mum and dad and us three kids had a three-bedroom house that my mum and dad then went on to live in for many years. I think we need to, in some respects, rejig our housing policy. There needs to be a wider dimension to it, especially given some of the issues that we face as a nation and a state in attracting skilled workers.

We need to not just focus on housing for people in category 1 with real need. Clearly it is not necessarily government policy, but I would argue that we need to revisit what the Housing Trust did all those years ago and have a 21st-century version of the Housing Trust so that it does form part of industry policy. It can do so in partnership with the private sector, but sometimes it might have to do it alone. We need to look at how we do that, because the challenges are profound.

Going back to that period of time in the community that I moved to with my family from the UK, there was serious industrialisation going on. We had a demand for skills, which we filled with people from all over the place. Those of us who came here, as I said, had secure housing as part of that whole package of coming to Australia. My parents did not like being referred to as ten-pound Poms because they were Scottish and Irish, but for the whole package of that approach—assistance to come here, making it easy, having a house—we need to start looking at what we are doing nationally and at a state level and seeing what we can learn from the past and how we adapt it.

It is good to see the current federal government addressing the mess that is our visa system—and what an absolute mess they inherited. It needs to be simplified; it needs to be far easier for people, especially people with skills, to come to Australia. But then we have to address the housing issue. Because of COVID we are going to have an uptick in immigration levels that is going to put even more pressure on housing, so we need to have far more creative solutions.

I will say that there is a good start at the federal level, assuming they can get some of their legislation through, but they are going to have to do far more. We as a state are going to have to do far more because we are in competition with other countries that are making it a lot easier, whether it comes to housing or whether it comes to visas, in order to attract skilled people to Australia. We know that in this state, with some of the projects and some of the long-term projects that are on the drawing board, we need to bring people in, and it is going to be very difficult to bring people in if they cannot afford housing.

I spent the last part of last week in my community trying to assist somebody who had five children—a single mum, but her dad also lived with her. She was in the private rental market in Whyalla. The landlord wanted to sell the place, but he provided, if you like, a six-month grace to give her the opportunity to look around and see if she could get another private rental. She could not. She could not find a private rental anywhere in Whyalla that would accommodate their needs in a price range that they could afford. When you go into the real estate agencies in Whyalla now, there are lots of houses being sold and lots of houses under contract.

I contacted the Housing Trust—and I am still calling it the Housing Trust—and they somehow performed some magic because initially they thought they had nowhere and now they have found somewhere. It is not ideal for the size of the family, but at least it is a stable roof over their head, compared to what they were offered by Centacare—and this is the experience of a lot of people—which was a tent. I am not blaming Centacare; that is the position that they were in. We have profound challenges when it comes to housing in South Australia and nationally, and it is going to take a lot more policy grunt than we have seen to date to address it.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Women and the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Recreation, Sport and Racing) (11:48): I am really, really proud that, through this bill, our government is reforming the Residential Tenancies Act to make sure that we better meet the needs of today's renters by absolutely improving protections for them and also by responding to the needs of today's rental housing market and making sure that landlords can continue to effectively manage properties. Rental reforms have been initiated across all Australian jurisdictions. Our government will ensure that South Australian renters are not left behind, by making sure that we implement regulatory safeguards that protect them.

In making these remarks, I want to say thank you to the minister for her tireless work in this space and for bringing this bill to the house. I also thank her team for their work, and also the many South Australians who have provided information, contributed ideas and raised issues that we now respond to through this piece of legislation.

As part of the reform to the act, last year the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs announced a review of the act, with the release of a comprehensive discussion paper, marking the start of the first really comprehensive review of the act since 2014. We have, however, alongside that comprehensive review, identified some immediate priorities to be introduced right now so that we can assist renters with affordability, protect their rights and privacy, and overall improve the housing outcomes for people in South Australia.

Those steps are articulated through our recently announced housing package, A Better Housing Future. As the Premier has said—and I wholeheartedly agree—every South Australian deserves to have a roof over their head and be safe and secure in a place they call home. This government recognises the extraordinary pressure the current housing market is placing on South Australians, particularly vulnerable South Australians, and this bill is one part of the government's plan for a better housing future that provides an immediate response to the challenges being experienced by many South Australian renters.

As the house knows, South Australia's economy has been performing well and our population has been growing more strongly in the past couple of years, with more people moving to South Australia from other states. This has contributed to very strong demand for housing across all sectors and in both the metropolitan and regional areas of our state. South Australia's residential vacancy rates remain at historically low levels, and the supply shortage of rental properties has caused rents to substantially increase. This has created an environment where renters are really struggling to find rental properties in an increasingly competitive market.

This shortage of rental properties has also led to rent bidding and requests for tenancy information that exceeds what a tenant would or should reasonably be expected to provide. Through this bill we are addressing those issues. We are ensuring that information renters are required to provide is limited. The bill provides for information, to be proscribed in the regulations, that must not be requested of a prospective tenant.

There will be further consultation on the type and extent of the information that should be proscribed, and it may potentially include things like the applicant's rental bond history, a statement from a bank, etc. It will certainly not include any information about the applicant that might relate to a protected attribute under equal opportunity legislation.

It protects tenants' information, which is very important in terms of how tenants' information is disclosed or not disclosed, and how information is dealt with once a relationship between a particular tenant and landlord ceases to exist. Very importantly, it also bans rent bidding, which a number of other speakers have made important points about. It also attempts to make residential tenancy bonds much more affordable. These are very important areas to act upon, and I am pleased we are doing so.

I was absolutely appalled to hear the story the member for Gibson related about a young woman she knows who was asked to provide video footage of her being in a particular property. That is highly alarming behaviour, and it reminded me of an experience I had many years ago, as a young woman, when I was renting a maisonette by myself. The rental arrangement was through a real estate company but the father of the person who owned the particular home lived next door to the property and unbeknownst to me still had keys to the property.

On a number of occasions I returned home to find that he had actually entered the home that I was renting and without any consultation, without any notice, had actually undertaken the moving around of furniture and undertaken particular maintenance, etc. As a young single woman, it was quite alarming to come home to find that clearly somebody had actually been in my home unannounced. It was terrible; it was appalling.

When I was listening to some of the other comments I was thinking about our two young sons, in their early 20s, and their partners. One son and his partner have living arrangements with me and my husband and the other son and his partner with the girlfriend's parents. That is a lovely arrangement. I am happy for them to stay there forever. It is fantastic. I speak with them a lot about how difficult it is to get money together. Both couples want to eventually purchase a home. It is difficult to get into the housing market but it is certainly also difficult for them to rent.

Having said that, they are absolutely lucky. They know that. They do have parents who can help to provide for them and help to fill that housing gap. It is really important that I note that, and I make sure that I note that to them most days and on some days much more vociferously than on others, depending on the circumstances. What I do know from talking to them is that many of their friends, some couples, some single people, are finding it increasingly hard to find rental properties and certainly are also finding it hard to save should they be in a rental property and wanting to actually purchase a home; finding it really, really hard to actually get to that point in their lives. I am just saying again, they are very lucky. Certainly many of the young people they know do not have that same experience.

Thinking about that reminded me of a number of conversations I have had in my community in the south. In particular, I was thinking about a young woman I know who is a young mum of two children. She is quite a young woman and her children are very young. She does not have a car. At the time I spoke with her, she was searching desperately for a secure rental property. When she spoke to me, using public transport she had gone to inspect around 40 properties.

She spoke to me about how every single time she arrived with her child to inspect properties there were dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of people there. And each time, despite her incredible record and despite the fact that knowing this young woman and knowing her extraordinary ability to budget, to provide care and safety for her child and to manage a pretty small amount of money that she receives, despite what I say is an impeccable record in that regard, every single time in those numerous visits and numerous applications that she made for those properties that she visited, she was outbid.

To me that is utterly unfair when you have a young woman with a child who, as I said, is an extraordinary manager of her money, a really great prospective tenant, but just because she did not have that capacity to outbid others she continued to be unsuccessful in applying for a rental property. I am so pleased that through this bill we are addressing that issue which, to me, absolutely speaks to a desire from our government to make sure that there is equality of opportunity to access that safe and secure place to call home.

Also, while listening to other speakers and thinking about the importance of this bill, I was thinking about another woman I know in my community to whom I have spoken many times. She went through an extraordinarily difficult domestic violence situation, a situation where for many years she was coercively controlled by her now ex-husband, and they, for a long time, had a home that they lived in—they were both part of the mortgage on their home.

She went through a significant journey to get to a point where she decided to leave that relationship. She had many things in place, supports around her, as she made that decision to leave the relationship very carefully—and I say 'very carefully' because it was an awful, just terrible, deeply unacceptable situation where a number of her movements and transactions, etc. were monitored.

She went through quite a process to get to a point where she could safely begin to apply for rental properties. Just getting to that point was a really difficult exercise in itself, but, of course, similar to the other story that I have just recounted, she found it really, really difficult when she was able to organise herself to safely get to rental properties for inspection. Again, she found it really, really difficult to in any way compete with the excessive rent bidding that was happening as she attempted to secure a property.

I do have to just say on another note that I am so proud of this woman. She is an extraordinary woman, and I am so happy that after such a long journey just in the last few weeks—and she had a period where she did end up finding a rental—she is now just about to buy a new unit for herself to live in and again to find that safe and secure place to call home. I am very pleased that that is moving along for her, but I and other people who were supporting her and talking with her were highly alarmed at how long she had to stay in this circumstance before she could find that rental property to exit the home.

I do commend the minister for bringing these incredibly important reforms to this place. This legislation will absolutely make a difference in people's lives. As I have spoken about, it sits alongside a number of other housing measures this government is proudly taking forward. One I wanted to mention that I do not think has been mentioned yet is that our government has also recently established—very importantly—an older women's housing security taskforce, where we are bringing together women who have experienced stress in accessing safe and secure housing in their older years.

We are bringing together experts from across the housing arena and across the social services sector. I want to take the opportunity to say thank you very much to that group of outstanding leaders who are doing such incredibly important work alongside this legislative process to make sure that we are aware of and influencing every possible lever, initiating every possible action, to ensure that that fastest growing group of people in our community who are experiencing homelessness have a plan to make sure that they are safe and secure and able to access that place to call home into the future.

Mr FULBROOK (Playford) (12:03): I am happy to rise and speak in support of the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023. Before I begin, I warn you that I recently recovered from a cough, so I apologise if my voice does not go the distance.

It was nearly a year ago when I delivered my maiden speech and made it abundantly clear that we need reform in this space, for we know that housing is not a choice, nor a luxury: it is a fundamental human need and therefore we should elevate it to being a right. I say this based on the fact that we cannot expect anyone within our community to realise their full potential if they do not have access to the basics of food, warmth and shelter. If we want a harmonious and productive society, when necessary we must prioritise resources so nobody misses out on having a roof over their head.

While I believe there is a lot more to do, any investment in public housing puts downward pressure on private rental and sales costs. I am encouraged by the Malinauskas government's increase in public housing with the addition of an extra 564 public homes for South Australians who are in need. It is a good start, and I also note our commitment to carry out extra maintenance on a further 3,000 public housing properties. An increase and progressive flow on the land supply front will also have a positive impact on putting downward pressure on both rents and overall housing prices.

There is still a long way to go, and I do not think anyone in government is denying this, but it is also worth noting that there are other pathways beyond government investment to make it easier for South Australians seeking shelter. The legislative path is one we cannot ignore, and I am grateful this bill is one of a number of steps to help make a difference on this front.

Across my electorate, we have seen rents increase because of a dwindling supply. This is understandable, and in many cases we are a victim of our own successes. My electorate is reasonably close to the CBD, cosmopolitan and within close proximity to many employment opportunities. It is easy to understand why so many people want to live my way.

According to realestate.com, the median price for a rental in Mawson Lakes is $480 a week. This is up from $385 four years ago. In Salisbury Downs, it is at $400, up from $300 over the same period. Parafield Gardens has seen a steeper increase, from $320 to $450 a week, with similar results in Paralowie of a rise from $325 to $440 over the past four years.

While I have just presented median numbers, I am mindful of and have seen far greater extremes. Needless to say, I cannot see within the data at this point anything to suggest locally that there will be a decline in rental prices. When you factor in that 27 per cent of dwellings within Playford are rented and our median weekly income is $1,455, then it is easy to see why this is a problem that bites not only hard but also wide. We have seen stagnant wage growth over the last decade, which means we are making do with a lot less.

I prioritise this problem locally, but this is not something exclusive to my electorate, let alone the state. This is a national problem that requires careful consideration from all tiers of government as well as from those who are currently in opposition. I say this because our problem of poor housing affordability took a generation to create. It will therefore take this long to unravel the problems that we unfortunately have brought upon ourselves.

While I do love the fact that Labor is in charge across every jurisdiction in Australia, I am aware that there is an inevitability that governments do come and go. We need to sing from the same sheet, and to do this properly we have to bolt in a set of principles that all sides of politics are prepared to accept. This means understanding and embracing solutions put forward from the left and also the right.

We are a federation, with capital flowing unrestricted across borders and, under current arrangements, a very liberal approach to foreign investment into our property market. This means any gains we make locally on housing affordability have the potential to be wiped out by investment from outside South Australia. It does not mean that we necessarily restrict investment, but we do need to be clear that we are not necessarily masters of our own destiny if we do not sing as one from all sides of the country. That is not necessarily easy, but if we do not try to take appropriate action together then we betray generations of future Australians who will not have the same opportunities as those before us.

Rather than wave a white flag until this is realised, I feel it is paramount that all governments get on with it and lead by example in tackling the problem. Hopefully, when one gets a good idea, others will embrace it to ensure positive changes are felt nationally. On this occasion, while I understand we are not setting the pace, we are certainly rubberstamping some positive ideas.

In my eyes, the two reforms that I am most pleased about in this bill centre around rent bidding and bonds. I understand there is more coming as a result of the most comprehensive review of the Residential Tenancies Act since 2014. When you receive more than 5,000 responses to a review of this nature, it is pretty clear that there is need for a lot of reform in this space. The next wave of reforms will be eagerly awaited as a result, but in this instance I understand that these specific changes in this bill are here because this is what the Labor government took to the people at the last election.

While it is too early to presuppose the outcomes of the consultation, I do note the matter of renting with pets was a topic of discussion. I saw firsthand in the Northern Territory how numerous stakeholders attempted to argue against this by claiming the sky would fall in and investors would abandon their product. This did not happen—and I am digressing—but I take this moment to warn those locally that, if they try a similar tactic here, there is enough data to dispel any fearmongering that may arise.

As mentioned, I am particularly keen to see the practice of rent bidding outlawed. The bill prohibits rental properties being advertised at a price range and prevents a landlord or an agent inviting higher rent offers. With a maximum penalty of $20,000, I hope the temptation to falsify rent offers in an attempt to drive up prices is removed. While I am not suggesting for one moment this problem is rampant, removing the ability to artificially inflate the value of a rental product should have a positive overall effect on rent prices across our housing market.

I am also encouraged by what this legislation proposes to do around bonds. Getting the money together for a bond is a massive hurdle made all the more difficult through the dramatic rental increases we have seen over recent years. Under current practices, prospective renters of even a moderately priced house must provide a six-week rental bond. I say this because landlords can claim residential bonds equivalent to a maximum of six weeks' rent when the weekly rent is $250 or greater. I would love to know where in South Australia, let alone Adelaide, you could find a decent rental at that price.

Rules currently state that a four-week bond can only be collected for properties falling below the $250 threshold. This threshold is proposed to increase to $800, which is thankfully below the median rent cost within my electorate. I also understand this change will affect the majority of rental properties in South Australia, which is worthy of my support. Seeing this from a local perspective, taking Mawson Lakes as an example, there is a big difference from charging $1,920 up-front for a bond to the full $2,880 that would be collected now for a house under current arrangements. It is fair to charge for a bond but we are taking steps to avoid several weeks of saving that could make a difference to whether a family does or does not have a roof over its head.

It is also worth asking what basic essentials people must make do without while trying to put those extra hundreds of dollars to one side to cover the cost of the bond. The thought is a worry and something good policy should not facilitate. By and large, most tenants do the right thing, so I would also argue that it is better for the local economy to let the extra two weeks' bond money flow through local communities to create extra jobs rather than having it sitting idle in a holding account.

In focusing on this change I do feel there is need to consider the plight of the landlord. While renting presents a risk, I would be hopeful most damage caused by dodgy tenants could be claimed through landlords' insurance with a four-week bond adequate enough to cover any insurance excess. While this is primarily a win for tenants, it is worth pointing out that this was a key election commitment. Once the feedback from the Residential Tenancies Act consultation process is complete and policies are developed, I would imagine this will not be a one-sided affair for tenants.

That said, with Adelaide suffering from record lows in terms of housing stock, this trigger for housing inflation should not be ignored. It is therefore incumbent on us as lawmakers to do what we can to make it easier for those feeling the most pain to ensure they can get a roof over their heads now. I said we need to do more, and I think more broadly nationally, but we cannot afford to stand in the way of policies to help people in this space right now.

Also worthy of support is new section 47B, which provides the information that will ultimately be prescribed in regulation on what cannot be requested of a prospective tenant. I sit on the Legislative Review Committee, and I look forward to scrutinising what will fall into this space, though I am encouraged, firstly, that there will be additional consultation, and, secondly, that it has the potential to limit the applicant's rental bond history, credit or bank account details and any information about the applicant that relates to a protected area under equal opportunity legislation. There is some more work to do, but I think it is important that this process is standardised with a view to stamping out some of the more elaborate processes we have recently heard about that have overstepped the mark.

While the regulations will follow, the Malinauskas government means business with the bill proposing an expiation fee of $1,200 and/or a maximum penalty of $20,000 for anyone to attempt to get information they are not entitled to. Similar penalties will also apply protecting tenant information by prohibiting details being disclosed without specific consent or, as required by law, a tenancy agreement, a court or a tribunal. The recent Optus incident was front and centre on how costly information leaks are to our community, and it therefore makes sense to take this opportunity to tighten up protection around consumer information.

While prospective tenants can consent to their information being held for up to six months to support another application, it is proposed that information held for a successful tenant will need to be destroyed after three years. In the case of unsuccessful tenants this should rightfully be lower, and I feel that this is set appropriately to within 30 days.

I have made it clear that, in the future, I would like to see a greater coming together across the nation in tackling housing affordability. Money flows freely across state and international borders, but until this need is adopted we are left to our own devices to do our best with what we have. This is not me singling out the federal Labor government and suggesting that what it is doing is inadequate. To the contrary, I think that a lot of its policies are quite good, and I have to say that I am deeply relieved that the Coalition's proposal of using superannuation to cover the cost of a home deposit did not see the light of day.

To be quite specific, it is going to be hard—maybe even impossible—but we do need to try to take as much politics out of this space as possible in tackling housing affordability into the future. There is truth in both left and right, and it is therefore time that, as a country, we made an effort to sing from the same sheet. In the meantime, there is still a lot to look forward to from the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs and other ministers working hard within this government.

Before I finish, I want to make it very clear that our system must support retaining existing landlords and attracting more of these to the market. We should not be seeing landlords as the problem but rather that they are part of the solution. In noting that Minister Michaels oversaw a consultation process that attracted feedback from over 5,000 people, I am hopeful there will be some positive ideas to make rental properties available in the future from our landlord population.

We cannot do this if we continually kick them. Gone are the days when public housing was a lever that helped keep costs in step. While I lament this, our housing market these days is a lot more focused on the private sector, which currently means that the best way to lower costs is to boost private supply.

In finishing, while I am only new to this parliament, as a former staffer I hope that my colleagues are beginning to notice that I consider it appropriate to thank them and those associated with the work behind the scenes for bringing a bill like this to the chamber. Members may remember that the review of the Residential Tenancies Act kicked off in August last year and heard firsthand the issues impacting the residential tenancies sector. A lot of work has been achieved since then and it is a credit to all involved.

I want to pass on my thanks to all those who have worked hard from this point to deliver this bill before us. This includes those working in Minister Michaels' department and parliamentary counsel. It is not an easy task capturing the sentiment of public opinion and turning it into legislation, but I feel all those involved have done a great job. The minister is also assisted by a great team led by Joel Wemmer, her Chief of Staff, and diligently assisted by senior adviser Ben Saint—

The Hon. L.W.K. Bignell: He wrote your speech.

Mr FULBROOK: —I did—and Chad Buchanan, adviser for Consumer and Business Affairs. I imagine there are a lot of other brilliant hands on deck and I apologise for missing the obvious.

The minister and her team have worked very hard on this bill and I do feel that, with so many other issues currently under examination, the best is yet to come. In the meantime, we have something before us that will be welcomed by renters, specifically in relation to lowering a number of avoidable cost pressures while also safeguarding their privacy. There is much more to do, but this piece of work is a positive step forward and I am happy to commend this bill to the house.

Ms CLANCY (Elder) (12:20): I rise today in support of the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023 to amend the Residential Tenancies Act 1995. Rarely does a day go by where I do not have a member of my community contact my office seeking support for a housing issue. A family of seven whose lease is about to expire and after attending more than 20 rental inspections has been unsuccessful. A woman and her son living in a caravan park when their lease expired also could not find a rental. There have been many couples living with one set of parents for a few months to save up for a house, with those few months extending to years.

I know this is not a unique experience for my electorate, or indeed broader South Australia; this is an issue right across the country. After years and years of neoliberal 'leave it to the market, cross your fingers and hope it works out' housing policy, nobody should be surprised that we find ourselves in the situation we see today. Census data from 2021 tells us that over 7,000 South Australians are experiencing homelessness, a number likely underestimated given the temporary accommodation provided at the time this data was collected in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Access to housing is a human right—article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights tells us so. The right to housing is more than simply a right to shelter, but a right to have somewhere to live that is at least adequate. We acknowledge this human right and understand that every South Australian deserves to have a roof over their head and to be safe and secure in a place they call home.

In my electorate, and electorates right across this country—not just South Australia—the message is clear: wages and welfare payments are not keeping up with the rising cost of living. The gaps in our economy are getting so large that even affluent middle-class families cannot begin to imagine how their children will ever be able to afford to move out of home one day.

How did we get here? Once upon a time, the dream of buying your first home was part of becoming an adult. Moving out of home, growing up, independence and the life skills and experience it brings are all now unachievable for so many in our community. Now we need to have grown-up conversations about what it is going to take to fix this crisis. We need to have grown-up conversations, no more, 'But we had 18 per cent inflation when we bought our first home.'

We need to ask ourselves if it is appropriate for government to provide more support for someone buying their 15th home than someone who is buying their first. We need to ask ourselves if it is appropriate that tax concessions be awarded to the owners of the vacant homes that make up 10 per cent of Australia's total housing stock, according to last year's ABS figures. We may not have all the answers, but we need to ask these questions without whataboutisms and juvenile debate because these questions will lead us back to the purpose of the housing market: to provide our community with homes, not to make a quick buck.

While house prices are starting to moderate, the median house price in South Australia increased to $595,000 in the December 2022 quarter, an increase of 36.8 per cent on the December 2019 quarter. Similarly, for metropolitan Adelaide, the median house price has increased by 38.1 per cent over the same period, reaching $670,000 last year. This may be great for existing home owners and especially for those with multiple properties, but even they are concerned for what this unsustainable growth will mean for their children and their grandchildren in addition to the already thousands of Australians looking for shelter.

I am very proud that one of the top priorities of this government was to review the Residential Tenancies Act, legislation which has not been comprehensively looked at in almost a decade. With renters making up a third of the housing market, getting the balance right and supporting South Australian renters will go a long way to supporting a fairer housing market.

This review, announced by the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs last year, will aid our government in delivering an ambitious reform agenda that puts providing South Australians with a safe and secure place to call home back at the centre of government housing market policy. I would like to sincerely thank the minister for her work in this area and for bringing this bill to the house. I would also like to thank her office and her staff, but I feel like the member for Playford has probably listed everybody efficiently. I will leave it at that, but thank you very much to the department as well.

This bill to amend the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 seeks to improve affordability for South Australian renters and better protect their rights and privacy in the housing market. We introduced this bill in addition to our review not to pre-empt what the community has to say but to address the immediate priorities that have already been identified as part of the Malinauskas Labor government's plan for a better housing future.

Our housing market is under immense pressure. As South Australians are trying to find a home in a market where fewer are available and the ones that are available cost more to purchase or rent, this growth is unsustainable and only worsens market conditions, which are simply not in the best interests of South Australians. To respond to these conditions, our $965 million plan for a better housing future seeks to deliver more social and affordable homes, greater protections for those who are renting, more affordable opportunities to rent and more support for South Australians to buy their first home.

Since our election in March last year, the South Australian economy has gone from strength to strength. Now ranked second in the nation, our economy is driven by population growth and construction as we continue to outperform the Eastern States, but as the pie gets bigger we need to make sure that everybody's slice gets bigger at the same time. As our population grows, so too does the demand for housing, reducing the supply of available housing and driving up rents.

While some may be tempted by prejudice and political pointscoring to suggest the way we improve housing supply is to limit immigration, those of us on this side of the house understand that you can increase housing supply and support the immigration that only serves to strengthen our state. That is why we have released critical land in Adelaide's north and south to allow the development of nearly 2,000 homes. It is also why we are building an additional 564 public homes and stopping the sale of 580 others. That is an additional 1,144 public homes for South Australia over the next three years.

Earlier this year, I was incredibly excited to join the Minister for Human Services on a visit to some of these new homes that are being built in my community. These accessible homes are being made by local builders and with quality Australian steel in the suburb of St Marys in my electorate. I cannot wait for the construction of these homes to soon be completed and to welcome new tenants to the community I am so deeply honoured to represent.

These two homes I visited are being built on a block that previously had one home on it with a very big garden and are a really great size both inside and out. We want people in public housing to be able to truly enjoy their homes, and where appropriate we want people to be able to age in place. Building homes with many accessibility features and much more manageable gardens helps to facilitate that.

We understand that the crises facing our housing market come from forgetting the core purpose of housing—to provide a safe and secure home for South Australians. Leaving the housing market to just do its thing has failed South Australians and this bill addresses some of the worst aspects of an underregulated profits before people market.

This bill prohibits rental properties being advertised at a price range and prevents landlords or agents from soliciting higher offers, a practice commonly referred to as rent bidding. Rent bidding only serves to squeeze every last dollar out of rental hunters in an already competitive and expensive market. The government's role is to support South Australians to find a home, not allow them to be taken advantage of.

In addition to this reform, third parties, which often include websites facilitating tenant application forms, are prevented from engaging in rent bidding. These provisions intend to stop prospective tenants from being charged fees for background checks, assessments or ratings of their suitability for tenancy. I, like many others in this place, was disgusted by reports that agents would provide higher ratings for those who paid for their assessment or background check alongside providing a higher bid for rent.

The successful passage of this bill will prohibit rent bidding by landlords and agents, prevent a person in trade or commerce from providing an assessment or rating of a prospective tenant that is based on an offer of higher rent and disallow a person from receiving or requiring a prospective tenant to pay for an assessment or rating of their suitability for a tenancy.

This bill also provides for information to be prescribed in the regulations that must not be requested of a prospective tenant. There will be further targeted consultation on the information prescribed, which may potentially include the applicant's rental bond history, a statement for a credit or bank account containing daily transactions and any information about the applicant that relates to a protected attribute under equal opportunity legislation. This bill provides an expiation fee of $1,200 and/or a maximum penalty of $20,000 to apply for these offences. These reforms are reasonable and fair, bringing our rental market in line with much of Australia.

At the peak of supply shortages due to the COVID-19 pandemic, South Australians would have rioted if supermarkets began reserving toilet paper and asking customers who was prepared to pay more before they handed over their stock. I am sure that South Australians are equally disgusted when they are made aware of this misleading and dishonest practice in our rental market.

Another immediate priority of our plan for a better housing future was to provide more affordable residential tenancy bonds. I understand this is progressing through amendments to the Residential Tenancies Regulations 2010. Making tenancy bonds more affordable, particularly in this current housing climate, is incredibly important. As rental prices increase, renters of even moderately priced housing are too often required to provide a six-week rather than four-week rental bond—a near impossible task for South Australians trying to find affordable housing.

Landlords can currently claim residential bonds equivalent to a maximum six weeks' rent when the weekly rent is $250 or greater, with only a four-week bond entitled to be claimed for properties falling below that threshold. As rental prices only continue to increase, fewer and fewer homes in South Australia fall below this threshold. Our proposal to increase the threshold to $800 will ensure that for the majority of rental properties in South Australia only a four-week bond will be required. This will reduce the up-front cost to tenants by as much as $1,600, depending on the amount of rent they are paying.

The residential tenancies amendment bill also seeks to protect the information of South Australian tenants. Considering recent cybersecurity incidents that impacted so many in my electorate and communities from right across our state, this bill contains measures to protect tenants' information.

Our proposed reform will prohibit tenant information from being disclosed without their consent or as required by law, the tenancy agreement, a court or a tribunal. Successful tenant information will be required to be destroyed after three years and within 30 days of a tenancy agreement being executed for unsuccessful tenants. However, prospective tenants will still be able to consent to their information being held for up to six months to support looking for another home.

The data breaches of so many private companies have given South Australians a glimpse into the type of data that is kept and what that data is used for. As we are bombarded with terms and conditions that some lawyers would probably struggle to understand, these terms and conditions can also be easily ignored with the press of a button and then, before we know it, our personal information is sold to the highest bidder.

Regardless of with whom or where our data arrives, the intention remains the same: to sell us something we probably do not need. This bill will ensure that prospective tenants' information is not used for this purpose while allowing them to continue to be contacted by an agent of their choice should an appropriate opportunity for housing become available.

The reforms in this bill are our immediate priority before further consideration and consultation on the broader review of the Residential Tenancies Act. There is absolutely more to come. Consultation is currently under review on a number of issues facing renters, including renting with pets, longer tenancies and retaliatory evictions, just to name a few that are frequently brought up with me by members of my community.

Improving the Residential Tenancies Act will go a long way to addressing the housing crisis. By improving the rights and protections of renters, and ensuring landlords can continue to manage properties effectively, we acknowledge the human right of housing and strive to provide safe and secure housing for all.

This bill, our review of the Residential Tenancies Act, and our plan for a better housing future, show a clear shift in priorities regarding the housing market from those of the previous government. South Australians have made their voices clear. They want government intervention in a market that is not delivering for their interests.

You only need to sit in an EO for an afternoon or attend a rental housing inspection and see the huge line snaking down the road from the front door to see renting is becoming increasingly difficult—more difficult than I can ever remember. The goal of home ownership is verging on impossible for so many South Australians.

We were elected on a platform for delivering more public housing and a fairer rental market. Whether it is the largest release of residential land in our state's history, banning rent bidding or stopping the previous government's sale of public housing, South Australians know that this Malinauskas Labor government has their back in the housing and rental market. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr ODENWALDER (Elizabeth) (12:38): I rise to also lend my voice to the support for the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023. It is particularly important to me as the member for Elizabeth, where the pressures of the housing and rental markets have been felt most intensely. It is no exaggeration to say that perhaps after cost of living, the rental crisis, such as that is, is the most common issue raised with me when I am with constituents. When people ask me, 'What is going on in your electorate?' the term 'rental crisis' is never far from my lips.

I would firstly like to commend the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs for her commitment to the comprehensive review of the Residential Tenancies Act, which led to this bill. The bill introduces some important protections for South Australian residents, including those in Elizabeth.

This amendment bill comes at a time when rental reforms are taking place across all Australian jurisdictions, and we on this side of the house want to ensure that South Australian tenants are not left behind. We are doing so by implementing these regulatory safeguards that protect all South Australian renting households.

Last year, as part of the reform to the Residential Tenancies Act the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs announced the start of the most comprehensive review of the Residential Tenancies Act since 2014 with the release of the discussion paper. This discussion paper invited comment on the priority issues which were identified by the residential tenancies sector.

Some of these were—and they have been outlined by other speakers—renting with pets, a crackdown on the practice of rent bidding, maximum bond amounts, standardising application forms, minimum notice requirements for not renewing fixed-term tenancy agreements, rooming houses and share accommodation, housing standards, tenants making safety modifications and minor changes to the properties they are renting and support for renters experiencing domestic violence.

There were over 5,000 responses during the consultation on this discussion paper, and I am pleased to see our government taking very swift action on several immediate priorities that can be regulated through this amendment bill. These include banning rent bidding, considering information that should and should not be required in a rental application and protecting tenant information.

I was particularly shocked by the story of the member for Gibson about the prospective tenant who was subject to video surveillance in order to ascertain whether she was a good prospective tenant or not. There are shocking practices out there—not universal by any means, but there are shocking practices out there, and hopefully this bill and the rest of the implementation of some of this review go a long way to solving some of those problems.

I do know that the passage of this amendment bill would go a long way to ease the current burden on tenants and prospective tenants in my electorate of Elizabeth. Recent statistics have shown that residential properties in Elizabeth South and Elizabeth North have experienced the highest price growth over recent months in the state. Over the past year alone house prices in Elizabeth—the suburb known as Elizabeth as opposed to the entire City of Playford—have increased by 20 per cent, which is well above the national average of 4.3 per cent.

The numbers are even more striking, though, when you look at a suburb like Elizabeth South. Elizabeth South has experienced a localised growth in the median house price of 46 per cent, which is more than 10 times the national average in the past year. While this is obviously great news for home owners in Elizabeth, like myself—for those who have been able to purchase a property and perhaps are looking to sell—this is good news, but for those who are trying to enter the rental market or simply trying to get by and find stable affordable rental accommodation, these effects are disastrous.

With home ownership becoming more out of reach, there has been enormous strain put on the rental market, where residential vacancy rates remain at an all-time low. The supply shortage of rental properties has caused rents to increase substantially, and has created an environment where renters are struggling to find rental properties in an increasingly competitive market.

The cost of renting a home in Elizabeth has continued to put a sizeable financial burden on many of my constituents, with median rental prices rising to $480 per week in March 2023. This makes it increasingly difficult, if not completely impossible, for tenants and applicants to find affordable housing. The negative impacts of this on prospective tenants, of course, should be obvious to anyone. They are wideranging, from financial strain to potential overcrowding and, in more and more cases, homelessness.

One of the main issues faced by tenants and applicants that has been identified in this reform and through the consultation on the discussion paper is the competition for rental properties. With vacancies in short supply rental properties are often quickly snapped up, sometimes within hours of becoming available on the market. As others of my colleagues have remarked earlier in this debate there are concerns that rent bidding is becoming increasingly common in these situations, where priority is given to applicants who offer more than the advertised rent.

Should this amendment bill pass, landlords will no longer be able to advertise properties with a rent range, put properties up for rent auction or solicit offers over the advertised rental price, which will put a formal end to rent bidding. This reform brings South Australia in line with many other Australian jurisdictions which have also introduced restrictions on rent bidding.

In such a competitive market prospective tenants in my electorate and indeed across the state are frequently required to submit multiple applications and provide information well beyond what should be expected in an application, as evidenced by the member for Gibson's story. There are reports of prospective tenants being requested to provide very personal information, to provide rental bond history and their own financial records, which it cannot be guaranteed is not passed on to a third party.

Trying to navigate what is fair and reasonable as an applicant can be very challenging. We have heard that prospective tenants may be made to feel that providing such information to third parties is compulsory, with little transparency on whether their information will be kept confidential or used for any other purposes or shared with other parties. Further to this, disclosing certain information can also create opportunities for discrimination in the tenant selection process.

As the member for Elizabeth, I am particularly pleased to see that our government is putting a stop to this through the amendment bill by allowing for there to be prescribed information in the regulations that must not be requested of a prospective tenant. Through further targeted consultation, I am confident that the prescribed prohibited information will ensure a consistent approach to application requirements from landlords and property managers in South Australia and reduce opportunities for discrimination.

In addition to this, the amendment bill in sections 76A, 76B and 76C contains measures to protect the information that tenants do provide by requiring their consent to be provided before their information is disclosed to a third party. Should an applicant be successful, their information, under this amendment bill, must be destroyed after three years. The time allowed to keep information will be reduced to 30 days from a tenancy agreement being executed for those applicants who are not successful.

Despite this, should an applicant wish for their information to be kept on file if they are unsuccessful, they are able to provide their consent for the information to be held for up to six months to assist in later property searches. I think this balanced approach will give assurance to applicants and successful tenants and put the power back in their hands when it comes to their own personal information.

Another issue faced by prospective tenants is the increasing amount that rental applicants are required to pay up-front. This can include a bond that is equivalent to a maximum of six weeks' rent when the rent is $250 or more. If we use my electorate as an example, tenants could be asked to pay up to $2,880 up-front, based on the current median rent price.

You can imagine that rental housing advertised at below $250 a week is a very rare find in the current market, and I am proud to be part of this government that has now taken swift action to change that threshold. As of 1 April, our government has lifted this six-week bond threshold from $250 to $800. This ensures that the majority of South Australian rental properties will not attract such excessive up-front payment requirements. I know this will reduce the burden on many South Australians, and very particularly constituents in Elizabeth, and I look forward to receiving an update from the minister on how much the Malinauskas Labor government has saved tenants in up-front costs via this amendment to the regulations.

Before I conclude my remarks, I am pleased to see these reforms contributing to our broader policy for a better housing future, announced in February this year. One of the many actions to come from this policy is the review of the Private Rental Assistance Program, which is designed to assist low income earners to access affordable private rental housing. I know that many people in Elizabeth will benefit from this. Managed by the South Australian Housing Authority (the Housing Trust), this program provides assistance to eligible tenants in the form of rent subsidies or bond guarantees. The Private Rental Assistance Program aims to reduce rental stress and help people maintain their tenancies.

I am pleased to see the eligibility criteria being reviewed by our government to enable more households, especially in my electorate, to access this support by first of all increasing the household assets test limit from $5,000 to $62,150 per household and secondly increasing the weekly rent limit from $450 to $600 per week. With the median rent in Elizabeth now sitting at $480 a week, these changes will keep pace with the current market and allow customers on lower incomes to retain their cash reserves.

Through this government's changes to the Private Rental Assistance Program, rent in advance payments will also be increased from one week's to two weeks' rent for low income households, and there will be an increase in the availability of rent arrears payments, provided other eligibility criteria are met. We on our side of the house know that support for the up-front costs for low income households must be readily available and reviewed regularly, and it is promising to see that an estimated 400 additional households will become eligible for the program as a result of these changes.

In closing, our government recognises that the housing market is placing extraordinary pressure on vulnerable South Australians, particularly in the suburbs of Elizabeth and neighbouring suburbs like Salisbury, and I thank the Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs for introducing these reforms to provide some immediate relief. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms WORTLEY (Torrens) (12:49): I rise to add my support to the Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill 2023, a bill that proposes to amend the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 to introduce some immediate protection for tenants. You only have to pick up a newspaper to see the number of people who are in demand of rental properties. You can drive around the suburbs even on a weekend and see cars and people lining up at the front of rental properties, hoping to be the lucky one. It has created an environment where renters are struggling to find rental properties in an increasingly competitive market.

I have spoken to some residents who have been forced to couch surf, to live out of a car or to 'burden' themselves—and that is a quote—by having to live with family members. I have also spoken to residents who are considering, when their rental property lease is up, living in a caravan because they will not be able to afford the rental increase they know will occur once their lease is completed.

As part of our commitment to improve housing outcomes for South Australians, this bill aims to improve protection for renters while ensuring that landlords can continue to manage their properties effectively. To this end, the Minister for Business and Consumer Affairs hosted the Residential Tenancies Act review forum with the Commissioner for Consumer Affairs to hear about issues impacting the sector and potential solutions.

Keys stakeholders from the forum included Shelter SA, the South Australian Council of Social Service, Uniting Communities, Aboriginal Housing, Disability Housing, the Real Estate Institute of South Australia, the Landlords' Association (SA), the South Australian Housing Authority, the Department of Human Services, and the University of South Australia. This was followed by public consultation, with more than 5,000 people completing the YourSAy survey, along with more than 150 submissions received from key stakeholders and members of the public. This really does demonstrate the demand for rental properties in South Australia, and we know that South Australia is not alone in this but that it is right across Australia.

The bill before us aims to address significant issues arising during the consultation: the banning of rent bidding, compulsory information required on the rental application form and the protection of tenant application, just to mention three. On the issue of compulsory information on the rental application form, including unnecessary personal information that should not be required for a rental application, the bill proposes to insert a new section 47B to prohibit a landlord or agent requesting prescribed information from a prospective tenant.

This will, in effect, reduce the amount of information a prospective tenant must provide in rental applications and should go some way to protecting the privacy of prospective tenants. This should assist in reducing opportunities for discrimination to occur in the tenant selection process. Importantly, however, there is another section, section 47B(2), which does allow for an exemption for a landlord or agent who is a provider of a housing assistance program to request prescribed information from the applicant for the purposes of determining eligibility for assistance.

Included in this bill is that unsuccessful prospective tenants' information can be kept for no more than 30 days after the date on which the tenancy agreement is entered into by the successful applicant without consent of the applicant. It also introduces section 76B, which specifies obligations to protect tenant information from misuse, interference or loss and from unauthorised access, modification or disclosure. Further, information provided in a successful tenancy agreement is to be destroyed after three years from the tenancy ending. A number of people I have spoken to are very pleased about the area addressing privacy and the fact that they know that information will be destroyed.

On the issue of banning rent bidding, this bill proposes to insert a new section 52A which requires properties for rent to be advertised at a fixed amount and bans a landlord or agent encouraging or inviting applicants to offer to commit to paying a higher rent than advertised.

This alone does not address all the circumstances surrounding rental application, so the bill proposes to introduce a new section 52B to prohibit third parties engaged by landlords or agents charging prospective tenants a fee for an assessment. The minister has advised that the proposed introduction of section 52B will see South Australia leading the nation in the regulation of these third-party operators.

There are many more issues I know from a tenant's perspective and also some through landlords that could be addressed through the act, and I have heard some of those mentioned here today. I have also had some of them raised by constituents in my electorate of Torrens.

I commend the minister for the work that has been carried out to date on this bill, and I know that the staff have also contributed significantly towards that. The challenges facing those in the rental market are large; it is something we are addressing also through our housing package, and I know there is more to come in the future. I commend the bill to the house.

Ms HUTCHESSON (Waite) (12:56): I rise in support of this Residential Tenancies (Protection of Prospective Tenants) Amendment Bill. I am proud to be part of a government that is taking rental affordability seriously and commend the minister and her team for the work they are doing to improve housing outcomes for the people of South Australia.

We recognise that there is immense pressure within the market to find suitable and affordable housing, and it is important that we are using every trigger available to us to try to alleviate this. Our government is reforming the Residential Tenancies Act so that it better represents the renters and landlords of today and so that it meets the needs of the market, provides improvements for renters and allows landlords the ability to continue to manage their properties effectively.

The review, which started late last year with the release of a discussion paper, was the start of the most comprehensive review seen of the Residential Tenancies Act since 2014. There are, however, immediate issues that need to be addressed so that we can assist renters with affordability. Everyone should have a roof over their head and a warm and comfortable place to call home. The affordability and availability of housing is an issue and, as such, we are doing all we can to address the underlying problems.

This bill is only one part of our government's plan for a better housing future, a plan that seeks to improve the rental issues that plague quite often our most vulnerable. It is an immediate response to these challenges, and I am glad to be speaking in support. There is a strong demand for housing in our state. It is a great place to live, and people from across the country are realising this and choosing to move here. With great wine, weather and incredible events, opportunities and employment, it is the place to be.

Whilst this may be good for statistics such as population growth, we need to ensure that we are working to address the supply shortage that this increase in interest causes. It does create an environment where, due to demand, rents have increased substantially, which leaves renters struggling to find a home. This shortage of rental properties has also led to rent bidding and requests for tenancy information that exceed what a tenant would reasonably be expected to provide.

Personally, a family member of mine has experienced this. When looking to move out of home for the first time, the pursuit of finding accommodation that was convenient and assisted in him accessing employment was a challenge. Landlords and real estate agents are looking to the highest bidder, which leaves many unable to compete and, in this case, in order to secure the accommodation that he required he had to offer $50 per week extra above the asking price. Not everyone can afford to do that.

This bill will address this issue, along with other priorities identified as part of the government's plan, including standardising rental application forms and protecting tenant information. This amendment bill will regulate that information that is prescribed may not be requested of a prospective tenant.

We will look to consult with renters and landlords about what constitutes prescribed information, but it may include the applicant's rental bond history, bank statements that contain transaction details and any information about the applicant that relates to a protected attribute under equal opportunity legislation. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 12:59 to 14:00.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT