Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee

Portfolio Committee

View on parliament.qld.gov.au

Bills Reviewed (9)

Trusts Bill 2024Recommended passageLapsed

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 17, 57th Parliament—Trusts Bill 2024, government response2025-01-30

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 17, 57th Parliament-Trusts Bill 2024, interim government response2024-09-26

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 17, 57th Parliament-Trusts Bill 20242024-08-02

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the Trusts Bill 2024 and tabled its report in August 2024. The committee recommended the bill be passed, while also recommending the Department of Justice and Attorney-General consider including a definition for 'appoint' to ensure it does not restrict who can hold property under a remedial constructive or resulting trust. The bill lapsed when the 57th Parliament was dissolved on 1 October 2024, and the incoming government noted the recommendations were not adopted but would be reviewed if a similar bill is introduced.

Key findings
  • The bill aimed to replace the Trusts Act 1973, which had not been substantially amended since commencement, with modern legislation based on contemporary drafting practices.
  • The Queensland Law Society raised concerns about the requirement for court approval to appoint more than four trustees, suggesting a concurrent power for the Attorney-General to reduce costs.
  • The department confirmed the bill's approach was consistent with the Queensland Law Reform Commission's final report recommendations.
  • Stakeholders raised concerns about whether the definition of 'appoint' could unintentionally restrict who may hold property under remedial constructive or resulting trusts.
  • The bill lapsed upon dissolution of the 57th Parliament and was not re-introduced in the 58th Parliament.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Trusts Bill 2024 be passed.
  • The committee recommends the Department of Justice and Attorney-General considers including a definition for 'appoint' in the Trusts Bill 2024 to ensure it does not restrict who can be deemed to hold property under a remedial constructive or resulting trust.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Help to Buy (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 11, 57th Parliament-Help to Buy (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 2024, government response2024-06-11

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 11, 57th Parliament-Help to Buy (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 20242024-06-07

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the bill over approximately one month, receiving 10 submissions and holding a public hearing with industry and academic stakeholders on 27 May 2024. The committee recommended the bill be passed, while also recommending the Queensland Government continue liaising with the Australian Government to ensure the Help to Buy Scheme's parameters — including purchase price caps, income levels, and buy-out provisions — are appropriate for Queensland. A statement of reservations was filed by some committee members.

Key findings
  • The bill is a text-based referral of legislative power to the Commonwealth Parliament under section 51(xxxvii) of the Australian Constitution, enabling the Commonwealth's Help to Buy shared equity scheme.
  • Queensland's bill must be passed before the Commonwealth bill can be passed, with other states then able to refer power or adopt the legislation for the scheme to operate in their jurisdictions.
  • Stakeholders including the REIQ, HIA, MFAA, and housing policy experts raised concerns about the scheme's operational details, including purchase price caps, participant income levels, and allocation of places for Queenslanders.
  • The text-based referral approach was preferred over a broader subject-based referral, as it allows the Queensland Parliament to consider the specific text of the Commonwealth bill.
  • The Queensland Government accepted the committee's recommendation to continue advocating to the Australian Government for operational settings appropriate for Queensland.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends that the Help to Buy (Commonwealth Powers) Bill 2024 be passed.
  • The committee recommends that the Queensland Government continue to liaise with the Australian Government on the parameters of the Help to Buy Scheme to ensure that the volume of participants and places for targeted groups, purchase price caps, participant income levels and buy-out provisions are appropriate for Queensland.
Dissenting views: A statement of reservations was filed by some committee members, though the full text was not available in the extracted report data.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Arrangements Amendment Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED with amendment

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 9, 57th Parliament-Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Arrangements Amendment Bill 2024, government response2024-05-23

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 9, 57th Parliament-Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Arrangements Amendment Bill 20242024-05-17

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Arrangements Amendment Bill 2024 over one month, receiving 18 submissions and holding a public hearing. The committee recommended the bill be passed, and also recommended that the Government consider adding the Gold Coast Mayor to the Brisbane Organising Committee Board. The Government supported both recommendations. A dissenting report from Katter's Australian Party opposed the bill entirely, and LNP opposition members filed a statement of reservation raising concerns about delegation of powers, restricted review rights, and transparency.

Key findings
  • The bill establishes the Games Venue and Legacy Delivery Authority as a statutory body to deliver venues and coordinate government obligations for the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
  • Stakeholders were broadly supportive of establishing an independent Authority, which had been consistently called for since the Games were awarded.
  • The committee examined significant planning, land acquisition, and transport direction powers granted to the Authority, finding them justified by the need for timely Games delivery.
  • The City of Gold Coast argued it should have representation on the Brisbane Organising Committee Board given its significant investment as a Games delivery partner.
  • The Office of the Information Commissioner raised concerns about the Authority's exemption from Right to Information requirements, which were not fully resolved during the inquiry.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games Arrangements Amendment Bill 2024 be passed.
  • The committee recommends that the Queensland Government consider amending Clause 12 of the Bill to include the Gold Coast Mayor as a member of the Board for the Brisbane Organising Committee.
Dissenting views: Robbie Katter MP (KAP) filed a dissenting report opposing the bill, arguing that the Olympics' escalating costs (from $5 billion to over $11 billion) disproportionately benefit Brisbane at the expense of regional Queensland, and that only 14 per cent of Queenslanders supported the Government's Olympics plans. LNP opposition members Jim McDonald MP and Michael Hart MP filed a statement of reservation expressing concern that 1,000 days had been wasted by not establishing the Authority sooner, and raising issues with broad delegation powers, restricted judicial review rights, and lack of transparency around the Authority's exemption from Right to Information laws.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Planning and Other Legislation (Make Developers Pay) Amendment Bill 2023Did not recommend passageLapsed

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 8, 57th Parliament-Planning and Other Legislation (Make Developers Pay) Amendment Bill 20232024-05-15

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined this private member's bill, which proposed removing the Maximum Allowable Charge (MAC) cap on infrastructure charges that local governments can levy on developers for trunk infrastructure. The committee recommended the bill not be passed, citing concerns that removing the cap could increase new housing costs and reduce housing supply. While stakeholders broadly agreed the MAC framework needed modernisation, most argued that simply removing the cap was too blunt an approach and called for a more nuanced range of short- and long-term funding solutions.

Key findings
  • Stakeholders broadly agreed the MAC framework needed modernisation to reduce the trunk infrastructure funding gap, but most opposed the complete removal of the cap as too blunt an approach.
  • Industry groups warned that removing the MAC would create uncertainty for developers and investors, potentially leading to stricter lending terms, higher borrowing costs, and reduced housing supply.
  • The Local Government Association of Queensland supported the bill's intent but advocated for a broader range of infrastructure funding solutions rather than simply removing the charge cap.
  • The Department of Housing, Local Government, Planning and Public Works cautioned that any changes without transparent evidence risk impacting new housing supply during an existing housing crisis.
  • The committee found no breaches of fundamental legislative principles and was satisfied the bill was compatible with human rights under the Human Rights Act 2019.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Planning and Other Legislation (Make Developers Pay) Amendment Bill 2023 not be passed.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED with amendment

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 7, 57th Parliament-Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 20242024-05-10

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the bill over approximately seven weeks, receiving 103 submissions and holding a public hearing with key stakeholders including Tenants Queensland, REIQ, QCOSS, and the Property Council of Australia. The committee recommended the bill be passed, finding that its provisions appropriately balance renters' rights with property owners' interests. Feedback was largely polarised, with tenants' advocacy groups supporting the reforms and property industry groups raising concerns about several amendments. Opposition members filed a Statement of Reservation expressing concerns about the government's handling of rental reforms and questioning the practical operation of the portable bond scheme.

Key findings
  • Tenants' advocacy groups broadly supported the bill's intent, while property industry groups including the REIQ and Property Council of Australia expressed reservations about several amendments
  • The committee was satisfied that the bond process reforms strike an appropriate balance between the rights of tenants and property owners, but encouraged wide consultation on the portable bond scheme
  • Stakeholders raised concerns about the 3-year retention period for tenant records, with several submitters arguing it was too short for rental references, insurance claims, and taxation purposes
  • The committee found the amendments limiting rent increase frequency to once every 12 months per property were appropriate, despite industry concerns about potential unintended consequences such as higher initial rents
  • The committee noted merit in reconsidering the definition of 'exempt lessor' to ensure community housing providers, specialist disability accommodation providers, and student accommodation providers are not unintentionally excluded
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill be passed.
Dissenting views: LNP opposition members Jim McDonald (Member for Lockyer) and Michael Hart (Member for Burleigh) filed a Statement of Reservation. They criticised the government's handling of rental reforms, arguing that the 2023 rent increase frequency changes were poorly executed and bypassed the committee process, causing negative outcomes for renters. They raised concerns about the practical operation of the portable bond scheme, questioned whether rent bidding reforms were necessary given existing prohibitions, and flagged concerns about the narrow definition of 'exempt lessor' potentially excluding community housing and specialist disability accommodation providers. The LNP members recommended the government reconsider the definition of 'exempt lessor' and its applicability to various accommodation types.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Amendment Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED with amendment

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 6, 57th Parliament-Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Amendment Bill 20242024-05-10

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Amendment Bill 2024 and recommended it be passed. The committee received 48 submissions and held public hearings in Hervey Bay, Deception Bay, and Logan. Home owners broadly supported the reforms, particularly the prohibition on market rent reviews, while park owners and industry representatives opposed restrictions on site rent increases. The committee noted the sector is undergoing significant change and recommended a broader government review of the sector's future structure.

Key findings
  • Home owners supported the removal of market rent review-based increases, citing unpredictable rent rises of over 10 per cent in a single year, while park owners argued market reviews were necessary to maintain industry viability.
  • The proposed annual site rent cap at the higher of CPI or 3.5 per cent drew mixed views, with some home owners arguing it should be lower and park owners warning it could discourage investment in the sector.
  • The buyback and site rent reduction scheme for homes unsold after 18 months was modelled on retirement village obligations, but opposition members raised concerns that GST implications had not been properly considered.
  • The committee found the manufactured homes sector is evolving, with homes becoming more expensive and fewer, larger operators dominating the market, raising concerns about long-term affordability for senior Queenslanders.
  • Dispute resolution was a significant concern, with home owners reporting delays and difficulties in resolving conflicts through QCAT and feeling their concerns were dismissed by park owners.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Amendment Bill 2024 be passed.
Dissenting views: LNP members Jim McDonald (Deputy Chair, Member for Lockyer) and Michael Hart (Member for Burleigh) filed a Statement of Reservation. While supporting the government's decision to modernise the legislation, they raised concerns that the 3.5 per cent rent cap floor could disadvantage pensioners if CPI falls below that level, that the buyback scheme had not properly accounted for GST costs to park owners (estimated at $47,000 per home), and that the bill's scope was too limited, failing to address dispute resolution, financial transparency, and conduct issues raised by stakeholders.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Criminal Code (Decriminalising Sex Work) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED with amendment

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 4, 57th Parliament-Criminal Code (Decriminalising Sex Work) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024, government response2024-05-02

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 4, 57th Parliament-Criminal Code (Decriminalising Sex Work) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 20242024-04-12

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the bill over approximately two months, receiving 176 submissions and holding public hearings with a diverse range of stakeholders including sex worker organisations, government departments, the Prostitution Licensing Authority, the Local Government Association of Queensland, academics, and advocacy groups. The committee recommended the bill be passed, finding that decriminalisation would improve the safety, health, rights and legal protections for sex workers. The committee also recommended that forthcoming amendments to the Planning Regulation 2017 ensure sex work businesses are regulated no more and no less than other legal businesses. Two LNP members filed a Statement of Reservations expressing concerns about regulatory clarity and the lack of a finalised regulatory framework at the time of the bill's introduction.

Key findings
  • Broad support was received from organisations including Respect Inc., Scarlet Alliance, the Public Advocate, Queensland Council of Unions, and the Public Health Association of Australia, who argued decriminalisation would enhance worker safety and reduce stigma
  • The committee found that the current licensing system captured only about 10 per cent of the industry, with most sex work occurring outside the licensed sector in a criminalised or unregulated environment
  • Evidence presented showed that sex workers have lower or equivalent rates of sexually transmitted infections compared to the general community, and that mandatory health checks applied only to a small fraction of the workforce
  • The committee was satisfied that new Criminal Code offences addressing coercion and the exploitation of children in commercial sexual services provided appropriate protections with penalties consistent with existing offences
  • The committee wrote to the Department of Justice and Attorney-General requesting further consideration of the outdated term 'impairment of the mind' in the Criminal Code, after compelling evidence from the Public Advocate and disability organisations
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Criminal Code (Decriminalising Sex Work) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 be passed.
  • The committee recommends that amendments to the Planning Regulation 2017 which support a decriminalised sex work framework, reflect the principle that the regulation of sex work, including land use and planning applications related to sex work businesses, be no more and no less than for other legal businesses.
Dissenting views: LNP members Jim McDonald MP (Deputy Chair) and Michael Hart MP filed a Statement of Reservations. While acknowledging that sex workers should be protected and their health and safety is paramount, they expressed concern that the bill did not offer clarity on regulation at any substantive level. They cited the Local Government Association of Queensland's concerns that the bill would remove local governments' ability to regulate sex work businesses in the same way they regulate other businesses, including matters such as advertising signage, separation distances, traffic, parking, and hours of operation. They argued these regulatory issues should have been resolved prior to the bill's introduction.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023Recommended passagePASSED with amendment

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 2, 57th Parliament-Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, government response2024-04-18

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 2, 57th Parliament-Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 20232024-03-08

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee (which took over from the former State Development and Regional Industries Committee after a parliamentary restructure) examined the bill and recommended it be passed. The committee made five recommendations covering dog breed identification guidelines, mandatory destruction orders for dogs that seriously attack people, privacy safeguards for fisheries monitoring data, and aquaculture authority timeframes. The Queensland Government supported four of the five recommendations, declining only the suggestion to mandate destruction orders for non-regulated dogs that seriously attack a person, citing concerns about removing officer discretion in cases involving provocation or mitigating circumstances.

Key findings
  • Over 8,500 complaints about aggressive dogs and dog attacks are received annually by local governments across Queensland, with approximately 2,500 victims requiring hospitalisation, 81 per cent of whom are children.
  • The committee found that breed identification guidelines were needed to support local governments in implementing the proposed state-wide ban on restricted dog breeds.
  • The committee identified privacy concerns around information collected through Independent Onboard Monitoring of commercial fishing vessels and recommended the preparation of an information privacy plan.
  • The committee considered the rights of victims in serious dog attacks to be underdeveloped and suggested mandatory destruction orders for non-regulated dogs that seriously attack a person, though the government did not support this.
  • The committee was satisfied that the penalties proposed in the bill were relevant, proportionate and consistent with the rights and liberties of individuals.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Agriculture and Fisheries and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 be passed.
  • The committee recommends that the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries develop guidelines on breed identification, in consultation with the Animal Management Taskforce, to support the local government sector.
  • The committee suggests that the Government amend new section 127A in clause 67 to provide that if a non-regulated dog has seriously attacked a person, the authorised person must make a destruction order in relation to the dog.
  • The committee recommends that the Government consider introducing into regulation measures that safeguard the privacy of information collected through Independent Onboard Monitoring, including the preparation and publication of an information privacy plan.
  • The committee recommends that the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries consider the timeframes associated with aquaculture authorities, specifically whether a period of more than 12 months may be more appropriate.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors
Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024Recommended passagePASSED

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 3, 57th Parliament-Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 20242024-04-12

Committee findings

The Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee examined the bill over several weeks, receiving nine written submissions and holding public hearings with industry stakeholders including Master Builders Queensland, the Housing Industry Association, and the Queensland Small Business Commissioner. The committee recommended the bill be passed, finding the amendments to the project trust account framework would strengthen payment security for subcontractors in the building and construction industry. While most amendments received broad support, the treatment of GST in retention accounts drew mixed feedback from industry, with several bodies raising concerns about cash flow impacts. Two opposition members filed a statement of reservations citing ongoing concerns about the framework's practical effectiveness.

Key findings
  • Industry stakeholders broadly supported measures to clarify who qualifies as a subcontractor beneficiary and to simplify trust account record keeping and audit requirements.
  • The treatment of GST in retention accounts was contentious, with Master Builders Queensland, UDIA Queensland, and the Property Council of Australia raising concerns about cash flow impacts and inconsistency with existing ATO tax rulings.
  • The department confirmed it had engaged an independent taxation expert to consult with the ATO on the GST retention provisions and would implement targeted education for industry.
  • Amendments to reduce the QBCC board from 10 to 7 members and publish a conflict-of-interest register were supported and formalise arrangements already in place since late 2022.
  • Opposition members noted that despite the trust account framework, no subcontractors had been paid from a trust account following at least four head contractor insolvencies as at early March 2024.
Recommendations
  • The committee recommends the Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill be passed.
Dissenting views: Opposition members Jim McDonald MP (Deputy Chair) and Michael Hart MP filed a statement of reservations. They raised concerns that subcontractors are still not being paid despite the framework, citing evidence that no subcontractors had received funds from trust accounts following at least four head contractor insolvencies. They also highlighted the financial burden of the GST retention requirement on businesses, the continued lack of software solutions for framework compliance, and repeated delays to the framework's implementation.
AI-generated summary — may contain errors

Other Reports (15)

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 22, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 22 May 2024 and 20 August 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-09-17

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 21, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 1 May 2024 and 21 May 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-08-28

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 20, 57th Parliament-Annual Report 2023-24

Other2024-08-28

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 19, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 17 April 2024 and 30 April 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-08-09

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 18, 57th Parliament-2024-25 Budget Estimates-Volume of Additional Information

Other2024-08-09

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 18, 57th Parliament-2024-25 Budget Estimates

Other2024-08-09

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 10, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 14 February and 5 March 2024, government response

Subordinate Legislation2024-07-26

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 16, 57th Parliament-Examination of Auditor-General Report 2: 2023-24-Improving asset management in local government

audit2024-06-28

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 15, 57th Parliament-Examination of Auditor-General Report 15: 2022-23 Local Government 2022 and Report 8: 2023-24 Local Government 2023

audit2024-06-28

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 14, 57th Parliament-Examination of the Office of the Independent Assessor 2024

Other2024-06-28

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 13, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 16 March 2024 and 16 April 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-06-18

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 12, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 6 March and 15 March 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-06-07

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 10, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 14 February and 5 March 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-05-17

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 5, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 15 November 2023 and 13 February 2024

Subordinate Legislation2024-04-24

Housing, Big Build and Manufacturing Committee: Report No. 1, 57th Parliament-Subordinate legislation tabled between 11 October and 14 November 2023

Subordinate Legislation2024-02-23