18th November, 2025.
I speak tonight on the pressing issue of affordable housing, what it truly means and why our current approach in New South Wales falls short. The electorate of Wollondilly is on the front line of Sydney's growth. Wilton, Bowral and Appin, which is just outside the boundary of Wollondilly, are slated for tens of thousands of new homes. But "affordable" cannot just mean cramming people into distant units without schools, roads or services. It also cannot mean cheap builds driven by land values and developer profits. True affordability must ensure that families can live securely, close to jobs and community, without crippling costs. They must be able to afford to live there.
A UNSW City Futures Research Centre 2022 study showed that 221,000 low‑income households in New South Wales face unmet needs. That is projected to rise by 35,000 to 256,000 by 2041. The State's social housing waitlist hit 57,000 in 2022, up 15 per cent, underscoring a crisis where demand outstrips supply amid soaring market rents. Social housing—whether it be public, community or Aboriginal—provides a safety net for very low income earners, with rents at 25 per cent to 30 per cent of income. Community housing providers like those under the Government's Communities Plus program receive funding to manage over 150,000 dwellings statewide, delivering stability and better health outcomes.
Affordable rental housing, however, targets low to moderate incomes, at up to 80 per cent of market rates. Providers are not directly funded but exploit the system through reduced fees, waived contributions and density bonuses under policies like the State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021. That boosts their profits while burdening locals with extra infrastructure costs from population surges. In Wollondilly, greenfield developments exemplify that. Land values skyrocket, pricing out young families, yet developers reap enormous benefits without commensurate community investment.
But affordability is not just about rent or mortgages; it is eroded by hidden costs that make life unsustainable. A lack of local services means that families fork out for private options or endure hardship. Needing to travel up to two hours each way for work is not affordable; it adds thousands in fuel and tolls, as well as time lost. It is equivalent to a second job just to commute. In Wollondilly, residents in growth areas like Wilton face exactly that. Jobs in Sydney's CBD require gruelling drives or travel on unreliable trains, costing between $5,000 and $10,000 annually in transport alone. Buses are infrequent and trains are nearly non-existent. They never run on time, even if they do not break down, and they are overcrowded. Households have to rely on multiple cars, inflating budgets by 15 per cent to 20 per cent. That is not affordable; it is a trap that costs residents more.
Worse, the lack of school options for children compounds the burden. Families in new estates wait years for promised schools, bussing kids to overcrowded facilities hours away. I had to fight for a new high school in Wilton in 2025, despite 15,000 planned residents. The new school is a start, but parents and students in many other towns still have to travel 45 minutes each way, adding childcare costs and parental stress. The NSW Council of Social Service reports that the service desert in outer suburbs forces low-income families to spend 10 per cent to 15 per cent more on education and transport, pushing affordability ratios to over 30 per cent of income. Essential worker housing is a positive step, aiding the teachers, nurses and paramedics who serve my shire, but it does not address generational inequity. Children in my electorate deserve the opportunities we had for home ownership.
The Minns Government's $1.1 billion Social and Affordable Housing Fund, which aims to build 6,200 homes over 10 years, is commendable, but we could go further. Look to Britain's 1980 Right to Buy policy under Margaret Thatcher, which allowed long-term public tenants to purchase their homes at a discount. Critics note that austerity cut new housing supply, but in New South Wales, with private market driving provision, there is no such risk. We should adapt that and offer pathways for renters to buy, perhaps through shared equity or rent‑to-own schemes, which turn tenants into owners.
Current planning rhetoric from the Government and the Opposition promises revolution, but we still see a greenfield sprawl of isolated estates that inflate land prices and are far from transport, adding hours to commutes. Affordable does not mean a two-hour drive to work; it means integrated communities with amenities. We should push developers harder by requiring 10 per cent to 15 per cent genuine affordable units in all projects, in line with the NSW Council of Social Service's calls for 5,000 new social homes annually. We should also involve the Federal Government. Its National Housing Accord target is 20,000 affordable homes nationwide. Growth areas need services up-front, not as an afterthought. If we do not provide them, we risk creating a problem that none of us will be able to afford.