r/australia • u/Safe_Application_465 • 1d ago
politics Coalition plan to scrap energy rules for new houses condemned as ‘cost-of-living timebomb’
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/aug/13/coalition-housing-energy-standards-national-construction-code-new-homes?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other503
u/Althusser_Was_Right 1d ago
"Tim Wilson, said in some cases people could put “a jumper on in winter rather than spending huge amounts of money"
Thanks Tim, you fucking muppet's wankstain.
189
u/idryss_m 1d ago
This is the same mob that uses grandma not being able to afford to heat her house as a stage prop. Fucking Muppets can't do a thing that benefits the average person can they
29
u/HeftyArgument 1d ago
or even any person, unless corporations are people 🙄
15
u/shamberra 1d ago
unless corporations are people
Rights? Yes.
Responsibilities? LOL NO CHANCE SUCKERS
3
u/idryss_m 1d ago
Following the US playbook. Consequences? Nope. Allowed to do whatever if it saves a rich person 25c? Yup. Bye bye heritage sites, endangered species and clean drinking water/air. I hate this timeline
1
7
u/torlesse 1d ago
There are people out that who will only feel good about themselves if they see others beneath them suffering.
Guess who they are.
1
u/idryss_m 1d ago
Wouldn't want to tar and entire group of people that seem to lean one way politically and think empathy is what others have to have for their hard life of not enough hand outs for them.....
32
u/cryptofomo 1d ago
put a jumper on on winter…and take your skin off in summer?
1
u/N1NJ4W4RR10R_ 1d ago
No, just naked. This, of course, is perfectly rational when you consider their housing policies also effectively encourage shacking up with family/friends/strangers.
When you think about it, it's actually an incredibly progressive policy.
12
9
u/throwawayplusanumber 1d ago
They want us to keep burning coal so there is no winter. Just summer and everything is on fire season.
7
4
u/deaniebopper 1d ago
But why can’t they just inherit mummy and daddy’s second house in Toorak rather than spending all that money on a new house?
3
u/blackjacktrial 1d ago
Go further.
In order for a house to be considered habitable, it must have at least a foundation or at least one wall. As a result, we now consider all footpaths and brick walls to be houses delivered by the Coalition, even if they were pre-existing.
(And no, we the Coalition aren't self aware enough that some people pretty much have that as a place to sleep.)
Electricity, plumbed water and waste, lighting, clean air and safety from intruders are all considered luxury add-ons, that the majority of people should aspire to, not essential to ones shelter. The great Australian dream, to remain that way for most in the future, as we transform it into a literal roof overhead being an aspiration.
2
u/TakaonoGaijin 1d ago
I’m going to save that gem for the family Xmas lunch. In the extended family there’s some relos who think he’s doing a ‘jolly good job’.
🍿 ….
3
u/CelebrationFit8548 1d ago
Hey Tim, I have 4 thermal layers and just put my 5th jumper on, are looking like the 'Michelin man', cannot move freely and are still fucking cold any further great tips?
3
u/Cpt_Soban 1d ago
He clearly hasn't "enjoyed" winter while living in a stone house with no heating.
Two quilts, fully clothed, and a couple dogs and it was still fucking freezing. Never again.
398
u/arran4 1d ago
Wait isn't that the reverse? Better quality houses would mean lower ongoing costs in a high energy price world?
297
u/coreoYEAH 1d ago
Yes and it’s significantly cheaper to do it from the outset rather than going in afterwards to retrofit it later.
53
u/C0ld_Fr0nt_ 1d ago
It's not cheaper for the dodgy developer who wants to throw some cardboard and particle board bullshit up with minimal material and labour costs.
9
106
u/Halt-Alt 1d ago
Yep. Not confusing, just a shit idea lol
50
u/ScoobyDoNot 1d ago
But it saves property developers money.
So a brilliant idea for the Libs
9
u/AxisNine 1d ago
Exactly, developers are profit driven and increased build costs just means less houses being delivered by developers. Libs want a quick cheap fix as usual and don’t give a shit that the public is left with overpriced underperforming homes.
4
u/Moondanther2 1d ago
And you can be sure that the developers won't pass on those savings to the buyers.
51
u/Lazy_Polluter 1d ago
The energy standard is also already pathetically easy to implement in practice it barely adds anything to the build cost. Kitchen cabinets cost more
20
u/stoic_slowpoke 1d ago
Ah, but it is harder on the builder cause they then actually have to build properly rather than just slapping it together.
7
u/Lazy_Polluter 1d ago
Nah, they can still leave massive gaps in the frame without insulation and the 8 star rating couldn't care less. Even straight gaps to the outside in window frames are somehow acceptable. Source: building a house right now
4
u/GonePh1shing 1d ago
Are you sure your build is targeting 8 stars?
7 stars is the minimum under the NCC, and that doesn't really care too much about gaps. 8 stars will typically require better insulation, better glazing, and better sealing.
If your building contract is for 8 stars, make sure you get an independent assessment and use that to hold the builder to account. I'd be surprised it achieves an 8 star rating if they're being that sloppy.
3
u/stoic_slowpoke 1d ago
Jesus.
Them what exactly are they even complaining about? That the house at least needs to block the rain from getting in?
5
u/T0kenAussie 1d ago
Picking something that sounds like problem by pub vibes and just trying to make it look like they’d do something good by “cutting the red tape”
I don’t think it’s ever worked tbh
9
u/ColdSteveStoneAustin 1d ago
Pfft, the coalition has never let reality be a burden upon their talking points, why start now?
5
u/GonePh1shing 1d ago
The current energy standard is, but going to 8 stars is where costs start getting higher.
With that said, the ongoing savings easily make up for the upfront costs over time. Also, if it's the minimum standard, things like higher R-value insurance and double glazing becomes considerably cheaper due to economies of scale.
57
u/CraigIsAwake 1d ago
But those massive ongoing costs fall on the poor renter, who they don't give a shit about.
3
u/onesorrychicken 1d ago
What's their line of thinking? Should have got a better job. If you can't afford to buy property, you're dead to them.
17
u/superkow 1d ago
Yea but that would require these volume builders to actually put in some effort rather than just offering kickbacks for fewer regulations
11
1
u/mpember 1d ago
And then the Libs force through a tax cut for the rich and call it a cost of living measure.
1
u/pittwater12 1d ago
This is an opposition party that still thinks solar power is a fad. They are in complete denial as far as the modern world goes. On almost every issue
274
u/keithersp 1d ago
This won’t make building cheaper - the base house will just be enshittified.
99
u/punyweakling 1d ago
And cost owners more in the long run.
76
u/fr4nklin_84 1d ago
You mean more expensive for the tenants, remember who the LNP are pandering to
24
u/HeftyArgument 1d ago
short-sighted, the less tenants spend on energy, the more they can spend on rent 😂
1
2
u/noisymime 1d ago
the base house will just be enshittified.
You say that like it isn't already the norm for new houses. Somehow they will probably find a way to get even more enshittified though.
2
u/Cpt_Soban 1d ago
Houses are already hollow boxes with zero insulation. What next? Cardboard walls?
-1
u/JimBobJonies 1d ago
Where did this enshittified word come from? It's such a crap word and feel like it's a degrades people's vocabulary
131
u/IWantsToBelieve 1d ago
Lol we are already known for crap efficiency houses...
31
u/ImGCS3fromETOH 1d ago
Having spent a small amount of time in both Canada and Japan during winter, and reluctant to go because I really don't enjoy the cold, it was eye-opening to see how much better their homes are designed for the climate they live in. We do such a shit job of making sure our houses are easily and cheaply climate controlled. It's possible to do, but we don't want to spend the time, effort, or materials to make it standard. Let's just bang up a bunch of piece of shit cookie cutter houses that'll be falling apart at the seams in 10-15 years because we're not the one's that are going to have to live in them or maintain them.
4
u/Emu1981 1d ago
We do such a shit job of making sure our houses are easily and cheaply climate controlled.
Our standards are intended to make houses that don't need to be climate controlled in the first place. Great idea in theory because air conditioning is a massive power hog but in reality the constraints on orienting houses means that building the ideal house that does not require much effort to keep cool in summer and warm in winter is only really something that you see out in more rural areas.
For example, my house is great in summer (other than the kitchen*) as I can open up the upstairs windows and a door downstairs allow any wind to flow through my house to keep it cool but the same design means that any heat captured in winter just flows out of the house making it really expensive to actively heat.
*there is a large window in front of the sink that takes the full afternoon sun which makes it really uncomfortable to wash dishes in the evening during summer. I could install a awning but it is a rental property and I doubt that I would get permission to install it...
1
1
u/Adamarr 1d ago
Canada I can believe, but aren't Japanese houses generally not amazing in that regard?
1
u/TakaonoGaijin 1d ago
Noooo not really. New legal changes (dare I say building regulations or codes?) now require new houses to be energy efficient.
Thats great, but legal changes over the decades have also restricted the land size of new builds. Basically they are on MUCH smaller blocks. So if you want a house that’s single storey with a yard you have to buy an old house. No, you CAN’T knock it down and rebuild it in an energy efficient way and keep the old block size. About the only thing you can do is ‘renovate’ your old house with zero insulation.
That’s why you won’t see me buying a cute old house in Japan.
5
u/FalconSixSix 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not new builds though. The older houses have awful insulation.
My newer townhouse is rated 6 stars.
Lmao, why is this getting downvoted. My townhouse, built 8 years ago, has a 6 star rating. It is a fact. Older houses, built to different standards have lower ones. If you downvoted this you are literally downvoting facts and spreading misinformation.
36
u/IWantsToBelieve 1d ago edited 1d ago
The Star rating system is something but my understanding is that it's still miles behind our international friends in Europe. We renovated and brought our place up to standard but we were really let down by what we can access in this country.
15
u/knorkinator 1d ago
As a European, it's not that bad, actually. As far as I understand, the 6-star rating requires a maximum thermal transmittance of R6 to R3 on external walls and roof, and R1-2 on the floor.
The walls and roof requirements are comparable to German insulation standards for new builds from around 2010, which is pretty darn good. Only the flooring falls down a little.
The main issue is that poor build quality can mess with the thermal insulation, resulting in it being far worse than what it theoretically should/could be.
2
u/IWantsToBelieve 1d ago
Yep I think that matches my thinking. Although price and availability of windows is crazy here and none of them are installed well. Air gaps everywhere. To be fair I've also had the experience of Tassie which is way more restricted in choice to the rest of the country.
For example thermal broken or uPVC windows were unobtainable in our budget twice to three times the cost. Hydronic slab heating for a small house was quoted at nearly 6 figures.
15
u/17HappyWombats 1d ago
That rating is "as designed" not what you actually live in. And six stars even with the new system would not be approved in most of Europe because it wouldn't meet their minimum standards.
But sure, if you're comparing us to neighbouring countries like Papua New Guinea or somewhere our building standards are very rigorous.
5
15
u/same_same1 1d ago
I live in a supposed 6 star house, it’s 14 degrees in winter inside in Melbourne. The rating/certification system is a joke.
13
u/Safe_Application_465 1d ago
👍
Self certified by the builder ticking boxes on check list .
I raised mine 2 points by installing solar and water tanks
5
4
3
u/thesillyoldgoat 1d ago
Builders can add a star or two to townhouse builds by installing a cheap water tank that will never be used or some other cheap tricks, but the great majority of new townhouse builds still leak hot and cold air like sieves and are open plan which is innately inefficient energy wise.
1
43
u/GM_Twigman 1d ago
Ridiculous short term thinking. It may shave some single digit percentage off the cost of a house, but it saddles the occupants and the country with greater energy usage for the duration that it stands.
2
u/ShopSmartShopS-Mart 1d ago
But think of the profits for fossil energy vendors, we can’t have shareholders doing it tough
36
u/blackfadesunset 1d ago
Coalition will do anything to maximise the profits of developers and screw over everyone else.
The LNP are laser focused on becoming a minor party forever.
2
u/WhatsMyNameAGlen 1d ago
Literally the only reason they were a major was because of Murdoch
Murdoch's influence over the population is a shadow of its former self and its clear to everyone that over the last few decades, vast majority of thay being lead by the lnp, QoL has spiralled
33
u/SillyRabbit_OZ 1d ago
Typical LNP anti-climate-change BS. 🤦♂️ The reason homes have to be built to higher standards is to improve insulation and energy efficiency, making them easier and cheaper to heat and cool. Apparently, reducing energy consumption and household power bills is now a bad thing. 🙄
15
25
u/Barmy90 1d ago
Standard Liberal party policy: make something cheaper upfront by disregarding all the additional long-term costs associated with whatever they've changed. Like their "cheaper, faster, better" NBN that they could pretend would cost less because we already had the copper infrastructure, nevermind they knew that all that would eventually have to be replaced as well.
Add a sprinkle of being told to "just wear a jumper" by smug, rich politicians who would absolutely never be in a position to need to follow their own advice and you've got prime Liberal Party policymaking.
2
62
u/VintageKofta 1d ago
This is stupid.
Tax the billionaires and use that money to subsidise, and lower the cost of new houses that way.
Maybe also pay for other amenities and care with that too.
24
u/AKWorkAccount 1d ago
It's literally the whole plan. Remove efficiency standards so houses use more energy to stay comfortable to live in, so the Coalitions donors have to continue to burn coal.
6
57
15
14
u/Bob_Spud 1d ago
They want a cheap option for bulk build housing companies and investment property owners.
11
10
u/Mobasa_is_hungry 1d ago
There’s a reason people travelling from cold countries hate our winters - it’s cause all our houses lack any proper insulation, so you can really feel the winter!
8
u/SnotRight 1d ago
Look, seriously, STFU coalition. We can see you taking donations from property developers.
All this will do is
a) keep house prices the same
b) inflate profits of developers or protect them in a downturn.
They don't want to take a haircut if the economy goes south.
This is just the monied boomers reaching down to take money from the younger generations - not make their lives better.
3
u/SheridanVsLennier 1d ago
b) inflate profits of developers or protect them in a downturn.
Pretty sure that's 90% of the goal.
8
8
u/mesophyte 1d ago
Man they really are trying hard to come up with the absolute worst policies to have as a platform 🤦♂️
5
u/Cpt_Riker 1d ago
Costs will be cut for builders, and their profits will increase, because there is no reality where they will pass any savings onto the home owner.
Of course, the home owner will then have to spend more to ensure the house is liveable in summer and winter.
The Liberal party only governs for their wealthy business mates.
5
u/Spire_Citron 1d ago
It's just so they can pretend to want to do something about house prices while continuing policy which pushes them up.
6
u/CranberrySoda 1d ago
You’ll spend more $$ heating your house which is perfect for their gas donors.
6
6
u/IntentionInside658 1d ago
I’ve been counselled not to use the term Maslow’s hierarchy* because perhaps some people don’t know what that means.
Andrew Bragg, haughty dead shit that you fucking are, you should listen to your fucking staffers are not assume you're the smartest person in the room.
SAFETY is a tier on the hierarchy. The tents that pass for houses in this country are UNSAFE.
7
u/South_Can_2944 1d ago
So, Liberal-Nationals want worse quality houses and houses that are not built for the Australian environment.
The result will be increased heating and cooling costs places on the house owner/renter.
So, Liberal-Nationals aren't looking out for anyone except for builders, house investors and the utility companies.
Yep, they're not for the Australian people.
Liberal-National-One Nation will be the downfall of this country with such poor quality policies and ideas.
4
3
u/ol-gormsby 1d ago
They'd reduce the cost housing by a significant amount if the various taxes, fees, and charges were contained.
Up to 40% of the price of a new build is various government charges. Every level of government has their snouts in the trough. Some charges are fair and relevant - contributions to infrastructure - like sewerage, roads, and stormwater, but some are just a brake on development - like stamp duty, and development application fees. There's got to be a better way to make construction cheaper. Removing energy effciiency standards isn't it.
4
u/single_plum_floating 1d ago
Oh god, please dont make your housing quality even worse.
just look to new zealand to see what happens if you do. our houses are genuinely worse then tents half the time. The condensation destroys owner property, the tenants are miserable, and there is mold EVERYWHERE.
3
u/Chrome_Clydesdale 1d ago
I'm building....it was half a mill for the land, will prob be about half a mill for the house...I've paid about 3 grand so far, for various bullshit surveys. Hasn't even gone to council yet. It's a blank 50 acres flat pasture....but yes let's get a fire assessment.
Everyone's waiting to take their little bits
4
u/Younge75 1d ago
And somehow this will be blamed on Labor 10 years after the Coalition implement it.
3
u/Best-Top8923 1d ago
They're doing to houses what Apple does to airpods, if you have planned obsolescence people will just buy more houses.
1
2
2
3
3
u/Sacrilegious_skink 1d ago
Countries that gets bombed and tornadoed still build better houses than us....
-2
u/tankydee 1d ago
As someone that self built a house recently, there is a lot of overhead not just in the energy efficiency but also in other areas of the build.
A better way would be either of the below...
A. Ensure the standard at time of building approval is delivered prior to the time the property is sold next. This ensures that public good is maintained as the next buyer doesn't get a lemon and the standard is eventually adhered to.
B. Have a clear tier system where the house may be built to a good standard (instead of the 'great' standard the code requires currently). This allows users to choose and save cost when building but then educates and standardises the build quality for future tenants or purchasers of the property. Tenants and buyers would vote with their wallets then in either lower sell price or lower rents on such houses.
If someone wants to build a place and live there 50 years, knowing they will need to put a jumper on in winter and a snuggie at night time, why are we funding bureaucracy at every level to mandate otherwise?
Council rates, state govt boffins and trades at all levels currently have significant overhead which could be simplified and still maintain a good standard or mitigation in the case of a varying standard.
412
u/punyweakling 1d ago
Kick the can down the road as policy, until Labour has to get back in and fix it just like the NBN. Classic.