Thursday, 2 April 2026

 Josh BULL (Sunbury) (10:23): I am pleased to continue the contribution that I got a brief opportunity to commence last night and go to what is a key piece of reform when it comes to building and housing within our state. As I was saying last night, this is an opportunity to make some serious reforms when it comes to the building industry. The announcements that have been made, many of which have been well canvassed in this place, outside of this place and of course within the media and local communities, go to I think the position of the government’s housing strategy and the statement about providing more supply to the market at a time when significant pressures are being experienced, not just in our state but across the country and indeed across the globe. With what we are subject to, there is no more timely position than now to be able to see those external forces, whether they be the conditions currently being experienced in the Middle East due to the conflict or many of the issues that have been well canvassed over the last couple of decades. Whether you go to the GFC, whether you look at the pandemic, whether you now look at the war in the Middle East, those circumstances do indeed change conditions that we experience on the ground.

What we have been focused on as a government is being able to provide for a more robust, more beefed-up system whereby residents within our community can get an opportunity to build a house and make renovations to a home with confidence, and making sure that we are able to do that is something that is really important. The reforms that are in the bill before us this morning – and carried over of course from last night’s debate – go to making for a better system, and that is as a result of many of the experiences that members of this chamber have listened to. They have worked with constituents, worked with communities and worked with families. The concerns that have been raised go to the government’s position, which is about creating a better system. If we are able to do that, if we are able to provide more confidence and an ability for those that want to get into the housing market and those that might be changing their current housing arrangements to do so, that is something that is really important.

If you look through the journey of the housing statement and the work that has been done, I am sure, certainly on this side of the house, there is a significant recognition of the amount of work that has been done. This builds upon those announcements that I referred to earlier by the Premier and the Minister for Planning, which go to not only providing more supply but providing more supply in the right places; leveraging the existing commitments that this government has made, particularly in transport, with the delivery of the Metro Tunnel and the delivery of the West Gate Tunnel; removing nearly 90 dangerous and congested level crossings across the state; and making for provisions for a future Suburban Rail Loop. We have got an opportunity to be able to leverage those commitments, those investments, and that is something that we are focused on and that is something that we remain committed to. What we see from those opposite is some sort of policy that completely ignores all of the needs of local communities when it comes to transport, to access to jobs, to opportunities, to training, to health, to education. But we remain practically committed to progress. Being able to do that means that we are enabling people to get an opportunity to move into a place that may be close to family and friends, that may be connected to public transport, and that indeed helps people get around safer and sooner.

Just this morning at the Sunbury station, as I was lined up to grab a coffee as I was about to jump on the train, a constituent said to me, ‘Were you at Parkville station on Tuesday?’ I said that I was actually, and she said to me that she is a nurse and is now getting on at Sunbury, getting off at Parkville, and it saves her 30 minutes on her daily commute. She gave me some feedback about how she was a bit frustrated during construction of the project but, now that that station is open, how pleased she is that she has the opportunity to commute in and out of the city from Sunbury to Parkville, the doorstep of our amazing hospital precinct.

Steve McGhie interjected.

Josh BULL: Absolutely, member for Melton. I think that is the story in itself. The ability to do that and open up that Parkville precinct and all of the other areas that we have been able to do through the construction of the Metro Tunnel relates specifically to the housing statement and the ability of the government’s to unlock those areas. Those opposite have what is an ideological position on housing and opportunity. We deal with the practical reality of people’s decision-making each and every day in what is an ever-increasing, complex world. We have got an opportunity through this bill, the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026, via the establishment of the new principal act for integrated administration and enforcement of the building legislation into the building system and the establishment, as others have mentioned, of the Building and Plumbing Commission as the successor to the Victoria Building Authority, to provide for a more robust, fairer and better system.

This of course is the work that I say quite often is ever and ongoing. We want to make sure that we get this system as fair and as decent and as practical as possible, and we remain committed to that. We will not be spending our time driven by some sort of wild ideology that does not deal with those practical pressures that local families face each and every day. The work that has been done on this bill is significant and important, and it builds upon those broader reforms that I mentioned earlier. To be able to reflect on the stories, the experiences and the challenges that local communities face when they talk about housing and all of the pressures that I mentioned earlier – whether they be global, national or indeed local – we need to make sure that we are doing everything we can to make housing fairer, safer, better and easier. Certainly creating those opportunities via this bill and, as in the earlier comments I made, the Premier and the Minister for Planning’s work is something that we remain committed to and, I think, really important work that the government will continue to do. We reserve the right of course to come back, to make changes, to make it better and fairer, and that is something that we will keep doing each and every day. I do want to thank all of those that have put significant work into this. I am confident, reading through the bill and the mechanisms and the initiatives that are within the legislation, that this is going to be an important bill that is going to make a genuine difference on the ground, and that is what matters. I commend the bill to the house.

 Kim O’KEEFFE (Shepparton) (10:32): I rise to speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. This is a very important bill, and one that goes to the heart of something that every Victorian relies on, which is confidence in the homes that we build, buy and live in. At the outset, the opposition acknowledges the very real and serious failures within Victoria’s building system. For far too long we have seen poor-quality construction, defective buildings, combustible cladding risks and a regulatory framework that has been fragmented, slow to act and too often ineffective. There is no doubt that on this side of the house we want to see better protections, but we also want to see more housing being built and not further restraints to doing so. Consumers must be protected from debilitating debt and heartbreak when things go wrong. Whether Victorians are purchasing or renting, they should be able to do so with confidence that they will be moving into a safe and high-quality home which is free from costly defects.

The majority of tradies, builders and plumbers who work day in and day out in the industry do it with pride, professionalism and high standards of quality and integrity. But there is unfortunately a small number of tradies within the industry that need to face consequences to deter them from undermining hardworking builders in the industry. We know that confidence in the building industry and the system itself has been badly shaken, and reform is necessary. Across the state over time we have seen serious defects, poor construction practices and builders collapse, which has eroded trust in the industry. When the system fails, families are left with unsafe or defective homes, cost blowouts and disputes that can drag on for years, and trust in the entire industry collapses. But you cannot just ram a bill through without adequate consultation and in just two weeks.

My question is: does this bill address the current housing crisis and build more homes? As our lead speaker the member for Caulfield raised, this is a bill that has significant implications and constraints that directly reduce the opportunity to build more homes, including increased costs and significant impacts on the building industry. I support the reasoned amendment put forward by the member for Caulfield. The bill needs further consultation, including with the industries that are going to be significantly impacted by this legislation, and consideration of the impact that will have on reducing the number of houses being built.

You would think that it would be a given that the building industries and other stakeholders directly impacted by this bill would be given the opportunity to have their say. We should be depending on their feedback and acknowledging their expertise and the importance of having the right information needed to make this bill a success and make the changes needed without having a negative impact on the building industry and allow thorough consultation. The Housing Industry Association, HIA, have expressed their concern with the bill. They are requesting that the second reading of the bill be delayed so that the industry can properly consider the bill and the impacts it might have on the broader industry. They have said that this bill is substantial and not merely administrative, despite being described as a restatement of existing legislation. It introduces significant changes, particularly to disciplinary sanctions and enforcement powers.

There are concerns about maintaining procedural fairness, given increased regulatory activity in recent years. Industry stakeholders need adequate time to review and understand the bill’s implications.

Master Builders Victoria have reported that their members indicated that these legislative changes contained in this bill could in fact increase construction costs by 10 to 30 per cent. This should ring alarm bells. House construction prices have increased by over 40 per cent since 2020 already. Forty-three per cent of the cost of a new home is taxes, fees and levies. They also said, while there is support for stronger consumer protections and actions against poor practice, the bill represents a substantial expansion of regulatory control, increased compliance obligations, enforcement powers and direct liabilities, significantly raising financial considerations and operational and personal risks for builders. The cumulative impact of reforms, rising costs and fixed-price contract pressures is likely to reduce builder capacity, increase insolvencies and constrain housing supply. They also raised that small and medium builders are particularly exposed, with risks of reduced participation, stalled growth or market exit, and that the consolidation of powers within the Building and Plumbing Commission increases the risk that a single regulatory decision could severely disrupt or end a business. We cannot afford to lose businesses during this housing crisis.

The Victorian Forest Products Association believes that this bill is an opportunity to strengthen accountability for compliance with building standards, including imported timber products. They have some concerns around imported products meeting Australian standards, impacting quality and safety, and are calling for further investigation and support measures for improving confidence in building materials without adding unnecessary regulatory burdens or delays – something that is needed and should be considered.

The bill is being presented as reform, but what we are seeing is not balanced reform. It is a rushed, heavy-handed expansion of power without proper consultation, without adequate preparation and without accountability for past failures. The bill restructures Victoria’s building and plumbing regulatory framework by consolidating administrative, enforcement and discipline provisions that are currently contained across multiple acts into a single legacy framework. The government claims this new regulator will be capable of handling a surge of complaints, yet the reality is it is already struggling under the weight of existing demand. If it cannot manage the system as it stands today, how can we expect it to succeed under an even broader and more complex mandate? Let us be clear: the very issues this bill seeks to address – defects, cladding failures and weak oversight – all occurred on the government’s watch. And now, instead of fixing the root causes, the response is simply more power, more penalties and more burden placed on builders and a significant lack of consultation. This is not a minor adjustment, it is a systemwide overhaul. Yet stakeholders have been given no meaningful time to understand its implications. This is not good governance; this is a government rushing legislation – important legislation impacting significantly on the building industry and housing.

This bill centralises sweeping enforcement powers into a single regulator, expands penalties, increases direct liability and concentrates authority in a way that is deeply concerning. That is not balanced reform, that is unchecked power. We are told this bill targets bad traders, but the reality is it risks impacting on compliant builders – the very people we rely on to deliver housing across the state. The thresholds are unclear, the safeguards are weak and there is no compelling evidence that this approach will effectively deal with rogue operators. At a time when the construction sector is already under immense pressure, with rising costs, supply chain disruptions and critical workforce shortages, this government is choosing to pile on more regulation without fair consultation. Instead of supporting the industry, it is ignoring it, and it should be restoring confidence. All this is doing is creating uncertainty and concerns across the sector. Instead of delivering real reform, it is repeating the same mistakes. This is why we are moving a reasoned amendment to ensure this Parliament takes the time to properly scrutinise this legislation and to ensure the voices of the industry are heard.

The government promised to build 800,000 homes over 10 years to fix the housing crisis, but the reality is that the government are well below their target and they are failing in addressing the housing crisis in this state. We are in the midst of a housing crisis, and we should be doing all that we can to ensure that more homes are built and to get more people into homes, not putting the industry at risk. Since coming into office Labor has introduced or increased more than 30 property-related taxes. The cost of building in this state has made building a house unaffordable. The increased land tax has seen people sell up because it is no longer viable to own a rental property in this state, reducing the rental market significantly.

We desperately need to address the housing crisis and the current housing failings of this government.

Victoria is in the midst of a housing crisis, and despite billions of dollars committed the outcomes are falling well short. We know wait times for vulnerable people, including those escaping family violence, can stretch up to nearly two years, and we know that even after the Big Housing Build is complete Victoria will still have one of the lowest proportions of social housing in this country. In communities like Shepparton that means fewer rentals, higher prices and more people locked out of housing altogether.

In regional communities like Shepparton the building industry faces challenges, workforce shortages, rising costs, regulatory burden and supply chain challenges, all of which slow housing delivery and can make it harder for families to get into a home. We cannot add further restraints. I get so frustrated when we stand in this place and have the opportunity to discuss building more housing to see that we are constantly going backwards. Until this government gets serious about delivering planning reform and restoring confidence to build, Victorians will continue to face this current housing crisis. This bill is not doing that. It is making building harder and more costly, and what makes me angry is the $15 billion that has been wasted in rorts on the Big Build sites that should have gone into housing to get those who are homeless off our streets and into homes.

My electorate is in the midst of a housing and rental crisis. It is real, and we have one of the highest rates of homelessness in regional Victoria. It is becoming more visible, with more people sleeping rough, people sleeping down on the river and mothers with their children in cars. This is not the country I grew up in. We know how we have got to this, with this government wasting billions and not prioritising housing. As a region alone, local services are reporting long waiting lists, with more than 2474 people on the public housing waiting list, reflecting significant shortages and housing stress. There is so much more that we need to be doing, and we cannot sit on our hands. This was an opportunity to have reform that could help build more homes, and that will not happen under this bill.

 Steve McGHIE (Melton) (10:42): I rise to contribute on the Building and Plumbing. Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. Of course it is a very important bill, and important not only for Victoria but particularly for an electorate like mine, Melton, which is one of the fastest growing areas in the state, if not the country. Within the next 20 years we will double our population to 450,000 in Melton, and between Melton and Wyndham by 2046 there will be a million people living in that corridor, which will be one-tenth of the Victorian population. So you can see why housing in my electorate and the western suburbs is so important.

Of course people in Melton do not just talk about housing, they are building, and they are coming out to Melton because it is still affordable, and they are buying their first home. They are sometimes stretching every dollar that they have got to get into the market, and of course they are starting their families. It is a very young population and demographic in Melton, and as I said, they are buying their first homes because they think it is an affordable area. It is only 31 kilometres from the centre of the Melbourne business district, and it is a great place for people to move into. It is quite a diverse community that we have got out there now, and many of those members of that diverse community are coming out where friends and relatives are living.

Something that we see in my electorate office very often is when people come in and raise concerns about housing, issues of builders and things like that, and obviously when things have broken down in regard to the building of their homes, the defects and things like that and trying to get them rectified. Of course it is quite heartbreaking for people when they have to go through those battles to get some of the building defects and construction issues sorted out, and that is what this bill is all about. It is so heartbreaking for hardworking people, families who have done everything right – scraping together their deposits for a home, signing contracts in good faith and trusting that the system will deliver what they have paid for and a good standard of build for what they have paid for, only to be let down by a dodgy operator who is more focused on profits than people. We see that too often with some of these dodgy builders, and that is what this bill will address. This bill is about restoring confidence within our communities, and it is about making sure that when people such as in my electorate of Melton or across Victoria build or buy a home they are not left on their own if something goes wrong and that they will be supported by a well-structured system.

It is outlined in the bill summary that this legislation establishes a new principal act and strengthens enforcement across the building system, including formally establishing the Building and Plumbing Commission as a stronger integrated regulator. The system has long been fragmented; it has been confusing and often too weak when it comes to dealing with those who deliberately do the wrong thing. I have seen that firsthand with some of the people that have come into my electorate office, but hopefully this bill will change all of that.

It also introduces for the first time a clear building system objective, putting consumers at the centre and making it explicit that health and safety must come first, which is great to see. It is not just symbolic; it is a fundamental shift in how decisions are made, how regulation is applied and how accountability is enforced. It strengthens enforcement powers. It gives the regulator real teeth. It provides for stronger investigation powers. It gives them the ability to intervene earlier and the capacity to impose meaningful consequences if serious breaches occur. Obviously too many of these dodgy operators have not been held to account. It is quite clear that most builders and tradies, I am pleased to say, do the right thing – there are only a few that do not. Most builders and tradies are proud of their work, and it is great to see that. They want to show off their good outcomes and their good product. That is great to see, especially when they hand over the keys to a house that has been finished. They really want to show it off, which is terrific, because it is a good selling point and it is a good promotion for them to build more and more houses and to show the good quality work that they do.

Unfortunately, the minority of dodgy builders at times make it very difficult for the genuinely good builders and tradies. It only takes a small number of those bad ones to make it really difficult. That is why stronger enforcement matters, and that is why civil penalties matter: to make sure that these dodgy ones do not get away with it. It is about holding company directors to account. This is why cracking down on phoenixing – the practice of shutting down one company and then reopening under another name to avoid consequences – is so important. We have seen that quite a bit where that has happened in the past: a dodgy builder has shut down their company and they have wandered off, and then next thing you know, they are practising under another name and continuing to build dodgy builds.

Cutting corners and ripping people off is not the way to go, of course. Just masking yourself and hiding yourself under a different name for a build is terrible. I have firsthand knowledge of a particular area; it actually happened in Bacchus Marsh to a young woman where there were some issues with the building of her house and she just came up against roadblocks all the time to try and get it rectified. In particular, at times she has been intimidated and harassed by the builders of her particular house. This is a young woman on her own that came out of a domestic violence situation, and it has been very difficult for her to deal with the issues.

This bill is not just about protecting homebuyers; it is also about protecting subcontractors and small businesses, the people who are out there every day working their guts out to build something for themselves and their families. In Melton we have seen strong growth not just in housing but in small businesses. I note recently that in the Melton LGA there are 18,793 small businesses and it achieved a growth rate of 9.8 per cent, which is the highest in Victoria. It is pleasing to see that people are starting up their businesses in Melton. Again, as I come back to the diversity of our community and the diversity of businesses now that are in Melton, it is great to see.

A lot of these people have come through our strong TAFE system. They have learned their skills through TAFE, and they have honed their craft through TAFE. Now they are contributing strongly to our economy and our community out there in the west. Victoria’s TAFE system has delivered generations of skilled tradespeople and people who take pride in what they do and want to help build quality homes using the quality skills that they have learned through the TAFE system. That pipeline of skilled workers will only become more important as our community continues to grow.

I have got to give a shout-out: we will be starting to build the new Kangan TAFE out at Melton later this year, to be completed by 2028. Primarily the courses that they will be teaching at Kangan TAFE in Melton will be construction courses and construction training, and that will go a long way to assisting us with the massive growth of housing in Melton. Over the next 20 years 109,000 houses are to be built in Melton. Currently there are only 89,000 houses in Melton. There is going to be another 109,000, so you can see the pressure is on in that western corridor. I am sure it is very similar to what is happening in Wyndham. That is why I said in the next 20 years we will see a million people in that corridor, and that is why housing is so important out there. That Kangan TAFE facility will be training up 600 apprentices every year to deliver their construction trades and to assist us in building those houses, which is terrific to see.

As I said, this bill is very important in regard to securing the process and the system here in Victoria. I do not support the reasoned amendment put up by the opposition. I think it is really just a way of opposing reform and delaying and watering down this particular bill. It is standing in the way of stronger protections, and I do not support the reasoned amendment. I do not think it is a way of standing up for the consumers and for home builders and for tradies in delaying the bill through the reasoned amendment. This is a really important bill, and I commend this bill to the house.

 Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (10:52): I am always more than happy to rise in this place to talk about housing, so the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026 gives me another opportunity this week to do so. This is one of those bills that we will talk about. I can read the tea leaves on this one, and we will refer to this bill down the track when builders have left the industry and plumbers have left the industry because it has just got too hard for them.

There are certain people in this place who I go to for certain pieces of advice and certain counsel, and the people that I turn to with regard to building and plumbing are on my right and my left in this place. The member for Narracan spoke on this bill yesterday, and as a builder, he knows a thing or two about the impact that this bill will have. To my left, the member for Morwell, as a plumber, knows a thing or two about the impact of this. He also spoke on this bill yesterday. They both support the member for Caulfield’s reasoned amendment on this bill, and that is to delay it and at least properly consider the bill and the impacts it will have on the building industry and consult with the major stakeholders here – those that actually know how to build a house, which way to hold a hammer, although I suspect it has been quite some time since the member for Narracan has held a hammer and actually used it; there would not be a callus that adorns his palms or his fingers of late, I would suspect. The member for Morwell, on the other hand, I know is still very handy with a spanner and pipes.

The Housing Industry Association (HIA), we know, was one of the major key stakeholders that requested a delay to the second reading of this bill to allow for the industry to properly consider the impacts, like I said. It is substantial. This is not merely an administrative bill, despite being described as a restatement of existing legislation. It is not. It is going to make building houses and those completely unrealistic housing targets of 80,000 a year – they are unachievable at the moment; we are around 30,000 short as it is – completely unachievable. Builders have multiple different builds going on at once, and the restrictions that this bill will then put on them will kill mum-and-dad businesses, they really will.

I said yesterday when talking about the cladding bill that in the country, in rural Victoria, we have started to see the return of young families coming back to small towns. That includes a builder in Ouyen, which is fabulous because we have not had a builder. They usually have to travel from Mildura, which is an hour away. It is the same thing for towns like Robinvale. They usually do not reside in those towns – for good reason – as there is not normally enough work for them there. However, there was a gap in Ouyen. Eighteen houses were constructed there in 2024, so a gap was identified. Gee whiz, there is some money to be made there with families moving back and construction to start, so he did that. This bill has the real danger of making his business unviable. Cash flow is really important in any business. This bill will put a stranglehold on that family’s business in Ouyen and the ability for more family homes to be constructed to attract people back to towns like Ouyen.

[NAME AWAITING VERIFICATION]

There are always different ways to construct housing. There are businesses coming out with different innovations. Deputy Speaker, if you will indulge me for just a second, I was speaking to an old friend a week or so ago, who is one with an entrepreneurial spirit and very, very clever who had again identified a gap. This is often what happens. If there is a gap in the market, the private sector often fills it, particularly when we have so many entrepreneurs in this state. I was talking to this old friend, and he was talking about this prefab housing project. In my mind I thought of prefab housing like workers accommodation – dongas, if you will – which are multi one-bedroom sorts of rooms. A lot of the time they are 3 by 3 or 3 by 9. They are not great. But I got talking to him. The name of the business, or the company, is Atlas Systems Pty Ltd. They have actually started doing a five-house project. These houses take literally days to construct because they come sort of flat packed from overseas. They import them from China. If you are looking for a website at the moment, you will not find one. They are still in the development stage and have not got a website yet, but it takes days for them to construct homes.

They are doing five houses at the moment in Byron Bay. They have just completed one in Swan Hill, which is kind of their little pet project, if you want to have a look at it. When I said I thought these housing systems were going to be like the old Jayco cabins or something similar to that, I was very, very wrong. Ray White Swan Hill actually have one for sale at the moment at 12 Wanera Street. $799,000 is the guide. It is actually under offer. I looked at this and I thought, ‘My goodness – that kind of construction in five days.’ It meets everything and is 100 per cent compliant. There is more development to go, because you still need a sparky – sparkies are very qualified. But it is one of those things that could help the government, or any government coming to power in November, actually hit some housing targets, particularly if they could construct these things in a matter of days. There are some that take, depending on how many bedrooms they are, up to three months. But could you imagine going from the planning stage to the move-in stage in three months – 90 days. That is amazing. And just so you are aware, the more of them they build, the cheaper they get.

A member: Really?

Jade BENHAM: Yes. Volume – who knew? It is one of those things. Again, these are little flat-packed prefab housing systems that are shipped over here. It is incredible, so watch this space for that. That is a gap in the market that has been filled by a group of young entrepreneurial businesspeople who could help solve the housing crisis in this state. But what will not is this bill.

As the Master Builders Association, HIA and several others have pointed out, it is fraught with danger. It will only make building homes and actually running a small construction company even harder for builders. I suppose one of the gifts – and there are many – of living in regional and rural Victoria is that you know who your builders are. That luxury is not afforded to those, perhaps, that live in the city. Because of the tight-knit communities, you know your builders – you know the good ones, you know the not-so-good ones. And for plumbers it is exactly the same. If any of them are dodgy, what happens? They get run out of town. There is simply no room for dodgy operators to run in smaller regional and rural communities. So although this gift is not afforded to those in metropolitan Victoria, it is certainly a gift in the regions.

I did not actually know the term ‘phoenixing’ was a thing – where you shut down one business and start another. I had no idea that was a thing. It is not just the building and construction industry, though – this happens quite often. I did not know that was the word. I knew it happened, but I did not know that was the word for it.

To wrap things up – again, you will be surprised to learn that I was going to keep it short, and that has not actually happened, surprise, surprise. The minister at the table, the Minister for Climate Action, is also very surprised that I have not managed to keep it short. But we do support the member for Caulfield’s reasoned amendment on this bill and insist that there is actual key stakeholder engagement – like the HIA and the Master Builders – and that they listen to people that actually know how to work a hammer.

 Michaela SETTLE (Eureka) (11:02): I am pleased to rise and speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. When I read through this legislation and thought about what I was going to talk about today, there was a really key moment that came to mind. It was actually a couple of years ago. I was out in my van doing my mobile office, and I was in Bacchus Marsh. A gentleman came to see me, and he was genuinely really worried for his daughter. They were about to build a house, they were about to enter into contracts and they just felt incredibly insecure about that prospect. I remember ringing him back and telling him about the minimum financial requirements, and that made him very happy, because that was one of the things that he had been concerned about. But of course, what he was really concerned about for his daughter was that they would build something and find that it was defective.

I think we all know in this place that probably one of the biggest and most important things that we can do is that first home that we own, or for some people, first home that they build. Really, people need to have the confidence that when they take someone on that person will do a good job. I know it can be very difficult in such a big market. I have been lucky enough to have an absolutely wonderful builder who has been working on some renovations for me. But at the heart of that relationship is trust. I have worked with him before, and I know that I can completely trust him – Sims building in Ballan; I would highly recommend them to anyone. I guess what I am trying to say in that is that I have had a one-on-one relationship with him, and so that trust has been established. But so many people are going into what is really the biggest contract they will probably ever sign, and they need to know that they can trust the person that they are asking to build their dream – quite literally build their dream.

This bill is incredibly important. I think what I am so pleased about is that it puts protecting Victorian families right at its centre. It is one of the really important elements of this bill – to make sure that health and safety are right there at the base of any of those contracts. I find it pretty extraordinary to listen to those on the other side who are claiming that this is going to destroy the building industry.

What I cannot understand is their willingness or their desire to protect dodgy builders, because at its heart that is what this bill is about – it is about protecting consumers from dodgy builders. They seem to think that this is going to impact the entire industry. Well, the fact of the matter is that anyone who comes before the Building and Plumbing Commission is going to be there for a real reason, which is that they have delivered defective works, and why those on the other side feel that they need protection is extraordinary. Really, I thought we were all here in this place to protect the people of Victoria, but again we see that those on the other side have interests in large lobby groups which seem to be more important than the interests of Victorian families.

This bill is the first really comprehensive overhaul of the system since the act was introduced 30 years ago, and I think everyone in this room would acknowledge that a lot has happened within that industry but within our communities as well in those 30 years. So it really is time to usher in a new era with a principal act and a transformed regulator in the Building and Plumbing Commission. I know in my wonderful electorate of Eureka there are some real growth areas – Bacchus Marsh of course and West Maddingley are growing at a really, really quick rate. There are people coming into our communities, and we welcome them. We welcome people coming into our communities, but I want them to come into our community and know that they have a safe house to live in and that they will not be checking for defects in the years to come. For all of those people that are moving into West Maddingley: this bill is for you. This bill is to protect you and make sure that when you enter into those contracts you really are having something substantial delivered. I know that Cladding Safety with some of their work suggested that of the buildings that they inspected, 50 per cent had non-cladding defects, and it is pretty terrifying to think of that volume of defects is out there. But even more concerning was that 78 per cent of those were less than 10 years old, and that really speaks to the point that the legislation has not been changed in 30 years and clearly practices have changed. If we are seeing that 78 per cent of those defective buildings were built in the last 10 years, it means something is wrong with the system and that we really need to address this right now, and of course that is what this bill does.

The main purpose is to deliver a principal act for building and plumbing that will sit at the core of a contemporary integrated legislative system. What is really good in the bill is that it provides a regulator with real teeth. Obviously, there have been consumer protections all along, but now to have a regulator that really has the power to enforce and remedy defects is a wonderful thing. I think it integrates all of those services. It also means that people have one place to go to so when they are seeing defects in their builds, they know that they have got one regulator that they can go to. It combines regulation insurance and dispute resolution. What that means for families building a home is that there is real clarity, accountability and transparency, and that is exactly what we need.

Of course there will be stronger enforcement. The bill enhances inspection and investigation powers and introduces early intervention tools. I really cannot understand why those on the other side would object to a bill that provides a regulator the opportunity for early intervention, because we know that to remedy defects after the fact is incredibly expensive, not to mention traumatic for the families involved. But it is very expensive, so it is important to have that early intervention tool within these new powers.

It also introduces significant financial penalties. Those on the other side are suggesting that that is going to be difficult for the building industry, but I would say to them that we need those penalties to be strong and enforceable. We need that for the very safety and security of all of those people that are embarking on what should be an incredibly happy and joyous part of their lives: building their home, building their dream. As I say, this bill really goes towards putting them at the centre of it. Accountability requires liability, and part of the bill will hold directors accountable and will tackle phoenixing and corporate avoidance. That is something that is really heartbreaking to see for families when they have gone through a collapse. To see those same people pop up again in another guise is nothing short of traumatic for a family that have seen their dreams quashed. Certainly, as I say, in Eureka there is a lot of building going on in Bacchus Marsh and West Maddingley but also in Teesdale just on the outskirts of Geelong. It is one of the fastest growing areas in the Golden Plains shire, and it is for those families that this bill has come to this Parliament. Those on the other side would like to protect the lobby groups and businesses that they are referring to. We on this side put Victorians at the centre of everything we do, and I commend the bill to the house.

 Matt FREGON (Ashwood) (11:12): It is my pleasure to rise on the Building and Plumbing Administration Enforcement Bill 2026. As other members have said, it does give us an opportunity to talk about not only building but housing, which is something that is on the minds of not only us here in Victoria on a daily basis but the whole nation and probably a lot of the world. But let us stick to Victoria for now. To take up some of the points that I have heard over the last day, it is fair to clarify beyond doubt that when members on any side of this house refer to dodgy builders, we are not referring to every builder being dodgy – it is not the same. I did hear in passing yesterday the suggestion that the government is suggesting all builders are dodgy, which is completely wrong. I guess it is a bit of a George Costanza thing, if I can paraphrase that: ‘It’s not a fabrication if you believe it.’

Pauline Richards: Dad joke mode.

Matt FREGON: Thank you, member for Cranbourne, I will try and keep the dad jokes out of it, but it is a personal misfortune of mine. Back to the bill, housing is the biggest investment that most of us will ever make, whether we are building or whether we are renovating. Bec and I renovated last year. On the grounds that we have excellent builders in this state – many of them – I will give a big shout-out to John Kennedy Plumbing and Building. Yes, that is John Kennedy from Hawthorn, so he is doubly awesome. They were fantastic.

Rob Adam, who was our project manager, is a good, local Mount Waverley boy – fantastic job. But when you are doing a build like we were doing with our renovation – which we are very, very happy with – little things crop up in the normal scheme of things. If you have a good builder that you have a good relationship with, when these little things come up – it might be some scope creep, it might be changes or it might be something does not look how you thought it was going to look or something not working as you expect – you work on that during the process. But not all consumers of the industry are as fortunate as Bec and I were with our renovators. If that relationship breaks down, it makes perfect sense that the Building and Plumbing Commission are able to intervene at an early stage.

One of the other things that we have introduced over the last couple of years is Domestic Building Dispute Resolution Victoria, which is a key part of this. I have had a couple of emails from constituents over the last few months – and I will not name the people, because I have not told them that I would mention them, so that is not fair; and I will not mention the builder because that is equally not fair. But they have had an issue with a build in Mount Waverley. The relationship broke down with the builder, and they contacted my office trying to get some assistance. We pointed them to the DBDRV, and they went through that conciliation process. In a perfect world, you go through the conciliation process, like they did, the builder says, ‘All right. I’ll fix this. I’ll fix that,’ and DBDRV says, ‘All right, you’ve got a month to do it.’ Again, in a perfect world, with a builder who is just trying to get everything done and fixed and do the right thing, it would work. I found out even just this week that the builder in this case has not done what they said they would do in conciliation.

It is fair to say that part of the reason we have this bill in front of us today is because the former Victorian Building Authority (VBA) did not have the teeth that it needed to clamp down on builders who do the wrong thing, so that is why we are addressing this. For those that say this is going to kill the building industry – well, George Costanza. If you are not part of the problem, you probably do not have anything to concern yourself with. If you are trying to be part of the solution, again, you are not going to have to suffer the consequences that some builders who refuse to remedy the problem will. We will be doing our best to help out constituents, again, with dispute resolution, to see what the next steps are and how that goes for them.

Interestingly, I had another email from a separate constituent with another builder problem – same builder. This is part of the problem. I think the member for Mildura mentioned – rightly so, I am not having a go at you. Sorry, Speaker, my mistake there; I will try to follow the standing orders. But builders have multiple builds at the same time. I am sure it is very difficult – and I have great respect for our building community – to juggle all of that, to have the contractors in, to have the tradies in at the right time. I am sure that is very complicated; I have no doubt. But if you have a builder who is doing the wrong thing, that means they have also probably got many builds on at the same time, and if they are doing the wrong thing many times you have got multiple people who are at the whim of bad practice. So surely it is the government’s role – any government’s – to enforce those regulations to clamp down on those who are doing the wrong thing, and that is why we are here today. That is what we are debating.

I noticed the reasoned amendment, and I have no doubt the Housing Industry Association have questions – good on them. I have questions about their 43 per cent tax figure, but anyway. Again, delay – I mean, come on. We have been talking about these issues – before the VBA, dispute resolution, phoenixing – and addressing them as we go for as many years as I have been in this place, so delay is not required in my opinion; obviously we will agree to disagree on that with the other side of the chamber.

The other thing I would go to in closing is that this bill comes into play when people have already made those investments. We talk about a housing crisis, and there will be different views in this chamber on whose fault it is and all this sort of stuff, but we on this side of the chamber are doing what we can to work on supply, which is the main thing that a state government can do. A lot of the levers that are available or have led us to this point in time are federal, and I am interested to see the conversations in the paper about a potential capital gains tax discount change. I think that is a conversation this country needs to have. I have said before in this house Bec and I were lucky enough to buy our first place in 1999, shortly after those changes were made, and from an asset point of view we have done very well. The problem with it, though, is that not everyone is as fortunate as people who happened to buy shortly after those changes were made and rode the wave, and you end up with a generation following us who look at the size of the hill ahead of them to get equity under their feet for their future and their children’s future and it is unobtainable.

In the 30 seconds I have, I remember a guy, Marcus – I cannot remember his surname – who does the financial report on the ABC. A number of years ago he just made this throwaway comment and it stopped me in my tracks. Talking about just finances, he said, ‘Well, of course you can’t make wealth from just working for a living anymore.’ Think about that. The average Australian, in this guy’s opinion – and he knows his finances – cannot make wealth from working anymore.

 Paul EDBROOKE (Frankston) (11:22): On those profound remarks – and I agree, that is a very interesting comment, previous member – I am very pleased to rise and speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. We have heard quite a few interesting anecdotes from those across the house, and I will get to those in a second as far as having an agency with teeth goes. But this bill is indeed about one thing above all else, and that is protecting Victorian families. For most people in Frankston and indeed Victoria, making the purchase of a home, or building and buying a home, is the biggest investment of their lives. It is the biggest financial decision they might ever make, and when that investment goes wrong, when we see defects, delays or builder collapses or phoenixing, the consequences are absolutely devastating. I am amongst the many MPs in this place that are representing people in their communities that have their own stories, explaining what they went through, especially in those areas of high population growth and increasing housing demand as well.

It is I think the most comprehensive overhaul of the system since the Building Act 1993 was introduced over 30 years ago, and the scale of change in the building and plumbing industries since that act was introduced in 1993 is absolutely immense. Now is definitely the time to usher in a new era with a new principal act and a transformed regulator in the Building and Plumbing Commission. I agree and wholeheartedly concur with those who have stood up and said it is not the time to delay this. Speaking on behalf of my constituents, which is at the heart of my role, I would ask everybody to ask themselves if any of their constituents want a building regulator with more teeth – protection for Victorian families – delayed, because I do not think anyone is hearing that. It is fine for some peak bodies and stakeholders to say that, but we are here to represent our communities first and foremost.

On this bill the opposition seem to be pulling some figures – well, I will be polite and say from thin air. Their claims about cost increases for businesses due to the National Construction Code and due to these reforms I think are up for interpretation.

I think those opposite need to be reminded that every single time we bring in consumer-focused reforms in this portfolio which will protect Victorian families from potentially debilitating and life-changing debts which can be incurred when they are left on their own when dodgy builders have their way, they are the ones that stand in the way of these reforms. It is very, very clear that a Labor government, this Labor government, fights for working Victorians while the Liberals consistently leave Victorians on their own.

I did hear yesterday talk of minimum financial requirements in this bill over and over and over from subsequent opposition speakers – I think the member for Narracan and the member for Morwell. Well, minimum financial requirements are part of the buyer protection reforms that the Liberal opposition opposed last year. They are still part of the reform package, but indeed they are not part of this bill so I am not sure what the obsession is with MFRs. It was repeated again and again. The opposition are referring to legislation that passed this place a year ago, has already received royal assent and is enacted into law. It is worth asking if people are reading the right bill in that way too, I think.

The other argument I have seen from the opposition is about increased building costs for the industry, and this is a concerning argument – it really is. But at the same time, I think some data would allay fears here. The Centre for International Economics estimates Victoria has amongst the highest rates of defective building work, with an estimated 1.04 defects per dwelling, and for apartments, the rate of defects is the worst nationally at 2.13 per apartment built. Whilst the precise cost of defects is obviously difficult to quantify, the CIE also estimates that defects cost Victoria more than $675 million annually. We saw even in our debate on the Cladding Safety Victoria Repeal Bill 2026 that CSV found that 50 per cent of buildings in its program had non-cladding defects, including serious issues like water ingress, and 78 per cent of those buildings were less than 10 years old. That points to systemic problems, not isolated cases.

The BPC data tells the same story: around 60 per cent of complaints relate to defects and non-compliance, and BPC’s audit work also found that every audited building had at least one area where compliance could not be demonstrated. So I think we are coming to the same conclusion here. If we rely on data, if we rely on a foundation of evidence, which is that Victoria needs to continually strengthen its building regulator to reinforce confidence in industry, that is exactly what this bill does. It is not about adding burdens to the industry. It is not about adding burdens for those doing the right thing. It is about stopping poor practices and the effects of those poor practices, meaning financial strain on good Victorians, and reducing those defects before they become entrenched and costly to fix. I think that matters as much to the industry as it does consumers, because fewer defects mean fewer disputes, fewer defects mean fewer costly rectifications and fewer defects mean greater consumer confidence to build and buy. In short, better regulation reduces defects, and a system with fewer defects is a system that Victorians can actually trust with their nest egg and the biggest investment in their lives. I think this bill goes a long way to underwriting what this government is all about, and that is fighting for Victorians and giving them confidence in our state’s building industry. When consumers are confident, the building industry wins and the industry flourishes.

Like many others in this house, as I recently said, I have had very, very sad stories come through the office door about people who have been put in these unenviable and tragic positions by shonky builders, by companies that have phoenixed their operations, and this bill is about stopping that. It is about giving a regulator teeth. Families deserve to have the confidence that work will be done right the first time, so this bill gives the BPC strong new powers to protect consumers and ensure dodgy builders face consequences. This includes powers to proactively – I think that is a really important word, ‘proactively’ – combat dodgy building practices and work with builders and plumbers to fix problems earlier.

The BPC will now have tools to enforce higher civil penalties. The BPC will be able to have a broader scope to issue infringement notices and the ability to hold directors personally liable for wrongdoing. This includes changes making it harder for company directors to escape consequences by phoenixing their businesses.

I believe the member for Mornington spoke about it yesterday, and we have been on an absolute unity ticket about an address in Frankston, Culcairn Drive, where basically, through the cladding process, as BPC found, lots of defects were found – building defects – and Culcairn Drive in Frankston is one of the worst examples of that. I remember hearing about this first from some residents that came in. The cladding authority had a look and said, ‘You actually need to get a building surveyor in here.’ There was no waterproofing in some rooms. The external balustrading was falling down. There was an interior fire-monitoring alarm system put on the exterior of the building which was rusting out and falling out of the wall. There was no sprinkler system fitted into a multistorey building with a car park under the residences, which is against the Building Code of Australia. Basically, what we found out was the contractor that signed off the occupancy permit for this place was actually related to the builder. We could not for the life of us figure out how this place was signed off any other way. That dodgy operator ended up phoenixing, and these people were left with about a hundred units that needed fixing, some at their own costs. That body corporate had to get together and decide that they would bill residents extra, but it meant no-one wanted to buy those places. It was stagnant. We have come to a stage now where most of that work has been done. This bill will be heralded in Frankston as something that has been a long time coming and obviously very complicated but is very, very welcome. We ought not to delay this at all. It would be futile to delay this. I support the bill.

 John LISTER (Werribee) (11:32): In rising to speak on this bill, I was doing a little bit of research last night, and I came across one of my favourite YouTube channels, which is Site Inspections. If anyone has seen it, they have seen one of my favourite building inspectors on the internet go around to see some of the worst work done around Australia. He has got his vest; he has got his cameras. He also now sells a whole heap of little gadgets to help people do those tests. He is famous for his classic phrase ‘noncompliant’. He will find so many defects in these houses, and with a lot of them it is quite disturbing what happens. It is not just about the distance between where the flashing starts and the roofing material starts – it is not just little things like that; it comes down to some serious structural issues as well. So in watching probably about half an hour of that and going down a real YouTube rabbit hole, I was reflecting on why it is so important to have a Building and Plumbing Commission set up with a single bill that we can refer to when it comes to those powers of that commission to enforce the codes and make sure that people are not getting ripped off. It is because this is such a complex, complex industry.

The building, plumbing and construction industry is incredibly complex. I feel for some of those students that I encourage to go into the building industry, who now have to try and work their way through all these different standards and all these different regulations, but having one organisation set up to support builders and to support those inspectors as well to be able to do their job is so important. I think from a government point of view having this single reference to establish this commission after the work that we have done over the past 12 or 18 months to set them up through the existing legislation is so important, because it is incredibly complex.

Building a home is, as many have said, one of the single biggest investments most working Victorians will make in their lifetime. A lot of people out in Werribee, Wyndham Vale, Manor Lakes, Mambourin and all the new growth areas drop a lot of money into these new places, and it is only fair to expect that what they receive at the end of that journey is safe and is fit to live in and that the people doing the work are of good character and standing.

Recently I was fortunate enough to purchase my first home, after being a renter for a very long time. Having that process around purchasing the home but also the site inspection and the inspection around that, the conveyancing and all the other stuff – it was such a complicated process. But finding the resources through the BPC website to help us navigate that process was really, really handy. This work that they are doing with the Building and Plumbing Commission is not just about helping people who are in the industry, it is also about helping consumers as well.

Buying your first home is probably one of the only times you will ever go through this process. Very few people in my electorate will buy more than one house. You know, we are not like some of those in the leafy green suburbs that seem to have 12 or 15 houses on the books – we will very rarely have more than one. There may be some with two. But out in Werribee, where the Minister for Environment does not live, however – he is more than welcome to come and visit any time – we usually only have one or two houses to our names, so it is particularly important that we have legislation that is consistent and that is a one-stop shop to understand what we are doing with the Building and Plumbing Commission.

It is a common story that we see right across the western suburbs, but it disturbs me – some of those figures that the member for Frankston, who has also seen a lot of growth in parts of his electorate with new houses, raised – to hear those rates of defects from the Centre for International Economics estimates of 1.04 defects per dwelling. It is particularly disturbing that there are so many. I understand that constructing a new building is quite complicated, but it is quite disturbing that they are so high. Having something like the BPC set up so that we can work with the industry to make sure that as they build things, they are getting done properly – to use some of those principles that come from quality assurance, maybe from Japan, where they actually fix things as they go rather than finding them at the end of the process – is really important. A lot of those different practices that we see around the world – we should be bringing that knowledge in and leveraging off the knowledge that is already in our industry to make sure that we have fewer defects. As the member for Frankston also observed – and it was a particularly disturbing figure – defects cost around $675 million per year to the Victorian economy. That is money that would probably be best spent with those people building the houses that are probably their first homes or what they have dreamed about having for such a long time.

The three main objectives of the bill – establish the principal act to have that integrated administration and enforcement all in one act, legally establish the Building and Plumbing Commission as the successor to the Victorian Building Authority and equip the BPC with that stronger enforcement power – are so important to make sure that we can continue to have a good regime that supports people as they go through this endeavour. Because, like I said, it is probably the one and only time you will ever build a house – your first house – for the majority of Victorians. By improving clarity, consistency and accountability across that lifecycle of building and plumbing work – it is not just when they get first built out the back of Wyndham Vale or places like that, it is also about those that have already been built or works that might already be happening.

One of the great things about being a parliamentarian is when this legislation comes through, it also gives you pause for thought about what is happening in your own community or in your own life. I recently asked someone to come in and fix my kitchen up and do a bit of building work. In preparing to talk to this builder, I went and actually searched them on the BPC website to make sure that they were licensed to do the work, and they are indeed licensed to do the work – they are a great local business. But it is good that that support is there for people who are going to be dropping quite a lot of money into something that they want to live in. And it is a lot of money for my partner and I. We do not come from means – we were not born with silver spoons in our mouths, certainly. We have had to work very hard to get to where we are today.

We all know that the affordability and availability of housing is the most pressing issue, and I have spoken about this many times in this house. The issue of supply is one of the biggest issues when it comes to the affordability of houses, and we have seen a lot of statistics recently showing that Victoria is one of the most affordable places across Australia to be able to purchase a house – although it is still a lot of money to drop. But support services out there, particularly things like the 5 per cent first home buyer guaranteed deposit, which the Commonwealth has taken over from the state, is a particularly important way to get more people into that.

There have been other states that have sought to water down building controls, but we continue to build more homes and build them well. I think having this bill is first and foremost about protecting consumers. No working family should be forced to take on the responsibility, cost and time to fix defective building work. You put a lot of trust into someone that you drop thousands of dollars to, and you want to make sure that that work is being done by someone of good standing but also someone who has the technical knowledge to be able to fix things as they go, acknowledging it is a complicated industry and not every site is the same and not every job is the same. Having that clear building system objective in the act, which I note is something that has been in the last few acts that we have discussed in the house around having objectives set in the legislation, sets the principles behind what we are doing in those spaces. We recently saw it in the Safe Food Victoria Bill 2026 as well, which I think is a really innovative and good way of making sure that all our organisations, departments and authorities are meeting those objectives, particularly that objective where it is about putting the consumers at the heart of the system and putting safety at the heart of the system as well. Having those strong powers is particularly important.

In the time I have left, we have seen a lot of dodgy contractors, a lot of dodgy builders, working out the back of Werribee and Wyndham Vale and Manor Lakes, and I have had a lot of people come to me as well about this work. So we are giving the BPC those strong powers, including the proactive powers to combat that dodgy building practice but also to work with the industry and help support them to fix things as they go. This is not just a slap on the wrist; it is about getting out there and changing that practice across the industry. This is a really important bill, particularly for people in my growing suburb, and I commend the bill to the house.

 Sarah CONNOLLY (Laverton) (11:42): I too rise to speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. I have been here in this place for almost eight years, and I have seen hundreds of pieces of legislation and policy reform come before this place. I have had thousands of conversations with constituents. I have spent hundreds of hours talking about legislation and having these conversations with constituents at my dining table with my family, and I have to say – and I will talk about this later tonight with my family – that this is one of the most important bills to come before this house. The establishment of the Building and Plumbing Commission is perhaps one of the most important things that this Labor government has done in the almost 12 years it has been in government. I am going to tell you why, and it is extremely personal.

I think it was last week when we had that really heavy downfall of rain, that sort of torrential rain, overnight. I think 3 am was the worst of it, because I had to get up at 3 am. We moved into a property that has been built, a townhouse. I have spent many years as a renter, and we finally built our townhouse and we moved in. Our neighbours, the other four townhouses connected to us, have had extensive defects. I am going to name the company; it was AVJennings. You might say, ‘Hey, they’ve been around for a while.’ AVJennings – I am not sure if they are still operational here in Victoria. I know they have been bought out by AVID because now the defects that my neighbours and I are having to deal with go through a new company, through AVID, who have been slightly better on the communications than AVJennings. But at 3 am we had to get up and we had to check that there were not leaks in our house, because our neighbours were experiencing water coming through. Not coming through the roof, thank God – if you have problems with the roof, it is pretty serious – but through the downstairs bedroom. We ran down to my daughter’s room, and sure enough, water is coming through her roof. I think it was a Thursday night, because she had an exam on Friday morning and she stayed at home. She actually missed the exam. She was very upset; she was in tears. She had to get up at 3 am and come into my bed to go to sleep, because we had to put a bucket on her bed to catch the water coming through the roof. The reason why this has happened is because we had a dodgy builder, and that was AVJennings. Thousands of people across this country have built homes with AVJennings.

There is commercial real estate that has been built through AVJennings, including the property that I live in. We went with AVJennings because we thought they were reputable and would do a good job. Well, over the last 12 months we have found out they have done anything but, and I can tell you, it is a horror situation. People say to me, ‘How do you deal with stress?’ There is nothing stressful about this job compared to trying to deal with defects in a property where your dodgy developer and builder does not really exist anymore and you are having to deal with the a company that operates out of Broadbeach, Queensland. What has happened in our property – this is how bad it can be, and this is why this legislation and the Building and Plumbing Commission are just so important and will make absolute change in significant ways. Unless it has happened to you, you can never fully understand.

The waterproofing on our balcony: apparently the way in which that is installed and has to be done requires licensed people to do it – people who actually know what they are doing – and you always hope that the site supervisor is supervising tradies. They have come on and they have not done the waterproofing properly, so the balcony is leaking into the downstairs bedroom, and not on just our property, but in five properties. When I went for a walk in the evening with my dog, I was stopped the other day – this was shortly after the rain – and there was a neighbour from the townhouses and the apartments behind us who said, ‘I just want to reach out and say I feel your pain.’ I said, ‘What do you mean?’ And he said, ‘Well, I know you guys also have the same dodgy developer.’ There are up to 19 balconies as part of this precinct that have defects – the same defect – because the same dodgy builder had the same dodgy tradie, who probably was not licensed and accredited, I do not know, waterproof these balconies. The actual cost, I heard haphazardly, to the new builder who has bought out AVJennings is coming close to a million bucks for 19 balconies. This is just one of many defects. So when I say to you that this legislation is so important, I say to colleagues on this side of the house and to those opposite: unless it has happened to you, you will never fully understand how important this legislation is. When I saw it on the list for today, I thought, ‘This is amazing,’ but what I really hope I do not have to do is go ahead and use it. My neighbours probably will have to. Their buildings are in a lot worse condition than mine. We love where we are. We are very happy. We have no intention of moving. But the shock and horror that you can think you have a reputable developer like AVJennings build a property, only to be told by the people that have bought it out – and they have done full site investigations – that it is one of the worst jobs they have ever seen, is absolutely appalling. The fact that these people will get away with it and have made money from it is just beyond reprehensible. It is hard to imagine.

I do want to thank the minister, and I want to thank the Premier and the government – my own government – for bringing on this legislation and for affording protections to people just trying to build a house wherever, or an apartment or a townhouse. Unfortunately, in this state the building industry does have dodgy operators within it. I am not saying they are all dodgy, but when we are in the process of trying to build 800,000 homes, what I would say is protections must be in place for the buyers and the builders.

I do truly think that the Building and Plumbing Commission is such an important and integral part of the journey of anyone trying to build their dream home. I hope it is not a journey that, like I said, I will have to delve into, but I do not like to think that I will be here again talking about an experience, or I hope it will be a positive one. The watchdog now has teeth and it needs to use it so the building industry know it is game on. You cannot have dodgy tradies coming onto sites doing defective work and not being supervised, whether they know the work is defective or not or they are cutting costs, and then walk away and the cost then landing on the home owner or, in our situation, the company that has bought out AVJennings.

Now we have been dealing with these defects for the past 12 months, and when you have a new build, you kind of go, ‘Okay, all right, we have got defects in the paint. This might not be screwed on.’ All right, you can accept that, but when you are talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars – like I said, I think 19 balconies almost at a cost of around a million bucks – I mean, that is just absolutely shoddy work, and it needs to be called out.

There is lots of reform we have been doing in this space, and I have been watching it unfold over the past eight years. Representing a community where there are thousands of new homes being built, thousands of new townhouses and apartments, particularly in Melbourne’s outer west, there is nothing more tragic than sitting down with grown men in my office in tears, with me consoling them about the dodgy defects in their properties. Having experienced it myself now, the empathy and the sympathy are from real lived experience. I too want to sit there with my head in my hands, but what I can say to my community and Victorians is that Labor has your back. If you are currently experiencing this, we are going to give you the opportunity to chase these people and get the justice you deserve, or if you are going to be building your dream home – I do not care whether it is your first, second or whatever – you will have protections, because the money that goes into building these properties is huge. It is usually a once-in-a-lifetime spend, and people do need protections.

What I would say to the building industry is that, for the good operators who are doing the right thing, the dodgy ones need to be called out. You cannot have them subcontracting on your site. These sorts of defects really do affect families. They cost a lot of money and they certainly can ruin the experience. What homebuyers and home owners are wanting is to have such a joyful experience when they move in. I am dreading the next downfall of rain. I know who is going to be asleep in the bed next to me. But this is truly a wonderful, wonderful bill before the house, and I commend the minister for bringing it through this week.

 Dylan WIGHT (Tarneit) (11:52): It gives me great pleasure to rise this morning to make a contribution in favour of the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026, because you cannot be a government that want to build more homes unless you are a government that want to protect those consumers that are making the biggest investment, in all likelihood, that they will make at any time in their lives.

We have to protect consumers from unscrupulous behaviour within the construction industry. I have been a member of this place now for 3½ years, and like the member for Laverton and like the member for Kalkallo, the minister at the table, I represent an incredibly fast-growing area where thousands and thousands of homes are being built every single year. In the 3½ years that I have been a member, I cannot count on two hands the amount of constituents that have sat in my office and told me an absolutely nightmarish story about a construction company that has built their dream then phoenixed – you know, shut down – and how now they are left with dozens and dozens of defects all the way through their home and are trying to go through what is a horrendous process to try and get those fixed. I have had people in tears in my office that have spent their life savings to build their dream home just for it to be crumbling around their ears a couple of weeks later, with no company left to hold accountable. I concur with the member for Laverton. This is one of the more practical and important pieces of legislation that I have had the pleasure to support in this place for the 3½ years that I have been a member, because I know how much it means to the families that have been affected in this way in my electorate of Tarneit.

I note the reasoned amendment from the opposition, which in my view is diabolical. How can any opposition of good standing say that we should delay the passage of this bill whilst there are families out there, like I said, who have embarked on a dream to build their own home and had it turn into an utter nightmare? I think they cited consultation as part of their reason amendment, which we all know is false. It is just to delay the passage of this bill because they have some backers in the industry that do not like it, and shame on them for doing so.

As I said, we are not just a government that want to build more homes for Victorians where they want them, but we are also a government that want to protect consumers from what has been, from time to time, unscrupulous behaviour within this industry. With the house’s indulgence, because it is slightly left of the scope of this piece of legislation, we all remember the case of Porter Davis only a couple of years ago, where fantastic families in our growing suburbs, and many families in my electorate of Tarneit, were left holding the bag with half-constructed homes after a large building company went into administration and indeed continued to take deposits and trade whilst insolvent. The government stepped in at that time to support those families, and this piece of legislation is another example of government intervention to protect working families and to protect Victorians from their dream becoming an utter nightmare. When homebuyers are left to fight dodgy builders on their own, or indeed when those builders no longer exist, they can be exposed to debilitating debt and to heartbreak. Like I said, there are some examples that I have encountered in my own electorate, with my own constituents. It literally breaks your heart as a member to have those conversations and to see, at times, how helpless those families are in trying to recoup the losses that they have encountered. So it is an incredibly important piece of legislation. I think it is incredibly important and practical to have the one regulator in this space. Like I said, building more homes starts with building better quality homes, and if homebuyers are more confident in the system and in the lasting quality of a new home, especially with off-the-plan apartments, they are more likely to buy.

This is obviously pertinent timing for legislation like this, given the housing statement that we released some years ago now – I think 2½°years ago – and our plan to build more homes in places where people want them. Outer suburban Melbourne – in the south-east, in the north and in the west – has shouldered the load of housing growth for far too long. We have shouldered the load in a disproportionate way. That is why the activity centres that have been announced as part of that housing statement are so incredibly important. Making sure that 70 per cent of new homes are built near existing infrastructure, like train stations, upgraded roads and schools – that critical infrastructure that Victorian families need to make the place that they live a home – is incredibly important. I know how incredibly popular it is in places like Tarneit which, as I said, have been shouldering the load for too long.

Recently the opposition released their response to our housing statement – their own housing policy, which is more of the same. They are not opposed to some further height limits as long as they are not in their electorates, so they have gone out of the eastern suburbs and, I believe, to Fitzroy, Brunswick and Collingwood, because not many Liberal voters live there. But they have also come out and said bluntly that they plan to stick tens of thousands more homes in the outer suburbs, which are already bursting.

They do so at the same time as coming in here every time there is a bill of this nature and criticising infrastructure levies. They come in here and they criticise infrastructure levies that developers have to pay to be able to build and fund the critical infrastructure that is needed in greenfield sites. At some point the opposition will have to come clean with its plan: you are going to build more houses in the outer suburbs, and you are also going to reduce infrastructure contributions from developers, and you are also going to reduce spending and debt and have a higher surplus et cetera. They are going to have to come clean with the Victorian people at some point and people in the outer suburbs that what they are planning to do is to repeat the mistakes from the past of the member for Bulleen – I have spoken about the Tarneit North Precinct Structure Plan in this place before – and build tens of thousands more homes in our outer suburbs without any plans for infrastructure or transport infrastructure, without any plans for health infrastructure, without any plans for play spaces or for outdoor recreational spaces and without any plans for health infrastructure, because in their housing plan, there is no way to pay for it. In contrast, we will build new homes near existing infrastructure and near existing train stations so people can live the life that they deserve to live close to where they grew up if they choose, close to existing transport infrastructure and close to fantastic schools as well.

At the beginning of this contribution I said that you cannot be a government that plans to build more homes and that wants to build more homes – we are building more than any other state in Australia – if you do not want to be a government that looks after consumers, and that is exactly what this piece of legislation does. I commend it to the house.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Wayne Farnham): Just before I call the member for Bass, I will remind members that ‘you’ is a reflection on the Chair and to please refrain from using that terminology.

 Jordan CRUGNALE (Bass) (12:02): I rise to speak in support of the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. As we have heard, Victorians invest their savings, their time and their trust into their homes and families and everyone expects that investment to deliver safety, quality and long-term security, and this bill strengthens that expectation. It gives Victorians confidence when they build, buy or renovate. It delivers assurance that homes meet proper standards and reflect the value people pay for them. This legislation places protection of Victorian households at its centre, and it strengthens the confidence across the housing system and supports a more reliable pathway to home ownership and improvement. The effectiveness of the building regulator directly shapes the quality of homes delivered across our state. As Victoria continues to grow, new communities emerge near transport, jobs and services, and this growth demands a regulatory system that is strong, coordinated and responsive.

In 2024 the Victorian Building Authority commissioned an independent review following concerns raised by consumers, and the findings confirmed systemic weaknesses and highlighted the need for structural reform. The government responded with decisive action. The creation of the Building and Plumbing Commission brought together the functions of the Victorian Building Authority, Domestic Building Dispute Resolution Victoria and domestic building insurance, and this integration marked a significant step towards a more cohesive regulatory system. This bill completes the final step by formally establishing the commission and embedding its authority within a new legislative framework.

The bill delivers three clear outcomes: it establishes a new principal act that consolidates administration and enforcement across the building and plumbing system, it formally establishes the Building and Plumbing Commission as the successor to the Victorian Building Authority and it equips the commission with stronger enforcement powers to uphold standards and protect consumers. These reforms create a modern foundation for regulation. They replace fragmented arrangements with a unified and coherent system. They provide clarity for industry participants and stronger safeguards for the public.

This bill represents the most significant transformation of the building regulatory framework since the introduction of the act in 1993. Over three decades amendments and additions have layered complexity into the act, and the system has grown harder to navigate and more difficult to enforce. This bill introduces a clean, structured and contemporary legislative approach, and these reforms align with the government’s broader agenda.

The housing statement prioritises speed, supply and efficiency. Victorians need more homes delivered faster and in the right locations. The building statement prioritises integrity, accountability and strong oversight, and Victorians expect homes that are safe, durable and built to a high standard. This bill brings these priorities together. It supports increased housing supply while strengthening system integrity, and it ensures that growth in construction aligns with quality and safety expectations. Clear legislation supports this outcome. Defined roles and responsibilities reduce confusion. Strong monitoring powers allow earlier identification of risks. Early intervention enables faster resolution of issues. These elements work together to support timely delivery of housing while maintaining high standards.

Recent events have shaped the urgency of these reforms. High-profile failures within the building industry have eroded public confidence. The widespread use of combustible cladding created serious safety risks and financial burdens. The collapse of Porter Davis Homes in 2023, like many others, has left families facing uncertainty and loss. These events exposed weaknesses in oversight, enforcement and consumer protection, and this bill addresses those weaknesses directly. It responds to priority reform areas endorsed by the housing and building committee. It advances the development of an integrated one-stop shop regulator. It strengthens enforcement powers to ensure effective action where required.

The policy underpinning this bill has undergone thorough consideration. Cabinet endorsed the model for the integrated regulator, gave approval to draft the legislation, followed ongoing consultation, refined the framework and ensured its practicality. Consultation has played a central role in shaping this bill. The department engaged extensively with industry representatives, consumer advocates and legal experts. Workshops explored regulatory powers and system objectives. Surveys gathered feedback on key proposals, and advisory groups provided ongoing input throughout 2025 and 2026. This collaborative process strengthened the final design and ensured the legislation reflects both operational realities and community expectations, and the impact on consumers stands at the forefront of this reform.

The bill introduces a clear building system objective centred on consumer safety and health. This objective guides decision-making across the entire system. Regulators, builders and all participants align their actions with this shared purpose. Stronger enforcement powers support this objective. The Building and Plumbing Commission gains a comprehensive suite of tools. These tools allow early intervention in minor matters and decisive action in serious cases. This approach reduces harm and prevents escalation. Improved information-sharing provisions enhance the commission’s ability to act quickly. Access to relevant data supports timely responses and reduces risks for consumers. The continued role of the building monitor ensures ongoing attention to systemic issues. Emerging risks can be identified early and addressed effectively, and these measures create a system that is easier to navigate, more responsive and more protective.

The bill also delivers important benefits for builders. A modern legislative framework provides clarity and consistency. Builders operate with a clear understanding of obligations and expectations, and this reduces in turn uncertainty and supports compliance. Early intervention tools such as improvement notices offer practical advantages. Builders receive timely guidance on compliance gaps. They can address issues before they escalate into disciplinary action or prosecution, and this approach reduces costs and protects professional reputations.

The enforcement framework reflects proportionality. Actions must match the scale and severity of wrongdoing. This ensures fairness and supports confidence in regulatory processes. Stronger oversight removes poor practices from the industry. Unregistered and noncompliant operators face greater scrutiny and consequences, and this creates a fairer competitive environment. Businesses succeed through quality, innovation and productivity. Increased trust in the regulatory system encourages investment. It supports economic activity and strengthens the building sector as a whole.

Plumbers also benefit from these reforms. The bill delivers a consistent and transparent framework for regulation. It aligns disciplinary arrangements across builders and plumbers, promoting fairness and equity. Stronger oversight supports high standards of workmanship. It removes operators who undermine the reputation of the profession and ensures that compliant plumbers compete on equal terms. Existing arrangements for licensing and registration continue under the Building Act 1993 and the Plumbing Regulations 2018. The bill strengthens the broader system while maintaining the established processes where appropriate.

The building system objective reinforces the importance of safe and effective outcomes. Compliance involves meeting standards and exercising professional judgement to achieve these outcomes. Design choices, construction methods and approval decisions reflect this focus. Building surveyors, inspectors and practitioners demonstrate how their work supports safety and public wellbeing. Existing compliance documentation already supports these expectations. The reform clarifies and reinforces them. It creates alignment across the system without introducing unnecessary burden.

The bill is about restoring confidence in the system, in the regulator and in the law itself. It recognises past failures and fixes them. It puts safety and consumers where they belong – at the centre. It supports good industry practice and removes incentives for wrongdoing. Ultimately it sends a clear message to all Victorians: when you build or buy a home in this state, the rules matter, safety comes first and accountability is real. I commend the bill to the house.

 John MULLAHY (Glen Waverley) (12:12): I rise to speak in strong support of the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026, and this is an important reform. It goes to something deeply personal for every Victorian – the place they call home. For most people, their home is not just a financial investment, it is where they raise their children, it is where they feel safe and it is where their life happens. When that goes wrong, when the building work is defective, when the plumbing fails and when corners are cut, the consequences are not just financial, they are emotional. They are deeply stressful, and too often they are life disrupting. That is why this bill matters, because at its core this bill is about protecting consumers and protecting families from exactly that kind of harm.

I want to start with the reality of what people experience when the system fails. In my electorate of Glen Waverley, I have had residents come to me with stories that, frankly, should not have happened in a modern, well-regulated building system. I have met families who saved for years, sometimes decades, to renovate their home. They trusted a builder, they signed a contract and they did everything right, and then the problems began – water leaking through ceilings within months of completion, bathrooms that were never properly waterproofed and pipes that were incorrectly installed, leading to mould, structural damage and thousands upon thousands of dollars in rectification costs.

[NAMES AWAITING VERIFICATION]

I heard of an experience from Brian and Lyn, who were basically at the end of their working career. They had their big family home there in Vermont, and they wanted to downsize to a smaller property that was more manageable for them in their retirement. They paid the builder. It all got built. Then three weeks after moving in they started smelling a sewer smell that was coming up through the laundry, so they went back to the builder and asked them to rectify the issue. The builder then sent out the plumber that had done the original work, who said, ‘Oh yeah, it’s a bit wrong. I’m going to go and fix it, and I’ll change whatever the levels were.’ Well, she did not want to have that plumber back. He did not do the work properly in the first place. So it got into a battle between her and the builder about trying to get those works rectified. When she and Brian came to see me, you could see that they were not sleeping. You could see the stress on their faces. You could just see all of this pain that they were experiencing with this administrative nightmare of trying to get these things rectified.

The system, as it was two years ago, did not really help them at that stage. I am hoping things like this will help to make a difference, so that when people make these big, life-altering decisions they will have an understanding that if they have got a problem it will get fixed.

Another constituent told me about a builder who simply disappeared mid-project – no answers, no accountability, just an unfinished home that left the family in limbo. These are not isolated stories. We have all got stories here. We are all telling stories here in this chamber today. They point to a simple truth where the system fails to hold bad actors to account and it is the ordinary people that pay the price. That is why one of the most important aspects of this bill is the creation of a stronger and more powerful regulator in the Building and Plumbing Commission. For too long the system has been fragmented with responsibilities spread across different bodies, gaps in enforcement and delays in resolving disputes – this bill changes that. It brings regulation, insurance and dispute resolution together under one roof. It creates a single integrated watchdog with real teeth, not just to respond after harm has occurred but to intervene early and prevent harm in the first place. That matters, because a regulator that can act early, that can issue improvement notices and that can step in before defects escalate is a regulator that actually protects people.

This bill also does something fundamental that has been missing in our system for too long: it puts consumers at the centre. For the first time it establishes a clear building systems objective to protect the health and safety of occupants and the public. That might sound simple, but it is powerful because it means that every decision, whether by the builder, a surveyor or a regulator, must be guided by that principle – not by profit, not by convenience and not by cutting corners but by safety, quality and accountability, and that is exactly where the focus should be.

I want to speak about enforcement, because this is where the rubber hits the road. We all know that the vast majority of builders and plumbers in this state do the right thing. They take pride in their work, they build homes that last generations and they deserve our respect. But we also know that there are those who do the wrong thing. The reality is that under the old system the consequences were often not strong enough. For some operators a fine was simply the cost of doing business – this bill changes that. It introduces a modern enforcement framework, including stronger investigation powers, civil penalties and the ability for courts to strip profits from those who cut corners and put people’s lives at risk. It introduces new disciplinary powers, including the ability to suspend or cancel licences quickly where there is a serious risk to consumers. Importantly, it introduces director liability, because too often we have seen phoenixing behaviour where a company walks away from its obligations leaving consumers to pick up the pieces, only for the same operators to re-emerge under a new name. This bill says, ‘No more.’ If you were a director and you allowed that to happen, you will be held accountable. I will bring up the guy again: Frank Nadinic from Maxstra, who set up many, many, many companies using different dates of birth and different cities of birth. He would often just phoenix the companies, leaving many people in the lurch, especially subcontractors, and just put so much harm and pain through our community.

I want to return briefly to the human impact, because behind every clause in this bill is a person, a family, a story. It is the young couple who bought their first home only to discover major defects months later. It is the retiree who invested their life savings into building a new house, just like Brian and Lyn, only to spend their retirement fighting for repairs. It is the family living with buckets, catching water from a leaking roof, wondering how it all went so wrong. These are all real experiences and they go to the heart of why reform is needed. When somebody buys or builds a home, they should not have to become an expert in legal disputes just to get what they had paid for. They should not have to chase builders and insurance regulators just to fix those defects. They should be able to trust the system. This bill is about restoring that trust. It modernises dispute resolution processes so they are faster and easier to navigate, it strengthens insurance arrangements so consumers can access support more quickly when things go wrong, it improves information sharing so regulators can act on risks earlier and more effectively, and it creates clearer roles and responsibilities across the system so everyone knows who is accountable for what. Importantly, this bill supports the broader challenge we face as a state delivering more homes. We know we need to build more homes to meet demand, but we cannot do that at the expense of quality, because building more homes only works if people have confidence in what is being built, confidence that their homes will be safe, confidence that defects will be fixed and confidence that the system will back them if something goes wrong.

This bill helps deliver that confidence, and that in turn supports investment, supports industry and supports the delivery of new housing across this state. There is a phrase I have heard from constituents more than once: ‘We just wanted someone to be on our side.’ That is what this bill does – it puts the system on the side of consumers. It says that when things go wrong, there will be accountability. It says that those who do the right thing will be supported and those who do the wrong thing will face consequences. And it says that the safety and wellbeing of Victorians will always come first.

I do like to have a good conversation with the member for Narracan often about building and plumbing and the industry as a whole. We have many disagreements with regard to how things are done, but we do care for the people of Victoria. We care about them being able to have a home that has been built right, built correctly and delivered how it should be. I know the member for Morwell and I have good conversations on that as well. We just want to make sure that we have good quality homes for our constituents and that when they pay for a home, they get what they have paid for.

In closing, this is a significant reform. It is a once-in-a-generation overhaul of how we regulate building and plumbing in this state. It is about fairness, it is about accountability and ultimately, it is about protecting people, protecting families and protecting the place they call home. I commend the bill to the house.

 Iwan WALTERS (Greenvale) (12:22): I also rise to speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. It has been interesting listening to the variety of contributions from across the chamber on what I think is actually quite an important bill – an important bill because it really gets to the heart of a functioning market. This is something I am really interested in from the perspective of policy but also as a local representative, where you see the consequences of when markets fail and when you have informational asymmetries between a builder and somebody – that very small cohort of builders who do the wrong thing, who cut corners or who engage a subbie who may not be qualified for the job. As the member for Laverton so powerfully canvassed in her contribution in the context of waterproofing, someone may know that the job has not been done well, but the person buying a new property – or buying a second-hand property that is not necessarily a new build but that continues to have defects – does not know about that. So a bill which seeks to improve those information asymmetries, improve consumer confidence in the market and enable the market to function better I think is a good bill.

It comes off the back of the Cladding Safety Victoria Repeal Bill 2026, which we debated earlier in the week and which I also contributed to. I think it is another example of where challenging practices in the context of the construction sector have undermined confidence and undermined investment. Turning back to some of the contributions that have been made on this bill, Acting Speaker Farnham, I was particularly interested, when I was sitting in the chair, in your own contribution when you were wearing the member for Narracan hat. I respect your extensive experience as a practitioner in the building trade and your contribution to home building in West Gippsland and environs. But I do disagree with some of the points that you made in your contribution. Without reflecting on the Chair, I might seek to deal with some of those. I think they have also been made by others opposite throughout the debate – suggestions that the bill will impose an unmanageable compliance burden upon the construction sector and also financial obligations that will completely erode building activity in the state.

My perspective is somewhat different, looking at it from a systemic perspective, because when you have a complete loss of confidence – this can happen when, for example, you have got flammable cladding on the side of high-rise buildings – it is understandable in that instance that fewer people will want to transact or to purchase an off-the-plan apartment. At a time of significant population growth and with a need to build the housing that will provide homes to people in Victoria, in that context of a growing state, that confidence is really important.

So I come back to that point that market failure can exist when there is not an adequate information base and confidence base for consumers when they are making what will be the most significant decisions and investments in their lives.

I also look at it from the perspective of the vast majority of builders, who are, as you made the point in your own contribution, Acting Speaker Farnham, mum-and-dad operators who are doing the right thing and who are working really hard on behalf of their clients to develop homes, deliver homes which are safe and compliant and do not have the kinds of issues that the Building and Plumbing Administration Enforcement Bill is seeking to address. But it is those good operators who are most exposed in some respects by the conduct of dodgy operators, because their conduct has a chilling effect upon the whole market. It diminishes confidence, it diminishes investment appetite and it means that those who are doing the right thing, and who probably have a higher cost base as a consequence and are being undercut by those who are actively and knowingly doing the wrong thing, are the market operators who are most exposed and most damaged by that conduct. That is why, again, taking a contrary position to the contributions of those opposite, I think this is a bill which injects greater market confidence and greater certainty for those good providers.

I touched upon the member for Laverton’s contribution earlier. She is not in her chair, but the member for Laverton is still in the chamber. That was a really powerful example of why the provisions in this bill are necessary, because it does wreak havoc on people’s lives in a real and tangible way. I think all of us, particularly those of us perhaps in growth corridors – or like my community in Greenvale, where there is a lot of infill development, where acreage blocks have been chopped up over the last decade and a half and a much greater density of housing has been built – have constituents who have had some of the most challenging circumstances they are ever likely to confront in their lives because of two principal reasons. One, they have been left with a dodgy product that is fundamentally unsafe, unsound, and has created massive challenges for their families. As you put it as well in your contribution I think, Acting Speaker Farnham, waterproofing seems to be at the core of so many of these issues. I am not a plumber, I am not a builder, but I do have a basic appreciation of how water can enter and flow, and it will find that weakest point. That is why getting that right the first time around is so important, because the consequences that stem or that flow – an unfortunate pun – from a lack of adequate waterproofing, like mould and the destruction of internal plastering and so forth that can come from that, adds huge burdens onto people, which current arrangements have to meet privately or which have been socialised back onto the taxpayer.

The other issue that has arisen in a similar vein – and the member for Tarneit mentioned this in his contribution, and I think it is germane to this debate – is the collapse of Porter Davis. Again, informational asymmetries existed between the builder, in the form of Porter Davis, and their clients on the basis that clients in good faith thought that their builder had taken out insurance on their behalf, and when they did not and when that entity collapsed, it left mums and dads in my electorate, families who were building their first home, holding the bag. We as a government intervened to correct that, but that comes at a cost, and it comes at a cost to the taxpayers who are socialising the responsibilities that should be borne and discharged by the builder in the first instance. It is why regulatory and legislative change like this bill with the Building and Plumbing Commission I think is required in instances like that – to strengthen consumer protection. There is always a tension between ensuring that consumer protection is adequate without creating unnecessary and undue compliance burdens.

But we have seen such egregious examples of market failure that have imposed incredible and frankly unsustainable costs upon individual consumers – that language can be too abstract. They have imposed real financial hardship on the people we represent, on the families that I have spoken to, who, as the member for Laverton said, are in tears, who are utterly distraught, because they have seen what they thought was already the biggest investment they were ever going to make in their lives either go up in smoke, proverbially, or have an extra couple of hundred thousand dollars added to it that they do not have, to rectify, to make good or to complete the build, in the context of Porter Davis collapsing. As someone who is cognisant of that need to strike a balance and to avoid imposing excessive compliance burdens upon those operators in any market – builders in the context of this market – who are doing the right thing, I do come back to that basic principle that it is the job of government to ensure that punters are not left holding the bag, as it were, but also that there is a duty upon government to ensure that it is not taxpayers collectively who are left to pick up the pieces and socialise the losses of market operators who should have been doing the right thing in the first place.

I have seen that happen too often in Greenvale. I have seen it happen through the media in other parts of Victoria too. That is why it has been an interesting debate, because so many people have drawn upon individual examples from either their own community or, as the member for Laverton did, their own households where these things have not been done properly. At a time when a lot of the housing that is being built, across Melbourne in particular but I am sure down in Warragul and Drouin as well, is more townhouse-oriented developments that are new builds, a higher density form of development, or high-rise development, which is very hard to rectify, we need to get this right first. It needs to be done at that end of the pipeline so that consumers are not left holding the bag with prohibitive costs.

 Gary MAAS (Narre Warren South) (12:32): I too rise to speak in favour of the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. In doing so I would like to mention a business that operates in Narre Warren, right on the border of the member for Narre Warren North’s electorate and mine. They are called IAPMO, and they are a local plumbing and building regulation company that carries out testing, inspection and certification services. They are one branch of some several hundred that operate globally that perform these really vital testing services. I know that the group is celebrating its centenary this year. To have them operating out of Narre Warren South, where we see their industry-leading plumbing and mechanical services and the way they go about doing their certification, just means that everyday products that people use, such as heaters and cookers, are safe, because they perform the test to make sure that they meet that Australian standard. It is a terrific place. They train their employees there, and then they employ those plumbers who are trained there to perform that highly skilled work.

From a Victorian government perspective, we have also been very proud to support them as they adapt to new technologies, so it was with great pride recently that the member for Narre Warren North, the Minister for Economic Growth and Jobs and I were there to help officially open their new high-tech plant all the way down in our little part of the world. It was really terrific. The government assisted with funding for that project, and it just helps businesses like this to transition into a really high-tech business, ensuring that they are ready for a renewable energy future right here in Victoria. I wanted to kick off with that because they really are a terrific business that operates in our part of the world.

But to the bill itself, the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill is about giving Victorian families the support that they need to build or renovate their own home. It will help protect Victorian families from the risk of debilitating debt and heartbreak, with the legislation giving the Building and Plumbing Commission strong new powers to protect consumers and ensure dodgy builders face consequences. Building or buying a home is the single biggest investment that most of us make in our lifetimes, and Victorians rightly expect to get what they pay for.

Earlier this week I spoke on the Cladding Safety Victoria Repeal Bill 2026, and this bill similarly works to put consumers at the heart of the building system, because no matter whether Victorians are buying or renting they deserve to be able to do so with confidence that they will be moving into a safe, high-quality home that is free from defects. This is particularly true as we work to build more homes right across the state.

A new public interest objective will require builders to put health and safety at the centre of every build. This is the first time a common objective will apply across the entire system. Under the bill, the objective of the building system is to promote and protect the health and safety of building occupants and the public. The purpose of this objective is to define the fundamental goal that underpins all regulation and activity across Victoria’s building system. The objective makes clear that protecting the health and safety of building occupants and the public is paramount whenever building and plumbing work is carried out or is regulated.

You have heard other speakers speak to having a regulator with some teeth. Well, building or buying a home is the single biggest investment most working Victorians make, so families deserve to have the confidence that it will be done right. The bill does give the Building and Plumbing Commission stronger new powers to protect consumers and to ensure those dodgy builders do face consequences. This includes powers to proactively combat those practices and work with builders and plumbers to fix problems that were made earlier. The BPC will have new tools to enforce higher civil penalties as well as a broader scope to issue infringement notices and the ability to hold directors personally liable for wrongdoing. This includes changes making it harder for company directors to escape consequences by the phoenixing of those businesses.

In terms of civil penalties, the bill introduces a new regime which will enable the BPC to seek significant financial penalties. That will be a real deterrent to the most serious noncompliance. The ability to seek civil penalties will bring the BPC into line with other modern consumer regulators, including the Essential Services Commission as well as the EPA. Civil penalties can be large enough to strip companies of the profits they make from cutting corners and disregarding the health and safety of building occupants and the public. This will ensure that fines are not simply a cost of doing business for big and profitable companies.

Victoria’s program of reform is leading the nation by building more housing while ensuring consumers are protected. More homes are being built in Victoria than in any other state. While other states have sought to water down their building controls to catch up, Victoria continues to build more homes and to build them to the highest standards. The Allan Labor government is getting on with building more homes for Victorians who need them, and reforms like the ones which are proposed in this bill will make sure that we keep delivering the high-quality homes that Victorians deserve.

Let us take a look now at some of the housing policy from those in the opposition. You might recall that in 2017 the member for Brighton opposed a development in Hampton, and that was for the building of 207 new apartments. In 2018 he opposed a new public housing development delivering 300 new homes. In 2021 the member for Sandringham opposed a proposal to build 1048 apartments in Highett.

Cindy McLeish interjected.

Gary MAAS: In the middle of a housing affordability crisis, that is what we see from those opposite, and I am really glad that the member for Eildon took the bait as well.

This bill represents the most comprehensive overhaul of the system since the Building Act 1993 was introduced well over 30 years ago now. The scale of the change in the building and plumbing industries since the Building Act was introduced in 1993 is immense, and now is the time to usher in a new era with a new principal act and a transformed regulator in the Building and Plumbing Commission. On 24 October 2024 the government announced the Building and Plumbing Commission as Victoria’s new building regulator, with powers to deliver more protections for consumers, and in 2025 the Minister for Housing and Building released the building statement setting out its commitment to a safer, more trusted building system for Victoria.

In conclusion, this is a good bill. The bill complements the many reforms that have been made in the building and consumer space. It complements reforms in the Building Legislation Amendment (Buyer Protections) Act 2025 and the Domestic Building Contracts Amendment Act 2025, which really did begin the process of creating a more integrated and effective building regulator. It is a good bill, and I commend this bill to the house.

 Paul HAMER (Box Hill) (12:42): I too rise to make a contribution on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. As has been outlined by speakers before me, the bill will legally establish the Building and Plumbing Commission as a successor to the Victorian Building Authority, and it will equip the Building and Plumbing Commission with the stronger enforcement powers necessary to restore confidence in Victoria’s building system.

I have had the privilege of being in the chamber for the last couple of hours, first listening to contributions as the Acting Speaker and then sitting in for subsequent contributions. I must say, I was particularly moved by the member for Laverton’s contribution because of how much it resonated with my own experience. The experience that she is living through at this moment is very similar to the experience that we lived through about 15 years ago. We have had the good fortune of being able to upgrade and scale up our homes on a number of occasions. We have only purchased a new home once, and this home was a townhouse. We did not buy it off the plan. It was a fairly small builder who had developed the land into three townhouses. We bought the property when the structure was up but had not been fitted out, so it was about three months to completion. We went through all the occupancy. We moved into the home. We thought everything was going swimmingly – sorry, that was probably a bad pun, because a couple of months after we moved in we noticed a puddle in the kitchen downstairs, and we thought, ‘That’s odd, in a ground floor kitchen to have a puddle of what looks like water.’ There had been some rain, and it appeared to have been coming through the light fittings, through the downlights. It was really difficult to identify the problem. We thought, ‘Okay, well, maybe it was just a one-off.’ And then it started happening more frequently. At that time we contacted the builder, who could not be contacted, would not return any calls. They were still registered as a business but just had completely disappeared.

Then there was one evening – I remember it distinctly – in June, and I reckon we had about 4 inches of rain that evening. On that particular day there were significant floods, I think, particularly down in your area, Acting Speaker Farnham, in Gippsland. They had 200 or 300 mil of rain. In Melbourne we had about 4 inches of rain overnight, and the amount of water that had come into the garage was such that the whole ceiling of the garage was just sagging under the weight of water. I think it was probably my finest engineering moment that I had to actually cut open the ceiling and try and whip up some pipe that we had so that we could actually try and drain that into the garbage bin.

Members interjecting.

Paul HAMER: I know, I am not a licensed plumber, and I am not condoning any of that work. But in the case of an emergency, we had to do something to actually try and get the water away. Then that set off a very long-running saga to actually try and get the plumbing issue – and it was a waterproofing issue in the end – identified and get it repaired. As I said, the builder was nowhere to be seen. We could not make contact with him. He would not return our calls. He would not return any form of correspondence. We did try and seek some money or recompense from the builders warranty insurance. However, the insurance could not be activated because the builder was still solvent, so the insurance did not apply. Fortunately, we were in the position and we had both the skills and the resources that we could take the builder to VCAT. We managed to get an order that was successful, and then we were able to eventually get some money from the builder.

Our neighbours had a very similar situation to the one that the member for Laverton outlined. The three townhouses in our block all had exactly the same problem. They were all going down their own path, but they did not have access to or knowledge of the legal avenues that were available to them, or potentially the time and knowledge that would be required for that. They just had to deal with the problem themselves in terms of totally covering the cost of the repair. As demonstrated just even in the contributions that individual members are making today, this is not a unique problem. I mean, it has happened to me, it has happened to the member for Laverton and it has happened to a number of members. It has happened to many of our constituents, particularly in relation to some new builds.

There are many good builders out there as well, but it is really important that there are the mechanisms in place so that new home owners who perhaps do not have access to finance and the legal know-how to go through VCAT are supported in their consumer protection by the state. This is particularly in an environment at the moment where we are encouraging more housing and we know that more housing needs to be to be built. Our demographics are changing so that we are having fewer people living per house, so the number of houses needs to grow more quickly, in a way, than the population as a rate of growth. We will be seeing new housing. I think when we talk about the number of new houses, we are talking about almost a doubling of the housing stock that will have to be delivered over the next 30 years.

It is really critical that we have the appropriate consumer protections in place across the building sector. Waterproofing does seem to be an issue that comes up a lot. I am sure you, Acting Speaker, would have a lot of experience in that sector with how complicated and difficult that is. It is so important for families. Just again to reflect back on what the member for Laverton was saying, it has probably never been so stressful in that environment. At that time when you did not know where to turn to and you did not know what the problem was and were lying awake at night, hearing the rain come and saying, ‘What is this going to do? What damage is it going to do? Where is it going to go?’ You would feel really helpless and would feel that you do not have a solution in mind. It is even worse if you are in a situation where you do not have the financial means to address the solution at the time. I think this bill is a really important piece of legislation in terms of the aims that it is trying to achieve in adding to our consumer protections, particularly when it comes to that significant investment that is your home and is your primary asset. For that reason, I commend the bill to the house.

 Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (12:51): I stand today to speak on the Building and Plumbing Administration and Enforcement Bill 2026. As was said before I had the chance to speak, this is an incredibly important bill. We have heard many stories from around the chamber about awful situations that have occurred, and that is part of the reason as to why this bill is so important. It is important for Victoria, but it is particularly important for growing communities like mine in Kororoit. It has the fastest growing local government area in Australia, the Melton local government area. The overall objective of this bill is to establish a new principal act for the integrated administration and enforcement of building legislation and the building system. It is also to legally establish the Building and Plumbing Commission, the BPC, as a successor to the VBA, the Victorian Building Authority. Thirdly, it is to equip the BPC with the stronger enforcement power necessary to reinforce confidence in Victoria’s building system.

As we have heard, this bill will implement a new principal act to provide for the administration and enforcement of laws regulating the building and plumbing industries and building and plumbing work, but it will also deliver the government’s commitment to establish a new regulator that brings together all aspects of building quality control into a single agency by establishing the Building and Plumbing Commission. As we know, Labor fights for working people who are making the biggest investment in their entire lives, and that often is building or buying a home. When homebuyers are left to fight dodgy building work on their own, they can be exposed to debilitating debt and of course heartbreak. On the rare occasions where we find that changes like these need to be made, it is good to have consistent conversation with all across the aisle. So I am glad that there has been conversation happening with both the opposition and those across the chamber.

In Kororoit, people do not just talk about housing, they are literally building it. For anyone who has come out to my patch, you would know that originally out there were just acres and acres and acres of paddocks. The member for Melton Steve McGhie and I often reflect on the fact that it was just paddock after paddock but is not any longer. Now there are many houses. I remember when I was younger playing basketball against Melton, and it seemed to be forever away. You would drive up the highway – the highway has not changed much, but we will hopefully fix it – and you would literally just see paddocks for days and days and days. Those days are gone now. You have got a beautiful temple on one side – you have got many temples actually in that area – but then you have also got a lot of homes that are all being freshly built. I think on a monthly basis, as I drive around the electorate, I will often see a notice that there are another 20 or 30 brand new houses.

People in Kororoit are stretching every dollar to get into the market, and they are starting families and trying to create stability and their own family in the area. For many, building their home is their biggest investment, but if something goes wrong, it can be absolutely heartbreaking. Unfortunately, it is something that I see at my electorate office far too often. Our constituents do not come to us when things are running smoothly, and I think we can all attest to that. They come to us when something has gone wrong – when a builder has let them down, when a builder has stalled or defects have emerged, when communication has broken down. I can say very clearly that it simply is not fair. It is terrible to see hardworking people, families who have done the right thing and are trying to scrape together deposits, signing contracts in good faith and trusting that the system will deliver what they have paid for, only to be let down by a dodgy operator. That is exactly why this bill matters, because this bill is about restoring confidence and making sure that people across all of Victoria have confidence in our trades and in our builders.

Most builders do take pride in their work. We have all got mates who are tradies and very proudly so, but we as consumers want to know that when they are handing over the keys, it will stand the test of time. It only takes a small number of bad actors to cause tremendous heartache. When those bad actors are allowed to operate unchecked, they do not just hurt families, they undermine the entire industry. They undercut the good operators, and they erode the trust. That makes it hard for everybody. It is why stronger enforcement matters. It is why civil penalties matter. It is why holding company directors to account matters. It is why cracking down on phoenixing, the practice of shutting down one company and reopening another with no consequences, is so important. Importantly, this bill is not just about protecting homebuyers, it is also about protecting subcontractors and small businesses – the people who are out there every day working their guts out to build something for not only themselves but also their families. That pipeline of skilled workers will only become more important as our communities continue to grow.

Melbourne was recently voted the most livable city, and it is a city that we all want to live in. So irrespective of where your electorate is, whether it be Kororoit or Melton or Dandenong, more homes are being built, thanks to this government. It is why it is so encouraging to see the plumbers union keen to establish a new training facility in Melton, which could train up to 600 apprentices. I have been to some of these training facilities from the plumbers union, and I have got to say, they are absolutely tremendous and a great way to learn on the job but also off the job and have the right outfit needed for a training centre. These apprentices will create real opportunity for our community, one that will create local jobs, build skills and support the next generation of tradespeople. With support from both the state and federal members, I urge Melton City Council to also get behind this initiative and ensure that it can be delivered locally in Melton, like the plumbers union is trying to do.

I also note that my good friend the member for Melton, Steve McGhie, has also been a huge advocate in this space, and it is something we both hope to see come to fruition. Ultimately, this is about people in trades and businesses, people who want to do the right thing. They start small. They invest in their tools and their vehicles, staff and training, and they take risks. They back themselves and they deserve a system that backs them too. But too often they are exposed to risk from those higher up the chain who do not play by the rules. This bill is about confidence to buy. It is about confidence to build, and it is about confidence to invest. That confidence does not come from deregulation or turning a blind eye; it comes from strong, fair rules that protect people and create a level playing field. That is what this bill will deliver.

On this side of the house we are very focused on working people. We are focused on families, not just in Kororoit but across all of Victoria, who are saving for their first home, who are going to take that big step with the deposit that they have saved up. We are focused on tradies starting their own businesses. We are focused on small operators trying to do the right thing, and we are focused on making sure that the system works for them. But what do we see from those opposite?

The ACTING SPEAKER (Wayne Farnham): Member for Kororoit, you can continue your contribution after lunch.

Sitting suspended 1:00 pm until 2:02 pm.

Business interrupted under standing orders.

The SPEAKER: I would like to acknowledge in the gallery the Ambassador of Lebanon to Australia Her Excellency Mirna Khawly and the consul general in Melbourne Rami Hamidi.