Tuesday, 2 June 2026

 Sarah CONNOLLY (Laverton) (19:22): (1678) My adjournment is for the Minister for Planning, and the action I seek is that the minister update me on how the government is ensuring Melbourne’s future housing growth is more fairly distributed across the city, including by reducing pressure on outer suburban communities like those in Melbourne’s west. That remains a really important question, because the housing policy put forward by the Liberal Party makes very clear what their vision for Melbourne looks like: more growth on the suburban fringe and protection from change in their own established suburbs. For communities like mine, this is going to mean more families pushed further and further to the edge of the city and more pressure piled onto roads, onto schools and onto public transport and health services and all of the infrastructure outer suburban areas are still fighting to catch up on.

That is exactly why our Labor government has pursued activity centres in established areas close to trains, trams, jobs and services – because a growing community cannot be planned on the assumption that the outer fringe must always absorb the burden. Yet those opposite have made it clear that when it comes to these well-serviced suburbs their instinct is not to share responsibility for growth but to protect their own backyards from any meaningful change. They oppose the very activity centres designed to create more housing choice in areas with the infrastructure, the public transport and the employment access to support it. Their alternative is to fast-track more development on the fringe and tell outer suburban communities like mine to keep carrying the load – more homes for Truganina, more homes for Tarneit, more homes for Point Cook; less change for Kew, and less change for Brighton. That is the absolute substance of what they are offering.

Outer suburban communities like mine have already done more than their fair share in accommodating Melbourne’s growth. They should not be told yet again that they must keep taking more while better serviced suburbs are separated from contributing.

Our government takes a different view: if Melbourne is to grow, then that growth must be shared and it must be shared fairly across the city, including places with strong public transport links, established services and real access to jobs. Those opposite want to protect privilege in the inner east and push the consequences of growth into the outer west. That is the choice at the centre of their policy. And that is the reason I ask the minister to update me on how the government is ensuring Melbourne continues to grow in a fairer way and how it is standing up for outer suburban communities against a planning approach that would once again leave them carrying the burden alone.