I rise today to speak in support of the Sale of Land Amendment Bill 2019. I have to start by saying that it is a tremendous pleasure that this is the first bill that I have the privilege of being able to speak on in this house. It is a privilege because I have some pretty recent vivid memories of sitting down with families in Tarneit to talk about legislative loopholes like sunset clauses that have enabled dodgy developers to go ahead and rip off the very hardworking families across my community. I state from the outset that the amendments in this bill will without doubt protect families like those that I have spoken with. They will protect them from the heartache, the stress and devastation that is caused by the improper action of those seeking to gain further financial benefit in the building industry.

This is a bill that will address the imbalance of power that has taken root between consumers and vendors, developers and other business operators that have been complicit in what I can only call predatory and morally corrupt behaviour. While they are not representative of the wider industry, the actions of a few have stained an industry’s reputation, damaged consumer confidence and left countless Victorians in limbo, including families in Tarneit.

Under the current law, in recent years we have started to see a rise in the exploitation of everyday Victorians through the dodgy use of sunset clauses—clauses once designed to serve the purpose, a really good purpose, of providing safety, certainty and flexibility for businesses taking on financial risk that really does come with development, with building our homes and building our communities. Sunset clauses provide businesses with an emergency safeguard when things just do not go as planned. I think we can all appreciate that sometimes things do not go as planned and we really do need those safeguards. But the development of property, of housing and of our communities should be a mutually beneficial task, a task for all Victorians seeking an affordable place to call home and for the businesses that take the risk, provide employment and provide the goods and services we demand for the continued development of our state.

But on some occasions, including in the outer west, this is not what we have been seeing. Victoria is one of the fastest growing states in this great nation, and our economy is booming. Melbourne’s outer west is poised to grow into an economic powerhouse, a regional hub of business activity and employment opportunity. It is out there and, as the member for Cranbourne will soon be able to tell us, it is down there in the south-east—in the hotspots of growth, scattered around Melbourne’s fringe—that these few developers have taken root, ready to take advantage and ready to greedily exploit an already profitable industry boom at the expense of consumers and their competitors alike.

Exploiting sunset clauses in their current form has become a standard practice for some—to delay the construction or completion of homes for vaguely unspecified reasons, sometimes for months and, if necessary, for years. Once enough time has lapsed for a sunset clause to take effect, they then use it to cancel the contract and to onsell the property at a much higher price. These are the stories that I have been told in my community. These are homes that Victorians have invested their futures in, homes they have poured their life savings into and homes they are waiting to move into, settle down and raise a family. This unfair practice cannot be allowed to go on.

So many Victorians have put their trust into these developers promising the Australian dream of home ownership only to be left in limbo when betrayed and cast aside for extra money. In their current form sunset clauses have enabled this to happen—enabled developers to take the capital of hardworking people, like those in Tarneit. These are people putting everything they have into what they believe will be their future home. Developers can then go on to use this money to finance construction before handing it back without interest or returns. What is meant to be an investment in a family home can become instead a cheap source of finance for a developer—a developer who can then go on to sell the near-complete property for an even higher or a much higher price. Worse still are the few that cut out half of this exploitative process—rather than selling the property at an inflated price, they merely threaten to do so unless you pay the additional amount equivalent to the inflated price. We know that works just as well.

This is exploitation in its most blatant form. Vulnerable Victorians are already facing the impact of stagnant wage growth and the rising cost of living. Off-the-plan housing has grown attractive because it can be affordable for our growing population of young or new Victorians. It is affordable for those struggling to enter the housing market who want a place to settle down and raise their family. They have bought with the long-term belief that their investment will grow as more development comes. Current remedies for this type of exploitation have been ineffective because, let us be honest, understanding contract law and the taking of legal action are beyond the means of most, and that is without having to consider the costs and the risks involved in doing so. But this bill is going to correct these issues. It will ensure equal contractual protection for both the purchasers and the developers who are already doing the right thing.

I have sat across the kitchen tables in Tarneit with fathers worried sick about their family’s future because they received a letter, and in that letter they were told that the sunset clause in their contract had been activated. No real reason was given and, most importantly, there was no real ability to ever have those reasons checked by a higher authority. Those fathers were hardworking, honest Victorians. I recently sat down to inform them that we are going to change the law, we are going to close those loopholes and we are going to help provide better protection not only for families in Tarneit but across Victoria. We are going to get a higher authority to check these so-called reasons, and that higher authority is going to be the Supreme Court of Victoria.

This was very much welcomed by these families. And then I had to sit there and explain to them that they would not be protected by the amendments in this bill, that what had happened to them had happened well before August and that there was very little we could do to go on and help them. They would have to go and pay for very expensive legal advice to take the matter further. These are good people of Tarneit, and I know they felt disappointed—I could feel it there at the table—but they responded to me with relief in knowing that no family in the future would have to experience the stress and the hardship and the heartbreak that they have gone through. I still to this day can only wish that I had been able to do more.

This is not the only reason I stand to speak in support of this bill. I also speak to it because it will crack down on rent-to-buy schemes and term contracts and address the abhorrent predatory conduct that we have seen in recent times using these outdated alternative sources of finance. There are a lot of examples I can use across my community, but the Consumer Action Law Centre has done a report with plenty of case studies for those that are sceptical about this bill. There was a story about Nina, a single mum of six children, and her family that got caught up in a rent-to-buy scheme. Having newly arrived from East Africa in 2005 and having separated from her husband, she was living in government housing, but she had started a childcare business at home and she had a little bit of an income. She came into contact with a company promising to design and build her home in exchange for a deposit and weekly payments, and at a meeting lasting less than 20 minutes she was told it would take 34 weeks to build and that in 34 weeks she and her six children would move into this house. Nina paid a $40 000 deposit to this company, which was the equivalent of her lifetime savings. Six months down the track she realised this property was never going to be built. She asked for her money back and of course the phone calls were never returned. Nina lost $57 000 on this scheme.

These are prime examples of why this bill is important—to close these loopholes and to crack down on the dodgy use of sunset clauses, rent-to-buy schemes and term contracts. I commend this bill to the house. I know that it will make a difference for all Victorians and make a difference for the families across Tarneit.