Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025

High-Level Summary

The Defence Housing Australia Amendment Bill 2025 amends the Defence Housing Australia Act 1987 to allow Defence Housing Australia (DHA) to provide housing and housing-related services to additional classes of persons—including foreign military and government personnel, their contractors and subcontractors, accredited charity representatives, and other ministerially-determined groups—to meet the operational needs of the Australian Defence Force and the Department of Defence.

The change supports forthcoming AUKUS rotational deployments of UK and US submarines (SRF-West) and ensures that visiting allied personnel and their families receive an equivalent standard of housing and support.


Summary

This Bill amends the Defence Housing Australia Act 1987 by expanding the scope of section 5. Currently DHA may provide housing and housing-related services to Australian Defence Force (ADF) members, Department of Defence staff and their families, and contracted providers. The Bill makes the following key changes:

  • Inserts new definitions in section 3 to cover ‘government of a foreign country’, ‘government body of a foreign country’, ‘military organisation of a foreign country’, ‘registered charity’ and ‘accredited representative of a registered charity’.
  • Replaces the phrase “contracted to provide” with “who provide” in paragraph 5(1)(c) to include persons supplying goods or services to Defence even without a formal contract.
  • Adds new paragraphs 5(1)(e)–(j) enabling DHA to house:
    • Persons facilitating engagement with the ADF or Defence,
    • Members of foreign military organisations and officials/employees of foreign governments,
    • Foreign military or government contractors and their subcontractors,
    • Accredited charity representatives assisting Defence,
    • Other classes of persons specified by ministerial determination.
  • Inserts section 5(3) to permit the Minister, by legislative instrument, to determine additional classes of persons for whom DHA may provide services.

These amendments align DHA’s functions with Defence’s current and future requirements, notably facilitating the rotational presence of US and UK submarines at HMAS Stirling under AUKUS, while future-proofing the Act. The Bill has no direct financial impact.


Argument For
Normative Bases
  1. Hobbesianism
  2. National Prestige/Patriotism

Effective defence relies on robust institutions. By expanding DHA’s remit, the Bill ensures that all personnel—domestic and allied—have secure, appropriate housing so that the Australian Defence Force and its partners can maintain readiness and morale [Judgment].

Strengthening AUKUS arrangements is vital for Australia’s strategic standing. Providing UK and US rotations with DHA-managed housing demonstrates our commitment to the alliance, enhances interoperability and reassures our allies that Australia is a reliable host and partner.

The amendments also implement a long-standing recommendation from the Auditor-General to align DHA’s legislative functions with Defence needs[1]. In doing so, the Bill removes administrative ambiguities, reduces ad-hoc arrangements and future-proofs DHA to adapt to evolving Defence requirements without further parliamentary delay.

  1. ^

    Auditor-General Report No. 31 (2019–20) recommended aligning DHA and Defence housing requirements.


Argument Against
Normative Bases
  1. Value-Neutral / Epistemic Objection
  2. Egalitarianism

Even granting the importance of allied rotations, the Bill is a blunt instrument that entrusts the Minister with broad, open-ended power to add any classes of persons by legislative instrument. This undermines parliamentary oversight and risks mission creep, allowing future determinations that may fall outside genuine Defence needs.

By extending DHA services equally to foreign personnel and charities, the Bill potentially diverts scarce housing resources and administrative focus away from Australian Defence Force members and their families [Judgment]. A more targeted, needs-based approach—managed by Defence directly—would better safeguard equity and ensure that benefits are reserved for core personnel.

The claim of ‘no financial impact’ overlooks indirect costs: expanded eligibility will require DHA to reconfigure allocations, manage additional tenancies and potentially invest in new stock, imposing administrative and logistical burdens that have not been quantified [Judgment].


Date:

2025-07-24

Status:

Passed Both Houses

Sponsor:

Unspecified

Portfolio:

Defence

Categories:

Defence, Housing Policy, Foreign Policy

Timeline:
24/07/2025
25/08/2025

Comments (0)