Building Costs and the Housing Crisis: Is the NCC Really to Blame?

Will cutting Australia’s National Construction Code from 2,000 pages to just 80 make housing more affordable?

That’s the proposal being put forward by Liberal Housing Spokesperson Senator Andrew Bragg, who has called for a significant reduction in the National Construction Code (NCC) as part of the broader push to tackle Australia’s housing crisis.

It’s an appealing proposition on the surface. Fewer rules. Less red tape. Potentially lower costs?

Paul was recently interviewed by ABC Radio about the proposal, highlighting that the solution isn’t as simple as slashing pages from the construction code because the housing crisis is more nuanced. Click on the image below to have a listen (starts around the 37 minute mark).

What is the NCC?

The National Construction Code is Australia's primary technical standard for building and construction. Put simply, it sets the minimum requirements for buildings to be safe, healthy, accessible and fit for purpose. It covers aspects like structural safety, fire protection, waterproofing, ventilation, accessibility and energy efficiency.

Is the NCC causing the housing crisis?

Ask someone trying to build a home today, ‘what's making it unaffordable’, and you're very unlikely to hear: "The NCC has too many pages." As building designers, what we hear from clients every day is, 'the cost of materials and construction'.

Labour, materials, site costs, engineering, infrastructure, finance, land prices and approval processes all contribute to the final cost of a home making the housing crisis a multi-layered affordability and supply problem.

Is Cheaper Always Cheaper?

One of the more concerning aspects of the proposal is the suggestion that things such as energy efficiency and accessibility could become optional extras.

You’ll hear us say this every day, BUT — good energy-efficient design doesn't necessarily cost more!!

Orientation, shading, glazing, insulation and natural ventilation are fundamentally design decisions — not luxury upgrades. Get those decisions right and you can create a home that is more comfortable, uses less energy and costs less to run. A cheaper house to build isn't necessarily a cheaper house to own. If we save money during construction only to give homeowners higher energy bills for the next 20 years, have we really solved affordability?

Looking at the Problem from Multiple Angles

There could certainly be room for improvement within the NCC; however, there is also a conversation worth having about making the building process more efficient and materials less costly. In our experience, the approvals process can sometimes be more challenging than the build itself.

Regulation is absolutely important, but too much or poorly designed regulation can stop new homes being built, making projects slower and more expensive. Planning requirements, documentation, engineering, consultants and approval timeframes can all add cost and delay. Reform could help streamline approvals, reduce unnecessary duplication and improve consistency — finding smarter ways to reduce costs without compromising safety, quality or performance.

Australia doesn't need homes that are simply cheaper because we've removed the things that make them safe, comfortable and efficient. The goal here shouldn’t be to build the cheapest house possible, but to make robust, safe housing more affordable to build — that’s the challenge worth solving.