Tony Arnel of Building Commission Victoria ('Real costs of five-star rating') claims that the regulations on new houses will impose costs of only $1,500 per house. The industry says it is $7-14,000. People will make their own judgements about whether the builders have a more accurate fix on costs than the regulatory authority.
He also claims that the regulation "is widely supported by builders and homeowners alike". If this were true it would make the regulatory compulsion unnecessary. Repealing the regulation would leave people free to decide for themselves whether to opt for the additional up-front costs of five-star energy saving measures. And if saving greenhouse emissions is a "fundamental reason" for the regulation, would it not be fairer to offer a subsidy to new home buyers rather than place a discriminatory tax on them?