#housingcrisis

Where is the Leadership on Housing?

15 August 2024 1 Comment

Over the past 3 weeks, I’ve had conversations with individuals who you might expect to be leaders in the ongoing housing debate. Among them were a local Queensland Mayor elected on a platform advocating for change. Then, a Federal Member of Parliament and a popular YouTuber from Punters Politics. Here’s how those discussions unfolded:

The Regional Town Mayor

This first-term Mayor eagerly took our call, recognising that their community desperately needs housing solutions. The local economy is stunted, and it cannot expand or diversify due to the lack of available housing for the workforce. Despite this, and after a decade of attempting to engage with this local government, it seems that even new leadership is still mired in the old council priorities of roads, rates, and rubbish. Meaningful change remains elusive despite every local ratepayer’s outcry over the “cost of living” and the “housing crisis.”

It seems that there is leadership in housing intent. However, intent is not enough to cut through the administration and red tape and effect change.

The Federal Parliament’s Role

With a $10 billion budget making headlines, one would assume that leadership and decisive action would be forthcoming from the Federal Parliament. Yet, in a brief in-person conversation, a Federal Member of Parliament candidly admitted that they are focused on what can be realistically achieved within the current political cycle rather than on ambitious, long-term goals. Their current term ends in 2025, and while they acknowledged the necessity of addressing the housing crisis, they expressed doubt about their ability to support any grand vision before then.

These ambitious people seem to want leadership, not that housing is even on their radar. In such privileged positions and insulated from the common experience, it probably is no surprise that these few do not understand what “housing stress” means.

“We will offer what can be achieved, not what might be a great aspirational goal. We need to work with our system and within the political cycle, so I am not sure I can help with your grand vision. No matter how wonderful and necessary this vision is. Our current term runs out in 2025.”

Insights from a YouTuber Influencer

In the age of declining traditional media, influencers like those behind the YouTube channel “Punters Politics” have stepped in to fill the void.

Yes, these people want leadership, and housing is a key topic. One should ask if they have the necessary experience, resources, and capacity to lead the discussion.

One of their videos, “Why Australia WON’T Fix the Housing Crisis,” presents some compelling arguments. The video discusses how a small percentage of the population—about 1%—holds the power to make key decisions affecting housing. This elite group has crafted a system that benefits them, while the rest of us are left with limited influence over significant areas like defence, major infrastructure projects, and, of course, housing.

Let us Dive into this argument a bit further

The Singapore Comparison

Singapore is often cited as a success story in housing, but it’s not an easily transferable model for Australia. Singapore’s approach involves building thousands of units at a time—something we neither have the capacity nor the need to replicate. Additionally, Singaporean homes are usually small flats of less than 100 square meters, occupied by multi-generational families. This contrasts sharply with the Australian average household size of 2.5 people and our preference for larger homes.

Even if you could convince Australians to accept: –

smaller flats
living with multiple generations
no backyard

Such a shift would be nearly impossible because of one key element.

FINANCE: With no precedence of a new housing type, there are no successful valuations. Therefore, there is no financial approval to purchase a different housing solution.

A Historical Perspective on Housing

Historically, Australia has taken steps toward widespread homeownership. Particularly under Prime Minister Robert Menzies, who promoted the “Australian Dream” of homeownership. The Prime Minister was enamoured with all Australians becoming “little capitalists” to pursue home ownership. This led to homeownership rates reaching a high of 70%. However, those efforts have waned, leaving us far from where we once were.

1970s HOUSING: Was far different to what we expect today

Kids in shared bedrooms
A carport at best
One bathroom
The “outhouse” had only just been removed
No power outlet is required in the bedroom

Who’s Really in Control?

Australia has around 10 million households, but less than 1%—about 100,000 households—hold the real power. This group includes elected officials, corporate leaders, and influential institutions like universities and churches.

To put this in perspective, it is not the income but the power to influence our system.

If you want to understand how our household income is working, you should review our blog. Understanding Housing Stress in Australia.

Elected Officials:

There are 227 seats in the Federal Parliament, 620 in the state and territory parliaments (excluding our island territories), and 5,670 local council positions (see the data here). This represents only some 6,500 households.

Corporations:

The top 500 Australian corporations likely contribute another 2500 influential households (using 5 influencers in each of these corporations). By the time you add in their key decision makers: –

Chairperson
Chief Financial Officer
Chief Executive Officer
Chief People & Stakeholder Engagement Officer
Shadowy consultant (KPMG perhaps)

These companies are governed by a few powerful individuals who shape policies and strategies.

Institutions:

Schools, universities, and churches also play significant roles in decision-making, often implementing changes without broad public input.

What Can We Do?

As elections approach, it’s crucial to consider how we can mobilize a critical mass to bring about change. In my local area, the state seat of Jordan has 46,135 enrolled voters. To secure a decisive win in the upcoming October 2024 election, a candidate would need the support of just over 23,000 voters. Offering secure, stable housing options could be a compelling reason for residents to rally behind a candidate who truly represents their needs.

In this seat of Jordan, we’re dealing with significant issues:

700 people are experiencing homelessness.
1,800 households are affected by domestic violence.
50% of households are experiencing housing stress.

These figures should be more than enough to drive meaningful change. If you’re a local leader looking to engage with the electorate in Jordan, Queensland, we’re here to help you craft a message that resonates with voters. We desperately need leadership in housing in every electorate. Let’s focus on solutions that benefit everyone, not just the 1% who are satisfied with the current system.

Return to People Purpose Place home

What is the Housing Australia Future Fund

8 August 2024 Leave a Comment

Investment Returns and Alternatives

What the HAAF?

The Australian government introduced the Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF) to address housing affordability and supply issues. This long-term initiative is designed to finance the construction of new affordable housing and support various housing projects, aiming to improve housing outcomes for Australians, particularly those in need. Let’s delve into the HAFF’s investment returns and compare them with two alternative investment strategies to see which approach might yield better results for public housing funds. See more on the HAAF here.

Investment Mandate and Expected Performance

The Housing Australia Future Fund Investment Mandate Direction 2023, issued on 1 November 2023, requires the Future Fund Board to target a long-term benchmark return of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus 2.0% to 3.0% per annum, net of investment fees. With the CPI currently running at an annual rate of 3.6% (as of July 2024), the HAFF should aim for a performance band of 5.6% to 6.6%.

These are rather modest goals for a $10 billion investment!

Current Economic Environment

1. Investment Strategy

The HAFF’s returns depend on its investment strategy, which likely includes a diversified mix of assets such as government bonds, equities, and other investments to balance risk and return.

2. Management

The effectiveness of the fund’s management team in navigating market conditions is crucial for achieving the fund’s objectives.

3. Market Conditions

Broader economic conditions and market performance significantly impact the returns of the fund’s investments.

4. Goals vs. Returns

While the HAFF’s primary focus is on addressing the housing supply, its financial performance must also be considered to ensure the effective use of public housing funds.

Early Performance and Evaluation

According to the Department of Finance, the HAFF’s early investment returns were a nominal 1.9% for the quarter ending 31 March 2024. This equates to an annualised return of 7.6%, which falls within the targeted range but raises questions about the adequacy of these returns for public housing funds.

Option 1:

Investing in Australian Property Trusts

An alternative strategy could involve investing the HAFF in Australian property trusts. The Residential Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) industry in Australia is dominated by companies like GPT Group (GPT), Stockland (SGP), and Mirvac (MGR), which own and manage residential properties across the country.

The reported performance of these companies typically shows higher returns than the HAFF’s early performance. For example:

GPT Group (GPT): Historically stable with periodic high returns.

Stockland (SGP): Consistently delivers solid returns with moderate volatility.

Mirvac (MGR): Known for strong performance and resilience in market downturns.

While these REITs have demonstrated the ability to outperform the HAFF’s returns, they also come with higher volatility, which might not be acceptable for public housing funds. The recent “unprecedented” times have shown significant fluctuations in real estate markets, suggesting that such investments might expose public housing funds to undue risk.

Option 2:

Direct Investment in Residential Property

Another viable alternative is direct investment in residential property. With $10 billion, the government could purchase 10,000 homes at an average cost of $1 million each. This approach leverages the dual returns of rental income and capital gains, which have historically increased at higher rates than these early HAFF results.

Direct investment in residential property can provide steady rental income and capitalise on property value appreciation. Given the current market trends, this strategy could reasonably be expected to outperform the HAFF’s early returns of 7.6%. However, managing a large portfolio of residential properties involves significant administrative efforts and potential property management and maintenance challenges.

Before conclusions can be drawn, we need to step back and ask a key question:

“To increase public housing supply, this mechanism aims to take public funds and maximize their impact.”

Does this current strategy achieve this aim?

Is investing in producing income and then using that ongoing income to make a difference the best return on funds in this strategy?

In Summary big goals is this the right plan?

The Housing Australia Future Fund is a promising initiative to address the housing crisis, but its early returns have sparked debate on its financial performance. Comparing the HAFF with alternative investment strategies, such as Australian property trusts and direct residential property investments, reveals that while these alternatives might offer higher returns, they also come with increased volatility and management challenges.

Ultimately, the best approach depends on balancing the need for stable, reliable returns with the primary goal of increasing housing supply and affordability. A diversified strategy that combines elements of these options might offer a robust solution, ensuring the effective use of public housing funds while addressing Australia’s pressing housing needs.

Return to People Purpose Place HOME

Understanding Housing Stress in Australia: An In-Depth Look

1 August 2024 1 Comment

What is Housing Stress?

Housing stress is a critical issue in Australia, defined as households spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs, including rent or mortgage payments. This is especially relevant for those whose life circumstances make it impossible to avoid participating in the established housing marketplace. For instance, owning multiple luxury properties and facing dilemmas about leisure activities does not constitute housing stress.

The portion of the low income population spending more than 30% on housing otherwise refereed to as “rental stress”.

Who is Affected?

The most recent data focuses on the bottom two quintiles of the Australian population when considering disposable household income. Interestingly, even the middle quintile is not exempt from housing stress, illustrating the widespread nature of this issue across various income levels.

Of the 10 million Australian households if we rank them by disposable household income
The top 20% Australian households (Quintile) by income have an annual average disposable income of $280000
These people probably have choices about their housing outcomes.

Frequency of Data Collection

Housing stress data is measured biennially, providing insights into trends and changes over time.

Housing Stress by Housing Type

Households in stress

Of the 10 million Australian households if we rank them by disposable household income
The lowest 20% Australian households (Quintile) by income have an annual average disposable income of $24000
It is fair to assume these households are experiencing housing stress.
This equates to 2 million Australian households

The private rental marketplace emerges as the most stressful environment. The latest statistics highlight the substantial portion of low-income households experiencing rental stress:

1. Prevalence of Housing Stress

Approximately 52.5% of low-income households renting in the private sector spend more than 30% of their gross income on housing costs, indicating significant rental stress.

Among Commonwealth Rent Assistance (CRA) recipients, 70.6% experience rental stress without CRA, and 42.9% still face rental stress even with this assistance.

2. Income Measurement Methods

Housing stress can be measured using gross income (before tax) or equivalised disposable income (after tax, adjusted for household size and composition). The 30:40 indicator is commonly used to identify housing stress in households within the bottom 40% of the income distribution.

3. Impact on Low-Income Households

The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) provides detailed insights, noting that using gross income helps identify households in stress if they pay more than 30% of their income on housing. Equivalised disposable income takes household size and needs into account for a more nuanced assessment.

4. Government Reports and Surveys

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) conducts the Survey of Income and Housing (SIH) every two years, collecting data on rental stress and broader housing costs. The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey also contributes valuable data on housing affordability, monitoring economic and social welfare trends.

Housing Types by Income Quintiles

Lower Quintiles (1st and 2nd)

Housing Type:

Renters and those in more affordable housing options, including public housing and rental accommodations from private landlords.

Housing Costs:

Lower housing costs compared to higher quintiles but significant financial pressure relative to their income.

Middle Quintile (3rd)

Housing Type:

A mix of renters and homeowners. Homeowners typically have mortgages and live in smaller detached houses, townhouses, or units.

Housing Costs:

Moderate costs, balancing affordability and quality. Less likely to experience extreme housing stress but still face challenges.

Higher Quintiles (4th and 5th)

Housing Type:

Predominantly homeowners, many of whom own their homes outright or have significant property equity. Housing types include larger detached houses, high-end apartments, and properties in more desirable locations.

Housing Costs:

Higher costs but a lower proportion of income spent on housing, making it more affordable. These households also often own investment properties and secondary residences.

Income and Housing Data

Income Distribution:

The highest quintile earns significantly more than the lower quintiles, with the top 20% of households earning over $280,000 annually on average, while the bottom quintile earns just over $24,000 (McCrindle).

Housing Affordability:

In 2019-20, average housing costs vary by state, with the highest costs in the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory and the lowest in Tasmania (Australian Bureau of Statistics).

These insights highlight the ongoing challenge of housing affordability in Australia, particularly for lower-income households. For further detailed information, you can refer to the Australian Bureau of Statistics and other comprehensive reports on the subject (Housing Occupancy and Costs, 2019-20 financial year) (Household Income and Wealth, Australian methodology 2019-20).

For a deeper dive into the topic, explore resources from the [Australian Bureau of Statistics](https://www.abs.gov.au) and [AHURI](https://www.ahuri.edu.au).

Return to People Purpose Place home

Tablelands Region: Local Housing Action Plan 2024-2029

25 July 2024 Leave a Comment

The Tablelands Regional Council recently issues a Media Release about their plan for more housing. You can review the full T ablelands Local Housing Action Plan

Focus area 1

Increasing housing supply and diversity.

As evidenced by the past 40 decades of housing production, there is no successful mechanism for substantially increasing housing diversity. This is a failure of a housing action plan if there is no mechanism that can address this aspirational goal.

The primary barrier is that the big four banks need similar housing valuations. This drives the whole housing market to produce the same stock as all the comparisons.

TRC Opportunities

Provide ongoing monitoring of housing supply, needs and trends.
Investigate statutory and non-statutory levers and incentives to support the delivery of increased density housing, (e.g. planning scheme and Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP) review).
Investigate statutory and non-statutory levers and incentives to support the delivery of increased density housing, (e.g. planning scheme and Local Government Infrastructure Plan (LGIP) review).
Support construction and manufacturing industry development to encourage the affordable and timely delivery of housing (e.g. provide incentives for delivering smaller housing product).
Investigate approaches to address high construction costs.
Review housing grant and incentive opportunities and conditions to ensure the delivery of more housing.
Provide information to the community on housing needs and development opportunities.

Focus area 2

Housing for people in need, Social housing, Affordable housing, First nations housing and Housing to meet ageing population.

TRC Opportunities

Divest the TRC-owned housing stock and provide to local community housing providers.
Advocate that the social housing process is reviewed and encourage local people to be housed.
Support the delivery of affordable housing as a part of large-scale housing developments.
Strengthen relationships with between housing providers, First Nations housing.

Focus area 3

Building the capacity of the homelessness sector.

(Not sure how this is different from Focus area 2.)

TRC Opportunities

Increase understanding about the current homelessness service landscape and capacity.
Develop an appropriate crisis accommodation model for the regional and rural Queensland context.

Focus area 4

Housing for the local workforce

TRC Opportunities

Undertake research and develop a strategy to manage workforce development growth.
Workforce accommodation consideration for major projects in the Tablelands region.
Deliver housing to support (State) government employees as part of associated developments.
Explore new and emerging models for housing delivery.

While we have every support for this type of discussion and planning of a local housing action plan. It seems that many of these points for action would fall under the category of business as usual. The action item “Provide ongoing monitoring of housing supply, needs and trends.” would appear to be a most obvious statement of this business as usual. Given we are talking about the greatest need for all of this council constituents (cost of living relief, or reduction in housing stress) it would appear that it should be expected that the local governing authority already has a grasp of the housing needs and trends. If you wanted to get an update without the beautiful graphics and micro details included (see below) then the 6’O’Clock news should suffice any night of the week.

Often quoted as the definition of insanity is: –

“Taking the same actions and expecting a different result”

Our proposal for local councils is this:

For no additional cost to what you are currently doing in this space there are answers to each of these needs with our framework and coaching.

Return to People Purpose Place home

Losing Your Home: A Serious Look at the Human Experience

19 June 2024 Leave a Comment

The Journey to the NQ Tablelands

My story begins in Victoria, where I grew up on a farm with my large, close-knit family. With a family tragedy out of the blue, this was my first example of losing my home. As a stay-at-home mom, I packed up my two children and moved to the Tablelands region of North Queensland. In part, I was lured by the prospect of a fresh start and the opportunity to be closer to my aging parents. What was meant to be a six-month stint turned into a 32-year residency, as I found myself drawn to the beauty and community of the region.

There are numerous examples of government intervention that have moved people on.

Growing up on a farm, I was no stranger to hard work and the cycles of nature. The extended family environment provided a strong sense of resilience and survival, as we weathered the challenges of farm life together. However, the harsh realities of that era also left their mark, shaping my approach to life and how I would navigate the difficult times to come.

The Loss of a Home

After many years of building a life in the Tablelands, I found myself facing a devastating housing crisis. I had purchased a small house in Herberton, which I later had to relinquish to the bank. This was the second instance of losing my home. This loss was a significant blow, and I sought refuge in a local caravan park, a temporary solution that would soon become the centre of a much larger struggle.

For 13 years, I called the caravan park home, working tirelessly to maintain a sense of community and stability for myself and my fellow residents. We negotiated with the council, advocated for our rights, and even won several battles to improve living conditions and ensure the park remained welcoming. However, our hard-fought efforts were ultimately futile, as the council decided to demolish the park and redevelop the land without regard for the human impact.

The Emotional Toll

The news of the impending eviction hit me like a shockwave. I was consumed by a whirlwind of emotions – anger, hurt, and a deep sense of betrayal. How could the authorities entrusted to serve the community turn their backs on us so callously? The lack of empathy and disregard for our stories and struggles was overwhelming.

In the face of this adversity, I found myself having to dig deep within, drawing on the resilience and strength that had been forged through a lifetime of challenges. It was a battle on multiple fronts – not only fighting the bureaucratic machinery but also managing the emotional toll of losing my home and community. The process was arduous, filled with endless meetings, paperwork, and the constant need to prove the validity of our situation.

Rebuilding and Resilience

Yet, there was a third situation: losing my home. As the eviction process dragged on for nearly two years, I found myself in a state of constant crisis mode. This time was spent scrambling to find temporary housing solutions and navigate the complex web of social services. It was a time of immense upheaval, with my own personal life and my family members also facing significant challenges.

Through it all, I refused to give up. I channelled my anger into a fierce determination to fight for our rights. I took on a leadership role by becoming a spokesperson and advocate for the other residents facing a similar plight. It was a gruelling process that strengthened my resilience and sense of self-worth.

Today, thankfully, I find myself in a new living situation. I am sharing a home with friends while continuing to navigate the complexities of housing insecurity. While the journey has been arduous, it has also been a testament to the power of the human spirit. I have learned that true resilience comes not from the absence of struggle but from the willingness to confront it head-on, to find strength in the community, and to never lose sight of our inherent worth as individuals.

A Call for Compassion

My story is a stark reminder of the human cost of housing crises. There is an urgent need for a more compassionate and holistic approach to addressing these issues. Too often, the voices of those affected are drowned out by bureaucrats and policymakers’ cold, impersonal calculations. It is time to shift the narrative and recognize the profound impact that the loss of a home can have. It is much more than the individuals; it includes families and communities.

As we grapple with the complexities of housing affordability, homelessness, and urban development, we must remember that these are not just numbers on a spreadsheet. They are the stories of real people, with their own histories, dreams, and struggles. By listening to these stories and acknowledging the humanity at the heart of these issues, we can begin to build a more just and equitable society – one that values the well-being of all its citizens, not just the bottom line.

My journey has been difficult. It has also taught me the power of resilience, community, and the unwavering human spirit. I hope that by sharing my story, I can inspire others to advocate for change. We must demand more from our leaders, and never lose sight of the fundamental truth:

that a home is not just a roof over our heads but a reflection of our shared humanity.
Jenny Sader

If you are inspired, the unedited longer-form interview with Jenny is available on our YouTube channel here.

People Purpose Place home

Australia needs a better housing system

30 May 2024 Leave a Comment

Source: National Housing Supply and Affordability Council

Darren Finlay

Our view of this reporting

Over decades we have reviewed any number of industry, government and academic reporting often there are solid points of agreement contained within. In principle these reports are commissioned with good intentions and the authors are skilled and diligent in their task.

Often our view is that there are gaps of what is not discussed or considered in these reports that should be debated in our wider public. Feel free to start here as we review the options looking forward as identified in this report.

Australia needs a better housing system I wholeheartedly agree!

Imagine how good our community could be if we were enabled to not only shelter in these 11 million structures but they were designed and matched to our needs to intentionally allowing each of us to thrive!
Rowan Blizzard

Looking forward what options are there?

This chapter outlines 10 areas that could improve the state of the housing system. These require collective effort and coordination across all levels of government, the private sector, the community housing sector and the broader Australian community.
Source: National Housing Supply and Affordability Council

Broadly speaking these are probably not very controversial but we have some cheeky suggestions for a wider discussion: –

Investing in social housing
Reducing homelessness
Improving rental market outcomes for tenants
Improving efficiency in the land use and planning systems
Boosting capacity in the construction sector
Improving data availability
Addressing regional-specific housing challenges
Enhancing First Nations housing outcomes
Reviewing the suitability of the national housing target
Ensuring Australia’s taxation system supports supply and affordability

While these individually might be a handy list of future blogs we will review in brief here to start the ball rolling.

Investing in social housing

Sounds like we have furious agreement across our community on this one. One small caveat though “not in my backyard”. With our history of high density low socioeconomic housing being poorly supported there are reasonable grounds for local communities to be hesitant. Social and affordable housing can and should be done with the necessary skill and support such that it becomes a seamless integration in our overall housing market rather than being treated as an “other” housing type. When we make exceptions for “other” types to be delivered we are setting ourselves up for problems.

Reducing homelessness

Not controversial but we should ask some more questions.

What is an acceptable level of homelessness?

Perhaps a reasonable expectation is that when homelessness occurs that is is brief and not a repeating pattern for those experiencing it.

Improving rental market outcomes for tenants

We have a belief that 3, 5 or 10 year tenure can be provided to tenants that offers the necessary checks and balances for both sides of the equation. Landlords need a sufficient and reasonable return on their investment. At the same time the tenants need some predictability and security in the costs of their housing.

For a better housing system at the very least we need more options than the current house or apartment offer. See some of our historical case studies here.

Improving efficiency in the land use and planning systems

With 6 States and a couple of territories and 14 houses of parliament for our meagre population of 26million we suspect that these statements are well intentioned and great ideals. In reality we suspect that these are unlikely to actually achieve any level of efficiency or consistency across the country.

Boosting capacity in the construction sector

How do we discuss dirty, dusty, dangerous outdoor work with the youth of today?

How do we actually convince imported skills and labour to continue in our inefficient and wasteful construction sector. Often these same employment candidates will find that are more attractive jobs in our modern economy. Because a migrant has entered the country with a skill in demand often these trade skills can be attractive to remote fly-in fly-out sites where their skills are put to use for a multi-national company. We cannot fault a new entrant from maximising their pay packet but this still ends up not expanding our housing supply.

Improving data availability

In the 2018 Royal Commission into Aged Care there were some startling findings around some very fundamental questions.

How much does government spend on aged care?

Apparently this could not be answered in the Royal Commission and some of the suggestions to come out of this system interrogation was to get better data. How is that coming along?

Yes improving data availability sounds like a good idea however I would suggest it is not the main game. Issues that demand attention are plentiful without getting too bogged down into further analysis.

Addressing regional-specific housing challenges

For housing we have some dramatic issues in our two tiered system. Metropolitan communities seem to do reasonable well. Perhaps this is because our representative political system means that they do have all the political sway. In the regions our communities suffer may inequities. Perhaps we should even be asking some probing questions.

Should the access to housing, hospitals, transport and communication be equal across all of our great country?

Do our country cousins deserve lesser services as a cost of living in the regions?

Enhancing First Nations housing outcomes

Our first nations communities are doing worse than average on every metric that we can measure. In our “first world” country some of these inequities are truly astounding. Poor outcomes include:-

Education opportunities
Health outcomes
Interaction with the justice system

These negative outcomes will be improved with intentional fit for purpose housing. It seems that when we engage with our first nations communities we still persist with applying our housing thinking to their situation. This seems to be quite contrary to these communities experience of living in sync with the country and environment rather than our typical response of building incompatible boxes.

For a better housing system we could learn much from our First Nations examples.

Reviewing the suitability of the national housing target

Targets are great for sure and they help to provide some direction. None of these big picture targets have been met, or even benchmarked, in delivery. When we review the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) or perhaps the Northern Territory Intervention (Northern Territory National Emergency Response, also known as “The Intervention“) how did we go against the stated goals or targets. We understand that plans are almost never delivered at 100% as circumstances (it’s called life) changes along the way.

An example of the reporting on the “Failed” Northern Territory Intervention after the event can be found here.

Ensuring Australia’s taxation system supports supply and affordability

With a 5 year projection this is tricky. With our human bias for the negative we provide any opposition has a free kick. In our popularist system of government candidates generally run a mile when the word “TAX” is mentioned. I have no fear of being voted in our out! You are most welcome to debate my views.

This report makes no mention of the fact that our established housing system is taking up to 40% in fees taxes and charges for all new housing delivery.

Across the states and territories we have found the costs of fees, taxes and charges involved in new house supply and delivery.
Housing Industry Australia

Perhaps there is some room in our existing tax system to revisit the current settings.

Return to People Purpose Place home.

A Big Dialogue: Housing – What Do We Want To Achieve?

24 May 2024 Leave a Comment

People Purpose Place views in review

We have had the great pleasure and privilege to meet with many of these housing leaders, and there was much anticipation of the forum and proposed topic.

Dr Cameron Murray’s most recent book is one of our reference books.

Jackson Hills holds a strategic role in the Q Shelter

The Q Shelter organisation ably supports our community housing providers.

Natalie Rayment is a director of Wolter Consulting Group.

Among other things the Wolter Consulting Group assist with long term strategic planning for the future direction of local councils. Natalie is also a keen advocate for YIMBY.

For a discussion that has been very capably hosted, moderated and applying the “Brisbane Rule” for civil discussion. Brisbane Dialogues will certainly have my attention for any future events.

As an attendee I was really looking forward to a discussion of the key question “What do we want to achieve?”

This strikes me as a really helpful starting point and from a clarity about our intentions we can then apply our:-

Developed first world economy
Highly educated workforce
Historical understanding of 11 million dwellings
Community expectations

to actually deliver against the identified problem.

While much of the discussion was collaborative and well intentioned I am unsure that this question was really clarified into the necessary stark reality.

Housing what do we want?

While it seems quite a simple question my first thought is that there are many responses depending on where our current personal situation. As former NSW Premier is famously quoted as advising Paul Keating

‘Always put your money on self-interest, son. He’s the best horse in the race; always a trier.’
Former NSW Premier Jack Lang

The vast majority of guest were of a mature “late youth” demographic.

If you have lived through a period of continual property value growth and have amassed a personal wealth in property then ….

the status quo may look quite attractive.

you may have the capacity to assist family into the property market
you may believe in the establishment of a career and building wealth as the sensible path
you may not be aware yet of the Government impending financial challenge when this cohort doubles and we have two taxpayers to find each retiree rather than the 7 when the pension and superannuation systems were first imagined

For the “8” guest in the room experiencing a first hand housing crisis

You have likely started your careers without a free education and with your first full time employment have already incurred a significant HECS debt.

you may not believe that property ownership is even possible
you may expect to continue to rent all of your life including housing, books, music, clothes, sex and many of the essentials of life
the idea of a single career seems quite odd and unlikely with higher priorities than career building a gig economy allows for adaption and travel convenience

With these differences within our community, how is consensus even possible?

Our view is that the necessary elements are still common to almost everyone regardless of their current life stage or circumstances.

a place or private secure refuge
a place for communion with friends and family
some connection to nature
the possibility of getting your hands into the soil gardening or just being connected to nature
a place for revelry where telling stories (some might even be true) around the hearth

It strikes us that we are not all that different in our humanity, and in this discussion, we could do very well to keep that in mind.

Return to People Purpose Place home.

Governments are unwilling/ unable to comprehend housing

24 April 2024 Leave a Comment

Our government should address big issues for our community. Why can the government not solve housing issues? Housing has been at the top of our community concerns for many years. Some reports from 20 years ago highlighted that “housing affordability” was a top three concern across Australia. Government cannot solve housing for 1 primary reason.

Imagination!

This is not meant as a criticism of any of the well-intentioned people we have met in politics. We have found that most individuals who have entered Australian politics have done so with the intention of serving our community. It seems to us that most politicians enter politics for the right reasons. Yet the fact remains that the government cannot solve housing.

If they have good intentions, surely they can make the necessary changes?

Well, the evidence is stark and quite contrary to this ideal scenario. We can and should review several Government programs to address housing issues. Any significant review will document very high public costs (these are our taxes here) being invested in any number of well-meaning projects.

Federally

To start with, let’s have a look at some of the higher-profile Federal programs: –

First Home Buyers Scheme
The Territory’s intervention in aboriginal housing
Defence housing program
National Housing Rental Affordability Scheme

In each of these programs, nobody will claim that they have made a tangible difference to the problem that they were tasked to address. In many instances, the actual deliverables are very small fractions of the stated goals, and after some years, these programs are renamed, shelved, or dropped from the political discussion.

Some excellent references are available (see our reference page here). A standout federally produced website that is infinitely useful is the Housing Data—Australian Federal Government. This website is great for geeks and academics to research issues.

State Housing Programs

We all know that the state governments do the work, so perhaps there are more successful programs there: –

Department of Housing head lease program 55 million
Vacant property back into the market nope, we will hold that for some potential future use

In the past, we have discussed a state asset that was a “vacant” house. When identified to the particular department, the property agreed that “yep, that is vacant.” Then, unbelievably, they bulldozed the house (in 2021) to make way for overflow car parking that this department required for the adjacent train station.

Local Government Housing Programs

Well, these guys are direct and immediate. Surely they can do more than roads, rates, and rubbish? Well, actually, nope. The silence from local councils is deafening.

Where are the local councilors talking about the housing issues in the current local council election campaigns?

They can see the people sleeping in their cars in the local park and under the bridges even when we discuss the specific challenges these communities face, population loss to the prominent metro locations, and inability to attract additional essential workforce. The local councils are paralyzed, hoping big corporations, private investment, or someone else will ride into the local community and address the housing crisis! We have reviewed many local council housing action plans, which are embarrassing in their lack of understanding of any deliverable projects. Again, it isn’t the individual humans involved. It is the whole system of local government.

Some examples of the local council action plans just make media statements but have little substance.

Signed off by people in positions to do something …..

Lets drill down into one such example for a bit of understanding….

Rail yards, affordable housing. Is land contamination now cured by injecting a low socioeconomic cohort into this parcel of land?

The land remediation would be quite different if it were for an expensive 5-star resort on the river overlooking the CBD and within walking distance of the entertainment precinct.

As all governments have become paralyzed and risk-averse

To make an omelet, you have to break some eggs. Our systems of government are now only self-perpetuating and unable to take on new content. Perhaps there is a discussion around our governments and whether or not they are still fit for purpose. Given the age of some of our governance fundamentals, the Westminster system, etc., as a community, we might have moved well past these outdated paradigms.

Since we federated and separated from Britain in 1901, what of these old systems still remain? This was a time before the advent of the motor vehicle and powered flight!

Ken Henry: We are breaking the ‘golden rule’ of economic policy

Ken Henry is an economic expert who has spent decades studying our great economy. Instead of finding the modern electric car with advanced manufacturing and technology skills, he is looking at the iconic Australian Camira—a car so rare that none exist today, not even those handful of examples that fall under the category of “collectors” cars.

His 8-minute interview on ABC Radio on 9th April 2024 is compelling and disturbing. Here it is

Ok, so it’s not a Government quick fix!

Then who else? Private enterprise in our current housing marketplace? Ummm, no. Social housing? Still no…. My family? Great if they can, but this is becoming a solution for fewer and fewer of us. Then who…..

Individual agency: You have the power to make change

At first glance, everything you hear and see will tell you that it is nonsense.

Over the weekend, your well-meaning “Uncle Bruce” will tell you that the housing process is clear-cut and straightforward. Work hard, save your deposit, and apply for a loan…..

For many of us this advice from Uncle Bruce is just nonsense.

The average house across Australia is now approaching the 1 million price point. The chief executive of ANZ is reporting to his shareholders that “the average Australian cannot afford the average home,” which is a significant problem for him as he realizes that his customer base is shrinking. It is also quite uncomfortable for the rest of us trying to wrangle a home in the current dog-eat-dog marketplace.

Hang in there and come on a journey to explore what this means. With some simple caveats, almost anyone can find a great, enduring home.

1. You can make agreements and keep these agreements

2. You have an intention to follow our process

We will coach those willing to do the work. Our process means thinking, testing, and researching within the framework provided by People Purpose Place. We have found that after decades of this issue continuing to worsen, the government cannot solve housing, but you can.

As you next step check out our START HERE page

Return HOME