Contemporary politics,local and international current affairs, science, music and extracts from the Queensland Newspaper "THE WORKER" documenting the proud history of the Labour Movement.
MAHATMA GANDHI ~ Truth never damages a cause that is just.
Wednesday, 8 August 2018
The government has walked away from social housing. Now we are paying the price
Housing
policy in Australia has a split personality: we are either shaking our
heads at how hard it is for wealthy millennials to buy their first home
or we are wringing our hands at the plight of the homeless.
Policymakers have responded in a piecemeal and often
counterproductive fashion to these individual and seemingly isolated
issues, providing financial incentives to first homebuyers and crisis
support for those on the streets.
This view of the world sees housing as a game of winners and losers,
where the role of government is to set people on the road to a secure
financial future while giving a helping hand to those who fall through
the gaps. If there is a crisis in the housing market, this story goes,
then it affects the nearly well-off and the very, very poor.
But if this were true housing would be a niche political issue –
felt deeply by specific demographic groups but really not affecting
others. Instead, housing affordability has consistently rated among the
top-tier political issues in recent years and continues to do so, even
as there is a reported fall in housing prices.
These
findings from April this year show housing affordability is rated a top
three issue by nearly a third of all voters, behind only cost of
living, health and job creation. This is higher than headline-grabbing
issues like national security and terrorism, tax cuts, education funding
and renewable energy.
What’s going on? Surely, Australia hasn’t suddenly become swamped by
empathy for their fellow citizens; after all the one rule of politics
that seldom shifts is that self-interest is the key driver of most
worldviews.
That’s where new research that Essential is releasing for the Everybody’s Home campaign to mark Homelessness Week today, is illuminating: the spectre of homelessness is a mainstream issue.
The findings suggest more than half of all Australians feel stretched
to meet their current housing commitments, be they mortgage or rent.
Forty-two per cent fear they could become homeless if their
circumstances change. The market no longer provides a buffer to middle
Australia.
Of particular concern are the high numbers of young people who feel
themselves under housing stress. And its not some hypothetical or
unfounded fear: one third of all respondents know someone who has
experienced homelessness, with the numbers again skewed towards younger
people.
The simple takeout from these findings is that the housing crisis
facing Australia is not really about getting into the market or staying
off the streets; it’s more systemic: there just aren’t enough affordable
homes to rent.
That’s reinforced with the responses to another set of propositions, which show widespread support for government intervention.
Two points stand out in the findings. Firstly, support for government
market intervention is strong across the political divide. Secondly,
opposition to the proposition is close to negligible: the proposition
the market should be left to its own devices clearly doesn’t apply when
it comes to the housing market.
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
The big question is not whether the government should do something, but what should it do?
Housing policy is a bit like the housing market itself: totally
fragmented and subject to the vagaries of the moment. As the value of a
property is determined by a range of subjective factors, from the
quality of the dwelling, to the position on the street, to the suburb,
to the weather on the day of sale, so too housing policy is complex and
interrelated.
The stress on rents is being driven by a web of decisions being made
at all three levels of government. From local zoning rules, state
planning decisions, to the way the federal government sets taxes, rent
stress is affected by both the capacity to pay and the availability of
affordable rental properties.
But one of the more obvious, albeit less glamorous, drivers has been
the federal government’s gradual withdrawal from directly building
low-cost rentals. In social housing, this has been gradual creeping
away, so public and community housing is now as scarce as hen’s teeth,
and almost impossible to access.
In affordable housing the withdrawal was more sudden, with the 2014
budget decision to scrap the National Rent Affordability Scheme that
provided investment support for rental properties for moderate-income
earners.
This was a deliberate attempt to distort the housing market – to
actually make it more attractive for investors to build affordable
rental properties and accept a more moderate short-term return while
building an asset with long-term value.As
government has walked away from social and affordable housing, more
renters have been left to compete for the few relatively cheap private
rentals on the market, pushing rent prices up and making it harder for
renters to save for a deposit. Alternatively the lack of affordable rent
forces people further down the housing chain into short-term
accommodation, on to couches or worse, the street.
So if housing affordability is a middle Australia issue, it makes
perfect sense to attack it at the middle with pragmatic measures to
change the market, rather than disposing largesse on those who don’t
need it or sympathy on those for whom something more tangible is really
required.
Because here’s the unspoken truth of the housing debate: it’s not
about the transaction, it is about the homes and the responsibility of a
decent society to ensure that everyone has one.
• Peter Lewis is the executive director of Essential and a Guardian Australia columnist
No comments:
Post a Comment