Affordable Housing | |
Over the last 8 years the ACT Labor Party's ideologically driven policy on housing has resulted in Canberra having the nation's third most expensive residential housing market and the tightest and most expensive rental market. Far from benefiting low income earners, the ACT Government's approach has had the effect of running the poor out of town. The LDP's policy is to make housing more affordable by removing the dead hand of the Government. The High Proportion Of Public Housing The ACT has the highest ratio of public to private housing in the Australia. Approximately one in every 10 residential dwellings in the ACT is owned by the ACT Government, compared to a national average of 4%. This is not compatible with the ACT having the youngest, healthiest, best educated and most affluent population in Australia. Moreover, public housing in the ACT costs taxpayers more each year per dwelling than public housing in other States and territories . Although public housing is intended to help the genuinely disadvantaged, many of the people who live in public housing are not poor, elderly or disabled. Greens MLA Deb Foskey made headlines a couple of years ago when it was revealed she was residing in a government-owned house in Yarralumla despite earning over $100,000 per year. One effect of this is that waiting lists are so long many elderly and poor end up renting in the private market anyway. Public housing policies are also inefficient. For example, tenants are able to remain in large three-bedroom houses even if their circumstances substantially change. This policy, referred to as “security of tenure”, allowed convicted murderer David Eastman to retain his ACT Government unit while he served his jail sentence (the unit sat empty!). Security of tenure was doggedly defended by the ACT Government until late 2007 when common sense and economic reality finally forced a change. It is interesting to note Jon Stanhope's shrill criticism of those who questioned the logic of security of tenure. Below is an excerpt from a Stanhope media release attacking the Opposition housing minister for criticising the policy: “Labor believes in giving public-housing tenants security of tenure because it appreciates that a house is more than four walls and a roof—it is also a home. Does Ms Burke suggest that an ageing widow, living in the home in which she watched her children grow up, the home in which her husband died, ought to be forced out simply because she no longer meets the strict eligibility criteria for that particular size of residence? Does Ms Burke believe that a family that has roots in a particular neighbourhood should be forced to move, that children should be forced to change schools and make new friends, just because a parent has, perhaps only temporarily, enjoyed an increase in income? Limited And Inadequate Release Of Land The Property Council of Australia has identified land release as the single biggest contributor to housing affordability in the ACT. Only in the last 12 months has the ACT Labor government accepted this fact, belatedly attempting to alleviate the shortages that have driven up prices over the last 7 years. This has improved the problem of supply in outlying areas of the city, but issues of urban infill and opportunities for greater housing density remain unresolved. Cutting Red Tape And Taxes With the ACT enjoying the lowest unemployment rates in Australia, coupled with the highest rents and high property prices, demand for housing remains intense. However, the ACT Government is reluctant to allow market forces to meet demand. There is a range of obstacles that inhibit the establishment of new housing. Planning and zoning rules are highly restrictive and response times by the planning authority ACTPLA too long. The ACT Government has only just changed zoning laws in Braddon to allow residential units above retail space, with height restrictions raised to five stories. (Reported in the Canberra Chronicle March 18 2008) Elsewhere they are not allowed, yet mixed residential and retail developments have been common in other cities for decades. People investing in housing are burdened with: * High stamp duty * A “Betterment Tax” * A $1,000 annual fee to be a registered landlord * Restrictions on rent increases at the end of the rental lease * Restrictions on grounds for evicting tenants at the end of the rental period LDP Position and Policy The LDP believes that individuals, operating in a free market, offer better long term solutions to the needs of society than governments. This philosophy is particularly relevant to the accommodation market, both rental and home ownership. The LDP believes that the current housing affordability crisis has been brought about by governments either distorting or preventing the application of market forces. The LDP believes landlords making commercial returns from investing in housing are essential to an environment in which everyone can afford a place to live. The LDP would modify planning and zoning laws and lower barriers that prevent the private sector from building affordable housing for all levels of society, including those on low incomes. The LDP would transfer to local real estate agents the management of a large proportion of existing government properties. An LDP Government would substantially increase the rate of land released for residential dwellings. An LDP Government would relax zoning laws, allowing for faster approval of medium density housing, with the government taking its lead from the market as to where higher housing densities should be located. An LDP Government would not stand in the way of residential development above retail or office space in town centres such as Belconnen, Phillip and Southlands. The relaxation of zoning laws would allow for development of housing alternatives such as long-stay caravan parks and hostels. The LDP would also implement a process of selling its public housing stock so that eventually (say within 30 years) it only owned a small number of residential properties required for emergency short term accommodation for special cases. This disposal process would be as follows:
| |
» ACT Home | |
