Unsustainable housing policies

While Labour, Coalition and the Greens battle it out in parliament over the housing bill, vulnerable groups in society continue to live without a roof over their heads.

People with a disability and those fleeing domestic violence are the forgotten ones left behind while politicians play politics.

We are seeing a massive rental crisis, and there are two components to what is causing it.

The number one issue is obviously the soaring rental prices due to rising interest rates.

Most landlords only own one investment property and have little choice but to raise rents to survive.

The second challenge is lower house density than prior to COVID.

Worldwide shared accommodation is really common, but in Australia that is not the case.

Philip Lowe's comments in early June went down like a lead balloon, but his advice was not wrong.

We are a little spoiled in Australia, compared to other countries around the world where shared housing is the only option.

However, we also don't have many regional city centres and don't tend to spread out too far from the cities.

This creates afalse perception that we have to live close to the CBD and those that live further out are disadvantaged.

While sharing your household is not for everyone, there is a certain age group and demographic that could benefit from sharing.

However, charities push away from this idea, especially for women over 65 and those fleeing domestic violence.

While for people with a disability, the government has recently recognised this is advantageous.

Following consultations with powerful industry voices the government has made changes, including opening up the disability housing market to private retail investors, rather than having the government and taxpayers buy housing.

The NDIS provides a good model for subsidised rent to community housing providers.

The government should adopt this model to cover other vulnerable groups, such as victims of domestic violence, to ease the housing crisis. It would be a far cheaper and quicker solution than building 30,000 homes over the first five years of the plan.

The Future Housing Fund as a model is seriously flawed.

It is not a reality; it will be a fund activated over the next few years when housing prices are ridiculous.

To understand the flaws, we have to understand how the Future Housing Fund works. Its purpose is to be a fund (like most others) investing in things like the s&p500 to create a long-term fund which can purchase houses on a yearly basis some time in the future if the funds make a profit

Rather than spend time debating the fund and trying to reinvent the wheel, I would urge the government to consider expanding the existing NDIS model.

The NDIS accommodation model itself works really well, because it was designed for the private investor.

It is the 'mum and dad' investors who are in a position to address the crisis, rather than the government or retail investors, if the government was prepared to back them.

Instead of mum and dad investors buying a home for another family or friends to live in, the house could be constructed for social housing purposes.

Investing in a house with a social cause, built to the right housing standards, could be subsidised by the government either through a tax break or a top up in rental payments.

I strongly believe this model would attract investors, and it's one I've built a business on.

People want to help. They want to do more than it in their living rooms and listen to the daily news telling them how dire the situation is for so many people without a roof over their head.

Taking the power away from community groups, who want properties for free, while still getting handouts from the government, which is the intention behind the Housing Future Fund.

It is the power of the people that can fix the problem, rather than significant government intervention.

To achieve this, however, the government needs to act to encourage investors.

Thenow defunct National Rental Affordability Scheme, or similar model, should be reinstated, but extended beyond single person households into shared accommodation.

To use a well-worn analogy, we don't need to reinvent the wheel, or even buy a new car, just put on better tyres!

The government's plan with the Housing Fund would involve investing in the stock market to produce a return, which then gets invested in property. This is a convoluted long way to go about things.

Why not just subsidise rents, which is done all over the world?

The new government changes to the NDIS enacted from July, which include, a premium for risk to the investor, a greater understanding of tenancy demand, and the ability of people with disability to finally live with their friends andfamily, will be effective in easing the accommodation crisis within the disability sector.

There is no doubt these are welcome changes that will make things easier, however, there remains much work to be done in that space.

Further to this, there is another viable option in some of the most sought-after areas when it comes to easing the housing pressure.

I would urge the government to consider implementing these new changes to alleviate the crisis facing other vulnerable groups, particularly women affected by domestic violence.

On one hand, we have a vacancy rate in NDIS of up to 20% in purpose-built housing.

Queensland has the largest challenges in social housing, and yet has the highest vacancy rate of NDIS housing, of between 30-40 per cent sitting vacant.

Perhaps the government can use these homes for social housing outcomes in the short and medium term, rather than just disability housing.

Further to this, I believe by creative innovation, we can bring compassion back to the market.

Imagine a world where women fleeing domestic violence should be able to go to a property manager who has their best interests at heart. These property managers would specialise in housing for the aforementioned groups and have a list of available housing – just the same way a Specialist Disability Accommodation provider does under the NDIS.

Currently, there is virtually no support for them to find suitable accommodation, and those organisations working on the frontline to house them generally have to wait until they are bequeathed houses.

These extremely vulnerable women are being overlooked in terms of the housing shortage.

Either we can continue down the path we are on, which is not sustainable, or we make the right changes with the right policies and oversight and have the chance to fix the housing crisis once and for all.