Should public land be made available for affordable housing.

[bob10]

I think it is something we must talk about, in the next couple of years, homeless numbers will rise, with the shutting down of caravan parks.

Caravan park closures leave pensioners scrambling for affordable homes (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/caravan-park-closures-leave-pensioners-scrambling-for-affordable-homes/ar-BBPXFa3?ocid=spartandhp)

[DiscoMick]

Of course. 115,000 Aussies are homeless every night.
This is a very political topic though so may belong in CA.

[bob10]

Of course. 115,000 Aussies are homeless every night.
This is a very political topic though so may belong in CA.

I don't think this is political at all. It is a social topic. If we have to hide this away in the secret society that is CA, it's a cop out. If AULRO members are not adult enough to discuss this , we as a society really need to have a hard look at ourselves. We can talk about law and order is stuffed, and that is not political? Really?

[DiscoMick]

I agree, but I don't make the rules.
Homelessness needs political solutions, which I won't state here.

[bob10]

I agree, but I don't make the rules.
Homelessness needs political solutions, which I won't state here.

Fair enough. I wont push it further.

[Zeros]

YES.

[bob10]

YES.

My choice, not yours.

[Zeros]

My choice, not yours.

No it’s my choice to say YES I think public land should be used for more public housing.

[bob10]

No it’s my choice to say YES I think public land should be used for more public housing.

I apologise profusely. And now bow out , with respect.

[Zeros]

I apologise profusely. And now bow out , with respect.

No worries at all Bob. Wasn’t sure what you meant. Just trying to be clear.

The lack of public housing for the less fortunate and the the rising cost of living in this country are getting out of hand. I want my taxes to better support those who need support.

[trout1105]

Well if the Government thinks it is a good idea to hand over immense tracts of land to the indigenous community that does absolutely nothing with it then allocating some public land so that the homeless and the younger generation can be housed or afford to buy a house is a No brainer.

[Zeros]

I’m not sure if Bob throws up these discussion topics as provocations. In my view threads like these are about social justice and have nothing to do with racial politics. ...until of course someone can’t resist airing their prejudiced views. When this happens it just de-rails what could have been an intelligent discussion about a significant human rights issue.

...back to Land Rovers fellas?

[p38arover]

I am no social justice warrior.

[trout1105]

I’m not sure if Bob throws up these discussion topics as provocations. In my view threads like these are about social justice and have nothing to do with racial politics. ...until of course someone can’t resist airing their prejudiced views. When this happens it just de-rails what could have been an intelligent discussion about a significant human rights issue.

...back to Land Rovers fellas?

I don't think that this is a human rights issue its more of an economic/political issue.
If there was a large amount of public land made available for affordable housing it would have a signficant effect on house/land values and this would have a flow on effect to the economy as a whole.

[Tote]

So logstically how would you do it? There is crown land around my farm that could be repurposed for public housing but no one would want to live there. Small villages like Cumnock have programs to encourage people to move there but again noone wants to live in the bush. NSW houses for rent at $1 a week (https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/buying/houses-are-available-for-rent-at-1-a-week-in-rural-nsw/news-story/d89d05e12671482caf9a748a099b19a8)

There are already affordable houses and blocks available, they are just not where people want to live. I'm not sure that there is much crown land that could be released in the Newcastle-Sydney-Woolongong at a reasonable price. Who would pay for the infrastructure like roads, electricity, etc for a greenfield development of an affordable estate?
Maybe the bloke in the article would be able to move to regional NSW or SA and rent a house for $120 per week?

Regards,
Tote

[weeds]

Maybe the bloke in the article would be able to move to regional NSW or SA and rent a house for $120 per week?

Regards,
Tote

Totally agree, we seem to think it’s OK to push new Australian into regional areas but the fool olde Ozzie battler.....hell no

[Bigbjorn]

Of course. 115,000 Aussies are homeless every night.
This is a very political topic though so may belong in CA.

I once was a Social Security field officer. I interviewed many homeless clients. A significant proportion were "homeless" by choice. Money otherwise wasted on rent could be used to purchase the essentials of life, grog, tobacco, drugs, gambling, etc.

As to use of public land, I thought that is what the Housing Commission built on.

Caravan parks in major urban areas are dying out due to land values. Parks with a significant population of permanent residents were commonly welfare ghettos. One region I worked once had fourteen caravan parks but is now down to four. The rest are now urban housing estates. Two of the remaining four are now relocatable home parks which dwellings must be bought from the park operator. No vans or annexes allowed, no transients.

[DiscoMick]

Public housing programs have been gutted and stocks sold off, so fixing that requires political decisions.

[Bigbjorn]

Totally agree, we seem to think it’s OK to push new Australian into regional areas but the fool olde Ozzie battler.....hell no

The govt. tried that in the 1950's in an attempt to get sufficient labour for the sugar harvest. The then Dept. of Labour and National Service had a rule that migrants had to go where they were sent by the dept. for two years. They sent totally unsuitable people to cut cane in a Qld. summer. Few stayed. Most just slid off to easier life in capital cities where jobs were then plentiful. One time a liner full of young Maltese men was sent straight to Cairns where the new arrivals were put to work in the cane fields. After a few weeks hardly a one could be found. They were waiting tables and making coffee in Sydney & Melbourne.

Shades of the kanakas and blackbirding. The WASP community regarded the Spanish, Italians, and Maltese as suitable for this work as they weren't like us, not quite white. Nor were they Irish who were regarded as untrustworthy and disloyal.

The Qld. Govt. even considered civil conscription for labour for the cane harvest but the lawyers said it was unconstitutional.

[Zeros]

There's also plenty of public land in and around all Australian cities and major centres.

[PhilipA]

The govt. tried that in the 1950's in an attempt to get sufficient labour for the sugar harvest. The then Dept. of Labour and National Service had a rule that migrants had to go where they were sent by the dept. for two years
Well I reckon a lot of Italians stayed around Innisfail and Ingham and grow sugar cane and bananas to this day.

Regards Philip A

[Bigbjorn]

Well I reckon a lot of Italians stayed around Innisfail and Ingham and grow sugar cane and bananas to this day.

Regards Philip A

They came earlier. Progressively from about 1910 after the kanakas had been sent home. First were Spanish, then Italians in the 1920's, then Maltese in the depression era. Given the political situation in their homelands then many did not want to go back and the depression unemployment kept them on the cane knife. Australian cane cutters despised the "dagoes". Aussie cutters mostly only worked the season and did not go fruit picking or tobacco chipping in the off season like the "dagoes" who ended up owning the farms. Ethnic surnames abound in the sugar districts. Italian/Sicilian, some Spanish around Innisfail, Maltese by the gross at Mackay, and Danes and Germans from Bundaberg south.

I was writing about the 1950's when the sugar industry doubled after the war then doubled again. Calwell's "New Australians" were seen as the solution to the labour shortage but this did not work out. The solution was the Qld. government decision to fund and sponsor design and development of mechanical harvesters no matter the cost.

[vnx205]

There seems to be an assumption that making public land available for housing is some sort of miracle solution to the problem of homelessness.

I thought that the shortage of building blocks was not so much the result of a shortage of patches of dirt, but the reluctance or inability of the relevant authorities to provide the services and infrastructure that make it possible to build on the land.

[DiscoMick]

True. Services can cost more than the land or building.
Most homeless people would be renters, not buyers.
Rental supplements are far too small to go even close to paying a typical rent, as are Centrelink benefits generally.
People may just have enough money to buy food and live in their old car, or rent but not buy food and depend on charity meals. Rent or food but not both. This is the reality many face.

[bee utey]

The cost of land and services means that the only way to have really cheap housing near the jobs market is to go upwards. Unfortunately tenements or tower blocks create their own social problems, especially when the jobs vanish.

[bob10]

I’m not sure if Bob throws up these discussion topics as provocations. In my view threads like these are about social justice and have nothing to do with racial politics. ...until of course someone can’t resist airing their prejudiced views. When this happens it just de-rails what could have been an intelligent discussion about a significant human rights issue.

...back to Land Rovers fellas?


Zeros, old mate, you got me. I am so impressed by the mature discussion on the subject. Restored my faith . I've been derailed a few times, when my plan went haywire. [ what do they say, the best laid plans are forgotten at first contact with the enemy. ] The mere fact that social media [ AULRO, pretty social place] can have a conversation at a mature level, as we are, makes me feel warm and fuzzy. [ no I have not ****ed myself] May it always be so.

[Zeros]

I like your conversation starters Bob. Like fishing from your couch. Throw out a line and see what bites. Lots of hungry fish.

[DiscoMick]

In Asia they build blocks of low rent studio apartments which provide a roof over their heads, have services like air-con, TV and Wi-Fi, security and are close to shops and public transport. I think this could be a good answer for here. They're not slums, they're good quality.

[ramblingboy42]

No, public land should not be made available for affordable housing.

How will it be affordable? Who is going to market it and build at affordable prices?

It's not going to happen and the concept has probably been put up by one of the builders representative bodies.

There are thousands of unoccupied houses all over Australia and these could be sourced...if a govt is genuine.....and made available.

If an affordable housing concept needs to brought to fruition then build upwards and build basic units not luxo apartments , we are talking affordable , it can be done if it's kept simple.

My first home was 14squares , ffs , no one wants to market a home this size now at a realistic price , but a bare arse 10sq hi rise unit in an ordinary suburb without coastal or hinterland views could fit the bill.

[martnH]

If socialist,yes public land for public housing

If capitalist, no. Poor people do not deserve a decent living.

So which way?

[Bigbjorn]

Whilst the land sharks and real estate criminals would be slavering at the idea of getting their greedy paws on cheap or free government land they would never build low cost housing in this land for first home buyers or the homeless. To make the housing affordable the houses would need to be small two or three bedroom designed to be readily extendable as families grow. Also need to have bare minimum of fittings and services and appliances to keep costs down. The rapacious building and development industries are not interested in this. Low cost houses mean low profits. They much prefer to stick the buyer with a monster four or more bedroom, three bathroom, triple garage and swimming pool with all the bells and whistles. One of the reasons young first home buyers complain they can't afford a house is this industry's concentration on high prices and high profits.

[vnx205]

I'm waiting for someone who is advocating making public land available to explain in detail why or how it will solve the housing problem.

There is not much point discussing whether it should be done if it hasn't been established that it will actually solve the problem.

[trout1105]

I'm waiting for someone who is advocating making public land available to explain in detail why or how it will solve the housing problem.

There is not much point discussing whether it should be done if it hasn't been established that it will actually solve the problem.

Simply put if there was more public housing more people would be able to afford to have a roof over their head.
The downside is that if there was more public housing there would be less private renters and this would have a detrimental effect on the housing market.
This is probably why only small parcels of land are allocated at a time so that it doesn't make any waves in house values.

[vnx205]

Simply put if there was more public housing more people would be able to afford to have a roof over their head.
The downside is that if there was more public housing there would be less private renters and this would have a detrimental effect on the housing market.
This is probably why only small parcels of land are allocated at a time so that it doesn't make any waves in house values.

That wasn't the point I was making.

I don't doubt that more affordable housing is a good thing.

My question is how will opening up public land provide more housing?

[DiscoMick]

It won't unless the housing is rented out at affordable rents, which won't happen under a private system, so it has to be government housing.

[RANDLOVER]

Hedgehog Self Build Housing Co-op (http://www.forevergreen.org.uk/Forever_Green_Ecological_Architects/hedgehog-self-build-housing-co-op.html)

Having land available doesn't necessarily mean homes will follow, as where are the homeless going to find the money for houses, but the above type self build co-op could work. This was shown on Grand Designs years ago, in Bob's suburb's namesake, in Blighty.

[DiscoMick]

Only about three percent of rental housing is affordable for homeless people, according to a recent survey.

[bob10]

I like your conversation starters Bob. Like fishing from your couch. Throw out a line and see what bites. Lots of hungry fish.

If enough Australians got involved in this type of conversation at a National level, this country may actually move forward. Aulro may be the start of a trend.

[Zeros]

If enough Australians got involved in this type of conversation at a National level, this country may actually move forward. Aulro may be the start of a trend.

Glad to hear it Bob, I hope you’re right. ...what I don’t understand is why the question even needs to be asked?

We’re clearly short of public housing. Where else is new public housing going to be built but on public land?

I’m even more dismayed when the conversation turns to race or politics or whether homeless people should be provided for or not. None of these should even be a factor.

[vnx205]

[QUOTE=Zeros;2859533
... ... ...
Where else is new public housing going to be built but on public land?
... .... ...
[/QUOTE]

I don't understand why that is the only option.

[biggin]

If socialist,yes public land for public housing

If capitalist, no. Poor people do not deserve a decent living.

So which way?

Grow up Martn.

The homeless are homeless for a reason and affordability is generally way down the list.

[bob10]

It won't unless the housing is rented out at affordable rents, which won't happen under a private system, so it has to be government housing.

Unfortunately a private system has to make a profit, that's the system we live in. I'm thinking an organisation like the Salvation Army, overseen by a Federal Minister , funded by a lottery system. Start small, such as housing designed to accommodate those living rough on the streets. A medical facility would have to be included, for obvious reasons, perhaps using University students in their final year overseen by Military doctors. The students would be able to pay off their HECS debt quicker, and the Military doctors would gain valuable experience dealing with third World type problems, standing them in good stead for peace keeping / making operations which we have been told to expect more of in this overcrowded World. People like Twiggy Forrest could get involved, and other very rich people could add their expertise. As more of these facilities are built, employ the residents as cleaners, gardeners, etc, to help raise their self esteem. I know you can pick holes in this suggestion, I know that many homeless have alcohol/ drug problems, but moaning about a problem is not going to fix it. Some one has to make the first step.

I also know this won't solve the problem of the caravan park residents mentioned in the article. What's wrong with Governments providing public land for Government run caravan parks for low income residents, [ pensioners] where part of the pension is used for rent. Pie in the sky stuff, I know , but I remember a trip to Sydney, not that long ago, where almost every street corner in the CBD had a beggar, with a cardboard carton having their plea written in scribbled text. I've been to India, and seen the plight of their homeless, forced to begging on the streets. Not in my country, we should do better. Must do better. The journey of a thousand mile starts with a single step. [ rant over :soapbox:]

[DiscoMick]

I think it's great you're trying to get people to think about this topic in a sensible way Bob, so good on you.
I remember being shocked when I lived in Thailand to fly to Sydney one time and see there were more beggars in Sydney than in Bangkok. It just didn't seem right for such a wealthy country to fail to take care of its own people.

A recent report into superannuation by the Grattan Institute said an increasing number of older women without much super who were renting housing would become homeless when they stopped working because they wouldn't be able to afford market rents.

They said the only answer was to increase the rental supplement for pensioners, which hasn't kept up with rising rents.

So really, there is a whole chunk of the population who will never be able to afford to rent under the private rental market.
They include jobless young people who just can't survive on the tiny Youth Allowance.

Possible solutions?

Raise the rental supplement
Share houses where several people rent together
Studio apartments
Caravans

But they will have to be on public land, because they won't be affordable if they are private

[martnH]

Relax I am sure your property portfolio will still be on the rise with more public housing.

Cheers
Grow up Martn.

The homeless are homeless for a reason and affordability is generally way down the list.

[laney]

Many homeless are there by choice as has been said here but this isn't just a government problem it's a social problem as well if public housing was built rented out to low/middle income wage earning people then after say 7 years the government offered the tenant to buy the house for what it cost to build back then and rent paid could be there deposit and loan is government loan with small interest. This would ease pressure on private rental market which would see more homeless people in accommodation the money the government makes from sales on homes to tenants could go to building more homes. This could also work with hi rise accommodation as ownership of a dwelling bring pride in your home and that leads to less problems with hi rise complexes' the first home buyers in my opinion is a waste of money as the government offers a set amount and the new home goes up by that or more so the only winners there are the banks builders and real estate agents. To say we could put people on drugs in cheap housing wouldn't work as they wouldn't have the rent to pay to government or private as their habit is more important taking it out of there social security before they get it won't work as this would mean they find other ways to pay for there own self inflicted habit usually crime.

[bob10]

Many homeless are there by choice as has been said here but this isn't just a government problem it's a social problem as well if public housing was built rented out to low/middle income wage earning people then after say 7 years the government offered the tenant to buy the house for what it cost to build back then and rent paid could be there deposit and loan is government loan with small interest. This would ease pressure on private rental market which would see more homeless people in accommodation the money the government makes from sales on homes to tenants could go to building more homes. This could also work with hi rise accommodation as ownership of a dwelling bring pride in your home and that leads to less problems with hi rise complexes' the first home buyers in my opinion is a waste of money as the government offers a set amount and the new home goes up by that or more so the only winners there are the banks builders and real estate agents. To say we could put people on drugs in cheap housing wouldn't work as they wouldn't have the rent to pay to government or private as their habit is more important taking it out of there social security before they get it won't work as this would mean they find other ways to pay for there own self inflicted habit usually crime.

There was a system, called housing commission, in Qld , that provided low rent housing with an option to buy. I know because when we moved from the bush, in order to give myself and my siblings a better education than Dear Old Mum could give us over correspondence and school of the air, we lived win Nana , at Stafford Heights, three families in the one house. Probably not policy, but no one really checked back then, as long as the rent was payed. It may still exist, to my knowledge only Qld had this system. Being involved with a junior Rugby League club, you rub shoulders with all types, mostly from the lower social economic cohort [ love that word] and after talking to some young men who are at the coalface of poverty, who have mates who do drugs, I have found that their is a spirit of mateship among them, they look after each other. They don't condemn , or ostracise, they just get on with life. Leave us old farts in shame, really. Us oldies do not have the answer, the future of our Nation is not in the hands of the privileged children, I believe, but in the hands of the young ones who have done the hard yards. As it has always been. We ignore them at our peril.

[DiscoMick]

Housing department still exists, after surviving an attempt by a previous mob to sell it off. Needs more funding.

[Zeros]

The culture of privatisation has rapidly turned this country from a social democracy which cared for its citizens, towards becoming a capitalist autocracy that values a winner take all economy over humanity.

If we continue down this path, time will come where the people will rebel, homeless or not.

[bob10]

The culture of privatisation has rapidly turned this country from a social democracy which cared for its citizens, towards becoming a capitalist autocracy that values a winner take all economy over humanity.

If we continue down this path, time will come where the people will rebel, homeless or not.

Let's hope they rebel with the most important weapon they have, their vote.

[Zeros]

Let's hope they rebel with the most important weapon they have, their vote.

Indeed. Whilst remaining apolitical, let’s hope there’s some kind of alternative vision worth voting for.

[incisor]

talk politics elsewhere if you must

most of us don't want to see it on here...

ta

[bob10]

So sorry, incisor, may I, as a form of recompense, offer this? A classic.

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ab7axFMVWa0)