FEDERAL ELECTION - Queensland Shelter

THE 

QUARTERLY 

FEDERAL ELECTION 2010 

Featuring data, 

analysis and articles 

relevant to the 

Federal Election

CONTENTS 

The Queensland Shelter Quarterly is 

published by Queensland Shelter Inc 

Email: comms@qshelter.asn.au 

Web: www.qshelter.asn.au 

The Queensland Shelter Quarterly 

Volume 5, Number 4 

August 2010 

Executive Officer: 

Adrian Pisarski 

Editor: 

Jasmine McCormack 

Contributions for the QShelter 

Quarterly can be submitted to: 

comms@qshelter.asn.au 

Copyright: 

Articles are subject to copyright. Apart 

from dealings under the Copyright Act 

1968, persons and organisations wanting 

to reproduce material must obtain written 

permission from both Queensland Shelter 

and the author. 

Federal Election: Labor scrapes in...........................................................Page 4 

NAHA baseline performance report 2009-2009...................................... 6 

National community housing standards manual...................................... 6 

National Shelter Chairperson’s report..................................................... 10 

Indigenous: COAG Reform Council baseline performance report 08/09....... 11 

Our tax system makes our housing too expensive and needs to be fixed 13 

State Budget 2010-2011: More houses, shorter waiting time but a long 

way to go predicted.................................................................................... 15 

Logan Housing Interagency Network: real estate networking 

breakfasts................................................................................................. 18 

First Dog Cartoon.................................................................................... 20 

Upcoming events..................................................................................... 21 

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this 

publication are the views of the author and 

are not necessarily those of Queensland 

Shelter Committee Policy. 

ISSN: 1832-6625

FEDERAL ELECTION: 

Labor scrapes in 

Finally we have a result! And if you 

ask any of the Q Shelter staff who have 

watched me go quietly insane on a daily 

basis, they will tell you that it couldn’t 

have come soon enough. (editors observation) 

Overall the outcome of the election is a 

positive one, with Labor being able to 

offer the most stable government over 

the three year term and offering continued 

investment in housing through 

NRAS, the Building Better Regional 

Cities fund, and National Partnership 

Agreements. That teamed with the 

Greens holding the balance in the senate 

will hopefully see affordable housing 

regain some momentum in the political 

agenda. 

However, the fact remains that the 

Federal election; six weeks dedicated to 

‘boat people’, NBN and the changing 

of Prime Minister; was very disappointing 

from an affordable housing 

perspective. The Greens led the charge 

by releasing a policy which is broadly 

consistent with that of National and 

Queensland Shelter and was innovative 

in its approach to dealing with stock 

underutilisation through the convert to 

rent scheme. 

Relying on its existing policy, while 

irrefutably positive, the ALP failed 

to release a new policy platform, or 

acknowledge the impact of unaffordable 

housing on households during the 

campaign. 

Likewise, the Coalition also failed to 

acknowledge the importance of housing 

as an election issue, and only released a 

housing policy on the second last day of 

the election campaign – providing very 

little opportunity for media coverage or 

public understanding. 

It is also important to recognise, that 

many other crucial social issues went 

under the radar during the election campaign, 

including Indigenous affairs and 

homelessness. 

Queensland and National Shelter will 

continue to work with all parties to 

promote the best policy outcomes for 

affordable housing in Queensland and 

Australia. 

National Shelter Chairperson’s Report 

Policy Outlines 

ALP 

As the incumbent government, The ALP 

already has significant policy on affordable 

housing including: 

• The development of a National Affordable 

Housing Agreement 

• National Partnership Agreements 

with States on Homelessness ($400m), 

Social Housing ($800m), Remote Indigenous 

Housing ($5.5b over 10 years) 

• Establish the Housing Affordability 

Fund ($512m) 

• Boost Social Housing by 20,000 properties 

($5.65b) 

• Create 50,000 affordable rental 

properties through NRAS ($1b over 10 

years) 

The ALP has committed over $13b in 

new funding towards affordable housing 

programs. It has committed to the creation 

of an additional 70,000 properties 

by 2014. It announced the creation of 

a Building Better Regional Cities Fund 

of some $500m in the first week of the 

election to improve home ownership in 

regional cities. 

Overall this follows a program of improvement 

outlined by Queensland and 

National Shelter and is a practical and 

welcome boost to affordable housing 

programs. It is fully costed and committed 

and forms a base for meeting targets 

and forward programs. 

There has been no criticism of the 

building program associated with the 

stimulus spending on housing and the 

NRAS program has met any reasonable 

measure of implementation. 

We commend the ALP’s coherent 

policy surrounding affordable housing, 

yet remain frustrated by its failure to 

recognise the issue during the election 

campaign. 

Coalition 

The Coalition released its housing 

policy on the Friday prior to the election 

and announced its priorities as: 

• Introduce a National Home Affordability 

Compact 

• Affordable Housing Vouchers 

• State Housing Trusts 

• A National Framework for Community 

Housing 

We welcome the Coalition’s support of 

NRAS. While some of the measures 

outlined in the Coalition’s policy are 

consistent Q Shelter’s program including 

direct investment into the housing 

market, A National Framework and a 

National Home Affordability Compact, 

we believe that the introduction of housing 

vouchers and State Housing Trusts 

will have a much greater negative 

impact on the housing market. There is, 

however, no costing or funding allocated 

to any policy measure. 

Having State Housing Authorities put 

all their own housing (and the housing 

they own but which is managed by 

community organisations) into State 

Housing Trusts, appears to be a regression 

to the old housing commissions 

from which we have recently emerged; 

it is an outmoded policy. 

Implicit in this is also an incorrect view 

that State Housing Authorities cannot 

manage, when all the evidence shows 

they manage well and have very high 

tenancy satisfaction rates. 

The coalition seeks the dismantling of 

public housing and misses the point of 

the past three years which is to build the 

capacity and holdings of the community 

sector. 

The other plank of coalition policy is 

the creation of housing vouchers which 

we say are unworkable, expensive and 

which will add further inflationary pressure 

to an overburdened market. 

The Greens 

The Greens housing policy broadly reflects 

the sentiments of Queensland and 

National Shelter, and we commend their 

acknowledgement of affordable housing 

during the Federal election campaign. 

We recognise the innovative approach 

taken by the greens, and welcome the 

Convert to rent initiative, which tackles 

affordability and stock underutilisation 

in Australia. The Greens policy is a 

widely coherent policy, which in many 

ways is reflective of the ALP’s and we 

are encouraged by their support for 

continued investment into Affordable 

Housing. 

Q Shelter Quarterley 

4 

Election 2010

NAHA: baseline performance 

report for 2008-09 

The Council of Australian Governments 

(COAG) have agreed, under the 

National Affordable Housing 

Agreement (NAHA) to ensure people 

have access to affordable, safe and 

sustainable housing that contributes to 

social and economic participation. 

The recently released COAG NAHA 

Baseline performance report 2008-09 

outlines NAHA’s six outcomes: 

•People who are homeless or at risk 

of homelessness achieve sustainable 

housing and social inclusion 

•People are able to rent housing that 

meets their needs 

•People can purchase affordable 

housing 

•People have access to housing through 

an efficient and responsive housing 

market 

•Indigenous people have the same 

housing opportunities (in homelessness 

services, rental, purchase and access to 

the market) as other Australians. 

• Indigenous people have improved 

Noelle Hudson, Senior Policy Officer 

housing amenity and reduced 

overcrowding, particularly in remote 

areas and discrete communities. 

The report aims to establish a set of 

baseline data on which the States and 

Territories performance can be assessed 

and measured. The authors of the report 

state ‘data collections should inform 

about the ‘interconnected nature of the 

difference parts of the housing sector 

and how government and performance 

area flows to other areas’. 

The NAHA baseline performance report 

has two strong themes. 

1. Broad approach to improving housing 

outcomes for all of housing sector – 

including, renters, buyers, those in 

the housing sector and those that are 

excluded including whether people 

receive assistance or not. 

2. Specifically committed to improving 

housing outcomes for people facing 

homelessness and Indigenous 

Australians. 

Key contextual differences between 

Queensland and other States and 

Territories 

Almost 20% of Australia’s population 

live in Queensland. The state has a 

higher percentage of people with a 

disability; Indigenous Australians; 

people living in remote and very remote 

areas than the Australian average but 

less people aged over 65 years. 

The State’s proportion of people 

living in the most socio-economically 

disadvantages areas is level with the 

national average. In Queensland the 

upper limit of the 40% of equivalised 

disposable income is $594 per week, 

higher than the Australian average of 

$570 per week (as shown in Fig.1). 

However this is not very high and 

displays why people are in housing 

stress and struggle to meet the rising 

costs of everyday living. 

900 

800 

700 

600 

$ per week 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas ACT NT Aust 

State or Territory 

Figure 1: Comparison of Income thresholds for low-income household by State and Territory 

2007-2008 bottom 40% of equivalised disposable income 


6 

Election 2010

NAHA Outcomes 

People who are homes or at risk of 

homelessness achieve sustainable 

housing and social inclusion 

This outcome will be measured by 

the rates of homelessness and repeat 

homelessness. The report notes it is 

difficult to count homeless people and 

states that the data in the report has its 

limitations including the proportion 

of undercount and over-counting 

depending on what data is used. 

Homelessness rates are consistent 

across Australia except in Queensland 

which has 69 people experiencing 

homelessness per 10,000 and the 

Northern Territory (248 per 10,000) and 

compared with 42 per 10,000 in NSW, 

Vic and ACT. 

Around one-sixth of homelessness is 

primary, however nationally 63.7% 

of people experience secondary 

homelessness . Across Australia, 

primary homelessness rates increase 

the further out you go – the more 

remote the higher the level of although 

Queensland differed from this trend. In 

Queensland the highest rates of primary 

homelessness were in the inner and 

outer regional areas (Fig. 2). 

Homelessness is highest amongst 

young people; with Queensland’s 

average of 100 per 10,000 above the 

national average of 92/10,000. The 

gender breakdown of young people 

experiencing homelessness shows 

young females 97/10,000 compared 

to young males 87/10,000 across 

Australia. 

People are able to rent housing that 

meets their needs 

Nationally more than one in three low 

income households that are in rental 

stress and in Queensland 37.4% of low 

income renter households are in rental 

stress. Rental stress highest in private 

market with Queensland (45.6%) 

slightly less than the national average of 

47.5%. 

The majority of Queensland households 

in the lowest 40% live in private rental 

(63.8%) with public housing 33.8% 

and other landlords the remaining 2.4% 

(Fig. 3). Compared to the national 

average Queensland has significantly 

less people in public housing with many 

more at the mercy of the volatile private 

rental market. It further reinforces the 

need for continued investment in social 

housing and other affordable housing 

products to protect the most vulnerable 

households. 

People can purchase affordable 

housing 

Sixty-eight per cent of Australian 

households own or are purchasing a 

home, and Queensland’s proportion is 

lower with 65.4% Nationally there 

was a very small proportion of homes 

sold were affordable to low income 

households (30% percentile) – only 

3% were below the 30% of income to 

mortgage ratio. Queensland had less 

than the national average in affordable 

homes to moderate income households 

with on 16.6% compared to Australia’s 

average of 27.5% 

This was further reinforced with 

Brisbane and Perth being names 

the least affordable capital cities, 

with affordability at 9.8% and 5.5% 

respectively. Affordability outside 

metropolitan areas was three times 

more in Queensland (12%) than the 

proportion of homes affordable in other 

capital cities which had a difference 

of 4% (Perth was the exception with 

15.9%). 

In Australia 46.6 per cent of low income 

households purchasing a home were in 

mortgage stress. This point reinforces 

the earlier comment regarding the lack 

of affordable houses for low income 

houses. 

Remote 

12% 

Very remote 

4% 

Major cities 

14% 

Inner regional 

31% 

Outer regional 

39% 

Figure 2: Percentage of people experiencing primary homelessness in Queensland on 6/8/2006

Aust 

NT 

ACT 

State or Territory 

Tas 

SA 

WA 

Qld 

Vic 

NSW 

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 

Per cent 

Figure 3: Low income renter household by tenure type by State and Territory (%) 

Public Housing Private Landlord Other landlord 

People have access to housing through 

an efficient and responsive housing 

market 

The report does not have any indicators 

or data sets relating to this outcome 

with the report calling for development 

of indicators and naming the National 

Supply Council as a potential partner in 

this process. 

Recommendations 

The report contains a number of 

recommendations in relation to the 

frequency of information collections, 

the setting of bench marks and targets 

and others relations to the indicators 

for NAHA outcomes. The writers of 

the report call for the development of 

additional performance indicators that 

measure the achievement of sustainable 

housing and social inclusion; intercensus 

counts or yearly data collection 

that indicate change in the homeless 

population change and measures 

to quantify repeat homelessness. 

Additional recommendations include 

the development of indicators to 

show the extent to which rental 

accommodation meeting tenant’s 

needs; how to measure an efficient 

and responsive housing market and 

improving the collection of data in 

relation to Indigenous people’s housing 

outcomes and overall consideration for 

the indicators and methods used. 

Conclusion 

This baseline report will be used by 

the government to track and rate it’s 

performance (and in effect the housing 

providers and services involved in 

homelessness and support) against the 

nominated NAHA outcomes over the 

years of the agreement. However robust 

evidence is only useful if it actually 

reflects meaningful information. 

The recommendations identify the 

limitations of some of the data methods 

and indicators and call for further 

enhancement and development of 

indicators which go to satisfying the 

needs of policy developers and the 

community service organisations. This 

NAHA Baseline performance report 

2008-09 contains a large amount of data 

in one document – it presents each State 

and Territories position at that point in 

time using some data that has not been 

readily available to all. For this purpose 

alone it is an important resource tool 

for people involved in housing and 

homelessness policy and provision in 

Australia. 

References 

1. Data Source from ABS, AIHW and Mackenzie and 

Chamberlain cited in COAG Reform Council National 

Affordable Housing Agreement: Baseline performance 

report for 2008-09Report to the Council of the Australian 

Governments 30 April 2010 Australian Government: p54 

2. COAG Reform Council National Affordable 

Housing Agreement: Baseline performance report 

for 2008-09Report to the Council of the Australian 


3.COAG Reform Council National Affordable 




4.Data Source from ABS, AIHW and Mackenzie and 





5.Data Source from ABS, AIHW and Mackenzie and 





6.Source ABS (Unpublished 2008) Survey of Income 

and Housing in COAG Reform Council National 




7.Source ABS (2009) Survey of Income and Housing 

in COAG Reform Council National Affordable 




8.COAG Reform Council National Affordable 



Governments 30 April 2010 Australian Government: 

p128 


8 

Election 2010

NATIONAL COMMUNITY HOUSING 

Kate Cowmeadow, Operations Manager 

STANDARDS MANUAL 

Mid last year Queensland Shelter was 

contracted to gather feedback from 

Queensland based stakeholders on 

the proposed text for the third edition 

of the National Community Housing 

Standards Manual. 

Three strong themes emerged from our 

consultations: 

•stakeholders were strongly supportive 

of setting high standards and continuous 

quality improvement in Community 

Housing service delivery; 

•community housing providers had a 

range of concerns about the processes 

involved in becoming accredited, and 

•the standards and Manual need to be 

flexible enough to be relevant to a range 

of providers from very small to growth 

providers. 

Minister for Housing, Tanya Plibersek 

and Community Housing Federation 

of Australia Executive Director, Carol 

Croce released the third edition of 

the National Community Housing 

Standards Manual on 9 June 2010. 

The first edition of the standards, 

developed by the National Community 

Housing Forum, were published in 

1998, followed by the second edition in 

2003. The manual includes: 

•common national standards for 

community housing 

•a system to assess organisations on the 

basis of the standards, and 

•a structure to accredit community 

housing providers on the basis of the 

standards. 

The new manual includes two new 

standards, one on environmental 

sustainability reflecting the 

communities greater focus on this 

issue, and another on asset management 

strategies, reflecting the growth agenda 

for community housing providers. 

Information about the detail of the 

changes of the standards is available on 

the Department of Communities website 

- http://www.chsau.qld.gov.au/national/ 

and will be promoted at upcoming 

Housing and Homelessness Network 

meetings. 

From a policy angle, it is interesting 

to consider the relationship between 

this new edition of the standards and 

the emerging national regulatory 

framework for community housing 

providers. They are also relevant 

to the Department of Communities 

current work on streamlining standards 

across the service areas of the combined 

Department. 


9 

Election 2010

NATIONAL SHELTER: 

CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT 

Adrian Pisarski, Chairperson National Shelter 

The past quarter has been an eventful 

period and there has been a great deal of 

activity at both state and national levels. 

In this report I focus on the national. 

It is possible to write now the anxiety 

of the past couple of months has 

passed. Since Labor decided Kevin 

Rudd no longer had their confidence 

as P.M. there has been a question mark 

over support for some of the causes he 

championed, particularly the issues of 

homelessness and affordable housing. 

Whilst we have confidence in the views 

of Minister Plibersek and the Treasurer 

Wayne Swan, both of whom have consistently 

champion affordable housing, 

the views of the P.M. are unclear and 

the depth of the problem requires a 

P.M.’s imprimatur to produce the sustained 

process required to address the 

scale of the problem. 

Another key aspect is Indigenous housing. 

National Shelter ran a very engaging 

forum on Indigenous housing in 

August. Over 30 delegates from every 

state and territory, excepting Victoria, 

attended including state Shelter reps. 

Held over two days in Brisbane the forum 

looked at the issues and began the 

first national conversation about Indigenous 

housing, involving those affected 

and involved since ATSIC. Whilst there 

has been a great deal of attention given 

to remote Indigenous housing by various 

governments, our process was intent 

on also looking at urban and regional 

Indigenous housing. 

Over 75% of Indigenous people live in 

non-remote areas of Australia and we 

need to be addressing the massive housing 

issues confronting them. 

With an emphasis on improved housing 

outcomes and enhanced self determination, 

the forum 

called for: 

• more resources to be urgently directed 

to producing 20,000 dwellings identified 

by the AIHW; 

• support for Indigenous community 

housing providers to play a central role 

in meeting this need; 

• the involvement of Indigenous communities 

in all aspects of the response, 

from high level policy to on the ground 

delivery and management; 

• mainstream government and community 

providers to engage with 

Indigenous communities to develop appropriate 

housing and support in order 

to address issues of overcrowding and 

sustain tenancies; 

• programs to be developed to support 

Indigenous people to access market 

housing, including home ownership and 

private rental; and 

• the establishment of an Indigenous 

owned and controlled National Indigenous 

Housing body 

The final report from the forum is available 

on the National Shelter website, 

www.shelter.org.au 

National Shelter, with and through the 

National Association of Tenant Organisations 

(NATO) has also produced 

a paper outlining a reform agenda for 

tenancy legislation across Australia. The 

report was presented to Tanya Plibersek 

by myself and Penny Carr from NATO. 

We are now turning our attention to the 

issues of marginal tenancies (boarders 

and lodgers, caravan parks) and to the 

Henry review of taxation and transfer 

payments. 

We remain part of the Affordable Housing 

Summit Group and have also joined 

with the ACTU, ACOSS, CHFA and 

Homelessness Australia in forming the 

Community Organisations Housing Alliance 

(COHA), to bolster the community 

policy and lobbying process. 

I have presented at a National Indigenous 

Housing Conference, the National 

Homelessness Conference and have 

conducted a number of media interviews 

over the period so as I started out 

saying it has been eventful.

Indigenous: COAG Reform Council 

baseline performance report 

Kate Langdon, Statewide ICHO 

2008-2009 Coordinator 

The Council of Australian Governments 

(COAG) recently released their baseline 

performance report for 2008-09. The 

report devotes two chapters to reporting 

on housing opportunities for Indigenous 

people, and the housing amenity 

and overcrowding for Indigenous 

people. It is the intention of COAG 

that the National Affordable Housing 

Agreement (NAHA) contributes 

significantly in closing the gap 

on Indigenous disadvantage. For 

Indigenous Australians this would 

mean greater access to affordable, 

safe and secure housing, greater 

access to homelessness and housing 

services, a significant decline in the 

number of households experiencing 

extreme overcrowding due to a lack of 

affordable and culturally appropriate 

housing stock, and the eradication of 

the extreme discrimination experienced 

by Indigenous Australians in the private 

rental market which prevents them from 

accessing housing. 

In its analysis of the level of 

disadvantage experienced by Indigenous 

Australians in the housing arena, the 

report considers the proportion of 

Indigenous Australians experiencing 

homelessness, the proportion of lowincome 

Indigenous households in rental 

stress, the proportion of Indigenous 

households owning or purchasing a 

home, and the proportion of homes 

sold or built that are affordable by 

low and moderate Indigenous income 

households. 

For a number of reasons such as 

their likelihood to be more mobile 

than general populations, and their 

likelihood of living in remote areas, 

it is particularly difficult to accurately 

measure the number of Indigenous 

Australians experiencing homelessness. 

However, despite this, nationally, 

primary homelessness is over seven 

times higher for Indigenous people, 

with the Northern Territory having 

the highest rate of Indigenous primary 

homelessness. Further, Indigenous 

people remain over-represented in all 

categories of homelessness, primary, 

secondary and tertiary. Nationally, 

the Indigenous homelessness rate was 

almost four times that of the non- 

Indigenous rate. 

The report also indicated that repeat 

experiences of homelessness were 

significantly higher among Indigenous 

people, with many repeatedly needing 

SAAP services. Interestingly, rental 

stress levels were generally lower 

among Indigenous households with 

31.7 per cent of low-income Indigenous 

households renting in rental stress, 

12.1 percentage points below the 

non-Indigenous rate. This could be 

attributed to the fact that low-income 

Indigenous households are more likely 

to be in social housing, that Indigenous 

households are more likely to be 

significantly larger than other Australian 

households thereby increasing the 

household income relative to rental 

Figure 9.2 Proportion of households living in overcrowded conditions, by Indigenous status, by State and Territory, 2008 


11 

Election 2010

costs, and perhaps also the differences 

in the geographical distribution of 

Indigenous households to other 

households. 

The report also indicated that less than 

one-third of Indigenous people own a 

home, as opposed to 69 per cent of non- 

Indigenous, with Western Australia and 

the Northern Territory having the largest 

gaps. In addition, only 11 per cent of 

homes sold were deemed affordable to 

Indigenous households with moderate 

income. Homes are considered 

affordable when the household spends 

no more than 30 per cent of its gross 

income on mortgage payments. 

The COAG report also devotes a 

chapter to investigating housing 

amenity and overcrowding for 

Indigenous people, with the aspired 

outcome that Indigenous people have 

improved housing amenity and reduced 

overcrowding, particularly in remote 

areas and discrete communities. The 

report indicates that not only are 

Indigenous Australians more likely to 

like in inadequate, poorly maintained 

housing, but they are particularly 

likely to be living in overcrowded 

conditions, especially in remote and 

discrete communities. The number of 

overcrowded Indigenous households 

in Australia is listed at 26,000 in 

the report, with 34% of Indigenous 

households in the Northern Territory 

living in overcrowded conditions. 

Indigenous people are more than 

five times more likely to be living in 

overcrowded conditions than non- 

Indigenous people. The results of this 

are profound, impacting on Indigenous 

Australians’ access to employment, 

access to education, and their health. 

Crowded living conditions can have the 

effect of exacerbating domestic violence 

or tensions within a household, and are 

not conducive particularly to children 

being able to study, sleep and relax. 

The gap therefore between the number 

of Indigenous and non-Indigenous 

Australians living in crowded 

households is frightening because of its 

potential implications. 

The COAG report also recognises the 

need for housing to be of an acceptable 

standard, meaning access to clean water 

for cooking, drinking and washing, 

and functional sewerage services. It 

recognises the critical need for housing 

to be structurally sound and functional 

in that it can provide shelter, privacy, 

and access to cooking and cleaning 

facilities. The report indicates that 

overall, most Indigenous households are 

living in acceptable housing however, 

in the Northern Territory, 71.8 per cent 

of Indigenous households were living in 

houses on an unacceptable standard. 

From the baseline report, it is clear 

that there is still a long way to go in 

particular areas before the gap is fully 

closed on Indigenous disadvantage. 

Measuring the gaps however is an 

important starting point from which 

progress can be tracked to ensure that 

access to adequate housing is improved 

for Indigenous Australians and 

overcrowding is reduced. 

Notes: 

1. Indigenous data is sourced from the 

NATSISS 2008. Non-Indigenous data is sourced 

from the SIH 2007-08. 

Sources: ABS (unpublished) National Aboriginal and 

Torres Strait Islander Social Survey 2008; ABS (unpublished) 

Survey of Income and Housing2007-08. 

Below: Attendees at the National Indigenous Housing Roundtable 


12 

Election 2010

Our tax system makes our 

housing too expensive 

and needs fixing Adrian Pisarski, Executive Officer 

An oldie but a goodie, with post 

election relevance 

The tax treatment of housing helps 

explain why Australia’s housing is so 

expensive and as some commentators 

have claimed, is both “upside down and 

back to front.” 

The way we tax, or exempt housing 

from tax, provides greater benefits to 

those on higher incomes than those on 

low incomes and to those who have 

established themselves in the market 

rather than those trying to. 

It also gives free kicks to investors to 

generate personal wealth rather than 

using public money to provide a public 

good, in this case affordable rental 

housing. 

The Rudd Government’s Nation 

building and jobs stimulus contained 

nearly $6b worth of new investment in 

affordable housing, however the most 

important reform to housing should be 

its tax treatment. 

The exemption of owner occupied 

housing from a range of taxes, 

exempting investors from 50% of 

capital gains and their ability to offset 

losses against any income source 

(negative gearing), costs the tax system 

over $28b each year, every year. 

On top of this, first home owner grants 

(FHOG) fuel demand whilst not adding 

to net supply, adding further inflationary 

pressure. FHOG may help many to get a 

foothold but it will cost them in the end. 

Grants are one off, interest bills may 

last forever. 

The base problem with Australia’s 

housing markets is an inability to supply 

sufficient housing to meet demand. 

This is particularly so at the lower 

end where we now have a shortage of 

251,000 affordable rental properties.[i] 

Whilst we have this shortfall house 

price inflation continues to deter general 

investment in residential rental because 

rental yields continue to fall relative to 

the capital value of property. 

Negative gearing encourages investment 

at the upper end of the market rather 

than the low and contributes to this 

problem. Whilst this has been somewhat 

offset by the welcome National Rental 

Affordability Scheme, there is still an 

imbalance of scale. 

There is also a major impediment to 

NRAS developing its potential because 

of the uncertainty about its effect 

on the charitable status on the many 

community housing providers who 

administer the scheme. 

As Ken Henry sits down to frame his 

report on tax and welfare he should 

consider a number of measures to 

address these problems. 

Limit or remove the capital gains tax 

exemption on higher priced owner 

occupied housing above a reasonable 

threshold such as a $2m value. 

Limit the inflationary pressure of 

current negative gearing provisions by 

quarantining the deductibility of costs 

on rentals housing to the income from 

rental housing, rather than any income. 

Provide support to first home owners 

through the tax system instead of a 

grant to reduce the inflationary effect of 

boosting demand via lump sum grants 

that only end up on first home prices. 

Provide certainty for investors in NRAS 

and the community housing providers 

by establishing the provision of 

affordable rental housing as a charitable 

activity. 

Use the tax system to encourage other 

forms of investment in affordable rental, 

such as tapering negative gearing so its 

benefits maximised to investors at the 

lower rather than upper end. 

Henry George, the 19th century 

American social philosopher argued 

for a single tax on land as a means to 

stop the inevitable inflation of house 

prices beyond incomes which we are 

experiencing in Australia, it is time a 

shift to land tax was also more seriously 

considered. 


13 

Election 2010


14 

Election 2010

State Budget 2010-2011: More houses, 

shorter waiting time but a long way to 

go predicted 

Budgets are an essential financial 

planning tool that tells the story of 

what was predicted to happen, what 

actually happened and what is coming 

up on the horizon (estimates) for the 

organisation. This article investigates 

Queensland’s 2010-11 State Budget 

including population growth, areas of 

capital investment, indigenous housing, 

waiting times, predicted demand, crisis 

housing and private market assistance. 

This year’s budget reporting format has 

changed with the previous Department 

of Housing’s accounts being included 

in the new amalgamated Department of 

Communities budget figures. 

Population growth 

One major headline of the Bligh 

Government’s 2010-2011 budget was 

the announcement to increase the 

First Home Owner Grant to $11,000 

for new dwellings built outside 

South East Queensland. This is in 

response to the managing population 

growth in Queensland by encouraging 

regionalisation. Other announcements 

included extended the Urban Land 

Development Authority’s powers and 

scope to other areas in Queensland and 

investigating ways to deliver affordable 

housing options for people on low-tomiddle 

incomes . It is an encouraging 

sign to see housing recognised as an 

important element when planning for 

growth and encouraging economic 

opportunities, especially if it is tied 

to sound infrastructure and transport 

expenditure. 

Capital Investment 

The big ticket item for the Department 

of Communities (Housing and 

Homelessness Services) was the Nation 

Building and Jobs plan with 300 

units completed and 3000 dwellings 

construction started. This is on top of 

the additional 350 discounted market 

rental dwellings have been delivered 

through the NRAS program with 

more to come in future years. The 

government stated $36.4 million from 

Social Housing National Partnership 

Agreement was used to fund 

construction on 217 new social housing 

rental units and complete 79 new units, 

with 296 in total. 

Great news on the overall supply side 

(over 4100 through these programs to 

date) – however continued efforts to 

maintain this level of additional stock is 

needed to overcome Queensland’s huge 

shortage in affordable housing. 

Indigenous housing 

Indigenous communities had 353 

rental units upgraded and 176 new 

dwellings built in 2009-10. This was 

11% less than predicted continuing the 

underspend with Indigenous housing 

as shown in the graph (Figure 1). 

Although this is a vast improvement on 

the previous year, the estimate for 2010- 

2011 shows a 14% reduction in capital 

housing investment. The Department’s 

states this is due to construction carried 

over from previous years to 2009-10 

and predicts there will be minimal 

carryover in 2010-2011 . Continued 

investment and growth of Indigenous 

housing is vital, especially as one of the 

new budget measures is ‘Overcrowding 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

in Indigenous Housing’ which is 

estimated to be 24% for 2010-2011. 

This leads to the question of how can 

we “Close Indigenous housing 

Indigenous communities had 353 

rental units upgraded and 176 new 

dwellings built in 2009-10. This was 

11% less than predicted continuing the 

underspend with Indigenous housing 

as shown in the graph (Figure 1). 

Although this is a vast improvement 

on the previous year, the estimate for 

2010-2011 shows a 14% reduction 

in capital housing investment. The 

Department’s states this is due to 

construction carried over from previous 

years to 2009-10 and predicts there will 

be minimal carryover in 2010-2011 . 

Continued investment and growth of 

Indigenous housing is vital, especially 

as one of the new budget measures is 

‘Overcrowding in Indigenous Housing’ 

which is estimated to be 24% for 2010- 

2011. This leads to the question of how 

can we “Close the Gap” on Indigenous 

disadvantage when almost 1 in 4 

indigenous houses are overcrowded 

Figure 1: Number of dwellings delivered through capital programs to Indigenous communities 

64 

Actual 2007- 

2008 

148 

Estimate 

2008-2009 

95 

Actual 

2008-2009 

196 

Estimate 

2009-2010 

176 

Actual 

2009-2010 

151 

Estimate 

2010-2011 


15 

Election 2010

Total Cost of housing and 

homelessness 

Actual expenditure for 2009-10 on the 

total output amount for housing and 

homelessness was $920,302,000, a 

14% reduction on what was estimated 

although the Department notes some of 

this was due to a lower level of capital 

works. However the Department has 

increased its estimate for the next 

financial year by over 30% (as shown 

in Fig 2). These amounts include all 

revenue from State and Commonwealth 

sources however the state’s component 

of the total is predicted to increase by 

37% during 2010-2011. 

The total cost for housing and 

homelessness is large ($1.2 billion) 

– almost beyond comprehension for 

many, so let’s look at what has been 

delivered and achieved during this time 

and what is predicted to be over the 

horizon in 2010-11. 

1,400,000 

1,200,000 

1,000,000 

800,000 

600,000 

Demand 

Historically, estimated numbers of 

households assisted have been higher 

than the actual, as happened during the 

years 2007-2009. This trend stopped 

in 2009-2010 when actual demand 

was higher (albeit under 1%) however 

the Department has substantially 

increased its prediction for next year 

by estimating almost 3000 extra 

households to be assisted with social 

rental housing (Fig. 3) which correlates 

with the additional housing stock that is 

coming on line. 

Waiting periods 

The comparison of applications on the 

combined waitlist or OSHS register 

depicts the change in policy during 

the past years with 2008/09 being the 

introduction of eligible applications 

for the housing register under OSHS 

(in purple on Fig. 4). This change 

in policy saw a marked reduction in 

eligible applications however this 

number increased to 28,300 in 2009-10 

and is estimated to be 30,000 during 

2010-2011. This shows an increased 

number of eligible households seeking 

assistance for social housing reinforcing 

the urgent need for additional housing 

stock. 

This targeted approach to helping 

those in the highest need has showed 

a vast reduction in waiting time for 

government managed social housing 

with the wait time going from 31.2 

months (2.6 years) in 2007-08 to 12 

months during 2009-10 and predicted 

to be under a year during 2010-11 

(Figure 5). This comparison is for the 

average and therefore not a comparison 

of how long each segment takes within 

the OSHS register as it is a need based 

allocation system and pre-2008 it was a 

wait/turn system. 

Notes 

1. Also included are homelessness figures that were 

previously reported in the former Department of 

Communities budget. Where possible previous years 

have been compared and policy changes noted where 

applicable. 

2. Queensland Government (2010) State Budget 

2010-11 Budget Highlights Available at: http://www. 

budget.qld.gov.au/budget-papers/2010-11/budgethighlights-2010-11.pdf 

3.Queensland Government (2010) State Budget Service 

Delivery Statements Book 3 pp3-26 Note 69 

400,000 

200,000 

0 

Estimate 2009-2010 Actual 2009-2010 Estimate 2010-2011 

Figure 2: Total Cost Output Summary Actual and Estimates 2009-2011 

including State and Commonwealth revenue ($ ,000) 

69,040 

67,545 

65220 

64,993 

65,900 

66,270 

64,000 

Estimate 

2007-2008 

Actual 

2007-2008 

Estimate 

2008-2009 

Actual 

2008-2009 

Estimate 

2009-2010 

Figure 3: Total number of households assisted in social rental housing 2007-2011 

Actual 

2009-2010 

Estimate 

2010-2011

Crisis Housing 

Crisis housing numbers have remained 

static during the last 2 years and are 

predicted to be the same in 2010- 

11. These figures are for the Crisis 

Accommodation Program (CAP) and 

the Department of Communities states 

that methods for calculating these 

figures are complex (disaggregating 

SAAP data) which goes to explain the 

static nature and the estimate for 2010- 

11. The development of a new national 

data management scheme may address 

this data collection issue. 

Private Market Assistance 

Private market products have shown 

a better than anticipated uptake every 

year since2007-2008 with the actual 

amount of households assisted during 

2009-10, 6076 households more than 

was anticipated. Next year’s estimation 

is higher again showing a stronger 

commitment to this product and aligns 

with the rolling out of Rent Connect 

and other products to many areas in 

Queensland. 

To successfully house the homeless, 

“Close the Gap” and meet current 

and future needs requires a solid 

commitment to resourcing additional 

dwellings and the wrap around 

support to maintain these tenancies. 

This year’s budget displayed an 

increased investment in new dwellings, 

homelessness initiatives along with 

decreased wait times for social housing. 

However for increased numbers of 

households to access housing, more 

stock will need to be built including 

discounted rental products, continued 

investment in maintenance and 

additional support funding to sustains 

vulnerable households. 

To successfully house the homeless, 

“Close the Gap” and meet current and 

future needs requires a solid commitment 

to resourcing additional dwellings 

and the wrap around support to maintain 

these tenancies. This year’s budget 

displayed an increased investment in 

new dwellings, homelessness initiatives 

along with decreased wait times for 

social housing. However for increased 

numbers of households to access housing, 

more stock will need to be built 

including discounted rental products, 

continued investment in maintenance 

and additional support funding to sustains 

vulnerable households. 

40000 

35000 

30000 

25000 

20000 

15000 

10000 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5000 

5 

0 

0 

Number of Applications on combined 

waitlist/eligible applicaitons 2009-11 

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 

Figure 4: Number of applications on combined waitlist/eligible applications for OSHS register 

2007-2011 

2010-2011 

2009-2010 

2008-2009 

2007-2008 

2006-2007 

Average wait time for assistance 

(in months) 

2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 

Figure 5: Average wait time to allocation for assistance with Government managed social 

housing (in months) 

Total number households assisted 

with Crisis housing 

5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 

Figure 6: Total number of households assisted with Crisis Housing

LOGAN HOUSING INTERAGENCY NETWORK: 

REAL ESTATE NETWORKING 

BREAKFAST 

Peter Mengede, Policy Officer 

The Logan Housing Interagency 

Network (LHIN)/LANARTA branch 

held the fourth of its real estate 

networking events at Logan Diggers 

Club in May of 2010. In just over a year 

the networking series has improved 

relationships between the private and 

community housing sectors through 

sharing of information about common 

challenges faced by both sectors when 

housing low income tenants. Speakers 

have included representatives from 

the Residential Tenancies Authority, 

Small Claims Tribunal, the Logan 

Tenant Advice and Advocacy Service, 

SAAP Agencies, Community Housing 

providers, Homelessness Early 

Intervention Services, Rent Connect 

officers, and the private real estate 

sector. 

In the past, Logan was traditionally 

seen as an area with lower rental prices 

and plenty of social housing stock. Wait 

times were short with applicants often 

receiving offers within months. In the 

early 21st century, as futuristic as that 

sounds, houses could still be bought for 

under $140,000. Rental prices reflected 

a balance between people looking for 

and those living in rental housing. A 

single person on benefits could afford 

a modest unit. However, as population 

growth overtook construction, and 

investors shied away from a volatile 

stock market in favour of bricks and 

mortar, competition for both rentals and 

homes purchases rose sharply as people 

moved towards urban fringes in search 

of cheaper housing. 

Nowadays, lunch time line-ups at 

inspections are common, as are requests 

for lengthy tenancy references, and 

even pet resumes. Above all, and often 

regardless of the fine moral standing 

of a quadruped companion (or indeed 

the quality of their references), realtors 

manage risk by offering tenancies to 

applicants with the best income to 

rent ratios and histories of caring for 

properties. 

The LHIN decided to try and 

transform what had become a largely 

oppositional exercise, renting in Logan, 

to an appositional one by looking at it 

from both points of view to promote 

partnerships. 

The events drew on the Housing 

Industry Collaboration Project and 

Australian Housing and Urban Research 

Institute (AHURI) research. While 

these projects revealed high levels of 

interaction between realtors, community 

housing providers, and support workers 

they highlighted different views about 

the value of these relationships. While 

over 80% of property managers and 


18 

Election 2010

95 % of community housing workers 

had dealings with each other, 70% 

of property managers rated their 

relationships with the community 

sector as at or below average. 

AHURI research indicated that property 

managers identified four significant 

barriers to growing these relationships: 

• A lack of awareness of available 

services 

• Time Constraints in forming 

partnerships 

• The lack of follow up and 

communication, and 

• Scepticism about the value of forming 

partnerships. 

The LHIN decided that something 

needed to be done to build existing 

relationships, nurture new ones with 

realtors, and further open interagency 

doors. 

The first event, held at the Logan 

Entertainment Centre attracted over 70 

realtors and featured special guest (now 

retired) Small Claims Magistrate Bill 

Randall who stressed the importance of 

preventing departmental evictions and 

the need to ensure that Commonwealth 

Rent Assistance is compulsorily debited 

directly to lessors to reduce evictions 

for arrears. 

Over the next few meetings the 

series evolved into a panel discussion 

format, which was opened to the 

floor for questions. Topics addressed 

included residential tenancy legislation 

amendments such as proposed tenancy 

database reform, homelessness early 

intervention services, changes in 

Department of Housing eligibility, Rent 

Connect, and the role tenant advice and 

advocacy services play in resolving 

tenancy issues before they become 

disputes. 

Local realtors also took part in the 

panels and talked about the challenges 

they face in housing low income 

earners, the benefits of absorbing 

Centrepay fees, and circumstances 

under which a landlord will agree to 

rent to a tenancy database black listed 

applicant. 

LHIN members visited local real estate 

agents in the lead up to these events 

collecting property managers’ contact 

details to maintain an up to date list 

of invitees. Specialist Homelessness 

Support Services, Community Housing 

Providers, TAAS agencies, and early 

intervention services all invited 

realtors with whom they had existing 

relationships. Heeding the advice of the 

Housing Industry Collaboration Project, 

the LHIN has focussed on working with 

amenable realtors rather than pursuing 

those with a purely business approach 

to asset management. 

Queensland Shelter has developed a 

quick guide to running your own real 

estate networking events that can easily 

be easily and locally adapted. Members 

are welcome to contact us for a copy. 

Over the course of a year, the 

networking events developed a 

personality of their own. One in which 

network members began to relate as 

individuals rather than organisational 

representatives. They humanised the 

private and community sectors in 

each others’ regard while offering 

examples of ways of working together. 

Ultimately, the breakfasts gave voice to 

the stories of faceless names left in the 

application pile in the wake of another 

lunchtime open house. We’ve even 

heard that they’ve helped a few rise to 

the top. 


19 

Election 2010

FIRST DOG CARTOON courtesy of Crikey: www.crikey.com.au

UPCOMING EVENTS

QUEENSLAND SHELTER’S AGM 

22nd October 9.30am - 10.30am 

FOLLOWED BY.... 

An Anti Poverty week event hosted by Q Shelter as part 

of its Shape of Affordable Housing in 

Queensland project 

“The Queensland Affordable Housing System: 

Who will be housed By Government or 

Community providers and how should rents be set” 

SPEAKERS INCLUDE: 

Julian Disney, Chairperson of Anti Poverty Week 

David Cant, CEO of Brisbane Housing Company 

22nd October 10.30am - 12.30pm 

Bardon Conference Venue, 390 Simpson Rd 

Bardon QLD 4065 

FREE PARKING 

COST: The post AGM forum is free for members. For non 

members the entry fee is $35, however this will be waived 

by becoming a member. Membership forms are available at 

www.qshelter.asn.au 

RSVP: 15th October to info@qshelter.asn.au

The Queensland Affordable Housing System: 

Who will be housed 

By Government or community providers 

How should rents be set 

----------------------------------------- 

If you are a current member of Q Shelter your admission to the forum will be free. If you are not a member, admission will 

be $35.00. If you would like to become a member the individual membership is currently $22.50 and membership forms 

can be found on our website www.qshelter.asn.au. 

Please complete and email it to Kym Lawrence at info@qshelter.asn.au 

______________________________________________________________________________________ 

Name......................................................................................................................................................... 

Organisation.............................................................................................................................................. 

Address...................................................................................................................................................... 

Telephone............................................ 

Email......................................................................................... 

______________________________________________________________________________________ 

Please circle: Q Shelter member 

Non Q Shelter member 

Payment Options: 

Please circle: Cash on the day: Cheque: Credit Card: 

Credit Card details: 

Type of card: Please circle Mastercard / Visa (Cannot accept AMEX or Diners Card) 

Number: .............................................................................................................................. 

Name on card: ..................................................................................................................... 

Expiry: .................................................................................................................................. 

CSV : ..................................................................................................................................... 

Amount Paid: ....................................................................................................................... 

Signature: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

Cheque: to be posted to: Queensland Shelter, PO Box 214, Spring Hill, Qld, 4004 

EFT: Acct Name: Queensland Shelter Inc. BSB: 633000 Account No: 125239418 

Please email EFT details to: info@qshelter.asn.au 

On payment this form is a Tax Invoice. ABN: 21 495 503 790 If you require a receipt please tick the box. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Special requirements: Please specify if you have any dietary requirements or accessibility needs: 

_______________ ________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________

Queensland Shelter: PO Box 214, Spring Hill 4004 

PH: (07) 3831 5900 Fax: (07) 3236 1396 Email: info@qshelter.asn.au 

Members details 

Become a member of Queensland Shelter... 

because there is no place like home 

Name:......................................................................................................................................................................... 

Organisation:.............................................................................................................................................................. 

Address:..................................................................................................................................................................... 

Phone:........................................................................................................................................................................ 

Email:......................................................................................................................................................................... 

Type of membership: 

Please select: New Membership Renewal of Membership 

$160.00 Large Organisation (revenue of more than $1 Million) $60.00 Small Organisation 

$22.50 Individual $5.50 Concession 

$500.00 For profit business, statutory bodies and government agencies including local government 

(All membership prices are GST inclusive) 

Payment Options 

1. Cheque or Money Order: Please make these payable to Queensland Shelter 

2. Direct Deposit: Account Name: Queensland Shelter Inc BSB: 633 000 Account Number: 125239418. 

If a Direct Deposit is to occur could you please send the details with the membership form to the above address. 

3. Credit Card: 

Card Type: M/Card Visa Bankcard 

Name on Card............................................................................................................................................................ 

Card No...................................................................................................................................................................... 

Expiry Date: ................................. CCV No: ......................... Amount: .............................................................. 

Signature: .................................................................................................................................................................. 

Branch Participation 

Are you interested in participating in a branch If so please select from the branches below... 

Far North Queensland North Queensland Mackay 

Central Queensland Sunshine Coast Brisbane North 

Gold Coast Redlands Inner City 

Toowoomba South West Brisbane Indigenous 

Ashram North Moreton Logan Lanarta 

Seniors Housing 

TAX INVOICE ABN: 21 495 503 790 

Please indicate any other areas of housing policy which interest you:........................................................................ 

..................................................................................................................................................................................... 

E-Bulletin 

Please select if you would like to receive Queensland Shelter’s free fortnightly email bulletin 

THANK YOU FOR BECOMING A MEMBER OF Q SHELTER - WE WILL BE IN TOUCH SHORTLY!

FEDERAL ELECTION - Queensland Shelter

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?