<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/consolidated-properties">Consolidated Properties Group</a> (CPG) is approaching the launch of its latest Brisbane riverfront development, Castile, on the dress circle Skyring Terrace in Newstead.

VIP buyers are now being engaged, with a full public sales launch coming later this year.

Positioned as the final opportunity to secure a new absolute riverfront residence on the East bank of Newstead, Teneriffe or New Farm, Castile at 47 Skyring Terrace has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/woods-bagot">Woods Bagot</a> as a timeless addition to the Brisbane skyline.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371113]

The name Castile draws on themes of permanence, sophistication and legacy, reflecting a broader vision centred on enduring architecture and timelessness in the rarest of riverfront positions.&nbsp;

CPG Chairman and CEO Don O’Rorke said the project had been envisioned as a future Brisbane icon.&nbsp;

“With 47 metres of direct river frontage and never to be built out views, 47 Skyring Terrace is the definitive address on the Brisbane River,” O’Rorke said.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371114]

“Rather than following trend-based apartment design, Castile draws inspiration from Brisbane’s great heritage buildings, reinterpreting classical architecture into a contemporary riverfront landmark designed to stand proudly for the next 100 years,” he said.&nbsp;

The approved development will comprise 227 apartments across a 25-storey tower alongside a boutique six-storey riverfront building of just 12 residences.&nbsp;

Construction is scheduled to commence in September 2026.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150489]

Joel Robinson

CPG unveils Castile Newstead ahead of upcoming sales launch

Australia’s online shopping habits have shifted dramatically over the last decade. As eCommerce volumes surged, so too did the frustrations that came with traditional parcel delivery: missed deliveries, long Post Office queues, parcel theft and the challenge of being home during business hours.

Australia Post’s Parcel Lockers emerged as one of the more practical responses to that changing consumer behaviour.

What started as a relatively niche delivery option has evolved into a nationwide network of more than 1,400 self-service Parcel Lockers positioned at train stations, shopping centres, supermarkets and Post Offices across the country. The system allows Australians to send, collect and return parcels 24 hours a day, fundamentally changing how many people interact with deliveries.

The appeal is relatively straightforward: flexibility.

Instead of waiting at home for a delivery driver or rushing to a Post Office before closing time, users can direct eligible parcels to a Parcel Locker location of their choice. Once the parcel arrives, Australia Post sends a notification with a collection code or QR access through the AusPost app, allowing customers to retrieve their package at any time within the collection window.

For apartment residents in particular, the system has become increasingly valuable.

Higher-density living has created logistical challenges around deliveries, especially in buildings without concierge services or secure parcel rooms. Missed deliveries are common, while parcel theft has become an increasing concern as online shopping volumes continue to rise.

Australia Post itself has repeatedly highlighted the growing issue of “porch pirates” during peak shopping periods, encouraging customers to use Parcel Lockers as a safer alternative to unattended home deliveries.

That security aspect is one of the key reasons the Australia Post Parcel Locker network has grown so rapidly.

Parcel Lockers are positioned as secure, monitored collection points that reduce the risk of theft while also improving delivery efficiency for Australia Post. Instead of multiple redelivery attempts, parcels can be consolidated into a single secure destination.

The Parcel Lockers themselves are free to use through a MyPost account and support a range of parcel sizes up to 16 kilograms and dimensions of approximately 35 x 44 x 61 centimetres.

Beyond receiving parcels, the system has increasingly become integrated into the broader eCommerce ecosystem.

Customers can now use Parcel Lockers to return online purchases, while retailers have embraced the model as a way to improve delivery success rates and reduce friction in the shopping process. Australia Post has actively expanded partnerships with major retailers and promoted Parcel Lockers as part of a broader out-of-home strategy.

The timing of that expansion aligns with broader changes in Australian shopping behaviour.

The acceleration of online retail during and after the pandemic placed enormous pressure on delivery infrastructure. Parcel volumes reached record highs, particularly during Black Friday and Christmas periods, with Australia Post delivering more than 100 million parcels during peak festive seasons.

That growth forced logistics providers to rethink the “last mile” of delivery, widely regarded as the most expensive and operationally difficult stage of the process.

Parcel Locker systems have increasingly been viewed as part of the long-term solution.

The concept itself is not unique to Australia. Parcel Locker networks have become common globally, particularly across Europe and Asia, where dense urban environments and apartment living create similar logistical challenges. But Australia’s geography and suburban sprawl made adoption slower initially.

Now, however, the convenience factor is driving mainstream usage.

For commuters, Parcel Lockers near train stations allow parcels to be collected on the way home from work. For apartment dwellers, they remove the uncertainty around access and missed deliveries.

The rise of the AusPost app has also streamlined the experience, centralising notifications, tracking and Parcel Locker access into a single platform. Australia Post has increasingly pushed customers toward app-based delivery management, partly as a way to combat phishing scams and fake delivery notifications, which have become more sophisticated in recent years.

The Parcel Locker model is also beginning to influence property development itself.

Parcel management has become a growing consideration in apartment building design, particularly as online shopping becomes embedded in everyday life. Many new residential developments are now incorporating dedicated parcel rooms or Parcel Locker systems into foyers and communal spaces.

For developers, parcel management is increasingly viewed as part of the broader resident amenity offering, alongside gyms, wellness spaces and communal work areas.

That reflects a wider evolution in how residential buildings are designed.

Apartment buyers are placing greater emphasis on convenience, security and operational functionality, particularly in higher-density urban environments. Parcel delivery, once considered a minor operational detail, has become an increasingly important part of that equation.

Australia Post’s Parcel Locker network sits at the centre of that behavioural shift.

What began as a simple alternative delivery option has evolved into a key piece of infrastructure supporting Australia’s growing eCommerce economy and changing urban lifestyles.

And as online shopping continues to expand, the role of Parcel Lockers is likely to become even more embedded in how Australians live, shop and receive goods.

How Australia Post Parcel Lockers changed parcel delivery convenience in Australia

Perth’s new apartment market recorded its strongest quarter of sales since Q4 2021, with 412 apartments sold in Q1 2026 and a record quarterly sold value of $537 million, according to Urbis’ latest Apartment Essentials results.

Urbis said the March quarter result reflects strong, highly product‑specific demand across both ends of the market, from more attainable projects delivering at scale, through to premium stock being absorbed by equity‑rich downsizers.&nbsp;

David Cresp, Partner at Urbis, said the key story in Perth is not demand, it is the market’s ability to convert demand into delivered housing.&nbsp;

“This is the strongest sales quarter since Q4 2021, and it reinforces that demand in Perth is real and it’s local,” David Cresp said. “But the task now is delivery, turning that demand into projects that can actually be built and completed.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110291 project_image_fid=302785]

<h2>Affordable product leads, premium demand remains resilient</h2>

Sales in Q1 were led by more affordable projects, with The Boulevard (SKS Group) recording 115 sales in the quarter, the presentation noting this is only the second time a single project has surpassed 100 quarterly sales. The project was able to offer more affordable housing product right next to a train station.&nbsp;

Palmyra West (Finbar) also delivered strong results with 28 sales in Q1, following 84 sales in Q4, with an average price of under $800,000, underscoring depth of demand for well‑located, attainable new stock.&nbsp;

At the premium end, Urbis said downsizer demand is continuing, with the results highlighting Romeo (Applecross, Finbar) recording 75 sales and reaching almost 50% sold in one quarter.

Jual (Shenton Park, Celsius Property) also posted a strong quarter with 28 sales, reaching 39% sold in one quarter.

Urbis noted that Perth apartment demand is not speculative, not investor‑led, and not uniform, describing it as localised, often equity‑driven and highly product‑specific, a pattern reflected in the polarisation between strong “attainable” performers and premium downsizer product.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=148957 project_image_fid=364102]

<h2>Prices underpinned by costs, and the delivery risk is growing</h2>

Urbis said pricing pressure is cost not demand‑driven: construction costs and delivery risk are now a central constraint, with the results noting build costs remain elevated and volatile, and that energy, fuel and labour uncertainty weigh on feasibility.

David Cresp said a growing challenge for private Build‑to‑Sell developers is simply securing a builder in the current environment.

“Developers are really feeling the pressure from a building market that was operating at capacity and securing a builder is challenging,” David Cresp said, adding that even where a builder can be secured, “trying to get to the price that makes the development financially viable is incredibly challenging in the current market.”&nbsp;

Urbis’ broader WA commentary also notes that industry remains at or above capacity with lot and housing creation, and that many builders are limiting new sales to manage stretched workforces and fixed‑price contract pressures, conditions that flow directly into apartment feasibility and delivery timing.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108869 project_image_fid=317905]

<h2>Supply: improving later, but still constrained, and Perth lags eastern benchmarks</h2>

While near‑term supply remains constrained, Urbis’ forecast shows completions lifting “Supply is forecast to be back above 1,500 apartments per annum for the first time since 2019”, with 1,775 completions forecast for 2026, and volumes remaining above that level over the following years.&nbsp;

Looking further ahead, completions are forecast to reach 2,500 in 2028, with the report noting 32% of that total is social/affordable, reflecting the role of government‑supported delivery in rebuilding the pipeline.&nbsp;

However, Urbis said Perth remains behind comparable markets on pipeline scale. In a national comparison of projects under construction, the report shows under construction Perth Build‑to‑Sell (BTS) at 3,446 apartments versus the Gold Coast at 7,922. Mr Cresp said “The challenge for Perth is how to we grow the delivery pipeline”.

Urbis’ conclusion is that Perth’s market is increasingly defined by product discipline and delivery certainty, with the research identifying “delivery certainty is key” and calling out builder risk and procurement models as core success factors, alongside “timing and staging”.&nbsp;

Perth apartment sales hit strongest pace since late 2021 as builder capacity tightens

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sammut-developments">Sammut Group</a> has secured development approval for its latest Brisbane apartment project, marking the Sydney developer’s next step in expanding its Queensland pipeline following the success of its debut Gold Coast development, Coast.

The approved project at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/44-glen-road-toowong-qld-4066">44 Glen Road, </a><a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/toowong-qld-4066">Toowong</a> will deliver a 15-storey riverfront apartment building with 42 residences, significantly increasing the scale of the site’s previous approval for a smaller luxury scheme. Designed by Bureau^proberts, the development will comprise a mix of predominantly four-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments positioned to maximise Brisbane River and city views.

Sammut Director Julian Sammut said the group had been actively searching Brisbane for several years before identifying Toowong as the right fit.

“Brisbane was the right step for Sammut,” Sammut said.

“With the success of Coast we thought we should definitely look to do more in Queensland alone. We then pushed up to look at Brisbane. We've been looking for I'd say two to three years actually and it was hard to find the right location.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.14%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=dYAVIL7qdcGA8ojvkslSrLjczXFejSSx" />

Sammut said suburbs including New Farm and Teneriffe were considered before the group ultimately focused on Toowong due to its strong downsizer demographic and limited supply of developable riverfront land.

The site was acquired off-market after what Sammut described as a lengthy negotiation and planning process, with the developer pursuing an uplift to the original approval.

“We are DA approved now which is very exciting,” Sammut said.

“We've had our change approval come through and we've obviously doubled the height, 15 storeys plus rooftop. We've got 42 amazing apartments that are going to be coming to market soon.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,dpr_2.0,q_auto:good/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.26%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=ohkRkY0dIZlqdfME2EZePsCQavRiBadE" />

Bureau^proberts said the design responds to Toowong’s evolving urban character, balancing contemporary apartment living with the area’s established residential identity.

“A place where traditional Queensland living has taken place for centuries; Toowong is seeing a shift of contemporary influence, commercial and retail hubs mixed with well-considered residential offerings – all the while maintaining its character and charm,” the architect noted in planning documents submitted to Brisbane City Council.

The architecture practice said the project’s form was shaped by its riverfront setting, flood considerations, neighbouring building scales, and view corridors.

“They said the mix of four and two-bedroom apartments capture the ‘fundamental qualities of Queenslander living,’ translated into the context of a contemporary subtropical building.”

The development sits just off Coronation Drive within walking distance of Toowong’s retail precinct and the upgraded Regatta ferry terminal, while also benefiting from proximity to the incoming green bridge connection to West End. Sammut said the accessibility and amenity offering were central to the site’s appeal.

The approval adds to growing residential activity along the Toowong riverfront, joining nearby projects including Consolidated Properties’ Monarch Residences and Spyre Group’s ARC Residences.

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

Developer Lanevick is heading back into Sydney’s apartment market after focusing more heavily on the luxury townhouse and terrace sector in recent years.

Lanevick, founded and directed by Steve Maroun, is expecting to receive approval in the coming months for a new apartment development in Gladesville, with the aim to launch it to the market later this year.

The 51-apartment project, designed by Studio Johnston, will comprise a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments positioned toward the Hunters Hill downsizer market.

“Traditionally it’s been difficult for people in that market to downsize because there just hasn’t been the right product available,” Maroun said.

“We’re targeting buyers who might have 30 to 40 per cent of their house value sitting in the bank after downsizing.

“They still want good spacious entertaining areas, they still want quality design, but they also want flexibility and the ability to enjoy life a bit more after working hard for a long time.”

The project sits near Boronia Park and within close proximity to the Parramatta River foreshore, an area Maroun says offers more of a Hunters Hill lifestyle than a traditional apartment precinct.

“From a lifestyle perspective, it’s really more Hunters Hill than Gladesville,” Maroun said. “You’re close to the foreshore, close to parklands, and still connected back into the village precinct.”

From level four and above, apartments will capture water views&nbsp;toward Sydney Harbour. Communal amenity will include rooftop entertaining areas, wellness spaces, and a gym tailored toward owner-occupier buyers.

“We’ve really designed these apartments around that buyer coming from the Hunters Hill LGA and what they’re actually looking for in their next chapter.”

The proposed development has also been designed to respond to the changing character of the broader Gladesville town centre, where a growing number of mixed-use and residential proposals are expected to emerge over the coming years.

“Gladesville presented a rare opportunity to deliver a genuinely design-led residential project within an evolving lifestyle precinct, just moments from the growing Gladesville town centre, and we’ve approached the project with a strong focus on architecture, liveability and long-term community value,” Maroun said.

Maroun said Lanevick saw a first-mover advantage within the precinct as planning controls continue to evolve to accommodate greater housing density.

“We think there’s a real opportunity there that hasn’t really been serviced properly yet,” he said.

“There’s going to be a broader evolution of the whole Gladesville village precinct over time, particularly with more activation and mixed-use outcomes.”

The Venus Street proposal will include a commercial and retail component at ground level designed to contribute to that evolving streetscape activation.

“A big part of the thinking was how do you activate that area properly and create more vibrancy and amenity, which is what Hunters Hill has been looking for,” Maroun said.

Lanevick’s focus since 2020 has largely been on smaller-scale luxury townhouse and terrace developments. The developer recently completed Royale Randwick, also designed by Studio Johnston, where prices reached $3.65 million. The project was featured in the UDIA NSW 2026 Professional Development Prospectus and was also named a finalist for Development of the Year.

&nbsp;

Lanevick to cater for Hunters Hill downsizers with new Gladesville apartment development

Policy

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Victorian politicians' $136 million of property: What hope is there of housing policy reform?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Under changes proposed by the government, financial planners will be required to register with the Australian Securities and Investment Commission from next March. They will need to provide details of their educational qualifications, experience and any complaints lodged by clients.
The government has made determined efforts to wind back red tape through the amendments to the Future of Financial Advice reforms. However, a register will just create further compliance requirements without being of much benefit for clients. Until reforms are made to better align interests between adviser and clients, we will not see any real change within the industry.
A register is unlikely to weed out rogue advisers
A register is unlikely to overcome the problem of identifying “rogue advisers”. This issue has continued to plague the industry because of the failure by ASIC and financial services firms to tackle the systemic conflicts of interests between planners and clients. The successful performance of individual planners is still directly related to a product sales culture.
While the register is a step in the right direction, it will be valueless without strict registration requirements and enforcement. Currently, the registration requirements are vague and the corresponding penalties for any breach are very unclear.
If removal from the register is the only penalty, it may give the impression the government is assuring the community that registered advisers can be trusted to give appropriate advice. This is unlikely to actually be the case.
Challenges to industry reform
The difficulty for clients is finding an adviser who is committed to their best interests. No legislation, education qualifications or experience can overcome a culture of “product selling”.
What is needed is a client-centred industry. Both individual advisers and their organisations need to work in a culture where ethics and professionalism are valued, maintained and delivered. This requires a huge cultural shift from product advice to strategy advice.
While education goes part of the way in achieving this goal, fundamentally this must come from the licensees and advisers themselves. The problem is complicated by six large licensees controlling 80% of the financial advice industry. Many clients fail to appreciate that if you seek advice from one of these large institutions, most likely your funds will be placed in their internally branded products.
The industry is further complicated by the variety of individuals giving unregulated financial advice. In direct real estate investing, advice on gearing, investment returns and taxation is often freely given with little controls or oversight.
The proposed register will not overcome this problem since real estate salespersons are not considered financial advisers and are not included in its scope.
So is it possible to gain truly independent and transparent advice? In the current environment this is difficult and perhaps word of mouth and personal recommendation is still the client’s best friend.
When a registration system works
There are examples of registers that have been successful in improving standards across an industry. The Tax Agents Register is administered by the Tax Practitioners Board and has very specific education and professional registration requirements. Registration must be renewed every three years.
Tax agents must provide evidence of professional indemnity insurance and the professional development undertaken during the period to maintain their registration. Any non-compliance results in removal from the register and hence the inability to practise.
A similar regime would need to be applied to the financial planner register if it is to have any credibility.
Current indications are that the register will include any complaints or offences committed by the adviser. However, what the industry needs is for these advisers to be struck off the register and unable to practise.
The whole success of the register will also be dependent on the funding and resources allocated to ASIC to monitor and continually update the register. Without ASIC’s active involvement, the register will not be credible and is likely to become a “toothless tiger”. What consumers don’t need is just another list of financial advisers which offers no real value.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/33471/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Sharon Taylor is senior lecturer at <a href="https://www.uws.edu.au/" target="_blank">University of Western Sydney</a><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-western-sydney"></a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

National financial planning register will just list problem, not solve it

<html><body>
There has been fierce debate around commercial licensing recently. The Real Estate Institute of Victoria's (REIV) Enzo Raimondo is particularly against the recent changes.
Here's a Q&amp;A with Raimondo explainging why they oppose the gazetted regulatory changes.
What are the changes to commercial licensing?
The Victorian government has gazetted a regulatory change which enables anyone involved in the sale of real estate other than residential or rural land, will be exempt from the licensing requirements of the Estate Agents Act where,
<ul>
<li>The price in the contract of sale is at least $15 million or the property has a total gross floor space of at least 10,000 square metres.</li>
<li>Each party to the sale purchase or exchange of real estate owns other real estate with a total value of at least $15 million or a total floor space of at least 10,000 square metres.</li>
</ul>
Anyone involved in the leasing of real estate other than residential property or rural land, will be exempt from the licensing requirements of the act if the person or company for whom the person is acting owns property with a total of at least $15 million or a total floor space of at least 10,000 square metres.
It should be noted that the ALP, on Monday announced that it will review these changes if elected in Victoria at the upcoming state election on 29 November.
How does the REIV believe this will affect the industry and consumers?
It will create a two-tiered system where some agents will be licensed (for sales and leasing transactions below the threshold) and others won’t be licensed.
This will open the industry up to unqualified and inexperienced operators - and potentially criminals - because there will be no probity checks, and the operators will not be required to maintain an audited trust account or comply with the requirements of the estate agents act.
This will lead to a high level of financial risk to vendors, purchasers, landlords and tenants and means that thousand s of small businesses in Victoria will lose the inherent safeguards provided by the estate agents act.
This will hurt small business tenant in Victoria and may lead to increased rents, prices and put thousands of jobs at risk.  
What will the REIV be doing to stop the changes?
The REIV continues to lobby both sides of government in regard to the changes, and is running a public campaign leading up the state election (and beyond).
Are there any other changes to commercial licensing that should be implemented?
There is already an exemption in place for large commercial transactions between related parties, which the REIV believes is sufficient to meet the needs of a wide variety of stakeholders involved in these transactions. For this reason there is no need for the changes that have been proposed.
They represent deregulation of the commercial and industrial estate agency practice, yet are being promoted as red tape reduction.  
</body></html>

jduke-EHk3XBmHkn

Victoria's proposed commercial licensing changes: Q&A with the REIV's Enzo Raimondo

<html><body>
The NSW government would be well advised to start planning immediately to ensure the state's momentum keeps moving forward well into the next decade – failure to do so would clearly indicate that managing the state of NSW is well beyond their capabilities. 
They say success leaves clues, so look no further than the Sydney property market which has delivered the NSW budget a $1 billion windfall thanks to stamp duty and other related property taxes. NSW Treasury has just announced the final result for 2013/14 with a surplus of $1.247 billion – well up from the June budget estimate of $988 million.
The reality is that property prices have started to cool and commodity prices down 20% this year. Hence, it’s time to start fast tracking the next phase of NSW growth with confidence building infrastructure approvals. On current projections, Sydney will (at a minimum) need to double its 1,673,800 homes over the next 50 years – so there is no time like the present to get started – carpe diem.
It’s well documented that massive growth spurts follow new infrastructure developments – former NSW state architect Chris Johnson has forecast that Sydney needs to build 11 new highrise apartment towers each year for the next 50 years to protect suburban life from being ruined by overdevelopment as the city’s population grows. 
“Five thousand new towers, containing 110 apartments each, would provide 550,000 new homes – that will accommodate only a third of our planned population growth over the next 50 years,” said Johnson.
It’s not hard to see where declines are quickly starting to take place with BIS Shrapnel pointing out this week: “The recovery to a net overseas migration intake of 242,800 in 2012/13 was underpinned largely by a rebound in such arrivals. However, with arrivals now trending downwards as resource sector investment slows, net overseas migration flows weakened to 235,800 in the year to December 2013 and monthly indicators since then suggest a further slowing.”
The latest figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics reveal that Australia’s population increased by 160,000 births over deaths and a further 244,000 people through immigration – which is now the big driver in this demographic. NSW in 2013, had a natural increase of 50,000 extra people, net overseas migration added 68,000 extra people with 15,500 people deciding to reside elsewhere. As Chris Johnson pointed out: “The demographics for Sydney are clear. Growth is coming and is essential for the long-term prosperity of the city. It will keep house prices stable, it will provide jobs, it will support our ageing population and it will position us as a global city.”
Of course a major problem that requires immediate attention is Australia’s public transport which is hopeless given two-thirds of the country’s population resides in the capital cities. Everyone knows that the state and territory have neglected public transport for decades, so you can’t start announcing residential infrastructure initiatives without substantial public transport upgrades.
Cue the blame game between the states and federal government as to where these responsibilities lie. The latest in this ongoing debate is now clearly aimed at reforming Australia’s Federation – although this has major challenges in itself given the “vertical fiscal imbalance” with all the states and territories wanting more of the GST cake portions. This explains why a Federation white paper is being prepared to address Australia’s revenue and spending responsibilities of all governments.
In 2014 -15, NSW will receive 97 cents for every dollar of GST it pays, Victoria will receive 88 cents and WA will receive just 37 cents – so this explains why reforming the state and territories is such a difficult task.
In the case of NSW, you see businesses wanting to get going despite being constantly held back as they await the relevant approvals given NSW does not have a masterplan for development.
 The most obvious case is that in 2013/14 the NSW government pocketed $1.247 billion in taxes for doing next to nothing – just imagine what those revenues might be if they were to announce a residential real estate infrastructure plan? Who knows, first home buyers may even be able to get in given a significant number of apartment developments would actually bring prices down.
The only problem for the NSW government is that it has a long history of living in the past.
</body></html>

robertsimeon-hRNTwJyXkQ

It's time for NSW to stop living in the past and seize the day

<html><body>
Western Australia’s have started public consultation on proposed strata title law reforms, allowing for property owners and tenants of strata units to voice their opinion.
The reforms aim to create affordable housing options and encourage shared living communities via better management policies and efficient dispute resolution.
Lands Minister Terry Redman said this is a critical part of the process for those who own and live in strata scheme housing, or who may decide to in the future.
“WA is expected to be home to more than 3.5 million people by 2031 and we need a more robust and workable legislative framework to support strata title development and meet the future housing demands of the State,” Redman said.
“It is hoped these reforms will entice land developers and investors to WA, with provisions for more innovative and flexible planned community developments, which is currently a barrier to property growth in WA.”
Areas of focus include:
<ol>
<li>Vendor disclosure</li>
<li>Options for strata development and tenure</li>
<li>Dispute resolution</li>
<li>Management of strata</li>
<li>Termination of schemes</li>
</ol>
Landgate has already spoken to government agencies, industry and business peak bodies over the past 12 months. The Property Council of Australia (PCA) have announced their support of the WA Strata Titles Act Reform Consultation paper.
Joe Lenzo, executive director of the PCA, said that it is important to modernise the “antiquated” strata laws with an increasing number of people opting for strata properties, including townhouses.
“Community titles will encourage larger scale precinct-style housing development to occur in WA, similar to other states. This includes more mixed use development around suburban centres and strategic infrastructure investments like train stations,” said Lenzo.
“The reforms proposed in this discussion paper follow an extensive period of constructive consultation with industry and the community, and we look forward to their implementation.”
Investors can <a href="https://consult.landgate.wa.gov.au/consult.ti" target="_blank">leave feedback on the consultation paper online via Landgate</a>.
</body></html>

Public consultation starts on WA's proposed strata reforms

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Recently, the head of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, Greg Medcraft, called Australia a “paradise” for <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/business/australia-paradise-for-whitecollar-criminals-says-asic-chairman-greg-medcraft-20141021-119d99" target="_blank">white-collar criminals</a>. Soon after <a href="https://www.watoday.com.au/business/asic-backflips-on-criminals-paradise-comments-20141022-119v22" target="_blank">he recanted</a>, claiming he didn’t want the country to become a haven for financial fraudsters. This rephrasing likely followed when Finance Minister Mathias Cormann <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-22/red-faced-over-white-collar-criminals/5834540" target="_blank">leaned on Medcraft</a>.
The mass media has done an admirable job bringing the CBA financial planner scandal to light, forcing ASIC to finally investigate, the Senate to inquire and the CBA to apologise and provide compensation. Despite this, frauds like these are <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-24/cba-whistleblower-jeff-morris-discusses-financial/5840536" target="_blank">universally downplayed</a> as isolated events, perpetrated by “bad apples” in an otherwise trustworthy FIRE (finance, insurance and real estate) sector.
Australia’s economic history shows otherwise. Our past is littered with a surprisingly large number of control frauds, which government and regulators have done next to nothing to prevent and rarely prosecute. The mounting frauds appear emboldened by deregulation and liberalisation of banking and finance.
The following table provides an overview of the major frauds committed by the FIRE sector in recent decades.
<img src="/images/2014/10/31/Soos_Egan%20oct%2031%20one.png" alt="">
The term “control fraud” refers to the systematic, highly damaging, institution-driven and directed nature of the fraud, in contrast to common low-level frauds. The weapon of choice is accounting.
William K. Black’s book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/The-Best-Way-Rob-Bank/dp/0292754183/ref=dp_ob_title_bk" target="_blank">The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One</a> provides an excellent account of regulatory public executives who, during the United States Savings and Loan crisis in the 1980s, actively protected the worst fraudsters in the industry, while damning “mum and dad” investors. Black later developed the <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1590447" target="_blank">concept of control fraud</a>, whereby executives use the institution they manage as the mechanism to commit fraud.
Control frauds typically involve a four-part strategy: exponential loan growth, lending to uncreditworthy borrowers, extreme leverage and minimal loss reserves (plus obnoxious pay packets for bank CEOs). The obvious presence of these four elements in Australia’s banking system demonstrates the risk to stability which lies at the centre of finance.
Why fraud goes undetected
Australian economist Phillip J. Anderson documented in his book on <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Life-Real-Estate-Banking/dp/0856832634" target="_blank">US real estate cycles</a> from 1800 to 2008 that fraud is never detected by the mainstream for two reasons. The first is that FIRE sector executives and managers are extremely powerful politically, financially and legally, so few will tangle with them. Secondly, during economic booms, the public is typically too self-centred to care, as long as the predations don’t affect the majority.
ASIC refuses to investigate the control frauds, instead choosing to offer up a number of excuses: lack of funding, jurisdictional boundaries, ineffective laws and so on. Thankfully, 20-year veteran financial consumer activist <a href="https://www.bfcsa.com.au/index.php/about-bfcsa/about-denise-brailey" target="_blank">Denise Brailey</a> does what ASIC declines to do on a $400 million dollar budget. Brailey, a criminologist, has helped unearth and sue control frauds and recalcitrant state governments over the years.
According to Brailey, Australia has two major control frauds rapidly growing without restraint: a <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/watchdog-asleep-on-australias-subprime-scandal-20131024-2w323" target="_blank">subprime mortgage scandal</a> and debenture-funded pyramid business scams. The former is similar to the US subprime mortgage scandal. Brailey estimates these control frauds could each cause over $100 billion in losses. Brailey has warned ASIC about these control frauds for over a decade.
Paradise untouched
It has never been a better time to be a criminal, as long as you’re a white-collar criminal in the FIRE sector. Bankers involved with the CBA financial planning scandal have <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/the-response-to-the-commonwealth-financial-planning-scandal-shows-banks-really-are-above-the-law-20141026-11c13d" target="_blank">still managed to advance their careers</a> and win bonuses.
History enlightens us, which is why the history of control frauds isn’t taught anywhere. Political and economic elites want the public kept blind to the plague of theft they’ve been engaged in. In Australia, this history is left to individuals like <a href="https://www.bfcsa.com.au/">Denise Brailey</a> and <a href="https://www.bankvictims.com.au/dr-evan-jones" target="_blank">Evan Jones</a> to tell, whose work was used in my recently published <a href="https://www.worldeconomicsassociation.org/files/Bubble_Economics_Egan_Soos.pdf" target="_blank">book</a>, co-authored with Paul D. Egan.
The disparity between white and blue-collar criminals has never been larger. If I defraud my neighbour of $10,000, I’ll be charged, prosecuted and sent to jail for years. In contrast, a <a href="https://www.bfcsa.com.au/index.php/scams/hall-of-shame" target="_blank">banking executive</a> who robs borrowers and loots or destroys untold billions of dollars is praised by politicians, business groups, the mass media and the economics profession for “wealth creation”.
Australia’s credit-based banking system, liberated from responsibility by deregulation, self-regulation, de-supervision and de facto decriminalisation, has and will inevitably continue to generate toxic and recurring control frauds. The FIRE sector cannot be allowed to profit from control fraud. Government has a civic obligation to prosecute those who perform criminal acts on innocent parties. We know this as the rule of law.
Academia could offer an independent voice against these control frauds, but the legal and economics professions are mute before the FIRE sector, which employs many directly and indirectly. As Black documented, mainstream economists have intentionally ignored the dangers of control frauds, proclaiming that “private market discipline” and “rational agents” can prevent frauds from even occurring: “the market knows best” line of fallacious reasoning.
The full extent of these control frauds is yet to be revealed as the government, regulators and external dispute resolution organisations (RBA, ASIC, APRA, ATO, AFP, Treasury, FOS and COSL) resolutely refuse to investigate. Meantime, control frauds are free to weave a trail of forced bankruptcies, homelessness, poverty, desperation, depression and suicide.
History shows government only acts when the predations of control frauds break in the mass media. The two largest control frauds, the debenture-funded pyramid business scams and <a href="https://fsi.gov.au/files/2014/09/Banking_and_Finance_Consumer_Support_Association.pdf" target="_blank">subprime mortgage scandal</a>, are running rampant. Unfortunately, government will only grudgingly do something when the number of victims climbs far enough that they become too visible to openly ignore – but, by then, it will be too late.
Nevertheless, a Royal Commission is necessary to shine a light on the transgressions of the FIRE sector.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/33548/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Philip Soos is a researcher  at the School of International and Political Studies  at <a href="https://www.deakin.edu.au/" target="_blank">Deakin University</a>, and is a researcher for the <a href="https://blog.lvrg.org.au/" target="_blank">Land Values Research Group</a>, Melbourne.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

psoos-uR5EGb6SbQ

Australia's white collar criminals are doing the crime, but not the time

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
In recent times there have been a lot of arguments in the public domain on whether Australia should get rid of the negative gearing tax tool for property investors.
Negative gearing is a valuable tax tool in any economy to help companies that make investments reduce their risk-burden by allowing them to make tax deductions against losses incurred where the revenue of the investment does not cover the loan costs.
In other words, allowing the investor short-term tax relief in the investment they make, or long-term relief when an investment does not turn out to be as rewarding as anticipated (a lousy investment).
However, in Australia, negative gearing has unfortunately been used as a speculative tool to help property investors cover their losses throughout the time of holding a particular asset so they are able to eventually flip the asset for a profit.
There are two key problems with this mindset:
<ol>
<li>Using negative gearing in pursuit of capital gain only works when the investment appreciates in value greater than the overhanging costs involved in maintaining the liabilities of the asset whilst under ownership.</li>
<li>If there is a market correction, those who hold negatively geared assets in pursuit of capital gain generally get burnt.</li>
</ol>
Unfortunately with so many Australian property investors incredibly negatively geared, it would be economic suicide to get rid of this tax tool overnight. Getting rid of negative gearing today would simply burn too many property investors at the same particular time causing mass damage to the Australian economy.
With the majority of negatively geared property investors earning less than $100,000 per year, it would simply send too many Australians into bankruptcy too quickly. In economic downturns, negatively geared property investors would progressively suffer which would slow the pain burden.
If anything, they should keep negative gearing for property investors, however introduce resourceful tools to mediate property investors from taking advantage of a tax law where they are willingly prepared to take excessive risk where it is all but mathematically certain that they will incur losses for a very prolonged period of time. This forces investors to invest responsibly whilst reducing tax losses.
My recommendation is property investors with loan to value ratio (LVR) greater than 50% void from making any tax deductions against the first 2% of rental yields (or equivalent to property price paid).
This would force property investors to shift their focus from speculating mode to yield-hunting mode. It would also push those who are taking an abnormal amount of risk in the name of capital gain to offload their properties to reduce fiscal losses which increases tax revenue by billions of dollars. Furthermore, this approach would reduce the risk profile of property investors in a downturn.
Lindsay David is a co-founder of clean technology company GreenRigCo and a former strategy and business development consultant. You can read his blog <a href="/expert-insights/finance/fire-the-rba-governor">here</a>.
To purchase a copy of his book 'Australia: Boom to Bust', <a href="https://blog.australiaboomtobust.com/buy-australia-boom-bust/" target="_blank" title="Buy Now">click here.</a>
</body></html>

LindsayDavid-WEhfyLvNJJ

Let's end the madness of negative gearing

<html><body>
New Sydney apartments built near ­public transport will no longer require a car space, under new rules announced by the NSW Planning Minister Pru Goward.
The draft guidelines would apply to developments built within 400 metres of a transport hub, such as a bus interchange or railway station.
Goward said the cost of a new apartment could be up to $50,000 less under proposed changes.
The guidelines will apply to 22 councils: Ashfield, Auburn, Bankstown, Botany Bay, Burwood, Canada Bay, Canterbury, City of Sydney, Hurstville, Kogarah, Lane Cove, Marrickville, Leichhardt, North Sydney, Parramatta (city centre), Randwick, Rockdale, Ryde, Strathfield, Waverley, Willoughby and Woollahra.
The planning changes are open for <a href="https://planspolicies.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&amp;job_id=6692" target="_blank">public comment until 31 October</a>.
“The closer people live to public transport hubs, the less likely they are to rely on cars,” Goward said.
“A car space can add up to $50,000 to the cost of a new apartment, so providing more flexibility around car parking requirements could lead to savings of up to the same amount for home buyers.
“Importantly, this change is restricted only to particular councils, applies only to development within close walking distance of transport services, and strongly discourages councils from allowing residents of these buildings to receive street parking permits.”
Hassell architects principal Matthew Pullinger, who represented the Australian Institute of Architects in government consultations about the changes, told News Ltd papers an underground car park was one of the most expensive aspects of a building, costing between $50,000 to $70,000 per underground car spot.
Developers would still be able to build car spots if there was a demand for them, with the new draft policy not having a minimum requirement of car spots.
NSW Bureau of Transport Statistics data shows a reduction in the number of people aged under 35 who have a driver’s licence — dropping from 84% in 1998 to 74% in 2009.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Cheaper new Sydney apartment drive as compulsory car spaces scrapped

<html><body>
Without a doubt it’s one of the most confused and manipulated demographics within the Australian economy – yet year in and year out we have commentators both here and afar trying to solve this puzzle. 
What is clear is that very few can solve this puzzle given they quickly get lost deep in the permutations of the mathematics by focusing too much on theory and not enough on the practice.
Bubbles, booms and bonanza – and yet for some strange reason they have this creative ability to conjure this monumental market disintegration creating this almighty property Armageddon. 
This week, I was particularly interested to read commentary from Fabienne Michaux, head of Standard &amp; Poor’s Rating Service Australia and New Zealand. In particular: “One of the peculiarities of the Australian system is our huge reliance on foreign debt and most of that is channeled through the banking system.”
“Although the rise in house prices didn’t look like a speculative bubble the market is certainly looking fully priced and possibly a little overpriced, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne which account for such a large percentage of the national stock.” 
Finally, an assessment that I totally agree with, “fully priced and possibly a little overpriced”.
When the Murray inquiry is released later this year, many of the answers to solving the Australian property Rubik’s Cube will be answered – all that remains to be seen is whether or not the Abbott government will act on the findings. 
The major problem for Australian property is that the governments ignore the problems preferring to feed from these highly profitable property ”rivers of gold” – which is keeping the governments’ heads above water due to the ongoing taxes. Capital gains tax, land tax, stamp duty, rates – the list keeps going on.
GST was introduced by the Howard government on 1 July 2000, replacing the previous federal wholesale sales tax system and designed to phase out a number of various state and territory government taxes, duties and levies such as banking taxes and stamp duty. Well hello!!  We still have them today despite the promise that they would be removed. Actually, on the property side these taxes have mysteriously been increased since the GST was introduced.
Back in 2010 when the Henry tax review was handed down the Treasurer Wayne Swan responded that “Labor would never reduce the existing tax concessions on negative gearing and capital gains tax”. What we were seeing back then was an approximate 20% rise in house prices over that year where it was obvious from the report that tax breaks were inflating house prices. At the time former New South Wales auditor – general commented: “It doesn’t do Australia any good to have a government which, when they see these rational arguments from a very well experienced team, give it three minutes’ thought and then just ditch it.”
<a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/09/10-09-2014-1-31-59-PM.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-143882" src="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/09/10-09-2014-1-31-59-PM.jpg" alt="10-09-2014 1-31-59 PM" width="681" height="394"></a>
If we are to try and solve this Australian property Rubik’s Cube the next inquiry Mr Murray should be given is does Australia need middle and third tier governments? The problem here is the governments rely totally on the multitude of taxes which keeps them in jobs so that on retirement they can collect a handsome pension. Making such a decision like those contained within the Henry tax review would be committing some type of political treason.
You very simply can’t solve the problem when the politicians who make the decisions have a clear vested interest of self-preservation. This can’t be solved until such time as Canberra admits that we have a problem – despite reports confirming that change is needed, the preferred option is to then ignore it, which is confirmed when you see that the Abbott government does not even have a Housing Minister.
<a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/09/8-09-2014-2-25-50-PM.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-143883" src="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/09/8-09-2014-2-25-50-PM.jpg" alt="8-09-2014 2-25-50 PM" width="632" height="278"></a>
So let’s just think about this and how we can possibly solve this dilemma? Imagine the Liberals and Labor offering bipartisan support for the creation of (let’s get creative and call it) the Australian Economic Master Plan (AEMP). So let’s appoint David Murray as the chairperson, then appoint another nine pre-eminent business people to join this committee to actually closely investigate and then recommend what such a AEMP should look like, what needs to be implemented and what needs to be removed, which let’s say may take 12 months to determine. That would leave twelve 12 to discuss, then it is presented at the next federal election by referendum.
The problem previously has been that these conversations were quickly placed in the too – hard basket (for political reasons). It’s clearly time now to remove the politics by listening to what a totally independent body recommend – that way we just may solve the Australian real estate Rubik’s Cube.
Whatever the case we at least need to start this conversation – as it’s long overdue.
</body></html>

Bubbles, booms and bonanza – Solving the Australian property Rubik's Cube

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
When Australian prime minister Tony Abbott came into office last year his aim was to be remembered as the “infrastructure prime minister”.
In the Coalition’s September 2013 <a href="https://lpaweb-static.s3.amazonaws.com/13-09-05%20Coalition%202013%20Election%20Policy%20%E2%80%93%20Better%20Infrastructure%20Planning%20%E2%80%93%20policy%20document.pdf" target="_blank">policy</a> to “Deliver the Infrastructure for the 21st Century”, the government promised vital infrastructure projects would be underway across the country within 12 months.
The same document promised all Commonwealth infrastructure spending exceeding $100 million would be subject to analysis by Infrastructure Australia “to test cost-effectiveness and financial viability” – analysis that would be made public.
A recent report published by the Australian Logistics Council indicated a 1% increase in logistics efficiency, which could be achieved by increased spending on road and rail infrastructure, would boost GDP by $2 billion.
One year on it is time to review the government’s performance.
Infrastructure spending is a vote winner
Having a focus on infrastructure is popular with politicians: it provides tangible evidence of action and they might even have a project named after them. Why have a boring name like WestConnex or M5 when you could have the “Abbott Expressway”?
It also provides for good photo opportunities even when not a cent of public money has been spent on the project. According to trade minister Andrew Robb after a recent visit to New York, international funds management groups with trillions of dollars under management are “enormously excited” about investing in Australian infrastructure.
Assistant infrastructure minister Jamie Briggs recently said the government was investing “a record $50 billion in world class infrastructure that will leverage over $125 billion of public and private investment in infrastructure over the next decade”. However, he neglected to mention that $36 billion of the $50 billion was already committed by the previous government.
Asset recycling remains thwarted
The federal government has set up a $5 billion <a href="https://theconversation.com/asset-recycling-no-dream-for-hockey-but-efficiency-boost-likely-28802" target="_blank">asset recycling</a> fund from which it plans to give a 15% bonus for each project to state and territory governments who recycle capital gained from the privatisation of state-owned entities, such as ports and utility assets.
This additional capital is mainly available for road projects with spending on rail infrastructure a poor second, and spending on public transport not even on the government’s agenda.
Despite this, the much publicised East Coast passenger fast-rail link may be back on track after the government had recent high level meetings with a number of foreign rail companies. Unfortunately for the state and territory governments, the asset recycling plan is currently stalled in the House of Representatives following amendments proposed by Labor and the Greens in the Senate.
While the government has delivered on some promises, most are still just promises. The heavy lifting (and concrete pouring) of funding new infrastructure has been shifted to the state and territory governments and/or private businesses.
Article continues on the next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
Step one: Infrastructure Australia
One promise the government has delivered on is the changing of the guard at Infrastructure Australia, with the appointment of a new CEO and Board who have responsibility for delivering the strategic objectives of the agency.
But will Infrastructure Australia be able to deliver tangible results and be left to get on with their work without interference from politicians (from both sides of the chamber) keen on ribbon-cutting in their electorates?
The government committed the following projects would be underway within 12 months of its election:
<ul>
<li>$6.7 billion to fix Queensland’s Bruce Highway</li>
<li>$5.6 billion to complete the duplication of the Pacific Highway from Newcastle to the Queensland border</li>
<li>$1.5 billion to get Melbourne’s East West Link underway</li>
<li>$1.5 billion to ensure the WestConnex project gets underway in Sydney</li>
<li>$1 billion to support the Gateway Motorway upgrade in Brisbane</li>
<li>a number of smaller road infrastructure projects In Perth, Adelaide and Tasmania</li>
</ul>
Two rail projects get a brief mention: $300 million to finalise plans for an inland railway from Melbourne to Brisbane and a promise to get the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing underway.
The verdict
On the promise to provide a cost benefit analysis for projects over $100 million the government has recorded a “fail” as these analyses are generally being hidden under the veil of “commercial in confidence”.
All of the above mentioned projects are still to commence and none are “shovel ready”. Most have long lead times due to the complex planning processes involved, so we will have to wait and see if the government will be able to bring some of these promises to fruition. At this stage we may be able to give the government a “borderline pass” on its infrastructure report card.
In its pre-election infrastructure policy document the government also promised to deliver an “Annual Parliamentary Statement on Infrastructure Delivery” to the House of Representatives. It will be interesting to see what this statement contains if and when it is made public.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/30477/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
Peter van Duyn is maritime industry expert, Institute for Supply Chain and Logistics at <a href="https://www.vu.edu.au/" target="_blank">Victoria University</a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Policy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Policy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News