For most new apartment buildings, the Owners Corporation starts life with little more than a bank account and the first quarterly strata levies.

At <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/9-gay-street-castle-hill-9-gay-street-castle-hill-nsw-2154">9 Gay Street</a> in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/castle-hill-nsw-2154">Castle Hill</a>, it starts with around $7 million in reserve.

It's an unusual legacy of what was once one of Sydney's highest-profile apartment remediation projects. When the development, originally known as Skyview and built by disgraced developer Top Place, came under scrutiny by then NSW Building Commissioner David Chandler, an $11 million remediation bond was negotiated to ensure any building defects could be fully rectified.

The building underwent an 18-month remediation program, during which around $4 million of that bond was spent bringing the building up to the standard it should have been in from the outset.

After extensive inspections, all active rectification orders have been lifted. What's more, around $7.2 million remains secured for the Owners Corporation for the next 15 years.

In a twist few would have predicted, what began as a significant concern for purchasers has left the building with something almost unheard of in the apartment market: a multi-million-dollar financial reserve from day one.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=147685 project_image_fid=359136]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/equitifund-group">Equitifund</a> Executive Chairman Greg Huxley said the structure offers buyers a level of certainty that is difficult to replicate.

"The $11 million bond established for the Skyview Castle Hill development represents exceptional value, providing genuine financial security for purchasers," Huxley said.

"Unlike a standard insurance policy, this bond consists of real funds held in trust for the Owners Corporation, offering a tangible layer of protection and added peace of mind."

The apartments themselves have been designed with a focus on practical, contemporary living. Interiors feature Smeg appliances, stone benchtops, tiled living areas, carpeted bedrooms, 2.7-metre ceilings, floor-to-ceiling glazing, and ducted heating and cooling throughout.

Residents also have access to a range of shared amenities, including two rooftop barbecue areas, a swimming pool, children's playgrounds, secure building access, storage cages, and visitor parking.

The location continues to be one of the project's strongest drawcards. Castle Hill Metro Station sits virtually on the doorstep, providing direct connections across Sydney's expanding Metro network, while Castle Towers offers extensive retail, dining, entertainment, and service amenities within walking distance.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=147685 project_image_fid=359127]

The building, now named after its location at 9 Gay Street, comprises a diverse mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments starting from just under $600,000.

Equitifund National Sales Director Ben Hamblett said demand in the Hills District continues to be driven by buyers seeking convenience and connectivity.

"Interest from both owner-occupiers and investors in Castle Hill remains exceptionally strong, with buyers consistently prioritising developments in close proximity to the Metro station and Castle Towers Shopping Centre," Hamblett said.

"There is a clear trend in the market, with purchasers seeking convenient access to transport and lifestyle amenities that support a seamless, low-maintenance way of living."

On top of the long-term protection afforded by the remaining $7.2 million bond, Equitifund is offering a limited-time stamp duty rebate on selected apartments.

Eligible purchasers can also secure finance options, including a 3.99 per cent two-year variable rate, loan-to-value ratios of up to 90 per cent, and interest-only lending options through EquitiCredit.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=147685]

Joel Robinson

Why this Castle Hill apartment building starts with a $7 million advantage

For much of the past few years, conversations about Australia's property market have centred on the rapid growth seen in Sydney, Brisbane, Gold Coast, and Perth. <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/melbourne-vic-3004">Melbourne</a> has followed a different trajectory.

That relative underperformance is now encouraging some buyers to reassess the city, particularly those willing to look beyond short-term market movements and focus on quality property in established locations, along with the long-term growth prospects of a city expected to overtake Sydney as Australia’s most populous.

John Bekiaris, Research &amp; Market Insights at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/equitifund-group">Projects by Equitifund</a>, said Melbourne's current position is attracting increasingly sophisticated purchasers.

"Melbourne continues to present one of Australia's strongest long-term investment stories," Bekiaris says.

"While other capital cities have experienced stronger recent growth, that relative underperformance is exactly what's attracting sophisticated counter-cyclical investors."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363268]

Equitifund isn't just commenting on Melbourne's property market, it's investing in it.

The Sydney-headquartered capital partner has taken over the remaining apartments at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/victoriana-melbourne-20-queens-road-melbourne-vic-3004">Victoriana</a>, the recently completed glass-encased development opposite Albert Park Lake in Melbourne's tightly held St Kilda Road precinct.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/rothelowman">Rothelowman</a> and built by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/hickory">Hickory</a>, Victoriana places residents between one of Melbourne's most recognised parklands and the CBD, offering oversized two and three-bedroom apartments aimed at owner-occupiers seeking a genuine alternative to a traditional family home.

The development comprises 232 completed residences alongside a suite of resident amenities, including a 25-metre indoor swimming pool, gymnasium, landscaped entertaining areas, resident lounges, EV charging, secure basement parking and a concierge-style arrival experience.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363229]

The apartments have been designed with owner-occupiers firmly in mind.&nbsp;Open-plan living and dining areas flow onto generous balconies framing views across Albert Park Lake, Fawkner Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens and the Melbourne skyline.

Kitchens feature Gaggenau appliances, stone benchtops and generous preparation space. Bedrooms include built-in robes, while bathrooms feature full-height textured tiling. Hardwood flooring and ducted air conditioning complete residences designed for long-term living.

Rothelowman's architecture takes its cues from the landscape opposite the site. Sweeping horizontal glazing references the movement of Albert Park Lake, while generous balconies and expansive glazing strengthen the connection between the apartments and the surrounding parklands. The result is a building designed to deliver the scale and amenity expected of luxury apartment living, while offering the larger floorplans increasingly sought by owner-occupiers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363284]

The location is one of Victoriana's defining characteristics. Positioned on Queens Road, residents are directly opposite Albert Park Lake and within easy reach of Fawkner Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens, South Melbourne, St Kilda Road and the CBD. With few comparable development opportunities remaining in the precinct, buyers are increasingly placing value on outlooks that are unlikely to be interrupted by future construction.

Greg Huxley, Founder of Equitifund, believes those qualities become even more valuable over time.

"Premium real estate has always rewarded buyers who take a long-term view," Huxley said.

"Victoriana represents the kind of asset that's increasingly difficult to recreate today, particularly in an established location like Queens Road."

He said rising construction costs are also changing the way buyers assess completed developments.

"When you combine an irreplaceable location with thoughtful architecture and premium finishes, you create something that becomes increasingly difficult to reproduce as construction costs continue to rise."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363228]

According to National Sales Director Ben Hamblett, enquiry has been driven largely by Melbourne downsizers and buyers upgrading from smaller apartments.

"Interest in Victoriana continues to build, with strong buyer focus on the larger owner-occupier residences within the development," Hamblett says.

"Enquiry is increasingly driven by local buyers who recognise the rarity of what's on offer: park-facing apartments in an established neighbourhood where new development opportunities are becoming increasingly scarce. At Victoriana, the view is not just a feature; it's an appreciating asset in its own right."

He said interstate enquiry has also strengthened as buyers reassess Melbourne's position within the national property cycle.

"Melbourne currently stands as the most compelling entry point of any major Australian capital, and discerning buyers are beginning to recognise what those who move early always understand: the best opportunities are taken before the price rise confirms them."

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=1979]

Why now is the time to buy in Melbourne's premium apartment market

Developers and apartment buyers have a narrowing window of opportunity before Brisbane's Olympic infrastructure pipeline begins competing directly with residential construction, pushing up costs, tightening labour supply and making new projects increasingly difficult to deliver.

While Brisbane's apartment market continues to benefit from strong population growth and limited housing supply, industry research suggests the years leading up to 2027 could prove to be the most important period for developers looking to secure builders and buyers hoping to purchase before the next wave of price increases.

A new Colliers report, Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games: Creating Solutions, highlights the scale of the challenge. While thousands of new homes are planned across South East Queensland, the Brisbane Olympic Athletes Village alone will deliver more than 10,500 beds during the Games before being converted into around 1,750 to 2,000 apartments. Equivalent to almost two years of typical inner-city apartment supply, the project will also absorb a significant share of the construction workforce and building materials.

The broader construction pipeline paints an even clearer picture.

Construction Skills Queensland's Horizon 2032 report forecasts Queensland's annual construction pipeline will average $69 billion over the coming years before peaking at $75 billion in 2027-28. Demand for construction workers is expected to increase by 17 per cent to almost 150,000 people, with the industry facing an annual shortfall of around 19,000 workers that could blow out to as many as 35,000 during the peak construction period.

The Olympic venues, athletes village and supporting infrastructure will account for billions of dollars worth of work across South East Queensland through to 2032, creating intense competition for labour at a time when Australia's residential construction sector is already under pressure.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=373834]

Colliers Queensland Residential Director Andrew Scriven said the convergence of these projects is creating a clear window of opportunity for both developers and buyers.

"From 2027 onwards, the market will shift dramatically," Scriven said.

"Labour will increasingly be locked into government-led infrastructure and Olympic projects, which means private residential developments will face higher costs and tighter margins. The developers who move now are the ones most likely to get projects off the ground."

Scriven said the same dynamic would also affect buyers, with fewer apartment projects expected to launch once construction capacity tightens.

"If you're looking to change your lifestyle over the next five years, now is your window of opportunity to buy."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150713 project_image_fid=373827]

Developers are already positioning themselves ahead of that window.

Following the success of Monarch at Toowong, Consolidated Properties is preparing to launch two new Brisbane apartment projects in the second half of 2026. They include <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/gloriette-30-bedivere-street-yeerongpilly-qld-4105">Gloriette</a> at Yeerongpilly Green, a 25-storey tower within one of Brisbane's key Olympic precincts, and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/castile-47-skyring-terrace-newstead-qld-4006">Castile</a>, a recently approved 25-storey riverfront development at 47 Skyring Terrace in Newstead.

Hutchinson Builders will deliver both projects, with early works already underway at Yeerongpilly and Newstead expected to commence later this year.

The timing comes as Brisbane's fundamentals continue to strengthen, with strong interstate migration, population growth and vacancy rates remaining below 1.5 per cent.

Colliers Queensland researcher Pragya Sharma said Greater Brisbane is forecast to require around 40,000 new apartments between 2021 and 2031.

"There's a real mismatch emerging between when housing is needed and when it will be feasible to build," Sharma said.

"As a result, the period leading up to 2027 presents a key window of opportunity for developers to secure approvals, funding and construction capacity, while buyers will have greater choice before supply constraints intensify."

Colliers research outlines a critical pre-2027 window to start residential projects before labour squeeze: now is the time to buy

Developers, buyers on watch in South East Queensland ahead of construction crunch: Colliers

It's taken less than nine months for developer Sherpa Property Group to sell out all 51 apartments in its <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-oasis-palm-beach-7-9-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Oasis</a> development in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/palm-beach-qld-4221">Palm Beach</a>, over a year before its anticipated completion.

&nbsp;

Located at 7-9 Sixth Avenue, the $67 million development has resonated strongly with both local owner-occupiers and downsizers seeking high-quality apartments within walking distance of the beach, dining precincts and everyday amenities.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357458]

Christie Leet, Founder of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Group</a>, said the sell-out reflected both the strength of the Palm Beach market and the success of Sherpa's community-first approach to development.

"The sell-out of Oasis is a fantastic outcome and reinforces the strong demand we're seeing for thoughtfully designed apartments in lifestyle locations," Leet said.

"From the outset, our vision was to create a development that genuinely enhanced the Palm Beach community while providing residents with exceptional homes and wellness-focused amenities.

"We've been incredibly encouraged by the level of local support throughout the campaign, 72.5 per cent of buyers are locals, with a significant proportion of purchasers choosing Oasis as their future home rather than an investment."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357463]

Construction is now progressing following development approval, with trusted builder LPS Group delivering the project and completion anticipated in Q3 2027.

Oasis forms part of Sherpa Group's successful Flourish collection, which has become recognised for its focus on wellness, community and elevated coastal living.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357469]

Residents will have private access to a rooftop amenity space featuring a pool, gym, sauna, steam room, hot and cold plunge pools, spa and barbecue facilities.

"The success of Oasis demonstrates that buyers continue to prioritise quality, location and lifestyle," Leet said.

"We are proud to have delivered a project that has resonated so strongly with the market and look forward to bringing Oasis to life for our future residents."

Sherpa recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-soleira-palm-beach-1150-1160-gold-coast-highway-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Soleira</a>, its third instalment of the Flourish brand in Palm Beach following Flourish Oasis and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/amargo-6-12-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Amargo</a>.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=151449]

Sherpa sells out Flourish Oasis in booming Palm Beach

Urban Property Group's <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/la-vera-macquarie-park-94-talavera-road-macquarie-park-nsw-2113">La Vera</a> is leading the next phase of Macquarie Park's residential evolution, with the new apartment development set to become the first of several new apartment projects in the precinct to complete.

The 169-apartment building has now topped out ahead of its scheduled completion in the third quarter of 2026, as new residential investment continues to reshape one of Sydney's largest employment hubs into a true mixed-use precinct.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=368645]

Cox Architecture has designed La Vera to capture the best of its unique positioning on Talavera Road, orienting the building towards Lane Cove National Park.&nbsp;The building features a sculpted northern façade with flowing curves inspired by the surrounding landscape, while its city-facing elevation adopts a more structured architectural expression to maximise skyline views.

"The vision for the project was to conceive a building that adopted an organic and curvilinear form to the northern portion that faces the Lane Cove National Park," <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">Cox Architecture</a> Director Felipe Miranda said.

"The residents that reside in the northern portion of the building benefit by having beautifully crafted curved balconies that speak to the natural context and heighten the relationship of their internal living spaces to the external balconies."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=358802]

La Vera offers a diverse mix of one, two, three, and four-bedroom configurations, with prices currently starting from $740,000. Buyers so far have been a mix of Sydney-based investors,&nbsp;metro commuters, owner-occupiers and downsizers from surrounding North Shore suburbs.

Both investors and owner-occupiers have been drawn to La Vera's proximity to Macquarie University, Macquarie University Hospital, Macquarie Centre and the Sydney Metro, infrastructure that supports both strong rental demand and a convenient lifestyle for residents.

The apartments feature full-height glazing, timber flooring throughout living areas, stone kitchen benchtops, SMEG appliances, floor-to-ceiling bathroom tiling and ducted air conditioning.

Residents will have access to a rooftop recreation level featuring a swimming pool, sauna, barbecue facilities and landscaped relaxation areas, complemented by additional communal space at ground level. Many apartments enjoy uninterrupted views across Lane Cove National Park, reinforcing the project's connection to its natural setting.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=364551]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a>, a family-owned developer and builder with nearly four decades of experience, holds a 4.5-star iCIRT rating and was Australia's first developer to introduce 10-Year Latent Defects Insurance (LDI). La Vera is the first apartment development in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/macquarie-park-nsw-2113">Macquarie Park</a> approved to offer the additional insurance protection, alongside a five-year warranty on SMEG appliances.

Urban Property Group CEO Patrick Elias said the additional protection reflects changing buyer expectations in the off the plan market.

"Consumers are a lot more weary and a lot more concerned in buying off the plan than they ever have been. Having LDI is a tool to portray the confidence that we have in our product, and a confidence we want buyers to share," Elias said.

Following completion of the building later this year, buyers will move into their apartments well before Christmas.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=134951]

La Vera closes in on completion as Macquarie Park continues residential transformation

Scott Morrison

<html><body>
Regulatory tightening is working to cool the overheated property market without a hard landing, according to Treasurer Scott Morrison.
"The data shows to date that we are moving towards a safe landing when it comes to housing markets in Sydney and the pendulum swinging back in the favour of home owners and first home buyers, which is good news," Morrison said in Sydney on Monday, according to The Australian Financial Review.
In March, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority announced restrictions on interest-only loans in response to record high household debt levels and the measure was has been "fully supported by the government”, he said.
Interest-only loans must be restricted to 30 per cent of new residential mortgage loans, APRA said.
"We are seeing the outcomes of that now; that very careful approach that we have been encouraging and supporting now having this impact in the markets in Sydney and in Melbourne where things are easing off to a safe landing, not the hard landing that Labor's policies would deliver."
However, the CoreLogic Home Value Index <a href="/news/slowest-quarterly-rate-of-dwelling-value-growth-since-december-2015-corelogic">recorded a recovery</a> from the 1.1 percent fall in May, with an 1.8 percent rise in capital city dwelling values over June, with Sydney home prices up 2.2 percent.
Meanwhile, Australian Bureau of Statistics data showed building approvals fell 5.6 per cent in May, the second fall in three months.
Asked whether he was comfortable with how the housing market was tracking, Morrison said the data on housing was "an endorsement of the careful approach the government has been taking”, the AFR reported.
He again reiterated that the sober, careful approach “is providing that very calm and considered way to deal with what is a very real issue for so many Australians”. 
Morrison had advocated a scalpel-like approach to the housing affordability issue.
"I'm encouraged by the fact that we are seeing more owner occupiers, first home buyers coming back into the market. We want to see that happen."
 
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Treasurer Scott Morrison says housing market poised for 'safe landing' after regulatory curbs

<html><body>
Housing affordability is not a new problem, and as the Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison pointed out, he like anyone in Sydney has actual experience that it has actually never been easy to buy a home.
He rightly argues, dealing with housing affordability must involve a scalpel, not a chainsaw given the likely or unintended consequences of some policy.
He warns declining housing affordability can't be answered with lower economic growth.
It is likely the housing affordability will be an important policy focus of the Turnbull Government May budget.
And to try to shape the agenda, the Treasurer gave a 4600 word speech this month to outline some of the issues.
I took four nuggets from his speech to the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute which highlight the complexity of it all.
1) Some two million taxpayers in Australia have an interest in a residential investment property. Around 72 per cent own just one property and 90 per cent own no more than two. Less than one percent of investors have six or more investments. Around 1.3 million of these taxpayers negatively gear, including 58,000 teachers and one in five police officers. 
2) Mum and dad investors are putting a roof over the head of around a quarter of all renting households in the country. If mum and dad investors were not part of our private rental market, there would be fewer rental properties available, meaning higher rents. Morrison notes disrupting negative gearing would come at a cost, especially to renters. It would not be good news for the 30 per cent of Australian households who rent. 
3) Morrison said you can't help first homebuyers save for a deposit by implementing policies that increase their rent. Over 85 per cent of private renters move within five years and almost one third of moves are forced. Around 47 per cent of low-income rental households in our capital cities spend more than 30 per cent of their household income on housing costs. His concern for families with children who need housing stability to have beneficial access to schools and medical assistance suggests we need longer term leases. 
4) Australian residential property investment is more geared to capital gain than yield. Morrison sees the need to establish a new institutional investment class as is occurring overseas. Property needs to be a longer term fixed interest investment that can comfortably sit within institutional investment portfolios and Australian super funds. 
"Previous governments have avoided dealing with these issues for fear of raising and disappointing expectations," Morrison concluded, adding that failure to confront these issues in the past can be traced back to the problems we face today. I only hope he hasn't overly raised expectations.
Morrison's first property purchase cost $330,000 with his wife, bought in Bronte in 1995, where he grew up as a child, and then they upgraded to the Shire at $920,000 in 2009.
This article first appeared in the Daily Telegraph. 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Scott Morrison advises housing affordability is not a new problem

<html><body>
Treasurer Scott Morrison has said the housing affordability problem, mainly in Sydney and Melbourne which houses 40 percent  of Australia’s population, has to be dealt with a ‘scalpel’ approach, "not a chainsaw as advocated by the Labor Party."
He said the “principal cause of declining housing affordability is the failure of housing supply to adjust to increased demand, driven by higher economic growth”.
Batting for a careful and calibrated response, Morrison said drastic steps could “spark a negative housing shock that would undermine our economic confidence, negatively impact household consumption and retard economic growth”.
He noted that the proportion of Australian households that own their own home has fallen marginally from 71 per cent to 67 per cent over the last two decades.
“Between 2002 and 2014, home ownership among 25 to 34 year olds declined more significantly by almost ten percentage points to less than 30 per cent. That is more than 160,000 young people that would otherwise be home owners. For 35 to 44 year olds it fell by more than ten percentage points to 52.4 per cent.”
Higher house prices are making it tougher for potential homebuyers to transition into ownership.
He cited research by CHOICE, the National Association of Tenants' Organisations and National Shelter, that said just over half of renters say they rent because they can't afford to buy their own property.
Because of this, they are staying in the rental market for longer — a dynamic that puts upward pressure on rental prices and availability and even more pressure on lower-income households, increasing the need for affordable housing.
“Our response must first strive to remove obstacles that restrict supply responding to genuine demand. These impediments are well known, planning delays and regulations, supporting infrastructure and services, the cost of new development, taxes and charges and access to sites, including Government land, just to name a few,” he said.
As an example of the scalpel-like approach, he said a good example was the recent action taken by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority to limit the share of housing lending that is interest-only. This follows their earlier intervention in December 2014, placing a speed limit on investor credit growth that halved previous levels.
He noted the decline in home ownership and increase in mortgage costs has been most pronounced in family-forming households and that Australians are increasingly carrying into their retirement larger mortgage debts, or are renting.
“The proportion of home owners aged over 45 with a mortgage has increased and, according to the Productivity Commission in 2015, the most frequent use of superannuation lump sums was to fund housing, including paying down mortgages.”
He cited Saul Eslake's recent report to Superannuation trustees saying, "it is likely that an increasing proportion of new retirees will use some or all of their accumulated superannuation savings to discharge their outstanding mortgage debt' and that 'an increasing proportion of retirees will be living in privately rented housing, spending a higher proportion of their income on rent."
These are the facts and they represent a problem that needs to be addressed in the broader national interest, said Morrison.
“As a Government, we acknowledge that for certain Australian households, housing affordability is an issue regardless of where they live due to economic reasons such as not having a job or social reasons such as having a disability.”
The government is working on a taskforce to look at harnessing large-scale private investment through a bond aggregator concept.
The bond aggregator would issue bonds to the market, and on-lend these funds to community housing providers — allowing them to access cheaper and longer term finance.
The Housing Finance Corporation (THFC) in the United Kingdom, has operated a similar model successfully for over 30 years, he said. THFC has provided more than £5 billion worth of loans which is assisting the provision of affordable housing throughout the UK.
"Of course, if found to be viable, a housing bond aggregator is only a part of the solution. A variety of complementary reforms are required to increase the supply," said Morrison.
For the full text of speech, <a href="https://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/speech/005-2017/" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</body></html>

Treasurer Morrison says tackling housing affordability needs a scalpel-like approach

Address to the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne: Scott Morrison

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/72861/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS 
Federal government ministers have cast a cloud over funding for social housing and homelessness services, leading to speculation that the National Affordable Housing Agreement (NAHA) may not survive the 2017 budget.
Treasurer Scott Morrison and Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar point to the recent Report on Government Services, which shows the number of public housing properties has fallen, as evidence of the NAHA’s “abject failure”. Sukkar said:
"We believe it’s crucial that every dollar of spending on affordable housing programs increases the number and availability of public and social housing stock. Clearly, this objective has not been met."
It should be no surprise that Australia’s social housing has been largely static for 20 years. Everything we know about the system tells us it is not funded to even cover the costs of its ongoing operation, let alone growth to meet the needs of an expanding population. Aside from a one-off boost under the 2009 federal economic stimulus plan, social housing has been on a starvation ration for decades.
The whole system system is effectively being run at a loss. So, from the perspective of state governments, building a new public housing dwelling is just one more way of losing money.
The federal government has also long lamented the lack of transparency about how states and territories spend their NAHA funds – about AS$1.5 billion a year. And there are glaring gaps in the evidence about the operations and performance of public housing authorities.
In failing to act on a 2009 commitment to modernise and enhance the Report on Government Services metrics, the states and territories have placed themselves in a weak position to rebut claims of ineffective financial management.
That said, everyone who has any contact with the public housing system knows it to be grossly underfunded. One-off studies occasionally illuminate the scale of the issue. For example, a 2013 New South Wales Audit Office report found a $600 million annual operating deficit for that state’s public housing. But no-one can easily quantify the extent of the problem using routinely published data.
A snapshot of social housing in Australia
Around 320,000 of Australia’s approximately 428,000 social housing dwellings remain under public housing authority control. This stock was amassed through a long series of funding agreements between federal and state and territory governments. These were known as the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreements until their 2009 NAHA rebranding.
From the first Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement in 1945, the basic arrangement was that the federal government would lend funds to state housing authorities to build houses. The states would cover the ongoing costs from the rents paid by working-class tenants.
And, at least to begin with, the housing authorities did build. They made a significant contribution to housing supply, amounting to roughly one in six houses built between 1945 and 1965.
From the early 1970s, the housing authorities were directed, justifiably, to provide more housing to low-income households unable to pay full “market” rents. However, their capital funding also went into a long decline. With the exception of a brief period in the mid-1980s, housing authorities never again built at their earlier rate.
A number of interlocking problems set in. Social housing’s declining share of the housing stock became more tightly rationed to the lowest-income households. This eroded the system’s rent base. At the same time, its ageing buildings and households with greater support needs increased its costs.
Two landmark studies by Jon Hall and Mike Berry charted the implications of these developments for the finances. At the end of the 1980s, all but one of the housing authorities ran an operating surplus. By 2004, all but one ran an operating deficit.
Various attempts to improve the situation have been made. The 1989 Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement switched federal funding from loans to grants; the 1996 agreement allowed federal funds to be spent on recurrent expenses. In the early 2000s, rebates on social housing rents were reduced, slightly increasing revenue.
Modest amounts of public housing have also been transferred into the hands of not-for-profit community housing providers. Partly, this is to take advantage of the eligibility of community housing tenants for Commonwealth Rent Assistance. But although this often enables these providers to run a small operational surplus, it isn’t enough to fund stock replacement or any significant expansion.
Meanwhile, the overall stock has been eaten away, through market sales of public housing, and run down, through skimping on repairs and maintenance. Both are unsustainable strategies.
Running a system without good data
If the broad outlines of the problem are clear, there are major deficiencies in the data as to the details. The Hall and Berry analysis is now dated. There is no current evidence base that shows transparently and consistently what the social housing system in each state and territory costs, and how these costs are met.
For example, the Report on Government Services purports to show the “net recurrent cost per dwelling” for each state and territory. But this does not differentiate between distinct expenditure components such as management and maintenance.
Our 2015 research found that this metric was a “black box”, subject to implausibly large variations across jurisdictions. These reflected the vagaries of departmental restructures, rather than a sound accounting of social housing operations.
There is little doubt that all public housing authorities are now in deficit. However, the Report on Government Services provides no data on the relative scale of these funding shortfalls. Nor do governments routinely reveal the scale of system costs still met by tenants’ rents, nor through stock sales.
What should a rebooted NAHA do?
Although the NAHA does it inadequately, an enduring program of federal funding for operational expenses is essential to sustain the social housing system. Such funding cannot be “replaced”, as Morrison has suggested, by a government-backed aggregated bond financing model.
The bond aggregator model depends on social housing providers having a durable subsidy from government that pays the difference between their ongoing costs and the revenue from rent that low-income tenants can afford.
Instead, NAHA should be rebooted to deliver three things:
capital funding for new social housing stock, distributed according to an assessment of current and projected needs in each state and territory;
recurrent funding, distributed according to the number of social housing dwellings in each state and territory and an assessment of reasonable net recurrent costs; and
clear accounting by social housing providers for costs of provision and the contributions of tenants, government funding and other sources of income towards meeting these costs.
Many in the social housing world would agree the NAHA framework is far from transparent and that there is no certainty that NAHA money is optimally spent. But a ministerial focus on these issues while ignoring the system’s chronic underfunding smacks of re-arranging deckchairs.
Rather than scrapping the NAHA, the system should be rebooted, to properly fund both the growth and ongoing operations of social housing. This must be done on the basis of clear targets for the level of need to be met and the reasonable costs of providing the service.
Chris Martin is research fellow, Housing Policy and Practice, UNSW and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-martin-203935" target="_blank">here</a>.
Hal Pawson is<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hal-pawson-147969"> </a>associate director - City Futures - Urban Policy and Strategy, City Futures Research Centre, Housing Policy and Practice, UNSW and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hal-pawson-147969" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Australia needs to reboot affordable housing funding, not scrap it

<html><body>
Housing affordability is not a new problem, and as the Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison pointed out, it has actually never been easy to buy a home, especially in our major metropolitan areas.
Housing affordability will be an important policy focus of the Turnbull Government. And to try to get it right, the Federal Treasurer gave a 4400 word speech last week to outline some of the issues.
"As we move forward it is important to properly diagnose the problems we are trying to solve," he said. 
He noted when combining both outright ownership and those paying off a mortgage, the proportion of Australian households that own their own home has fallen from 71 per cent to 67 per cent over the past two decades, so there is a certainly a trend there.
He did stress the increase in Australian house prices has largely been driven by fundamental determinants.  
"Australia's housing markets may be expensive, but in aggregate they are substantively sound, reflecting the natural tension between the forces of supply and demand," he said.
I took five nuggets from the speech which are concerning, but which highlight the complexity of it all.
1) Between June 2010 and June 2015, the time taken for a dual income couple to save for a 20 per cent deposit in Sydney increased from 5.8 years to 7.9 years. In Melbourne it increased from 5.3 years to 5.8 years. However, outside NSW and Victoria, the change in the number of years to save for a deposit actually fell, showing the impacts are not even across the country. 
2) Home ownership rates are falling across all age groups, not just young Australians. Between 2002 and 2014, Australian home ownership among 25-34 year olds declined from 38 per cent to 29 per cent while for 35 to 44 year olds it fell from 63 per cent to 52 per cent.
3) When we look at the change in home ownership by state, the largest falls over the last twenty years have been in Queensland and Victoria, rather than NSW.
4) The percentage of purchasing households aged under 44 that are dual income has risen from just over 50 per cent in 1981 to more than 80 per cent in 2011, while the proportion of single income households fell from around 50 per cent to less than 20 per cent over the same period.  
5) The proportion of home owners aged over 45 with a mortgage has increased significantly over the past 20 years. It's taking longer to be free of the mortgage with the trend having the potential to undermine retirement incomes.
Morrison noted the challenge of not being able to access secure housing has flow on effects to many other policy areas. It impacts health, work force participation, social cohesion, welfare dependency, family formation and household consumption to name a few.
Morrison concluded that of all the determinants of house prices in Australia, whether cyclical or structural, "the most important factor behind rising prices has been the long running impediments to the supply side of the market."
Some argue with that conclusion seeking him to look at the impact of overseas migration which was not addressed, although he did note between 2005 and 2010, Australia had the highest average rate of overall population growth in the OECD, except for Israel.  
As there is no single housing market in Australia, there will however never be a single solution.
This article was first published in the Saturday Daily Telegraph.
</body></html>

Five concerning housing affordability issues

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67796/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Scott Morrison is a “once bitten, never shy” sort of guy. Having had a bad experience in the high profile debate over whether to change the GST, which ultimately came to nothing, the Treasurer this week launched into the hot topic of housing affordability.
The question is, can he and the government manage the issue or will it, too, turn on them?
With tax, the then-new Turnbull government put “everything on the table”, only to produce a package limited in scope and reform. Even the centrepiece of that - a company tax reduction over a decade – will have to be pared back to pass the Senate.
The opposite approach is being brought to housing affordability. Morrison wants to confine what’s put on the table to the supply side. Attacking demand would crash the market, he says. So in his Monday speech to the Urban Development Institute of Australia he focused on the need to cut planning regulations to free up land.
But the pressure is strong for a broader discussion.
Morrison’s address had plenty of statistics illustrating the problem. Over the past 20 years the proportion of Australian households owning or paying off their home has fallen from 71% to 67%; the proportion of home owners over 45 with a mortgage has risen significantly.
As Morrison said, “the real pinch point” is breaking into the market. “Across the country, a 20% deposit on the nationwide median home loan is more than 100% of annual household disposable income … well above the 60% levels that were the norm prior to 2000.” The proportion of home loans to first home buyers was 13.4% in August, the lowest since February 2004; this compared with the long term average of 19.4%.
Morrison noted that the housing issue had implications for retirement incomes. If it takes longer to pay off your mortgage, you can save less for later, or perhaps eventually need to use some of your superannuation to clear your house loan. He didn’t observe, but it is also true, that many younger people facing the challenge of getting together a deposit will also have the burden of starting to pay back student debt.
Malcolm Turnbull is said to be very anxious the government search for solutions to the affordability challenge. Expert opinion and common sense indicate this search should be as broad as possible, looking at the demand as well as the supply side.
The government knows this. Before the last election it considered imposing some restraint on negative gearing. But, wanting to sharpen the contrast with Labor, which proposed bold changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax, it did not go ahead.
Thus its attempt to put the affordability issue into the straightjacket labelled supply - with emphasis on regulations that are state and local rather than federal government responsibilities - is very political, when what’s needed is an open-minded quest for the best evidence-based policy.
Already the containment is being resisted.
Last term the government had a parliamentary inquiry underway by the House of Representatives economics committee into home ownership, chaired by Sydney Liberal John Alexander. Alexander was moved to another committee; by the time of the election the inquiry had not reported. Post-election Turnbull, hosing down another problem, had the economics committee divert onto quizzing bank CEOs.
Now Alexander wants the housing inquiry reconstituted under his House committee on infrastructure, transport and cities. That would make a lot of sense - much work was done and shouldn’t be wasted. Alexander wrote to Morrison in September seeking the reference, but hasn’t heard back yet.
This is a nice dilemma for Morrison. Alexander is widely on the record arguing the demand side is important and, what’s more, that investors are making it hard for young first home buyers. The evidence indicated “investors were trampling on the opportunity for people wanting to buy a first home”, he says.
Alexander believes there is a case for tweaking negative gearing - though he does not support Labor’s policy which would have been “catastrophic” - and for looking at capital gains tax provisions. He describes negative gearing as an “incredibly dynamic tool” and likens it to a high-powered car that needs to operate within a speed limit.
He says the policy objective should be a gradual transition “to maximum home ownership” and a reduction in “speculation and opportunism” in the market.
Not only does the government have to decide about the parliamentary inquiry but Morrison has said he will take up the issue of freeing up planning regulations with state treasurers when they meet in December.
This can be seen as pushing the issue onto the states. The perennial debate has also re-opened about how a shake up of state taxes could help.
Morrison faces the risk of perceived failure if the federal government raises expectations then little happens. Even if the states pledged to regulation reform, results would come in the medium term.
The other danger for Morrison and the government is that opening up the housing affordability issue is moving the play onto Labor’s ground. The opposition’s position on negative gearing doesn’t seem to have cost it votes on July 2. It gets the opportunity to run it again, arguing that it has a ready-made policy to respond to the problem the Treasurer has put right at the centre of the political agenda.
Michelle Grattan<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-grattan-20316" rel="author"></a> is professorial fellow, University of Canberra and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-grattan-20316" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Morrison opens housing affordability debate but can he control it?

<html><body>
There are few real estate activities more depressing than observing a media debate about housing affordability.
It’s a downer because it’s clear from the rhetoric that this nation is unlikely to ever achieve any kind of resolution of the issue.
There are four reasons: (1) the politicians don’t understand it and/or are unwilling to do what’s needed; (2) industry people who do understand it champion their vested interests rather than the national interest; (3) everyone else has their heads full of misinformation, political agendas and unhelpful emotion; and (4) most discussions focus on Sydney prices and ignore the realities in other parts of Australia.
The outcome is mishmash of misconceptions, myths and outright lies. Nothing useful is ever achieved.
A recent discussion of ABS TV program The Drum was representative of how bad it gets. None of the people at the discussion table had any knowledge on the issue and simply indulged their prejudices and personal agendas. One spectacular twit claimed no one can get into the housing market any more because you need a $200,000 deposit to buy a typical house. Not even in Sydney is that remotely close to the truth.
The so-called affordability crisis is never far from the headlines and it stepped up in prominence this week with Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison declaring he was serious about fixing the problem. But of course he wasn’t serious at all. He essentially dumped the problem at the feet of state governments, with a generalised assertion that taking steps to increase dwelling supply will make everything better.
That’s one of the subject’s biggest furphies – a simplistic policy of lifting supply won’t force down prices unless the idea is to deliberately generate a major oversupply. One thing Morrison got right was his statement that you won’t fix the problem by crashing the market.
As a general observation, we don’t need more dwellings in Australia. We’re already building far too many apartments, which will result in falling values, but only in specific areas such as the inner-city unit markets of Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth, as well as surfside Gold Coast. This runs contrary to the statement by Malcolm Turnbull this week that “we simply haven’t been building enough dwellings” – which shows how little he understands about the situation.
Federal Labor responded with its standard party line that restricting tax benefits for investors will make housing affordable again – despite the assertion by leader Bill Shorten that his policy won’t cause house values to decline (so therefore how will it make housing more affordable?). And that, sadly, is the extent of his understanding of the issue.
There followed lots of finger-pointing, with each level of government blaming another level of government for the perceived problems, and each side of politics scapegoating their opponents.
Industry lobby groups leapt at the opportunity to advance their pet causes. Master Builders Australia agreed, naturally, that a big lift in new home construction would be the solution, but argued that politicians needed to make changes to make it really attractive for developers and builders. The Urban Taskforce declared that developers would be happy to build lots of affordable homes, just so long as government handed them plenty of financial incentives. 
As I’ve often commented, the biggest noise in real estate is always the voice of vested interest.
Even in Perth, where there is vast oversupply and high vacancies right across the metropolitan area, the Urban Development Institute of Australia urged the WA State Government to take steps to increase housing supply. 
To paraphrase Shakespeare, they were all tales told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The problem is that none of solutions put forward will make the required difference. They’re all targeting the wrong villains.
Everyone has a theory on who’s to blame for rising prices: some say foreign investors, others claim Australian investors, a few proclaim it’s first-home buyers pumped up by government incentives and still others, including former federal minister Bob Carr, reckon it’s the high level of overseas migration into Australia.
Who’s right? Well, none of them. The real culprits are never mentioned.
The biggest single force in driving house prices comprises the market sector known as next-time buyers –i.e. home-buyers other than first-home buyers. Numerically they’re the biggest chunk of the market and they’re aspirational. They have the financial capacity and ambition to pay top dollar to secure the property they’re obsessing over.
Investors, generally, don’t do that and first-timers can’t afford to.
But there’s an even bigger villain, one the politicians never mention while they’re busy pointing their fingers in various other directions - because the biggest problems are caused by the politicians themselves.
The value of homes in Australia is under-pinned by their replacement cost – i.e. the high cost of creating new house-and-land packages, the biggest chunk of which comprises taxes, fees and charges from all three levels of government.
As long as local, state and federal governments treat the housing industry as a beloved cash cow, housing will remain pricey in this country. Most of the state budgets handed down this year made the problem worse by adding to housing costs. 
You can build as many new houses as you like, but developers can’t sell them for $250,000 if they cost $400,000 to create.
Federal politicians recently conducted an inquiry into the affordability issue, which took a lot of time, cost of lot of money and achieved absolutely nothing. The Federal Government made a show of clamping down on foreigners illegally buying mansions, but that has changed nothing for first-home buyers 
Last year another inquiry was initiated by the House of Representatives economics committee but, according to reports this week, that has lapsed through lack of energy.
So where are we after all that “sound and fury”? Exactly the same place we were before Scott Morrison stepped up to the microphone – nowhere closer to any solutions.
Terry Ryder is the founder of <a href="https://www.hotspotting.com.au/" target="_blank">hotspotting.com.au</a>. You can <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email him</a> or follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter.</a>
</body></html>

Scott Morrison

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Scott Morrison

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News