PIBCI - SAFEGUARD PUBLIC ASSETS

Statement of Support from PIBCI
Public Interest Before Corporate Interests







PIBCI is more than willing to support Friends of Public Housing Victoria
to oppose any further stock transfers of public housing properties to social community housing.

We also advocate that public housing should remain in public hands, both ownership and management.

As a movement PIBCI is committed to the safe-guarding of public assets and the further
improvement of such assets.

The take-over by private interest groups in our opinion will be increasing deregulation,
and ultimately it will become profit driven for stakeholders.

This is not in the public interest.


                                            **********************


The convenor of PIBCI, Dr Joe Toscano is running as an  Independent Candidate in the
House of Representatives for Dunkley.

MAKE THE 1% PAY 1%

From his Facebook page

"At this Federal Election you, as a Dunkley elector, have a real choice. You can vote for the same old parties making promises you know they will never keep or you can vote for Independent Candidate Dr. Joseph Toscano. Made from the same mould as the early 20th century radical activist Louisa Dunkley, after whom the electorate of Dunkley is named after, Dr. Joseph Toscano has the experience, intellect, courage and tenacity to ensure making the 1% pay 1% becomes a central plank of Australian politics during the next three years if he is elected as the Member for Dunkley.

Over 150 billion dollars per year can be freed up for public health, public education, public housing, public infrastructure, public renewable energy facilities and the funding of a social security system that looks after the needs of all Australians, not just those with the disposable income to buy the best health, housing and education services money can buy."

https://www.facebook.com/Toscano4Dunkley/info/?tab=page_info


                                                  

HINCH - ' PUBLIC HOUSING SHOULD BE KEPT IN GOVERNMENT HANDS '

"I am concerned about the ongoing loss of PUBLIC HOUSING 
which should be kept in government hands - 
not palmed off to others or sold to developers.

This is the only long-term way to address homelessness 
and the housing crisis."

Derryn Hinch 

CATRIONA THOOLEN - PALMER UNITED PARTY

We would like to thank Catriona Thoolen
Senate Candidate for the Palmer United Party
for writing to us and sharing her knowledge
and perspective on the situation.





"I have been appalled at the ongoing sell-off of public housing in every state of Australia. All State/Territory governments insist that the money from these sales goes back into housing, but it certainly is not going into actually building and providing new public housing.

The money seems to flow into some 'kitty' used to fund Rent Assistance provided to those who are renting privately. Not only is the value of the Rent Assistance inadequate due to rising rents, but eventually they will have nothing left to sell to refill the kitty.

1. Governments need to make a commitment to using all funds from the sale of existing public housing to be directed back to creating more, new public housing.

2. The rental cost of public housing needs to be defined as a set % of the occupant's income, not some arbitrary figure.

3. There should be one list in each state for people waiting for public housing, rather than the multiple lists that people requiring housing are recommended to join.

4. The transfer of public housing to community housing groups need to stop. Many of these, although claiming to be 'not for profit', manage to pay extraordinary salaries to their staff. These groups also 'pick and choose' which people to help, so the disabled, the unemployed, the elderly, can end up waiting far longer than what is acceptable if they were using a 'needs based' or even 'first come, first served' criteria.

I don't know who came up with the idea of privatising public housing, but the increasing size of the waiting list and the increasing numbers of homeless people has proven that it has not worked.

Time to return to an Australia that shows we truly value the 'fair go' that we all claim with national pride."

WHISTLE-BLOWING IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

How much is Community Housing costing the tax-payer?

In the absence of any real political analysis by the media regarding the privatisation of Public Housing, the general public may not be aware just how heavily Community Housing Organisations rely on Commonwealth Rent Assistance - CRA- if they are going to provide even a percentage - up to 50% - of its vacancies to people on low incomes and pensions. The vague 'up to' guideline has been criticised by the Auditor General's Office.

CRA was never intended as an operating subsidy for Community Housing Organisations but has effectively become one over time. In fact CRA adds around 50% to rental income across a Community Housing Organisation's whole operation over and above what would be received if rents were not 'optimised' for CRA.  'Optimised' means that rents are calculated to extract the maximum CRA available, where tenants are eligible for it. The peak body acknowledges that 'from a financial standpoint there is a disincentive to take on tenants on lower paying benefits ( and especially tenants that are not eligible for CRA' )
 
This ongoing tax-payer funded income-stream is deemed to be 'crucial' by the peak body if their businesses are to be financially sustainable. This equates to corporate welfare.

By contrast, public housing tenants require no CRA at all since rents are genuinely affordable and within their means. Furthermore Public Housing rents go back into the public purse, and provide councils with millions of dollars in revenue each year. One has to ask 'Which system is the real subsidized, tax payer-funded housing?' 

Interesting how the truth can be very different from commonly held assumptions...
  
Source-  Allocation,eligibility and rent setting in the Australian Community Housing Sector
pp 22,24, 45,44   http://tinyurl.com/j3s9lnc

Desperate people are not being housed. 
Presumably in exchange for being given so much Public Housing, a protocol was written up. In it the Vic State Government stated its expectation that 'up to' 50% of prospective tenants would be taken from the public housing waiting list. These would be referred to Housing Associations by the state government, and would comprise of those in the 'greatest housing need.'

An analysis of figures from 2013-14 shows that although targets were reached in allocating people on and /or eligible to be on the Public Housing waiting list - the number of desperate people actually referred by DHS to the 8 large Housing Associations ranged from 0-18% !
7 out of the 8 Housing Associations scored under 2% !

A review into these figures stated that the outcome was 'less than desirable.'
What an understatement!

These major players, the eight large Housing Associations, are likely to be the recipients and beneficiaries of any future mass public housing stock transfers.They are also property developers.

In response to the Auditor General's criticism that community housing organisations favour people on higher incomes who can pay more rent - and this vehement criticism has also come from various groups including ours - CHFV's response is not to deny it, but to draw attention to the fact that there is no 'financial compensation' paid to them by the government for housing those on very low incomes..

In its definition, registered housing agencies are 'viable businesses partnering with both the government and community'. But in reality, all government guidelines are just that - meaningless guidelines.

The peak body- Community Housing Federation of Victoria - CHFV -states that Community Housing Organisations are "independent bodies and are not subject to the control or direction of government unless there is a specific legal or contractual obligation to do so"  It goes on to say that, "the DHHS guidelines are perhaps therefore better understood as a statement of general intent by the government as to its desired outcomes"

The writing is on the wall...If, as a society, we want to ensure that everyone is housed - including people on low incomes and those with high and complex needs, the solution is not to 'pass the buck' by creating a 'homelessness industry'. 

State and federal governments must consider their Duty of Care and not privatise public housing by handing it over to business interests.

Sources
Access to Community Housing in Victoria Nov 2015   pp 6,8,11
http://tinyurl.com/h3yt2q5
 
Protocol for the referral of public housing applicants to Housing Associations
http://www.chfv.org.au/database-files/view-file/?id=6210

http://www.housingregistrar.vic.gov.au/Registered-Housing-Sector
http://tinyurl.com/h7avc7v

MATURE AUSTRALIA PARTY - MAP- STATEMENT OF SUPPORT

Graham McCarthy 

Mature Australia Party- 
MAP 






Their Victorian candidates for the Senate
Roy Ridge and Graham McCarthy

Statement of support

"The Mature Australia Party supports Friends of Public Housing Victoria (FOPHV) in their call to stop the transfer, sale and outsourcing of public housing to both community housing organisations and private concerns."

Graham grew up in a public housing home in Melbourne's West with five siblings.
He understands public housing, public housing communities and our issues very well -
from his own experience. After leaving school he took on a cadetship with the police force and became a policeman in the community where he grew up. According to research, this is the most effective model for policing; where there is a genuine connection between the police and the community they serve.

Personally I have witnessed some very skillful and sensitive handling of potentially explosive
situations by the police when dealing with young people with mental health issues.

When they heard about the Direct Political Action undertaken by homeless people in the city, both Graham and Roy visited them to showed their support and solidarity.

Says Graham, "The people here in City Square are here, because they have nowhere else to go.
They live in improvised dwellings and tents, huddling together for safety and pool what meagre resources they may have. These people need our assistance. I have spoken at length to a number of them over a period of time. All of them have a story to tell. They are in the main, not here by choice
but by circumstance. They are people just like you and me. I am not naive; yes some have issues-but that makes them no less entitled to receive the same level of support extended to other members of our communities in housing,education and welfare."

It is disgraceful that the privatisation of public housing and the growing plight of homeless people have been completely left off the political agenda before the Federal Election.

https://themap.org.au/

Our campaign email address is on the Blog. 
housing.humanrights@gmail.com

DLP's PUBLIC HOUSING POLICY

PUBLIC HOUSING POLICY - DLP

Although I don't agree with the DLP on some other key issues, they have an excellent
policy regarding public housing.

Public Housing Policy - DLP

'All public housing must be owned and have title held by either Federal, State or Municipal governments to provide security of tenure, with an immediate freeze on all sales and gifting of public housing properties (aka stock transfers) to social/ community housing sector and housing associations. Except for compulsory acquisition where the property must be replaced in the same area on a like-for-like basis.

Public housing rental rates should be capped at 25% of earnings, with the provision of 15% for people in ill health and for people with disabilities.

Public housing should be administered by appropriate government departments, not out sourced to non-government appointed and paid companies.

There needs to be an immediate increase in public housing stock to meet demand.'

http://www.dlp.org.au/policies/housing/

SENATE CANDIDATE OPPOSES PRIVATISATION OF PH

MEET 
LALITHA CHELLIAH

Socialist Alliance
Senate Candidate

Socialist Alliance lead Senate candidate for Victoria, Lalitha Chelliah called on the Liberal and Labor Parties to end their attacks on the poor and homeless and commit to building public housing.

For decades these parties have demonised public housing tenants to justify selling off public housing and giving it away to 'housing associations', resulting in a huge waiting list and the worst housing affordability crisis in Australia in decades.

“We need genuine public housing and public housing cannot be handed over to Community Housing Associations as “social” and “affordable” housing."

In the state of Victoria alone, Community Housing Organizations want the titles of 12,000 public housing properties -currently publicly owned - to be handed over to them.

"This represents the privatisation of public housing.” says Lalitha Chelliah

Sources
http://www.chfv.org.au/database-files/view-file/?id=6178  p.5

ARE CHURCHES SUPPORTING PRIVATISING PH?

No wonder public tenants are getting resentful of all the church groups which seem to have turned their backs on public housing and the plight of public tenants !! The CEO of Mission Australia Catherine Yeoman applauds NSW's Premier Baird's decision earlier this year to privatise Public Housing and wants the same to be done nationally - though of course there is no mention in the article of the p-word 'privatise'. Neither is there any mention of the rights of public tenants who will be part and parcel of these 'stock transfers' - That's how public tenants are treated in our society - like cattle to be corralled wherever and whenever the powerful decide. Or as this article implies - charity cases.

I've added a few interesting responses to the article, and I've ignored the usual exaggerations and slagging off of public tenants by people who don't actually know us. The usual mean-spirited prejudice. Interestingly the root of the word is to pre-judge.

Recently a good candidate - in with a chance- enthused to me about the diversity of backgrounds she encountered among public tenants after visiting a major housing estate. She had recently talked to the tenants and learnt about some of their histories. They were just people like everyone else, who's life's circumstances meant they needed public housing. She was surprised at how smart many public tenants were. ( lol )

I thought that was quite funny. I'm not a PC Nazi -where everyone has to watch and weigh up every word they say in case they get it wrong. I think it is very beneficial when people challenge themselves and their worldviews. All of us need to do so. 

When people walk away and say "Wow the public tenants are really great. I enjoyed talking to them and getting to know them"- This makes me happy because it is true. Challenging stereotypes- that's the main thing.

Many people love living in public housing - being part of a community. We should move away from it being seen as solely welfare housing. Defend it and then extend it - and make it available to a greater number of people. It is Public Housing after all.

Any candidate is welcome to contact us.We will try and get in contact with Bill Shorten too, even a this late stage. We have members who are keen to talk to him. He might be more receptive to listening to us than his Victorian ALP State counterparts - especially before an election     ; ) 

http://www.abc.net.au/…/yeomans-commonwealth-should…/7118172
ABC Drum

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/baird-government-sees-economic-boost-from-public-housing-revamp-20160123-gmciog.html
It talks of Baird's 'historic decision to privatise public housing'

In response to the article written by Mission Australia 's CEO

ghoul:

Yes it is a mighty mess of interest groups and poor public policy and therefore 

I have no faith it will be resolved in coming generations. 

Homelessness and the associated consequences will like in the days of the 
great depression become part of our identity once again.

PeterJH:

You misunderstand what a market is. It is the interplay of participants. 

Those who require the support of public housing are not "in the market".
Presumably you would do away with the aged pension as it impacts the market forces 

of the workforce and obviously we should disband police forces 
as they impact the private security market.

And in a comment to the following opinion,

"Just don't be too keen to put government at the centre of people's lives. 
That has never ended well"
 

Mitor the Bold writes

"It usually ends better than the alternatives. 
Look at the list of 'best places to live globally'and you will see places 
with strong governments at the centre of people's lives.
All failed states have weak governments with fear at the centre of 
people lives,  all corrupt states have corporations at the centre of people's lives 
pillaging natural resources for the benefit of a small minority, all totalitarian states have dictators at the centre of people lives 

telling them - rather than asking them - what to do.

Government - defined as elected representatives 

( rather than the bogeyman of totalitarian dictatorships you righties 
regularly misrepresent strong governments as being for dramatic effect ) - 

are the best arrangement discovered yet for a good life.

Point out to me one strong, successful nation with general prosperity
and high 'happiness' indices that does not have a strong government 
at the centre of it all. 

Go on, just one. Not even a little one?

 And one more comment by

tonyp:

Ah, the "government interference in markets is bad" axiom. 

So presumably we should not have a currency, nor consumer protection laws, 
nor contract laws, nor employee protection laws,  nor environmental protection laws, nor building standards laws.

All this wasteful and unnecessary interference just slows the economy down. 

If corporations routinely build skyscrapers that collapse and kill thousands of people

those people will stop paying for new skyscrapers so the company 

will be forced to liquidate, transfer their assets and build new skyscrapers 
under a new name. That'll teach 'em.

Private enterprise cannot be trusted. It is grasping, amoral, reckless, short-sighted, and completely uninterested in the welfare of society or individuals. 

There is such a thing as good government intervention and the reflexive 
and myopic description of all government activity as bad, inefficient and wasteful
is lazy and myopic.

                                           ***************************

PS  We sincerely thank the Quakers for standing with us 'against the tide', for supporting Friends of Public Housing and opposing further stock transfers of public housing to 'community housing'.

See blog-post Sept '15

WHEN MONEY SPEAKS THE TRUTH IS SILENT - PROVERB

SHAME ON POLITICS IN AUSTRALIA THAT THE PRIVATISATION OF PUBLIC HOUSING, AND THE QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ASKED IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, ARE  OMITTED FROM THE PRE-FEDERAL ELECTION AGENDA.

THERE IS SO MUCH POLITICAL COLLUSION RE THIS .. MAYBE AN INDEPENDENT WILL RAISE THE ISSUE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ?? THAT'S WHY WE NEED INDEPENDENT POLITICIANS.

SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT 'SOCIAL AND COMMUNITY' HOUSING IS ALL ABOUT LITTLE CHURCH GROUPS AND SMALL STRUGGLING 'NOT-FOR-PROFITS' ORGANISATIONS. 

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE...

WE NOW HAVE 'STOCK TRANSFER' EXPERTS INVITED TO CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS IN AUSTRALIA TO SHOW BIG BUSINESS INTERESTS HOW ITS DONE!

WITH SO MUCH HEARTBREAKING HOMELESSNESS ALREADY ON THE RISE -  IT  IS REPREHENSIBLE THAT THERE IS NO REAL DEBATE REGARDING SUCH AN IRREVERSIBLE COURSE OF ACTION.

Article 1 
BARONESS MARGARET FORD - Stock Transfer of Public Housing is vital to Sydney -  Feb 2016

Attending a lunch hosted by the Committee for Sydney, Baroness Margaret Ford whose 'defining moment in her career was achieving the transfer of 65,000 public housing dwellings to community housing associations in Scotland' said that 'making the argument for stock transfer was tough – but we were assisted in the process because the Government understood the opportunity this would deliver.' 

Read more-   http://www.sydney.org.au/baroness-margaret-ford/

Who is the Committee for Sydney?
http://www.sydney.org.au/

Titles such as 'baroness' remind me of Tony Abbott's reintroduction of 'lords' and 'ladies' in Australia although awarding these titles had been scrapped twice by Labor as anachronistic and not egalitarian.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-reintroduces-knight-and-dame-honours-for-australians-20140325-35fzo.html?rand=1395777417340

The old Tory ideology is very much a part of the Liberal ethos. The trouble is, as I see it, we have no real opposition anymore - no genuine mainstream left-wing government to speak of in Australia.
The Greens - the ALP ?  Everything's moving to the Right ..

And we are seeing the creation of an under-class in Australia thanks to these stupid housing policies.

Article 2

In the absence of any vigorous counter-argument here, let's look at the excellent newspaper, the UK GUARDIAN. We can learn a lot about how the privatisation of council ( public ) housing has played out in the UK.

In the article below, some confusing terms -
'Social housing' in the UK is sometimes used as a generic term for housing that is meant to be affordable and suitable for low-income people.The UK term for Public Housing is Council Housing.

extracts from
'Privatising UK Social Housing won't work-Just look at Europe' 'why we must fight tootha nd claw against social housing sell-off'
by Dawn Foster- Nov 2015

'The government is putting its faith in the market to solve our housing crisis. But many European countries have already done so and regret it.'

'During the 1990s, central and eastern European countries embraced the free market route.'

'Germany is often held up as a model for social housing privatisation, but the move has seen an increase in unaffordable housing.'

Its 'public housing was sold to international investors, such as Deutsche Annington, and Vonovia, Cerberus, Fortress and commercial banks. The sale and resale of the same properties on the market ended in a race for profits and an increase in housing prices. There are a million fewer social dwellings than there were prior to privatisation.'

the full article

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2015/nov/24/privatising-uk-social-housing-associations-europe


                                   *********************************

So tell us again how public housing stock transfers to 'social / community' Housing Associations have been a great success in the UK ?