Re Covid 19 updates
https://www.dhhs.vic.gov.au/coronavirus-covid-19-daily-update
NO - COMMUNITY HOUSING ( AKA SOCIAL HOUSING )
IS NOT 'ON THE SAME PAGE' AS PUBLIC HOUSING.
- WHY THE COMBINED WAITING LIST SHOULD BE SCRAPPED.
Friends of Public Housing Victoria's
Attachment to our Submission (244 )
to the Inquiry into Homelessness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We propose an end to the conjoined waiting list.
The combined waiting list puts prospective public housing tenants and
private 'community housing’ tenants on a single 'social housing' waiting
list.
It was brought into legislation in 2016 and FOPHV raised our
concerns at the time, covering much the same points that Wendy Lovell,
formerly Minister and Shadow Minister for Housing, put to Parliament.
Wendy Lovell questioned the willingness of some Community Housing
operators to house the most vulnerable, and drew attention to the fact
that Housing Associations can house tenants who would not even be
eligible for Public Housing's Segment 4 ( which means those who are in a
low income bracket without necessarily any other factors. ) The answers
to Wendy Lovell's questions were inadequate at the time- and yet the
Bill was disappointingly passed by Liberal, Labor, Greens and the Sex
Party ( now known as the Reason Party ).
Over three years later, our concerns have been justified.
We note that politicians in opposition are often better at critiquing
policy than when they are in government. We appreciate Wendy Lovell's
work as an opposition member, much as we appreciated Richard Wynne’s
work as an opposition member. Friends of Public Housing Victoria is
genuinely non-party political. We speak with politicians of all
political stances, in our efforts to ensure that Public Housing is
preserved in the interest of a cohesive society free of homelessness,
and does not disappear by stealth.
We bring to this Inquiry our experience as public tenants.
We believe
the cherry-picking of prospective tenants by Community Housing businesses
is undermining the Public Housing system. The discriminatory practice
of choosing tenants they can most profit from results in an ever
increasing definition of Public Housing as welfare housing, instead of
the more diverse working class communities it has traditionally
represented.
From a capitalist market perspective Public Housing is becoming seen as
‘residual’ housing which, apart from being stigmatising, can lead to the
very problems that the government claims it wants to avoid- ie pockets
of disadvantage. Furthermore, this would make it easier politically to
privatise the remainder of Public Housing in future.
The relentlessly negative reporting of Public Housing and public tenants
in the media has obscured the overwhelmingly positive contribution of
Public Housing. This stereotyping has rarely been challenged by our
politicians. It seems that Public Housing will only be appreciated for
the role it has played when it’s gone.
Our vision is for Victoria to have a robust Public Housing sector available to a broader demographic.
Cherry-picking, insecure contracts, easier evictions and worse
conditions in general, is intrinsic to the nature of Community Housing
organisations as essentially private enterprise which has to make a
profit to be viable, even if that profit is not distributed as
dividends.
The takeover of Public Housing by Community Housing operators creates a
residual underclass which is evidenced by an escalating need for
Emergency and Transitional Housing. This underclass is apparently
intended by the government to end up being the responsibility of the
Churches. ( Church based housing providers such as the Salvation Army ).
We have heard of homeless people having to stand up for prayers before
being fed in a church shelter.
In a secular society with separation of Church and State enshrined in
the Federal constitution this is disturbing. The government should not
be handing over responsibility for the fate of vulnerable people to the
churches.
Conflating Public Housing and Community Housing as ‘much the same thing’
in its documents, and pointing tenants towards Community Housing with
its combined Waiting List, is confusing and misleading. We have frequent
anecdotal evidence that public tenants are commonly pressured to accept
Community Housing vacancies by state Housing Officers. This should not
be their role.
As a grass roots organisation we hear of many tenants disgruntled with
Community Housing who were misled and confused about the differences.
The combined Waiting List is this confusion made manifest.
The combined waiting list was introduced as an administrative
convenience, but it functions as an instrument for gutting Public
Housing and an exercise in social engineering.
We want a return to the single Public Housing waiting list and Community
Housing can continue with their own waiting lists. Also the umbrella
term Social Housing should be dropped in the interests of clarity.
Further points for Consideration
- We are disappointed that the privatisation of Public Housing via stock
and management transfers, was not included in your list of important
factors to be discussed as part of this Inquiry.
- As Prof Guy Johnson conceded, the research is clear that Public
Housing outperformed other Housing models in preventing homelessness,
and that the main driver of homelessness is poverty. In our view these
agreed facts should form the basis of all serious housing policies
addressing homelessness.
- Conflicts of interest is endemic to this Housing Policy and Homelessness space.
- The Government decision to transfer management of 4000 Public Housing properties to Community Housing should be scrapped.
Jeremy Dixon
Fiona Ross
Friends of Public Housing Victoria
If you want to get more involved in this campaign please contact
housinghumanrights@gmail.com
