DEAR News Of The Area,

THE state of housing in Australia, as in most of the world, is a cause of serious concern, particularly for young people who are watching the price of houses getting further out of reach.

Around a third of the population rent and many of them will do so for their whole lives so the condition of rental housing is a matter that should be addressed.

The Greens want to institute a rent freeze to allow wages to catch up to recent rent increases.

There is some merit in that, but what happens next?

The LNP want to allow people to raid their superannuation which would, like first home buyer grants, just push up the price of houses.

Labor wants to effectively pay developers to build affordable housing but shy away from the government building social housing with the aim of driving down house prices.

Let me relate a story about renting houses in Sydney.

If you are lucky you can rent a tiny terrace with suicide stairs in Waterloo for $700 p/w next to a busy main road.

In summer the bedrooms upstairs are stifling but there is no air-conditioning.

If you open the windows you get devoured by mosquitoes because there are no screens on the windows.

Your lease can be terminated at any time, and it probably will be when the property is sold for redevelopment.

I suggest that rents should be restricted on a publicly available property score that each rental property has to provide.

The higher the score, the higher the allowed rent.

Points can be awarded for features such as: air conditioning, window screens, solar panels, insulation, dish washer, etc.

In addition, all rental properties should come supplied with a modern refrigerator, a washing machine, and a clothes dryer or clothesline.

It is ridiculous to expect renters to continuously cart these things around given the often insecure nature of renting.

All windows should be openable and they should all be screened.

Given the high cost of rents it is the least that one should expect.

At the end of the day what is needed is a massive investment in government owned social housing which has the express aim of driving down the cost of houses by providing competition to private developers.

This will benefit the third of the population that rents.

The other third that are buying may whinge that the value of their home has fallen but so has the cost of their next house as well.

If you own one house, and you only live in one, then the change in house prices matters little.

And for the other third that own more than one house, they may consider selling one or two of them allowing more people to buy their first home.

And they will complain, a lot, and predict doom.

But we risk more by not acting.

Regards,
Peter SOBEY,
Valla.