Treasurer Josh Frydenberg pitched his election budget as one tackling the rising cost of living. But he proposed no policies to address one major driver of our inflation uptick — the rising cost of rent.
The price of renting a home in Australia increased last year by the highest annual amount in more than a decade. This included regional areas, where the working-from-home revolution has increased demand and prompted rent rises of up to 25% in some areas.
When Today host Allison Langdon asked the prime minister about this on Wednesday, Scott Morrison replied: “[The] best way to support people who are renting a house is to help them buy a house.” This was widely ridiculed as a Joe “get a good job” Hockey-esque betrayal of elite aloofness and class prejudice.
But Morrison’s comments, and his government’s lack of rental relief policies, illustrate a specific prejudice shared by many federal politicians: they look down upon renters. They routinely treat renting as a brief waystation on the road to home ownership, instead of a long-term way of life for millions of Aussies that ought to be improved. This is despite an increasing proportion (more than a third) of Australians renting their homes, for longer periods, due to skyrocketing house prices.
This might be easier to swallow if government efforts to support more renters to buy homes weren’t so limited and ineffective. The First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, which Morrison touted in his Today interview, is likely to provide a marginal benefit to the 45,000 successful applicants, but will further push up house prices and rent costs for the rest of us.
Both major parties have regrettably walked away from more effective policies for bringing house prices within reach of prospective first homebuyers — negative gearing and capital gains tax reform — effectively ensuring that a growing proportion of the population rents their homes.
Yet in nearly every budget, the government announces lukewarm policies pitched at prospective homebuyers, fig leaves used to explain away doing nothing substantive on house prices and even less to improve the cost and conditions of renting. Renters rarely even show up as “winners” or “losers” on the media’s budget scorecards, for we’re hardly discussed.
There is much the federal government could do to help renters with rising costs if they wanted to — particularly those who are most at risk of rental stress (when rent costs more than 30% of household income) are those on the lowest incomes, particularly welfare recipients.
To address this, a rental assistance supplement was added to various dole payments. The Morrison government recently raised this supplement, but by a minuscule $3 a fortnight to $145.80 for singles and $171.50 for families. This covers less than a third of the average single person’s rent and a quarter of the average couple’s.
Even on the progressive side of politics, the importance of rent assistance is often overlooked. The Greens once supported raising it by 30%, but failed to mention it in their recent, otherwise commendable welfare package, and Labor has focused on social housing.
The Grattan Institute has proposed increasing the supplement by 40%, and indexing the payment to “changes in rents typically paid by people receiving income support, so that its value is maintained”. The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute has also suggested changing eligibility criteria, as out of 1.4 million low-income private renters, only 933,000 receive financial help.
This change would be particularly useful for young people and elderly renters. About 40% of young people say they struggle with housing costs, compared with 23% of baby boomers. But for those elderly Australians who don’t own their home, the Retirement Income Review found they “achieve poor outcomes in terms of financial distress and income poverty”. Many of our welfare and superannuation policies presume that older people will own their homes, disadvantaging those who don’t.
In the absence of federal action, some state governments have begun helping renters improve their day-to-day lives. The Victorian government, for instance, introduced a renters’ rights package last year, which prevented landlords from unreasonably preventing basic property modifications, owning pets and more.
Meanwhile, after comedian Tom Cashman’s story went viral of having his successful rental application revoked for asking for a “landlord reference”, ACT Labor MLA Michael Pettersson (a renter himself) is presenting a motion to require landlords to provide a reference from a previous tenant if requested.
“The federal government must lead a coordinated national housing strategy involving all layers of government and addressing all aspects of housing tenure,” said Farah Farouque, director of community engagement at Tenants Victoria. “Short-term fixes won’t do. We need significant Commonwealth interventions and leadership.”
Maintenance request to Scott Morrison: please renovate our nation’s renter support system. You might still be distracted by the “Australian dream”, but those of us living in the new Australian reality would appreciate more than weak gestures and false hope.
A while ago I stated that renters were about to be the new dole bludgers; lazy deviates who can’t be bothered to take risks or knuckle down to achieve the Australian Dream. Morrison has just confirmed that. “The best income support is a job,” has now become the best rental support is a house. All the while ensuring that prices rose under the Liberal Party watch, that anyone trying to stall the market was suitably punished or ridiculed, and that every piece of legislature such as the first home owners grant actually contributed to the rises while appearing to be encouraging purchasers.
My gut level feeling is that this has been quite deliberate, and across the entire conservative board, not just in politics. People who are mortgaged to the hilt don’t argue back with employers, don’t rock the boat, don’t leave their jobs, and are obedient little wage slaves. Where as those in a cheap rental (remember they were around?) can be argumentative, can go elsewhere, and can actually advocate against their bosses. Renters. Antisocial vermin who hate the IPA, News Corp and who march on the streets protesting the lack of climate action. Don’t let your daughter marry one.
Relative to your gut feeling is the often-quoted assertion that if you own the debt, then you own the debtor. The bigger the debt, the more you ‘own’, so to speak.
If you owe a bank a $100,000 and cannot pay then you have a problem.
If you cannot pay and owe it a $100,000,000 it has a problem.
Yes. there is an upper limit on that, but I was commenting about us ordinary people who have lower debt limits.
Once one has ‘hostages to Fortune’ such as family & mortgage the revolutionary fervour tends to subside.
None of the radicals I knew, in several countries, 50yrs ago when it mattered and could have made a difference survived becoming householders.
They all buckled down. Many now vote tory or the local equivalent.
Only those with nothing to lose want to change things.
The way things are going, they’ll soon be the vast majority – interesting times ahead.
As more and more people choose not to have kids (gosh, I wonder why…), the new leverage is now the mortgage, which seems to be growing as the birth rate declines. I too have seen people who would have spoken out on issues that they professed to embrace go suddenly quiet when they contemplate how they’re going to repay the bank that half a million they owe without a job.
Morrison’s house-buying remarks simply provide yet more evidence (as is any were needed) of just how out-of-touch this pathetic excuse for a leader is.
On a par with Leventy’s sage advice after his 2nd horror Budget when Treasurer he insisted housing in Sydney was affordable and if people want to access the housing market they simply need to get a better job.or those unable to afford to buy a home – “get a better paying job”.
Ta very much, Smoking Joe.
It’s also evidence of the failure of that empathy training he was said to have undertaken.
Or as a human being?
You are right, Daibhin. Your remark almost, (I said almost), makes me feel sorry for him.
Morrison & many federal MPs may look down on renters but they are totally reliant on them to lease their numerous investment properties.
On Thursday’s QandA the Rootbeater, in response to a question about negative gearing, demanded the AA’s property portfolio be scrutinised.
I forget which tory MP has a prtfolio of 48 properties but the average for that side is 2-3 times of any ‘Labor’ MP.
Karen Andrews = 9.
Barrie O’Sullivan – Nationals leaner = “34”?
back in 2017.
“Barry ….” of course.
BoS whichever way you looked at him.
So, boys and girls, the moral of this amorality tale is:-
“Get a better paid job. To be able to afford the petrol to drive all that way from home, to work and back, and to buy a home you can afford – ie so far away from work that you’ll have to get another job to pay for the petrol to drive all the way from home to work and back….. And then you can live happily ever after” Just like Scotty and the Fraudy Cat.
One item absent from the discussion is that of rentable properties being held deliberately withheld from the rental market! I have seem figure of up to 10% of potential available being withheld as the owners are relying solely on capital gains on properties which do not require maintenance.
An empty tax of say 10% of the value of the property might release more homes back into the rental market.