Go Girls
Sunday, 30 March 2014
Saving the Community
Sunday
30th March 2014.......Saving Our Community........Smiling In The Face Of Adversity...Go Girls
Go Girls
Go Girls
Jack Mundey Story at The Rocks Sydney... Saved the soul of Sydney
The story or legend has not been forgotten..Much of Sydney has been saved....
Through the efforts of The residents action Groups and the BLF Green Bands.
Sydneysiders and visitors should be grateful The Rocks was saved from demolition. It’s a vibrant place these days.
Sydneysiders and visitors should be grateful The Rocks was saved from demolition. It’s a vibrant place these days.
Saturday, 29 March 2014
Millers Point for Sale
21 March 2014: Millers Point for Sale
This week the state government announced plans to sell off 293 public housing properties in Millers Point and The Rocks. Residents of Millers Point and The Rocks must be thinking here we go again, as this is not the first time the housing has been considered for sale.
The area has a long history of conflict over housing and housing rights, spanning most of the twentieth century and now the first decades of the twenty first. It also has a long history of publically owned housing.
In 1900 the arrival of the plague in Sydney heralded the resumption of Millers Point and The Rocks by the state. Residents’ houses were resumed and demolished, and the government became the new landlord. To replace those lost the Sydney Harbour Trust, and then the State Housing Board, built new apartments and flats between 1908 and about 1915 to house the workers, many of them wharf labourers, who had lived in the area.
In 1936 the Trust was reconstituted as the Maritime Services Board, and responsibility for housing was divested to the MSB. The MSB provided the houses for workers and their families already in the area, rather then what we would consider needs based housing that Housing NSW provides now. Some of these families were second or third generation residents. This practice of inheriting the house continued until the late 1980s, when with the declining wharf usage in the area, the MSB handed control of housing to the NSW Housing commission, putting Millers Point into the general pool of housing.
In 1988 the then Greiner Liberal Government made the first attempt to sell properties in the area. In November the sale of two hotels, the Hero of Waterloo and the Harbour View, was advertised. After protests about undermining the character of the area, the sales went ahead with Conservation Orders on the hotels to protect them. Attempts to sell some of the shops and residences above them the following year was meet with more opposition, and the sales were deferred. Research into the area as part of the proposal, concluded that Millers Point was an area of national significance, with an outstanding urban significance best managed through ongoing government ownership.
In The Rocks, the current proposal is also to sell the Sirius apartment block. This block was built in 1979 to house those long term residents who had lost their houses in the demolitions on the 1960s and early 1970s that had led to the Green Bans by the BLF. The Sirius apartments were a revolution in public housing in NSW. Designed by Tao Gofers and Government Architects for NSW Housing Commission, the modernist design incorporated individual refinements for residents determined through interviews with the prospective tenants. Much like in Millers Point, the residents included families who had lived in The Rocks since the colonial period.
The question is who does the city belong to? Is it only for the rich, those who can pay up for harbour views? What about public housing in other increasingly exclusive suburbs like Newtown, Redfern, Balmain, Glebe? Any what about diversity, vibrant communities, a fair go for all?
http://scratchingsydneyssurface.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/21-march-2014-millers-point-for-sale/
The area has a long history of conflict over housing and housing rights, spanning most of the twentieth century and now the first decades of the twenty first. It also has a long history of publically owned housing.
In 1900 the arrival of the plague in Sydney heralded the resumption of Millers Point and The Rocks by the state. Residents’ houses were resumed and demolished, and the government became the new landlord. To replace those lost the Sydney Harbour Trust, and then the State Housing Board, built new apartments and flats between 1908 and about 1915 to house the workers, many of them wharf labourers, who had lived in the area.
In 1936 the Trust was reconstituted as the Maritime Services Board, and responsibility for housing was divested to the MSB. The MSB provided the houses for workers and their families already in the area, rather then what we would consider needs based housing that Housing NSW provides now. Some of these families were second or third generation residents. This practice of inheriting the house continued until the late 1980s, when with the declining wharf usage in the area, the MSB handed control of housing to the NSW Housing commission, putting Millers Point into the general pool of housing.
In 1988 the then Greiner Liberal Government made the first attempt to sell properties in the area. In November the sale of two hotels, the Hero of Waterloo and the Harbour View, was advertised. After protests about undermining the character of the area, the sales went ahead with Conservation Orders on the hotels to protect them. Attempts to sell some of the shops and residences above them the following year was meet with more opposition, and the sales were deferred. Research into the area as part of the proposal, concluded that Millers Point was an area of national significance, with an outstanding urban significance best managed through ongoing government ownership.
In The Rocks, the current proposal is also to sell the Sirius apartment block. This block was built in 1979 to house those long term residents who had lost their houses in the demolitions on the 1960s and early 1970s that had led to the Green Bans by the BLF. The Sirius apartments were a revolution in public housing in NSW. Designed by Tao Gofers and Government Architects for NSW Housing Commission, the modernist design incorporated individual refinements for residents determined through interviews with the prospective tenants. Much like in Millers Point, the residents included families who had lived in The Rocks since the colonial period.
One historian has commented that the Sirius building is ‘an artefact of a time when governments believed that all citizens deserved quality housing’. Those days may be coming to an end. Mind you they’re a tough bunch down there and have won fights before.
The question is who does the city belong to? Is it only for the rich, those who can pay up for harbour views? What about public housing in other increasingly exclusive suburbs like Newtown, Redfern, Balmain, Glebe? Any what about diversity, vibrant communities, a fair go for all?
http://scratchingsydneyssurface.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/21-march-2014-millers-point-for-sale/
Sad state if there’s no place for poor in our city
THE people of Millers Point have not seen or heard from Christine Forster recently. If she spent more time with her constituents, her opinion piece in Thursday’s Daily Telegraph might not have been a rehash of the government’s media releases and spin.
Since being elected I have worked with the residents of Millers Point and the state government to seek an outcome that would protect this part of Australia’s history.
Having convinced the government of the need for its ageing population to be near services, it initiated a Social Impact Assessment. The assessment recommended a number of options that would have retained housing for those most in need. Despite promises, the government failed to release the study before making its decision, probably because the study did not support a wholesale sell-off.
Former Liberal minister Greg Pearce devised a plan to retain around 150 properties. Sadly these were discarded by the government, which is now planning a clearance sale. I cannot think of a term other than “social cleansing” to describe the systematic removal of all poor, vulnerable and elderly people.
Media is repeatedly shown a few terraces that are apparently “too good” for public housing tenants, but many properties are low-key 1980s units, without views apart from the Barangaroo construction site.
The “massive subsidies” the government alleges these residents receive are just based on the difference between market rent that someone made up and the rent paid by tenants — which is based on income, the same as for all social housing tenants.
Many tenants make their own repairs, because the government has neglected them pretty well since the then Housing Commission took them over. Maritime Services gave the land to the government years back to ensure our city had a place for low-income earners and vulnerable groups.
The decision to sell fails to address the vacuum of social and affordable housing in the inner city.
Sadly the government says we need a casino in this area but not a community that supports aged, ill and frail people.
Alex Greenwich is an independent NSW MP
Since being elected I have worked with the residents of Millers Point and the state government to seek an outcome that would protect this part of Australia’s history.
Having convinced the government of the need for its ageing population to be near services, it initiated a Social Impact Assessment. The assessment recommended a number of options that would have retained housing for those most in need. Despite promises, the government failed to release the study before making its decision, probably because the study did not support a wholesale sell-off.
Former Liberal minister Greg Pearce devised a plan to retain around 150 properties. Sadly these were discarded by the government, which is now planning a clearance sale. I cannot think of a term other than “social cleansing” to describe the systematic removal of all poor, vulnerable and elderly people.
Media is repeatedly shown a few terraces that are apparently “too good” for public housing tenants, but many properties are low-key 1980s units, without views apart from the Barangaroo construction site.
The “massive subsidies” the government alleges these residents receive are just based on the difference between market rent that someone made up and the rent paid by tenants — which is based on income, the same as for all social housing tenants.
Many tenants make their own repairs, because the government has neglected them pretty well since the then Housing Commission took them over. Maritime Services gave the land to the government years back to ensure our city had a place for low-income earners and vulnerable groups.
The decision to sell fails to address the vacuum of social and affordable housing in the inner city.
Sadly the government says we need a casino in this area but not a community that supports aged, ill and frail people.
Alex Greenwich is an independent NSW MP
Millers Point faces ‘social cleansing’
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Community Services Minister Pru Goward announced that 293 public housing in Millers Point and The Rocks on Sydney's harbourside would be sold. The billions gained would be used to invest in public housing in the rest of the state, Goward said. But the sell-off would come at a human cost — the destruction of the close-knit working-class community that has existed there for hundreds of years.
Barney Gardner is a well-known community leader and a member of Millers Point Save Our Homes. The 65-year-old has lived in Millers Point all his life. For him and many others, the government's announcement is a tragedy.
Millers Point has a long history of hosting Sydney's poor workers. Gardner told Green Left Weekly: “People say Australia was born on a sheep's back. That may be true, but all that wool had to go somewhere, and it came here to be exported.”
The area originally housed mainly maritime workers who worked on the nearby wharves. The rents were cheap because of the nature of the area. In fact, up until only a few decades ago, the wealthier denizens of Sydney looked down on the area.
“The roads were our playgrounds, we swam down in the harbour, we would go fishing because you could do it for free down on the wharves,” Gardner said.
But the area has changed markedly. “I've seen a lot of the old woolstores turned into offices, and a lot of the offices turned into apartments. This wasn’t done for the benefit for the public housing tenants, but we still got along with all these people. We have no jealousy or animosity towards them.”
Indeed, Gardner told GLW that many new private residents love the simple fact that people say hello to each other in the streets, a rarity in the rest of the bustling metropolis.
The community’s spirit remains high, but public housing conditions have deteriorated. "They didn’t continue doing the regular repairs that the maritime board did, who previously managed our housing. Houses began to fall into disrepair, some of the places are shocking. But we do the best we can, we all help each other out. I personally have helped paint two houses.”
The residents see a long-term trend of the department seems to deliberately run down the public housing tenancy. "I've been told now that since 2009, no families were being moved into this area. They were moving single elderly people in, they were moving vulnerable people in. It was a form of attack on us, the public housing tenants, because the government knows they can move them on at any time. The thorn in their side is us long-termers ... but we've adopted a lot of these vulnerable people into our community too.
“They move a lot of people with social problems here, more than we can handle. Mind you we look after our neighbours if they've got a problem, but we can't look after them all. They just fall through the cracks in the system.
“They're gonna socially cleanse this area ... it’s the total destruction of a community that has existed for near on 200 years.”
Even if the sell-off takes place, Gardner is wary of what will come of the money. The government has previously made $42 million by selling 30 houses in the area, which was meant to be reinvested in the area. “When we questioned them they said, no it’s going to Glebe. We asked people in Glebe were there any major projects in the area, they said no. Where has the money gone? Are we to trust them to put billions of dollars back into public housing? I think not.”
The media have spread many misconceptions about Millers Point public housing. One is the low rent they pay. People in public housing are the most vulnerable in society, and the waiting list is about 50,000 in NSW. It is reasonable to expect that most people in housing are on welfare. “Everyone knows when you pay rent to department of housing when you're on welfare, you pay 25% and that’s a minimum of at least $100. Low income earners pay 30%, Gardner said. “And it goes up the scale until you pay market rates.”
"My dad worked on the wharves, my mum worked in the canteen on the wharves. We've contributed to this community for years. I know people who go back four or five generations. We haven’t been sitting on our bums on welfare all the time, we built this community. I wish people would appreciate that instead of saying we're all welfare bludgers."
Gardner was an electrician then a dockworker until both his hips needed replacement, forcing him onto the disability pension. His partner Glenda “lost a few jobs in the Rocks that have closed down. She still goes to jobsearch, but she's 64. So where does she place on the system?"
Another myth is their million-dollar views. Gardner said: "In front of me were double decker finger wharves. No view. That was stripped down to make container sheds, no view. That was pulled down and it was the first time we had a view. But that’s soon to be lost because they're going to develop Barangaroo." Other properties, he said, have “good” views of old woolstores, apartment buildings and concrete walls.
Another misconception is the millions in subsidies that Goward says tenants in Millers Point receive. But as the NSW Tenants Union says, this is just the perceived missed revenue for not charging tenants market rates.
In other words, tenants are not receiving millions in cash from the government. Instead they are paying the department rents, and receiving barely any maintenance in return — and the possible destruction of their communities.
"It's just a total grab for money at the expense of some of the most vulnerable people of our society. The people own these properties, the people should have a say about whether we should stay or go.”
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/56145
A protest to save Millers Point in Sydney on March 25. Photo: Peter Boyle.
Barney Gardner is a well-known community leader and a member of Millers Point Save Our Homes. The 65-year-old has lived in Millers Point all his life. For him and many others, the government's announcement is a tragedy.
Millers Point has a long history of hosting Sydney's poor workers. Gardner told Green Left Weekly: “People say Australia was born on a sheep's back. That may be true, but all that wool had to go somewhere, and it came here to be exported.”
The area originally housed mainly maritime workers who worked on the nearby wharves. The rents were cheap because of the nature of the area. In fact, up until only a few decades ago, the wealthier denizens of Sydney looked down on the area.
“The roads were our playgrounds, we swam down in the harbour, we would go fishing because you could do it for free down on the wharves,” Gardner said.
But the area has changed markedly. “I've seen a lot of the old woolstores turned into offices, and a lot of the offices turned into apartments. This wasn’t done for the benefit for the public housing tenants, but we still got along with all these people. We have no jealousy or animosity towards them.”
Indeed, Gardner told GLW that many new private residents love the simple fact that people say hello to each other in the streets, a rarity in the rest of the bustling metropolis.
The community’s spirit remains high, but public housing conditions have deteriorated. "They didn’t continue doing the regular repairs that the maritime board did, who previously managed our housing. Houses began to fall into disrepair, some of the places are shocking. But we do the best we can, we all help each other out. I personally have helped paint two houses.”
The residents see a long-term trend of the department seems to deliberately run down the public housing tenancy. "I've been told now that since 2009, no families were being moved into this area. They were moving single elderly people in, they were moving vulnerable people in. It was a form of attack on us, the public housing tenants, because the government knows they can move them on at any time. The thorn in their side is us long-termers ... but we've adopted a lot of these vulnerable people into our community too.
“They move a lot of people with social problems here, more than we can handle. Mind you we look after our neighbours if they've got a problem, but we can't look after them all. They just fall through the cracks in the system.
“They're gonna socially cleanse this area ... it’s the total destruction of a community that has existed for near on 200 years.”
Even if the sell-off takes place, Gardner is wary of what will come of the money. The government has previously made $42 million by selling 30 houses in the area, which was meant to be reinvested in the area. “When we questioned them they said, no it’s going to Glebe. We asked people in Glebe were there any major projects in the area, they said no. Where has the money gone? Are we to trust them to put billions of dollars back into public housing? I think not.”
The media have spread many misconceptions about Millers Point public housing. One is the low rent they pay. People in public housing are the most vulnerable in society, and the waiting list is about 50,000 in NSW. It is reasonable to expect that most people in housing are on welfare. “Everyone knows when you pay rent to department of housing when you're on welfare, you pay 25% and that’s a minimum of at least $100. Low income earners pay 30%, Gardner said. “And it goes up the scale until you pay market rates.”
"My dad worked on the wharves, my mum worked in the canteen on the wharves. We've contributed to this community for years. I know people who go back four or five generations. We haven’t been sitting on our bums on welfare all the time, we built this community. I wish people would appreciate that instead of saying we're all welfare bludgers."
Gardner was an electrician then a dockworker until both his hips needed replacement, forcing him onto the disability pension. His partner Glenda “lost a few jobs in the Rocks that have closed down. She still goes to jobsearch, but she's 64. So where does she place on the system?"
Another myth is their million-dollar views. Gardner said: "In front of me were double decker finger wharves. No view. That was stripped down to make container sheds, no view. That was pulled down and it was the first time we had a view. But that’s soon to be lost because they're going to develop Barangaroo." Other properties, he said, have “good” views of old woolstores, apartment buildings and concrete walls.
Another misconception is the millions in subsidies that Goward says tenants in Millers Point receive. But as the NSW Tenants Union says, this is just the perceived missed revenue for not charging tenants market rates.
In other words, tenants are not receiving millions in cash from the government. Instead they are paying the department rents, and receiving barely any maintenance in return — and the possible destruction of their communities.
"It's just a total grab for money at the expense of some of the most vulnerable people of our society. The people own these properties, the people should have a say about whether we should stay or go.”
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/56145
Residents of Ivanhoe estate worried they are next on ’hit list’
Front: Esme Drew and Marie Sillers. Back: shadow housing minister Sophie Cotsis and Labor candidate for Ryde Jerome Laxale with concerned residents. Picture David Swift Source: News Corp Australia
Ivanhoe Estate residents are nervous about their future following the State Government’s announcement that it would sell public housing in Millers Point.
Ivanhoe Estate Tenant Group secretary Marie Sillars feared there was a “hit list” of public housing the Government was getting rid of and that their community was next.
The 600-plus residents of Ivanhoe, in Macquarie Park, have long worried their community could face the wreckers ball after it was declared an Urban Activation Precinct in 2012, destined for redevelopment into high-rise apartments.
“We are now into our third year of not knowing,” Ms Sillars said.
“It’s very depressing for everybody and we need answers.”
Esme Drew, 80, said she would not cope if the estate was shut down because she would be separated from a friend who cared for her.
“I don’t think I’d survive to be truthful — I’m not steady on my feet and every year I get older, it will become harder,” she said.
80-year-old Esme Drew at her home at the Ivanhoe Estate in Macquarie Park. Photo: Dave Swift Source: News Corp Australia
Labor candidate for Ryde Jerome Laxale, who visited the estate with shadow housing minister Sophie Cotsis, said it was clear the O’Farrell Government was on a mission to sell public housing.
They both called on the Government to rule out demolishing the estate.
“Society should work together to help those that are most in need and the Ivanhoe community is a perfect example of this,” Mr Laxale said.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Planning said plans for the precinct were being finalised and were expected to be released soon.
A spokesman for Community Services Minister Pru Goward said: “The Government has made no further decision on public housing estate sales.”
Wednesday, 26 March 2014
Public Housing Tenants Facing Eviction say Process Too Hasty
Trade unionists and community activists have pledged to fight alongside the public housing tenants of Millers Point who are now facing eviction by the NSW Government, during a demonstration on March 25, 2014.
Protesters chanted "Millers Point here to stay". This march, which went from the Kent St fire station to Millers Point, was organised by the Maritime Union of Australia with support from the Fire Brigade Employees Union. Local residents and tenants groups have united to resist the eviction plan.
Another protest is scheduled on Thursday March 27, with plans to meet at the Archibald Fountain in Hyde Park North for a march on NSW Parliament House.
Barry and Pru you have somehow have become heartless since you have come into government: COWARDS, come talk to the people.
Florence Seckald received an eviction letter days after her husband was buried. Photo: Brendan Esposito
Millers Point public housing tenant Florence Seckold buried her husband last Tuesday. ''Wednesday we got the eviction notice,'' the 80-year-old said.
Mrs Seckold, who was born, spent her youth, her 60-year marriage and - she had hoped - her final years in the harbourside suburb, was among roughly 150 people protesting the sale of almost 300 public housing properties on Tuesday.
At the same time, representatives from the Department of Family and Community Services were elsewhere arranging relocation interviews with some of the 400 tenants who would need to be rehoused in the next two years.
The move was criticised by some protesters as adding undue haste to a process that only served to compound their distress since last week's announcement
''Have a bit of decency, give us all time to take it in,'' said Barney Gardner, who accused relocation officers of approaching tenants with poor English skills, without giving them access to interpreters.
''Come and ring us or send a letter and say we'd like to make an appointment to see you, and the tenant can respond.''
Zulema Carro, a long-term resident of the Sirius Building, said she was accosted when leaving the house for a doctor's appointment. ''She said 'it takes five minutes'. I said 'no, you're taking away my life. It takes more than five minutes.'''
A Family and Community Services spokesman said tenants were being contacted either in person or by phone to arrange a suitable time for a meeting, and would be linked to interpreter services if required.
Some had contacted the department to ask to be relocated sooner, he said. ''We have offered every tenant the opportunity to meet with family, friends and support workers if tenants feel they need additional support.''
Mrs Seckold said she was told, given her recent circumstances, the department would hold off contacting her until next month.
''As if I'm going to be any better at the end of April, or even the end of December,'' she said.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/public-housing-tenants-facing-eviction-say-process-too-hasty-20140325-35g9e.html#ixzz2x3xVGeqP
Protesters chanted "Millers Point here to stay". This march, which went from the Kent St fire station to Millers Point, was organised by the Maritime Union of Australia with support from the Fire Brigade Employees Union. Local residents and tenants groups have united to resist the eviction plan.
Another protest is scheduled on Thursday March 27, with plans to meet at the Archibald Fountain in Hyde Park North for a march on NSW Parliament House.
Barry and Pru you have somehow have become heartless since you have come into government: COWARDS, come talk to the people.
Florence Seckald received an eviction letter days after her husband was buried. Photo: Brendan Esposito
Mrs Seckold, who was born, spent her youth, her 60-year marriage and - she had hoped - her final years in the harbourside suburb, was among roughly 150 people protesting the sale of almost 300 public housing properties on Tuesday.
At the same time, representatives from the Department of Family and Community Services were elsewhere arranging relocation interviews with some of the 400 tenants who would need to be rehoused in the next two years.
Millers Point Public Housing Protest
''Have a bit of decency, give us all time to take it in,'' said Barney Gardner, who accused relocation officers of approaching tenants with poor English skills, without giving them access to interpreters.
''Come and ring us or send a letter and say we'd like to make an appointment to see you, and the tenant can respond.''
Zulema Carro, a long-term resident of the Sirius Building, said she was accosted when leaving the house for a doctor's appointment. ''She said 'it takes five minutes'. I said 'no, you're taking away my life. It takes more than five minutes.'''
A Family and Community Services spokesman said tenants were being contacted either in person or by phone to arrange a suitable time for a meeting, and would be linked to interpreter services if required.
Some had contacted the department to ask to be relocated sooner, he said. ''We have offered every tenant the opportunity to meet with family, friends and support workers if tenants feel they need additional support.''
Mrs Seckold said she was told, given her recent circumstances, the department would hold off contacting her until next month.
''As if I'm going to be any better at the end of April, or even the end of December,'' she said.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/public-housing-tenants-facing-eviction-say-process-too-hasty-20140325-35g9e.html#ixzz2x3xVGeqP
Sign Up for a Petition Save Our Homes
Click on the link Below to sign up:
https://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/stop-premier-barry-o-farrell-and-housing-nsw-minister-prue-goward-from-selling-off-public-housing-in-millers-point
STOP Premier Barry O'Farrell and Housing NSW Minister Prue Goward from selling-off public
https://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/stop-premier-barry-o-farrell-and-housing-nsw-minister-prue-goward-from-selling-off-public-housing-in-millers-point
STOP Premier Barry O'Farrell and Housing NSW Minister Prue Goward from selling-off public
It is so unfair to uproot and dislocate a whole community of people who have lived in these homes for many years. Forced removal will destroy their community and cause distress to the current residents. It is the oldest community in Australia.
To:
Pru Goward, Minister for Community Services
Barry Robert O'Farrell, NSW Premier
Don't sell-off Public Housing!!! Let the Millers Point residents keep the homes they have lived in for many generations.
Sincerely,
[Your name] .
Peoples Preceptions Lets Cook the Financial Books
Great article of how the truth can be manipulated if worded correctly by the government media unit...
The truth about 'subsidies' at Millers Point and The Rocks
http://tunswblog.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-truth-about-subsidies-at-millers.html
The truth about 'subsidies' at Millers Point and The Rocks
When the NSW State Government announced last week that it would sell all the social housing at Millers Point and The Rocks, it highlighted the issue of social housing 'subsidies' there. It gave the impression that taxpayers' money – and lots of it – is being paid to tenants. This is incorrect.
Said Minister Goward:
The Government's media release refers variously to subsidies 'paid' and 'funded by the NSW taxpayer', and 'received by' tenants, all in dollar amounts.
The truth is that not a dollar of money raised from taxpayers is paid to public housing tenants or otherwise credited to their rent accounts. Not one dollar. Tenants pay money to Housing NSW, not the other way around.
The subsidies to which the Minister refers are accounting entries. The 'subsidy' for each tenancy is the difference between the 'market rent' for the property as assessed by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation, and the rent actually paid by the tenant, rebated according to the usual rules of Housing NSW's system of income-related rents.
The market rent for a property does not reflect the cost to the NSW State Government of providing housing or related services at the property. The market rent for a property can go up – and hence the 'subsidy' go up – without any change in the housing being provided at the property, or in Housing NSW's costs. (Housing NSW need not account for 'market rents' at all – for decades the old Housing Commission accounted for 'economic rents', reflecting the historic cost of its properties, and income-related rebated rents.)
What actually does cost money at Millers Point is repairs and maintenance. We'll take the Minister at her word when she says that in the past two years $6.8 million has been spent on repairs and maintenance there. This is a lot less than the $8.89 million per annum in 'subsidies' that was not actually spent.
It is important to note too how much tenants have paid towards that real cost of housing. There are 409 social housing tenancies in the properties at Millers Point and The Rocks. We understand the average income-related rent paid is about $100 per week, so, over the past two years, tenants have paid about $4.25 million in rent – in other words, not quite two-thirds of the repair bill.
You can see the impression it's trying to make. Let's turn it around. Half of all public housing tenants are over 60 years of age. They are ageing in homes to which they are much attached in a supportive community and should be allowed to stay there. As for the younger half: of course most of them receive Centrelink payments, that's why Housing NSW picked them to be public housing tenants! (Most tenants in Millers Point were housed there through the usual way: applying (and waiting) for social housing. A significant minority, however, have been there since before it public housing, when the Maritime Services Board owned the houses and let them to people who worked on the harbour.)
Cracks two and three are leveled against two individual tenants. The media release does not give their names, but it does disclose the gender, age, street of residence, period of residence, family circumstances of each person, and the amount of the 'subsidy' each has 'received'. We'll not repeat those details here; their privacy has been infringed enough as it is. Disclosures of personal information about clients of government services have no place in Ministerial media releases.
Said Minister Goward:
Subsidies to tenants in the last year alone reached $8.89 million, with individual tenants receiving subsidies as high as $44,000 per annum. This compares to subsidies of $8,000 per year in Campbelltown, $7,000 in Gosford, and $11,000 in Wollongong. For every subsidised tenancy in Millers Point, the Government could assist 5 tenants in Warrawong, or 3.5 tenants in Newcastle or Minto.
The Government's media release refers variously to subsidies 'paid' and 'funded by the NSW taxpayer', and 'received by' tenants, all in dollar amounts.
The truth is that not a dollar of money raised from taxpayers is paid to public housing tenants or otherwise credited to their rent accounts. Not one dollar. Tenants pay money to Housing NSW, not the other way around.
The subsidies to which the Minister refers are accounting entries. The 'subsidy' for each tenancy is the difference between the 'market rent' for the property as assessed by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation, and the rent actually paid by the tenant, rebated according to the usual rules of Housing NSW's system of income-related rents.
The market rent for a property does not reflect the cost to the NSW State Government of providing housing or related services at the property. The market rent for a property can go up – and hence the 'subsidy' go up – without any change in the housing being provided at the property, or in Housing NSW's costs. (Housing NSW need not account for 'market rents' at all – for decades the old Housing Commission accounted for 'economic rents', reflecting the historic cost of its properties, and income-related rebated rents.)
What actually does cost money at Millers Point is repairs and maintenance. We'll take the Minister at her word when she says that in the past two years $6.8 million has been spent on repairs and maintenance there. This is a lot less than the $8.89 million per annum in 'subsidies' that was not actually spent.
It is important to note too how much tenants have paid towards that real cost of housing. There are 409 social housing tenancies in the properties at Millers Point and The Rocks. We understand the average income-related rent paid is about $100 per week, so, over the past two years, tenants have paid about $4.25 million in rent – in other words, not quite two-thirds of the repair bill.
*
It is bad enough that the Government's media release creates a misleading impression about subsidies in the social housing system generally and at Millers Point and The Rocks in particular. What's worse is that it takes a couple of other cracks at Millers Point and The Rocks tenants as a group and, in a couple of cases, individually.
Crack one, against Millers Point tenants:
Half of all public housing tenants in Millers Point are of working age (18-59), but 94% of tenants claim Centrelink benefits as their primary source of income.
You can see the impression it's trying to make. Let's turn it around. Half of all public housing tenants are over 60 years of age. They are ageing in homes to which they are much attached in a supportive community and should be allowed to stay there. As for the younger half: of course most of them receive Centrelink payments, that's why Housing NSW picked them to be public housing tenants! (Most tenants in Millers Point were housed there through the usual way: applying (and waiting) for social housing. A significant minority, however, have been there since before it public housing, when the Maritime Services Board owned the houses and let them to people who worked on the harbour.)
Cracks two and three are leveled against two individual tenants. The media release does not give their names, but it does disclose the gender, age, street of residence, period of residence, family circumstances of each person, and the amount of the 'subsidy' each has 'received'. We'll not repeat those details here; their privacy has been infringed enough as it is. Disclosures of personal information about clients of government services have no place in Ministerial media releases.
http://tunswblog.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/the-truth-about-subsidies-at-millers.html
Eviction Plan for Oldest Suburbs Massive Land Grab
Peter Mac
The NSW government plans to evict more than 400 public housing residents from Sydney’s historic Millers Point and The Rocks within two years, and to sell off their houses and flats.
The move would destroy a community whose ties stretch back five generations.
The Sirius complex was built to rehouse public tenants who had been displaced after a controversial redevelopment of the historic Rocks suburb during the 1960s and ‘70s
Residents received the catastrophic news of the government’s decision in a letter pushed into their letterboxes or under their doors, like an advertising leaflet. There was no prior discussion. It was a grossly insensitive act and an insult, but it also showed that the government is worried about resistance.
The government claims that rental subsidies are too high in these areas, and that selling the properties would provide funds for construction of new public housing, and would eliminate the high costs of maintaining the old buildings. They warned that resistance would slow down the provision of new homes for the 27.000 people on the public housing waiting list. (Rental subsidy is the difference between market rent for the area and public housing rent.)
However, there is no guarantee that the sale proceeds would be ploughed back into public housing. They’ll almost certainly just disappear into consolidated revenue.
Moreover, not all the buildings concerned are old. The Sirius building, a reinforced concrete block of 79 flats, (which featured in Ruth Park’s novel Playing Beattie Bow) was built in the 1970s.
And whether buildings are old or new, failure to maintain them over a long period actually increases costs, because what was at first a simple remedial process eventually becomes a major exercise after surfaces or building elements fail.
Successive governments have not allocated sufficient funds for necessary works to the public housing stock in the area, and have let some of the buildings become uninhabitable. The O’Farrell government is using the dilapidated condition of some of the 298 dwellings as a convenient excuse to forcibly evacuate and sell off all of them.
The purchasers of the 50 buildings sold to date were certainly not deterred by high maintenance costs. They couldn’t wait to get their hands on buildings that have wonderful character and magnificent views, and are a short walk from the heart of the city’s central business district, including Barangaroo.
One estate agent gushed: “It’s a spectacular area and once it’s gentrified … it will be such an exclusive suburb”. A house recently sold by the government was auctioned for more than $3 million, and the maximum price paid for a property in Millers Point in the last 12 months was $6.3 million.
Location, location!
The Rocks and Millers Point, Australia’s oldest suburbs, have seen major battles over recent decades because of their high real estate value. They were originally inhabited mainly by the families of wharf labourers and storemen, and many of the houses were provided for them by the former Maritime Services Board.
In the 1970s, the NSW government approved a major redevelopment of The Rocks that would have involved demolition of most of its early buildings. That appalling initiative was defeated after a campaign that involved concerned citizens, the National Trust and community organisations.
The campaign was led by the Builders’ Labourers Federation, which placed the world’s first green bans on the proposed demolition sites. That caught world attention and spurred the formation of “green” parties in Australia and overseas.
The union was attempting to preserve the rights of the residents, not just to save the buildings. Last week Sydney’s Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, wrote: “Many residents in the neighbourhood have connections that go back generations. They can talk vividly about Sydney’s history as a working harbour. They have an irreplaceable connection to their local neighbourhood.”
Millers Point is listed on the State Heritage Register as “a living cultural landscape”. The listing provides the buildings with a degree of protection against demolition or abuse, but the community which also contributes to the area’s significance is now under threat.
Peter Phibbs, professor of urban planning at Sydney University, described the eviction plan as clumsy, inhumane and inconsistent with the government’s policy regarding ageing. He commented acidly: “It seems to be driven by people trying to get their hands on some quick cash …”.
More than 40 percent of the current residents are now aged 60 or over. A government report warned that the mental and physical health of residents with long-term ties to the area, especially the aged, would be damaged by enforced relocation.
It also noted that low-income rental stock in the city of Sydney had fallen by up to 45 percent between 2006 and 2011, and recommended the provision of affordable housing in the area for some residents.
The Minister for Community Services, Pru Goward, replied that the government would “make every effort to assist tenants to find a property close to their preferred area,” but would not build any more public housing in the Rocks or Millers Point.
Resist and defeat!
The government certainly has an obligation to use its resources wisely, to satisfy the demand for affordable housing. However, it is also obliged to respect residents’ emotional and cultural links to places their families have called home for generations.
But the government intends to sell off the properties to the super-wealthy as fast as possible, and is far too impatient to even allow the current residents to live out their time in dignity in their current homes.
Implementation of the Rocks/Millers Point eviction plan would set a precedent for the eviction of tenants from public housing in the inner city suburbs of Balmain, Glebe, Kirribilli, Woolloomooloo, Redfern, Surry Hills and Waterloo, all areas of rapidly rising rental prices.
Moreover, the logic of the government’s economic rationalist argument is that all public housing tenants should be relocated to the areas of cheapest rent, the city’s outermost suburbs.
The eviction plan has been condemned by community organisations, the Council of the City of Sydney and the Tenants Union of NSW. The NSW Council of Social Services stated that the plan dumps the “social mix” policy that is crucial for the success of public housing projects.
A rally was held last Friday and others are planned for this week. Guardian readers are urged to attend and to participate in this vital campaign to save public housing in The Rocks and Millers Point.
Russy's Daughter
This letter, penned by a daughter of Millers Point, was recently sent to the Sydney Morning Herald. As far as we know, it has not been published. It should be.
I sit here with tears in my eyes so I cannot pretend that I do not have a deeply personal and emotional connection to the proposed removal of the social housing residents of Millers point. I grew up in a terrace in Lower fort street and my mum still lives there as she has done so for 40 years, laboriously maintaining and restoring her home (largely herself). Even if she is forced to move away, that house will always be our family home and the fact that she doesn't own it does not make that connection or the emotional distress any less valid.
When I was growing up our terrace was, like many in the area, a Maritime workers owned boarding house populated by single old men who had worked on the wharves. These men had lived here through their working life and now into their retirement. Our men were "Jocky" and "Bluey". "Jocky" was a Scotsman who I loved dearly. We watched Sale of the Century each evening and shared chocolate biscuits. "Bluey" would say "respect your mother" if I gave her too much lip and would ball room dance with me in the kitchen at Christmas.
Mum assumed responsibility for our terrace when the former landlord moved on and it was always understood that these men would stay in their home with us as long as they wished. They were family to me and my childhood was infinitely enhanced by their presence and changed by their passing. We still refer to those rooms as Jocky's and Bluey's. Times changed as did the government department overseeing the property, but it was always our home. That is our story and if you scratch the surface in Miller's point there are a myriad of colourful, complex and moving stories to be told. There are of course such stories everywhere, the difference is here all our stories are entwined and many go back generations.
I do not live in Millers point and have not done so for many years. The announcement last week was not something which was completely unexpected. Indeed the community has been living in the shadow of the threat of this for years. A shadow of uncertainty which has pervaded everyday life and had a detrimental effect on many.
Never the less, reading the media over the last few days I have been profoundly moved. These are people I know. People who are part of the fabric of this community and hence my life. I see people in the articles who helped out at the canteen when I was a primary school on Observatory hill, people who brought my dog back when he escaped because they knew he was mine and where we lived, people who STILL stop me in the street and tell me I haven't changed since I was a baby. Living outside this community now I can fully appreciate how unique that experience is anywhere, let alone in Sydney today.
The letter which was handed to my mother last week said that attempts would be made to relocate her "close to family and friends". I am my mothers family. I would welcome her anytime but she does not want to leave her home. Not because it is in a street has recently been deemed a desirable location (when 30 years ago most did not see its virtues) but because it is her HOME. Much as we love each other, My mum does she does not want to move. Her friends and support networks are in the Millers point community, her heart is there, her past and her memories are there and she has always seen her future. As do many others with deep connections to one another and to the area. The human impact cannot be underestimated.
How many people know their neighbour these days? How many would give them the keys when they go away? They do in Millers Point. People here care about each other. They attend the funeral when a member of the community passes away. A good many came and celebrated my 1st AND my 21st birthdays in our backyard. They know the older members who need a helping hand or should be checked on if they haven't been seen on their daily walk. If an young community member is courting trouble, elders of the community will engage them or their parents and express concerns. Until the local corner store was sold as a private residence in the last few years the owners would run a tab if someone forgot money for milk or offer some of their home made falafel for you to try. Millers point is a community in the true sense of the word. Community does not mean people who live geographically close to one another. It is something which evolves over time if nurtured and it certainly cannot be manufactured or constructed.
New residents to the community have told me in the park that they are thrilled to have such a welcoming and supportive community. Indeed many have expressed that they have moved here because of this. Miller Point truly is, as the state heritage register described it, a ''living cultural landscape'' with ''an unusually high and rare degree of social significance''. I can tell you this as I was fortunate enough to grow up in this community, observe the changes over the last 30 years and now visit it regularly with an outside perspective.
Miller's Point is the type of community I think most people would want their children to grow up in and their parents to grow old in. A community spirit born of continuity and time. The Millers point community can, and has evolved. From the earliest public housing and Maritime workers accommodation, it has become a mix of corporate real estate, private and social housing. My understanding is that this integrated model is now widely recommended to prevent social housing area becoming socially depressed.
Surely the largely long term and often elderly residents should be treated with more compassion and respect than is being shown. Equally a community without youth has no future and this should also be considered. The significant economic benefits of true community, and the burden this removes from social resources should be supported, allowing our city to become more viable, integrated and community minded. Millers Point is an integrated social success. It should be recognised, celebrated and not destroyed.
I sit here with tears in my eyes so I cannot pretend that I do not have a deeply personal and emotional connection to the proposed removal of the social housing residents of Millers point. I grew up in a terrace in Lower fort street and my mum still lives there as she has done so for 40 years, laboriously maintaining and restoring her home (largely herself). Even if she is forced to move away, that house will always be our family home and the fact that she doesn't own it does not make that connection or the emotional distress any less valid.
When I was growing up our terrace was, like many in the area, a Maritime workers owned boarding house populated by single old men who had worked on the wharves. These men had lived here through their working life and now into their retirement. Our men were "Jocky" and "Bluey". "Jocky" was a Scotsman who I loved dearly. We watched Sale of the Century each evening and shared chocolate biscuits. "Bluey" would say "respect your mother" if I gave her too much lip and would ball room dance with me in the kitchen at Christmas.
Mum assumed responsibility for our terrace when the former landlord moved on and it was always understood that these men would stay in their home with us as long as they wished. They were family to me and my childhood was infinitely enhanced by their presence and changed by their passing. We still refer to those rooms as Jocky's and Bluey's. Times changed as did the government department overseeing the property, but it was always our home. That is our story and if you scratch the surface in Miller's point there are a myriad of colourful, complex and moving stories to be told. There are of course such stories everywhere, the difference is here all our stories are entwined and many go back generations.
I do not live in Millers point and have not done so for many years. The announcement last week was not something which was completely unexpected. Indeed the community has been living in the shadow of the threat of this for years. A shadow of uncertainty which has pervaded everyday life and had a detrimental effect on many.
Never the less, reading the media over the last few days I have been profoundly moved. These are people I know. People who are part of the fabric of this community and hence my life. I see people in the articles who helped out at the canteen when I was a primary school on Observatory hill, people who brought my dog back when he escaped because they knew he was mine and where we lived, people who STILL stop me in the street and tell me I haven't changed since I was a baby. Living outside this community now I can fully appreciate how unique that experience is anywhere, let alone in Sydney today.
The letter which was handed to my mother last week said that attempts would be made to relocate her "close to family and friends". I am my mothers family. I would welcome her anytime but she does not want to leave her home. Not because it is in a street has recently been deemed a desirable location (when 30 years ago most did not see its virtues) but because it is her HOME. Much as we love each other, My mum does she does not want to move. Her friends and support networks are in the Millers point community, her heart is there, her past and her memories are there and she has always seen her future. As do many others with deep connections to one another and to the area. The human impact cannot be underestimated.
How many people know their neighbour these days? How many would give them the keys when they go away? They do in Millers Point. People here care about each other. They attend the funeral when a member of the community passes away. A good many came and celebrated my 1st AND my 21st birthdays in our backyard. They know the older members who need a helping hand or should be checked on if they haven't been seen on their daily walk. If an young community member is courting trouble, elders of the community will engage them or their parents and express concerns. Until the local corner store was sold as a private residence in the last few years the owners would run a tab if someone forgot money for milk or offer some of their home made falafel for you to try. Millers point is a community in the true sense of the word. Community does not mean people who live geographically close to one another. It is something which evolves over time if nurtured and it certainly cannot be manufactured or constructed.
New residents to the community have told me in the park that they are thrilled to have such a welcoming and supportive community. Indeed many have expressed that they have moved here because of this. Miller Point truly is, as the state heritage register described it, a ''living cultural landscape'' with ''an unusually high and rare degree of social significance''. I can tell you this as I was fortunate enough to grow up in this community, observe the changes over the last 30 years and now visit it regularly with an outside perspective.
Miller's Point is the type of community I think most people would want their children to grow up in and their parents to grow old in. A community spirit born of continuity and time. The Millers point community can, and has evolved. From the earliest public housing and Maritime workers accommodation, it has become a mix of corporate real estate, private and social housing. My understanding is that this integrated model is now widely recommended to prevent social housing area becoming socially depressed.
Surely the largely long term and often elderly residents should be treated with more compassion and respect than is being shown. Equally a community without youth has no future and this should also be considered. The significant economic benefits of true community, and the burden this removes from social resources should be supported, allowing our city to become more viable, integrated and community minded. Millers Point is an integrated social success. It should be recognised, celebrated and not destroyed.
Tuesday, 25 March 2014
Barry O'Farrell Government has Terminated an Inner City Community Millers Point and The Rocks.
19th March 2014..... A sad Day after Barry O'Farrell Government have Terminate an Inner City Community Millers Point and The Rocks.
We are not talking 1 or 2 or 30 houses but a whole suburb. 293 public housing properties at Millers Point and The Rocks, Gone. The whole community moved to WHO KNOWS WHERE.
Does anyone know if a whole Sydney suburb in recent history was been evicted on this scale.
WHY
"Rich People Want To Live Here Now, You Need To Leave.”
http://junkee.com/an-entire-suburb-in-sydney-is-being-evicted/31371
We are not talking 1 or 2 or 30 houses but a whole suburb. 293 public housing properties at Millers Point and The Rocks, Gone. The whole community moved to WHO KNOWS WHERE.
Does anyone know if a whole Sydney suburb in recent history was been evicted on this scale.
WHY
"Rich People Want To Live Here Now, You Need To Leave.”
http://junkee.com/an-entire-suburb-in-sydney-is-being-evicted/31371
Sticking it to the man!
As a student of law, my primary area of interest is employment and industrial relations law. But I will never forget a job interview I had where a lawyer said I had the personality for litigation. I didn’t get the job, but I still chortle over that remark.
As I discussed in my last post, the NSW Liberal Government is planning on selling almost 300 public housing properties at Millers Point, The Rocks, and Gloucester Street. Minister Pru Goward said the main reason for the sale was the high cost of maintaining heritage-listed homes.
That got me thinking. If the NSW Government is not complying with its obligation to maintain properties, it might be leaving itself open to attack. Housing NSW has obligations under statute and contract. Under section 63 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW), a landlord must provide and maintain residential premises in a reasonable state of repair. This is a term of every residential tenancy agreement. An action could be based on tort like breach of statutory duty.
As I discussed in my last post, the NSW Liberal Government is planning on selling almost 300 public housing properties at Millers Point, The Rocks, and Gloucester Street. Minister Pru Goward said the main reason for the sale was the high cost of maintaining heritage-listed homes.
That got me thinking. If the NSW Government is not complying with its obligation to maintain properties, it might be leaving itself open to attack. Housing NSW has obligations under statute and contract. Under section 63 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW), a landlord must provide and maintain residential premises in a reasonable state of repair. This is a term of every residential tenancy agreement. An action could be based on tort like breach of statutory duty.
If NSW Housing is breaching its legal obligations, the time might be ripe for some kind of group claim. Grouped proceedings provide a remedy where many persons have suffered small losses and it is not economically feasible to recover via individual proceedings. This might be the case here. Part 10 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) allows for grouped proceedings in the NSW Supreme Court.
That is not to say there aren’t any obstacles. Residential tenancy laws usually specify landlord and tenant disputes are to be resolved by tribunals rather than courts. Under regulation 23 of the Residential Tenancies Regulations 2010 (NSW), the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) has jurisdiction to determine tenancy disputes. It is limited to $30,000 for rental bond matters and $15,000 for other matters. Can we get around this? You might not know what a claim is worth before an order is actually handed down. And there is no requirement that a claim be for a reasonable amount. And plus, a claim on behalf of a group might just be more than the set amount.
Grouped proceedings could facilitate access to justice for the residents of Millers Point, and other public housing tenants. It is a David and Goliath fight. Grouped proceedings could potentially mediate the power imbalance between tenants and the government. Tenants could consolidate their power base by litigating as a group. This is a simple matter of power in numbers. There are other advantages. One advantage is that time limits can be avoided. Residential tenancy laws usually specifies that claims must be lodged within a certain time frame. Another advantage is that group members need not be named. This means tenants would be protected from retaliation.
I don't know whether these arguments would fly, but a grouped proceeding could form part of a well-stocked arsenal.
That is not to say there aren’t any obstacles. Residential tenancy laws usually specify landlord and tenant disputes are to be resolved by tribunals rather than courts. Under regulation 23 of the Residential Tenancies Regulations 2010 (NSW), the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) has jurisdiction to determine tenancy disputes. It is limited to $30,000 for rental bond matters and $15,000 for other matters. Can we get around this? You might not know what a claim is worth before an order is actually handed down. And there is no requirement that a claim be for a reasonable amount. And plus, a claim on behalf of a group might just be more than the set amount.
Grouped proceedings could facilitate access to justice for the residents of Millers Point, and other public housing tenants. It is a David and Goliath fight. Grouped proceedings could potentially mediate the power imbalance between tenants and the government. Tenants could consolidate their power base by litigating as a group. This is a simple matter of power in numbers. There are other advantages. One advantage is that time limits can be avoided. Residential tenancy laws usually specifies that claims must be lodged within a certain time frame. Another advantage is that group members need not be named. This means tenants would be protected from retaliation.
I don't know whether these arguments would fly, but a grouped proceeding could form part of a well-stocked arsenal.
Monday, 24 March 2014
Money, money, money
Resourced: http://landlordwatch.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/money-money-money.html
1. the cost of maintaining heritage-listed buildings is exorbitant
2. the distribution of housing subsidies is inequitable
3. public housing needs to be sustainable in the long-term
Minster Goward made the announcement while her henchmen delivered the news to devastated tenants. There was no consultation. There was no procedural fairness. I have seen this tactic before. Holdfast Bay Council held a confidential meeting to evict permanent residents when it approved a redevelopment of a caravan park.
I really hope I see media outrage. So far there has been significant coverage. On the whole, it has been fairly sympathetic to the plight of residents. I only hope that it continues. A community action group has already sprung up. You can like the FB page here. We have two years to turn this thing around. So let's do it.
In my last post, I explored the relationship between the media and government. I analysed an online article about public housing tenants that trash houses. Little did I know NSW Community Services Minister Pru Goward was softening up the public for a sale of public housing on Sydney's harbour front. The article by the Daily Telegraph is an obvious example of forward-thinking strategy.
The NSW Liberal Government is planning on selling almost 300 historic properties at Millers Point, The Rocks and Gloucester Street. The sale includes the landmark Sirius building at The Rocks, a concrete brutalist high-rise apartment complex close to the Harbour Bridge, containing 79 units.
The sale is expected to raise hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s a blatant cash grab. Professor Phibbs from the University of Sydney says the policy seems ‘driven by people trying to get their hands on some quick cash rather than thinking about things from a policy perspective’. If you watch the video of the announcement, Minister Goward provides three reasons for the historic sale. They are as follows:
1. the cost of maintaining heritage-listed buildings is exorbitant
2. the distribution of housing subsidies is inequitable
3. public housing needs to be sustainable in the long-term
Minster Goward made the announcement while her henchmen delivered the news to devastated tenants. There was no consultation. There was no procedural fairness. I have seen this tactic before. Holdfast Bay Council held a confidential meeting to evict permanent residents when it approved a redevelopment of a caravan park.
Minister Goward tries to frame the sale as a matter of fairness and equity. I am not convinced. And plus she looks like Cruella Deville from 101 Dalmatians. The resemblance is quie remarkable. But I suppose she can’t help that. The Barry O’Farrell government is selling off houses when the waiting list is miles long and New South Wales has a huge homelessness problem. It’s classic political strategy at its best. They are saying they are helping tenants, when really, they are hurting them.
Minister Goward said proceeds from the sale of the historic properties would be reinvested into the social housing system. Somehow I doubt this very much. Shelter NSW's executive officer Mary Perkins says,We've had a long-time issue with the transparency around the promises that have been made about the sale of stock. They say 'we'll sell this to gain this', but there's never been any evidence produced about the gains...At the end of the day, we've got a really big concern about the geographic divide happening in the city, between these areas [that] are for rich people and these areas [that] are for poor people.
Diversity usually results in better outcomes for the community as a whole. We know that housing estates simply do not work because they localise entrenched disadvantage.
Despite overseeing similar sell-offs, the NSW Opposition has condemned the Liberal Government’s decision. Shadow Minister Linda Burney said Minister Pru Goward could not be trusted to reinvest any proceeds. The Liberal Government has overseen an increase in the public housing waiting list, and a decrease in the number of houses it is building. It has cut $42 million from the budget for maintenance, and $22 million from the budget for building. A report by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation shows that the O’Farrell Government has cut more than 1300 properties from its books.
I am not convinced by the argument older properties are more expensive to maintain. A diverse stock of housing will always involve a range of costs. I seriously doubt NSW Housing will be selling off old government houses in less well-to-do areas of Sydney. The government should not be able to get away with manufacturing excuses by failing to comply with its legal obligation to repair. We know that public housing is ageing and increasingly unfit for purpose. If state and territory governments keep selling off public properties, there is going to be none left. The NSW Government is clearly trying to push a core government responsibility off onto private providers. It is privatisation by stealth.Despite overseeing similar sell-offs, the NSW Opposition has condemned the Liberal Government’s decision. Shadow Minister Linda Burney said Minister Pru Goward could not be trusted to reinvest any proceeds. The Liberal Government has overseen an increase in the public housing waiting list, and a decrease in the number of houses it is building. It has cut $42 million from the budget for maintenance, and $22 million from the budget for building. A report by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation shows that the O’Farrell Government has cut more than 1300 properties from its books.
I am also concerned that the human rights of the tenants are not being respected. They are being evicted from their HOMES. It is not humane or compassionate to move elderly residents away from their communities and social ties. Many residents at Millers Point have connections to the area going back generations. The O’Farrell Government has even ignored the advice of its own consultants on evicting vulnerable tenants with minimal damage to their health and well-being. If things get that far, I would suggest pickets to stop police evicting residents from their homes. I don’t think the police would be too keen on physically ejecting the elderly and disabled.
They can't turf us like rubbish, say angry Millers Point residents
March 23, 2014 Georgina Mitchell
The crowd gathered at lunchtime on Saturday, furious at the prospect of having to leave the houses some were born in. And they didn't hold back.
''These people cannot come in and walk all over us and turf us out like we're rubbish,'' an elderly resident said to cheers. ''We're not going down without a fight,'' another declared.
 |
| In for the fight: Wendy Ford. Photo: Ella Rubeli |
The tiny hall in Millers Point held hundreds of residents, all angry at the state government's decision to sell the area's public housing.
The crowd gathered at lunchtime on Saturday, furious at the prospect of having to leave the houses some were born in. And they didn't hold back.
''These people cannot come in and walk all over us and turf us out like we're rubbish,'' an elderly resident said to cheers. ''We're not going down without a fight,'' another declared.
The heat of the Abraham Mott hall radiated from the packed crowd, who filled all the seats, leaving only standing room. MP Alex Greenwich urged the able-bodied to vacate seats for the elderly as speakers took turns at the podium, offering legal help, solidarity and support from unions.
Among the protesters was Glenda Cox, whose family has lived in the Millers Point area since the 1860s, working on the docks.
''I've been here in the one house for 61 years,'' Ms Cox said. ''I'm 63 now, and my daughter's done the family tree right back to 1860 in The Rocks and Millers Point area. We've worked and lived here all that time.''
Permanent housing in The Rocks was offered to dock workers and their families as an incentive for the long hours and dangerous work they undertook.
But with the properties run by the Housing Commission, the tenants now face the prospect of being evicted. Many say they helped to make Sydney the city it is today -
''Where will they go,'' asked Chad Ford, whose mother Wendy lives down the road from Ms Cox.
''They've lived here all their lives - it's all they know.''
Ms Cox said people once looked down on The Rocks as a lower-class area of Sydney, but it has become more appealing because of its history and harbour views.
''In my time, they didn't want to know you,'' she said. ''My father used to walk the Hungry Mile on the docks looking for work.''
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/they-cant-turf-us-like-rubbish-say-angry-millers-point-residents-20140322-35a6l.html
''I've been here in the one house for 61 years,'' Ms Cox said. ''I'm 63 now, and my daughter's done the family tree right back to 1860 in The Rocks and Millers Point area. We've worked and lived here all that time.''
 |
| I've been in the one house for 61 years": Glenda Cox with her daughter Natalie outside their home. Photo: Ella Rubeli |
But with the properties run by the Housing Commission, the tenants now face the prospect of being evicted. Many say they helped to make Sydney the city it is today -
''Where will they go,'' asked Chad Ford, whose mother Wendy lives down the road from Ms Cox.
''They've lived here all their lives - it's all they know.''
Ms Cox said people once looked down on The Rocks as a lower-class area of Sydney, but it has become more appealing because of its history and harbour views.
''In my time, they didn't want to know you,'' she said. ''My father used to walk the Hungry Mile on the docks looking for work.''
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/they-cant-turf-us-like-rubbish-say-angry-millers-point-residents-20140322-35a6l.html
Letter from the editor: Public housing sell-off a painful debate
Jennifer Duke | 27 March 2014
Change is underway in Millers Point as 293 properties, currently public housing supply stock for 400 residents, are being sold off to make way for private investors and buyers to snap up the offerings. While this makes sense, when looking at the blunt numbers provided by the government, it has pulled at the heartstrings of many causing a debate that's painful to read.
I've been known to use the phrase "investing is about the numbers" multiple times, and stand by it. However, property is unique as a financial choice in that it affects culture and the living conditions of those around the country.
Underestimating the role of a home in continuing family heritage and providing values is far too easy. Regularly, I see listings and stories of homes that have been in a family for decades that, upon a relative's death, are up for auction. They're regularly presented as a "once in a lifetime opportunity" and are often some of the most stunning homes. My heart aches for those that have to sell their history and memories with them. But at least this is, largely, a choice.
For those in public housing in Millers Point there is no choice, and they certainly do not appear to be going without a fight - there was a rally today at 11am, for instance. Sadly, with little of their own assets to boast of and clearly no written-down formalised rights to stay in these properties - what more can they do?
Minister for Family and Community Services, Pru Goward, publicly put out a statement regarding the high value property assets on Sydney Harbour's foreshore, that is those at Millers Point, and the subsequent reinvestment of the proceeds into social housing across the state. This logic truly cannot be argued with. The values in Millers Point have terrifyingly increased over the past years, as you can see in the suburb data here, and so it makes economical sense that 293 properties across Millers Point, Gloucester Street and the Sirius building in The Rocks were focused on for a sale.
Goward pointed to the high cost of maintenance and investment required to improve them to an 'acceptable standard' as part of the reasoning.
"Maintenance on properties in Millers Point costs more than four times the average for public housing dwellings in NSW. In the last two years alone, nearly $7 million has been spent maintaining this small number of properties. That money could have been better spent on building more social housing, or investing in the maintenance of public housing properties across the state,” Goward was cited as saying in the release.
"When the previous Government began selling off public housing in Millers Point in 2008 it let other properties here fall into disrepair. That has now left us with repair bills as high as $800,000 to restore some of these terrace houses to heritage standard."
Having jumped on to the New South Wales waiting list to have a look at what public housing contestants, because really that's what it feels like, have to deal with - I was stunned. Many areas have little remaining for certain housing stock with less than a five year waiting period. Some are waiting for even longer.
Goward points to 57,000 families on the waiting list across the state - a terrifying proposition for anyone looking to get housing soon. It must also be nerve wracking to read of the state of public housing, with the ABC reporting last year that the list of those waiting could grow by 30,000 people in three years unless changes are made to a number of aspects of the system.
Goward continued with citing the numbers of the costs of holding these properties. However, this is where the picture becomes more interesting.
“Subsidies to tenants in the last year alone reached $8.89 million, with individual tenants receiving subsidies as high as $44,000 per annum. This compares to subsidies of $8,000 per year in Campbelltown, $7,000 in Gosford, and $11,000 in Wollongong. For every subsidised tenancy in Millers Point, the Government could assist five tenants in Warrawong, or 3.5 tenants in Newcastle or Minto," she noted.
A blog post from Brown Couch, the voice of the Tenants Union of New South Wales, sheds light on another aspect to these numbers. They explain that these figures should be looked at as an accounting entry, rather than actual money spent.
The figure is created as the difference between market rent for the property, as assessed by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation, and the rent paid by the tenant, rebated according to the usual rules.
"The market rent for a property does not reflect the cost to the NSW State Government of providing housing or related services at the property. The market rent for a property can go up – and hence the 'subsidy' go up – without any change in the housing being provided at the property, or in Housing NSW's costs," the blog post explains.
"It is important to note too how much tenants have paid towards that real cost of housing. There are 409 social housing tenancies in the properties at Millers Point and The Rocks. We understand the average income-related rent paid is about $100 per week, so, over the past two years, tenants have paid about $4.25 million in rent – in other words, not quite two-thirds of the repair bill."
How this then works out on the books looking further is, as such, uncertain.
As an editor with a budget to manage, and as an everyday resident who has my own personal budgets and targets to maintain, it's logical to find the supposed drain, put a stop to it and move funds into an avenue where they will be more effective. That this makes financial sense is clear to me, despite the welcomed debate of the finer points - and the TUNSW does raise some important points. The simple situation, however, is that these are now lucrative financial assets that can be sold to funnel money back into creating more properties for those on the seemingly endless waiting list.
Goward expressed her acknowledgement that many tenants have lived in this housing for a long period of time, and the difficulties they may face moving elsewhere, but expressed her belief that this was the right decision and that a relocations team would assist the current tenants, including covering costs of moving and reconnection fees.
The fact remains that without ownership of these assets, the tenants do not have rights to them. That is how the property world works at present. Just as a tenant in a privately owned rental in the mainstream market does not have the ability to force a landlord to allow them to retain their tenancy and not to sell the home or let a different tenant live there, a public housing tenant also does not have these rights.
A letter written to the Sydney Morning Herald, shared by the TUNSW's Brown Couch blog, discussed the culture of the area.
"I grew up in a terrace in Lower fort street and my mum still lives there as she has done so for 40 years, laboriously maintaining and restoring her home (largely herself). Even if she is forced to move away, that house will always be our family home and the fact that she doesn't own it does not make that connection or the emotional distress any less valid," the letter is quoted as saying.
It notes that the letter received by her mother said that attempts would be made to relocate her close to her family and friends.
It is likely that this isn't the end. The Herald also recently reported that Glebe, Redfern and Kirribilli are the next sites that could face similar treatment.
Just yesterday, State MP Alex Greenwich slammed the decision as a form of 'social cleansing', and I have read references from a number of different individuals who declare she's ruining the culture on purpose for the property bigwigs in Millers Point and other city locations. These claims are currently unfounded, and when looking at the pure mathematics it makes sense to direct funds where they can have the biggest benefit for the greatest number of people. Of course this isn't just about maths. However, sadly, providing roofs over the heads of the needy at some point needs to trump the heart-wrenching, and they are truly hard to read, discussions of individuals' connections to an area.
It's a situation that is tearing many in two as the best decision is argued out - progress and the situation of the masses versus culture and the individual stories of those residents, and it's certain that someone was always going to leave the debate unhappy. But we need to remember that there are the stories of 57,000 or so others on the waiting list that are likely to be just as awful to read.
RESOURCED: http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/location/nsw/29662-march-27-letter-from-the-editor-millers-point-public-housing-sales-under-scrutiny.html
I've been known to use the phrase "investing is about the numbers" multiple times, and stand by it. However, property is unique as a financial choice in that it affects culture and the living conditions of those around the country.
Underestimating the role of a home in continuing family heritage and providing values is far too easy. Regularly, I see listings and stories of homes that have been in a family for decades that, upon a relative's death, are up for auction. They're regularly presented as a "once in a lifetime opportunity" and are often some of the most stunning homes. My heart aches for those that have to sell their history and memories with them. But at least this is, largely, a choice.
For those in public housing in Millers Point there is no choice, and they certainly do not appear to be going without a fight - there was a rally today at 11am, for instance. Sadly, with little of their own assets to boast of and clearly no written-down formalised rights to stay in these properties - what more can they do?
Minister for Family and Community Services, Pru Goward, publicly put out a statement regarding the high value property assets on Sydney Harbour's foreshore, that is those at Millers Point, and the subsequent reinvestment of the proceeds into social housing across the state. This logic truly cannot be argued with. The values in Millers Point have terrifyingly increased over the past years, as you can see in the suburb data here, and so it makes economical sense that 293 properties across Millers Point, Gloucester Street and the Sirius building in The Rocks were focused on for a sale.
Goward pointed to the high cost of maintenance and investment required to improve them to an 'acceptable standard' as part of the reasoning.
"Maintenance on properties in Millers Point costs more than four times the average for public housing dwellings in NSW. In the last two years alone, nearly $7 million has been spent maintaining this small number of properties. That money could have been better spent on building more social housing, or investing in the maintenance of public housing properties across the state,” Goward was cited as saying in the release.
"When the previous Government began selling off public housing in Millers Point in 2008 it let other properties here fall into disrepair. That has now left us with repair bills as high as $800,000 to restore some of these terrace houses to heritage standard."
Having jumped on to the New South Wales waiting list to have a look at what public housing contestants, because really that's what it feels like, have to deal with - I was stunned. Many areas have little remaining for certain housing stock with less than a five year waiting period. Some are waiting for even longer.
Goward points to 57,000 families on the waiting list across the state - a terrifying proposition for anyone looking to get housing soon. It must also be nerve wracking to read of the state of public housing, with the ABC reporting last year that the list of those waiting could grow by 30,000 people in three years unless changes are made to a number of aspects of the system.
Goward continued with citing the numbers of the costs of holding these properties. However, this is where the picture becomes more interesting.
“Subsidies to tenants in the last year alone reached $8.89 million, with individual tenants receiving subsidies as high as $44,000 per annum. This compares to subsidies of $8,000 per year in Campbelltown, $7,000 in Gosford, and $11,000 in Wollongong. For every subsidised tenancy in Millers Point, the Government could assist five tenants in Warrawong, or 3.5 tenants in Newcastle or Minto," she noted.
A blog post from Brown Couch, the voice of the Tenants Union of New South Wales, sheds light on another aspect to these numbers. They explain that these figures should be looked at as an accounting entry, rather than actual money spent.
The figure is created as the difference between market rent for the property, as assessed by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation, and the rent paid by the tenant, rebated according to the usual rules.
"The market rent for a property does not reflect the cost to the NSW State Government of providing housing or related services at the property. The market rent for a property can go up – and hence the 'subsidy' go up – without any change in the housing being provided at the property, or in Housing NSW's costs," the blog post explains.
"It is important to note too how much tenants have paid towards that real cost of housing. There are 409 social housing tenancies in the properties at Millers Point and The Rocks. We understand the average income-related rent paid is about $100 per week, so, over the past two years, tenants have paid about $4.25 million in rent – in other words, not quite two-thirds of the repair bill."
How this then works out on the books looking further is, as such, uncertain.
As an editor with a budget to manage, and as an everyday resident who has my own personal budgets and targets to maintain, it's logical to find the supposed drain, put a stop to it and move funds into an avenue where they will be more effective. That this makes financial sense is clear to me, despite the welcomed debate of the finer points - and the TUNSW does raise some important points. The simple situation, however, is that these are now lucrative financial assets that can be sold to funnel money back into creating more properties for those on the seemingly endless waiting list.
Goward expressed her acknowledgement that many tenants have lived in this housing for a long period of time, and the difficulties they may face moving elsewhere, but expressed her belief that this was the right decision and that a relocations team would assist the current tenants, including covering costs of moving and reconnection fees.
The fact remains that without ownership of these assets, the tenants do not have rights to them. That is how the property world works at present. Just as a tenant in a privately owned rental in the mainstream market does not have the ability to force a landlord to allow them to retain their tenancy and not to sell the home or let a different tenant live there, a public housing tenant also does not have these rights.
A letter written to the Sydney Morning Herald, shared by the TUNSW's Brown Couch blog, discussed the culture of the area.
"I grew up in a terrace in Lower fort street and my mum still lives there as she has done so for 40 years, laboriously maintaining and restoring her home (largely herself). Even if she is forced to move away, that house will always be our family home and the fact that she doesn't own it does not make that connection or the emotional distress any less valid," the letter is quoted as saying.
It notes that the letter received by her mother said that attempts would be made to relocate her close to her family and friends.
It is likely that this isn't the end. The Herald also recently reported that Glebe, Redfern and Kirribilli are the next sites that could face similar treatment.
Just yesterday, State MP Alex Greenwich slammed the decision as a form of 'social cleansing', and I have read references from a number of different individuals who declare she's ruining the culture on purpose for the property bigwigs in Millers Point and other city locations. These claims are currently unfounded, and when looking at the pure mathematics it makes sense to direct funds where they can have the biggest benefit for the greatest number of people. Of course this isn't just about maths. However, sadly, providing roofs over the heads of the needy at some point needs to trump the heart-wrenching, and they are truly hard to read, discussions of individuals' connections to an area.
It's a situation that is tearing many in two as the best decision is argued out - progress and the situation of the masses versus culture and the individual stories of those residents, and it's certain that someone was always going to leave the debate unhappy. But we need to remember that there are the stories of 57,000 or so others on the waiting list that are likely to be just as awful to read.
RESOURCED: http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/finding/location/nsw/29662-march-27-letter-from-the-editor-millers-point-public-housing-sales-under-scrutiny.html
Sunday, 23 March 2014
Money, money, money Bad Landlord Australia
In my last post, I explored the relationship between the media and government. I analysed an online article about public housing tenants that trash houses. Little did I know NSW Community Services Minister Pru Goward was softening up the public for a sale of public housing on Sydney's harbour front. The article by the Daily Telegraph is an obvious example of forward-thinking strategy.
1. the cost of maintaining heritage-listed buildings is exorbitant
2. the distribution of housing subsidies is inequitable
3. public housing needs to be sustainable in the long-term
Minster Goward made the announcement while her henchmen delivered the news to devastated tenants. There was no consultation. There was no procedural fairness. I have seen this tactic before. Holdfast Bay Council held a confidential meeting to evict permanent residents when it approved a redevelopment of a caravan park.
I really hope I see media outrage. So far there has been significant coverage. On the whole, it has been fairly sympathetic to the plight of residents. I only hope that it continues. A community action group has already sprung up. You can like the FB page here. We have two years to turn this thing around. So let's do it.
See More:
The NSW Liberal Government is planning on selling almost 300 historic properties at Millers Point, The Rocks and Gloucester Street. The sale includes the landmark Sirius building at The Rocks, a concrete brutalist high-rise apartment complex close to the Harbour Bridge, containing 79 units.
The sale is expected to raise hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s a blatant cash grab. Professor Phibbs from the University of Sydney says the policy seems ‘driven by people trying to get their hands on some quick cash rather than thinking about things from a policy perspective’. If you watch the video of the announcement, Minister Goward provides three reasons for the historic sale. They are as follows:
1. the cost of maintaining heritage-listed buildings is exorbitant
2. the distribution of housing subsidies is inequitable
3. public housing needs to be sustainable in the long-term
Minster Goward made the announcement while her henchmen delivered the news to devastated tenants. There was no consultation. There was no procedural fairness. I have seen this tactic before. Holdfast Bay Council held a confidential meeting to evict permanent residents when it approved a redevelopment of a caravan park.
Minister Goward tries to frame the sale as a matter of fairness and equity. I am not convinced. And plus she looks like Cruella Deville from 101 Dalmatians. The resemblance is quie remarkable. But I suppose she can’t help that. The Barry O’Farrell government is selling off houses when the waiting list is miles long and New South Wales has a huge homelessness problem. It’s classic political strategy at its best. They are saying they are helping tenants, when really, they are hurting them.
Minister Goward said proceeds from the sale of the historic properties would be reinvested into the social housing system. Somehow I doubt this very much. Shelter NSW's executive officer Mary Perkins says,We've had a long-time issue with the transparency around the promises that have been made about the sale of stock. They say 'we'll sell this to gain this', but there's never been any evidence produced about the gains...At the end of the day, we've got a really big concern about the geographic divide happening in the city, between these areas [that] are for rich people and these areas [that] are for poor people.
Diversity usually results in better outcomes for the community as a whole. We know that housing estates simply do not work because they localise entrenched disadvantage.
Despite overseeing similar sell-offs, the NSW Opposition has condemned the Liberal Government’s decision. Shadow Minister Linda Burney said Minister Pru Goward could not be trusted to reinvest any proceeds. The Liberal Government has overseen an increase in the public housing waiting list, and a decrease in the number of houses it is building. It has cut $42 million from the budget for maintenance, and $22 million from the budget for building. A report by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation shows that the O’Farrell Government has cut more than 1300 properties from its books.
I am not convinced by the argument older properties are more expensive to maintain. A diverse stock of housing will always involve a range of costs. I seriously doubt NSW Housing will be selling off old government houses in less well-to-do areas of Sydney. The government should not be able to get away with manufacturing excuses by failing to comply with its legal obligation to repair. We know that public housing is ageing and increasingly unfit for purpose. If state and territory governments keep selling off public properties, there is going to be none left. The NSW Government is clearly trying to push a core government responsibility off onto private providers. It is privatisation by stealth.Despite overseeing similar sell-offs, the NSW Opposition has condemned the Liberal Government’s decision. Shadow Minister Linda Burney said Minister Pru Goward could not be trusted to reinvest any proceeds. The Liberal Government has overseen an increase in the public housing waiting list, and a decrease in the number of houses it is building. It has cut $42 million from the budget for maintenance, and $22 million from the budget for building. A report by the NSW Land and Housing Corporation shows that the O’Farrell Government has cut more than 1300 properties from its books.
I am also concerned that the human rights of the tenants are not being respected. They are being evicted from their HOMES. It is not humane or compassionate to move elderly residents away from their communities and social ties. Many residents at Millers Point have connections to the area going back generations. The O’Farrell Government has even ignored the advice of its own consultants on evicting vulnerable tenants with minimal damage to their health and well-being. If things get that far, I would suggest pickets to stop police evicting residents from their homes. I don’t think the police would be too keen on physically ejecting the elderly and disabled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)