[Max Carnage]

I think ballots (FHB only) are a great way to distribute government-owned property to private hands. Here in Vic (and WA, NSW etc if my understanding is correct) such land would be tendered to a PPP which would maximise profit for gov't and the private developer regardless of outcome for the community. Not sure how it's working in this case though, perhaps some agreement with the developer to offer a proportion for ballot?

I'm amused that this bloke - the 'Minister for Affordable Housing' - thinks that $420,000 is "an affordable price" for "low-to-middle-income families". More like "a terrific opportunity" for a monumental personal finance f*ck-up, IMHO.

Quote

Another ballot for low-cost homes
BEN LANGFORD

September 17th, 2010

ANOTHER ballot has been announced for "affordable" land and homes in the new suburbs east of Palmerston.

Minister for Affordable Housing Chris Burns yesterday announced the new ballot, which will include 21 houses in Bellamack and 10 in Johnston.

The Bellamack house and land packages will cost no more than $420,000 for a two or three-bedroom home on a block of between 480-599sq m.

The Johnston ballot will be for 10 affordable dwelling lots priced at $140,000 on a block of about 700sq m.

People using the Homestart affordable housing scheme will have a $475,000 limit for the total house and land costs.

"This is a terrific opportunity for low-to-middle-income families to own their own home at an affordable price," Dr Burns said.

http://www.ntnews.co...041_ntnews.html

[zaph]

Max Carnage, on 16 September 2010 - 09:58 PM, said:

I think ballots (FHB only) are a great way to distribute government-owned property to private hands. Here in Vic (and WA, NSW etc if my understanding is correct) such land would be tendered to a PPP which would maximise profit for gov't and the private developer regardless of outcome for the community. Not sure how it's working in this case though, perhaps some agreement with the developer to offer a proportion for ballot?

I'm amused that this bloke - the 'Minister for Affordable Housing' - thinks that $420,000 is "an affordable price" for "low-to-middle-income families". More like "a terrific opportunity" for a monumental personal finance f*ck-up, IMHO.

http://www.ntnews.co...041_ntnews.html

Quote

As part of this commitment, 15% of land in new suburbs on crown land will be set aside for more affordable and social housing.

http://www.housingnt...affordable.html

they're also doing govt loans to help people into 'the dream', including shared equity with the govt.
http://www.housing.n...ship/loan_types

[tom]

I don't like these schemes to be honest. Like NRAS they do not address the market only a subsection of it. You can have parts of the market in complete disconnection with these affordable homes and that I imagine is what the government wants to achieve.

i.e. you cannot have an economy at all in a capital city if key workers cannot live there. How do we keep property prices high but address these key workers. You provide special schemes to address only these key workers and allow the rest of the market to disconnect.

I know it sounds selfish due to my never being entitled to anything like this but in my view these patch ups which include NRAS etc actually let the government off the hook in the short term on our affordability crisis. I would rather see affordability become the issue that it is unfettered by government manipulation so that the problem can be fixed uniformly.

Sure we need subsidised housing for people on the margins, i.e. disabled, long term unemployed etc but now that we have to provide it for key "low paid" workers. What will be next the bottom 50% of workers will have their housing subsidised just so we can continue to have a housing market disconnected from reality for the other 50% of workers.

That full time wage earners cannot buy (in places like Darwin even rent!) houses in our capital cities with boundless plains around them (which if not zoned resi are relatively cheap, is a symptom of our governments ineptitude and poor performance in housing.

IMO opinion we have passed the point that the private market can support our housing bubble on its own and are moving into territory where the government has to put its shoulder to the wheel as well.