Public housing and place based poverty

1. Public housing and place based poverty Melbourne Health and Drug Alliance Seminar Drugs, dealing and development of the estate Tony Dalton RMIT AHURI Research Centre Thursday 16th August 2012

2. Introduction • The problem – alcohol and drug use on on public housing estates • Public housing estates – what and where • Public/community housing –system under pressure • Prospects for public/community housing • A framework for thinking about drugs on estates

3. The problem • Problem of maintaining security and amenity on public housing estates • Evidence in • Tenancy offers and acceptances • Incident reporting on estates • Complaints by tenants • Perceptions and stigma • Media reporting

4. Media reporting

5. The Public Housing Stock

6. Public and private housing completions

7. Public housing estates

8. Public housing in context • Public housing – 65,000 dwgs • Community housing – 14,000 dwgs • Transitional housing – 4000 dwgs • Social housing (total) – 83,000

9. Unsustainable finances • Spending now greater than revenue • Increasing costs per dwelling and minor increases in rent • Significant maintenance backlog • Significant redevelopment requirement Rental shortfall or ‘rent gap’

10. System under Pressure

11. Declining housing affordability Stress by tenure Stress by household type Source: Yates et al (2007)

12. Entry into public housing Newly assisted households Newly assisted in greatest need

13. Segmenting the applicants • History or high risk of homelessness • Housing for people with disability or long-term health problems • Special needs housing for people who cannot obtain appropriate private rental housing • ‘Wait turn’ low income households

14. Living in public housing Length of stay Rebated rents

15. Workforce participation Commonwealth income support primary source of income for approximately 86 per-cent of tenants

16. Tenant satisfaction

17. public and Community Housingfutures

18. Post WW II strong institutional support

19. Loss of institutional support • Key developments: demand declines • Housing market delivers for most • Housing shortage overcome • Manufacturing industry restructures • Key developments: opposition emerges • RAG opposition to slum reclamation • Public housing not responding to poverty • Poor service delivery for tenants

20. Federal Housing agencies Frequently reorganised Junior minister Demand and supply focus Central agencies Demand management No urban focus Federal role questioned State Housing authorities Operational Independent Junior ministers No policy capacity Central agencies No involvement because of CSHA State agencies develop limited capacities

21. Focus on emerging housing poverty in private rental market Many public tenants could afford the housing market Service provider capture by state housing authorities Support for private rental market overcomes capture Target public housing towards the lowest income Encourage higher income households to leave Jones, M. (1972) Housing and Poverty in Australia, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne. Priorities Review Staff (1975) Report on Housing, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. Commission of Inquiry into Poverty (1975) Poverty in Australia, First Main Report Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. A new logic and discourse

22. Post 1970s weak institutional support

23. Prospects for affordable housing • What is on the policy agenda? • Limited capacity of the policy community comprised of • government agencies • industry associations • non-government agencies and peak associations • unions • professions • No mobilisation of tenants • History of weak alliances

24. framework for considering drugs on estates

25. High rise drug market • Markets in the city, including drug markets require • Accessibility • Suitable affordable premises • Trust in the drug market: a social economy • Actors in the high rise drug market • Dealers • Middle persons or runners • Users • Police

26. Locating drug markets • Actor groups • Users • Dealers • Residents • Local traders • Police • Drug services • Policing objectives and processes • Shifting locations

27. Life on the estates: an assessment • Inside the flats: significant improvement in amenity • Landlord services: significant improvement in service delivery • Beyond the front door • Soiling • Chaotic behaviour • Violence • Community persists • Reputation loss and stigma

28. ‘Tragedy of the commons’: a useful concept • Uncontrolled use of public resources leads to ruin of the resource • Overuse and unacceptable diminished resource • Pollution or spillovers (externalities) • Overcoming the tragedy requires • Interests of groups and judgement • Establishing laws and rules for new social arrangement • Administering the rules

29. Reclaiming the commons • Uncontrolled use of public resources has led to diminished resource • High housing need but housing is less popular • Overcoming the tragedy requires • Interests of groups and judgement • Establishing rules for new social arrangement • Administering the rules

30. Interests and judgement • Interests • Public housing tenants • Prospective tenants • Users • Sellers of heroin • Judgement which weights the interests of tenants and prospective tenants – move the market out

31. Acceptable rules • Existing laws, regulations are insufficient to protect the commons, including Residential Tenancies Amendment (Public Housing) Act 2011 • It is impossible to establish new social arrangement through mutual agreement given the illegal nature of the market?

32. A new social arrangement • A new approach to administering the rules • A renovation of public housing administration to change approach to security and community amenity – the ‘push’ approach • A new social arrangement for the selling and use of drugs in metropolitan Melbourne – the ‘pull’approach • ‘Pull’ the heroin market out of the high rise after responding to two questions • Where do we want to locate drug markets in Melbourne? • Can we establish agreement about this new location between participants in these markets, other civil society interests and government agencies?

33. References • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2011. Housing assistance in Australia 2011. Cat. no. HOU 236. Canberra: AIHW. • Bessant, J. Coupland, H., Dalton, T., Maher, T., Rowe, J., Watts, R. (2003) Heroin users, housing and social participation: attacking social exclusion through better housing, for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, RMIT University/NATSEM Research Centre • Dalton, T. and Rowe, J. (2004) ‘A Wasting Resource: Public Housing and Drug Use in Inner-city Melbourne’, HousingStudies,Vol.19,No.2. • Department of Human Services (2012) Pathways to a fair and sustainable housing system: Public consultation discussion paper, DHS, Melbourne • Hardin, G.(1968) The tragedy of the Commons, Science,162, pp.1243–1248. • KPMG (2012) Social Housing: A discussion paper on the options to improve the supply of quality housing, Department of Human Services, Melbourne. • Family and Community Development Committee (2010) Inquiry into the Adequacy and Future Directions of Public Housing in Victoria, Parliamentary Paper, No. 375. Session 2006–10 Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne. • Yates, J., Milligan, V., with, Berry, M., Burke, T., Gabriel, M., Phibbs, P., Pinnegear, S. and Randolph, B. (2007) Housing affordability: a 21st century problem, National Research Venture 3: Housing affordability for lower income Australians, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne.

34. ahuri.edu.au