By Lara Pullin
CANBERRA — The Residential Tenancies Act 1997 has recently come into effect, but there has been very little publicity given to the changes, particularly for public housing tenants.
The act specifies such things as fair process for the tenant — for example, the landlord is responsible to see that urgent repairs to premises are done in a reasonable time. This sort of protection has been the main reason that housing activists and lobby groups push for such laws.
The act provides for a Residential Tenancies Tribunal (RTT) to deal with disputes. The RTT will attempt to resolve issues through mediation, but it is also able to call witnesses and to make and enforce orders.
The ACT government, which created the law, is also the ACT's single biggest landlord, known as "ACT Housing". In a recent information leaflet for public housing tenants, ACT Housing states, "The new law brings ACT Housing and its tenants largely into line with the private rental market".
Like other moves to bring the public sector "in line with" the private sector, this has potential to be a big step backwards. As pointed out towards the end of the leaflet, the real change for public tenants is the removal of security of tenure — the right of landlords to terminate tenancy "without cause".
One of the few advantages of renting an ACT Housing property has been that once you are in one (after a lengthy wait), you can pretty much stay for life, as long as you pay your rent and "behave yourself".
If public tenants in financial difficulty are to be evicted, it defeats the notion of a public housing system. A fairer solution would have been to include rental housing — both public and private — in the ACT's essential services legislation along with electricity and water. The law recognises the need for access to these essential services and provides people in hardship with continued access.
ACT Housing can now remove a tenant even when there is no breach of tenancy agreement "where a landlord wishes to sell the dwelling, or where vacant possession is required to enable reconstruction or major repairs to the dwelling to be undertaken". No right of appeal, even to the RTT, is provided.
ACT Housing has already disposed of a large amount of property, particularly in inner city areas where property values are high. These were mainly vacant properties, so the major effect is longer waiting lists.
Now the government is able to identify profitable sales in advance and give the tenant notice, putting people who have little resources back into the private rental market.
ACT Housing "may" rehouse tenants if they meet income and family size eligibility criteria. But many people in poverty move in and out of the strict income criteria.
Until recently, ACT Housing has been seen as a lifelong rental option for those who want some stability as renters and who will not earn enough to purchase a home — especially people on benefits, or low-income workers, or the increasing numbers who move between welfare and wages.
This option is no longer feasible, and the lack of an affordable and secure public housing sector will add to the poverty cycle. A recent report by the Smith Family looked at why poverty is increasing despite welfare payments rising at a greater rate than the CPI. It identified rapidly increasing rents as the major cause.
The report says that the "average Australian" renter pays 16% of net income. ACT public housing tenants are required to pay 24% plus of the gross (30-40% of net) income.
ACT Housing rents are fixed at market value, despite the fact that many homes would not be able to attract renters in the private market because of poor maintenance.
There is a sliding scale of rebates for public tenants, but it is based on a complicated formula, and renters are still often paying up to 40% of post-tax income on housing.
As public housing tenants, these renters are not eligible for Centrelink rent assistance, which could be higher than the ACT Housing rebate for low income workers if they rented privately.
While most of these renters would still choose some form of security of tenure over private rental, it seems we won't have the choice in future if the ACT government continues selling properties rather than paying for maintenance of the public housing stock.
There is a lack of affordable, clean private rental properties. The Smith Family says that 31% of its clientele pay over 39% of their net income on private rent, and over 27% of these pay out more than half of net income.
It's time to demand "Public housing, not welfare housing" in the ACT, before there's no decent public housing stock left.