Social Housing Shortage Worsens

Australia's Deepening Housing Crisis Takes Centre Stage in Election Battle

The cherished Australian dream to become a homeowner feels increasingly distant for many. Securing affordable rental accommodation presents a similar challenge. Property values have soared to dizzying heights. Rents continue their relentless climb. A severe lack of social housing compounds the difficulties. This confluence of factors creates a potent crisis of unaffordability across the nation. Housing affordability now dominates voter anxieties as a federal election looms. The two major political forces, the Labor party and the Liberal-National coalition, recognise the issue's gravity. Both have presented strategies aimed at tackling this critical problem. Australians concurrently face mounting living costs. Global trade uncertainties, particularly surrounding US tariff policies, add further pressure. The effectiveness of proposed political solutions in reviving the possibility of widespread homeownership remains uncertain. Many question whether either party's plan can truly restore security and affordability to the housing market. The situation demands urgent and substantial action.

The Staggering Cost of Shelter

Financial realities paint a stark picture of Australia’s housing market. Affordability differs significantly depending on location. A recent international study by Demographia pinpointed Sydney as the world’s second most expensive city for prospective homebuyers in 2023. Market analysis from CoreLogic confirms this grim assessment. The median home price in Sydney approaches A$ 1.2m (£570,294). Looking nationally, the overall mean property value across capital cities now surpasses A$ 1.2m (£570,294). Over recent years, Australian home values have surged by an alarming 39.1%. This rapid appreciation far outstrips wage growth during the same period. Consequently, saving for a deposit has become a monumental task. A 2024 State of the Housing System report calculated that accumulating a standard 20% deposit for an average home requires roughly ten years of dedicated saving for a typical potential buyer. This extended timeframe places homeownership far beyond the reach of many ordinary Australians, particularly younger generations and those on lower incomes.

Renting Offers Little Relief

Turning to the rental market provides minimal respite from affordability pressures. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, national rents have climbed dramatically. An increase of 36.1% translates to an average weekly rise of A171 for tenants across the country. CoreLogic′s most recent data highlights Sydney as the most expensive rental market. The median weekly rent there stands at A171 for tenants across the country. The median weekly rent there stands at A 773. Perth follows closely with a median rent of A$ 695 per week. Canberra also features high rental costs, with a median weekly figure of A$ 667. These escalating rents consume large portions of household incomes. Many renters struggle to meet basic living expenses after covering their housing costs. The tight rental market also means intense competition for available properties. Prospective tenants often face difficult application processes and insecure tenure. This situation creates significant stress and instability for a growing segment of the population unable to enter the homeownership market.

Image Credit - Freepik

Understanding the Supply Shortage

At its core, Australia’s housing crisis stems from a fundamental imbalance. Housing construction has failed to keep pace with population growth over many years. This chronic undersupply inevitably drives up prices in both the ownership and rental sectors. Restrictive urban planning regulations significantly contribute to the problem. These rules often limit housing development, particularly in desirable urban centres where demand is highest. Complex bureaucratic processes further hinder efficient construction. As a result, major cities like Sydney and Melbourne exhibit much lower population densities compared to similarly sized international cities. This inefficient use of urban space exacerbates the shortage of available homes. Addressing these planning and regulatory hurdles is crucial for increasing housing supply. Without substantial changes to allow more homes to be built where people need them, affordability challenges will likely persist.

Public Housing Stock Shrinks as Waiting Lists Grow

The availability of public housing has dwindled significantly. This reduction places immense pressure on vulnerable Australians. Extensive waiting lists exacerbate the predicament. Individuals and families often find themselves trapped in overcrowded, unsuitable, or unstable living situations while waiting for assistance. Data reveals a concerning trend. The proportion of households living in social housing nationally dropped from 4.7% in 2013 to 4.1% in 2023. In the year ending June 2023, the number of social homes increased by a mere 2,870 nationally. This minimal growth occurred while over 184,000 households were officially registered on waiting lists. In Victoria alone, the social housing waitlist surpassed 65,000 applications by the end of 2024, a 2.7% increase in just three months. The priority list in Victoria also grew, reaching over 37,000 applications. This chronic underfunding and slow pace of construction leave Australia lagging behind comparable nations in social housing provision. The current stock represents only around 4% of the total housing inventory, a figure insufficient to meet the rising demand. Many eligible applicants face lengthy waits, sometimes years, before securing appropriate housing.

Climate Change and Natural Disasters Worsen Crisis

Natural catastrophes inflict significant damage on Australia’s housing stock. Bushfires, intense storms, and flooding destroy substantial numbers of homes each year. Climate change intensifies these events, making them more frequent and severe. Recent years witnessed devastating fire seasons and widespread flooding, particularly in Queensland and New South Wales. These disasters displace thousands of people and add strain to an already tight housing market. Rebuilding efforts face challenges, including material shortages, labour constraints, and rising construction costs. Insurance premiums also climb in disaster-prone areas, sometimes becoming unaffordable or unavailable, creating an 'insurance protection gap'. This gap leaves communities vulnerable and increases reliance on government support. Research anticipates significant future property losses due to climate-related risks. Adapting existing homes and building new ones resilient to future climate impacts, such as higher temperatures, extreme heatwaves, and more intense storms, becomes increasingly crucial. These climate impacts directly affect housing affordability and represent a growing economic management issue for the nation.

Investment Incentives Reshape the Market

Long-standing government incentives have significantly influenced Australia's housing market dynamics. Policies favouring property investment, such as negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts, play a considerable role. Negative gearing allows investors to deduct rental property losses against their other taxable income. The capital gains tax discount reduces the tax paid on profits from selling investment properties held for over a year. Critics argue these policies encourage speculative investment. They believe it transforms housing from a fundamental need into a primarily commercial enterprise, driving up prices. Analysis suggests these tax concessions cost the federal budget billions annually, potentially exceeding A$20 billion per year. This amount significantly surpasses government spending on public and community housing. Research indicates these benefits disproportionately flow to higher-income earners. The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) found the wealthiest 10% of households hold two-thirds of investment property value. These policies fuel demand from investors, often competing directly with first-home buyers and contributing to price inflation, making homeownership less accessible.

Immigration's Impact: Perception Versus Reality

Public discourse often points fingers at immigration as a primary driver of Australia's housing woes. However, expert analysis suggests this perception oversimplifies a complex issue. Michael Fotheringham, managing director of the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, clarifies the situation. Temporary residents, including international students often housed in purpose-built accommodation, exert less pressure on the general residential market than commonly assumed. Fotheringham believes their influence has been significantly overstated in public debate. Population growth naturally increases demand for housing. Yet attributing the affordability crisis solely, or even primarily, to new arrivals overlooks deeper structural problems within the housing supply system. Focusing excessively on immigration distracts from critical issues like construction bottlenecks, restrictive planning laws, and inadequate investment in social housing. A nuanced understanding acknowledges population growth as one factor among many contributing to housing demand. It avoids assigning undue blame to migrant communities. Addressing the supply side remains paramount for long-term solutions.

Foreign Investment: A Limited Factor

Foreign buyers also frequently face scrutiny regarding their role in escalating property prices. Brendan Coates from the Grattan Institute echoes the sentiment that their impact is often exaggerated. Official data supports this perspective. Figures from the Australian Taxation Office reveal foreign buyer purchases constituted only a minimal fraction of all property transactions during the 2022-2023 financial year. This trend aligns with previous years, indicating foreign investment is not a dominant force driving the market overall. Existing regulations already place significant constraints on foreign property acquisition. Furthermore, substantial state-level taxes imposed on foreign buyers act as a considerable deterrent. Coates explains that these rules and levies effectively limit the scale of foreign participation in the Australian housing market. While foreign investment can have localised effects in specific high-demand areas or luxury segments, it does not represent the widespread driver of unaffordability across the broader market that some narratives suggest. The available evidence indicates domestic factors play a much larger role.

Image Credit - Freepik

Political Parties Outline Housing Targets

Recognising the electoral significance of housing affordability, both major political parties have proposed substantial construction targets. The Labor party pledges an ambitious goal. Its plan aims to facilitate the building of more than a million new homes across Australia by 2029. The Liberal-National coalition presents a different figure. Its strategy targets the construction of 500,000 new homes over a similar timeframe. Labor detailed aspects of its housing strategy within its latest budget announcement. The party committed A$33 billion towards its housing objectives. This funding encompasses various initiatives designed to boost supply and improve accessibility. One key proposal involves establishing shared-equity loan schemes. These schemes aim to assist first-time buyers by enabling them to purchase homes with smaller initial deposits. The government would share in the property's equity under such arrangements. Both parties acknowledge the critical need for increased housing supply, though their specific targets and proposed mechanisms differ significantly.

Labor's Focus on Shared Equity and Social Housing

The Labor government's housing plan extends beyond mere construction targets. It incorporates specific programs designed to ease entry into homeownership and bolster the social safety net. The proposed shared-equity scheme, branded "Help to Buy," represents a significant policy pillar. Under this initiative, the government would contribute up to 40% of the purchase price for a new home, or 30% for an existing one. This co-investment reduces the required deposit and mortgage size for eligible buyers. Participants would need a minimum 2% deposit. Income caps and property price thresholds apply to ensure the scheme targets low-to-middle income earners struggling to enter the market. Labor also promises expanded investment in social and affordable housing programs. This commitment aims to directly address the critical shortage highlighted by extensive waiting lists. Further financial assistance measures target modest-income households. These seek to alleviate rental stress and provide pathways towards eventual homeownership for those currently locked out of the market.

Coalition Emphasises Migration Curbs and Infrastructure

The Liberal-National coalition presents a contrasting approach, placing greater emphasis on demand-side management and enabling infrastructure. A central element involves reducing overall migration numbers. The coalition specifically proposes cuts to student visa allocations. This strategy aims to lessen immediate pressure regarding real estate sector dynamics, particularly in major cities where student populations concentrate. Another key proposal involves a two-year freeze regarding overseas capital inflows into established residential properties. The coalition argues this temporary ban will reduce competition for established homes, potentially benefitting local buyers. Complementing these measures, the coalition pledges a substantial A$5 billion investment in infrastructure. This funding targets essential services like water, power, and transport connections for new housing developments. The plan intends to assist local authorities in unlocking land for construction by covering these upfront infrastructure costs, theoretically speeding up the delivery of new homes.

Greens Prioritise Renter Rights and Tax Reform

The Australian Greens adopt a distinct position, focusing heavily on protections for tenants and structural reforms to the housing market. Their platform advocates strongly for renters' rights. Key proposals include measures aimed at stabilising rents and imposing limits on the frequency and magnitude of rent increases. The Greens seek to enhance security of tenure for renters, moving away from short-term leases towards longer-term agreements. Should the election result in a minority government where the Greens hold the balance of power, they intend to leverage their influence. They will push forcefully for significant reforms to investor tax incentives. Specifically, the Greens target negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount, arguing these policies distort the market in favour of investors over owner-occupiers. Abolishing or significantly winding back these concessions forms a core part of their housing strategy, aiming to level the playing field.

Experts Question Adequacy of Proposed Solutions

Housing policy experts largely agree on a central point. While both major party platforms contain potentially beneficial elements, neither fully confronts the fundamental problem of chronic housing undersupply. Brendan Coates from the Grattan Institute suggests an integrated approach would yield better results. Combining aspects from both the Labor and Coalition plans could prove more effective than either party's singular strategy. A recent report from the UDIA (2025) casts doubt on ambitious construction targets. The analysis anticipates the federal government will likely miss its stated goal of building 1.2 million new dwellings by 2029. Projections indicate a significant shortfall, potentially reaching around 400,000 homes. This gap underscores the immense challenge involved in rapidly scaling up housing construction to meet demand. Experts stress that simply setting targets is insufficient without addressing the underlying barriers to development, including planning restrictions and infrastructure deficits.

Image Credit - Freepik

Concerns Raised Over Specific Policy Approaches

Experts voice specific concerns regarding elements within each major party's housing strategy. Coates examines the Coalition's emphasis on curbing immigration rates. While potentially offering a minor easing of housing demand in the short term, this approach carries risks. Coates argues that restricting migration could ultimately impoverish Australia over the long run. Limiting the influx of individuals with valuable, specialized skills might hinder economic growth. Reduced migration also means less revenue generated from the economic activity these individuals contribute. Michael Fotheringham, from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, highlights persistent issues with social housing investment. He points to chronic underfunding over many years, resulting in a dramatically insufficient supply. Fotheringham also expresses caution about government subsidies aimed at first-time homebuyers. While intended to help, such schemes risk further inflating property prices if supply does not increase concurrently, potentially cancelling out the intended benefit.

A Protracted Crisis Requiring Sustained Effort

Despite differing policy proposals, there is a consensus among experts about the crisis's long-term nature. Fotheringham commends the increased political attention now directed towards housing affordability. This heightened focus marks a positive shift. However, Fotheringham predicts a lengthy recovery period. This crisis developed over decades due to systemic neglect. Addressing it effectively requires sustained commitment and comprehensive reforms, not just short-term fixes. Australia, as a nation, largely ignored the escalating housing problem for too long. Finally, both the public and political leaders seem to recognise its critical significance. The path forward necessitates difficult decisions and substantial investment across multiple fronts. Overcoming restrictive planning, boosting construction capacity, adequately funding social housing, and potentially reforming tax incentives are all crucial components. The journey towards restoring housing affordability in Australia promises to be long and complex, demanding unwavering focus from future governments.