SUBMISSION BY THE PORT JACKSON BRANCH
OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF AUSTRALIA
OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF AUSTRALIA
C/- Denis Doherty
74 Buckingham St,
Surry Hills NSW 2010
Mobile: 0418 290 663
Inquiry into tenancy management in
social housing
The Committee will inquire into, and report on, current tenancy
management arrangements in NSW social housing, with particular reference to:
• the cost effectiveness
of current tenancy management arrangements in public housing, particularly
compared to private and community housing sectors;
· the range and
effectiveness of support services provided to tenants in social housing;
· outcomes for tenants
from current tenancy management arrangements; and
· possible measures to
improve tenancy management services.
Submission by the Port Jackson Branch of the Communist Party of
Australia.
Introduction to the CPA
The Communist Party of Australia (CPA) has a long proud history of
support for and extension of public housing.
The Port Jackson Branch of the Party has been working on the issue of
public housing in and around Glebe for many decades.
General Comments on
handing tenancy management to the private sector.
There is ample evidence that privatization has failed everywhere
it has been tried. If it is in the
electrical industry – prices go up and blackouts are more frequent. In Railways prices go up for consumers,
maintenance and safety suffer.
The most recent long line of failures is what is called PPP’s
private public partnerships. The most
appropriate one in this context is the use of SPOTLESS for maintenance of
public housing properties. There are so
many complaints about Spotless coming in that activists for public housing call
it a Government policy of demolition and eviction by neglect. Spotless does NOT do its work well, we can
document this with numerous cases. We
can document the number of call backs and the victims of this neglect left
stranded for weeks with urgent repairs which are not done or done so
ineffectively that the victims have to begin another round of calling the so
call ‘hot line’ for repair and waiting for 6-9 weeks and often giving up.
We
call on the committee to take notice of an article in the SMH called ‘Spotless
makes sparkling debut on the stock market’. (SMH May 24-25) This article notes that the CEO of ‘Spotless’
earned a cool $23 million in his shares as well as the company making nearly
earning $1 billion. We have asked
everyone we can from the State Government, the Federal Gov and ASIC how did
they pass a probity check when their record is dodgy in regard to some of the
poorest people in NSW?
Using the SPOTLESS experience we can see that not only does
the State have to pay for the dodgy, non-existent, tardy and shoddy services of
that company but it has to contribute to the luxurious life style of its CEO
and the profits of the company. This
experience in the maintenance of public housing should have any Government of
any stripe running a hundred miles from such a concept as
Licia Wood, Political
Reporter, The Daily Telegraph, July 09, 2014 10:53am
NSW Community Services Minister Gabrielle Upton has
welcomed the announcement.
PUBLIC
housing rent, maintenance and inspections could soon be outsourced to the
private sector.
A parliamentary inquiry will
investigate if better value can be found for taxpayers. The state government
spends $120 million a year on tenancy services to 117,000 public housing
households.
Community Services Minister
Gabrielle Upton said she welcomed the inquiry announced yesterday.
“It’s sensible and appropriate
to review such a major and important area of public expenditure,” she said.
However, the script is written in concrete it seems the private is
always better and the Minister Upton has complied with this mythology in the
face of overwhelming evidence for the contrary.
We draw your attention the recent article by Rob Oakeshott (former
LNP member of state and Federal Parliaments) in the Saturday Paper (9
Aug) and his remarks to the Wheeler centre in Melbourne.
The rules are simple: fight the bastards, bankroll the
other side of politics, cause them damage until they learn to ignore treasury
and finance advice and start listening instead to that grubby leveler in
politics – money.
….
Our key decisions for the future of Australia are now
being outsourced at a level never before seen. Parliamentary democracy is going
through its own sort of privatisation.
We would ask the committee to come at this issue from a social
justice perspective rather than a purely monetary one. We have proved that private sector is the
wrong sector to provide services to the public housing, will cost more money,
will transfer money from the public purse to the ultra-rich. Your experience of failed PPP’s in the State,
of SPOTLESS and a myriad of cases from overseas and here that privatization
will not work. Privatisation of tenancy
services is a bad idea and will cause more distress than there already is in
public housing.
This is an idea which comes from the Neo Liberal handbook, the
very same principles that led to the GFC and the current demise of the
economies of Greece, Spain and Ireland.
Reject this notion of saving money on the administration of public
housing and reverse a long standing ‘bleeding obvious’ failure of Government to
adequately fund and appreciate public housing.
• the cost effectiveness of current tenancy management arrangements
in public housing, particularly compared to private and community housing
sectors;
In a decision made
during the Fraser Government that public housing would only be for the neediest,
public housing has gradually evolved to cater for the most marginal in our
community. Public housing is a housing for
people who are extremely needy. Those
with mental health issues, health or fragile elderly have gravitated to the
public housing estates.
Community Housing has
evolved for those on a socio economic level higher than the above – those who
are employed in low paid work, have some casual work and are fairly positive
about life.
How can there be a
comparison between the two? The very
premise of the term is defective, a veritable apples and oranges situation. It is like comparing the cure rate of children’s
ward to a palliative care ward for the dying.
The administration costs of catering for those people must be a lot
different.
In the Community sector
there will be managers and CEO’s who will say they are achieving great things
and providing great service very efficiently and in a cost effective way. Do not believe them, they are subject to the
iron laws of profit just as private sector.
They have to pay their staff and increase their stock of housing with
their profits. Presently the state
Government gives housing stock to the community housing providers and
encourages them to make a profit out of it.
A money merry go round rather than good social policy. They can save by reducing staff, ignoring
maintenance which in the ends leads to a situation where the State has to
rescue the service from bankruptcy.
Private sector housing
admin is run by Real Estate agents and developers hardly an appropriate
yardstick for a service like public housing.
The cost effectiveness
is a buzz word. The Spotless experience
is that they fail to clean the drainpipes $600.
A tree grows in the gutter and extends its roots to the walls of the
house - $6,000 repair bill. The tree
causes the house to be demolished $60,000.
We all know about false economies where things are neglected and the
problem gets worse.
For
want of a nail the shoe was lost,
For want of a shoe the horse was lost
For want of a horse the rider was lost
For want of a rider the message was lost
For want of a message the battle was lost
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
(Proverbial rhyme)
For want of a shoe the horse was lost
For want of a horse the rider was lost
For want of a rider the message was lost
For want of a message the battle was lost
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
(Proverbial rhyme)
· the
range and effectiveness of support services provided to tenants in social
housing;
Due to the changes made
over recent years by both Governments of removing Housing and repairs to
separate departments the services for the tenants is less effective. A CSO is informed/finds out etc of problems
has to contact another department to get things done. They feel powerless and the cross
communication just does not happen so neither group knows what the other group
is doing.
The CSO’s can talk to
the tenants about rent issues, complaints about other tenants, report on who is
living with them etc. But they have no
role in the care of tenants – directing their personal problems to health
professionals and so on.
·
outcomes for tenants
from current tenancy management arrangements;
Under funded and with
roles that are confusing the CSO’s cannot do their jobs effectively. The CSO’s of a few years ago who had a better
grasp of what was needed for tenants.
The job description and job splitting of the O’Farrell/Baird years has been
less than effective.
In public housing where
mental health is an issue, the problem of the acute mental health teams being
overwhelmed leads many in our community spending many days with suicidal
tendencies and no support.
In general the outcomes
for the tenants is not good not because of the staff but because of the system
and dedicated cutting of public servants by the recent Governments.
·
possible measures to
improve tenancy management services.
Improving staffing ratio
to tenants
Expanding the roles of
CSO’s to include maintenance and some social work coordination
Seeing public housing as
a credit to the state not something to be flogged off.
ON NO ACCOUNT TO
INTRODUCE PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT IN TENANCY MANAGEMENT.
SMH May 24-25
