Join! it's $20

Homes for Families

Homes for Families

We have to tackle the Housing situation as a very TOP priority. This will be the hardest task and we can have no effect without alienating some people, we have to live with that (and Gareth is not starting this to be a mediocre 'also ran' who makes no impact). Here's my suggestions for what we need to talk about 1- clear and legal definition between 'homes' and 'investments' - any social housing initiatives or attempts to control the housing economy escalation are currently doomed by the ability to create new purchasing entities or a ridiculous 2 year occupation period. A family or person genuinely wanting to own their own home and needing support to get started would need to live in the house for a minimum of 6 to 10 years. I know this is correct from my own experience of our generation's first homes. Investments carry risk that home ownership should not. We are aiming for a fair society as far as I understand and there could be no worthwhile equity in a shorter time period. We can look later on at other measures such as lower cost houses built offsite, the shape of new communities, and this is a good arena for some national discussion once investment interests are separated out. Meantime we have desperate need, generations of children growing up without basic rights, with inherent lack of stablility at home (worsened by changes of school), and with chips on their shoulders from seeing constant inequality all around them and with no hope of change. We've seen so many property investors jump on the social housing offer of public money in return for a very low % of "social housing included in the development for $600,000+" who then bailed fast when they were expected to meet better standards and close loopholes allowing for fast resale by the purchasers. I personally would like to see property developers made ineligible for social housing funding and special consent policies.

Showing 7 reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?

Sign in with

Or sign in with email

    Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
    • Jeanette Garnett
      commented 2016-11-28 19:40:15 +1300
      Tim, the way the minimum occupancy was handled years ago when my first house was built with a government loan was that we could not sell it. If marriages broke up for example, the house could be rented or the primary parent lived in it with the children for the secured period (although family courts commonly ruled it was for the children’s use throughout their dependancy).
    • Alan Dawn
      tagged this with important 2016-11-27 18:29:19 +1300
    • John Rusk
      tagged this with important 2016-11-27 17:12:44 +1300
    • Tim O'Donnell
      commented 2016-11-27 14:52:21 +1300
      It’s true housing needs to be a priority & some of what you’re talking about needs to be investigated. A lot can change in 6 years (babies, employment, deaths) so I don’t know how this idea would work. As soon as you give exceptions they get exploited. Like your intention though
    • Tim O'Donnell
      tagged this with interesting 2016-11-27 14:52:21 +1300
    • Jeanette Garnett
      posted about this on Facebook 2016-11-27 13:24:08 +1300
      Suggestions: Homes for Families
    • Jeanette Garnett
      published this page in Suggestions 2016-11-27 13:20:01 +1300