Perpetuating the problem: neoliberalism, commonwealth public policy and housing affordability in Australia

Abstract

This paper argues that the scale of the contemporary housing affordability crisis in Australia is at least partly attributable to the influence of neoliberal ideas over the past three decades. After providing an overview of the nature and scope of the crisis, the process by which housing as a policy problem has been reconceptualised by policy makers and others since the 1970s is examined. This is followed by analysis of the ways in which a number of commonwealth government policies which are ideationally underpinned by neoliberalism have amplified and perpetuated the problem of housing affordability in Australia and, ipso facto, prevented the issue from being addressed. The paper concludes by suggesting that policies which are ostensibly intended to improve housing affordability will continue to founder until the ideational obstacles which are the focus of this paper are recognised, and housing policy is reconceptualised along lines more conducive to the amelioration of the housing affordability problem. The paper seeks to extend the existing literature on housing affordability by explicitly identifying the linkages between neoliberal ideas, commonwealth public policy, and the extant problem of housing affordability in Australia.

A reverse form of welfarism: some reflections on Australian housing policy

“…Endnotes 1 See Darcy (2009); Gurran & Phibbs (2014); Nicholls (2014); and Rogers & Darcy (2014), for four recent exceptions. 2 See for example, Milligan & Pinnegar (2010); Gilmour & Milligan (2012); and Tomlinson (2012) for approaches that broadly support this attribution.…”

“…A second area that requires further analysis is the extensive influence of neoliberal ideology on housing policy (see Burke & Tiernan 2002;Berry 2014; Orchard 2014 for three wide-ranging discussions with reference to Australia). The ideology of neoliberalism has been deployed as a rationale to justify the reduction in funds for public housing and the use of market-based mechanisms to deliver services within government welfare agencies (Nicholls 2014). While the influence of neoliberalism is apparent, it is important to recognise that the market-based reforms and privatisation policies that were in place in the late 1970s can be sourced to other factors such as: demographic shifts, technological innovation, and globalisation processes (see Berry 1988;Hayward 1996).…”

“…The Australian Journal of Social Issues (AJSI) performs an invaluable role in publishing commentaries on social policy concerns. Some of the best articles in AJSI advance not only an incisive understanding of the systemic factors that inform social policy, but also suggest viable reforms for policy makers to consider (see for example, AJSI articles authored by: Bryson & Mowbray 2005;McDonald & Baxter 2005;Ziersch et al 2007;Thompson 2009;Francis-Brophy & Donoghue 2013;Groenhart & Burke 2014;and Nicholls 2014). This noted, much of the corpus of Australian social policy research falls short in interpreting the different roles performed by government in the overall setting of housing policy.…”

Housing in a Federation: From Wicked Problem to Complexity Cascade?

“…While attempting to address problems of supply, the Commonwealth's efforts to outsource delivery (e.g. to the community housing sector) and to incorporate private finance were seen by some as ‘divest[ing] government of responsibility for a particular policy area while attempting to facilitate market‑based and/or community/private sector solutions’ (Nicholls : 236). In any case, as the government descended into internecine battles over direction and leadership, housing policy was again subject to drift and uncertainty.…”

“…By 2013, though the ideological frames through which the housing issue was seen had changed (Orchard ), some have suggested that the problems facing policy makers were precisely those that had confronted them at the end of World War II (Yates : 127; Nicholls : 232). Like many of its predecessor coalition governments, Tony Abbott's Liberal‐National Party government sought first to disengage from the Rudd–Gillard legacy (by instituting a series of reviews, including a Commission of Audit that suggested it withdraw entirely from funding), then to subsume the problem within its planned white paper on federation reform.…”