Because tenants do this..

I keep on top of media reporting in relation to tenancy, housing, and homelessness. I have noticed a disturbing trend. The media love reporting on trashed houses in public housing or in the public sector. Unfortunately, the narrative really impacts on tenants when they campaign for fair and equitable treatment.

 

One recent article by the Daily Telegraph screamed out - Trashers and abusers keep cheap public housing despite growing dope and causing destruction. Linda Silmalis reported as follows,

The hardline approach comes after repair bills soared above $11 million last year — up from $8 million in 2012. The bond would apply to tenants viewed as being at “high risk” of damaging homes. Photographs of trashed properties taken by the Land and Housing Corporation for future legal action provide a shocking glimpse of the state in which some tenants have left their properties. In some cases tenants were evicted for failing to pay rent, while others abandoned their homes. Families and Community Services Minister Pru Goward said too much money was being spent on repairing homes and on legal bills, instead of improving properties.

 

What proportion of this large amount was actually for legitimate repairs that tenants are legally entitled to under housing law as an incidence of the landlord and tenant relationship? The way this article is drafted is very misleading. View the whole article here.

 

I am concerned about the concerted attack on tenants we see in the media. I really don’t understand why tenants are being demonised. Reporting is quite different in other parts of the western world. I have read articles from other countries about discrimination, unsafe houses, and unfair evictions. The media here tends to focus on stories that shock and appal their readers, such as trashed houses. Tenant stories do not usually have this characteristic. And tenants are usually timorous about approaching the media in case their prospects of obtaining future housing are affected.

 

But why aren’t we shocked when landlords intimidate blackmail or abuse their tenants? Why aren’t we shocked when families can’t access housing appropriate to their needs? Why aren’t we shocked when real estate agents steal rent moneys?

 

I am also really surprised that the media didn’t take up the fight of Vanessa Robinson. Her two young boys died of carbon monoxide poisoning in their rental home. Despite the outrageous nature of this incident, the media still didn't take up the cause of renters.

 

Articles such as this disrespect every other tenant out there that looks after their homes. It is a small minority of tenants that abuse their housing. But the issue is so conflated the public thinks it is a huge problem. We know there are people out there that abuse our socialised system of income transfer, but people don't suggest that we get rid of it. And that is what I fear is happening with public housing.

 

This article is well and truly on the path of characterising homeless persons as criminals i.e. homeless people deserve to be homeless. If criminals don't deserve housing, where are they going to go? The streets most likely. The focus on problem tenants removes attention from government incompetence. A recent NSW report concluded as follows:

 

Public housing is ageing and increasingly not fit for purpose. It is declining as a proportion of overall New South Wales housing. There is an increasing shortfall between the supply of and demand for public housing. There is no clear direction for managing the shortfall between need and demand for public housing, although HNSW and LAHC are working towards one.

 

Public dialogue tends to focus on education and healthcare...but not housing. This is quite odd considering the essential nature of housing. People need housing to have good health, and to access schooling and employment. State and territory governments are decreasing spending on public housing. But if government was to decrease spending on education or health, we would see expressions of outrage in the media. Why aren’t we outraged that governments are selling off government housing to private investors well below their real value?

 

The media should not just take the word of government as gospel. Think and ask questions. I’m pretty sure there are journalists out there with a brain. What is the government's agenda here? 

 

Cash bonds could be another way for whingeing state governments to recoup costs from the Commonwealth Government via the tenant. I am told this usually happens when the federal government increases the pay of pensioners, and the state and territory governments raise the rent of its tenants. Public housing is supposed to be accessible and affordable. It is there for the vulnerable and disadvantaged in our community.

There is also potential for cash bonds to be abused by governments seeking to minimise spending on public housing i.e. claims for wear and tear things that really should be the landlord’s responsibility anyway (just as in the private sector).

I also think we need to look at root causes. Why aren’t these tenants maintaining their houses properly? I can think of few situations where the behaviour while not justifiable is at least understandable.  What about domestic violence? What about kids with ADHD? What about people with intellectual disabilities? Are these people getting the support they need to maintain their tenancies? Women subject to domestic violence should not lose their housing because they are being abused in their own home.

 

And think about the impact of these policies on children and the severely disabled. It is not their fault that their parents or carers cannot meet the obligations of their tenancies. Watch this segment by A Current Affair. See how the mother cries and apologises to her child.

 

So think twice before you write from the commercial imperative. Think about the implications of your article. We know that trashed houses happen. But it does not obviate the need to think critically and ask questions.