Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Tax time headache?
Let us crunch the numbers

John Hargreaves talks to himself on housing affordability

By johnboy 28 February 2006 35

ABC Online has a humourous piece in which Minister for Housing, John Hargraeves, asks some truly stupid questions on the subject of housing affordability.

“I would challenge the private rental market to think about the profits that they’re taking out of the private rental market,” he said.

“I’d be challenging developers to say whether or not they really need to make so much profit out of development

They key word here is market. Which means supply and demand. Want to lower prices? Increase supply. Want to raise prices? Reduce supply.

Well-intentioned but dimwitted legislation being a tried and tested way to reduce supply.

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
35 Responses to
John Hargreaves talks to himself on housing affordability
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Maelinar 11:18 am 08 Mar 06

I don’t really, but unfortunately this is one of the main reasons why the Greens will never be a viable party. Total avoidance of tricky questions may be ok for the AWB, but a political party might wish to consider a response if they are more than a fly in the wind party.

The cruel irony here is that I used to be a green voter. I accepted their inconsistencies as something all parties must face, and something I was prepared to suffer for the greater good.

Since they have outright decided on a party level front that supporting somebody who is rorting welfare under the misaprehension of representative and/or educational issues (which coincidentally I find to be one of the weakest political responses I have ever heard – a feat for any party in these times of John Howard, wholesale executive level bouts of amnesia, Tampa crises etc etc).

If I could retract my vote, I would. As it stands, I will no longer even vote green preferences, they have lost the plot IMHO. Welcome to the bottom of the list. (I hope the Red Socialists, bring back communism party are happy, they just moved up one notch by default)

caf 9:59 am 08 Mar 06

why is it ok for some people to rort welfare and not ok for others ?

Do you really expect someone to answer a “So when did you stop beating your wife?” style question?

Maelinar 8:26 am 08 Mar 06

Roland, I understand that a pro-green response from you will not be forthcoming, but I would like to know your thoughts of the situation, why is it ok for some people to rort welfare and not ok for others ?

And what relationship does this situation have within a greenie context ?

I’m a greenie (you have my CV) although I tend to plant trees instead of wearing loose fitting hemp clothing and burning incence, all the while banging on about how crap the world is, yet not doing anything worthwhile about it.

(For Information)
Last year, I generated funding to put over 2million trees into the ground, in Australia. This year, I intend to double that figure.

Roland, I welcome your considered response.

Maelinar 3:38 pm 03 Mar 06

Still considering responding Roland ?

Maelinar 4:08 pm 01 Mar 06

Roland, would you kindly like to explain why when I left Queensland to move to Canberra, I was obliged to sell my property in order to be able to purchase a home here ?

Because I was a landholder in Queensland it was bleedingly obvious that I wasn’t eligible for public housing, and nor should I be looking at moving to a new city in order to obtain public benefit in the form of a rent-compensated house.

In what hazy green smoke world does that become a legitimate reason to become a bludger ?

I also believe that purchasing real estate outside of the juristiction of the welfare bubble to be just as fraudulent so it doesn’t matter if Deb purchased the land before or after she moved into public housing.

Infact, had she purchased it while she was in public housing (proof of generation of assets whilst in public care) – that’s an even more hideous and revolting a concept.

Ari 2:32 pm 01 Mar 06

Yeah right, Roland. So it’s simply pure coincidence she decides to haul her arse out of there once the world starts pointing out her hypocrisy (but not after trying to defend the indefensible for a couple of months)?

Roland GRNS 2:08 pm 01 Mar 06

Actually Ari you don’t know that and i know otherwise.

but let’s not let the facts get in the way of tasty venom, shall we.

barking toad 1:58 pm 01 Mar 06

There’s one place that could be used immediately for the needy if foskey got the snout out of the trough!

Ari 1:40 pm 01 Mar 06

Foskey would still be sponging off my (and your) taxes if she hadn’t been called to account by “personal attack”.

Roland GRNS 1:19 pm 01 Mar 06

In a gentle attempt to keep the conversation moving forwards, and take away the =(unfounded) personal attack as a method of avoiding the issues, I suggest a visit to, where today’s Media Release begins

Stop just talking and do something

ACT Greens MLA (and private housing renter) Deb Foskey has echoed consumer calls for the ACT Government to stop just talking about housing affordability and do something.

“None of the issues or the possible solutions are new, but they need a whole of Government approach” Dr Foskey said today…

bonfire 12:47 pm 01 Mar 06

perhaps the gummint coudl purchase 4 or 5 units in each new development and rent them out. by not paying stampduty etc they signifcantly decrease the real cost. it would also minimise the creation of public housing ghettos.

the socialist plea to reduce profits is just theatre for his audience.

Indi 11:59 am 01 Mar 06

caf, what will happen when the decline in the number of full market renters reaches a point when the govt will have no choice but to source supplementary funds to replace this income stream?

Full market renters are becoming a thing of the past as it seems housing is for the needy and not well paid, well to do politicians (and the likes of academics, senior bureaucrats, and other layabouts earning too much $$)

Ari 11:46 am 01 Mar 06

This is a worrying statement from the the CT article: “Last year, Chief Minister Jon Stanhope floated one possible change, limiting market renters to five years before they were obliged to buy the property or move out.”

If he reckons $270 is market rent for a three-bedroom house in Yarralumla, I don’t trust him to ask a fair price for the sale.

johnboy 11:07 am 01 Mar 06

Lets say they make a few K on the rent after the bloated costs of the ACT public service have done their work.

That’s still a $350,000 asset pulling a not very good return on investment which could instead be spent putting up genuinely homeless people in the Hyatt.

It’s a terrible use of resources at a time when people are sleeping rough.

barking toad 10:15 am 01 Mar 06

And here they come Maelinar, right on cue.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site