Key Points
- Victoria's government announced in September that it would demolish Melbourne's public housing towers.
- Tenants fear the development will mean less public housing, higher rent prices and disruptions to their community.
- Some have issued a class action, arguing the government hasn't put forward a strong enough case for the development.
Residents of Melbourne's public housing towers are filing a class action lawsuit against the Victorian government, after it announced plans to demolish the towers and replace them with new social housing.
Many tenants fear the development will mean less public housing, higher rent prices and disruptions to their community. Some have decided to take legal action for what they say is a breach of human rights.
Louisa Bassini, a lawyer who is leading the lawsuit, said the group had decided to start legal action because "other announcements of this sort made by government regarding public housing renewal" usually include "a case put forward to the public as to why the changes need to happen".
That typically includes "such things as how the people whose rights will be impacted have been properly considered in the process", Bassini said.
"In this case, we haven't seen that; we haven't seen any, what we call a charter assessment, a document that shows how people's rights under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act have been properly considered.
"Nor have we seen really any case made publicly for why there are structural problems, for instance, with the towers that require them to be necessarily torn down."
Surprise announcement
Residents of the 44 high-rise towers dotted around Melbourne's inner suburbs were made aware of the government's plans to demolish their homes in September 2023, when they received a flyer under their doors informing them that the iconic buildings would be knocked down to make way for new social housing.
Some tenants say the news has fuelled the community's already worsening housing insecurity.
"I've lived here for 13 years and before then I was in foster and youth shelters,” said one resident, who wished to remain anonymous.
"I found out with a flyer underneath my door when I came home one day in September, and then I looked up some information online about it," they said.
"It's a really big thing, and I've been in really insecure housing before this and I had it in my mind that this would be the first safe place I would have, and I've had to stay here for a long term. So that really, really stressed me out."
Government says it will look after residents
The Victorian government's plans currently indicate the first tower replacements in Carlton, Flemington and North Melbourne are set to be completed by 2031. All 44 public housing towers are set to be demolished by 2051.
The government says it's focused on improving its supply of quality social housing, adding that no resident would be without a home as a result of the redevelopment.
"The redevelopment of Melbourne’s public high-rise towers is the largest urban renewal project in Australia’s history and will boost social housing by at least 10 per cent. We’re focused on delivering modern, fit-for purpose housing that every Victorian can be proud to call a home," a Victorian government spokesperson told SBS News.
"As these redevelopments progress, every public housing resident is guaranteed a home, with a right to return to newly redeveloped housing at their current rental conditions and rent settings."
The government said keeping the towers in a habitable condition would cost an estimated $2.3 billion over 20 years, which didn't include improving building compliance with modern standards.
This isn't the first time it's faced scrutiny over its treatment of public housing tenants.
During the COVID-19 lockdowns in Victoria, strict and sudden lockdowns left thousands of Melbourne's public housing tenants trapped without warning in their units, many without access to food or medicine.
Public housing residents in Melbourne will be paid compensation for the snap lockdown of apartment towers in Flemington and North Melbourne. Source: AAP / James Ross
Now, the distrust that some public housing tenants already felt towards the government is worsening.
Public versus community housing
Victoria has the lowest proportion of social housing of any state in Australia, with a January report by the Productivity Commission finding that just 2.8 per cent of the state’s dwellings are allocated to social housing. The national average sits at 4.1 per cent.
Social housing is an umbrella term that refers to both public housing and community housing.
Katelyn Butters, CEO of the Victorian Public Tenants Association, explained that public housing is the well-known "traditional model" of commission housing in Australia, where rents are capped at 25 per cent of household income and property is allocated based on urgency of need.
Community housing was designed to supplement and add to the public housing mix, but not to replace it.
"The rent can be slightly more expensive," Butters explained. There are also less strict requirements over who the housing should be allocated to, she added.
"In Victoria, community housing providers are charities, but because they are not the government, they do have wider discretion around who they have to allocate properties to and how many of those allocations have to come from the priority section of the waiting list," she said.
"So there are some very specific differences. It doesn't mean that one is bad and one is good, but it does mean that we do have to have both."
All 44 of the high-rise towers are currently allocated to public housing. But many residents fear the plan to build more social housing will involve turning public land into a mix of publicly and privately owned housing, which may mean developers have the power to displace existing residents and make a profit on what was once public land.
Bassini, from Inner Melbourne Community Legal, said another major concern is that public housing tenants will agree to community housing options without being properly informed of the differences.
"We know people are being offered community housing homes and accepting them, probably without fully understanding the implications this has for their rights,” she said.
"We sought not just assurances from government but undertakings or some legally enforceable mechanism that would be able to be signed by both parties ... [but] no such document has been provided to people."
Those in favour
While many fear the decision will make their place in public housing insecure, not everyone thinks the plan is a bad idea.
Emma Dawson, executive director of Per Capita, an independent policy analysis centre working to fight inequality in Australia, says that while the communication could have been handled better, she agrees the buildings need replacing.
“A lot of the towers that were built under part of this policy are really out of date in terms of them being fit for purpose as modern houses. They’re highly inaccessible. A lot of them are not accessible to people with disabilities or older people. They are very hard to heat and very hard to cool,” she said.
“I think the decision was made after looking at the various options for replacing them, and replacing them with more modern sustainable housing that can be adequately provided to be accessible, have universal design principles, and that kind of thing."
“If that's what we're going to end up with then I think this is the right thing to do.”
