Continued from Rooming Houses Reality Check- Part 1
HOUSING CONDITIONS
It’s no secret that rooming houses are often run down and filled with undesirable characters. Many people liken the housing conditions to living in hell. The rent for an individual room is high compared to renting a whole house. While these points are not disputed, do they really paint an accurate picture of the rooming house industry, or has the government twisted the facts to their advantage?
An average room may cost around $150 per week, with an average of maybe five to six people sharing the lounge, kitchen and bathroom facilities. In reality, this is standard market rate. International students are slugged the same sort of rents and no fuss is made. Even homeowners giving up one of two rooms for board will charge similar amounts. So the claim that they are fleecing these people is absolutely false.
The house owner will obviously receive a lot more rent than if they were to lease it to just one family, but they do face other problems they would otherwise avoid by not rooming. The fact is the vast majority of rooming house tenants are simply put, the scum of society. They fail to pay rent on time, destroy the houses and hock in furniture for money to buy drugs. Larger rents are needed to offset the non-payment of rent and large repair and replacement bills. It’s no wonder they need to sometimes charge the ‘illegal’ furniture deposits the government likes to mention.
As mentioned previously, the government is making a play on the two deaths caused in a house fire three years ago. They have jumped on the fact that houses do not contain fire extinguishers or smoke detectors. Let’s not forget that they also want all rooming houses to have fire evacuation plans and power overload detection mechanisms.
Hang on; are we forgetting that these are normal houses letting out rooms? The government doesn’t make a fuss over non-rooming houses not being required to have these items. If a house owner rents the house to a family with five people, nothing is said. But if it is renting to five individuals, suddenly it is the end of the world because the house doesn’t have a fire extinguisher. Can you imagine a family in standard house being forced into having a fire evacuation plan sitting on the wall?
Yes, the houses might be degraded and without curtains in some rooms, but how much of the damage is caused by the tenants? Plus, if a prospective tenant views a bedroom without a curtain or a house without a lock on the bathroom door, they have the choice whether to take it or not. So how is this taking advantage of people? People have the choice whether to live there or not.
Another story is of intimidation and stand-over tactics being used by rooming house operators. Has anyone forgotten that they are leasing to drug addicts who spend almost all their money getting high? Sometimes a bit of pressure is required to get the rent paid. We also hear of stories like rubbish being piled high in the front yards or thrown over neighbour’s fences. How is this the rooming house operator’s fault, when the local council has a responsibility to pick up the trash each week?
THE REALITY
The government loves to use horror stories to promote their agenda. Julia Canty-Waldron from crisis housing agency HomeGround gave the example of a father who had to guard the bathroom every morning while his sixteen year old daughter took a shower, since the bathroom didn’t have a lock. There was also a mention of filthy bathrooms, used needles lying in hallways, occurrences of prostitution, urine and alcohol odours, and blood-stained mattresses in the rooms. Yes, this is the reality of rooming houses.
Compulsory rooming house registration will do little to address the problems. While a lock on the bathroom door might seem like a good idea; in reality all locks can be opened easily and the young girl in the example above faces more danger without her father there. The problem is not the houses, but their tenants. So in spite of registration, the houses will still be filled with the same people who get up to the same activities and cause the same problems.
The only thing that will change is that the Victorian government will be lining their pockets with a raft of new fees. Apart from the obvious Permit Fees and their associated Application Fees and Annual Fees, there will also be Design Assessment Fees, Transfer Fees, Police Check Fees, Inspection Fees and Safety Regulation Compliance Fees. This is not an exhaustive list and we should expect the government to create as many fees as possible in order to suck as much tax as possible from rooming house operators.
While the Victorian government may throw around some large numbers to give the appearance that they are spending a lot of money to address the rooming house issue, their real objective is to turn the rooming house industry into a government cash-cow. Most of the funds being spent are on short-term works anyway, and many will probably replace current outlays such as the Housing Establishment Fund, which costs them millions of dollars each year.
The government has a responsibility to provide housing for the homeless, so why not make some money out of it? Taking control of the rooming house industry also provides other benefits, such as diverting attention from the real issues like ridiculously high rents and lack of housing options. New jobs will be created, such as the twelve recent positions created for housing inspectors. In a sneaky move, the government is also seeking new search-and-entry powers to identify unregistered rooming houses. Talk about creating a loophole to get around search warrants.
To summarise, we should expect the rooming house industry to remain a haven for criminals and drug addicts. These types of people still need housing and rooming houses will remain their only practical option. The Victorian government’s plans are just a front for a tax increase specifically targeting the rooming house operators. It is only a matter of time before they hatch their next devious plan and target another industry type.