The End of an Era: Melbourne’s Public Housing Towers and the Future of Affordable Housing

A leader’s legacy and a contentious farewell

Daniel Andrews’ final act as Victoria’s Premier in September 2023 was a bombshell: the demolition of Melbourne’s iconic public housing towers. This decision, dubbed “Australia’s biggest-ever urban renewal project,” was part of a larger Housing Statement aimed at building 800,000 new homes across Victoria over a decade. The move was intended to address the state’s worsening housing crisis, but it left many questioning the timing and logic behind it. For the thousands of residents living in the towers, the announcement brought fear and uncertainty. Beza Gizaw, a single mother living in Flemington, sums up the sentiment: “Why are they moving us in the first place? What’s wrong with the building?”

The decision was met with fierce criticism, not just from residents but also from within Labor’s own ranks. Former Labor Deputy Prime Minister Brian Howe called it a “very bad decision,” accusing Andrews of making a “sloppy bit of politics” without proper consultation or justification. The lack of transparency and the hasty nature of the announcement have raised concerns about the future of public housing in Victoria and the broader implications for vulnerable communities.

Controversy and Conflict: The Debate Over Redevelopment

The demolition plan has sparked heated debate across the political spectrum. Architects, academics, and even Greens and Coalition MPs have questioned the logic behind razing the towers. Within Labor, frustration runs deep. Current and former MPs argue that the decision was made without adequate consultation or evidence, with one minister describing it as an “Andrews thought bubble” that others were forced to scramble behind.

Critics argue that the financial and human costs of demolition far outweigh any potential benefits. The government claims that maintaining the towers would cost $2.3 billion over 20 years, but it has refused to release comparative figures for redevelopment. Meanwhile, a $100 million contract for the demolition of the first three towers has already been signed, leaving many wondering if the real motivation is to unlock the valuable inner-city land for private development.

The debate also highlights a broader ideological shift away from public housing. For decades, Victoria’s public housing stock has stagnated, and the state now has the lowest proportion of social housing in Australia. The rise of community housing, funded by not-for-profit organizations, has been touted as an alternative, but critics argue it is less secure and more expensive than traditional public housing.

A Financial and Ethical Quagmire

The financial arguments for redevelopment are murky at best. While the government insists that long-term savings will outweigh the costs of demolition, critics point to the millions of dollars already spent on recent upgrades to the towers. Federal Labor MPs, including Housing Minister Clare O’Neil, have called for greater transparency, with one asking whether the towers truly need to be demolished.

The ethical implications are just as stark. Residents like Beza Gizaw, who call the towers home, face the prospect of being uprooted from their communities and relocated to unknown destinations. Gizaw, who found stability in the towers after a series of personal setbacks, fears the loss of her “haven” and the sense of belonging she has built over the years. The government’s plan to replace the towers with a mix of private and social housing has raised concerns about equity, with only a 10% increase in social housing units promised.

The Rise and Decline of Public Housing in Victoria

The towers were built in the postwar era as part of a bipartisan effort to provide affordable housing for working families. Over the decades, they have become a symbol of government intervention in the housing market, offering stability to generations of residents. However, the shift toward neoliberal policies in the 1980s marked the beginning of the end for public housing as a priority.

Today, Victoria’s public housing stock is in decline, with the state spending less on maintenance and upkeep than any other jurisdiction in Australia. The value of the land beneath the towers has skyrocketed, creating what housing researcher Liam Davies calls “perverse incentives” to let properties fall into disrepair and justify redevelopment. The government’s push to partner with private developers has further eroded confidence in its commitment to public housing.

The Future of Public Housing in Victoria

The redevelopment of the towers has exposed deep divisions within Labor and raised questions about the party’s commitment to its core values. Federal Housing Minister Clare O’Neil acknowledges the decline of public housing nationwide but insists that it still has a vital role to play in addressing the housing crisis. However, the Albanese government has not committed to the kind of long-term funding needed to rebuild and expand public housing stocks.

In Victoria, Housing Minister Harriet Shing has defended the redevelopment plan, arguing that it is necessary to build modern, energy-efficient housing that meets the needs of today’s residents. She dismisses concerns about privatisation, insisting that the government is committed to maintaining social housing. However, the lack of clear plans for the majority of the sites has left many skeptical.

A Safety Net Under Threat

For residents like Beza Gizaw, the towers represent more than just a place to live—they are a lifeline for those who have fallen on hard times. Gizaw, who once dreamed of owning her own home, now fears that the demolition of the towers will leave her and thousands of others without a safety net. Her story is a powerful reminder of the human cost of housing policies that prioritise profit over people.

As the debate over the towers continues, one thing is clear: the future of public housing in Victoria hangs in the balance. Whether the government can find a way to balance the books while preserving the safety net for vulnerable residents remains to be seen. For now, the towers stand as a symbol of a broken housing system and a society struggling to provide for its most vulnerable citizens.