Reform

<html><body>
Another fascinating week with Australia experiencing a significant stock market correction followed by the National Reform Summit which in all probability won’t amount to anything given the responsibility rests with our politicians. When it comes to anything economic in Australia we see a typical allergy where they are too frightened to come into contact with these issues.
Since 2013, the internet population grew approximately 20% – from 2.4 billion to 3.2 billion people yet for some strange reason we still struggle to understand data, or is it that the data we should be seeing is withheld? Australia’s misunderstood property markets are a prime example – with Sydney well ahead of the country in terms of inaccuracy in reporting.
One of the main areas for concern to come from the National Reform Summit was productivity where many believe Australia has come to a grinding halt which is replicated with our present GDP growth rates. For some time now I have been carefully watching property growth rates which (wait for it) closely resemble our GDP results.
To further explain we closely looked at sales data from 2009 to 2014 for house and apartment sales in Seaforth, Mosman, Cremorne, Neutral Bay, Cammeray and Northbridge where the total number of households equates to 39,227.Source CoreLogic RP Data.
We need to bear in mind that when you closely examine individual suburb markets at five (5) per cent turnover per annum the market turnover is normal and slightly under-performing. When it gets to ten (10) % per annum turnover the market is considered strong and when the market hits fifteen (15) % turnover per annum that is a boom. The last time we witnessed the market hitting 15% was in 1988.
So we took the six year averages for sales and this is what we found.
<ul>
<li>Seaforth – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 120 houses which equates to 5.1% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Seaforth – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 16 apartments which equates to 4.7% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Mosman – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 312 houses which equates to 5.3% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Mosman – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 492 apartments which equates to 4.9% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Cremorne – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 62 houses which equates to 4.6% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Cremorne – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 278 apartments which equates to 5.0% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Neutral Bay – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 55 houses which equates to 4.95% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Neutral Bay – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 323 apartments which equates to 4.8% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Cammeray – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 56 houses which equates to 5.6% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Cammeray – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 147 apartments which equates to 5.5% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Northbridge – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 88 houses which equates to 4.3% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
<li>Northbridge – Average number of sales from 2009 to 2014 per annum – 28 apartments which equates to 5.5% of the total market on a per annum basis.</li>
</ul>
When one takes into account that the cash rate at the beginning of 2009 was 3.25% and dropping to 2.50 at the end of 2014 we would have expected the number of properties to be rapidly increasing – which has not been the case. Moreover this reaffirms that business is not doing that well given households are not that interested in taking on more debt, which certainly resonated with a lot that was presented at the National Reform Summit. . The burning question is what is Canberra going to do about this?
<h5>Mosman Houses Sold – Total Number 5,890 Houses</h5>
2009 – 303 2010 – 325 2011 – 264 2012 – 276 2013 – 355 2014 – 350
<h5>Mosman Apartments Sold – Total Number 10,020 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 523 2010 – 453 2011 – 474 2012 – 443 2013 – 543 2014 – 514
<h5>Cremorne Houses Sold – Total Number 1,135 Houses</h5>
2009 – 71 2010 – 65 2011 – 56 2012 – 56 2013 – 66 2014 – 59
<h5>Cremorne Apartments Sold – Total Number 5,481 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 339 2010 – 302 2011 – 288 2012 – 218 2013 – 267 2014 – 255
<h5>Neutral Bay Houses Sold – Total Number 1,109 Houses</h5>
2009 – 61 2010 – 69 2011 – 51 2012 – 51 2013 – 61 2014 – 40
<h5>Neutral Bay Apartments Sold – Total Number 6,638 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 411 2010 – 362 2011 – 287 2012 – 283 2013 – 308 2014 – 286
<h5>Cammeray Houses Sold – Total Number 1,275 Houses</h5>
2009 – 58 2010 – 50 2011 – 50 2012 – 56 2013 – 64 2014 – 61
<h5>Cammeray Apartments Sold – Total Number 2,610 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 156 2010 – 194 2011 – 156 2012 – 107 2013 – 135 2014 – 137
<h5>Northbridge Houses Sold – Total Number 1,914 Houses</h5>
2009 – 88 2010 – 63 2011 – 68 2012 – 89 2013 – 102 2014 – 94
<h5>Northbridge Apartments Sold – Total Number 504 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 32 2010 – 33 2011 – 20 2012 – 23 2013 – 35 2014 – 27
<h5>Seaforth Houses Sold – Total Number 2,317 Houses</h5>
2009 – 113 2010 – 109 2011 – 113 2012 – 121 2013 – 138 2014 – 127
<h5>Seaforth Apartments Sold – Total Number 334 Apartments</h5>
2009 – 21 2010 – 11 2011 – 10 2012 – 14 2013 – 17 2014 – 26 Source – CoreLogic RP Data
<h5>MOSMAN – 2088</h5>
• Number of houses on the market this time last year – 69
• Number of houses on the market last week – 53
• Number of houses on the market this week – 65
• Number of apartments on the market this time last year – 51
• Number of apartments on the market last week – 41
• Number of apartments on the market this week – 42
<h5>CREMORNE – 2090</h5>
• Number of houses on the market this time last year – 7
• Number of houses on the market last week – 2
• Number of houses on the market this week – 4
• Number of apartments on the market this time last year – 15
• Number of apartments on the market last week – 15
• Number of apartments on the market this week – 18
<h5>NEUTRAL BAY – 2089</h5>
• Number of houses on the market this time last year – 5
• Number of houses on the market last week – 4
•Number of houses on the market this week – 2
• Number of apartments on the market this time last year– 36
• Number of apartments on the market last week – 25
• Number of apartments on the market this week – 30
 ROBERT SIMEON is a director of <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/" target="_blank" title="RWM" rel="nofollow">Richardson Wrench Mosman and Neutral Bay</a> and has been selling residential real estate in Sydney since 1985.  He has also been writing real estate blog <a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/news/" target="_blank" title="Virtual Realty News" rel="nofollow">Virtual Realty News</a> since 2000. 
 
</body></html>

robertsimeon-hRNTwJyXkQ

Data doesn’t lie when you keep misreading it: Robert Simeon

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Hopes for root-and-branch internal reform of the federal Labor Party at its national conference look set to be dashed. The draft organisational reform agenda, published ahead of this weekend’s conference, signals that wholesale democratisation of the party’s decision-making structures may not happen.
Expectations had been building for more than a year that the national conference would deliver deep organisational reform. This belief was sparked in April 2014. Bill Shorten, who won the leadership of the federal Labor Party in its first election to involve rank-and-file members, set down his vision for a “modern, outward-looking, confident and democratic party” in his <a href="https://billshorten.com.au/towards-modern-labor-party" target="_blank">“Towards a Modern Labor”</a> speech.
Shorten called for:
<ul>
<li>
a reduction in the structural power of the union in party matters;
</li>
<li>
increased membership involvement in preselections for the lower house (70:30 split between local members and a central panel) and for the Senate (50:50 split);
</li>
<li>
increased female representation across all party domains; and
</li>
<li>
direct election of delegates to national conference.
</li>
</ul>
However, not all of the bold initiatives that Shorten laid down in 2014 appear on the draft agenda. Conspicuously absent from the document are commitments to enshrine the new rules for selecting the leader in the national party constitution, and significant reform of preselection.
Many of the agenda items are less radical proposals to introduce online policy branches and consider new types of local branches. These sit alongside the usual calls to increase the membership, encourage union members to become active party members, and foster greater engagement by the parliamentary party with the rank and file.
There are also reforms that could be construed as increasing the centralisation and consolidation of power in the hands of party elites. The proposal to require state campaign directors to consult the leader and the national campaign director before the selection of candidates in both targeted and safe Labor seats is a case in point.
The draft statement also “supports state branches that are considering direct election”. Significantly, it proposes an implementation committee be established to further explore the direct election of national conference delegates. While this could ultimately result in reform, it is just as likely to postpone change in the short term.
Why such a tentative agenda?
Three key factors can explain the reforms being put forward.
First, while Shorten is federal parliamentary party leader, he does not have the power to change the rules unilaterally. A majority of national conference delegates must approve the changes.
Second, as a decision-making forum, the conference is not naturally suited to deep, system-wide organisational reform. Achieving agreement among 400 delegates on comprehensive organisational reforms is a logistical feat, especially when no faction has a majority of delegates capable of mobilising the numbers.
It is complicated further because the conference also seeks to tackle contentious matters of policy and platform, such as climate change, same-sex marriage, the treatment of refugees and the recognition of Palestine. The national conference has many issues to deal with, and only three days to do so.
Third, although Shorten is in a unique position to argue for the reforms as party leader, he would need to expend significant political capital on this. Given the possibility the Abbott government will call an early election, and Labor being ahead in the polls, Shorten may be reluctant to allow the party to become embroiled in contentious debates, which may evoke memories of the divisive Rudd-Gillard era.
Does it matter if internal reform is not achieved?
The presumption is that failing to achieve substantive outcomes will consign the ALP to political and electoral irrelevance, and Shorten’s leadership to oblivion. Both are dramatic overstatements.
For a start, although Gough Whitlam’s efforts to reform Labor’s organisational structures are widely lauded, few recent Labor leaders have systematically pursued – let alone secured – major organisational change. Leaving aside Kevin Rudd’s move to have rank-and-file involvement in electing the party leader in the dying days of the last Labor government, Simon Crean has been the only federal leader to achieve major reform in recent times.
And although political commentators are deeply engaged in the issue of organisational reform, it is rarely a vote-winning issue.
Elections are usually decided by public policy issues, leadership and government performance – not by matters of internal party reform. Both the ALP (2007) and the Liberals (2013) were able to win office while largely failing to act on the major reforms recommended by internal party organisational reviews.
However, there are signs that momentum for organisational reform is gathering pace.
Senior party figures such as former senator John Faulkner and ex-Victorian premier Steve Bracks have renewed their calls for change. They have been joined by former union bosses, such as Greg Combet and Bill Kelty, in calling for structural and cultural change. Within the party, newly formed ginger groups such as Open Labor are calling for party democratisation.
It would be a mistake, then, to view the national conference as a failure if comprehensive organisational reform is not achieved. The short-term importance of reform to Labor’s electoral fortunes and Shorten’s leadership has generally been exaggerated. However, the pressure to change is unlikely to dissipate.
Narelle Miragliotta is senior lecturer in Australian Politics at Monash University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/narelle-miragliotta-3372" target="_blank">here</a>.
Nicholas Barry is lecturer, faculty of humanities and social sciences at La Trobe University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-barry-13539" target="_blank">here</a>. Both are authors on The Conversation.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Longing for Labor to reform itself? National conference may not provide

<html><body>
There were some 90 plus proposed changes to strata laws announced by the NSW Government Fair Trading Minister Victor Dominello​ last week that will affect how strata operates for owner occupiers, landlords and tenants.
It is the first major reform of strata laws since the Strata Titles Act was made in 1973. 
NSW has around 75,000 strata schemes worth $350 billion in assets. 
The draft Strata Schemes Development Bill 2015 and Strata Schemes Management Bill 2015 have been released for public consultation.
Here are what Property Observer senses are the key reforms. 
<h3>OVER CROWDED APARTMENTS</h3>
The reform will allow owners' corporations to create bylaws limiting the number of adults who can actually live in an apartment with fines for over-crowding to be raised to $5500 for the first offence and $11,000 on the second offence. The reforms allow owners corporations to make a by-law limiting the number of people who can reside in a lot (but schemes must still allow no fewer than two adults per bedroom), so that strata schemes are able to better manage overcrowding. Schemes wanting to impose such a limit could introduce a by-law by passing a special resolution. Larger families would not be discriminated against because the by-law would not apply to children and an overcrowding by-law cannot be inconsistent with the planning approval for the building.
<h3>COMPULSORY SALES AND DEMOLITION </h3>
The reform will allow 75 per cent of residents of older buildings to agree to their sale to a developer for redevelopment, regardless of the wishes of the 25% minority. Currently there is a requirement of a 100 per cent vote in favour of abandoning a strata scheme. The new process will apply only to existing schemes if the owners corporation agrees to opt in. If the majority of owners (50% or more) don’t support the decision, no further action can be taken.
<h3>RENOVATION</h3>
The reform will create a three-tier regime that allows certain minor work to be done without permission, some significant renovations to be carried out just with a simple majority vote of the owners' corporation and then for major renovations the need for special resolutions, bylaws and restrictions. The reforms aim to provide clearer, common-sense approvals for owner renovations. They would waive restrictions for minor, cosmetic changes to lots such as inserting a picture hook. Renovations with a lasting impact, such as installing floorboards, would still require approval but only a general resolution (50% of the vote). Renovations like those that affect the structure or external appearance of the building would still require a special resolution (75% of the vote).
<h3>PROXY FARMING FOR MEETING VOTES</h3>
The reform sees a cap on number of proxies held by owners in larger buildings with a limit of 20 per cent of the vote or five votes, whichever is less.
<h3>ILLEGAL PARKING</h3>
The reform will allow owners' corporations and local councils to let council parking inspectors patrol strata car parks and issue fines to people who have parked where they shouldn't. As part of proposed changes, owners corporations would be able to enter into an agreement with the local council to manage unauthorised parking on the common property. Current options already available to owners corporations to address unauthorised parking include by-law enforcement, signage and barriers and calling the police if an individual is thought to be trespassing.
<h3>DEVELOPER DEFECTS BOND</h3>
The reform will see property developers having to place a bond of 2 per cent of the value of the building to cover potential defects after completion. A building bond for the construction of high rise strata buildings (those over 3 stories in height) would maintain developer and builder accountability for their work. A process for the early identification and rectification of defects would be implemented, requiring developers to engage an independent building inspector to carry out a defect inspection report, at their cost, between 12 and 18 months after the completion of the building.
<h3>PETS</h3>
The reform will change the standard or default bylaw to state that pets are allowed, provided that the strata committee approves, although that approval can't unreasonably be withheld. During consultation on the reforms it was highlighted that, in some cases, people can be forced to choose between their pet and living in a strata building. Reforms would amend model by-laws to make it easier to keep pets as opposed to automatically prohibiting pet ownership in a scheme. The strata reforms would remove any reference to a ban in the model by-laws. Schemes would also be actively encouraged to review their by-laws and to consider whether their existing ban should be lifted. The strata reforms would not remove a scheme’s ability to make its own rules about pets. Schemes could place reasonable conditions on keeping pets (eg. its access to common property). If the model by-law were adopted, the request to keep a pet could not be unreasonably refused. For example, schemes could not unreasonably refuse the keeping of small animals, such as fish, or a cat, but could reasonably refuse rodents or venomous snakes. Each case would be considered on its merits.  Guide dogs would continue to be allowed regardless of a scheme’s by-laws and the reforms expand the category of guide dog to include hearing dogs and other assistance animals.
<h3>SMOKING</h3>
The reform identifies balcony smoke drift as a potential "nuisance" under the legal meaning of the word. The owners corporation would be able to prosecute offenders rather than leaving this to individual owners.
<h3> </h3>
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Overcrowded strata apartments, illegal parking and other NSW strata reforms

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The Urban Development Institute of Australia NSW welcomes the release of the state government’s Strata reform Bills following more than three years of stakeholder consultation.
The Bills introduce a number of measures that reflect the complexity of modern strata developments, and have the capacity to continue to change as more home buyers prefer to live in apartments. The strata laws under which we operate are the oldest in the world so the system is in desperate need of an upgrade.
Under current strata schemes it is difficult to renew dilapidated buildings because of outdated processes and procedures.
These Bills pave the way for Strata schemes to opt to modernise buildings that have reached the end of their economic life. 
The Bills do not apply to existing strata schemes, only future strata schemes with current strata schemes having the option to opt in, so it will take time to see material change in the NSW system. The introduction of the legislation will also be telling. 
We won’t see an impact from the draft Bills overnight, the true impact will be realised when the legislation is introduced, and we see the effect on existing strata schemes.
Numerous protections have been introduced for owners under the new schemes including a 2% bond to guard against building defects and major protections for elderly and disadvantaged residents through just-terms compensation and legal assistance. 
The UDIA NSW has minor concerns with aspects of the draft bills, particularly the proposal to include a non-voting tenant representative on strata executive committees – which may not be effective for a number of reasons including the often transient nature of tenants.  
While we will be working through the details over the coming weeks, we can’t lose site of the fact that the reforms are an improvement on the antiquated system that presently exists.
The Institute will be making a submission to the draft Bills and it looks forward to continuing to work with government on strata reform.
Stephen Albin is chief executive of the Urban Development Institute of Australia NSW. He can be contacted <a href="https://www.udiansw.com.au/pages/contact">here</a>.
</body></html>

Reform

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Reform

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News