It may be politically unpalatable, but we need to see the view from socioeconomic bottom

The Personal Connection: Lyndon Gannon’s Unique Perspective on Public Housing

Sydney City Councillor Lyndon Gannon brings a rare and valuable perspective to the debate on public housing. Growing up in the inner-Sydney suburb of Glebe, Gannon witnessed firsthand the challenges and complexities of social housing. Many of his childhood friends lived in public housing, and some of his family members still do. This personal connection gives him a deep understanding of the system’s strengths and shortcomings. However, Gannon’s experience has also left him frustrated. He believes that some tenants exploit the system by occupying larger homes than they need or staying in public housing long after their financial situation has improved. This frustration is not born of detachment but of a genuine desire to see the system work fairly and effectively for all.

Gannon shares an example that illustrates his concerns. He knows of public housing tenants who have encouraged their adult children to enrol in full-time courses they had no intention of completing. The purpose of this ruse? To ensure that the children remain classified as dependents, allowing the parents to retain family-sized homes long after the children have moved out or started their own lives. This kind of manipulation, Gannon argues, undermines the integrity of a system that should prioritize those in genuine need. His perspective is not that of an outsider looking in but of someone who understands the system’s potential and is disheartened by its misuse.

The Problem of Under-Occupation in Social Housing

The issue of under-occupation in social housing is not just anecdotal. It is a systemic problem recognized by the state government. As of June 30, 2023, more than 16,000 (17%) of all social housing tenancies in New South Wales were classified as under-occupied. This means that these households had two or more bedrooms than they actually needed. NSW Housing Minister Rose Jackson’s office explains that under-occupation typically occurs when household members move out during the life of the tenancy. While this may seem harmless, it has significant consequences. When families remain in homes larger than their needs, it limits the availability of housing for others, particularly those on waiting lists who are in dire need of a place to live.

Minister Jackson deserves credit for acknowledging the problem. Recognizing and understanding an issue is the first step toward addressing it. However, the blame game is never far away in politics. Jackson’s office was quick to criticize the previous government for “mismanagement” of public housing. But Gannon is right to point out that the failings of public housing are not unique to any one political party. They are a shared responsibility of the political class. Both sides of the aisle have failed to address the systemic issues that plague social housing, and both have, at times, exploited the issue for political gain.

The Politics of Public Housing: A System Stuck in Neutral

The challenges of reforming public housing are compounded by the political climate. Whenever a government attempts to address under-occupation—whether by moving tenants to more suitable accommodations or selling off under-utilized properties to build new housing—it inevitably faces resistance. Opportunistic politicians often latch onto the cause of existing tenants, framing any change as a heartless attack on vulnerable communities. These campaigns are less about solving the problem and more about scoring political points. As a result, much-needed reforms are either watered down or abandoned altogether.

Local councillors, like Gannon, often find themselves caught in the crossfire. While local government has no direct role in creating or managing social housing—responsibility lies with the state, sometimes with federal funding—councillors are acutely aware of the issue’s emotional resonance. They use it to generate political capital, and their influence can act as a deterrent to meaningful change. The result is that many multi-bedroom homes in inner-city areas, which could be ideal for families like Morgan’s, are left to deteriorate. These homes, which could provide a balance of space and accessibility, are instead allowed to fall into disrepair, becoming unlivable and even dangerous.

Beyond the Noise: The Need for Real Solutions

The root of the problem lies in a system that is both inefficient and unjust. While some tenants game the system to retain larger homes, thousands of others languish on waiting lists, desperate for a place to call home. Meanwhile, valuable housing stock is under-utilized or allowed to deteriorate. The injustice of this situation is compounded by the fact that those most affected—low-income families, single parents, and vulnerable individuals—often lack the platform to make their voices heard. They are overshadowed by the noise of political campaigns and the self-interest of those who seek to exploit the issue for their own gain.

Until the voices of these individuals are given equal weight in the conversation, the injustice will persist. Housing is already a critical issue for voters, and it will only become more so as populations grow and urbanization intensifies. To address the crisis, policymakers must be willing to tackle the tough questions. This includes addressing under-occupation, incentivizing tenants to move to appropriate housing, and ensuring that the system prioritizes those in greatest need. It also requires a commitment to building more affordable housing and maintaining existing stock to prevent it from falling into disrepair.

Listening to the Marginalized: A Call for Change

Parnell Palme McGuinness, managing director of campaigns firm Agenda C, offers a valuable perspective on the broader implications of this issue. With experience working for political parties such as the Liberal Party and the German Greens, McGuinness understands the interplay between politics and policy. She emphasizes the importance of listening to the stories of those most affected by the housing crisis—stories that are often reduced to sound bites or ignored altogether. Until these voices are heard, and their experiences taken seriously, the system will remain broken.

McGuinness’s words serve as a call to action. Policymakers, campaigned by political opportunists and influenced by the loudest voices, must also listen to those at the bottom of the socioeconomic pyramid. These individuals are not statistics or talking points; they are people whose lives are shaped by the system’s failures. Their stories reveal the human cost of under-occupation, under-maintenance, and political inaction. By amplifying these voices, we can begin to build a system that is fair, efficient, and compassionate—a system that truly serves the community.

Conclusion: Toward a Fairer Future

The issues plaguing public housing in Sydney—and other cities around the world—are complex and deeply entrenched. They cannot be solved overnight, and there are no simple answers. However, progress begins with honesty and a willingness to confront the challenges head-on. This includes acknowledging the problem of under-occupation, discouraging those who exploit the system, and ensuring that policies are designed to serve the greatest good.

Gannon’s personal connection to public housing, combined with his frustration at seeing the system misused, highlights the need for reform. His story is a reminder that the debate over public housing is not just about numbers and policies—it is about people. It is about families like Morgan’s, who could thrive in a well-managed, equitably distributed system. It is about the single mother working two jobs to make ends meet, the elderly tenant who fears losing their home, and the young couple desperate for a place to start their life together.

Ultimately, the key to fixing public housing lies in a combination of smart policy, political courage, and a commitment to fairness. This means creating incentives for tenants to move to appropriate housing, investing in the maintenance and expansion of housing stock, and ensuring that the system prioritizes those in greatest need. It also requires a shift in the political conversation—one that moves beyond blame-shifting and campaign slogans to focus on tangible solutions. Only then can we begin to address the injustice at the heart of the housing system and build a future where everyone has a safe, secure, and dignified place to call home.