Speaker 1: So yeah, so this has been here since says I
Speaker 1: was a kid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think Barry Barry has lived in his North
Speaker 2: Melbourne flat for most of his life.
Speaker 1: So there's two rulings here. I think this is a
Speaker 1: Sunner suit. And he's got twenty fours and he's got
Speaker 1: twelve floors.
Speaker 2: He has mild cerebral palsy and he's cared for by
Speaker 2: his mother here in his home. He has all the
Speaker 2: medical support he needs close by.
Speaker 3: And how many bedrooms did she say?
Speaker 1: I've got three bedrooms? Some of them got like four
Speaker 1: or five bedrooms? Can I think, sir? Yeah?
Speaker 2: And tickets. His mosque is nearby his Erritrey and community
Speaker 2: surrounds him, as do his friends and wider family. This week,
Speaker 2: my colleague Ruby Jones went to visit him there and
Speaker 2: Barry told her about this moment in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 4: He remembers being in his home back in twenty twenty
Speaker 4: three getting a text message from a friend. This friend
Speaker 4: told him to turn on the TV, which he does.
Speaker 1: I've got a calm saying a message saying hey, turn
Speaker 1: the town nine.
Speaker 2: Barry watched as Daniel Andrews announced Barry's home in Melbourne's
Speaker 2: public housing towers would be demolished.
Speaker 4: And so that is how he finds out that the
Speaker 4: apartment that he's lived in for more than twenty years,
Speaker 4: the government wants to knock it down and he is furious.
Speaker 1: Once announcement came kicked in straight away my min started
Speaker 1: to just go and I workload basically what to do next.
Speaker 4: I think for anyone who lives in Melbourne, they will
Speaker 4: immediately have an image of those public housing towers. They're
Speaker 4: pretty iconic to the city. You find them in the
Speaker 4: inner suburbs of Fitzroy, Carlton, Richmond, North Melbourne, that home
Speaker 4: to a lot of new immigrants, refugees, people who are
Speaker 4: living on low incomes, and those people who were sitting
Speaker 4: in those homes in September twenty twenty three, they had
Speaker 4: no idea that and Andrews was about to announce that
Speaker 4: the government planned to tear these towers down.
Speaker 2: From Schwartz Media, I'm Daniel James. This is seven AM Today,
Speaker 2: reporter and co host of seven Am Ruby Jones on
Speaker 2: plans to demolish public housing during a housing crisis and
Speaker 2: the David and Goliath fight to stop the towers falling.
Speaker 2: It's Friday, April fourth.
Speaker 3: Ruby.
Speaker 2: Once Barry hears Dan Andrews say on TV that the
Speaker 2: towers would be locked down, he was shocked, he was angry.
Speaker 2: What does he do about it?
Speaker 4: So he starts talking to people, and everyone in these
Speaker 4: towers is talking to each other. They're asking him what
Speaker 4: he's going to do, what they should do. And eventually
Speaker 4: Barry ends up connecting with a local legal service, the
Speaker 4: Inner They're called Inner Melbourne Community Legal, and they end
Speaker 4: up launching a class action and they ask him if
Speaker 4: he will be a part of it, and he eventually
Speaker 4: ends up actually being the lead plaintiff.
Speaker 2: So Barry decides to take on the Victorian government over this.
Speaker 2: Tell me about the case he's making. What's his argument?
Speaker 4: Yeah, so the basis of his claim is that the
Speaker 4: way that the government made this decision without consultation is
Speaker 4: not compatible with his human rights or anyone else who
Speaker 4: lives in the towers. So I spoke to one of
Speaker 4: the lawyers from in a Melbourne Community Legal about this,
Speaker 4: Louisa Bassini.
Speaker 3: My name's Luisa Bassini.
Speaker 5: I'm the manager of Housing and Tendency in a Melbourne
Speaker 5: Community Legal. We work closely with people who live in
Speaker 5: public housing in this area. So I think we were
Speaker 5: the first port of call for them when the announcement
Speaker 5: was made.
Speaker 3: She has been leading the class action.
Speaker 5: We made an argument that people have the right not
Speaker 5: to have their homes arbitrarily interfered with under the Charter
Speaker 5: of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act, that there needs to
Speaker 5: be an opportunity for people to have a say when
Speaker 5: a decision is being made that so directly affects them.
Speaker 4: Victoria has this Charter of Human Rights. It was put
Speaker 4: in place back in two thousand and six, and it
Speaker 4: requires public authorities, so state and local government departments to
Speaker 4: act consistently within the human rights of that chatter flowing.
Speaker 5: From that, you know, our argument was that even if
Speaker 5: there is a decision made that public housing needs to
Speaker 5: be renewed, so improved or grown, whatever on, the estates
Speaker 5: that any objective that the government is seeking to achieve
Speaker 5: needs to be pursued in a manner that is the
Speaker 5: least restrictive on people's rights.
Speaker 4: And so this all comes back to consultation. The idea
Speaker 4: that because the government didn't consult with the residents before
Speaker 4: they made this announcement, they've disregarded those human rights. And
Speaker 4: she says that flowing on from that, other options should
Speaker 4: have been investigated, things like improving the towers other than
Speaker 4: knocking them down, for example.
Speaker 2: How has the Victorian government responded to this?
Speaker 4: Yeah, so Homes Victoria. They made several arguments in their defense.
Speaker 4: So first of all, they say the towers, it does
Speaker 4: not fit for purpose. They're in bad condition, there are
Speaker 4: all these noise problems, problems with accessibility, safety concerns, and
Speaker 4: that they can't retrofit them. The impact of that would
Speaker 4: be the same as redevelopment anyway. They also say that
Speaker 4: they did consider the impact on human rights. They know
Speaker 4: that the redevelopment program will affect people's home lives, their
Speaker 4: community connections, and their ability to access local services, but
Speaker 4: they say that they have taken steps to minimize those impacts.
Speaker 4: And then they also say that they have consulted. They
Speaker 4: said that they got some reports about the feasibility of
Speaker 4: refurbishing the towers versus redeveloping them. But I think it's
Speaker 4: important to say here that they didn't consult with the
Speaker 4: people in the towers. That all happened after the announcement,
Speaker 4: after people had already seen it on TV.
Speaker 2: Right, So what do we know then about the government
Speaker 2: decision making process. I mean, who did they actually consult
Speaker 2: and what were they told.
Speaker 3: It's a really interesting question.
Speaker 4: So there are these series of reports that Homes Victoria
Speaker 4: commissioned when they were investigating all of this, and then
Speaker 4: they sent these reports to cabinet to look at. But
Speaker 4: because they were prepared for cabinet, they're considered cabinet in
Speaker 4: confidence and they're not public.
Speaker 3: But we do know who was consulted with.
Speaker 4: They've seen this list and it's really largely engineering consultancies.
Speaker 3: There's also an architecture firm.
Speaker 4: There's a demolition contractor, and then there's this global commercial
Speaker 4: real estate this firm.
Speaker 2: But no residents. But no residents, right, so how does
Speaker 2: it all go in court?
Speaker 4: Well, so we're waiting on a decision and that decision
Speaker 4: is due in just a few hours time, at ten
Speaker 4: am this morning, and so I think right now there'll
Speaker 4: be a lot of residents getting ready to go down
Speaker 4: to the courthouse to hear what the judge has to
Speaker 4: say in real time. But while this court action has
Speaker 4: been going on, Holmes Victoria agreed to not evict anyone.
Speaker 4: What they have done is sent letters to residents offering
Speaker 4: to relocate people. And I'm sure that Homes Victoria would
Speaker 4: say that what they're doing is giving people their options.
Speaker 4: But for a lot of residents receiving these letters, it
Speaker 4: actually feels like pressure is being placed on them to leave,
Speaker 4: and that's what they have been doing en mass, and
Speaker 4: they say it really feels like it's eviction by stealth.
Speaker 2: Coming up after the break the class actions chance of
Speaker 2: success Ruby the Victorian government can't evict people at least
Speaker 2: while this class action is ongoing. But nonetheless, residents are
Speaker 2: feeling the pressure to relocate. So tell me what the
Speaker 2: vibe is on the ground.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So everyone who lives in these towers, they are
Speaker 4: guaranteed a PLA to live while the redevelopments happen. The
Speaker 4: government has said that. But the way that it works
Speaker 4: is that people under the guidelines of Homes Victoria, they
Speaker 4: are entitled to two offers of housing. When they receive
Speaker 4: them and see that, a lot of them get really
Speaker 4: concerned that if they don't accept the first offer they get,
Speaker 4: then maybe the next offer won't be as good. And
Speaker 4: then they wonder what happens if they don't accept that
Speaker 4: second offer. Because it's been outlined they're only entitled to two.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 4: The Victorian government maintains that no one will be made
Speaker 4: homeless and that housing officers are working closely with everyone.
Speaker 4: But I think what's ended up happening is that a
Speaker 4: lot of the people who might disagree with the government's
Speaker 4: plans to get rid of these towers, they are relocating
Speaker 4: because they feel like they don't have any other options.
Speaker 4: So according to Barry, some of those include families who've
Speaker 4: had to split up because there hasn't been houses that
Speaker 4: have been big enough for them. And when you go there,
Speaker 4: I mean, not only is the place emptying out, there
Speaker 4: are already construction crews testing the soil below the building
Speaker 4: that Barry lives.
Speaker 1: In, testing the soil for the production so for the
Speaker 1: real book.
Speaker 3: But they haven't. Wow, okay, so we've got the class.
Speaker 1: Yes. Yes.
Speaker 4: So the message is that this is happening, whether or
Speaker 4: not you like it. And that's something that Barry himself
Speaker 4: has felt, I think very acutely, because his own mother
Speaker 4: and brother have also been telling him that they want
Speaker 4: to leave. They've been getting the letters too, and they're
Speaker 4: worried about their future. So he, you know, he's convinced
Speaker 4: them to wait it out. Because he is the lead
Speaker 4: plaintiff in this case, so he obviously can't leave. But
Speaker 4: I think he is very worried and so the rest
Speaker 4: of his family about their future.
Speaker 2: So the judgment will come down at ten am today.
Speaker 2: What's likely to happen.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So I asked Harry about that and he said
Speaker 4: he thought it was fifty to fifty. I would say
Speaker 4: that the lawyer who's working on the class action, Louisa Passini,
Speaker 4: having she seemed less hopeful.
Speaker 3: I think it's pretty clear it's a.
Speaker 4: Real David and goliathe kind of fired. So if they lose,
Speaker 4: so Barry will have to move and everyone who lives
Speaker 4: in his state will as well. Most of them will
Speaker 4: go into community housing, which is different from public housing.
Speaker 4: So in public housing, the government is your landlord, the
Speaker 4: rent is capped at twenty five percent of your income.
Speaker 4: But community housing is quite different. It's run by not
Speaker 4: for profits, the rent tends to be higher and there
Speaker 4: are just less benefits in general. And if we look
Speaker 4: to what happened in Barrie's estate, So just a couple
Speaker 4: of weeks ago, the Victorian government actually released the plan
Speaker 4: for that site, and that plan includes a mix of
Speaker 4: private rentals and community housing, but that does not include
Speaker 4: any public housing at all. I mean I spoke to
Speaker 4: someone of Victoria Victorian government who said that each estate
Speaker 4: will be approached on a case by case basis. But
Speaker 4: if you look at what has happened to the very
Speaker 4: first one that the Victorian government has redeveloped, I think
Speaker 4: it's pretty clear to see that it's a very different
Speaker 4: kind of a state than the one that Barry grew
Speaker 4: up on.
Speaker 3: And then there is the location. So for Barrier, that
Speaker 3: means that.
Speaker 4: If he moves, he he might lose his community, he
Speaker 4: might lose easy access to the mosque across the road,
Speaker 4: and you know, to the landscape of his entire life.
Speaker 4: Really and I think if you look more broadly at
Speaker 4: what will happen, the inner suburbs of Melbourne are going
Speaker 4: to change drastically if these towers do not exist. You know,
Speaker 4: it's already an incredibly expensive place for people to live,
Speaker 4: and if you remove the towers, that only becomes more acute.
Speaker 4: You only get more gentrification. And so the inner suburbs
Speaker 4: of Melbourne they become wealthier and they become whiter.
Speaker 2: And this case is coming in the middle of housing crisis.
Speaker 2: Which is a key election debate. What will the effect
Speaker 2: be on housing?
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean the Victorian government is making the case
Speaker 4: that this will improve the housing crisis, so they say
Speaker 4: that there'll be more homes at the end of all
Speaker 4: of this, and more social housing specifically as well by
Speaker 4: ten percent.
Speaker 3: You know, that is kind of the stated aim of
Speaker 3: all of this.
Speaker 4: But when you start to speak to people who work
Speaker 4: in the housing sector, you know, it's clear that they're
Speaker 4: pretty worried. This could make the housing crisis worse because
Speaker 4: it will put pressure in the public housing weightless, you know,
Speaker 4: even more than there already is pressure, which you know,
Speaker 4: could mean that more people are homeless. And I think
Speaker 4: one of the big problems that they identify is that,
Speaker 4: you know, even if there is the same amount of
Speaker 4: housing or more housing replacing what's being knocked down, it
Speaker 4: is all going to take a lot of time. These
Speaker 4: new builds, they don't happen quickly. It takes years and years,
Speaker 4: and in the meantime, this housing squeeze, it just gets
Speaker 4: tighter and tighter. And at the end of the day,
Speaker 4: it comes back to how you see public housing and
Speaker 4: whether you think that it's you know, a principle that
Speaker 4: governments should provide housing for people or whether I think,
Speaker 4: as is increasingly being seen, public housing is kind of
Speaker 4: a social service that really is only for the poorest
Speaker 4: of the poor and should only be used for a
Speaker 4: short time until people can kind of somehow find their
Speaker 4: way into the private rental market. So there is this
Speaker 4: bigger ideological shift underpinning this transition, but that is not
Speaker 4: really a conversation that is being had out in the
Speaker 4: open at this point. Having said that, I think there
Speaker 4: is people within labor who are uncomfortable with this plan,
Speaker 4: particularly federal labor.
Speaker 3: As the election approaches.
Speaker 4: There are MPs who have these towers in their electorates,
Speaker 4: and I think some of them are worried about what
Speaker 4: this means for them when they're walking into an election
Speaker 4: that is going to be about the cost of living
Speaker 4: and about housing, Like, is it a good look for
Speaker 4: them when public housing is being demolished, particularly when these
Speaker 4: towers is public housing, I think for a lot of
Speaker 4: people is a symbol of a time when governments did
Speaker 4: really invest in housing for people. It was seen as
Speaker 4: a fundamental human right and something that we should expect
Speaker 4: our governments to provide.
Speaker 2: Ruby James, thanks fit Reporting and thank you for coming
Speaker 2: on seven AM this morning.
Speaker 3: Anytime.
Speaker 2: Daniel also of the news today, Australia has been hit
Speaker 2: with a ten percent tariff and all goods exports to
Speaker 2: the United States as part of US President Donald Trump's
Speaker 2: sweeping Liberation Day announcement. Australia's rate was one of the
Speaker 2: lowest announced tariffs, matching the UK, Singapore, Turkey, Brazil and
Speaker 2: other countries. Ten percent has been described as the baseline amount,
Speaker 2: and Anthony Albertinzi says the Trump administration may have breached
Speaker 2: the terms of our trade deal with the United States
Speaker 2: and has threatened to use dispute resolution powers within our
Speaker 2: free trade agreement. The government could be set to take
Speaker 2: the United States to the World Trade Organization to resolve
Speaker 2: the issue. And we'll have full coverage of the political
Speaker 2: fallout of Trump's tariffs on a special edition of seven
Speaker 2: AM tomorrow. I'm Daniel James. I'll catch you then.