Short-term rental advocates say restrictions hurt tourism, not help housing
Short-stay rentals, typically associated with websites like Airbnb and Stayz, have drawn criticism for taking properties away from the long-term rental market.
In other parts of the world, jurisdictions are putting restrictions on short-stay accommodation, including in New York City and Barcelona, amid housing shortages.
But research from the University of South Australia has claimed restrictions and bans have done little to help housing stocks.
Tourism expert and study author Peter O'Connor said jurisdictions that had banned short-stay accommodation failed to see any meaningful growth in housing access.
He said the main consequence was limiting tourism accommodation, in turn increasing prices.
"If you reduce the number of short-term rentals which are available, one of the things you do is make it more difficult for tourists to find accommodation," Professor O'Connor said.
"Here in Australia, tourism is our number one service export and it has a lot of knock-on effects in terms of the local community and spending in bars, restaurants and shops."
A South Australian parliamentary committee is looking into the short-stay accommodation sector, including possible regulations on short-stay rentals.
Wendy Roeters owns two homes in Mount Gambier which she rents out for short stays.
She said the sector was needed in regional areas where workers travel and stay for extended periods and where there were fewer large hotels.
"For companies, the short-term stays are the better option," she said.
"You get a lot of people for the hospital, like doctors and nurses. I've just had a nurse stay for three weeks.
"You'll have work crews who might be working on construction who might be doing it for a period of six months."
Ms Roeters added it was unfair to penalise short-stay property owners for there being a wider shortage of housing.
"I can understand that the government wants housing, but that's not the responsibility of people that have a property, that's the government's responsibility," she said.
Property reform advocacy group Grounded produced its own report into the short-stay sector in Australia, released in June.
It found the profits on short-term rentals were 81 per cent more than if the property was placed on the long-term market in 13 of Australia's busiest tourism towns.
Grounded managing director Karl Fitzgerald said it was clear short-stay accommodation was impacting local housing supply.
"It's more supply coming out of the long-term rental market and out of the ownership market," he said.
"When government is talking about supply on every front, it's strange that Airbnb is not considered as a factor.
Mr Fitzgerald said a plan to limit the growth of short-stay accommodation would be more effective, such as a "cap and trade" scheme, which would give licenses to property owners.
"That's where having at least a licensing system that regulates the growth and the supply and perhaps caps it and reduces it over time until there's enough funding to channel some of the profits away from Airbnb," he said.
"Use that money to fund long-term affordable housing under a community land trust model."
Professor O'Connor argued short-stay accommodation had become a "quick fix" for governments in favour of more complicated plans to ease the housing crisis.
"It's a lot easier for a state government or a council to introduce a regulation that limits the number of short-term rentals than it is to introduce some way of encouraging the building of new houses," he said.
South Australian Greens MLC Robert Simms is leading the state's parliamentary committee into short-stay accommodation.
He agreed the sector was not solely to blame for the state's housing crisis, but said it still needed regulation.
"I think there's no doubt that short stay is here to stay, but the question is whether or not we've got the balance right," he said.
"It is concerning that people might be running a property that is, in effect, a business, and yet they might be paying at the same rates as their neighbour who is living in a private residence.
"That doesn't really seem fair, and that's why I think there's a level of community interest in the idea of regulation of the sector."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
2 hours ago
- SBS Australia
All about the federal government's productivity summit
Listen to Australian and world news, and follow trending topics with SBS News Podcasts . As government officials, business leaders and economists attend a national economic round table in Canberra this week, you will keep hearing them mention a buzzword: productivity growth. According to the Reserve Bank, productivity refers to how much output can be made within a given set of inputs. One is labour productivity, which focuses on workers themselves, such as their skillsets, the technology they use, and how they are managed. The other one is multifactor productivity, which looks at factors beyond the workers, such as capital, land, energy and materials. Why will it be the focus of the national economic round table this week? Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers says that's because there's no better time than now to talk about it. "Our economy is finally balanced, between the progress we've made on wages and inflation and living standards and the productivity that we desperately need to sustain that progress in the years and decades ahead. Living standards, higher living standards, are the holy grail, and that makes productivity the primary focus." In recent decades, Australia's productivity growth has slowed. During the Financial Year of 2022/2023, it was only 0.9 per cent. It mirrors the general experience of many advanced economies, but the Reserve Bank says the slowdown also reflect persistent flaws of Australia's economy, such as declining business competition, slower upgrades in technology, and low wage growth. Trent Wiltshire, Deputy Director of Grattan Institute's Economic Prosperity program, says in the past decade, there have been attempts and measures by both federal and state governments to increase talent pools and business investment. "There have been reforms to skilled migration in the past few years, (such as) streamlining employer sponsorship (which has been) good, the reform of point tests (which) is underway - that's a big layer for the input - but it hasn't been implemented. There's been some attempts on tax reform, although not particularly big. We have seen some changes in higher education. State governments also play a role too, so we've seen Victorian and New South Wales (government) are reforming their planning system on more houses can be build at where people live." But Mr Wiltshire says these policies haven't been able to offset some persistent barriers for Australia's productivity, including its ageing population. He says Australia's growth of service sector also slows down productivity. Ahead of the round table, various stakeholders already signal their pitches to boost Australia's productivity. Business representatives call for cutting the levels of red tapes and the uptake of emerging technology. Unions want to see four-day working weeks. Welfare advocates urge the Government to fix what they call the broken employment services. Among the calls, one of the most controversial topics is artificial intelligence. It follows the Treasurer's comment that A-I is what he calls a game changer for Australia's economy. But questions have been looming regarding A-I's tolls on human jobs, regulations on copyrights, and the capacity of businesses to roll out the technology. Even Mr Chalmers has also admitted that Australia needs to find a middle path for A-I. Dr Jake Goldenfein is a law and technology scholar at Melbourne Law School. His research has found while A-I may help boost productivity at work, the roll out of A-I can be pricey and slow. "If we as a nation are interested in increasing sovereign capability around A-I and getting benefits from A-I, we need to think about ways in which we can do that but don't rely so heavily on international software companies, because we are sending a lot of cash overseas in order to procure these technology products that aren't necessarily what our organisations need, and require a lot of work to operate safely." The three-day national summit only serves as a brainstorming platform for the Albanese government. But Danielle Wood, the chair of the Productivity Commission, says the government needs to re-adopt what she calls the growth mindset to its policy making, as young Australians are already paying price for the low productivity growth. "Australians born in the 1990s – who hit the job market in the 2010s when economic growth was slow – were the first generation not to earn more than people born a decade before. "This generation will bear more of the cost of addressing climate change – both the impacts of wilder weather, and the policy response – because Australian policy makers have for so long avoided the lowest cost policy choices." Dr Chalmers says he has realistic but also optimistic expectations on the outcome of the summit. He says while the round table won't solve all economic problems in three days, it will set light on the government's budgets in the next three years. "I'm optimistic that there is an appetite for reform, there is ambition when it comes to dealing with the three major challenges in our economy, productivity first of all, but also economic resilience and also budget sustainability as well. So I'm realistic, but I'm optimistic that we can make some progress together."
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
The ASU is pushing for presumed work from home. Here's what that means
Working from home may become the presumed status of Australia's white-collar workforce as part of a new push from the Australian Services Union (ASU). The ASU announced plans to submit the new clause to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) this week and has published the results of a new survey to support its plans. Here's what you need to know: The ASU is proposing a new clause that will give clerical and administrative staff the presumed right to work from home if it is reasonably requested. If an employer and employee cannot come to an agreement, the employer would be required to give that employee 26 weeks' notice before enforcing a return to the office. ASU Assistant National Secretary Emeline Gaske said a fair notice period was a critical protection that recognised the reality of people's lives. "For many people, particularly women, working from home is deeply integrated into how they manage their family and caring responsibilities," she said. "Suddenly removing that arrangement isn't a simple change — it pulls a thread that can unravel a family's entire routine. "It means finding new after-school care where there are often long waiting lists, rearranging transport, or finding alternative support for an elderly parent." The FWC is working to develop a working from home term for the Clerks Award that supports employers and employees making workable arrangements. The ASU's clause forms part of a submission to the Clerks Award review. The Clerks Award covers private sector staff whose primary duties are administrative or clerical. According to ABS data, about 1.8 million Australians are clerical and administrative employees, of which about three-quarters are women. About 91,000 are covered by the clerks' award. The ASU represents a broad range of industries, including: local government, social and community services, transport, travel and airlines. They also represent clerical and admin staff in various industries in the private sector. A survey of 600 workers conducted by the ASU found: One union member, IT software specialist Shaun Ruigrok, said working from home helped him to be more productive. He said that as a neurodiverse person, he was able to set up a working space that was not as overstimulating and exhausting as a work office environment. Ms Gaske said the people who have overwhelmingly taken up working from home are women, particularly those with care responsibilities. "If we were to cut those conditions, it would have a really negative impact on working women who are trying to manage their care and work responsibilities," she said. Ms Gaske said some big businesses were asking employees to give up penalties and overtime rates in exchange for working from home. "Over many, many years we've seen the big business lobby try and attack penalty rates and overtime pay at any opportunity they get," Ms Gaske said. "I think this is just another attempt to whittle away some of these conditions." Australian Industry Group Chief Executive Innes Willox has described the proposal from the union as the "loopiest yet". "The proposal is not only entirely unnecessary and unreasonable, it would inevitably operate to discourage employers from continuing to adopt an accommodating approach to employee requests to work from home," he said. He referred to an independent survey of employers and employees undertaken at the Fair Work Commission's request, which found 94 per cent of employees who asked for working from home arrangements had their request approved or partly approved. "The Fair Work Act already gives employees the right to request flexible working arrangements, including working from home, in a range of circumstances," Mr Willox said. "Employers can only reject these requests on reasonable business grounds." He said the ASU's proposal could force employers to refuse flexibility out of fear they would not be able to require a return to the office in a reasonable timeframe if the circumstances change or the arrangement is proving to be unworkable. "We want employers to be free to work with employees to structure their working hours in a way that suits them," he said. The ASU said it would make its new submission on Tuesday. The Clerks Working From Home review will remain open for submissions until September 2 before entering the next stage. A hearing for further directions from the FWC will be held on September 5.
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Western United left with less than three days to save club after being granted extension to appeal A-Leagues licence call
Western United have less than three days to save their club after they were granted additional time to submit their appeal against the stripping of their A-Leagues licence. On August 8, United were stripped of their licence for the men's and women's leagues due to their ongoing financial issues, leaving the club on the brink of folding and players and staff in limbo. Later that day, the club vowed to appeal the decision by Football Australia's First Instance Board (FIB), an independent body responsible for club licensing, to withdraw their licence. United originally had until August 16 to submit their appeal, but requested an extension. The club now has until 10am on Thursday, August 21, to do so, otherwise their right to appeal will lapse. "Western United has requested, and been granted, an extension to appeal against the decision of the First Instance Board (FIB), made Friday 8 August 2025, to withdraw their licence," Football Australia (FA) said in a statement. "Western United has until 10:00am on Thursday 21 August 2025 to submit an appeal to the Appeals Body as per Football Australia's regulations. Just three years after their first A-League Men championship, United have been in financial turmoil for months, with players and staff paid late in April, May and June, while superannuation payments were also delayed. The club, led by chairman Jason Sourasis, had hoped their issues would be solved by a planned takeover by American group KAM Sports, which was announced in May. But that is yet to be completed, with the Australian Professional Leagues still to tick off the takeover because KAM hasn't submitted its full ownership proposal. The club's current ownership were unable to satisfy the financial criteria required to maintain their licence United, based in Tarneit in Melbourne's western suburbs, have also been unable to register players due to a FIFA ban related to an ongoing dispute with former striker Aleksandar Prijovic. The United saga is also having an effect on other clubs, who are yet to receive their fixtures and therefore cannot plan for the season ahead or ramp up their marketing and membership sales. AAP
