Every dollar in the housing system has to work hard and this week's news gave us stories from both ends of the spectrum about how to make it stretch further.

At one end, governments are committing billions to increasing housing supply, but there is a risk that value is lost between investment and delivery. At the other, residents are balancing tight household budgets while dollars disappear through poorly insulated roofs and homes that are difficult to heat and cool.

And in the middle are housing providers, tasked with making both equations work: turning investment into homes while making finite resources stretch across the properties and communities already in their care.

It raises an interesting question about what efficiency really means in housing. It isn't simply about spending less. It's about losing less: less value between funding and delivery, less money through inefficient homes and fewer opportunities to direct limited resources where they can make the greatest difference.

This week's developments look at that challenge from opposite ends of the housing system.

This Week in the News

Energy hardship puts a new focus on housing condition

New national research suggests the condition and thermal performance of community housing is compounding the consequences of high energy prices. 

Some residents have resorted to limiting heating and cooling and sometimes even cooking to make ends meet. 

The research points to ageing and inefficient housing, inadequate heating and cooling and high energy prices as key contributors to energy hardship.

For housing providers, addressing those problems isn't straightforward: capital for upgrades is constrained and investment has to be prioritised across portfolios.

Better information about housing condition and thermal performance can help providers identify where residents are most exposed, prioritise maintenance and upgrades and understand where investment could have the greatest impact on both asset performance and resident wellbeing.

Further reading
Energy Hardship in Community Housing

Billions are being invested in housing. An audit raises questions about whether we can deliver.

Australia is committing billions of dollars to new housing, but two developments raise an uncomfortable question: how much of that investment will actually translate into homes?

The Australian National Audit Office has found that delivery arrangements for the Housing Australia Future Fund are only partly effective, identifying weaknesses in governance, risk management, oversight and performance monitoring. 

Meanwhile, the $4 billion remote housing agreement in the Northern Territory is caught in a dispute over funding, reporting and delivery targets, amid claims that construction is behind schedule and the original target of 2,700 homes could be substantially reduced.

Neither suggests the investment itself is being wasted. But together they highlight the risk that money and housing targets are not enough. 

As governments commit more funding to housing, the ability to coordinate delivery, track progress and hold participants accountable will increasingly determine how much of that investment ultimately becomes homes.

Further reading
Governments' deadlock on $4b housing plan

Delivering the Housing Australia Future Fund: Report