Our Association believes that:
 

• everyone deserves a safe place to call home 
   

• there are ‘good’ tenants and ‘bad’ tenants, and ‘good’ landlords and ‘bad’ landlords, but the majority of tenants and landlords are very decent, hardworking and respectable people
   

• both tenants and landlords should be treated fairly and recognised as people and households
   

• Tasmania's housing crisis has been many years in the making, a result of:

  • successive state government's inability or unwillingness to provide adequate social housing

  • successive state government's lack of foresight on the need to ensure housing supply takes into consideration population growth

  • local government, often fairly, being seen as a blocker rather than an enabler of housing development.
     

• it is unfair and unconstructive to blame and vilify landlords for the state's housing troubles and it would be more productive to redirect resources towards the various tiers of government 
   

• it is the Government’s role to provide social housing and this should not be transferred, directly or indirectly, to landlords
   

• private rental properties are not the housing safety net; they are privately owned assets that operate in a supply and demand environment 
   

• for the majority of landlords, being a rental owner is a for-profit activity and while we applaud those who enter into ownership to low costs social housing, this isn't the desire or motive of the majority
   

• landlords of private property should retain their fair rights to:

  • set the price for their product 

  • accept or decline the undeniable additional risk tha​t animals bring

  • end a fixed-term lease when it has run its course 

  • be provided with information that enables the landlord to select a suitable for tenant that is likely to respect the property and honour their obligations under the lease.
     

• multiple basic human needs have been commoditised and it is unfair and irrational to select a single class of provider and seek to restrict their fair rights. For example, healthcare, education, clothing, food, water, electricity and even sex has been commoditised. Many individuals need life-saving surgery and we have a public and private system available to them, with a broad spectrum of standards and fees applying. Where are the calls to force private specialists to operate in the public system? Where are the calls to cap the out-of-pocket charges for life-saving surgery done privately? 
   

• what is 'ethical' is highly subjective. We support owners who operate within the law, knowing that each individual is different and that owners will apply their own circumstance, values and beliefs when making their decisions
   

• the vast majority - if not all - of our members (and likely landlords more broadly) are empathetic and caring people who do consider the human impact of their decisions 

​

• through the rental eviction moratorium, landlords were the only seller that has had their buyer-seller interfered with through Government intervention and this discrimination is completely unacceptable  
   

• if the Government wants tenants who have not paid their rent to be housed in private rental properties, then it is the Government’s responsibility to fulfill the tenant’s obligations under the lease agreement on their behalf
   

• if Government intervention has resulted in rent being owed to a landlord then the Government is responsible for that debt and should pay the landlord the owed rent in full
   

• private rental properties are a critical part of the housing offering, bridging the many gaps between owner-occupied, social housing and short-stay premises
   

• a rental agreement is a commitment made in good faith by both parties and that this contract must not be interfered with by the Government
   

• offering a property for rent is a valid strategy that individuals can choose to support their pathway to financial freedom, thereby reducing their burden on the Government and leaving more funds for the Government’s safety net
   

• offering a property for rent comes with inherent risks which are appropriately mitigated through the existence of a legislative framework, the judicial system and the existence of a legal contract and that the instant removal of these risk mitigation strategies is abhorrent and grossly unjust
   

• interference with residential tenancies will result in fewer private rental properties being available for rent which will ultimately be detrimental to tenants through higher rents and to the Government through increased demand for income support and social housing
   

• the core component of rental affordability relates to supply; Tasmania's population has grown and social housing and new development has not kept up. Government at all levels should focus on increasing supply through new builds as more supply means more competition which leads to improved rent affordability, and that local government has a critical role here by supporting new residential construction  
   

• it is fair and appropriate for landlords to pay reasonable levels of tax when/if profits are made and to have the ability to offset losses as applicable to other investment classes.

​

​

JOIN OUR ASSOCIATION