NFIRB

Chinese investors are often blamed for Australia’s escalating house prices but a number of factors might mean the demand will drop off in coming years. A recently released report found investment in residential real estate by the Chinese is slowing. As the gap in rental yields between the two countries closes and house prices increase, Australian residential real estate is beginning to look less attractive. The lifting of restrictions on Chinese urban residential property ownership and personal investment monetary restrictions may also play a part. [Article first published on The Conversation, May 1, 2017]

Update: See note [1] on where candobetter.net's values differ from those apparent on Party for Freedom site. John Ajaka, the NSW Minister for Multiculturalism's indignation at Nick Folkes's (Party for Freedom)[1] protests against foreign property ownership in Australia would ring truer if Ajaka distanced multiculturalism from the billion dollar property development growth lobby that has captured the multicultural tag. See Background on the Australian Multicultural Foundation. Instead he sounds like a hypocrite attacking an Australian who tries to stand up to this Goliath.[2] Unfortunately multiculturalism has become code for mass migration and a political shield for a powerful global network of engineers, banks and financiers, property developers, government departments and academic propagandists, represented by numerous peak bodies of which the Property Council of Australia is probably foremost. The Fairfax and Murdoch Press are members of this growth lobby with strong vested interests in their own huge property dot coms, realestate.com.au and domain.com.au. The major political parties are similarly invested, with the Labor Party's stake best known, but it is no Robinson Crusoe.

The Coalition Government today announced that it is taking action to strengthen the integrity of our foreign investment framework.

The Government recognises that foreign capital is vital to help grow our economy and provide jobs. In the case of residential real estate, the current foreign investment regime aims to channel foreign investment into new homes for Australians to purchase or rent.

Planning Backlash reports that there have been some discussions with the Assistant Treasurer about the continued flouting of the FIRB regulations that contain exploitive overseas investment in the local property market. These breaches are resulting in driving prices for housing up to the exclusion of locals, adding to a rapid demolition of housing stock for new 'MacMasions', adding unoccupied houses to our neighbourhoods and resulting in buying tours from overseas which exclude local buyers. Here is how you can help:

The Parliamentary Economics Committee has posted its report on foreign investment in real estate.

Basically the report says they have no means of knowing the extent or impact, because the government has not gathered the data to allow it to be measured. It is scathing about the Foreign Investment Review Board, which is clearly both unable and unwilling to enforce the regulatory system.

Jonathan Page is outraged by 'journalist' pieces in the media where real estate agents brag about foreign speculators buying up our real estate, and even letting the properties sit empty while waiting for their capital to increase. This problem is related to the relaxing of Australian laws on foreign ownership

Real estate speculation occurs on previously unknown levels via the global Internet, with rapid convergence and mushrooming of of speculative industries and professions across government and private sector. At Federal level, the National Foreign Investment Review Board (NFIRB) promotes foreign investment in local real estate and encourages housing purchases by temporary immigrants for high turnover. Local realtors tout Australian property internationally, using private migration agents and local solicitors. At State level (where land use planning laws are made), organizations like the Property Council of Australia (PCA) are closely involved with determining government policy. The Australian citizen has less and less say in any of this.

The Brisbane mayoral election should have been anything but boring. Four candidates declared policies against population growth, but received next to no press coverage. These candidates for fundamental change ran right up against the major vested interests in the outcome of the Brisbane Council election. Those vested interests are the property development industry and its upstream and downstream dependents, which include the Courier Mail. Many group under the Australian Property Council umbrella. Choosing to structure themselves around continuously increasing population growth, naturally these industries prefer mayors who won't seriously challenge their objectives. Greg Rowell is employed by the Australian Property Council and “Can Do” Newman has been giving them what they want and telling Brisbanites that this is what Brisbane needs, for years now, in what the APC calls “the cooperative relationship between the State Government and Liberal Lord Mayor Campbell Newman."

See also "Courier Mail provides 'boring', yet unbalanced, coverage of Brisbane City Council elections"