Urban Land Development Authority Maranoa Regional Council
[2011] QCAT 647
•3 August 2011
| CITATION: | Urban Land Development Authority and Maranoa Regional Council [2011] QCAT 647 |
| PARTIES: | Urban Land Development Authority Maranoa Regional Council |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | ADL032-11 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Anti-discrimination matters |
| HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Peta Stilgoe, Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 3 August 2011 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
ORDERS MADE: | Urban Land Development Authority and Maranoa Regional Council are exempt from the operation of sections 9, 14, 15, 45, 46, 76, 77, 81, 82, 83, 102, 124 and 127 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 in relation to the attribute referred to in s7(b) of the Act for a period of 5 years from the date of this decision in respect to their activities in the provision of affordable housing in the Maranoa Regional Council area. The exemption applies only in relation to acts or omissions reasonably necessary to give effect to the following eligibility criteria and/or terms of a general tenancy agreement: a) The spouse or partner of the employee must not own, either directly or indirectly, a private dwelling within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area. b) The spouse or partner of the employee must not be in a position of employment which stipulates the provision of housing within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area under an employment instrument. c) The tenancy may be terminated under the provision of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 if the employee (as tenant) ceases to be eligible for occupancy of a Council house for any of the reasons referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) above. d) If the spouse or partner of a tenant purchases or otherwise acquires a residence within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area, the tenant must advise the employer and the Council and will be subject to termination of the general tenancy |
| CATCHWORDS: | Exemption sought from discrimination on the grounds of relationship – affordable housing – availability subject to circumstances of spouse or partner Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, ss 7(b), 9, 14, 15, 45, 46, 76, 77, 81, 82, 83, 102, 124, 127 Isaac Regional Council and Ors [2009] QADT 17 |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard on the papers in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Urban Land Development Authority was established to facilitate the provision of an ongoing availability of affordable housing options for low to moderate income households[1]. In August 2008, the Queensland Government established the Sustainable Resource Communities policy. Pursuant to that policy, the Authority has been provided with $2.7M for the delivery of 15 affordable housing units in Roma. Roma is within the local government area of the Maranoa Regional Council. The housing units will be constructed in the Roma Urban Development Area. Upon their completion, the Authority will transfer ownership of the housing units to the Council.
[1] Section 3(2)(c) Urban Land Development Authority Act 2007.
The applicants have provided material to show a need for affordable housing in the Council region. To ensure that the 15 housing units are directed to affordable housing, the applicants propose that the residents must meet these criteria:
a)The tenant must be a current employee of a Roma based business or the Maranoa Regional Council.
b)The tenant must be appointed or transferred as an employee to Roma from another location to meet the needs of a Roma based business.
c)The employee and/or spouse/partner must not own, either directly or indirectly, a private dwelling within a 100 km radius of Roma or in the Maranoa Regional Council area.
d)The employee and/or spouse/partner must not be in a position of employment which stipulates the provision of housing under an employment instrument.
The applicants also intend obtaining an acknowledgement from the tenant that, if the employee and/or spouse/partner purchase a residence, or otherwise acquire a residence, in Roma, they must advise the Council on the understanding that their tenancy will be terminated.
The applicants are concerned that the conditions relating to a person’s spouse or partner may offend s7(b) of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991. They have applied for an exemption from the operation of sections 9, 14, 15, 45, 46, 76, 77, 81, 82, 83, 102, 124 and 127 of the Act.
Section 113 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 provides the tribunal with power to grant an exemption from the operation of specified provisions of the Act.
The applicants’ evidence, which I accept, shows:
a)The Surat Basin, which has Roma on its western boundary, is one of Queensland’s key mining and resource areas.
b)Surat Basin will be the site of significant investment and development, commencing in 2015.
c)The region is already showing a high percentage change in rental costs, and it is now the most expensive region in Queensland for renting three and four bedroom houses.
d)The vacancy rate is 2.4%
e)Rental affordability has decreased. Twenty five percent of households in the region are at risk of affordability stress.
f)The cost of detached dwellings has increased 112% over the 5 years to 2009/10. The median house price is $276,000 but current properties are listed for sale in a range from $448,000 to $520,000.
g)The salary range for key workers such as early childhood education, teachers, hospitality, nurses and hairdressers indicate that the available housing will not be affordable.
The facts in this application are similar to those considered in Isaac Regional Council and Ors[2]. There is at least an arguable case that the terms of the tenancy agreement may offend the provisions of the Anti-Discrimination Act1991 because a person may be refused accommodation based upon their relationship with a person who does not meet the criteria. It is at least arguable that this results in less favourable treatment to a person with a spouse or partner than a person who does not have a spouse or partner. It is also arguable that the conditions result in indirect discrimination because a higher proportion of people without a spouse or partner will be able to meet the eligibility criteria.
[2] [2009] QADT 17.
There is no statutory defence to the potential discrimination.
By letter of 14 June 2011, the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner advised that he had no objection to the granting of the exemption.
[10] I find that an exemption pursuant to s113 of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 is appropriate:
a)The applicants have demonstrated that the proposed exemption is in the public interest. The sustainability of the Roma local community will be enhanced by providing affordable housing opportunities for employees of local businesses that might otherwise be excluded from living in town because of high rents.
b)The proposed conditions are appropriate to ensure that people who do not need subsidised housing do not have access to it and that the housing is provided for those who really need it.
[11] It is appropriate to grant the applicants an exemption from the operation of ss 9, 14, 15, 45, 46, 76, 77, 81, 82, 83, 102, 124 and 127. The exemption is limited to acts or omissions that are reasonably necessary for the applicants to apply the following eligibility criteria and, where relevant, terms of a general residential tenancy agreement to employees of Roma businesses and employees of the Maranoa Regional Council, who are prospective tenants and tenants of the Roma Urban Development Area namely that:
a)The spouse or partner of the employee must not own, either directly or indirectly, a private dwelling within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area.
b)The spouse or partner of the employee must not be in a position of employment which stipulates the provision of housing within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area under an employment instrument.
c)The tenancy may be terminated under the provision of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 if the employee (as tenant) ceases to be eligible for occupancy of a Council house for any of the reasons referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) above.
d)If the spouse or partner of a tenant purchases or otherwise acquires a residence within a 100 km radius of Roma or within the Maranoa Regional Council area, the tenant must advise the employer and the Council and will be subject to termination of the general tenancy.
[12] The exemption is to remain in force for a period of five years from the date of this decision.
0
0
0