this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)

Melbourne

1870 readers
51 users here now

This community is a place created for the people of Melbourne and Victoria. We are a positive, welcoming and inclusive community. We might not agree about everything, but we always strive to stay civil and respectful.

The focus of our discussions is based around things that affect Victoria, but we are also free to discuss our local perspective on wider issues. Or head to the regular Daily Random Discussion thread to talk about anything.

Full Community Guidelines

Ongoing discussions, FAQs & Resources (still under construction)

Adoption Certificate for Nellie, the Daily Thread numbat (with thanks to @Catfish)

Feedback & Suggestions

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The Victorian government is forging ahead with plans to demolish three public housing towers subject to a class action seeking to stop the redevelopment.

The move was described by a lawyer for residents as an example of them being “treated as an afterthought”, after the supreme court ordered the class action could proceed to a two-day trial this month.

Inner Melbourne Community Legal said it was notified by the Victorian government solicitor’s office that Homes Victoria – the body that oversees social housing in the state – would sign a contract for demolition works to commence “on or after 19 July”.

Louisa Bassini, the managing lawyer at Inner Melbourne Community Legal, said it was disappointing the government was “steamrolling ahead” with plans to raze the buildings despite the ongoing class action.

At the time, the supreme court justice Melinda Richards rejected their lawyers’ argument that government and the housing minister, Harriet Shing, should be defendants.

The court last week ordered the class action could proceed to a two-day trial, to begin on 28 October, after lawyers acting on behalf of the residents reframed their legal argument.


The original article contains 681 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 73%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm unclear on the issue here. Is it that the total capacity of public housing will be reduced or that residents will be forced out in the interim? Also, what's the point of these redevelopments? To "modernise" public housing facilities?

[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The poors will be decanted out to more socioeconomically appropriate areas further out, and the space they were taking up will be freed up for gentrification.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ugh. So they’re not replacing the housing with more/better social housing? Cunts.

[–] maniacalmanicmania@aussie.zone 9 points 4 months ago

Some social housing if I'm reading it correctly. Even then social housing is usually still privatised housing. So the amount of public housing could well be zilch.