Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“So yeah, so this has been here since I was a kid, kind of thing.”

DANIEL:

Barry Berih has lived in his North Melbourne flat for most of his life.

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“So there's two buildings here, kind of thing. This is Sutton Street and this has got 24 floors and this has got 12 floors.”

DANIEL:

He has mild cerebral palsy and is cared for by his mother. Here in his home he has all the medical support he needs close by.

Audio excerpt — Ruby Jones:

“And how many bedrooms does your house have, did you say?”

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“I've got three bedrooms. Some of them got like four or five bedrooms, kind of thing. So, yeah.”

Audio excerpt — Ruby Jones:

“And two cats?”

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“And two cats, yes.”

DANIEL:

His mosque is nearby. His Eritrean community surrounds him, as do his friends and wider family.

This week, my colleague Ruby Jones went to visit him there and Barry told her about this moment in 2023.

RUBY:

He remembers being in his home back in 2023, getting a text message from a friend. This friend told him to turn on the TV, which he does.

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“I got a message saying, hey, turn on channel nine.’”

DANIEL:

Barry watched as Daniel Andrews announced Barry’s home, in Melbourne’s public housing towers, would be demolished.

RUBY:

And so that is how he finds out that the apartment that he's lived in for more than 20 years, the government wants to knock it down and he is furious.

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“When the announcement kicked in, straight away my mind started to just go into work mode, what to do next.”

RUBY:

I think for anyone who lives in Melbourne, they will immediately have an image of those public housing towers. They're pretty iconic to the city. You find them in the inner suburbs of Fitzroy, Carlton, Richmond, North Melbourne. They're home to a lot of new immigrants, refugees, people who are living on low incomes and those people who were sitting in those homes in September 2023, they had no idea that Dan Andrews was about to announce that the government planned to tear these towers down.

[Theme Music Starts]

DANIEL:

From Schwartz Media, I'm Daniel James. This is 7am.

Today, reporter and co-host of 7am Ruby Jones, on the plans to demolish public housing during a housing crisis and the David and Goliath fight to stop the towers falling.

It's Friday, April 4th.

[Theme Music Ends]

DANIEL:

Ruby, once Barry hears Dan Andrews say on TV that the towers would be knocked down, he was shocked, he was angry. What does he do about it?

RUBY:

So he starts talking to people and everyone in these towers is talking to each other. They're asking him what he's gonna do, what they should do and eventually, Barry ends up connecting with a local legal service. They're called Inner Melbourne Community Legal and they end up launching a class action and they ask him if he will be a part of it and he eventually ends up actually being the lead plaintiff.

DANIEL:

So Barry decides to take on the Victorian government over this. Tell me about the case he's making, what's his argument?

RUBY:

Yeah. So the basis of his claim is that the way that the government made this decision without consultation is not compatible with his human rights or anyone else who lives in the towers. So I spoke to one of the lawyers from Inner Melbourne Community Legal about this, Louisa Bassini.

Audio excerpt — Louisa Bassini:

“My name is Louisa Bassini, I'm the manager of housing and tenancy at Inner Melbourne Community Legal. We work closely with people who live in public housing in this area. So I think we were the first port of call for them when the announcement was made.”

RUBY:

She's been leading the class action.

Audio excerpt — Louisa Bassini:

“We made an argument that people have the right not to have their homes arbitrarily interfered with under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act, that there needs to be an opportunity for people to have a say when a decision is being made that so directly affects them.”

RUBY:

Victoria has this Charter of Human Rights, it was put in place back in 2006 and it requires public authorities, so state and local government departments, to act consistently within the human rights of that charter.

Audio excerpt — Louisa Bassini:

“Flowing from that, you know, our argument was that even if there is a decision made that public housing needs to be renewed, so improved or grown, whatever on the estates, that any objective that the government is seeking to achieve needs to pursued in a manner that is the least restrictive on people's rights.”

RUBY:

And so this all comes back to consultation, the idea that because the government didn't consult with the residents before they made this announcement, they've disregarded those human rights. And she says that flowing on from that ,other options should have been investigated. Things like improving the towers rather than knocking them down, for example.

DANIEL:

How has the Victorian Government responded to this?

RUBY:

Yeah, so Homes Victoria, they made several arguments in their defence. So first of all, they say the towers are just not fit for purpose. They're in bad condition. There are all these noise problems, problems with accessibility, safety concerns and that they can't retrofit them. The impact of that would be the same as redevelopment anyway. They also say that they did consider the impact on human rights. They know that the redeveloping programme will affect people's home lives, their community connections and their ability to access local services, but they say that they have taken steps to minimise those impacts. And then they also say that have consulted. They said that they got some reports about the feasibility of refurbishing the towers versus redeveloping them. But I think it's important to say here that they didn't consult with the people in the towers. That all happened after the announcement, after people had already seen it on TV.

DANIEL:

Right, so what do we know then about the government's decision-making process? I mean, who did they actually consult and what were they told?

RUBY:

It's a really interesting question. So there are these series of reports that Homes Victoria commissioned when they were investigating all of this. And then they sent these reports to Cabinet to look at. But because they were prepared for Cabinet, they considered Cabinet in confidence and they're not public.

But we do know who was consulted with. I've seen this list and it's really, largely, engineering consultancies. There's also an architecture firm. There's a demolition contractor and then there's this global commercial real estate services firm.

DANIEL:

But no residents.

RUBY:

But no residents.

DANIEL:

Right so how does it all go in court?

RUBY:

Well, so we're waiting on a decision and that decision is due in just a few hours time at 10am this morning. And so, I think, right now there'll be a lot of residents getting ready to go down to the courthouse to hear what the judge has to say in real time. But while this court action has been going on, Homes Victoria agreed to not evict anyone. What they have done is sent letters to residents offering to relocate people. And I'm sure that Homes Victoria would say that what they're doing is giving people their options, but for a lot of residents receiving these letters, it actually feels like pressure is being placed on them to leave. And that's what they have been doing en masse and they say it really feels like it's eviction by stealth.

DANIEL:

Coming up after the break, the class action’s chance of success.

[Advertisement]

DANIEL:

Ruby, the Victorian government can't evict people, at least while this class action is ongoing. But nonetheless, residents are feeling the pressure to relocate. So tell me what the vibe is on the ground.

RUBY:

Yeah, so everyone who lives in these towers, they are guaranteed a place to live while the redevelopments happen, the government has said that. But the way that it works is that people under the guidelines of Homes Victoria, they are entitled to two offers of housing. When they receive them and see that, a lot of them get really concerned that if they don't accept the first offer they get then maybe the next offer won't be as good and then they wonder what happens if they don't accept that second offer because it's been outlined they're only entitled to two. Now, the Victorian government maintains that no one will be made homeless and that housing officers are working closely with everyone. But I think what's ended up happening is that a lot of the people who might disagree with the government's plans to get rid of these towers, they are relocating because they feel like they don't have any other options. So, according to Barry, some of those include families who've had to split up because there hasn't been houses that have been big enough for them. And when you go there, I mean, not only is the place emptying out, there are already construction crews testing the soil below the building that Barry lives in.

Audio excerpt — Ruby Jones:

“What are they doing?”

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“Testing the soil for the construction, so for the rebuild.”

Audio excerpt — Ruby Jones:

“Right, wow, but they haven’t even got the class action results yet.”

Audio excerpt — Barry Berih:

“Yes, yes.”

RUBY:

So the message is that this is happening whether or not you like it and that's something that Barry himself has felt, I think, very acutely because his own mother and brother have also been telling him that they want to leave. They've been getting the letters too and they're worried about their future. So, you know, he's convinced them to wait it out because he is the lead plaintiff in this case so he obviously can't leave. But I think he is very worried, and so are the rest of his family about their future.

DANIEL:

So the judgement will come down at 10am today. What's likely to happen?

RUBY:

Yeah, so I asked Barry about that and he said he thought it was 50-50. I would say that the lawyer who's working on the class action, Louisa Bassini, I mean, she seemed less hopeful. I think it's pretty clear that it's a real David and Goliath kind of fight. So if they lose, Barry will have to move and everyone who lives in his estate will as well. Most of them will go into community housing which is different from public housing. So, in public housing, the government is your landlord. The rent is capped at 25 per cent of your income, but community housing is quite different. It's run by not-for-profits. The rent tends to be higher, and there are just less benefits in general. And if we look to what happened in Barry's estate, so just a couple of weeks ago, the Victorian Government actually released the plan for that site. And that plan includes a mix of private rentals and community housing, but that does not include any public housing at all. I mean, I spoke to someone at the Victorian Government who said that each estate will be approached on a case-by-case basis but if you look at what has happened to the very first one that the Victorian Government has redeveloped, I think it's pretty clear to see that it's a very different kind of estate than the one that Barry grew up on. And then there is the location. So for Barry that means that if he moves, he might lose his community. He might lose easy access to the mosque across the road and, you know, to the landscape of his entire life, really. And I think if you look more broadly at what will happen, the inner suburbs of Melbourne are going to change drastically if these towers do not exist. You know, it's already an incredibly expensive place for people to live, and if you remove the towers, that only becomes more acute, you only get more gentrification. And so the inner suburbs of Melbourne, they become wealthier and they become whiter.

DANIEL:

And this case is coming in the middle of a housing crisis,which is a key election debate. What will the effect be on housing?

RUBY:

Yeah, I mean, the Victorian Government is making the case that this will improve the housing crisis. So they say that there'll be more homes at the end of all of this and more social housing specifically as well, by 10 per cent. You know, that is kind of the stated aim of all this. But when you start to speak to people who work in the housing sector, you know, it's clear that they're pretty worried that this could make the housing crisis worse because it'll put pressure on the public housing waitlist. You know, even more than there already is pressure, which could mean that more people are homeless. And I think one of the big problems that they identify is that, you know, even if there is the same amount of housing or more housing replacing what's being knocked down, it is all gonna take a lot of time. These new builds, they don't happen quickly. It takes years and years. And in the meantime, this housing squeeze, it just gets tighter and tighter. And at the end of the day, it comes back to how you see public housing and whether you think that it's, you know, a principle that governments should provide housing for people or whether, I think as is increasingly being seen, public housing is kind of a social service that really is only for the poorest of the poor and should only be used for a short time until people can, kind of, somehow find their way into the private rental market. So there is this bigger ideological shift underpinning this transition, but that is not really a conversation that is being had out in the open at this point.

Having said that, I think there are people within Labor who are uncomfortable with this plan, particularly federal Labor as the election approaches. There are MPs who have these towers in their electorates and I think some of them are worried about what this means for them when they're walking into an election that is going to be about the cost of living and about housing. Like is it a good look for them when public housing is being demolished, particularly when these towers is public housing? I think for a lot of people it is a symbol of a time when governments did really invest in housing for people. It was seen as a fundamental human right and something that we should expect our governments to provide.

DANIEL:

Ruby Jones, thanks for your reporting and thank you for coming on 7am this morning.

RUBY:

Anytime, Daniel.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

DANIEL:

Also in the news today...

Australia has been hit with a 10 per cent tariff on all goods exports to the United States, as part of US President Donald Trump’s sweeping “Liberation Day” announcement.

Australia’s rate was one of the lowest announced tariffs, matching the UK, Singapore, Turkey, Brazil and other countries. Ten per cent has been described as the baseline amount.

And,

Anthony Albanese says the Trump administration may have breached the terms of our trade deal with the United States and has threatened to use dispute resolution powers within our free trade agreement.

The government could be set to take the United States to the World Trade Organisation to resolve the issue.

We’ll have full coverage of the political fallout of Trump’s tariffs on a special edition of 7am tomorrow.

I’m Daniel James. I’ll catch you then.

[Theme Music Ends]