Nan Roman recently visited Australia to offer her insights into ending homelessness. Nan is President and CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, a leading U.S. national voice on the issue of homelessness. The Alliance is a public education, advocacy and capacity-building organization with over 9,000 nonprofit and public sector member agencies and corporate partners around the country. Under her leadership, the Alliance has developed a pragmatic plan to end homelessness within ten years. To implement this plan, Ms. Roman works closely with members of Congress and the Administration, as well as with cities and states across the nation. She collaborates with Alliance members to educate the public about the real nature of homelessness and successful solutions. She has researched and written on the issue, is frequently interviewed by the press, and regularly speaks at events around the country. Her unique perspective on homelessness and its solutions comes from over twenty-five years of local and national experience in the areas of poverty and community-based organization. Listen to her speech to the Queensland Homelessness Conference, or her interview by Andrew Bartlett on Radio 4ZZZ.

The National Alliance website has a wealth of material and resources on the Housing First approach, including a guide for organisations (pdf, 525 KB) in implementing the change to this approach.

Human Rights Charter

In January 2008, the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 ("The Charter") came into full force. The Charter enshrines a set of rights derived from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and applies to all processes and decisions made by State Government departments and public authorities. The Charter has implications for community housing organisations in Victoria, and in response CHFV is developing a project that will identify and support best practice in tenancy management and will train housing practitioners in Charter requirements.

The following is a snapshot of case law relevant to the Charter's application to community housing:

MetroWest v Sudi (Residential Tenancies) [2009] VCAT - [**LATEST NEWS 9/10/09**] This key case was heard by the President of VCAT, Justice Kevin Bell, in October 2008, and his judgement was finally handed down a year later on 9 Oct 2009. Bell declared that MetroWest, in its provision of transitional housing, is indeed a public authority under s 4(1)(c) of The Charter. More significantly, Bell states that "Providing social housing to people at risk of homelessness is an important function which government exercises on behalf of the community in the public interest. It exercises this function in various ways under the Housing Act 1983 (Vic).... Therefore I have concluded the function of providing social housing, which includes the management of transitional housing tenancies, is a function of a public nature" [paragraphs 177-178]. This obiter conclusion may have far-reaching implications not just for THMs but for all community housing organisations, and indeed for community services more broadly.
Homeground Services v Mohamed (Residential Tenancies) [2009] VCAT (6 July 2009) - VCAT rejected an application for a possession order. The tenant had failed to lodge their public housing application within the timeframe required under HomeGround's policies, and HomeGround had issued a 120-day Notice To Vacate, as they believed they were required to do under the terms of the THM Program Guidelines. VCAT found that HomeGround was a public authority and that their policies had been applied arbitrarily (s 13a) and without proper consideration of the tenant's human rights (s 38(1)). The Member's findings - in particular at paragraphs 19-21 - confirm the need for community housing organisations to ensure they can demonstrate that they have, in deciding to issue an eviction notice, weighed up the competing priorities of the integrity of the Transitional Housing Program (and, by extension, the needs of individuals and families in housing crisis) on the one hand, and the right of the tenant not to have their home unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with (in this case, by eviction) on the other hand.
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING v T (Residential Tenancies) [2009] VCAT (26 June 2009) - VCAT granted an eviction order against a tenant on the basis that they had used the premises for an illegal purpose (trafficking heroin). VCAT considered the tenant's human right not to have their home interfered with, but found "that intrusion on the right is justified and is proportionate. The Director of Housing has a legitimate and justifiable interest in ensuring that rented premises are not used for drug trafficking – it is in its own interests and also in the interests of other residents in adjoining or neighbouring public housing."
Director of Housing v IF (Residential Tenancies) [2008] VCAT (18 November 2008) - VCAT granted a compliance order against the tenant, rejecting the tenancy advocate's submission that the order would be contrary to the Charter. VCAT noted that the Charter applied to the human rights of neighbours as well as to the rights of tenants.
Director of Housing v TP (Residential Tenancies) [2008] VCAT (24 June 2008) - VCAT rejected an application for eviction against a tenant accused of using the premises for illegal purposes. While the decision was made on the facts, VCAT made some important observations on the application of the Charter.
R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust [2008] - UK High Court held that this Registered Social Landlord is a public authority. The Court's reasons are significant, but the finding is now subject to appeal. [**LATEST NEWS 18/06/2009: "Housing associations are public bodies and susceptible to claims under the Human Rights Act, London’s Court of Appeal confirmed today." - Inside Housing (UK)]
YL v Birmingham City Council & Ors [2007] - a key judgement by the UK House of Lords. The majority held that Southern Cross Healthcare, an aged care home, was not a "public authority", as the provision of care and accommodation did not amount to a "function of a public nature". However, the reasons given by Baroness Hale and Lord Bingham in their minority finding against Southern Cross have already been used in an amicus curiae submission to Justice Bell regarding the MetroWest v Sudi case (see above).
[more Charter case law to be added when available...]

Housing & other relevant legislation

Housing Act (1983) as amended 2004 (Word doc in new window)
Performance Standards (pdf in new window)