It appears no one is providing effective oversight, including Council despite providing HousingFirst with decades of crucial financial and institutional support.
This lack of oversight has come into sharp focus with the recent revelation that HousingFirst is selling 25 social housing units in the Inkerman Oasis. These units were originally the result of a land-for-homes swap between the Council and the developer of the apartment complex on a former council depot.
Residents of the 25 units were shocked when HousingFirst staff unexpectedly knocked on their doors to deliver news of the sale last month. When residents contacted TWISK, we were equally surprised and immediately questioned the Council about the sale.
The Council’s response proved even more unsettling. It became clear that the existing “governance arrangements” meant the Council had no say in the sale, let alone in the treatment of residents profoundly impacted by the sudden housing uncertainty.
Even more concerning was the fact that the Council was informed about the proposed sale at least 18 months prior, during the term of the previous council.
HousingFirst told the residents about the planned sale only weeks ago even though it had ample opportunity to do otherwise, especially in December 2024 when it sold an accessible apartment in the block. We now know that reassurances given to the residents at the time were shallow and worthless.
A doppelganger committee with a $477M property portfolio
As reported last week, the responsible officers of the Port Phillip Housing Trust and HousingFirst are identical, forming what is best described as a “doppelganger” or “mirror committee.” In practice, these individuals simply conclude one meeting and immediately begin another, effectively serving as both entities.
Investigations reveal that HousingFirst (formally known as Port Phillip Housing Association) acts as the trustee for the Port Phillip Housing Trust. The Trust Deed grants the Council the right to appoint two delegates to the Board of HousingFirst (currently two councillors). The public rationale for this structure, as explained by the Council in response to TWISK’s questions, was to meet the requirements for potential State Government grants. It also acknowledged the inherent conflict of being both the project deliverer and the statutory planning authority.
Ironically, there is speculation that this arrangement also serves a hidden agenda: to protect social housing sales from future councils that might be less supportive or cash strapped.
Success has consequences
Indeed, funding flowed, and HousingFirst became a significant player in social housing, boasting an impressive $477 million property portfolio across Melbourne, comprising over 2300 units for rent.
This portfolio is extensive, covering areas such as Moonee Valley, Merri-bek, Darebin, Maribyrnong, Hobsons Bay, Wyndham, Manningham, Melbourne, Stonnington, Maroondah, Whitehorse, Monash, Glen Eira, Bayside, Kingston, and Knox.
Housing First’s most recent annual report indicates they operate 682 properties in Port Phillip, representing 29.59% of their total housing units.
Measured by the number of social housing units created, HousingFirst appears to be a successful developer.
However, cracks are beginning to appear in this seemingly rosy picture.
Misplaced trust in Deed
The governance arrangements are a key concern. The “doppelganger” responsible officer committees, with the Council acting as “Governor” in name only, effectively allow HousingFirst to “mark its own homework.”
It sets its own criteria for success and approves its own performance. Its claim to social license is based on its ability to develop more properties. The massive growth since 2005 has significantly challenged the structures necessary to provide oversight of an organisation primarily spending public money from federal, state, and council sources, in addition to rental income from thousands of residents.
The Trust Deeds supplied by the Council state that the purpose of the Trust is to provide affordable housing in the City of Port Phillip to “Eligible Residents,” defined as individuals with significant links to the city who meet the criteria for affordable housing. The Trust Fund is intended to be maintained in perpetuity exclusively for these public charitable purposes.
TWiSK is reminded of the philosophy that “charity begins at home” but in this case the quest for scale has changed the fundamental mission.
Council voted to investigate in 2024 but hid the report from public view
In June 2024, the Council voted to “request officers to provide a report to Council on the governance arrangements and considerations of Council’s involvement in HousingFirst, the Port Phillip Housing Trust and related entities including options and advice.” (See minutes).
TWISK sought information about this report, but the Council evaded the question in this response. We believe the response given is disingenuous and that a report was produced in September 2024 and tabled at Council as the minutes show albeit deemed confidential. TWiSK believes that report should be released.
Meanwhile, partly prompted by recent news coverage, former Councillor Bond has expressed serious concerns. In a statement to TWISK, he wrote:
“It’s become clear that Housing First has very different objectives to those of the Port Phillip Housing Trust, and it’s time that the City of Port Phillip – as the Governor of the Trust – took the necessary steps to ensure that PPHT is represented by a completely separate and independent board to that of Housing First.
“This would ensure that the Trust prioritises the interests of the residents and ratepayers of Port Phillip ahead of the sometimes competing priorities of Housing First. It would also eliminate the difficult position that Cr Halliday and Cr Jay have found themselves in whereby their obligations as Councillors to the City of Port Phillip and its residents have been compromised by their legal obligations as directors of Housing First.
“On the 19 June 2024 a Notice of Motion was passed by the previous Council to investigate the Governance arrangements for PPHT, so much of the work to outline the process for a separate board for the Trust should be completed and available to Councillors should they wish to pursue this path.”
HousingFirst may have exceeded expectations and also its mandate
An examination of Housing First’s most recent annual report lends significant weight to the concern that its activities have outgrown its original scope.
As we will report in future weeks, the significant delay in the HousingFirst’s long promised Grosvenor Street development, currently no more than a large hole in the ground without recent progress, is evidence that Port Phillip might not be receiving adequate attention.
But Housing First’s financial position demonstrates a strong and growing asset base.
As of June 30, 2025, the total consolidated assets for HousingFirst Ltd stood at $645,243,887, an increase from $628,893,430 in the previous year. A substantial portion of these assets is in property, plant, and equipment, valued at $476,509,247, alongside investment property worth $129,905,000. The organisation also maintains a healthy level of current assets, including cash and cash equivalents of $8,103,295 and term deposits of $15,454,242.
In terms of liabilities, HousingFirst has total liabilities of $265,640,806, with the majority being non-current borrowings amounting to $256,586,764. Despite these liabilities, Housing First’s net assets are substantial at $379,603,080, indicating a solid equity position. The retained surplus is $306,557,420, and reserves are $73,045,661.
The Port Phillip Housing Trust, for which HousingFirst is the Trustee, also contributes to the overall financial picture. The Trust’s property assets were valued at $118,677,325 as of June 30, 2025, with total assets at $119,979,622. The Trust’s net assets are $108,995,070. This indicates that Housing First, both as a consolidated entity and through the Trust, possesses a robust financial foundation with significant property holdings and a healthy equity base.
Who cares about governance when financial performance is positive?
The adage “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” might be an option, but more is at stake than just growth metrics. For example, do residents feel at home in their housing? Do they feel secure in their tenancy? Are the housing units aligning with the original vision of the PP housing association to maintain local diversity in the face of escalating rents?
It may be that HousingFirst excels as a developer but is less effective as a property manager or landlord, suggesting that this aspect of the “business” might be under-resourced.
We note with interest that HousingFirst conducts a biennial Resident Satisfaction Survey, yet none of the results are mentioned in their annual report.
TWISK is concerned that success is being measured by the number of units rather than by quality, liveability and location. We are also concerned that HousingFirst provides housing rather than secure homes, as the Oasis experience dramatically demonstrates.
Further, any organisation building assets on this scale with public money requires independent scrutiny.
Should HousingFirst and the Port Phillip Housing Trust be allowed to mark their own homework. TWiSK thinks not. What do you think?
TWISK extends a right of reply to both Council and HousingFirst. We will happily publish any statement they wish to make in full.
Council responses to TWiSK in full (10 April 2026)
Q: Please explain this relationship, its purpose and selection of responsible officers. Please also detail when this relationship started and provide the minutes / public facing paperwork related to that initial decision.
Council established the Port Phillip Housing Trust in December 2005 when it executed the Trust Deed for the Port Phillip Housing Trust (PPHT). Parties to this Deed were Council, as ‘Governor’, and the Port Phillip Housing Association – now HousingFirst, as ‘Trustee’.
The PPHT was established because it was no longer suitable for Council to continue to directly develop community housing projects, a role it had undertaken since 1985. This is because:
- It was considered to no longer be appropriate for Council to be both the project deliverer and the statutory planning authority
- An entity with a sole focus and expertise in community housing would be able to scale delivery of housing projects more effectively than Council
- It would have been unsuitable for Council to be registered and regulated by the Registrar of Housing Agencies (the Housing Registrar) – which became a requirement for receipt of future project capital funding from the Office of Housing.
The Trust Deed includes the right for Council to appoint two delegates to the Board of HousingFirst. The remainder of the Board is appointed by HousingFirst in line with the constitution. Initially, Council was represented on the Board of PPHA by a Councillor and a Council officer, the (then titled) Housing Development Officer, and later this changed to the current arrangement for Council representation by two Councillors.
Q: How does The Trustee for HousingFirst Subtrust 1 Trust fit in the structure?
This is a question for HousingFirst.
Q. What is the nature of the financial and commercial relationship between the Trust/s and HF?
This is a question for HousingFirst.
Q: What is the nature of the flow of funds between them and the quantum in the FY25 period?
The flow and quantum of funds under the PPHT is a matter for HousingFirst. This may be clarified by reviewing the annual reports of HousingFirst for the 2024/25 financial year.
Q: Has the Council prepared a report for councillors on the governance structure relating to HF at any time in the past? Can I have copies please.
Successive Councils have discussed matters associated with the Port Phillip Housing Trust including its constitution. Publicly available Council reports until 2022 can be accessed through Council’s website and our governance team can be contacted to request reports before then.
Q: When decisions are being made on commercial matters between HF and PPHT, how does it work given the responsible officers are identical?
These are governance matters relating to how HousingFirst manages its responsibilities for the PPHT as distinct from managing its responsibilities for the other non-Trust matters. Questions on this matter should be referred to HousingFirst.
Q: In the event of the units being sold, who gets to decide on the sale, price, timing etc?
HousingFirst is fully responsible for deciding which properties (or units within properties such as at Inkerman Oasis) under the PPHT it wishes to sell, when these properties are sold and the sale price.
This power is reflected in the Trust Deed, Section 5 – Powers of the Trustee, part (c), where this states that The Trustee can generally deal with property (refer to enclosed Trust Deed).
Q: Looking forward, is it possible that PPHT could engage another provider to manage their portfolio and tenants? What happens if HF is acquired or merges or changes operations significantly, can PPHT separate from HF?
The PPHT is not an entity in itself and is controlled by HousingFirst as its Trustee. Council could only remove HousingFirst as Trustee of the PPHT if it was not meeting the intention of the Trust Deed. If HousingFirst is acquired by or merges with another organisation, the purpose of the PPHT and its Trust Fund (containing assets under the PPHT) must be maintained by any new organisation. Under the Trust Deed, the Trustee (HousingFirst) can join or merge with any other Trust if that is consistent with the objects of the Trust (refer to part 5 – Powers of the Trustee, part 5.1 (k)).
