The Minns government’s recent announcement addressing the housing crisis is a welcome step towards acknowledging the depth of the problem. But to untangle the mess we’re in, we must first understand the decades of decisions, policies, and public attitudes that brought us here.

At its core, the crisis is one of supply and diversity. For decades, local councils, influenced by vocal "drawbridge" residents, those who want no change after settling in, and political movements resistant to development, have stifled housing solutions. The result? A severe under supply of smaller, more affordable homes near town centres, leaving renters, young people, and downsizers out in the cold.

Public engagement, though introduced as a mandatory process under the Planning Environment Act of 1979, has often been dominated by those opposed to change. The rise of anti-development sentiment in the 1980s and 1990s, further entrenched the "not in my backyard" (NIMBY) mentality. These groups opposed medium density developments and vilified developers as greedy, creating an environment where even well planned, sustainable housing projects were blocked.

Adding to this was the production of lengthy, bureaucratic documents written in overly complex language, effectively shutting out large portions of the community from meaningful participation. Public consultations became exercises in frustration, with residents struggling to engage with content designed more for regulatory compliance than community clarity.

Our planning regulations, designed to accommodate community input, have become increasingly prescriptive and complex, often prioritising aesthetics over practicality. Minimum lot sizes, restrictive zoning, and outdated engineering standards have made it nearly impossible to build the variety of housing that modern communities need.

The Minns government must confront a planning system where innovation is stifled, and councils are paralysed by fear of public backlash. Developers, often the villains in public narratives, are simply delivering what regulations allow. If smaller homes, terrace housing, or mixed-use developments aren’t being built, it’s because the current system doesn’t permit them.

The loudest voices in public engagement have historically come from older, more established residents, comfortable in their single-family homes. Meanwhile, younger generations, renters, and essential workers, those most affected by the housing crisis, are underrepresented.

The Minns government must address this by finding ways to involve a broader spectrum of voices, particularly younger people, who are often left out of these discussions.

To solve the housing crisis, we must embrace bold, transformative solutions:

• Regulatory Overhaul: Replace outdated, single-use zoning with flexible, mixed-use zoning that allows diverse housing types.

• Community Diversity: Prioritise housing for all demographics, from singles and renters to families and retirees.

• Public Engagement Reform: Simplify the language and format of public consultations to make them accessible and inclusive.

• Creative Planning Standards: Adopt modern engineering standards, to enable smaller, low-maintenance homes.

• Density with Sustainability: Focus on high-quality, medium-density developments near transport and services to minimise environmental impacts.

The Minns government’s acknowledgement of the crisis is an opportunity to rewrite the narrative. By understanding the missteps of the past, resistance to change, overly complex regulations, and unbalanced public engagement, we can pave the way for a housing system that is inclusive, sustainable, and responsive to the needs of all.

The question now is, will we rise to the challenge, or will history repeat itself?