In this video, ABC economics journalist Alan Kohler succumbs to YIMBY propaganda, presenting a mathematical problem in a fundamentally flawed way by omitting a crucial factor: immigration. This oversight renders the analysis not only incomplete but absurd, highlighting the importance of considering all variables in any economic equation.
(Video: " What’s slowing down housing development?" | Alan Kohler | ABC NEWS, Australia, 28 July 2025.)
Alan might as well be discussing angels on a pinhead, as he focuses on the ratio of planner supply to housing supply without addressing demand rates. A surge in urban and town planners in Australia—up 9-fold over the past 40 years—is reviewed in the context of the housing crisis, where dwellings per planner have declined from 50 to less than 9 annually. However, this ignores key factors: the population increased by 72.3% between 1985 and 2025 (a 72.3% increase calculated as ((27.4m - 15.9m) / 15.9m * 100)), driven largely by mass immigration against a backdrop of low natural growth. From 1955 to 2013, the number of passenger vehicles in Australia grew at an average annual rate of 4%, while the number of vehicles per 1,000 people increased from 153 to 568. Car ownership rose to 776 per 1,000 people in 2021, while people per dwelling dropped.[1] The pressure on infrastructure and resources like land and water—exemplified by the need for desalination plants—is undeniable. The 900% increase in planners, far outpacing the 49% rise in total dwellings, suggests a system absurdly designed to cram more people into Australia’s already stretched infrastructure, no matter the cost.
Kohler's notion of blind efficiency—arguing that if more planners do not lead to more houses, then fewer planners will (through deregulation)—ignores a deeper truth: residents’ rights to shape their environment and manage their cost of living are being trampled. Efficiency should serve us, not enslave us. The YIMBY argument that deregulation will boost housing output assumes we are all cogs in a machine, not citizens with a voice. Residents have every right to object to overdevelopment that destroys canopy and native habitats, strains water resources, and erodes quality of life.
It is incredible that the mainstream press facilitates YIMBY to obstinately ignore the demand side, which is primarily fueled by mass immigration. Developers, governments, and media present Australia’s record population growth as a mysterious and inevitable challenge requiring more planners. This perspective dismisses the community's ability to determine their future, as population pressure is not inevitable; Australia’s birth rate is only 1.5 children per woman.
Looking at this from a different angle, without the growthist ideology, supply issues—such as complexity, development objections, and declining livability—signal a need to curb demand. This necessitates rethinking immigration numbers and reconsidering authoritarian densification or sprawl, allowing communities to reclaim control rather than submit to an adversarial planning system where developers and governments are at odds with Australians. Slowing growth could allow properties to become vacant, reducing prices and making housing affordable for young people. This is the time-honoured traditional and sustainable way.
There are undoubtedly many obstacles to building more houses beyond regulatory ones, and we should explore their implications. Consider car-related urban challenges: with vehicle numbers tracking population growth, the focus should shift from optimizing traffic flow at any cost to ensuring residents' right to a balanced environment, one that does not overcrowd with more people or cars. The nine-fold increase in planners, coupled with shocking parking and road strain, worsens living conditions when forced housing reflects a misaligned bureaucracy hell-bent on forcing its distorted agenda rather than empowering citizens to shape their neighborhoods.
Factors like infrastructure bottlenecks and smaller households highlight demand pressures, yet the solution lies in giving residents a voice—through local zoning votes—rather than adding more planners to enforce top-down housing targets tied to immigration goals. It’s not just governments driving this planner boom; developers are hiring armies of planners to battle local councils, state governments, and ordinary citizens, wielding regulations as weapons to push projects through. Land banking—hoarding land to inflate prices—and deliberate construction delays further choke supply, turning the housing crisis into a profit scheme for developers.
Framing the issue as the ratio of planners to housing production and homelessness, while ignoring immigration numbers, is both grossly dishonest and illogical. This dogma scapegoats planners and democratic constraints, treating people as data points in a housing algorithm and erasing their rights to sustainable living and a stand against overdevelopment. The real fix isn’t to increase staffing to navigate a broken system or to reduce regulations that permit substandard developments; it’s about empowering communities to set their own limits, ensuring growth aligns with their vision rather than mere economic greed. In a country where water is increasingly expensive and land is scarcer by the day, planning must serve the people, not grind them down.
NOTES
[1]
Car Numbers - Long-term Trend:
From 1955 to 2013, the number of passenger vehicles in Australia grew at an average annual rate of 4%, while the number of vehicles per 1,000 people increased from 153 to 568. "Car Nation, 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, July 2013, (https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features40July+2013#:~:text=How%20many%20passenger%20vehicles%20are,to%20568%20per%201%2C000%20people)
Population Stats from The Australian Bureau of Statistics
Add comment