The Problems

South Australia also seems to be following an urban containment policy, as can be seen from their page on Adelaide's Urban Boundary. However, in the case of Adelaide, they may actually have a point about preserving farmland, as can be seen from the climate map below (adapted from material by the CSIRO):

The Western Australian State Government is responsible for the state having the most unaffordable housing in Australia.

Problem 1: "Network City: community planning strategy for Perth and Peel"

This is a plan by the State government. Even a quick skim over reveals the flaws. For example, according to their website, the "Key new directions" include:

• Managing urban growth through the staging of development
  
• Providing the majority of new dwellings in existing urban areas

The Queensland State Government is responsible for the housing affordability crisis in Queensland.

Urban Land Development Authority

Unlike the New South Welsh and Victorian State Governments, they seem to be putting some solid effort into doing something about it, to the extent that they created the ULDA (Urban Land Development Authority), which has dealing with this problem as one of its primary aims.

Problem 1: Poor definition of affordable

The New South Wales State Government is responsible for the housing affordability crisis in New South Wales.

The Problem

The Sydney plan ("City of Cities: A plan for Sydney's future") asserts that sufficient zoned land will be made available for commercial and housing activity, but it can be seen from the land affordability situation that this is not the case.

The Victorian State Government is responsible fo the housing crisis in Victoria.

The Problem: Melbourne 2030

Federal Government

The Federal Government isn't really in a position to do much about housing affordability, as I believe they're restrained by the constitution of Australia; it's essentially the responsibility of the State governments. The Federal government are doing what they can with their first home buyer grants, but it's not helping much. There are a few actions they could take, though, that would send things in the right direction:

• They could also reduce immigration to pre-Rudd levels (or less)
  
• They could discontinue the tax deductibility of negative gearing

  Negative Gearing

  Negative gearing means that a rental property is losing money; if it is tax deductible against the rest of someone's income, it means that the price paid for the housing is inflated, as people can then claim a tax deduction on their losses; tax deductions from income is one thing, but personal tax deductions for losses is another.