Herald on Sunday Editorial: House or baby? It's an unfair decision

Sociologist Paul Spoonley says many are having to choose between having a baby or buying a house, to afford one they must put off the other. Photo / iStock

We read today that the average age at which our young people can buy their first home has risen by almost 10 years over the past 50 years.

Over the same period the average age at which they have their first child has risen by seven years, to 30.

Obviously the price of houses is not the only reason. Fifty years ago the Pill became available and shortly thereafter, women were able to combine motherhood with paid careers. Many sensibly got a qualification and some work experience before taking time out to have children. But young people today also carry student debt and face house prices that add greatly to the age at which they are having babies.

It is time to study in more depth the implications for them and for our society. Sociologist Paul Spoonley says many are having to choose between having a baby or buying a house, to afford one they must put off the other. There is a limit to how long childbirth can be delayed, which means those who opt for a house may be childless for life, and those who opt for a family face the prospect of renting houses for much, if not all, their lives.

This may happen even if the current boom in house prices abates soon. After two long surges so far this century, broken briefly from 2007-09, the market has put houses far beyond the reach of an average income and prices are unlikely to come down. The best the Reserve Bank and Government expect from lending restrictions and tax decisions taking effect in October is the rate of increase will be slower.

If a significant number of the under-40 population are facing long-term tenancy, more should be done.

The law should give them more security of tenure and more scope to treat the house as their own. They need sufficient tenure to give a child a stable education rather than frequent changes of school. A family should to be able to establish local friendships and feel part of a community. It should be able to paint the house and have freedom to change the grounds.

Tenants should have a reasonably stable rent and rights to remain in the house on the same terms if its ownership changes. They, and the landlord, should have easy access to a statutory adjudication body for any breaches of the tenancy or structural damage to the property.

If these rights reduce the appeal of rental housing to investors, so be it. House prices would come down a little and more tenants might become owners. But the case for more secure tenancy is one of social priorities. If people have to choose between a baby and buying a house, they should have the security to start a family.