Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan is attempting to frame November's state election around a simple narrative: those who support new housing versus those who block it. But local councils across the state are pushing back hard, arguing the real obstacles to solving Victoria's housing crisis lie with the state government itself.

The Premier's strategy positions her government as champions of the "Yes In My Backyard" movement, casting councils and community opposition as NIMBYs standing in the way of desperately needed homes. It's a politically appealing frame that taps into widespread frustration over housing affordability and availability.

But according to The Age, councils are refusing to accept the blame, pointing instead to chronic state government failures in infrastructure planning and approval processes that leave approved developments gathering dust.

The Infrastructure Gap

Local government representatives say the state's framing ignores a fundamental problem: many areas simply lack the roads, public transport, water systems, and community facilities needed to support significant new housing.

When councils approve developments in good faith, they often find themselves unable to deliver the supporting infrastructure because funding and coordination remain in state hands. The result is a pattern of stalled projects that the state can then point to as evidence of local obstruction.

This creates a political catch-22 for councils. Approve developments without adequate infrastructure and face community backlash when schools overflow and traffic grinds to a halt. Raise concerns about infrastructure gaps and get labeled as NIMBYs blocking housing.

The tension reflects a deeper structural issue in Australian governance: councils control planning approvals but lack the revenue-raising powers and infrastructure budgets controlled by state governments. This mismatch creates fertile ground for blame-shifting when housing targets aren't met.

State Approval Bottlenecks

Beyond infrastructure, councils point to the state's own approval processes as a major source of delay. Many developments require multiple state agency sign-offs — from transport authorities, water boards, and environmental regulators — that can take months or years.

When these state-level approvals stall, the projects appear on council books as "delayed" or "under assessment," creating the appearance of local government foot-dragging even when councils have already given in-principle support.

The dynamic highlights how Victoria's housing crisis involves multiple layers of government, each with different responsibilities and incentives. Simplifying it to a YIMBY versus NIMBY binary may be effective politics, but it obscures the complex coordination failures that actually prevent homes from being built.

Election Strategy

Allan's framing isn't accidental. With housing affordability consistently ranking as a top voter concern, positioning the government as pro-housing reformers battling entrenched interests offers clear political advantages.

The strategy also allows the government to cast any opposition — whether from councils, community groups, or the Liberal Party — as anti-housing obstructionists. It's a way of claiming the popular side of a contentious issue while deflecting responsibility for delivery failures.

But the approach carries risks. If councils can effectively make the case that state infrastructure failures and bureaucratic delays are the real problem, the Premier's narrative could backfire. Voters frustrated by housing costs may not be satisfied with a government that points fingers rather than delivers results.

What This Means for Housing

The dispute matters because it will shape how Victoria approaches housing policy after November. If the election validates the YIMBY versus NIMBY frame, expect more state government powers to override local planning controls.

If councils succeed in shifting focus to infrastructure and coordination, the next government may need to take a more comprehensive approach that addresses the full pipeline from planning to construction to supporting services.

For Victorians struggling with housing costs and availability, the political positioning matters less than results. Whether the barrier is local opposition, state bureaucracy, or infrastructure gaps, homes aren't getting built fast enough.

The question isn't really about YIMBYs versus NIMBYs. It's about which level of government will take responsibility for the coordination, funding, and political courage needed to actually solve the problem. As November approaches, that question remains unanswered.

What's clear is that both state and local governments have legitimate points. Councils do face genuine NIMBY pressure from existing residents who oppose density. But they also face genuine constraints from infrastructure gaps and state approval processes beyond their control.

The housing crisis won't be solved by one level of government blaming another. It will require state funding for infrastructure, streamlined approval processes, and local governments willing to approve appropriate density. Whether Victoria's election produces that kind of cooperation remains to be seen.