Imagine a Queensland where everyone has a place to call home. That’s the bold vision behind the state government’s latest move to tackle the housing crisis head-on. But here’s where it gets controversial: they’re releasing underutilized government land for housing, and not everyone agrees on how—or even if—it should be done. The Queensland government has just unveiled the Land Activation Program (LAP), a game-changing initiative aimed at fast-tracking the development of new homes across the state. As part of the Crisafulli government’s ambitious plan to deliver one million new homes by 2044, LAP invites developers to identify and register interest in surplus government land ripe for housing projects. Led by Economic Development Queensland (EDQ), the program leverages the Economic Development Act 2012 to expedite approvals and bypass the Queensland Government Land Transaction Policy, allowing land transfers at residual value. This means less red tape and more homes, faster. Deputy Premier Jarrod Bleijie sums it up: ‘Queensland is now open for business, and we’re cutting through the bureaucracy to bring development-ready land to market.’ And this is the part most people miss: EDQ isn’t just waiting for developers to come to them—they’re actively seeking proposals from the industry to identify potential sites. Once a site is flagged, EDQ investigates its suitability within 30 business days, ensuring a swift and efficient process. The first site to hit the market is a prime example: over six hectares of vacant land in Banyo, just 13km from Brisbane’s CBD. This former Energex depot, now transferred at residual value, could house up to 400 families, with easy access to public transport, shops, and amenities. But LAP isn’t just about one-off releases. The government’s ‘use it or house it’ policy mandates that surplus state-owned land be repurposed for housing if it’s no longer needed. This comes at a critical time, as Queensland experiences a population boom, with the state recording the largest net gain from inter-regional migration in the 12 months to September 2025, according to the Regional Movers Index. Not everyone is convinced, though. Here’s the controversial bit: while industry leaders like Queensland Property Council’s Jess Caire applaud the move, calling it a ‘meaningful commitment to delivering more supply sooner,’ others worry about the long-term implications of fast-tracking developments. Could this lead to rushed projects or overlooked environmental concerns? The government insists it’s all about balance—accelerating supply while ensuring quality. So, what do you think? Is this the solution Queensland needs, or are there hidden pitfalls? Let’s debate it in the comments. For those eager to dive deeper into the world of new homes, check out our New Homes section for more insights and opportunities. And while you’re here, help us improve your reading experience by sharing your feedback—it only takes a minute!
