Needing proper planning approvals is a no-brainer. Technically, this has probably always been required, but they never bothered enforcing it. It’s nice to see that that’s going to change.

I strongly oppose the idea that it should need body corporate support. The body corporate should function to maintain and upgrade the property and its facilities. They shouldn’t be able to tell you how you use your own apartment. They already have too much control over such things. My body corporate is actually really good, but our by-laws theoretically give it the power to say you can’t dry your clothes on your balcony, and that’s just not ok in my opinion. Allowing the body corporate to tell you what you can do with your apartment is very in keeping with the LNP’s paternalistic attitude, and it’s gross that they’re using the current anti-Airbnb zeitgeist as an opportunity to reinforce that.

I don’t know what I think about the property manager requirement. Guests at short stay should absolutely have someone they can call if something goes wrong. If that’s all this means, no issue. But if there’s some specific qualification or accreditation that person needs, or it has to be anything more than “phone number of a person who can authorise emergency repairs”, it seems unnecessary.

As a separate point, my biggest question is: how is any of this going to affect temporary Airbnbs? The original selling point of Airbnb was that you can rent out your place while you’re away on holiday, to help subsidise your trip. The article gives no indication of how people who use it in this way will be affected. I don’t think it should mitigate the requirement that a guest be able to call someone in an emergency, but it should mean you don’t need the same kind of planning approval and don’t pay a higher rates fee. And it’s a situation where the body corporate should absolutely have no control, even if someone were willing to give them power over more permanent Airbnbs.