Restricting the period but not the amount rents can be increased does very little but set in place the impression of limits before an election cycle.
Andrews says “Everything is on the table”. Perhaps he should consider a break with the entire history of his government and start investing in public housing at scale rather than the current social housing rort.
The trouble is that in the long term, without additional schemes to encourage construction (or public housing construction), rent controls discourage new dwelling construction.
However it is still a solvable problem. For example Germany subsidises new builds, as long as you do agree to rent controls. Hence housing co-ops and private investors are encouraged to invest in affordable housing.
Melbourne already has a defined urban growth boundary, but it still leaves the opportunity for a lot of low density fringe suburbs, which makes the provision of infrastructure and services cost prohibitive.
Hopefully the push towards 70% established/30% new areas will help address urban sprawl and get people living closer to services.
Melbourne has had various growth boundaries since I can remember. It also has plans for an airport rail. Both of these are fairy tales waved around by politicians occasionally and them dumped after the elections.
Definite gotta get urban sprawl under control.