While the premise and/or intent behind the article is on point, the delivery being inadequate, the HAFF is the fund, not the policy (or policies) around delivery.

The fund isn’t failing and it was a good idea to allocate it out of the future fund, but its limitations are generating more money and underwriting the build policies.

The other thing the article doesn’t touch on is that a lot of the policies and projects this is meant to fund are administered at the state level as the supply of public housing is a state remit. Housing policy is a state remit.

However, the broader premise behind it is correct; the targets are not being met.