Abstract: Plan Melbourne, the State of Victoria’s metropolitan planning strategy for the citizens of metropolitan Melbourne and its 31 local governments, was released for comment in October 2013. This ‘evidence-based strategy’1 for the next 37 years ‘consider[s] where new housing and business activities should be concentrated as well as transport connections, health services, schools, sports grounds and parks’ (DPCD 2013a 2 ). The intended detail is evident in the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Government (DTPLG) proposing to develop guidelines for neighbourhood village cafes (p. 101). The focus of this paper is on the politics and significance of Plan Melbourne, with significance being most closely assessed in terms of the Plan’s ability to influence housing outcomes. The paper proceeds from my housing and governance research that led to Australia’s Unintended Cities (Tomlinson 2012). Further to that research, the paper is based on reviewing submissions to the Ministerial Advisory Committee that in 2012 released Melbourne, let’s talk about the future. Discussion Paper, following the substantial trail of government documents and Web information and social media discussion, discussion with participants and commentators on the planning process and the Discussion Paper, and limited participation in the process. The paper has four sections. The first makes the points that to a considerable degree Plan Melbourne is a compilation of strategic decisions already made rather than the outcome of a metropolitan strategic planning process. It is also noted that none of these decisions are accountable to Melbourne’s metropolitan population. The second summarises the transition from Melbourne 2030 to Plan Melbourne and the associated housing policies and trends. The third concerns what is required for a strategic plan to be meaningful and how Plan Melbourne “measures up”. The final section considers whether the participation process has created community “buy-in” of the intended type, location and cost (TLC) of housing. The conclusion is that Plan Melbourne and its implications for housing are best understood by two words not included in the plan: ‘politics’ and ‘profit’. Plan Melbourne does not measure up.