Page 1604 - Week 05 - Thursday, 2 June 2022

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

territory into rolling cul-de-sacs and crescents, as we saw on coreflutes on every street corner in the context of the federal election.

Now at least we know that, finally and fortunately, we have advocates on the other side of the chamber joining the calls of the ACT Greens and ACT Labor to see a forgiveness of that housing debt. So if nothing else—by your own admission, Mr Parton, I am the ideas man—I am pleased to be providing more ideas to the Canberra Liberals to boost their policy chops. So that is useful.

In all seriousness, one of the things that I think have come from this debate certainly was not specifically part of the motion but has proven quite useful today and is worth reflecting on. I will take my lead from Mrs Jones, who, in her valedictory today, spoke quite eloquently about the need to perhaps be a bit kinder to one another.

It is really nice to see how many of my colleagues who grew up in public housing are proud to talk about having grown up in public housing and the great start that public housing has provided them. It looks like we are talking about 20 to 25 per cent of this Legislative Assembly being the products of great public housing. I think that is a credit to that investment. It is a credit that, across the political divide, we can all look at that. It invites a really important conversation that all 25 of us can start to have in our electorates about the need to push back against nimbyism in our community.

If my motivation behind this motion bears fruit—that we will have more money in public housing and we will be buying and building more public housing—the inevitable conclusion to that is the conversations, through the planning processes, about where these properties will be located. Of course, we have seen historic examples in the ACT of unflattering, uncomfortable high-rise public housing projects.

I distinctly recall a moment when I was younger, visiting my dad, when we went to the former Fraser Court, which I am sure members a little older might remember, down in Kingston. It was a rough part of the world. The ACT government’s approach to salt and peppering our public housing investment, I think, is really important. But that salt and peppering comes with making those investments in places where people already live, in apartment buildings and townhouse complexes where people already own property.

Today we have reflected on how many people grew up in public housing and how, as leaders and across three political parties, we all value public housing. We want to see greater investment. That invites a really important conversation about everyone’s need for a home, where those homes can go, the value in having diverse and eclectic communities in every postcode, in every SES bracket, near shops, away from shops, close to public transport, in your building and in your suburb. It is a really exciting next step to this process and an exciting community conversation that I certainly hope we can all have.

I underline the point that Senator Katy Gallagher and, indeed, what looks to be Senator-elect David Pocock were clear on these positions during the campaign. I warmly welcome their re-election and possible election. Perhaps the fate of Senator Seselja might have been different if the comments made by Mr Parton today about the

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video