Page 932 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 17 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
low - I refer you to the trust's initiatives to reduce the 5,775 people on the waiting list, as published on 4 May 1992 in the Canberra Times. What did they list? One, an increase in the capital construction program; two, joint ventures with the private sector; three, the redevelopment of older trust properties; four, borrowing from private financial services; five, finding private investors; six, increasing the provision of cheap housing loans; seven, encouraging the private sector to invest; and eight, the trust would push also for more funds from the Federal Government.
They are all quite commendable aims; but, of those initiatives, not one of them identified any attempt to reduce the waiting period for people eligible to purchase their government homes from ten to five years, thus freeing up more money for the trust to help to accommodate these 5,775 people on the waiting list. Clearly, the Government believes, 45 years on, John Dedman's objection to selling government houses - because it would "create a nation of little capitalists".
This amendment, Madam Speaker, of the Housing Assistance Act 1987 will challenge this ideological hang-up. It will give tenants the chance to buy their government home, thus realising their share of the Australian dream, and in consequence will provide additional capital to the Housing Trust to provide a roof for more of the almost 6,000 people on their waiting list. The amendment also places in legislation certain restrictions upon the purchase, and I will reiterate them again. They are that non-rebated rent has been paid for five years; that the sale is to be at market price, following an independent valuation; and that the trust has the right of repurchase within five years of the sale, again following independent valuation. These amendments, I might add, Madam Speaker, are in line with existing policy, save the last, and that is that the trust's opportunity to repurchase currently is restricted to three years, not to the five years to which I wish to extend it. I commend this social justice amendment to the legislation to the Assembly.
Debate (on motion by Mr Connolly) adjourned.
EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES (CONFIDENTIALITY) BILL 1992
Detail Stage
Clause 2
Debate resumed from 20 May 1992.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 3
MR MOORE (11.46): Madam Speaker, in speaking to this clause I would like, first of all, to express thanks to both Mr Berry and Mr Connolly in particular for raising a number of issues that I believe improve the Bill, and for negotiating in a sensible and logical way. Similarly, my thanks go to Mrs Carnell, who has raised a number of issues about the Bill which we have been able to resolve through an explanation from the Parliamentary Counsel's officers. That, of course, brings me to the Parliamentary Counsel staff, who, as always, have been particularly helpful in the preparation of this Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .