Page 2515 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am very concerned about the whole thing—this compounding of cutbacks. Community housing for the ACT is gone now. We have got rid of the chaff, according to Mr Hargreaves, but I think Dr Foskey was saying something about hoping that this is not just going to terminate in some sort of number crunching game—with the cheapest proved not to be best, of course.
There has to be a balance—the shadow Treasurer has said that; I am cognisant of that too—but it has placed enormous pressure on already stretched services like ACTCOSS and ACT Shelter to meet with the community in order to be able to present to the government a realistic picture of the needs, unmet or otherwise, in the public and social housing sector.
I am told that there continue to be serious issues relating to the lack of such services in the community, with people who seek emergency and crisis accommodation still being turned away. Again it has a knock-on, domino effect. Agreeing with ACTCOSS, I acknowledge that some of the affordability measures may reduce pressures on homelessness services in the long term; however, again according to ACTCOSS, their current difficulties will continue to worsen in the short term.
Realignment of the public housing stock is well overdue, particularly when successive housing ministers have known that the greatest demand has been for two-bedroom dwellings. The shadow Treasurer very clearly articulated the current situation and where we as the opposition stand: public housing should mean a roof over your head when you need it, for the duration of that need—apropos the commonwealth-state housing agreement guiding principles.
It is all too obvious that the Stanhope government have allowed existing public housing tenants to maintain for far too long tenancies that do not reflect their specified need. They had to play catch-up and do the right thing. I know that it is very distressing when you are moved out of your home, but we have to make sure that we have a system for the people on low incomes who cannot afford to go anywhere else.
Better management practices and efficiency gains are desperately needed in the public housing portfolio. The one-off funding boost of $4.3 million, which I understand is to see some 17 two-bedroom dwellings constructed over the next 12 months, is really welcome, but it is indicative of a minister not being able to effectively organise his portfolio and manage funds in order to house the Canberrans most in need for the duration of that need.
We see a concern about the recently proposed transfer of land titles to expand the community housing sector. The ACT government expects the number of properties in this sector to shrink in the coming year. Maybe the housing minister can tell me if that is right or wrong.
I also continue to wonder about the expenditure of the famous—or is it infamous?—$30 million which was announced, re-announced and re-announced again more times before the last election than I can mention. I am wondering how that is progressing.
Mr Hargreaves: We’ve spent two-thirds of it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .