Page 1994 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 25 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Households’ circumstances vary at a particular moment and over time. Their expectations and aspirations also vary. The scheme may not be a suitable or preferred choice for every household, but it provides another option and another choice. I must say the government is extremely disappointed that the opposition is not supporting this scheme. The opposition has expressed, and expressed it again today, through both its leader and the deputy leader, very much, it seems to me, a Marie Antoinette approach to housing affordability within the ACT. It is very much a case of “let them eat cake”.
We have a classic example here of the Liberal Party opposing an innovative scheme, an Australian-leading scheme, that has the support of almost every sector of the housing industry, from financiers to the Law Society, builders and the Real Estate Institute. It is supported everywhere—across the board. The first of what we hope will be many information sessions has been held, before the legislation was passed. It was booked out. It was not even advertised, yet it was booked out and there are names on a waiting list. There is very much an attitude of sour grapes that there is a very effective housing affordability strategy in place in the ACT, with 62 options, that is recognised around Australia and attracting international attention for the range and breadth of the initiatives being pursued.
We have an initiative that goes right to the heart of providing an opportunity for those families that have probably just about given up the prospect or the hope of owning their own home, and gaining entry—a foothold, a toehold—to home ownership. They want to have the capacity to come home at night and unlock the door of a home which they can call their own. We are offering that to households in this community that potentially have incomes as low as $50,000.
You need only do some basic sums on some of the implications of land rent, as opposed to purchase, to get some idea of the significance and the innovation inherent in this proposal. At the moment, a household weekly mortgage payment on, say, a $200,000 block of land, is in the order of $382. This puts it into perspective: on a $200,000 block of land, the mortgage payment would be in the order of $382 per week. Under the land rent scheme, a household would be required to pay $77 per week in rent—$77 as against $382. It gives a significant indication of what hope this scheme holds out to those people on lower incomes, young families, working families, young families with children, seeking to gain what many of us take for granted—namely, their own home.
The Liberal Party would begrudge them that. The Liberal Party have adopted this flighty, Marie Antoinette “let them eat cake” approach: “Who are we to care? Who are we to hold out the opportunity or the hope for homeownership to those Canberrans on incomes of less than $75,000? We have a stamp duty exemption scheme. We have one policy. You might have 62 but our one policy, our stamp duty exemption policy, un-means-tested, is attractive for those people earning more than $160,000.”
It is a scheme which is beginning to attract some attention. It has been adopted around Australia. The Liberal Party in the ACT are engaging in “me-tooism”. It is interesting that in the last week we have had the first detailed analysis of the stamp duty exemption schemes proposed by the Liberal Party here and which have been adopted
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .