Page 2291 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 22 June 2011

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


Before I respond to the specific claims in today’s motion, I would like to make the general observation that many in the community are starting to unpick that term “cost of living” and the arguments being put about as to whom this issue really applies and what it means to whom. In fact the OECD just last month released the “your better life” index, which found that “Australia had the third highest household disposable income in the OECD”—the ABS stats tell us that Canberra has the highest average income in Australia—and “the ACT has the highest average equivalised disposable household incomes” and our incomes have risen in real terms significantly faster than CPI. And that makes us, on average, the wealthiest of the wealthy.

That is, of course, not to say that there are not a significant number in our community who are doing it tough. As everyone knows, the Greens are committed to helping those who are in those difficult situations, those who are most in need. And I must say that to say that you care about cost of living but not want to provide more public housing for those most in need really does make your claims seem a little hollow.

The single-best response to the price of housing is public housing. And it seems clear that the Liberals have adopted a more Keynesian approach and seem to now be saying that the government should have more of a role in the housing market. So if they do not think that public housing has the single biggest impact, please tell us what does. And what would you do to help those who really need assistance with their housing needs? It is time. You do need to get out there now and you do need to put your solutions on the table.

In the last debate I thought we had managed to move beyond the very superficial approach of plucking out a few statistics with no context. So it is, I think, quite lamentable that we find ourselves covering almost exactly the same ground. One has to ask whether the Liberals have forgotten what was passed last year in that debate about poverty impact statements. Do they reject the basis of that work, as appears to be the case from statements they have made indicating that they believe cost of living pressures have more impact on middle income than low income groups?

If we look back at the data we know that here in the ACT the average household is doing quite well and there is quite a homogenous group with good, long-term public service employment. The problem, however, comes from that group of people that do not fit into the mould and rely on government benefits or unskilled work.

To live on a low income in Canberra is probably harder than it is elsewhere because our position, relative to the norm, is much further apart from that in other places, and things like high rents are definitely a struggle. If this is a matter that concerns the Liberal Party and is something they wish to pursue, then I really do welcome their engagement. But I think there is a great level of evidence that people on a low income struggle the most when rises in essential goods and services occur.

I am very concerned about statements that Mr Seselja has made. There were quotes by Mr Seselja in the Sunday Canberra Times on 12 June. In that Mr Seselja was quoted as saying:


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