Page 4295 - Week 13 - Thursday, 4 December 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
colleagues—put aside that and worked towards delivering a report that looked after the Mr Fluffy home owners, entirely aware of the impact that what we said may have on the budget. It is that balance I think we have achieved in a report of some 150 pages and 62 recommendations that gives us a way to finally eradicate the scourge of loose-fill asbestos in the ACT. In that I congratulate the Chief Minister on the decision she took.
I will say, on a lighter note, I do not think the committee appreciated the short time lines. We finished hearings at 6 o’clock on Monday evening. At about 5.35 yesterday we were still putting recommendations into the report. There was Ms Berry with ideas—she wanted more recs in; she wanted words out—but we did it. In large part that is due to the efforts of my colleagues, but particularly I acknowledge the work of Dr Cullen and Dr Lloyd, who assisted the committee in a way that no-one can imagine. I was sending recs from home to Dr Cullen at 11.30 on Tuesday night and there they were in the report on Wednesday morning. I do not know what time she got home any night this week. But if women of the ACT want a model of how to go about being a professional public servant, Dr Cullen is the person for you.
There are 62 recommendations in this report. I think we have covered the gamut, the range of suggestions that were made in the submissions and that we heard in the inquiry. I have to say, Monday was a fairly harrowing day for all of us, particularly when we had an 80-year-old couple come in to say they had lived in their house for 62 years and they simply wanted to stay. They were so overcome in the waiting room that we held the hearing in camera so that they were not afraid. They are afraid of the future. Many families are afraid of the future.
We need to establish a way that is fair and is affordable as a jurisdiction, but we have to get the balance right. So many of the submissions talked about fairness. There seem to be a number of groups now within the Mr Fluffy family, as it were. Some took the decision before the task force reported and knocked down their homes. They have the government assistance to knock down, they have the remediation, but they are getting their full lease back. And time and time and time again we heard from affected residents, “We just want to go home.” This report says they should be allowed to go home without any disadvantage.
While there was some argy-bargy and discussion inside the committee—and members can say which recs they supported fully—this report has been issued without dissent. It is a unanimous report from two Labor and two Liberal members, saying, “Let’s get this right.” There are some big issues in this still.
The first issue I want to address—and there is a recommendation about it—is removing contaminated material from these homes. Many people have been locked out of their homes and can take nothing because the contamination is so bad. Others have had assessments and been told they must leave and will choose what they take. If we are ultimately going to spend a billion dollars to eradicate this problem, why would we allow people to take with them goods contaminated with loose-fill asbestos when we know how deadly it can be and the 30- or 40-year time frame that it can be deadly for? Why would we allow those families to take material, soft furnishings, indeed hard furnishings, to a rental and then perhaps to a new home and carry
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video