Page 4331 - Week 13 - Thursday, 4 December 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The flexibility that has been spoken about today that the opposition particularly wants to see incorporated into the scheme goes beyond just the flexibility of allowing a resident to stay on the block in their home for the duration of the scheme—be it an extra, six, 12 or 18 months, two years or potentially even up a five-year mark—to the potential for families to retain not the bricks and mortar of the house but the land, the suburb, the community and the connection that they have to their street and the ability to retain the ownership of their property so they can, in a timely fashion, return, rebuild their lives and construct a new life moving forward. Certainly it is not going to be an option that suits all of the 1,021 home owners, but, as I said before, it is important that that choice is given and there is an opportunity for some to take that opportunity.
Over the past months, as this issue has been on the boil in the territory and debated in the Assembly, a number of constituents have contacted me. A number of friends and close acquaintances are also affected by this. Their experiences are very different.
I was talking to one friend this week who has already signed onto the scheme. She recognises that it is not a perfect scheme but feels that it is the best option that they have for themselves—for her family and for her situation. She shared the story of entering the housing market, seeking to buy a new property and already recognising that the property market has shifted substantially from the valuation date of her property of 28 October of this year compared to 20 November 2014—less than a month difference—and what the buying power of that money is. There is the bidding war that is occurring on a number of properties, particularly in the price range that she is looking at, which is a fairly modest price range. There are a number of families, both first home buyers entering the market and Mr Fluffy home owners and investors, all competing for what is a shortage of housing supply currently in the ACT. As the buyback scheme draws on, there is going to need to be some flexibility in the valuation of family homes to account for the fact that like for like should be able to be purchased.
That goes to what the Chief Minister said and the basis of the scheme being around safety, certainty and fairness. In providing certainty for families that choose to perhaps return to their blocks, it should not be a drawn-out process. There should be some fairly tight time frames around when the block is handed over for remediation and when it can be returned to its current owners to start construction of a home. For some, a very short time frame will be appropriate; others may prefer a longer one. But flexibility in that choice should most definitely be included.
This week I had a very interesting time. I met with a friend who invited around a couple of other affected home owners. We sat in the lounge room with five families that are affected by this Mr Fluffy issue. The emergency relief that is being provided has been of great assistance for a lot of families in this emergency time. But a young lady I was talking to said that they were originally a victim of the Brisbane floods and they came to Canberra for a new opportunity. They had to replace their furniture and all their belongings after the floods. They came to Canberra, set up here, bought a new home and thought, “Life is getting better; we’re on recovery; we can move forward with our lives,” only to discover in February of this year that the home they bought with all their dreams and aspirations is a Mr Fluffy property.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video