Page 3669 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 27 October 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
this would be the case, and agree with the amendments as they are outlined in this legislation.
I have considered these issues that some home owners have raised, but I believe that restricting the conversion to market value only gets the best balance for all Mr Fluffy home owners. It is equitable across the Mr Fluffy scheme, the land rent scheme and it is equitable across the community. It will avoid a situation where some owners would be able to pay a lot less to get their block back than anyone else.
I thank the families who came to see me about this issue. I know a small number of them believed the scheme would operate differently. I have learnt firsthand that this change has implications for how they plan for their and their families’ next steps.
Other aspects of the land rent scheme, including eligibility criteria, calculation of land rent and its applicability to single dwelling house leases only remain the same as the existing land rent scheme. I think this is a good outcome and for some families it will be an affordable way to return to their land at a particular point in time.
I believe the scheme has been moving as quickly as it can. It is unlike anything else in the territory’s history. Decisiveness was important, families have certainty about the parameters of the scheme, and its parameters are equitable within the Mr Fluffy community and the broader community as a whole. And it is a compassionate scheme. Sadly, it is not, and could not ever have been, a scheme that enabled everyone to return to exactly the same situation as before. But land rent is a viable option within the scheme as a whole.
Ultimately, this legislation will help the ACT community to move closer to eliminating the legacy left behind by Mr Fluffy. The government will continue to work closely with all stakeholders affected by loose-fill asbestos, and this bill reflects the essential changes required to provide an enduring solution to the Mr Fluffy legacy.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (5.32): The Greens will be supporting the Building (Loose-fill Asbestos Eradication) Legislation Amendment Bill 2015, which is the next step in helping facilitate the planning aspects of the government’s loose-fill asbestos insulation eradication scheme, or the Mr Fluffy buyback program. This is the second set of legislative amendments to ensure that the scheme can operate practically for both the owners of the properties and the ACT government.
As I have said in this place before, the Greens support the government’s buyback program. A great deal of thought and effort has gone into finding a solution that is as equitable as possible, and achievable. Taking action to address the Mr Fluffy legacy is vital to offer a solution to those who are affected, to allow people to rebuild and get on with their lives as well as to remove the toxic legacy from people’s homes in Canberra so that no-one else will have to endure the fear and the consequences of living in a Mr Fluffy contaminated house. There has been a range of legislative changes that need to be put in place to ensure that the systems are in place to cope with the mass buyback, demolition and sale processes needed for over 1,000 houses across Canberra.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video