Page 3253 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 18 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
are not held to the same standard as private tenants, looking after their property and having it inspected twice a year to ensure no issues and that the property is in good condition?
We understand that there are a lot of tenants with complicated situations, but if they were living in a private rental, they would be subjected to a higher level of inspection. Is the current standard that public housing tenants are held to really setting them up for success? That is my question. Or is it setting them up for failure and for constant dependence on this government. We do not want public housing tenants to fail. We do not want them to fail. We want to see more success stories. Yet we hear so many who tell us that, because they cannot get maintenance done or their house is falling apart, they feel like they are failing. The government must be held to account and they must do better in this space because it is so important to the lives of so many people.
When it was recommended that the government place end or conclusion dates on letters regarding maintenance and other such matters, it was said—and this is from the hearings—that the ACT government believes that it provides time frames and deadlines if applicable. In the recent energy efficiency program, when Housing ACT tenants were sent letters advising them of the program, many chose to take up this opportunity. I use this as an example of where end dates should have been applicable. What was not included in the letter was that the program had a limited amount available and would conclude on 30 June this year. It meant that many tenants missed out because they were not aware of the cap. They were not aware of the conclusion date.
Further, over 300 tenants were sent letters saying that they would be relocating as part of the growth and renewal program, which ends in 2024. But there were no dates or time lines. There were no dates or time lines given to tenants. I am not going to rehash that to a great extent here, but I think we know that that caused enormous stress to so many people who believed that they would be, as they put it, evicted in weeks or months. We know that that was not the case. But there was uncertainty. We believe that time lines and dates around expectations would have been beneficial on those letters.
The two examples I have touched on would have been extremely applicable, but no time frames or deadlines were provided. It is just another example of the Labor-Greens government saying that they are doing one thing and in fact the opposite is happening. Issues like these continue to cause concern or questions in the community when the government cannot provide completion dates allowing for the evaluation of programs.
How many times do the Canberra Liberals need to ask at what date—and I know there will be a rolling of the eyes—will Minister Vassarotti’s election promise of a home for all be delivered or when will the ACT government complete the 1,000 additional homes they keep promising? I have got to address some comments that were made about this by Mr Davis last week, suggesting that the Canberra Liberals were wrong to bring up Ms Vassarotti’s promise of a home for all because, Mr Davis says, should we not all be aspiring to that? He said that we were wrong—the Liberals—because we should all be aspiring to provide a home for everyone.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video