Page 3254 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 18 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
At the end of the day, I guess he is right. We should all be aspiring to that, but the difference is that we did not go to an election promising to provide a home for everyone. That is the difference. If you go to the electorate, in the lead-up to the election, and you very clearly promise to provide a home for all, I think there is an expectation from that electorate that you are intending to deliver that outcome and you are likely to achieve it in your first term in government. I do not see it as an aspirational: “Well, we will work towards this, and we might get to it in 2090.” That is not how the electorate sees it.
The problem for Ms Vassarotti is that I am not sure that she actually expected to get elected to this place. But she did. So well done to her. Additionally, I am not sure that she thought it was likely she would end up as the housing and homelessness minister. But she is. She is. My point is that if you promise a home for all and you are the minister, you cannot just say that it is an aspirational goal. You cannot just say that it is a dream that we have and we will work to it—we will get to it at some point.
You have drawn a line in the sand. Given how definitive the promise was, if by the end of the term you have not provided a home for everyone who wants one, then you have failed. You have not delivered. And you have definitely failed if homelessness has increased. So that is why we bring it up. (Second speaking period taken.) It gets down to not just this minister but this government and their inability to provide a time line for anything. Where is Mr Steel?
Every time we ask, all we hear is reasons why it has not yet occurred and this quote: “It is not a linear process. There will be fluctuations.” And fluctuations indeed there are. All we see is a small but steady decline in the number of dwellings available and a steady increase in homelessness and wait list times and applicants. So why the government cannot provide deadlines is pretty obvious, really. They do not want to be seen as a failure when it comes to indicating when this is going to happen. If they provided deadlines, they would consistently fail on these milestones and the evaluations would reflect that. We understand that there are many factors that determine whether this is a rolling deadline, but the people of Canberra want to know if this ACT government is succeeding. Hiding behind all the reasons why things have not been completed is getting old.
I appreciate all the efforts of the department to improve the system, but it appears to be getting worse. There are some major communication issues between the department and, dare I say it—I do not want to cause any fights here, or maybe I do; I don’t know—there seems to be, on occasion, from our perspective, a communication issue between both ministers. I am just putting it out there. If the ministers truly believe that Housing ACT is improving, then why do I keep having to send communication on behalf of constituents who have, most of the time, major problems with the system? I know that there has been a positive increase in the Housing ACT budget, including maintenance, community-funded supports and homelessness services. That is fantastic, isn’t it? That is great.
However, we know that these services could be better. The constant growth of the maintenance budget is wonderful because so much needs to be done to ensure that a suitable standard of living is available for every property. However, it raises concerns as to why there is not sufficient maintenance being done with the funding provided
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video