Page 1488 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 17 April 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Commissioner for Housing loans to be known as HomeBuyer; nor do we have any problem with the introduction of a deposit assistance program to be known as HomeEntry.
And why should we, Mr Deputy Speaker? There has existed for quite some time the need to revise the criteria for eligibility for Commissioner for Housing loans. Consequently, it is good to see the maximum income level raised from $630 a week to $750 a week, the maximum property value rise from $90,000 to $117,000, and the rise in the loan limit from $70,000 to $95,000. As the Minister noted in his speech, "the new limits bring the Commissioner for Housing loans back into line with the market conditions". May I also add that it is heartening to see that the maximum limits just mentioned will be revised at least every six months. Nevertheless, this is where the congratulations start and finish.
I will now move on to examine the proposal to sell Housing Trust properties to current tenants who have occupied Housing Trust properties for at least 10 years. Before the Minister interjects re the two houses in Barton and Griffith sold by me when I was Minister for Housing and Urban Services for an amount over $700,000, I point out that the reasons why these houses had to be sold were very clear. Let me now enlighten the Assembly on those reasons.
Both houses were in very, very poor condition. In fact, the Housing Trust found them impossible to let because of their condition. They were both in heritage areas, and therefore the amount of money the Housing Trust would have had to spend on bringing them into such a condition for them to be rented would have been enormous. In light of the rent we could have got for them, they would have made a very expensive pair of houses for the Housing Trust to maintain and own. Thus, the decision to sell both these houses was made after long consultation with the Cabinet, including the Chief Minister at the time, Rosemary Follett, and with the Housing Trust. The amount could then be used to purchase houses in that area or, where there was an area where townhouses could be built, we could pull the houses down and build six to eight townhouses. This was the idea that this money was to go to.
Before providing details about the Minister's proposal, let me put on record that the ACT Labor Party does not hold any ideological opposition to the sale of public housing to its tenants. This is well worth stressing to stop those opposite from making the cheap shot that we do not want people to own their own homes. It is a good thing that people own their own homes, especially those Housing Trust tenants who have put years of love and care into their houses and who have in fact turned a house into their home. This is an important distinction to make.
The problems I perceive with the Minister's proposal to sell Housing Trust properties concern the administrative arrangements which underwrite the program. Further, there
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .