Page 1186 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 24 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of 100 people who are being taken care of there, with absolutely no assistance whatsoever from government for that assistance. It seems to me that whenever things happen in this way it is only a short time before they reach breaking point. I just thought I would put that plug in.
The value of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement in the ACT is about $18m, with $6m matched by the ACT, on the horizontal fiscal equity formula. Without the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement, $24m per annum would be up for grabs every year, with no commitment to ameliorate the housing crisis in the ACT and no guarantee to a community already very insecure and fearful. The waiting lists in the ACT have increased 100 per cent over the last year. It is as if the recession hit late and hard in the ACT, with drastic rises in unemployment, domestic violence and poverty. In May 1991, 3,500 were on the waiting list for housing. In May 1992, 6,431 were on the same list, with 1,496 actually needing a transfer.
The Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement was one of the best performing joint agreements, and over the years has resulted in considerable improvements to the quality, spread and diversity of public housing. Ending this agreement will lead to a decline in the quality of public housing, will decrease the number of publicly owned houses, and will eventually cause a major crisis in housing for low income earners in the ACT and elsewhere in Australia. Australia, when compared to other OECD countries, has too few publicly owned houses; yet public housing is the most effective way of subsidising low income earners' housing needs. The Federal Treasury's proposal for private rental subsidies through the use of rental vouchers is at best a stopgap measure and at worst a subsidy to private landlords. It would inevitably lead to a major reduction in funds for the construction of public housing, and remove the requirement for States to provide matching contributions to fund housing. The impact of that on jobs is self-evident.
The Victorian report on the housing affordability benchmark prepared by the Victorian housing and residential program concludes that assistance to private renters paying more than 25 per cent to 30 per cent of income in housing costs should not be drawn from funds allocated for public housing. Such assistance, it recommended, if it is going to be used, should be made in addition to those funds. The Victorian Planning and Housing Minister, Andrew McCutcheon, showed that the strategies proposed, with their resultant reductions, would result in less building, fewer loans, fewer houses purchased and less home finance support for low income groups. This will result in a dramatic increase in the incidence of homelessness in this country, not to mention the decrease in employment. Such reductions not only would reduce housing opportunities for those on low incomes but also would significantly impact on employment opportunities in the building industry.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (3.16): The Government commends Mr Moore for bringing this important matter of public importance before the Assembly, because it truly is a matter of public importance for residents of the ACT that there should be any change proposed to the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. Perhaps saying "any change proposed" is overstating the case. Some change to the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement may be appropriate - beneficial change; movements at the margins; aggressive reform of that agreement, which is almost 50 years old. As Mr Moore indicated, it was a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .