Page 1195 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 24 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
otherwise hostile to the Commonwealth. I cannot stress enough the importance of our tax money being used in such areas as housing. Without these grants some States may be tempted to use Federal funds in ways that do not benefit the whole community. Federal money should not be used for projects such as the Eastern Creek raceway, a potential white elephant that may yet have to be bailed out. However, that temptation would be there if the Federal Government did not say, "Here you go, here is your money for this year". It might be used for back roads in National Party areas to hold National Party seats.
Madam Speaker, what would happen if the State governments chose not to spend any money on housing? The Federal Government has a responsibility to the people of Australia and this responsibility is not just in international affairs. We all know that housing lists are becoming longer and longer in all States, as they are here. The fact that people are getting into difficulties with repayments and are having to sell their houses means that the call upon the Government to supply reasonable housing is a must. Housing is a right, not a privilege, to Australians. The Housing Trust - members of the staff are here - does an excellent job in looking after people in Canberra who do need housing. It is a difficult time. We all know that, no matter how much housing stock we have, still more is needed.
Some of the initiatives arising out of the housing policy review, the results of which are clearly evident in today's climate - I refer to the housing review policy that was done in 1989 under the first Follett Government - are as follows: Finalisation of arrangements to enter into the 10-year housing agreement with the Commonwealth Government; development of legislation to establish a Rental Bond Board, which is now up and running and has proved to be a great success; and establishment of a single share accommodation scheme to provide medium- and long-term housing for young people. It is good to see that stage two, an extension of this program, is now well in hand. This scheme was included in the wide range of improvements in services for homeless youth. Under the Follett Labor Government a very good scheme was set up for houses for homeless youth. Agreement was reached with the Church of England and the Rotary Club. This meant that not only the Government but also people outside were involved in looking after our homeless youth.
There were significant increases in terms of funding and programs in the home ownership area, such as an increase in home ownership assistance from $1.2m to $15.1m. Mortgage relief was provided to home buyers experiencing financial difficulties and there was the introduction of stamp duty exemptions for lower income first home buyers. I could go on and on talking about the significant things that the Follett Labor Governments have done, first with me as the Minister for Housing and Urban Services and now with Terry Connolly as the Minister for Housing and Minister for Urban Services. Madam Speaker, if it were left to a Federal Liberal government and the Fightback package I am sure we would see the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement demolished. Those who do not have the opportunity to provide for themselves would be denied the one thing that everyone is entitled to - a roof over their head.
Madam Speaker, in closing, let me say that I do not believe that the people of Western Australia or Tasmania are entitled to more or less than the people of Canberra. The standard of housing and other community services throughout Australia should be as equal as possible. Therefore, I support the use of these grants to help to achieve equality in Australian housing and to give every Australian, no matter what their race, religion or creed, the right to have a roof over their head.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .