Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 3945 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

Turning to subparagraph (1)(d), it says:

ensure that the proportion of ACT Housing tenants living in Ainslie is at least preserved in any redevelopment plans ...

That is saying that there is a certain figure there, and I think it is about 34 per cent. To say that it would always have to be 34 per cent is ridiculous. There might come a time when people do not necessarily want to live there. There might be a time when it might be appropriate to have more. I cannot see that as being likely, given the history of Canberra and the history of public housing here; but to say that that has to stay, and that an arbitrary percentage which occurs at this point in time has to stay, is crazy. It is a bit like saying in 1850 that there always should be an emperor of China. They had a revolution in 1911 and there is not one now. It is crazy. Times do change. Circumstances change. To have something like that is quite ridiculous. So I make those two points, Mr Speaker. Those two points in the Greens' amendment, subparagraphs (1)(c) and (1)(d), quite clearly are inappropriate. In fact, subparagraph (1)(d) has connotations of dictating to tenants that they have to live in a certain type of accommodation when, quite clearly, a lot of them, especially senior ones, are looking for other options.

The Government obviously is under an obligation to continue its program, but this plan is about more than just that. The Government certainly will be continuing its program in relation to public housing. Public housing is important not only because there is a sizeable number of people in the inner city area, and in Ainslie and O'Connor, but also because of the current stage we are at in terms of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement and the proposed reform models put up by the Commonwealth. There is also the lack of any real detail on financial information supplied by the Commonwealth and the fact that that process is an ongoing one which will take a lot longer than until 1 July next year which the Commonwealth initially envisaged.

There are a number of concerns. I have passed on to my Federal counterpart, Senator Newman, all the concerns raised with me by the various tenants groups. Those concerns are not only local concerns. It appears that they are national concerns. The Commonwealth-State Housing Ministers meetings are very aware of all of those concerns. Those concerns have been noted and they are matters that have to be taken into account, and satisfactorily taken into account, just like the finances, which are absolutely crucial. They have to be appropriate and workable before any new agreement is signed. That means that interim arrangements will continue, and under those interim arrangements it is understood that when you sell some public housing you have to invest the money back into public housing. That is what we are doing at present. It is necessary because of the nature of our stock, the nature of our tenants, and the demands and expectations of our tenants.

With those two styles in that one particular suburb and, secondly, ensuring that the proportion of tenants, which is now about 34 per cent, is set in stone, it may well be, as a result of all the consultation and all the deliberations, that some plan is adopted for Ainslie which might well mean, for example, if we have 400 public houses and units there now, that we might in five years' time still have something like that. It may also well be that, instead of there being perhaps 1,200 properties in the whole of Ainslie, there might

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .