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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1390 ..

MR STEFANIAK: Fifty million dollars is about the lowest cut that has been bandied about. I had heard of cuts of up to $300m. That certainly concerned my interstate and Territorial colleagues very much. Whilst no cut is welcome, the $50m, which is about the lowest that anyone was expecting, I suppose, is better than getting nothing at all. What that means for us, Ms Reilly, is that there will be a reduction accordingly in the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement funds of around $780,000 for the next financial year, 1997-98.

MS REILLY: I ask a supplementary question. Thank you for telling me the exact amount.

MR SPEAKER: Ask your supplementary question.

MS REILLY: I was thanking the Minister for his very helpful answer. Minister, can you detail how many fewer homes will be built, how much more of the Territory's valuable housing stock will have to be sold to make up for this shortfall and how much longer the waiting lists for public housing will grow as a result of these cuts that you have just told us about?

MR STEFANIAK: Ms Reilly, the waiting list under us at present is about 4,500, and under you lot it was about 7,000; so actually it is pretty good.

Ms Reilly: We are talking about now.

MR STEFANIAK: I am talking about now - 4,500 as opposed to about 7,000 under you lot. However, in addressing that particular figure, there are a number of possibilities which we will look at. There are certainly a couple of things I do not think I would particularly consider at all because I think that would be inappropriate, but we have a number of options that we can look at in terms of that $780,000. The Government will be considering those. As soon as we make a decision on those, I will let you know. There are about three or four different options, all of which I think would have minimal impact or no impact.

MR HIRD: I intend to ask a question of Ms Horodny in accordance with standing order 116. Ms Horodny has a matter in her name on the notice paper. Yesterday the Greens moved a motion to censure the Minister for Education and Training on the basis that he failed to consult with the major stakeholders and that he had a preconceived notion of what he set out to achieve. Indeed, your colleague Ms Tucker, in her speech to the house yesterday, said:

This Government's consultation is no more than a public relations exercise after a decision has been taken and implementation is well under way.

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