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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (19 June) . . Page.. 1810 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

coming up soon is that, as part of the Charnwood revitalisation project, there may well be a need to realign a few boundaries. Under Mr Moore's proposal, that would incur betterment of the land. That would be something Housing would have to pay. Accordingly, that could not be supported.

Also, Mr Moore proposes to amend new regulations 14 and 15D. As I think both my colleague Mr Humphries and Ms McRae have alluded to, ACT Housing's client base is changing, particularly regarding the numbers of single people or older people needing accommodation. Two-thirds of new applications for public housing accommodation are from one-person households. However, half of the total stock of public housing is three-bedroom houses. To respond to these changing needs, ACT Housing's programs have focused on improving the mix of housing types.

To address locational and functional needs, the capital works programs involve varying leases for large blocks containing one family-type house to permit a multiunit redevelopment for smaller households. All these lease variations would attract a 25 per cent increase in betterment. As members know, Housing is currently working with Planning and Land Management and the local community to develop a local area plan for Ainslie - and shortly will be doing that with the O'Connor community - that will better address the needs of tenants and the community. The ability for ACT Housing to participate in any redevelopment of housing in the areas will be reduced if betterment is increased.

The proposed amendment would increase redevelopment costs for ACT Housing by increasing the cost of lease variations by 25 per cent and, as a consequence, would reduce the level of ACT Housing's outputs. As regards the national competition policy, more work is planned regarding its application to public housing authorities. However, this is directed more to expanding services to competitive tendering. Wherever possible, steps are being taken to place ACT Housing on the same regulatory and taxation and fee basis as other providers of rental accommodation and owners of residential property. However, the fact that ACT Housing and community housing providers are required under the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement to offer rental rebates to tenants means that their rental income is reduced and therefore they are at a disadvantage compared to other providers and owners.

Apart from new capital funds for housing acquisitions and redevelopments, all expenditure is derived from internally generated income - mainly rents. Therefore, Mr Speaker, any increase in costs, while being similar to private sector payment structures, will be at the expense of such things as maintenance on properties and/or property acquisitions or redevelopments - things I think we all regard as being crucial to ensure that we have a proper mix of stock for our tenants and that we properly address the needs and the likely future needs of our tenants. That would clearly be a reduced outcome for the housing program. Accordingly, if those particular amendments got through, that would decrease the amount of money available within public housing for the benefit of public housing tenants. I do not think that would be a situation that any of us here in this Assembly would like to see.

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