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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2144 ..

MS REILLY (continuing):

They are not people on the waiting list for housing. These are people who have jobs, who have the opportunity to go and purchase elsewhere. But you are taking money from people with low incomes to supplement those people, with no benefits that one can see in the way of jobs. You are just supplementing other people, to the disadvantage of people on low incomes, to the disadvantage of the 4,000-plus people on the waiting list.

When are you going to look at this program, Minister, and look at the flaws and try to work it out so that you can get a program that benefits someone other than the financial institution that was given this gift? You need to look at that program. You need to look at the people who are missing out on home ownership. You need to look at all the people who have been refused by this financial institution. How much business has this financial institution got out of this program? These are questions that should have answers. This program, plus the money that has gone out of the housing budget, makes us wonder how good this housing budget is.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Training and Minister for Housing and Family Services) (6.45): Apart from Kick Start, Mr Speaker, I think I have canvassed all the other points Ms Reilly mentioned. In relation to Kick Start, she still seems to have a complete inability to grasp the difference between applications that are approved and cheques issued. As at 6 June 1997, 170 applications have been approved and 100 cheques issued. Cheques issued are effectively issued on settlement. That is the end of the process. What is important, when you do your weekly or monthly figures, is how many applications have been approved and are going ahead.

I think I might have mentioned in the Estimates Committee, Ms Reilly, that the good point was that in recent times about nine or 10 applications have been approved each week, which would indicate that, certainly in the coming financial year, 500 people could well take this up. They are not all people on $45,000. She might be interested to know that some figures I have seen from Housing indicate that, in the last year of the old home loans scheme, the average weekly earnings of people taking that up were $685 a week. The average weekly earnings of people taking up the Kick Start scheme are $645 a week. So, that would indicate that people on lower incomes are actually accessing this scheme.

You seem to knock this scheme; but I think it is a very sensible scheme. It is a scheme where people get money. Sure, they need to satisfy criteria that they are able to pay; but, quite clearly, all the figures indicate that it is hitting the spot. It is being targeted at people who can access it but who do really benefit from that assistance. The fact that they are people with an average income of $645 a week, as opposed to $685 a week, speaks for itself, as does the fact that now there seems to be a steady flow of people getting their applications approved. I think the scheme was responsible for about a third of all new applications for new homes.

It is also having a very real effect in terms of the housing industry, keeping people in employment and assisting people in employment, at a time in Canberra's history and in the Canberra market when that is needed very much indeed. It is certainly a scheme that is overwhelmingly popular in the building area. Certainly, bodies like the HIA and the MBA are, overall, pretty satisfied with it. So, you keep making all the negatives you like about it, Ms Reilly; but I think those figures indicate that it is a scheme that is working.

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