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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4945 ..

MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, as I said, there was a meeting on 8 December at which a number of things were discussed - I have already answered this - including moving in, support plans, a trial period, reimbursement, all of those sorts of things. As I understand, they have been agreed. Support plans are very close to being finalised. The department certainly hopes to have the plans finalised before Christmas. Once the plans are finalised, the house rosters are available, the house is adequately furnished and equipment is there, the proposed residents will be able to move in. Ms Reilly said that she was not being negative, but in her supplementary question she said, "This has been such a disaster". I would like to know what being negative is. If saying something is a disaster is not being negative about it, I obviously have the wrong view on what negative means.

Mr Speaker, the COOOL project certainly has taken longer than I would have liked it to take, but it is a great model. It is fairly unique in Australia. I have not been asked by any of the residents to have a meeting, as far as I know, but I am always happy to. I think it is a great approach. I think it is wonderful to get these younger people with disabilities out of nursing homes, and I think the people who have been involved with negotiating this should be congratulated because it has been very difficult.

MR OSBORNE: Before I start, I know that Mrs Carnell has had a pretty rough week with the car accident and all that, and she is probably a bit worried about where the 12 pages of the VITAB contract are. I would just like to let her know that I have found them. My question, Mr Speaker, is to the Minister for Housing, Mr Stefaniak. Minister, 20 years ago a couple moved into a ramshackle Housing Trust home in Flynn. Over the ensuing years they improved the home, painted it, laid carpet, put new tiles and cupboards in the kitchen, put built-in robes in the bedrooms and built a carport. About two years ago the Housing Trust valued these improvements at $12,000. Anyway, the house is now to be sold. The tenants do not want to buy it and are happy to take another house. However, they have been told by the Housing Trust that they will have to remove the improvements at their expense. Minister, my question is this: Is it an incentive for your tenants to look after their houses and properties if they are going to be faced with this situation?

MR STEFANIAK: I thank the member for the question. A lot of our tenants do make improvements. Basically, the rule is that improvements can either be taken away, because they are things that tenants have put in, or left in situ. On occasion I have in the past received comments from tenants who have made improvements. One tenant once wanted Housing to buy the garage they had erected. I think in that case they ultimately decided to take it away. If Mr Osborne could give me the details I will look into this further. I have a quick idea of the matter you ask about, Mr Osborne, having been notified about five minutes earlier. I understand that they have been very good tenants. I also understand that there are some other issues which I would need to satisfy myself about in relation to what they were told, which is also very important. I will chase that up.

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