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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (7 December) . . Page.. 3874 ..

MR RUGENDYKE (continuing):

I am concerned that the department allows outrageous arrears to accrue and the government does not seem to be able to arrest the outrageous arrears that some people accrue and we are seeing those people being penalised for the government's inaction in recovering debt. That is the sort of thing on which we need to see compassion, caring for our most vulnerable.

I make note that housing has now come under the Health and Community Care Committee. It will be incumbent upon the minister to be fully frank and open with the committee, which will no doubt have a desire to oversight the reforms in housing as they occur and to maintain a watching brief over how housing reforms are implemented in the near future.

On balance, while there are totally opposing philosophical views on this issue, I think that it is the right of government to implement its policy and show us how it works. For that reason, I will be supporting the amendment by Mr Moore in which he has agreed to take back the government response and rejig issues that can be rejigged and to rework, reconsider and consult again, where possible. As I say, at the end of the day the government must put up its policy and survive or otherwise the implementation of that policy. I will be supporting Mr Moore's amendment to the amendment.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.59): Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not want to take up too much time. This issue has been particularly well canvassed by a number of members. I just want reiterate some of the main issues here and the basis on which we have come to this debate. It is a fact that we are debating a report of a select committee of the Assembly. On the select committee were a representative of the government, a representative of the opposition and two representatives of the crossbench, Ms Tucker and Mr Rugendyke. Was that not the case, Ms Tucker?

Ms Tucker: No, he was not on it.

MR STANHOPE: I beg your pardon, Mr Rugendyke. There was a member of the government, a member of the opposition and a member of the crossbench. The report was a unanimous report. I think it is fair to say that the report represented a very strong view of this Assembly. A number of issues have been canvassed today. We have heard the views of members of the opposition, we have heard the government's firmly put views, and we have heard views from the crossbench.

One view that we have not heard directly is the view of perhaps the strongest of the advocacy groups within the community in relation to the rights of tenants, namely, the view of the Welfare Rights and Legal Centre Ltd. I think we would all acknowledge it as the community organisation within this town that has been for the last 15 years, with the Tenants Union, the main voice for the major clients of the housing service.

In that context, it is probably relevant and moot that we should have some regard to the views of the Welfare Rights and Legal Centre. Their views have been expressed today in relation to the issue we are discussing. Their views go very much to the position put by the minister and are very relevant to the amendment that he put. In that regard, I will read some of the views of that organisation.

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