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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 8 Hansard (7 August) . . Page.. 2473 ..

MR MOORE : We are required by law to do it that way.

Mr Hargreaves: You have not done it for four years.

MR MOORE: Mr Hargreaves said we have not done it right for four years and, in fact, we have. ACT Housing has done the review it is required to do. There was some confusion over a press release that I issued, in which the word "review" can be interpreted in two ways, and I clarified that as soon as it was drawn to my attention following a statement I made on radio. That has already been clarified.

The reality is that Housing has been acting as is required by the law, review processes are in place and a system for protecting those who are most in need is in place. Nobody pays more than 25 per cent of their income in ACT public housing. That is the crunch; that is what is happening. For you to try to present this as something else is appalling. It is simply trying to jump on a bandwagon.

There is a system in place to allow a review should there be an anomaly-and we expected that there would be some, as there always is with rates, as well. In fact, Housing have gone further, saying, "You do not even have to go through that. Come and talk to us first, and we may be able to sort it out." That is an appropriate process, it is according to the law and it does not affect people on low incomes.

Public housing

MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, my question is to Mr Moore and is also on housing. Minister, your office has been informed several times over some weeks of an ACT Housing property in Oxley that has been vacant for a long period. The property, the subject of a story in today's Canberra Times, has become derelict, its windows have been smashed, it is unsecured and people are holding loud, drunken parties on the front lawn. Unsavoury people keep showing up at the property, causing trouble in the area and grief to other residents.

Both your office and ACT Housing were notified of the problem. I know the actions of an irresponsible tenant were not helpful, but I ask: why has nothing been done to secure the property long after the problem was first known?

MR MOORE: We manage over 11,000 properties. We were aware of some problems with this property and we are pursuing that. I will come back to Mr Wood with further information.

MR WOOD: I have a supplementary. Given that Canberra has a priority list of people waiting for public housing-segmented into "early allocation 1" and "early allocation 2"-as well as a normal waiting list, why has this property been vacant well beyond the period made necessary by any obligations on the part of Housing?

MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, when I provide the actual response to Mr Wood, I will also provide a response to that. Following question time, Mr Wood will be interested in a question I took on notice from Mr Osborne. In fact, I might use this opportunity to table my response to Mr Osborne now. He asked me about waiting times and allocations for people who are in the early and also standard allocation category in

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