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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 12 Hansard (18 November) . . Page.. 4251 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

high rents, actually help a large number of people living on a very low income into rental accommodation.

More public housing and innovative additions to community housing and other affordable housing stock are still absolutely urgent and essential. The target population for this scheme is slightly better off than others.

I am pleased to be able to say that the minister and the department have responded by engaging with the issues I raised in the amendment and that the minister has committed to introducing a replacement instrument which picks up on some of what I have proposed. This is a more straightforward procedure than trying in a short space of time to sensibly amend our amendments.

My understanding is that the revised instrument will include the following changes: firstly, extend the time limit from seven to 28 days for applicants to respond to requests for more information, to request a review and to appeal decisions; secondly, to slightly increase the income eligibility thresholds above those for access to public housing, but less than what I originally proposed, in recognition of the difficulty for people in the middle-income ranges in accessing private rental accommodation in the current conditions; thirdly, to clarify the residency requirement by adding studying as one of the residency eligibility criteria, which would be interpreted to include someone who has been accepted at an educational institution in the ACT; and finally, some form of words to allow temporary protection visa holders access to the program, perhaps, as I suggested in discussions, by using the word "refugee".

I am very pleased that TPV holders will hopefully be included as it is a serious equity concern that these people who have been accepted to be refugees have to meet a higher test-severe hardship that cannot be alleviated by any other means-than either other people who have been accepted to be refugees or other members of the community otherwise meeting the eligibility criteria.

Temporary protection visas are reviewable at any time and certainly every three years, and if the federal government-not the person who has had to flee their home in fear of their lives or their family's wellbeing but our government-decides that the risk is no longer there, then they will be forced to return. In the meantime, they are not eligible for the kind of support that we have recognised people in trauma and in a new country need. This treatment is inhumane, and this change to the rental bonds program is only one step that we could and should be taking here in the ACT to ensure that these refugees are at least treated well within our powers.

Other states such as Queensland and Victoria have been able to provide public housing assistance to TPV holders, so they must have found some way around the federal government's eligibility restrictions. I am very pleased that work is under way on this issue here as well.

I had also proposed changes so that the instrument limits the repayment structure of the loan to keep it affordable, possibly over a longer time frame, while retaining the restriction that aims to ensure people are not being assisted to get into a rental arrangement that they won't be able to afford-specifically, that the sum of the rental

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