Page 1358 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 5 April 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
behaviour some tenants were inflicting on other law abiding public housing tenants. It was as if it was just all too hard. That concerned me greatly. In the case in Florey, I think the two officers from housing were there when the difficult tenants who were giving other people a hard time came and started threatening everyone. I think finally the police were called. But even then some problems continued.
I appreciate that the law needs to be changed, and I am pleased to see that it will be. But I am concerned that there is this “it’s all too hard” attitude creeping in and I think it is terribly important for the government, especially, as much as anything for its own public service staff, to ensure that procedures and laws are in place that not only protect law abiding tenants, but also assist staff of ACT Housing to go about their jobs in a much more timely way than perhaps they might be able to do at present.
There was another problem in Dunlop with a particularly dreadful neighbour who was making the lives of everyone in the cul-de-sac a misery. Again, it was as if it was all too hard. There has been a tendency, not just under this minister but also probably since the time we have had self-government, to move a difficult tenant to another neighbourhood, rather than address the problem. Yes, it is hard. We have all done it. I think I probably did it myself when I was minister. Sometimes it works; sometimes it does not. It can be very difficult. There has been a lot of progress by all governments, but still certain things are not working as well as they could.
I will deal with a couple of issues. As I understand it, there are still some problems in court directives being issued, for example, restraining orders, and difficulties in what Housing ACT is empowered to do in those situations to ensure that all the tenants are actually abiding by their agreements, indeed abiding by court orders. That might be something the minister needs to address to assist the better operation of the system.
I heard Mrs Burke say that she made a point of speaking to at least 12 tenants every week, or whatever period of time it was. She does a fantastic job for people who come to her for assistance with problems with ACT Housing. She is a tireless worker for the underprivileged in our community and people who really are facing all sorts of difficulties. I commend her for that.
I understand that the minister does not make a point of seeing tenants with individual problems. I think he should. Certainly there are some things he probably cannot do and some things he probably should not do. But certainly he should see them. If he does not do that, some injustices invariably will be done. I am not suggesting the minister should go overboard. A previous minister used to intervene just before tenants were about to be evicted for things like not paying rent, and that absolutely frustrated the housing staff. That was certainly something they could not accuse me of doing. I let the process run, and I am very glad I did because we actually dropped the housing debt significantly. Interestingly enough, the vast majority of housing tenants, who pay their rent and do not want other people sitting in there and not paying rent—because they are taking from the ones who do, the law abiding citizens—were very happy to see that tightened up.
To illustrate the benefit of seeing someone, Mr Hargreaves, there was a woman who came to see me at Meet the Minister. She had borrowed a friend’s car from Kambah. She paid $10 for the petrol. She saw me out at Ngunnawal. She was in the process of court eviction. I do not think I had ever intervened before, but I did on this occasion because
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .