Page 1759 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 4 May 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
increasing flexibility in the source of capital funds available to social housing through the use of funding from the ACT home loans portfolio.
The Canberra plan, which includes the spatial plan, the economic white paper and the social plan, encompasses a commitment to address need and disadvantage in housing while at the same time providing a framework for economic growth. The first term of reference that I have suggested for the reconvened affordable housing task force is to review progress on affordable housing since 2002. I believe that there have been two areas in which improvements in affordable housing are evident. The first is affordability for first home buyers with moderate incomes looking to purchase a home and the second is assistance provided to public housing tenants to sustain tenancies. These improvements are important, but I believe that they are relatively modest sized pieces of a much bigger puzzle.
ACT Housing continues to report growing demand for public housing, particularly amongst people with urgent and complex needs. Service systems across the disability, mental health, aged care and homelessness sectors report a chronic lack of housing options for people in need, and there has been no softening in the private rental market, with the ACT remaining one of the tightest and most expensive markets in the country.
We need to do much more if we are to make a real impact on the affordability of housing for low-income households. The Housing people, building communities report, produced by the government in August last year, acknowledged that there is a range of challenges ahead, including: ensuring an adequate supply of affordable housing; building a viable and sustainable social housing sector; identifying strategic opportunities for development in partnership with the private sector; investigating affordable housing options such as shared equity and land rent schemes; and meeting the ongoing commitment to modernise, improve and grow public and community housing.
Most importantly, this report identifies the need to encourage further debate about affordable housing at a local and national level. To me, this is recognition that one government alone cannot address this complex issue. A whole of community approach is needed, and the affordable housing task force is an excellent platform to engage stakeholders and continue the debate.
The second term of reference I have included in this motion relates to the affordable housing task force undertaking a review of recent developments and initiatives to increase housing affordability in Australia and overseas and to assess their appropriateness in the ACT context. One of the major challenges in affordable housing is addressing the supply side of the equation. The need for strategies to stimulate private investment in affordable housing through subsidy options and/or public-private partnerships has long been recognised. There have been some important developments in this area since the affordable housing task force report Strategies for action was produced in 2002. There is an opportunity to revisit the recommendations of this report and examine the experiences of other jurisdictions in key areas of policy development.
For example, a recent article by Peter Williams from the University of New South Wales compares mandatory statutory planning approaches for affordable social housing in New South Wales and in Ireland, finding that although these approaches have had considerable difficulties they are necessary as part of the suite of policies to ensure
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .