Page 2602 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 June 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and service delivery—there’s a good one—and further empowering staff to perform in their respective roles. Given the likelihood of another three budgets being quite tight, and the minister indicating that due to price escalations for other capital works projects currently under way, the blow-out in construction costs of the Gungahlin Drive extension and subsequent legal action that is due to injunctions to halt further works on the road, it would seem unlikely that within the Sixth Assembly the Stanhope government will be fiscally capable of delivering on one of its major 2004 election commitments of $10 million per year for three years for capital injection into housing stock.
Contrary to any answer given in relation to internally sourced revenue to fund capital works for housing, the allocation has fallen by over $26 million from last year’s allocation of nonappropriated new works of just over $62 million. This must surely leave the portfolio area in the untenable position of being incapable of meeting some of the government’s objectives in relation to asset management of public housing, particularly in the areas of the adequate refurbishment and replenishment of the public housing stock in the ACT.
This minister and this government can crow all they want about public housing: it is deteriorating day by day and this minister is sitting on his hands doing absolutely nothing about it. He is tickling around the edges. We have Burnie Court lying vacant for four years. What has he done about the fantastic APUs there? There is also Fraser Court, the Currong apartments—what a state—and the Northbourne flats still not refurbished. There are 200 to 300 properties waiting off-line to be refurbished. That money would have come in handy. What did this minister do? He obviously did not push his Treasurer hard enough, and he could not care either. It is a crime, a shame. This government’s commitment to public housing simply is not there.
MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for Disability, Housing and Community Services, Minister for Urban Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (8.31): Mr Speaker, I want to address a couple of issues that have been raised, somewhat hysterically, by those opposite. Dr Foskey was right when she was talking about the Liberal Party’s policy statement that they would empty the stock of market renters, and she was right when she said that they put $18 million or $19 million back into the system. If we asked all of the market renters to leave, we would have to come up with $12 million to go back into the sector—so she was right in that sense. It seems to me that, if they are paying $19 million into the system and we would have to come up with $12 million, we are $7 million in front.
Mrs Burke: Yes, but you are going to lose your full market renters. You said it yourself.
MR SPEAKER: Mrs Burke, some of your colleagues will not be able to hear the minister.
Mrs Burke: You will never let me forget that, Mr Speaker. Thank you for reminding me.
MR HARGREAVES: It seems to me that we are $7 million in front. And again we hear the hoary old argument that if we did not have the arboretum—and I have to say, Treasurer, I do not think they like the arboretum.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .