Page 2237 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I now turn to the priority issues outlined in the budget. Housing affordability should indeed be a priority for this government—and for any other. I am sure that my colleagues Mr Smyth and Mr Seselja will talk further about this during the budget debate. I do welcome the appointment of Mr David Dawes to a senior position in the government to act on this matter. He is a very experienced, capable person, having been involved with the Master Builders Association for a number of years. However, he will face an uphill battle and struggle, given the impact of the government’s priorities and policies on housing affordability.
Only a couple of years ago, the then Treasurer, Mr Quinlan, said that the government’s policy was to “squeeze investors until they bled but not until they died”. That is one government policy that our illustrious Treasurer, Mr Stanhope, has certainly kept in place. A constituent wrote to me recently, saying that her rates had doubled since 2000. She is certainly not Robinson Crusoe in that regard. If you are in the private rental market, your landlord increases the rent to pay all the Stanhope government’s tax increases and pass them on to you. That is why the ACT now has the highest median weekly rent of any city in Australia, with $354 for a three-bedroom house.
Turning to another area, it is about time that the government focused on water security issues. I am pleased that the government appreciates—although it has not been decided yet—that we do need new, major storage capacity by way of a new dam. That, I suppose, is pleasing in itself. The government needs to do more, though. Centres in our region such as Goulburn, Queanbeyan and Yass are all well ahead of us in terms of water conservation measures. For example, Queanbeyan’s WaterWise strategy has achieved an 18 per cent reduction in water usage. It is a strategy that was introduced in about the year 2000. It has cost them about $3 million, but an 18 per cent reduction in water usage is impressive. We have achieved about 12 or 13 per cent. The target is only about 12 per cent by 2013. So at least we are ahead of that, but we are still only two-thirds of the way towards achieving what Queanbeyan, a city just over the border, has actually achieved.
I am concerned that the plan released recently by Actew contained no mention of water conservation measures. I am interested to see that the government has at least indicated new homes have to have tanks. It aims to achieve a 40 per cent usage reduction in any new homes. Again, if we contrast that with Queanbeyan, it is looking to achieve a 70 per cent usage reduction in new homes at the Googong estate, which will have an interesting dual system put in by the developers. They will have localised recycled sewerage plants which will pump water back through the toilet systems and onto gardens, although at this stage it will not involve water from washing machines. Again, it is a case of neighbours in our immediate vicinity often being miles in front of us on things like water conservation measures. We can learn a lot from them. The government has also been slow to act on other water security issues but I will deal with those specific issues later when we talk about Actew.
In land supply policy, we have finally seen the government remove ACTPLA’s monopoly on land development, and that is a positive step. However, much more needs to be done to increase the involvement of the private sector so that we can start
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .