Page 1630 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
is only in the last two years that the government has taken action by its affordable housing strategy.
I appreciate that much of the strategy aims at making housing more accessible to middle-income earners, in the hope that this will ease the pressure on moderately priced housing, both owned and rental, for low-income earners—the trickle-down effect. But even with the release of land and the applauded land rent scheme, it is likely that housing will maintain its price. Assuming house prices remain at current levels, low-income earners will continue to face exclusion from the market. They cannot afford what is currently available. If the government does not take action in providing housing to low-income earners, its only hope will be to sit back and cross its fingers that house prices have a downturn, which would negatively impact on current mortgagees.
The housing affordability strategy needs to be aimed not only at middle-income earners but at low-income earners as well. The only way low-income earners can afford shelter is via programs like public and community housing. That, too, will take pressure off supply in the private housing market.
This government committed spending of $10 million a year over 2006-09 to expand the public housing stock, noting that only $4 million of each came from new money and the rest was pulled out of Housing ACT cuts. Community organisations say they are yet to see whether this expenditure has made a sufficient impact on the total available stock. And while Community Housing Canberra will grow considerably, the way it charges rent will change, making it less accessible to those on very low incomes.
I am disappointed that the government has not committed to increasing our public housing stock; and I am worried that, as the government removes large public housing complexes, we will not see the number of residences replaced. To take this issue further, I am extremely disappointed that the ACT government is yet to replace the $1 million a year it ripped out of the SAAP services in the 2006-07 budget. Here we are with a government with an $80 million odd surplus, unwilling to combat the incredible demand on emergency housing.
The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, identified homelessness as one of his key priorities when he entered government, and made large financial commitments, yet here we see the ACT government still holding back. Maybe they are expecting the Rudd government to rescue them. This so-called homelessness strategy is a furphy, as is the social plan. I see little commitment from this government to the most disadvantaged members of our community.
There are numerous concessions on stamp duty, bus travel and water charges, but they are not being applied comprehensively or fairly. The concession on stamp duty for age pensioners downsizing their homes is significant, and we welcome it. But that concession is not being made available to older people on low fixed incomes, as many of our citizens are.
I also welcome the implementation of the land rent scheme first proposed in the long-awaited affordable housing action plan more than a year ago. We should note that this
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .