Page 2314 - Week 06 - Friday, 27 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
contractor, Spotless, refusing to increase the contract rates paid to subcontractors in the 2008-09 period. Representations have been made to me, and I think I may have written to the housing minister to point out this very concerning problem to him.
This has had the effect of sandwiching the tenants in the middle. Pressure is being exerted by Spotless on their subcontractors, who often may then not be able to carry out jobs properly, which then results in less or substandard works being done. Costs are often then shifted on to the tenants in the form of tenant-responsible maintenance. I recall in the estimates hearings that a departmental official was quite concerned about this increasing trend. Hopefully, as was pointed out by me in the estimates, that issue will be looked at.
The government needs to enter into a more realistic contract with the contractor to ensure better standards of cleaning and maintenance of the public housing properties. To shift the costs of routine maintenance on to tenants is irresponsible and shows poor management by the government, and this must be rectified.
This budget has yet again failed to allocate resources to the speedy allocation of vacant Housing ACT properties. Far too many properties still remain vacant for extended periods of time, equating to poor asset utilisation and financial management of the overall housing stock. The government needs to better manage its stock by putting more resources into front-line client managers. We see regular examples of properties that have obviously not been inspected for well over 12 months or more.
The government needs to get tough with the minority of tenants who repeatedly destroy the amenity of their neighbours and who destroy property. Unfortunately, we have seen little to no resources being allocated to the very real and prolonged problem, as I have said, of antisocial behaviour. This will be deeply concerning to public and private residents alike. Without effective management of the issue, the problem will continue to worsen, costing the entire community more than it would cost to rectify the issue.
The government’s failure to act causes this subgroup to be bold in their flouting of the law, causing much suffering in their neighbourhood, and sends a message that it is acceptable behaviour for the ACT. The government has also failed to allocate resources to the pulling back of debt owed to the government by Housing ACT tenants. Budget figures show that almost $1 million is outstanding in terms of the delay in recovering water consumption costs from tenants. Rental debt is at some $1.245 million, and there is other unexplained debt of some $900,000.
The government should not allow debt to grow to such high levels before it works with clients to manage that debt. The opposition maintains its position that there needs to be earlier intervention in order to arrest this escalating problem. The minister had put in a scheme involving the figure of $500. The opposition is saying it needs to be much sooner than that—$200 or maybe a week’s rent. If we know that there are families that are vulnerable, we do not need to be allowing them to be made more vulnerable by spiralling out of control with rent payments.
In closing, despite having the highest number of public housing properties per capita in Australia, this government has demonstrated its overall inability to effectively manage this portfolio area.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .