Page 5501 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
the case, because we know that affordable housing is not just the up-front purchase price; it very much is about that house that is built and its running costs over time.
This is not an either/or debate. Utility costs are integral to the running and affordability costs of a home. There is no point in constructing cheap homes or out-of-date designs and ways of building houses, because we have new building products. We know how to build energy efficient homes. We know that, if we construct these last-century houses, people, over time, will find that they struggle to pay the bills to run those homes.
All parties in this place have different priorities. We would all spend the money differently, no doubt, and the cost of delivering government services is increasing. The community has to pay for that or has to understand that there is a limit to the budget. Equally, we all have an obligation to ensure that taxpayers’ money is not wasted, that we distribute that money to those who need it most and that we deliver the best outcomes to the whole community and not just a select few.
I take umbrage at Mrs Dunne’s continued attacks on our stand to advocate for those who are doing it tough in this community. I am not sure whether, by saying that, Mrs Dunne is saying that she has absolutely no interest in the one in 10 people—probably even more—in our community who are doing it tough, who are finding it hard to cover the costs of rent and food and educational costs for their children. Somehow she believes that by us standing up and advocating for these people we have no interest in other parts of our community. That is simply a nonsense. Her continued push makes me wonder whether she does think about so many families who are on lower incomes, who may be on pensions and benefits and who are really doing it tough in this community. I would like to see the Liberal Party have a bit more of a focus in that area.
In recent days many members in this place would have received reports from a number of organisations about the ongoing research on the impact of poverty across Australian communities, including the ACT. One of them was from the Salvation Army and was about the perceptions of poverty and the insight into the nature and impact of poverty in Australia. Another was from Anglicare Australia, In from the edge. That is about the state of a range of different families and how they will be impacted by a range of issues.
Mr Hanson: Was it a good idea to give $26 million to the arboretum then? Where are your priorities?
MS HUNTER: Mr Hanson is interjecting again with his very droll contributions. I really think he should take some time out—no doubt he has these reports in his office—to read through those reports to get a good understanding of the challenges and the struggles that many people in the Canberra community are facing day in, day out.
I finish by moving my amendment to Mr Stanhope’s proposed amendment. The amendment has been circulated in my name, and I move:
Omit all words after “That this Assembly”, substitute:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video