Page 2333 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The estimates committee recognised this issue and called on the government to review land release so that greater housing affordability can be achieved. Making more blocks available should help with this. However, a review of the types of blocks released may also be necessary. We have to be careful that we do not have a one-size-fits-all strategy, which is so often the case with the government. It is no good releasing a large number of small blocks and land for apartments when the demand is for reasonable-size blocks suitable for family homes. All this does is lead to a glut of apartments on the market.
The LDA should be focusing on its core purpose of land release or, better still, it should be allowing the private sector to be releasing the land. Ultimately, it is not in the interest of Canberra families to have the government as the major and monopoly developer. It is unfortunate when the government decides it is necessary for it to take over the development of all the new areas of Canberra.
We saw one example of this in the last financial year, at Denman Prospect. The fact that the government has done so reflects the unreasonable requirements that it has placed on construction in the territory. The government has decided to develop the land in Denman Prospect itself because the land failed to sell for the amount that it had hoped to get at market. Of course, that was primarily due to variation 306.
We heard in this place the talk of getting $100 million; it then dropped to $90 million, then to $80 million and then to $70 million. We heard that they were trying to give it away at $50 million and still no-one would take it because of the unreasonable demands put in place by variation 306.
I believe recommendation 23 of the estimates committee report is a stinging rebuke of this government. The recommendation states:
The Committee recommends that in regard to land release in the ACT that the ACT Government return to one third … (LDA)/one third joint venture/one third private development.
It is interesting that we should have a committee which is half Liberal, half Labor, yet it can still deliver a recommendation such as that one-third, one-third, one-third should be returned. Therefore at least one member of that estimates committee, whether it be Ms Porter or Ms Berry, does not agree with the government’s current land release strategy, and that is so for a very good reason.
The committee has called for the return of one-third, one-third, one-third because it delivers a better mix for the people of Canberra, and especially for the first homebuyers of Canberra. Given that property is one of the most competitive industries we have, we should be able to back these businesses to actually deliver the product that Canberrans want. There are plenty of private developers who could do a better job and a cheaper job than what the government is doing at present. However, they have to be given a chance.
I endorse recommendation 24 of the estimates committee report, which states:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video