Page 4297 - Week 13 - Thursday, 4 December 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
complaints about the flow of information. We have to get this right. People have to know exactly what is happening and what it means for them. They are making decisions that will affect the finances for their lives—for many of them their retirement, and for many the future of their children. They do not feel they are getting adequate information.
To crystallise that for members, there is a recommendation from the Law Society. The Law Society said to us, “We must provide a certificate that people understand the implications of this,” and they said, “We don’t know. We do not have the full picture. We cannot advise these people, but we will be forced to so that they can then make a decision.” People do not know the time lines. People do not know the implications of staying and what the burden might be on them. People do not understand how it will work.
We know the short time frames; the committee have suffered through the short time frames ourselves. But it was worthwhile for the committee taking the extra time. We are sorry to foist a half-day sitting on people—I am sure it has ruined diaries—but this is too big an issue to be concerned about that. I do not resile from my decision—I thank the committee for their support—to take the extra time to get this right.
The report could have been much better. I take full responsibility for any errors, omissions, typos or corrections that are required. It is my responsibility and I take full responsibility. But we must make sure we get it right. I urge members to read the Law Society’s submission. If they do not know, if they do not understand, if they do not know the implications of the government acquiring land against the will of the home owners, how can they give these people the advice they not only need but deserve so that they make the right decisions for them? I urge the government to make that clear. We need that out in the public arena as quickly as we can.
There are a number of recommendations about what we call exceptional circumstance cases. Whether you are a person with a disability, whether you are a family that runs a small business from an affected block, where potentially you will lose your home and your business, we need to make sure you are looked after. We heard from one incredible young lady about how it affected her, her disability and her family and the decisions she made in the belief she had a clean house. There is a recommendation about not using the word “clean” anymore to describe these houses. These houses are not clean. Ms Erskine gave a tremendous presentation for somebody under a lot of duress about the money she had spent—some $60,000—getting her house ready as her condition deteriorated so that she could raise her family there as a single mum. Most of the value of the work she has done, I suspect, will not be recognised in the valuation of the home. That is what she feels; that is her fear. We are saying in exceptional circumstances the government might consider allowing people to stay or providing further assistance.
We heard from a number of pensioners who have no options. They are not going to be able to get another loan from a bank and they are concerned about their future. They would prefer to stay, in the full knowledge that their house is contaminated. There are recommendations about that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video