Page 553 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 17 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
can coordinate these moving parts well in the ACT, perhaps more so than any other jurisdiction due to our small size and strong partnerships across the sector, but of course I acknowledge that we can and are in the process of doing better. It must be a space of constant improvement because there are still people who on occasions perhaps do not get the service response they need or might fall through the cracks, and they are the places where we must seek continuous improvement.
One of the issues raised in Ms Lawder’s motion is the federal Liberal government’s asset recycling program. The way she has framed it around the number of properties and the way that they are currently being counted is clearly an attempt at a “gotcha” moment. But, as Minister Berry has said, there will of course be some fluctuations in total housing stock numbers over the life of the much-needed renewal program. I will reinforce a comment I made earlier today—and I know Minister Berry just made it—that this renewal program is a very positive one for the tenants of Housing ACT. It means they will no longer need to live in what I consider to be substandard housing in some cases. They will move to places that are better constructed, better insulated and therefore require lower costs for heating and potentially cooling. They provide a better quality of life and a more comfortable life. I think that the big picture needs to be kept in mind here, that this is actually about improving the outcomes for public housing tenants.
I will be concerned if these numbers drop much further or stay below that line for a long time. As of today, I think we can accept that in the pursuit of reducing concentrations of disadvantage and providing new, more appropriate and more sustainable accommodation, there will be some movement in the overall numbers. There is a clear commitment from the government, and a requirement under the asset recycling initiative, that the numbers do not fall. That is a commitment that I expect this government, the Labor Party and the Greens, to stick to. Certainly I am committed to it, and I know my colleagues are committed to it. That does not mean there will not be fluctuation as we go through this program. I think that to pick a moment in time, as Ms Lawder has sought to do, and go for a “gotcha” moment, is not a true reflection of what is actually being done here.
Of course, it provides me with an opportunity to reflect on a point that I made this morning. It was the Liberal Party in the ACT who sold off record numbers of public housing stock in the ACT. I gave the figures this morning. It dropped the proportion of ACT Housing properties from 13 per cent to nine per cent of our housing stock. Probably Mr Smyth was here at the time of that sell-off. Ms Lawder might like to talk to him about the rationale behind that, and the consequences that it has had down the line.
The motion as amended has a lot of the relevant material needed to inform this debate. I will leave my comments at that, other than to say that I look forward to the ACT’s contribution to the commonwealth affordable housing working group and to the working group’s recommendations and suggestions to improve housing affordability for all Australians.
MS LAWDER (Brindabella) (5.29): I would like to thank Ms Berry and Mr Rattenbury for their contribution to the discussion on this very important issue. I genuinely believe that every single one of us here in this place is interested in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video