MILLERS POINT PUBLIC HOUSING
Page: 1
Mr BARRY O'FARRELL (K u-ring-gai) [12.12 p.m.]: The decision by State Government members about the future of public housing at Millers Point is tough, logical and equitable. It is tough because it represents fundamental reform that is designed to free up funds to deliver more public housing. It contrasts with the approach that was taken by the past government, which turned a blind eye to manifest problems with Millers Point's public housing. It is logical because an estimated $90 million to $100 million is needed to restore and maintain the Millers Point properties. It is money that could and should be better spent on expanding the number of public housing properties across New South Wales, especially given the current unmet demand. The $28 million already realised from the former Government's leasehold program involving 29 Millers Point terraces is sufficient to construct three times as many public housing dwellings elsewhere in the State. Above all, the decision is equitable.How can anyone seriously justify providing annual subsidies as high as $44,000 to tenants in this suburb when public housing tenants in Campbelltown receive $8,000 and those in Mount Druitt, Gosford and Newcastle receive approximately $7,000 per annum? As the Minister for Community Services has said repeatedly, for every subsidised tenancy in Millers Point the Government could provide assistance to an extra three to five public housing tenants elsewhere in the State. There is a need for public housing across the State and the Government needs to address all that demand, not just those fortunate few who have access to an area and harbour views that most people can only ever dream about. It is important to remind members of the House that public housing tenants at Millers Point are to be relocated—that is, provided with housing elsewhere—not tipped into the street. The many elderly residents of Millers Point will therefore have better accessibility.
Amongst the hysteria generated by some about this decision have been claims that the heritage of the Millers Point precinct has been threatened. These claims are outrageous and false. Regrettably, they are dishonest claims that have been made by Independents who represent this area at a State and a civic level. Even those with a passing association with the properties know that, despite tens of millions of dollars in taxpayers' funds being spent on the terraces in recent decades, too many of them are in poor condition. The fact that these properties are Government-owned and subject to the Heritage Act has failed to guarantee a high standard of maintenance and conservation. Under this Government's program we know that they will be better maintained, restored and preserved. As part of the 2008 program that sold 99-year leases on 29 properties, responsibility for restoration was assigned to the new owners and bonds were required to ensure that restoration work complied with the Heritage Act. It is also obvious that those who participated in the program were passionate about preserving and maintaining properties in such an historic precinct of our city, reportedly spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and, in some instances, up to $1 million on restoring those terraces. People who buy these properties will be subject to the relevant heritage laws in a way in which government never subjects itself.
It was particularly disappointing to see the National Trust of Australia join the uninformed chorus. In May the trust's president falsely claimed that the Government's decision would see terraces "demolished and redeveloped", ignoring the provisions of the State's Heritage Act and the City of Sydney's local environmental plan. As a long-time National Trust member, I cannot fathom why the organisation is willing to spread untruths and promote heritage fears where none exist. Many people believe the National Trust has lost its way in recent years and these claims confirm that belief. Not only does the Government's program offer a practical way to improve the heritage of an historic harbour-side residential precinct, but also it does so in a financially responsible way that will deliver more public housing to New South Wales. The National Trust should strongly support any effort to improve and protect heritage buildings anywhere in New South Wales. It should also be honest enough to acknowledge the financial pressures that all governments and many non-government agencies face, especially in this area of social welfare. After all, it is not unknown for the National Trust to lease its properties and presumably it does so for the same reason: to gain income to assist it to meet its wider conservation obligations.
There is the rub. This tough, logical and equitable decision will assist the Government to better meet the demands of those needing public housing across New South Wales. This program will recycle the value of these housing assets and provide more accommodation elsewhere. It will deliver better value in the way in which taxpayers' money is spent as well as offering improved heritage outcomes. In the interests of taxpayers and of all public housing tenants across this State whose needs are not being met currently—not just the fortunate few at Millers Point—this program should be supported.
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20140805004?open&refNavID=HA8_1#
