Legislative Council, 11 September 2014
The Hon. NIALL BLAIR: My question is addressed to the Minister for Fair Trading in that capacity and in his capacity representing the Minister for Finance and Services. Will the Minister update the House on recent sales of public housing properties at Millers Point and allegations of under quoting?
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: I thank the member for this timely question because there are two more property sales occurring tonight. I know the Hon. Sophie Cotsis will be delighted to welcome those auctions. It has been a successful process. I will reflect upon that for a moment. The Hon. Sophie Cotsis stated:
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: I thank the member for this timely question because there are two more property sales occurring tonight. I know the Hon. Sophie Cotsis will be delighted to welcome those auctions. It has been a successful process. I will reflect upon that for a moment. The Hon. Sophie Cotsis stated:
- These secret auctions show the Government is more concerned with a quick cash grab, rather than the best interests of taxpayers and the current tenants of these properties.
The Liberals claims they want to invest the revenue from the sales in new public housing but there is no evidence of that in the budget.
The PRESIDENT: Order!
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: I guarantee that every single dollar will go into social housing in this State. That is how it should be. The proceeds from that investment will realise three times more social housing in places where people will be able to use that social housing.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Sophie Cotsis to order for the first time.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: As members are aware this process is being overseen by an independent project facilitator and undertaken by Government Property NSW through a very well-managed public sales process. I congratulate the Minister for Finance and Services and the Minister for Family and Community Services for a robust process that is delivering significant proceeds to the State. Six properties were part of the pilot program launched on 12 July. Two properties have been sold. The first property, at 119 Kent Street, was sold at auction for $1.911 million, which was very much in excess of the reserve price and the expected price in the market. That led to the request for an inquiry by the member opposite.
The second property, at 29 Lower Fort Street, was sold for $2.56 million. Two more properties will be sold tonight. We have a process that delivers magnificent proceeds to the Government. Those proceeds will be reinvested in social housing. The Opposition is carping about the reality of that sales process being successful. They are carping that the process is too successful. They said that an investigation into under quoting was necessary. So they wrote a letter to the Commissioner for Fair Trading. No-one complained except the member opposite.
The PRESIDENT: Order! I call the Hon. Sophie Cotsis to order for the second time.
The Hon. MATTHEW MASON-COX: What happened? The Commissioner for Fair Trading conducted an investigation and wrote the member a letter. Has she received it yet? What did it show? There are no issues with the sale process whatsoever. There are no issues at all; it is a very successful sale process. [Time expired.]
The Hon. Amanda Fazio: I have a supplementary question. I want to ask him where he's building the houses.
The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. Amanda Fazio will resume her seat; she did not ask the original question, as she well knows.
RESOURCED: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/V3ByKey/LC20140911?open&refNavID=HA6_1







.jpg)
According to your argument (which is grossly misplaced, might I add) all of those monies are just a fabrication or construct. You suppose a government who is 'always solvent, and can afford to buy anything for sale in their domestic unit of account even though they may face inflationary and political constraints' (quoting your Wikipedia source). Tell that to Argentina. Or more recently Greece. Or Spain. Or...
Your proposition (first paragraph) is wrong. Currency-issuing governments do not spend tax receipts. LAHC receives income from tenants. LAHC is not a currency-issuing government.
A government that issues its own currency is indeed always solvent with regard to liabilities in its currency.
Argentina has its own currency, but from 1991-2002 pegged it to another currency ($US).
Greece and Spain do not have their own currencies.
Crucial differences from Australia.
Further reading:
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=24010
"The Australian Government spends by crediting the bank accounts of recipients of payments. This is effected by crediting the relevant banks' reserve accounts at the Reserve Bank by the same amount. ...When a person pays taxes to the Australian Government, they direct their bank to debit their account in favour of the Government and, in doing so, the bank also directs the Reserve Bank to debit its reserve account by the same amount."