Tuesday, 14 November 2023

Housing

Samantha RATNAM (Northern Metropolitan) (12:12): (344) My question is to the Minister for Housing. Minister, over the last two months my Greens colleagues and I have spent time talking to residents living in the public housing towers your government is looking to demolish. Many of the residents I have spoken to are angry and confused. Many are distraught that they will be displaced from the communities that they know and love. Many are asking for one thing, and that is to live in and return to public housing. Public housing is housing that is owned and managed by the state. It has a maximum fixed rent cap of 25 per cent of income. Residents’ rights are protected by law, and their landlord, the government, can be held accountable for breaches of that social contract by the community. Community housing has an important place in providing housing solutions to some sections of the community but was never designed to replace public housing. You may be interested to read Michael Pascoe’s recent comments in an article published in June when he surmised:

We’ve arrived at the present housing disaster rather like the Hemingway character explaining how he went bankrupt: “Two ways. Gradually and then suddenly.”

The “gradual” part of the crisis started half a century ago when governments began to withdraw from … public housing.

Minister, on behalf of these residents who are asking me: will there be any public housing rebuilt at each of the 44 sites where public housing will be demolished?

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:13): Thank you, Dr Ratnam, for that question. Contrary to, perhaps, the belief that you may espouse and the belief that your colleagues might espouse, the question of access to a secure, accessible, modern, light and fit-for-purpose home is not a landscape that you own. It is important to note at the outset that we are investing in the largest reforms to social housing in the history of this nation. You can quote from Michael Pascoe all you want, but let us take a trip back in history to the time when the high-rise towers were built. You are not the only ones to be visiting and spending time in these towers. Constructed in the 1960s and 70s using a unique concrete slab construction method, these high-rise towers are at the end of their operationally useful life. That is notwithstanding a lot of the work being undertaken by maintenance crews, by housing officers and by Homes Victoria to make sure that they can be retrofitted, that we can undertake air-conditioning pilots and that we can in a number of instances, in particular in Richmond, be in a position to actually join up two different apartments to make sure that there are four-bedroom units. This work is happening every single day.

Dr Ratnam, for you to stand here and to talk about fear perhaps reflects on the campaigning activities that you have been undertaking and the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation about what this particular announcement means. As we support residents and renters in understanding what the long-term objectives are in giving people access to –

Nick McGowan: On a point of order, President, the minister is required to give an answer that is truthful. Not all the housing commission towers are made of concrete. Some of the housing commission towers are built of brick, like the ones at Nicholson Street and Johnston Street. The minister should know that if she does not already, or is she just believing the briefs she is receiving from the department?

The PRESIDENT: That is not a point of order. If you are going to call a point of order on a minister’s answer and you have been yelling during her answer, which makes it nearly impossible for all of us to hear what the answer is, that makes it difficult.

Harriet SHING: When we talk about the work that is happening, let us talk about the engagement, because that is where your question kicked off today. We have had the first town hall renter forums at North Melbourne and Flemington. We have in the process of engaging with renters provided specific information in 10 languages, received over 1200 visits in the first week and recorded 17,000 visits by the end of September 2023. A dedicated 1800 –

Samantha Ratnam: On a point of order, President, on relevance, I would like the minister to respond to my question.

The PRESIDENT: I believe the minister has been responsive.

Harriet SHING: Dr Ratnam, go back to the beginning of your question and you will perhaps see that you are using question time as a starting point for what might be a rhetorical question more than anything else. It is really, really disappointing that the Greens continue to peddle a narrative that opposes more housing for our communities. Everybody in the state wants more housing for our communities. That is exactly what we are delivering. It would do you well and it would do your communities well to get on board.

Samantha RATNAM (Northern Metropolitan) (12:17): I note the minister has not responded to my question, which was quite a specific question about whether any public housing was going to be rebuilt at each of these sites. I will request, post question time, that a written response is provided.

Minister, a group of these residents that my colleagues and I recently spoke with are residents of the first towers your government intends to demolish, at North Melbourne and Flemington. Many of them are devastated at being forced to move away from their lives and livelihoods. They feel they have been pressured into signing documents without having the time to consider their situation properly. They are not being provided with clear information about what is happening to their homes, and they do not feel like the government understands why it is important that public housing land is not sold to developers and privatised and why they do not want to be placed in community housing. Minister, these residents have asked to meet with you so that they can raise these concerns directly with you. Will you meet with them, Minister? I am happy to supply you with the relevant contact information if you take up this invitation.

Harriet SHING (Eastern Victoria – Minister for Housing, Minister for Water, Minister for Equality) (12:18): Thank you, Dr Ratnam. As at 22 September we had visited every home – all 5800 households – to advise residents of the government’s policy. We have had housing support officers knocking on thousands of doors, and there have been more than 2600 conversations across more than 40 pop-up sites. When we talk about case studies, let us talk about those examples of moving from Flemington back to redeveloped community housing in Ascot Vale. Let us talk about Omar, a previous renter –

Nick McGowan: On a point of order, President, the question was whether the minister would meet with the individuals, not what the minister is now answering. I ask you to bring the minister back to the question that was asked.

The PRESIDENT: The minister to continue.

Harriet SHING: There are so many examples of residents. Omar has advised that the best part of his new housing is that a brand new, clean and comfortable year-round home is his own.

Samantha Ratnam: On a point of order, President, I appeal to you: on both questions now the minister has not answered my question or made an attempt to answer my question. What are our rights as members to require a minister to respond to a question? It seems that the minister is just reading preprepared notes that are not relevant to my question and not going anywhere close to my question.

The PRESIDENT: There is a provision at the end of question time where I determine if a minister should give a written response to questions. If the member that has asked the question is not happy with my decision, then of course they can raise a point of order then. There have been a number of rulings and practices over the years that the preamble forms part of the question, and members need to take that into account when asking the question as well.

Harriet SHING: I have been meeting consistently with residents. I would be delighted to continue to do that as part of this portfolio. As Awatif said:

We are very happy to move. These buildings are old. This is a very good project by the government. The current buildings are very hot and very bad for old people. I’ve toured the new homes at Victoria Street. I think they’re very nice, modern, good heating and cooling. The current buildings have a lot of problems.