Spare a thought for those sleeping in their cars this Christmas, the ABC reports that Housing ACT has 336 empty properties which it hasn’t managed to get into a shape it can put the needy into.
Take your time!
I think that the people who do destroy public housing – which is a last resort for many – should not get another house.
Let them live in shelters etc. There are plenty more people out there who would be thankful for a roof over their heads. These are the people living in cars with or without their kids, or on the streets.
I mean how many public houses do you need to destroy to be evicted? 1, 2 or 5?
Everyone is entitled to shelter, but if you destroy it then the onus should be on you to find alternative accommodation.
Why aren’t people being made to be accountable for their actions? Is it easier to cry “hard done by” than admit you’re a pariah?
i still don’t think you’d get anyone to do it. And once you have staff there it becomes more like a hostel. maybe we just need more of those.
agreed, the accommodation would need to come with the job.
Then who’d be a public housing manager?
Yes but at full market rent.
If you allow it to become a lawless and neglected building yes.
neither of those things should be allowed to happen.
that’s why you make public housing managers live in the accomodation too.
yes but then you get burnie court type situations.
hostels? who cares?
Seriously though I’ve often thought that the human right of a roof over the head doesn’t run all the way to a house with a yard, I’d love to see something a bit more basic and low-maintenance from public housing to encourage people to stand on their own two feet.
if you get kicked out of act housing where can you go to live?
Now if you get 3 complaints you can be evicted.
However, those people go to Legal Aid etc and “fight” to be in public housing through the Tenancy Tribunal.
I’ve not heard of one “bad” tenant being evicted. Just “relocated” to another house in another area of Canberra.
The ACT Housing authorities are far too soft on bad tenants. They pay lip service to enforcing housing/tenancy agreements. That is because the Stanhope Government won’t take action in this area. ACT Housing needs to give bad tenants a chance to improve but at some stage (after some warnings) they should be enforcing housing agreements concerning appropriate behaviour. Those who can’t comply with the rules should not be housed in the ACT. You can’t run a system that allows people to constantly make problems for their neighbours and for the taxpayer, and remain in public housing. Tough love is required in the ACT system and soon. Let’s stop turning a blind eye to problem tenants in public housing. Bad behaviour by a few tenants in public housing is not fair on the majority who do the right thing. It is just not right that some people have to live in constant fear in some public housing areas because the “vigilantes” rule and the authorities refuse to take any action.
ACT Housing is for low income
The act housing 6month ago bought a house across from me .
it has air con,roller shutter,double built on garage,.
The painted it ,fixed fences,a guy was on the roof putting spray Insulation .
They just moved lebos in and they drive a merc and have other Expensive cars.
They have caused the street problems with there friends cars noise all times late at night.
they had a party there and abused they Neighbors and kicked there fence down.
This is what housing is spending there money on.
I think it’s on there although we’ve been having some problems with the audio on the site. It’s one of Marky’s songs.
Actually JB should have got a copy in the mail yesterday?
Barring that, you can always buy one of our CDs from the website. (Hehe)
have good one folks!
P.S. everybody check out the REVOLVER song – ‘want me back’ or whatever it’s real name is – its related to this thread…
Thumper back me up here and post a linkie or something buddy…
ranty ranty rant rant rant.
I could add a few, but I’m not inclined…
In case (as I suspect) this blog gets read by local pollies – Attn: don’t you realise there is one degree of separation in Canberra? When you make a crap decision impinging on (what you perceive as) one group, a whole lot of people are affected and/or hear about its ramifications, and are NOT happy. So. . . Schools. Buses. Teachers (underpaid, and many have no idea where on earth they are going to be teaching next year). Liberal-party-type con-job ads (costing . . ?). Library. Shopfront. Out-there yet expensive projects. Land deals. Coronial result. Anyone got anything else?
An insider (works in the Dept) told me today that resources are extremely tight. If they haven’t allocated the funds to refurb properties that would be enough to cause a bottleneck.
And by the by, they have even changed the rules on how many people should share a dwelling. You used to qualify for an extra bedroom if there was 7 years between sibs of same gender. This no longer applies, so teens and babies are expected to share; and to request a move to a larger dwelling, overcrowding has to be so bad that you need two extra bedrooms to even get on the priority list. Sneaky.
Are you sure this isn’t just counting shitholes like Fraser Court?
The “good news” stories from the Stanhope government just keep on coming
They leave properties empty for 3 months after tenants disappear ‘in case they come back’.
With waiting lists the way they are I think this should be cut back to one month. Espeically if the tenants have cleared out all their stuff. If they leave and discontinue paying rent they shoud forfeit their spot.
Should the government be allowed to swap the Curtin horse paddocks for West Basin?