Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Recruiting experts in
Accountancy & Finance

Causeway carefactor?

By johnboy - 23 July 2008 32

The Shadow Minister for Housing, Jacqui Burke, is taking up cudgels for the residents of Causeway who can’t get any maintenance done on their soon to be bulldozed houses, and yet can’t get official confirmation it’s going to happen.

Outrageous? Or bulldoze ASAP?

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
32 Responses to
Causeway carefactor?
cranky 9:52 pm 23 Jul 08

So what are the minority who own their houses to do? Are they going to be offered anywhere near the commercial value for their properties, bearing in mind the agravation factor they could cause if they decided not to sell?

Shades of ‘The Castle’.

This could be political dynamite for Sonic and Co.

Million dollar 3 beddys’. Whoohoo!

johnboy 9:46 pm 23 Jul 08

pushing the line on personal abuse there BD.

bd84 9:39 pm 23 Jul 08

Start up the bulldozers, then drive it along to the northbourne flats and buildings surrounding it and use it liberally there.

miz said :

Why should convenient locations (on the lake to boot) like Kingston be only the domain of wealthy people?

The usual excuse of this govt – wheeled out once again yesterday after Fraser Court was flogged, ie, that they can ‘use the money we get from this formerly ordinary but now-prime real estate to buy more cheap houses (subtext: on the outskirts where it’s cheaper, who cares that there are no services) – just won’t wash any more. Why can’t they stay? Sounds like pure avarice to want these tenants out.

Obviously you have no clue about anything. First of all the flats were totally uninhabitable and beyond repair from all the filth who have destroyed them, selling them was the only option. Anything that would have been built in their place on the site would not have been fully public housing due to the government not wanting to have condensed areas of public housing creating slums as seen in most other states. Furthermore, you will find that Housing purchase houses all over Canberra not just on the outskirts, also part of the policy mentioned above.. one of the requirements is close to transport, obviously it’s not going to be stopping outside your front door. Try doing some research first, policies on their website.

V twin venom 9:33 pm 23 Jul 08

@#6
“If the tenants don’t like living there, why don’t they move out to something else?

As far as I’m concerned, public housing is about helping those who can’t provide housing for themself – not those who simply choose not to. Given that they are getting housing (typically at a discounted rate), they can take what they’re given. Why shouldn’t the govt develop higher value land as a source of income?

I spent time in public housing as a kid, and very few people seemed to me to be trying to help themselves.”

Harsh and heartless but fair.

sepi 9:29 pm 23 Jul 08

One of the issues is that noone will tell then what they will get instead and noone will confirm if and when they will have to move.

They could be sent to Oaks estate, where apparently the govt has empty housing that is so bad noone wants it.

johnboy 9:24 pm 23 Jul 08

It’s not that they won’t be given another equivalent house.

How many people do you want to sleep on the street tonight to guarantee the lucky few their security of tenure?

And as if the libs would do it differently!

sepi 9:18 pm 23 Jul 08

Yep – get those lazy pensioners onto a chain gang!

Thumper 9:05 pm 23 Jul 08

As El pointed out, a lot of people live there. It is their home.

How could someone be so heartless as to slowly force them out?

el 8:21 pm 23 Jul 08

Agreed VY. I read about this in the crimes earlier in the week. Some of those people have been there ~30 years.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_ 8:19 pm 23 Jul 08

If the tenants don’t like living there, why don’t they move out to something else?

As far as I’m concerned, public housing is about helping those who can’t provide housing for themself – not those who simply choose not to. Given that they are getting housing (typically at a discounted rate), they can take what they’re given. Why shouldn’t the govt develop higher value land as a source of income?

I spent time in public housing as a kid, and very few people seemed to me to be trying to help themselves.

sepi 7:53 pm 23 Jul 08

I feel sorry for the causeway residents – noone wants to live with not knowing what their future holds. But I think that area will be more mega apartments pretty soon.

miz 7:46 pm 23 Jul 08

Why should convenient locations (on the lake to boot) like Kingston be only the domain of wealthy people? The usual excuse of this govt – wheeled out once again yesterday after Fraser Court was flogged, ie, that they can ‘use the money we get from this formerly ordinary but now-prime real estate to buy more cheap houses (subtext: on the outskirts where it’s cheaper, who cares that there are no services) – just won’t wash any more. Why can’t they stay? Sounds like pure avarice to want these tenants out.

VicePope 7:10 pm 23 Jul 08

Put ACTPLA in charge of preserving it …. that should see it replaced by five story luxury units, supermarkets ….

heinous 6:51 pm 23 Jul 08

There’s a lot of history in that there Causeway, and we should be very careful about just brushing it aside so quickly. Heritage is important for us and future generations, who can put a price one our culture, for without it we are worthless.

Pandy 6:33 pm 23 Jul 08

I have a soft spot for the Causeway. Bulldoze it and build the Causway across the Molonglo as Griffin envisaged, thereby flooding the Jerrabomberra wetlands, creating more water front properties.

1 2 3

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site