Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Green housing plans

johnboy 17 September 2012 28

The Greens’ Amanda Bresnan is sharing her thoughts on what the Greens want in the way of housing policy with CommonGround the big winners:

The ACT Greens Social Housing initiative includes:
· $7m in capital and $200,000 per annum recurrent to be provided to the CommonGround development for people experiencing homelessness;
· $1.5m in capital and $200,000 per annum recurrent to provide housing to people living with a severe mental illness in a 24/7 supported environment, similar to Home in Queanbeyan;
· $30 million in capital to be invested in public housing to grow stock numbers; and
· $334,000 to increase the advocacy and policy work of ACT Shelter.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to Green housing plans
Filter
Order
devils_advocate devils_advocate 10:49 am 19 Sep 12

gazket said :

you do know who gets the 100 extra houses don’t ya . Boat people will get the houses

I only know a handful of people in Canberra who are wealthy enough to own a boat as well as the mooring fees, and none of them qualify or otherwise use public housing.

Almost by definition, if you can own (or even regulalarly lease) a boat, you aren’t reliant on public housing.

Thumper Thumper 8:20 am 19 Sep 12

I can get a weeks worth of public service “work” done in half a morning

Of course you can.

Truthiness Truthiness 9:35 pm 18 Sep 12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdbJP8Gxqog

Contour crafting could build the houses we need, we could make them nearly self sufficient.

I am not saying we need to be living in a utopia overnight, just that currently we aren’t even aiming close.

LSWCHP LSWCHP 8:57 pm 18 Sep 12

Truthiness said :

It seems like a fine idea to encourage more people onto the dole, they’re cheaper than public servants and about as productive.

If we could print every person a self sustaining eco-house, and get them out of the public service, we’d save a huge amount of money. We have the technology, everything is so automated that most people don’t actually need to work anymore. Its only the workaholic dole-bashers that keep us all in cubicles.

I for one would be ten times cheaper to keep on the dole than as a government contractor, and I’d be ten times happier too, if they didn’t keep making me go back to work for no reason.

I even like working, I can get a weeks worth of public service “work” done in half a morning, but it doesn’t let me be at work any less. oh no, we have to keep bums in seats, maintain a physical presence and pretend to be working.

I don’t get why everyone is so dead set keen on infinite expansion, its clear our ecosystems can’t take it, and it is endangering our long term survival. Just let us do less and lower our impact already!

As for refugees getting houses over locals, it wouldn’t be a problem at all if there were enough houses to go around. We have no shortage of land, or even money, just a shortage of political will. We could have universal housing and universal unemployment, it could be glorious. but no, our economic paradigm and protestant work ethic are sacrosanct.

Mate, I actually admire some of the ideas you’ve put up. There are lots of bad people, bad policies and bad things in the world. In an ideal world things would indeed be a lot better than they are now.

But it’s not an ideal world, and we have to do the best with what is possible. Sitting around waffling on about how we could have a utopia if things were perfect is a waste of time and effort. Things are not and never will be perfect, and come what may, we definitely won’t have a utopia in our lifetimes. We can make things better, but being realistic about our objectives will only help the process.

If you are underemployed in your PS job, then leave it and join or start a business that provides something that somebody wants. You, your customers and society as a whole will all be the better for it. I’ve been doing that for 30 years, and in that damned long time I’ve never once had the experience of doing a weeks “work” in a morning, so I can guarantee that your experience is not the norm. If you don’t do that then you are simply enjoying the fruits of bludging, while simultaneously complaining about the awfulness of the relaxed mellow bludging PS lifestyle, which is not something that I have any regard for.

Finally, you seem to think that there is enough wealth around to supply everybody with almost everything for no effort. This is not the case. Communal prosperity does does not simply appear out of thin air. Yes, there is a great disparity of wealth in Australia, and we’d all be better off if it was all distributed more equitably, but if we all just sit around skinning up doobies and singing Kumbaya while waiting for the houses to magically appear then we’ll end up living in holes in the ground.

LSWCHP LSWCHP 8:36 pm 18 Sep 12

gazket said :

you do know who gets the 100 extra houses don’t ya . Boat people will get the houses

You’ve convinced me. I’m gonna buy a boat now.

milkman milkman 7:02 pm 18 Sep 12

Truthiness, that is one weird post.

Truthiness Truthiness 5:54 pm 18 Sep 12

It seems like a fine idea to encourage more people onto the dole, they’re cheaper than public servants and about as productive.

If we could print every person a self sustaining eco-house, and get them out of the public service, we’d save a huge amount of money. We have the technology, everything is so automated that most people don’t actually need to work anymore. Its only the workaholic dole-bashers that keep us all in cubicles.

I for one would be ten times cheaper to keep on the dole than as a government contractor, and I’d be ten times happier too, if they didn’t keep making me go back to work for no reason.

I even like working, I can get a weeks worth of public service “work” done in half a morning, but it doesn’t let me be at work any less. oh no, we have to keep bums in seats, maintain a physical presence and pretend to be working.

I don’t get why everyone is so dead set keen on infinite expansion, its clear our ecosystems can’t take it, and it is endangering our long term survival. Just let us do less and lower our impact already!

As for refugees getting houses over locals, it wouldn’t be a problem at all if there were enough houses to go around. We have no shortage of land, or even money, just a shortage of political will. We could have universal housing and universal unemployment, it could be glorious. but no, our economic paradigm and protestant work ethic are sacrosanct.

milkman milkman 5:30 pm 18 Sep 12

Knowing the greens the houses will all cost double what they need to to pay for ‘green features’ of minimal benefit.

housebound housebound 4:46 pm 18 Sep 12

gazket said :

you do know who gets the 100 extra houses don’t ya . Boat people will get the houses

Or Greens candidates.

gazket gazket 3:56 pm 18 Sep 12

you do know who gets the 100 extra houses don’t ya . Boat people will get the houses

watto23 watto23 2:54 pm 18 Sep 12

Masquara said :

I ask, how can the Greens build 100 houses if they will never be a government?

Not that I think it will happen, but 2 more seats could see them be the minority government, ie Greens 6, Labour and libs 5 and 4.

I think the greens have shot themselves in the foot though with their policies, they gained 4 seats based on the fact that both major parties were not favoured by many. Of course the reason 2 party preferred politics is common in Australia, is because theres not much in the way of organised 3rd parties eg Democrats, One Nation, Family First, Greens….. The whole divide and conquer and of course minor party votes all flow to the two major parties, before flowing to many other minor parties….

Chop71 Chop71 2:30 pm 18 Sep 12

Gungahlin Al said :

Chop71 said :

$30 million in capital to be invested in public housing to grow stock numbers.

F#$%^ me that’s a lot of a hand out.

Personally, I’d prefer the money go to hospitals (so they don’t have to fudge the figures) or schools (to educate the kiddies so they shouldn’t need public housing).

There is already enough public housing in Canberra.

Clearly there isn’t enough, or there wouldn’t be waiting lists.
And it isn’t a hand out. It is an investment in bricks and mortar, which apart from having rent paid on it, will also appreciate in value, offsetting maintenance costs.

Rather it spent on hospitals? Well put those people out on the streets and you’ll have to spend more on hospitals. And mental health facilities. And police, court, jails, insurance, …

Surely you can connect the dots and see that secure housing is the critical first step of preventative health practise?

seems you missed the dots re spending that money on education

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 1:34 pm 18 Sep 12

Chop71 said :

$30 million in capital to be invested in public housing to grow stock numbers.

F#$%^ me that’s a lot of a hand out.

Personally, I’d prefer the money go to hospitals (so they don’t have to fudge the figures) or schools (to educate the kiddies so they shouldn’t need public housing).

There is already enough public housing in Canberra.

Clearly there isn’t enough, or there wouldn’t be waiting lists.
And it isn’t a hand out. It is an investment in bricks and mortar, which apart from having rent paid on it, will also appreciate in value, offsetting maintenance costs.

Rather it spent on hospitals? Well put those people out on the streets and you’ll have to spend more on hospitals. And mental health facilities. And police, court, jails, insurance, …

Surely you can connect the dots and see that secure housing is the critical first step of preventative health practise?

chewy14 chewy14 12:04 pm 18 Sep 12

“$30 million in capital to be invested in public housing to grow stock numbers;”

This by itself is enough for me to not vote Green (not that I was going to anyway).

We should be reducing the stock of publically owned housing, not increasing it.

Deref Deref 11:33 am 18 Sep 12

You grow potatoes; you increase public housing numbers.

Chop71 Chop71 11:08 am 18 Sep 12

$30 million in capital to be invested in public housing to grow stock numbers.

F#$%^ me that’s a lot of a hand out.

Personally, I’d prefer the money go to hospitals (so they don’t have to fudge the figures) or schools (to educate the kiddies so they shouldn’t need public housing).

There is already enough public housing in Canberra.

Masquara Masquara 9:20 pm 17 Sep 12

Gungahlin Al said :

Now – you were saying…?

I was saying, that they should get some of the housing cheats out of public housing and free up a hundred properties for people who need them. That way they won’t NEED to spend multimillions of OUR money on un-needed new housing in the outer sticks of, er, “Gungahlin et al”.

Gungahlin Al Gungahlin Al 8:34 pm 17 Sep 12

Masquara said :

I ask, how can the Greens build 100 houses if they will never be a government?

As a part of the Parliamentary Agreement with the Labor Party, the ACT Greens included an item for public housing to be 10% of housing stock in the ACT. In the 2011-12 Budget, the ACT Greens secured $9.5 million to be invested in public housing, and in 2012-13 $5 million.

Now – you were saying…?

milkman milkman 7:02 pm 17 Sep 12

Good to see Home in Queanbeyan getting a rap.

Masquara Masquara 6:11 pm 17 Sep 12

Greens reported on 666 as “planning to build 100 new ACT Housing houses”. That’s houses, not units.
I ask, how can the Greens build 100 houses if they will never be a government?

Note to Amanda Bresnan: to release 100 ACT Housing houses for the deserving, all you have to do is empty 100 of the hundreds of housing cheats into the streets.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site