Skip to content Skip to main navigation


Get RSM on your side at tax time.

No more housing fun at Deb Foskey’s expense.

By johnboy - 1 March 2006 25

Thanks to Roland the Green for pointing out that Dr. Foskey has, in a backhanded way, announced that she’s no longer in public housing.

I welcome this move, and now look foward to wholesale reform of public housing in the ACT.

UPDATED: The ABC are now covering the story.

Further Update: The Canberra Times now has the story.

If only we all got that level of support.

What’s Your opinion?

Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
25 Responses to
No more housing fun at Deb Foskey’s expense.
Mr Evil 8:19 am 02 Mar 06

Yay! Ding dong the witch is gone…….

areaman 12:56 am 02 Mar 06

Yeah, that the list Kimba wrote was self-aggrandisement, not your intial post, which I thought was quite restrained.

johnboy 10:53 pm 01 Mar 06


areaman 10:44 pm 01 Mar 06

I never claimed you did JB, i was responding to Kimba, who I named at the begining of that point.

Vic, I personally hope they don’t have to sell the house due to a drop in rental income with market renters being forced out, we may never know.

johnboy 8:47 pm 01 Mar 06

Give us a break Areaman, you’ll note I made no claims as to RA’s influence.

barking toad 8:08 pm 01 Mar 06

Thank you roland the green for your gay contribution.

The bottom line is this :

foskey was rorting the system in an obscene way on two fronts :

1. As someone on approximately $100,000pa ;
2. As a member of the local council.

The first point is obscene because on that level of income public housing is not required despite the bleating about “market rent” providing so much housing for the unfortunates.

The second point is even more obscene because as an alleged representative of the people of Canberra with all the perks that go with it she still considered it fair to occupy public housing at the expense of the those that need it and then tries to justify the move because of some lifestyle change instaed of owning up to her shame.

As with Maelinar, I congratulate foskey on her acceptance of the bleeding obvious.

Vic Bitterman 7:57 pm 01 Mar 06

LOL. Hopefully with some luck a decent, hard working low-income battler will get the house.

All she needs to do now is join a relevant political party, which which the community sees value in, and her role in society will be complete!!!!!

Roland GRNS 5:56 pm 01 Mar 06

I’ll leave this dialogue to you all after this one.

And I won’t even argue the politics of it.

The media attacks have been very unpleasant, but Deb is moving – as every tenant in public housing should feel they can – to a better living situation for her and her daughter.

We in this office will continue to fight for secure and sufficient government housing, and for an increased supply of affordable housing in general.

Thank you and good luck.

Ari 4:47 pm 01 Mar 06

Foskey’s initial argument was she should be allowed to stay because an MLA’s high salary is not secure, being entirely at the mercy of us cruel voters. She would have known of her daughter’s changing educational requirements at that time and she was keen to stay.

Q: What’s changed in the meantime? A: More public anger = political pressure.

Hence the use of her daughter an an excuse to get out of an untenable political situation.

areaman 4:35 pm 01 Mar 06

As I’ve always said, staying in public housing was politically stupid and I’m glad that she has left (not that she’s any more likely to get my vote). That being said I still support security of tenure, due to the three basic facts, which I’ve outlined a million times already:
She wasn’t getting any money from the government
she was actually making money for the government
she wasn’t taking anyone else’s spot

Oh an Kimba, while I don’t doubt that political pressure forced her out, I think it’s self-aggrandizement to put RA anywhere on that list, let alone first.

kimba 4:05 pm 01 Mar 06

Kewl I can post my Nanny McFoskey poster again.

The great-unwashed-guru Roland can spin all he likes but the only reason Nanny McFosky left her government sponsored home was because of media pressure from RiotACT, Today Tonight, shock jock 2CC and even a late uproar by her politically correct mates from the ABC and Canberra Times.

Maelinar 3:53 pm 01 Mar 06

As someone who has been quite vocal about my disapproval of the issue, I certainly congratulate Deb for her decision to move on, although I did question the motives behind the move, as I’m sure that a lot of other homeless families would love the opportunity to move houses at the whim of the educational requirements of their children as well. Nevertheless, well done.

I hazard to suggest however, Deb has become a bit of a figurehead of the small group of people who are abusing the system, and indeed while she may not have been the highest earner, or the person with the most assetts that occupied public housing, she has become the most publicly recognisable figure on the wrong side of the fence.

For my part in that I have no regrets, and would consider that I have maintained a constant stance throughout the issue. On Deb’s part, while there was sufficient heat on the issue it was probably inadequate on a political front to make such wild assertions as she was doing it so that she could identify with the people, but that’s for the voting community to decide.

Congratulations Deb, you did the right thing eventually.

Indi 3:29 pm 01 Mar 06

Well done Dr Foskey, you have seen that it is the responsible thing to do and enter the private market (because you can afford to) and allow a poor, desperate family to have an affordable home. Your very statement below indicates that you yourself only required public housing for a period where you needed it the most – which was up until you became a politician with a decent salary:

“As someone who is just moving out of public housing into the private market, I know it was because my daughter and I were secure in our home of ten years we could make the right choice when the time came. Home security is something all public and community housing residents need”

Security of tenure should exist you are quite right, but only for those who need it and for a period of time when they need govt support the most!

Ari 3:18 pm 01 Mar 06

She must really be grateful for the extra bucks in her pocket now she’s downsized …
assuming the new landlord applies the same criteria for “market rent” as the ACT Government.

Slinky the Shocker 2:45 pm 01 Mar 06

The RiotACT should be proud! What an achievement…now rents will drop and I will be able to afford my first home. Oh, wait…that’s up to profit-mad investors who need a 2nd or 3rd home and manipulative real-estate agents. Can anyone please pick on them next?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | |

Search across the site