Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Thank you, honourable Speaker, and I thank the member for bringing this motion forward. I am going to be quick because by my read, we have less than 10 minutes left and I know Mrs Beswick wants to get in and have a say as well, so I will say upfront that we will support both the substantive motion and the amendment and thank the member for bringing on the amendment.
The Greens did not support the Homes Tasmania bill when it went through this parliament. They wanted it to work. We were not convinced about the corporatised structure. We were concerned about Homes Tasmania being increasingly loaded with debt, which is an issue that is increasingly coming to pass, and we ultimately voted against the bill even though some amendments were made along the way.
I could talk about the fails that have been flagged already in relation to Homes Tasmania. We have raised significantly over the last number of months and years the budget and the budget allocation for Homes Tasmania. We have heard already in this debate the fudged figures around the six houses, the vacant land and the crisis accommodation, and of course the dashboard figures – 4700 applications on the list. That is not people. We have to times that by x amount because some of these are families and couples and the like – 90 weeks waiting. They are well understood.
I want to put on the record some concerns we are hearing about Homes Tasmania when it comes to Aboriginal housing, and some deep concerns from the Aboriginal Tenancy Advisory Panels about Aboriginal housing about how housing is being allocated. There has been a shift from the Housing Tasmania model; Homes Tasmania is seemingly shifting responsibility around tenancy to organisations such as the Aboriginal Community Housing Limited. It is Victorian‑based, and it is seen as taking the power and some of the autonomy out of the hands of the community.
We support the motion substantially. We do note that there is an independent review of Homes Tasmania in 2026. That is absolutely appropriate, but given we are halfway through the period until then and there are these significant issues, we absolutely support the call on the government to urgently review Homes Tasmania.
We do not necessarily want that review to have a predetermined outcome, but we certainly also do not want that to be an internal review by government departments. It needs to have input from Treasury and others.
Our policy is for a public works department to be established so that the construction of social housing is brought back into the fold of government. We know that when Stainforth Court was redeveloped into Queens Walk there were propositions around demolishing that completely. It was built in the 50s by the public works department, so government‑managed contractors and employees, and the quality of that build was such that the decision was made not to completely flatten it and rebuild it.
We are supportive of bringing the functions of Homes Tasmania back into the fold of government and within the purview of Cabinet. We note also that the Legislative Council, Government Administration Committee B is looking at the viability and function of Homes Tasmania as well.
We support and welcome this motion and the amendment.
