Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

An interesting story, but I think the situation is a little bit more complex. At the outset we should note the importance of Defence to the Northern Territory. A recent estimate was that $800 million a year of gross state product in the Northern Territory stems from the defence department presence. I think we have to be cognisant that at any one time it is important they have a degree of latitude in thinking the way forward with regard to their presence. Whilst the previous speaker had a throwaway line conceding that there had been some construction by the current government of housing up there, it is perhaps more noteworthy that 185 of those houses for defence personnel come under the government's nation-building economic stimulus program—a policy thrust that was opposed by the opposition. So we should remember that when they lament the sad state of housing, which of course is pronounced there. There is obviously a high demand in the Northern Territory because of other aspects of their economy. We know that around the world and in Australia there has been a drying-up of finance by the banking system to the building sector and there are problems. But before we start getting too excited about the problems there, we should perhaps concede that the current government has been extremely active with regard to public housing, social housing, opposed by the opposition again in New South Wales.

It is not as though the defence department is sitting on its hands doing nothing. There has been construction of 381 houses in Darwin, including 338 in the new suburb of Lyons, and there is further construction occurring. It is also important to note that defence personnel have been voting with their feet with regard to the use of this housing. Despite the offer of it, people just will not take it. One has to question how suitable it might be for other people, no matter how lamentable the housing shortage is. In actual fact it is offered to defence personnel and currently 50 per cent of the houses at RAAF Darwin are vacant, for a number of reasons. Some are vacant due to the posting cycle; others are due to routine repair requirements and, more particularly, major upgrades and repairs and the reality that demolition is the only option for some of that housing.

The minister has not been inactive. He has sought an answer from the Department of Defence as to what the long-term aims are. Minister Snowdon has noted that there is an expectation that the government will be able to provide more information about the outcomes of this review quite shortly. It is not a matter of just handing over what has been regarded by the defence personnel themselves—not by the minister, not by major authorities in the defence forces but individual soldiers themselves—as inadequate housing. I really question whether housing of that sort is really the solution to the shortages in the Northern Territory. It is defence land and defence might have other options for the land. It might sound like a very nice idea, a bit of sloganeering, a bit of political self-interest to demand that it be turned over for public housing, but its location and the long-term requirements of the defence department itself should be a major consideration here. It might be required to be used for different purposes. I also understand that some of it has been offered at various stages to the Northern Territory government and the Department of Families, Health, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and, surprisingly, they have expressed a very strong lack of interest in taking responsibility for this land. I would think that, given the fact that the minister has indicated that he will be making a response to the review in the near future, given the fact that much of this housing has been found to be unsatisfactory by defence personnel, given the paramount requirement that defence's long-term considerations are part of the decision making there, this motion is inappropriate.

See this speech in context