Linda Burney (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

This motion is in four parts. It observes the national partnership remote housing program. It notes that it expires on 30 June this year, which makes this motion very urgent. It also recognises many aspects of the program, including additional houses and what it means in terms of employment. It acknowledges that the loss of funding would mean jobs going at a local level. It also acknowledges that, without this funding, there is not only an implication for less housing; there's an implication for what it means for overcrowded housing in Indigenous communities. It also talks about the responsibilities in terms of closing the gap. Most importantly, this motion calls on the government to urgently restore the commitment to this program. It also calls on the government to recommit to a further 10 years of the program.

I rise to speak about this strategy. Ten years ago the Rudd government launched its $5.8 billion program to help address the overcrowding and homelessness, and poor housing conditions, in remote and rural areas, essentially in First Nations people communities. Without continued support of funding from the government, this strategy, as I mentioned earlier, is due to expire in June 2018. It has delivered 11,500 homes and contributed to a significant decrease in overcrowding in rural and remote Australia. The number of overcrowded houses dropped from 52.1 per cent in 2008 to 41.3 per cent in 2014-15, and the expected drop is to 37 per cent this year. By these measures alone, the strategy has been a success. These findings are supported from the government's own review into the agreement released last year.

I want to address the issue of discrete Aboriginal communities in Queensland. In Queensland alone, the agreement has delivered 1,150 new homes and refurbished about the same number, well beyond the initial targets set. It's also been a great generator of local jobs and apprenticeships, with 800 trainees and apprentices in Queensland alone. Local businesses and organisations benefit too, and their participation was projected to rise from 10 per cent in 2011 to 70 per cent in 2017. This is a success story, and I just don't understand why there wouldn't be a continued commitment at a federal level to sustaining this program. It seems that the federal government has decided to cost-shift to the state governments almost entirely, and we know that there has been little discussion about this.

I don't need to explain in great detail the importance of housing. We know it creates functioning social units. It provides a fixed address, which means people can get things like registration and driver's licences and register their SIM card for a mobile phone. It's very important, particularly for people on Centrelink payments who are enrolling and seeking a jobseeker program, to have a fixed address. The importance of a home in building a strong and self-sufficient community cannot be understated. Housing provides shelter, privacy, safety and security. It provides better health and education outcomes. It also impacts on the workforce, provides protection and shelter, and negates very significant physical and mental health issues. These are the sorts of things that guaranteed housing can provide.

I want to address the issue of overcrowding. I have seen reports from rural and regional Queensland that up to 30 people living in a single house is not unheard of. These numbers in single houses mean poor access to hygiene health. It provides intolerable conditions. It also means there is not regular access to hot water, functioning sewerage systems and working washing machines, as well as the electricity supply. Daily tasks we take for granted—showering, washing clothes, washing bedding, removing household waste and the ability to cook and prepare food hygienically—are things that guarantee safety. If this housing program is not continued, that is what we are risking.

The government's report notes an increase in leprosy and tuberculosis among remote Indigenous communities in Western Australia and other parts of remote Northern Australia. This happens at a rate that is seven times higher than it is for non-Indigenous people. Those things cannot be allowed to continue. That is why this program is so important.

I have extensive notes on case studies, which, given the time that I have, I won't go into. But I want to say that we need to take into account the increasing population rates of Indigenous communities in remote areas. Half of this need for additional dwellings is in the Northern Territory. We also need to provide support in overcrowded places that aren't considered remote—places like Yarrabah, in Queensland, or Elliott in the NT. Those places need to be considered. I have extensive notes on maintenance and return on investment, which are absolutely crucial in relation to the importance of this particular housing program. Maintenance of toilets, taps and other fixtures is a small thing which we take for granted. When you've got overcrowding, there is a great strain on maintenance.

There is also a great strain on investment. A $5.4 billion investment is lost if remote housing is not recognised as a government priority, as well as, of course, the call to action that we are making in relation to Closing the Gap targets. This housing partnership helps local economies and provides local jobs and traineeships. All of those things are being risked. I understand that the program cannot cover all housing outcomes and I understand that there are complex funding arrangements from various states and territories, but the federal government cannot walk away from its responsibility in this area. This goes to the heart of what I'm talking about. This motion also addresses issues around domestic violence and child safety, which are pretty obvious if you do not have reasonable and dignified housing.

Assistance for remote Indigenous housing has been in place since at least 1968 through a number of state and federal government initiatives. We are calling for this $5.8 billion program to be committed to for another 10 years. It is showing success. It is one of those programs where, if you don't continue, that success that I've outlined will absolutely disappear. It just does not make any sense, if you want to address some of the fundamental issues existing in Indigenous communities, that you would not continue to support such a program. In 2008 the target for the strategy was 4,200 new homes; 4,020 homes were built. The target for refurbishing homes was 4,800, and just over 7,500 have been refurbished. That is success. That is success, so why stop it now?

I urge this government to restore its commitment to this program. The Indigenous community needs this program to build new dwellings, as does the broader Australian community, in terms of investment and addressing those really fundamental issues that I've outlined in moving this private member's motion. We need this program to maintain and refurbish existing dwellings and double down on our existing investments. Secure housing is a key element in last year's Closing the gap report. Indigenous people have poorer housing outcomes than other Australians. Continuing to fund this program brings us closer to those goals. It is not about who is on what side of the chamber and who sits in the Independent seats. This is a program that has demonstrated success. The government in its own review recognises that success. We need this program to continue to reduce overcrowding and provide, as I've outlined, many of the basic human rights that we all enjoy.

See this speech in context