“The Supreme Court decision, we believe, will highlight the heartlessness of the ACT government’s seemingly relentless war against the poor and less well off in our community.” JON STANHOPE and KHALID AHMED look at Minister Berry’s bizarre management of public housing. 

In responding to the Auditor-General’s report on the Growing and Renewing the Public Housing Program, Housing Minister Yvette Berry said that increasing the proportion of public housing was not the aim of the program!

The Growing and Renewing Public Housing Program was announced in the 2019-20 Budget. It included an undertaking to replace 1000 public housing dwellings and to increase the stock by 400 dwellings. One wonders then what meaning the minister ascribes to the word “growing”.

This was the second phase of the purported growth and renewal of public housing undertaken by the ACT government. The announcement followed the completion of an earlier program in 2019 that falsely boasted that 1288 public housing dwellings had been “renewed” under that program.

We have previously noted that the 1288 public housing dwellings referred to were sold off with all proceeds directed to Light Rail Stage 1, under an agreement entered into by Chief Minister Andrew Barr with the Commonwealth Government. 

The stock disposed of was not fully replaced with an overall reduction of 194 dwellings. The government also sold off and banked prime land blocks and has failed to provide a full financial acquittal of the Program (Mark-I).

The audit report on the Program (Mark-II) pointedly noted, among other things, that the proportion of public housing stock in the territory had declined and will continue to decline within the timeframe of the Program. 

Minister Berry’s claim that the aim of the Program was not to increase the stock of public housing is extraordinary and raises a raft of serious questions. 

Interestingly, the government in its formal response to this audit accepted all recommendations. That surely flies in the face of the claim by the minister that the objectives of the Program were different from those that formed the basis of the audit assessment.

It begs the question whether Ms Berry is suggesting that the auditor-general got the objectives of the Program wrong and went on to audit something that was never intended? 

However, in accordance with the requirements of the Auditor-General Act 1996 the Community Services Directorate (CSD) was provided with a draft report and a proposed final report for comment. The auditor-general is required to take any comments or objections into account and if necessary, make any necessary changes. Notably, however, no objections were raised by CSD in this instance.

In any event it is indisputable that there was a public commitment by the ACT government to increase the stock of public housing by 400 units of housing under the Program (Mark-II). Sadly, as a result of the failure to meet that target, together with the loss of stock that occurred in the Program (Mark-I), the decline in public housing in Canberra since 2011, that we have previously highlighted, would not have been as dramatic or destructive.

If, therefore, the objectives of the two programs, announced with such fanfare at their respective commencements, had been realised, the proportion of public housing in the ACT would be much higher than it is. There would still, of course, be a major reduction and hence shortfall in public housing stock compared to the levels in 2011 or 2016. 

The minister’s denial is truly bizarre

This assessment must surely have been provided to the minister by Housing ACT. The minister’s denial of any intention under the Growing and Renewing Program to increase the proportion of public housing stock is truly bizarre and certainly contradicts the ACT government’s boast that it is a “progressive government”.

A major hurdle in meeting the objectives of this program, particularly the increase of 400 dwellings, was clearly the Program design. It involved relocating tenants in free-standing dwellings and selling off their homes. The dwellings targeted for sale were tenanted in large measure by elderly widowed women, the disabled and people with mental health conditions.

The government resorted to forced evictions which were characterised by the then CEO of ACTCOSS, Dr Emma Campbell, as heartless, while being strenuously defended by Minister Berry.

Shortly thereafter, the Ombudsman commenced an Own Motion Inquiry while tenants initiated a challenge in the Supreme Court asserting, among other things, that in some instances, the evictions constituted a breach of human rights. 

The government has indicated, in the most recent Budget Papers, the potential for it to be hit with a significant liability arising out of this litigation. The involuntary tenant relocation was paused in August 2023, and Ms Berry apologised to the tenants for distress caused. Forced relocations were ceased subsequently. The Program completion is now expected in 2027.

We await with interest the Supreme Court decision in the case brought against ACT Housing. A decision which will, we believe, highlight the heartlessness of the ACT government’s seemingly relentless war against the poor and less well off in our community. A decision that we have no doubt the ALP and the Greens are praying will not be handed down before the election.

Jon Stanhope is a former chief minister of the ACT and Dr Khalid Ahmed a former senior ACT Treasury official.