Mr EDE - 1995-06-20
I will try again to elicit a proper response from the Chief Minister who has decided that part of being in charge of this government means not answering questions relating to statements that he has made on matters that are his responsibility. On Friday morning, he said that the notice of rent increase had gone out just after the budget. On Friday afternoon, the story changed and he said that the notices had been withheld until Friday at 2 pm, too late to be received before the by-election. He said that that was the result of 'a technical approach to issues in the department'. That was the reason he gave.
Mr Speaker, I wish to table another memorandum ...
Mr HATTON: A point of order, Mr Speaker!. Is the Leader of the Opposition proposing to ask a question and, if so, of whom?
Mr EDE: I am asking the question of the Chief Minister.
Mr Bailey: A little sensitive, are we, Steve?
Mr Hatton: I wish he would address questions on my portfolio to me.
Mr EDE: It was a statement.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I understand that the Leader of the Opposition is asking a question of the Chief Minister.
Mr Bell: It was you who pulled the shonky, was it, Steve?
Page 640
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Leader of the Opposition continue with his question.
Mr EDE: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table this document.
Leave granted.
Mr EDE: It states that, in relation to the rent increases, action is in hand for the letters to go out in early June. We have a clear statement from the department that initially the letters were to be sent out in early June. That document is dated 26 May, 3 days before the election was called. However, by the time the election was called, they were not to be sent out until the afternoon of the day before the election was to be held. I ask the Chief Minister to institute an inquiry into what is an obvious case of political interference or use of the public service for political ends and report back to this Assembly on the results.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition because he has vindicated what I have been saying. I was of the view, because I had been told, that the notices had been sent out. That is consistent with the memorandum that he has just tabled. I thank him for bringing that to the attention of members. I refer the remainder of his question to the Minister for Lands, Housing and Local Government.
Mr HATTON (Lands, Housing and Local Government): Mr Speaker, it seems that the opposition is a little frightened to ask the minister responsible for the portfolio to answer a question relating to his own portfolio.
Mr Reed: They might get an answer.
Mr HATTON: Yes.
It is not surprising that the Chief Minister is not familiar with the particular details of another minister's portfolio. It is a minister's responsibility in this Assembly to answer questions relating to his own portfolio. I am happy to do that. I am trying to glance through this letter at the moment. Decisions on rental movements were taken at the budget Cabinet.
Mr Bailey: Rental increases.
Mr HATTON: Those decisions were taken at the time and it was anticipated that the advices would be sent out in late May or early June. I had assumed that they had gone out. I was the person who advised the Chief Minister that the letters had gone out because that is what I believed had occurred. I did not know that they had not gone out. I misinformed the Chief Minister and that caused him a certain degree of embarrassment last Friday ...
Mr Stirling: Did you check whether they had gone out?
Mr HATTON: I apologise to him for that and I apologise to ...
Page 641
Mr Stirling: Did you ask anyone whether they had gone out or did you simply assume it?
Mr Stone: He is being truthful. What more do you want?
Mr Stirling: You just assumed?
Mr HATTON: Don't you like the truth?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Ede: We want an inquiry.
Mr HATTON: You obviously do not.
Mr Stirling: Inept ministerial responsibility - that is what you have exercised.
Mr Coulter: Settle down!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: The Cabinet decision was that there would be an increase of 5% which would represent a 5% increase in the revenue base for the Housing Commission. There was some confusion between Treasury and my department as to whether that meant a 5% rental increase or a 5% revenue increase. In fact, it meant a 5% revenue increase, and that was clarified in Cabinet last Tuesday.
My department was preparing letters and obviously I have taken the opportunity to obtain a detailed briefing of the circumstances. This memo was part of a normal process and is known as a TMS newsletter. Such newsletters are circulated by electronic mail among Housing Commission officers. They are technical memorandums circulated to people in the day-to-day workings of their operations. I was not aware of this memo, but I am never aware of these memos when they are circulated. In fact, I received a copy of it from the ABC which happened to forward a copy to me asking me to comment on it. That was the first I knew of it and, obviously, the first the government knew about it. It came as somewhat of a surprise to me. As it turns out, I am quite sure that the person who circulated it, who is certainly not a senior executive in the department, was seeking to defer dispatch of the letters until the terminology in them ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: ... had been ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Let me say this ...
Mr Stirling: Any time after the by-election will do.
Page 642
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: In fact, errors were found in the letters and, to the best of my knowledge, they have still not been sent out because, as late as yesterday afternoon, corrections were being made to ensure their accuracy. I know that the opposition has no interest in accuracy.
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Let me clarify a couple of fundamental points. Firstly, there is absolutely no way that the Housing Commission rental increases were not a matter of public record. They were debated quite extensively in this House and were reported quite extensively in the media. It would have been to our advantage had the advices gone out earlier because a very large percentage of tenants - in particular, in the Fannie Bay electorate - were not subject to a rental increase. That is the reality They would not have a rent increase because they were on rebated rents already. The rents are based on a percentage of their income. Whilst we adjust nominal rents, as required by the federal government under the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement, the affordability is maintained because people pay a percentage of their income on rent. A large percentage of the people would not have received a rental increase.
Mr Ede: They would have.
Mr Stirling: Who would not have an increase?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: Anybody on a rebate, and that is half the tenants in the Territory.
Mr Ede: No increase?
Mr HATTON: That is right - as a consequence of this increase.
Mr Ede: That is not what you said last week.
Mr HATTON : Settle back and listen.
Those are the facts. The opposition decided to do a little push-polling on Friday morning. It whacked out this document which I understand was mail dropped to all the flats at Warrina and Kurringal on Friday morning - the day before the election. It reads: 'The CLP's budget means Housing Commission rents will go up by $150 to $260 per year for pensioners in a single-bedroom flat'.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: That is a lie.
Mr Ede: That is what you said.
Page 643
Mr HATTON: You ought to listen.
Mr Ede: You sent out 2 notices.
Mr HATTON: Pensioners will have an adjustment in rents, but let me read the letter that is being sent out. Listen to it carefully:
The calculation of rental rebates paid to pensioners and other benefit recipients has recently been adjusted to take into account increases in income received through
the Departments of Social Security and Veterans Affairs since April 1992. If all or part of your income is derived from this source, your rent is to be adjusted in
accordance with the schedules set out below. You should be aware that, whenever there is a change in the number of persons who reside in your dwelling or to your
household income, you are required to notify the department promptly ...
The only reason there was a rental increase ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: It has nothing to do with our budget ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Stirling: You just misled the House, you dill.
Mr HATTON: It has nothing to do with our budget - not a thing to do with our budget. Pensioners pay 14% of their income in rent. That is the lowest percentage for aged pensioners in Australia. We maintain that at 14%. If their aged pension increases, they still pay 14% of their income. In New South Wales ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Stirling: It is for other pensioners when they have to pay extra, but it is not written in ignorance!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MITCHELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker! I am trying to listen to the minister's answer ...
Mr Stirling: Sit down, you dill!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 644
Mr MITCHELL: I cannot hear a word because of the screaming across the floor.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I agree with the member for Millner that some members on the opposition benches, whom I will name but not as a means of putting them out of this House - the members for Nhulunbuy and Wanguri in particular - are trying me very seriously this morning. I make this point now. If either of those members continues to talk over me when I call for order, I will name them. The Minister for Lands and Housing.
Mr HATTON: Mr Speaker, I have made the point very clearly. It is a fact, and has been a fact for a long time, that we offer very large rebates in rents to support our aged pensioners. We do that by charging rents at a level which is the lowest percentage of the aged pension for any state or territory in Australia. We are being abused by the opposition which is accusing us of budgeting increases. That is a lie.
I believe it is excellent that pensioners receive a CPI adjustment to their age pension every 3 or 6 months, but part of that increase does go towards their rent. We maintain a very large percentage of rebate support for aged pensioners and other persons on low incomes. Another letter is going out to a large number of tenants. It will advise that there is no increase because they are already receiving rental rebates. If their wages or their social security benefits increase or their financial circumstances improve, their rent will be adjusted. However, it is adjusted because their financial circumstances have changed, not because we have changed our policies. Our only adjustments have been on the nominated rents and all the rebates continue to apply. That relates to about half of our tenants.
There is no doubt that the opposition document was designed unjustifiably to put fear into the minds of pensioners and low-income earners. The Leader of the Opposition makes much ado about push-polling. That is the most deceitful kind of push-polling that I have seen for many a long year.
Page 645
Mr Speaker, I wish to table another memorandum ...
Mr HATTON: A point of order, Mr Speaker!. Is the Leader of the Opposition proposing to ask a question and, if so, of whom?
Mr EDE: I am asking the question of the Chief Minister.
Mr Bailey: A little sensitive, are we, Steve?
Mr Hatton: I wish he would address questions on my portfolio to me.
Mr EDE: It was a statement.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I understand that the Leader of the Opposition is asking a question of the Chief Minister.
Mr Bell: It was you who pulled the shonky, was it, Steve?
Page 640
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I ask the Leader of the Opposition continue with his question.
Mr EDE: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table this document.
Leave granted.
Mr EDE: It states that, in relation to the rent increases, action is in hand for the letters to go out in early June. We have a clear statement from the department that initially the letters were to be sent out in early June. That document is dated 26 May, 3 days before the election was called. However, by the time the election was called, they were not to be sent out until the afternoon of the day before the election was to be held. I ask the Chief Minister to institute an inquiry into what is an obvious case of political interference or use of the public service for political ends and report back to this Assembly on the results.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition because he has vindicated what I have been saying. I was of the view, because I had been told, that the notices had been sent out. That is consistent with the memorandum that he has just tabled. I thank him for bringing that to the attention of members. I refer the remainder of his question to the Minister for Lands, Housing and Local Government.
Mr HATTON (Lands, Housing and Local Government): Mr Speaker, it seems that the opposition is a little frightened to ask the minister responsible for the portfolio to answer a question relating to his own portfolio.
Mr Reed: They might get an answer.
Mr HATTON: Yes.
It is not surprising that the Chief Minister is not familiar with the particular details of another minister's portfolio. It is a minister's responsibility in this Assembly to answer questions relating to his own portfolio. I am happy to do that. I am trying to glance through this letter at the moment. Decisions on rental movements were taken at the budget Cabinet.
Mr Bailey: Rental increases.
Mr HATTON: Those decisions were taken at the time and it was anticipated that the advices would be sent out in late May or early June. I had assumed that they had gone out. I was the person who advised the Chief Minister that the letters had gone out because that is what I believed had occurred. I did not know that they had not gone out. I misinformed the Chief Minister and that caused him a certain degree of embarrassment last Friday ...
Mr Stirling: Did you check whether they had gone out?
Mr HATTON: I apologise to him for that and I apologise to ...
Page 641
Mr Stirling: Did you ask anyone whether they had gone out or did you simply assume it?
Mr Stone: He is being truthful. What more do you want?
Mr Stirling: You just assumed?
Mr HATTON: Don't you like the truth?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Ede: We want an inquiry.
Mr HATTON: You obviously do not.
Mr Stirling: Inept ministerial responsibility - that is what you have exercised.
Mr Coulter: Settle down!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: The Cabinet decision was that there would be an increase of 5% which would represent a 5% increase in the revenue base for the Housing Commission. There was some confusion between Treasury and my department as to whether that meant a 5% rental increase or a 5% revenue increase. In fact, it meant a 5% revenue increase, and that was clarified in Cabinet last Tuesday.
My department was preparing letters and obviously I have taken the opportunity to obtain a detailed briefing of the circumstances. This memo was part of a normal process and is known as a TMS newsletter. Such newsletters are circulated by electronic mail among Housing Commission officers. They are technical memorandums circulated to people in the day-to-day workings of their operations. I was not aware of this memo, but I am never aware of these memos when they are circulated. In fact, I received a copy of it from the ABC which happened to forward a copy to me asking me to comment on it. That was the first I knew of it and, obviously, the first the government knew about it. It came as somewhat of a surprise to me. As it turns out, I am quite sure that the person who circulated it, who is certainly not a senior executive in the department, was seeking to defer dispatch of the letters until the terminology in them ...
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: ... had been ...
Mr Bailey interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Let me say this ...
Mr Stirling: Any time after the by-election will do.
Page 642
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: In fact, errors were found in the letters and, to the best of my knowledge, they have still not been sent out because, as late as yesterday afternoon, corrections were being made to ensure their accuracy. I know that the opposition has no interest in accuracy.
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr HATTON: Let me clarify a couple of fundamental points. Firstly, there is absolutely no way that the Housing Commission rental increases were not a matter of public record. They were debated quite extensively in this House and were reported quite extensively in the media. It would have been to our advantage had the advices gone out earlier because a very large percentage of tenants - in particular, in the Fannie Bay electorate - were not subject to a rental increase. That is the reality They would not have a rent increase because they were on rebated rents already. The rents are based on a percentage of their income. Whilst we adjust nominal rents, as required by the federal government under the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement, the affordability is maintained because people pay a percentage of their income on rent. A large percentage of the people would not have received a rental increase.
Mr Ede: They would have.
Mr Stirling: Who would not have an increase?
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr HATTON: Anybody on a rebate, and that is half the tenants in the Territory.
Mr Ede: No increase?
Mr HATTON: That is right - as a consequence of this increase.
Mr Ede: That is not what you said last week.
Mr HATTON : Settle back and listen.
Those are the facts. The opposition decided to do a little push-polling on Friday morning. It whacked out this document which I understand was mail dropped to all the flats at Warrina and Kurringal on Friday morning - the day before the election. It reads: 'The CLP's budget means Housing Commission rents will go up by $150 to $260 per year for pensioners in a single-bedroom flat'.
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: That is a lie.
Mr Ede: That is what you said.
Page 643
Mr HATTON: You ought to listen.
Mr Ede: You sent out 2 notices.
Mr HATTON: Pensioners will have an adjustment in rents, but let me read the letter that is being sent out. Listen to it carefully:
The calculation of rental rebates paid to pensioners and other benefit recipients has recently been adjusted to take into account increases in income received through
the Departments of Social Security and Veterans Affairs since April 1992. If all or part of your income is derived from this source, your rent is to be adjusted in
accordance with the schedules set out below. You should be aware that, whenever there is a change in the number of persons who reside in your dwelling or to your
household income, you are required to notify the department promptly ...
The only reason there was a rental increase ...
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Members interjecting.
Mr HATTON: It has nothing to do with our budget ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Stirling: You just misled the House, you dill.
Mr HATTON: It has nothing to do with our budget - not a thing to do with our budget. Pensioners pay 14% of their income in rent. That is the lowest percentage for aged pensioners in Australia. We maintain that at 14%. If their aged pension increases, they still pay 14% of their income. In New South Wales ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Stirling: It is for other pensioners when they have to pay extra, but it is not written in ignorance!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr MITCHELL: A point of order, Mr Speaker! I am trying to listen to the minister's answer ...
Mr Stirling: Sit down, you dill!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Page 644
Mr MITCHELL: I cannot hear a word because of the screaming across the floor.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I agree with the member for Millner that some members on the opposition benches, whom I will name but not as a means of putting them out of this House - the members for Nhulunbuy and Wanguri in particular - are trying me very seriously this morning. I make this point now. If either of those members continues to talk over me when I call for order, I will name them. The Minister for Lands and Housing.
Mr HATTON: Mr Speaker, I have made the point very clearly. It is a fact, and has been a fact for a long time, that we offer very large rebates in rents to support our aged pensioners. We do that by charging rents at a level which is the lowest percentage of the aged pension for any state or territory in Australia. We are being abused by the opposition which is accusing us of budgeting increases. That is a lie.
I believe it is excellent that pensioners receive a CPI adjustment to their age pension every 3 or 6 months, but part of that increase does go towards their rent. We maintain a very large percentage of rebate support for aged pensioners and other persons on low incomes. Another letter is going out to a large number of tenants. It will advise that there is no increase because they are already receiving rental rebates. If their wages or their social security benefits increase or their financial circumstances improve, their rent will be adjusted. However, it is adjusted because their financial circumstances have changed, not because we have changed our policies. Our only adjustments have been on the nominated rents and all the rebates continue to apply. That relates to about half of our tenants.
There is no doubt that the opposition document was designed unjustifiably to put fear into the minds of pensioners and low-income earners. The Leader of the Opposition makes much ado about push-polling. That is the most deceitful kind of push-polling that I have seen for many a long year.
Page 645
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016