❓ Dr. Honey questions the cost-effectiveness of the Pier Street housing development, particularly the high cost per social housing unit. Minister Carey defends the project as a mixed-tenure development run by a community housing provider, criticising the opposition's lack of housing policies.
AnsweredQoN 328Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
HOUSING — PIER
STREET DEVELOPMENT
328. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Housing:
I
refer to the announcement of state and federal funding of $129.2 million
announced earlier towards the development of a 219-apartment building in
Pier Street—of which only 110 will be for social housing and affordable
rentals—and a further $8 million of state funding announced in this
state budget.
(1) Can the
minister explain why he is joining with his federal counterparts in
contributing $137.2 million for 110 social housing units, which equates to
nearly $1.25 million per social housing apartment?
(2) Why would
public funds not be better used for substantially more units in a government-run
project than the 110 units in this private project?
(3) Will the
minister table documentation to show how the government's contribution
came to be calculated; and, if not, why not?
STREET DEVELOPMENT
328. Dr D.J. HONEY to the Minister for Housing:
I
refer to the announcement of state and federal funding of $129.2 million
announced earlier towards the development of a 219-apartment building in
Pier Street—of which only 110 will be for social housing and affordable
rentals—and a further $8 million of state funding announced in this
state budget.
(1) Can the
minister explain why he is joining with his federal counterparts in
contributing $137.2 million for 110 social housing units, which equates to
nearly $1.25 million per social housing apartment?
(2) Why would
public funds not be better used for substantially more units in a government-run
project than the 110 units in this private project?
(3) Will the
minister table documentation to show how the government's contribution
came to be calculated; and, if not, why not?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(3) I find that question fascinating on a number of
fronts. It really demonstrates that the opposition fundamentally does
not have an understanding of housing construction and development and that it
opposes housing development and high-density development.
Dr D.J. Honey : We oppose
wasting over a $1 million when people are living in parks.
The SPEAKER :
Order, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY :
I will get to that point.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Cottesloe, you
have asked the question; give the minister the opportunity to answer, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY : Let us be very
clear on this development. I have been on the public record: the future of
housing development is called ''mixed tenure''; that is well
known. We no longer do huge towers of social housing. It is quite interesting
because the member for Cottesloe has personally advocated for the removal of
social housing in Mosman Park—in his own electorate.
Dr D.J. Honey : That is a lie.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY : That is the
fact.
Dr D.J. Honey : That is a lie.
Withdrawal of Remark
Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN : I think
the member is well aware that that is an unparliamentary comment and he should
withdraw it.
The SPEAKER : Yes, the Leader of
the House is correct, it is an unparliamentary comment, and you need to
withdraw, member for Cottesloe.
Dr D.J. HONEY : I withdraw the
comment.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, it
has been withdrawn.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr J.N. CAREY : Let us be very
clear that this will be a mixed-tenure development, run in full by a community
housing provider—so it is not a private development; it is not a commercial
development; the whole complex is run by a community housing provider that is
highly credible and highly respected. There will be a mix of social, affordable
and private rentals. The reason is simple. It is because that is what works
from both a social housing perspective and a community perspective. It also makes
sure that the model works. Do members know what? It is not unique. Across
Australia a large number of high-density housing projects are being delivered.
Pier Street is one. We are also doing Smith Street, which is another community
housing project we are delivering.
I find it interesting that an
opposition that has no housing policies is now making it very clear that it
opposes major community housing projects in Western Australia.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
fronts. It really demonstrates that the opposition fundamentally does
not have an understanding of housing construction and development and that it
opposes housing development and high-density development.
Dr D.J. Honey : We oppose
wasting over a $1 million when people are living in parks.
The SPEAKER :
Order, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY :
I will get to that point.
The
SPEAKER : Member for Cottesloe, you
have asked the question; give the minister the opportunity to answer, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY : Let us be very
clear on this development. I have been on the public record: the future of
housing development is called ''mixed tenure''; that is well
known. We no longer do huge towers of social housing. It is quite interesting
because the member for Cottesloe has personally advocated for the removal of
social housing in Mosman Park—in his own electorate.
Dr D.J. Honey : That is a lie.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please.
Mr J.N. CAREY : That is the
fact.
Dr D.J. Honey : That is a lie.
Withdrawal of Remark
Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN : I think
the member is well aware that that is an unparliamentary comment and he should
withdraw it.
The SPEAKER : Yes, the Leader of
the House is correct, it is an unparliamentary comment, and you need to
withdraw, member for Cottesloe.
Dr D.J. HONEY : I withdraw the
comment.
The SPEAKER : Thank you, it
has been withdrawn.
Questions without Notice Resumed
Mr J.N. CAREY : Let us be very
clear that this will be a mixed-tenure development, run in full by a community
housing provider—so it is not a private development; it is not a commercial
development; the whole complex is run by a community housing provider that is
highly credible and highly respected. There will be a mix of social, affordable
and private rentals. The reason is simple. It is because that is what works
from both a social housing perspective and a community perspective. It also makes
sure that the model works. Do members know what? It is not unique. Across
Australia a large number of high-density housing projects are being delivered.
Pier Street is one. We are also doing Smith Street, which is another community
housing project we are delivering.
I find it interesting that an
opposition that has no housing policies is now making it very clear that it
opposes major community housing projects in Western Australia.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER : Order, please!
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.