Member for Morayfield, Mr Darren Grimwade, sent this response to constituent who sent it to us on facebook.  We cannot let this pass without comment because many things said are incorrect (see our responses below). To be fair, it’s not much different to what other members of the government have been saying, but with a TAAS in his electorate, we thought Mr Grimwade might had a better understanding. This is what he said:

….Hi Julie, The government last year made the decision to redirect funding from TAASQ to bricks and mortar housing solutions, this decision stands. Services provided by TAASQ were an unnecessary duplication of services already provided by the RTA, various Queensland NGOs and more than 30 community legal centres around Queensland. Priority must be given to housing the 23 000 households on the social housing waiting list, which includes people with a disability, the elderly and single parents with children. The Federal Government is playing politics, there has been no official representation by the Federal Government on this issue. The Federal Government has used the media to make its announcement and manipulate the issue. If the Federal Government believes it is necessary to duplicate already available advice and advocacy services then they should make their own arrangement with TAASQ providers. We would welcome the $2.5 million to be used in the Newman Government’s homelessness plan and bricks and mortar housing solutions. The Newman Government will not play political games and is committed to providing appropriate, targeted and sustainable housing and support to all Queenslanders

Here’s a few responses from us to what Mr Grimwade’s says:

• The government has changed it’s line on the TAAS services a number times.  Until about three weeks ago, it consistently said TAAS is a valuable service but one it can’t afford. Recently the government has started saying it made the decision to de-fund TAAS last year and hasn’t changed its mind.  However, the government has been considering its position for some time.  Some local members wrote as late as April this year saying the government ‘was reviewing options for the provision of tenant services’ beyond June 30.  As well, on March 28, the State and Commonwealth government came to an in principle agreement on the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness which required funding for tenant advice services.
• Services provided by TAASQ do not duplicate the RTA. The RTA  cannot compromise their position as an impartial industry body and regulator.  They cannot represent either party or provide advice like TAAS does.
• The Minister has been made aware there will be gaps.  We would really like Mr Grimwade to name some of these ‘various other NGOs’ because we don’t think there are any.  Community Legal Centres (CLCs) have said publicly they cannot fill the gap due to an already large unmet demand for their services and wait times for appointments in some areas are not compatible with tenancy law time frames.  Anyway, isn’t that just cost shifting to another portfolio?  And as an aside, the Tenants’ Union (TU) is both a TAAS provider and the specialist tenancy CLC.  Isn’t it defeating the purpose to say CLCs can take up the slack whilst simultaneously pulling money from the TU?
• Regarding priority for the social housing waitlist – everyone including tenants pay their taxes to support the delivery of social housing, a core government responsibility. This argument is like imposing a second tax on private rental market tenants who happen to be the most likely to be living in poverty after paying their housing costs. Last year the government re-introduced stamp duty concessions for repeat home purchasers.  That is estimated to cost the government $250M per year in lost revenue, or forty times the cost of the TAAS program.  Re-introducing these concessions seems contradictory if the government is saying we must prioritise the 23,000 on the social housing waitlist.  It seems only private rental market tenants have to do that, the load is not being spread.
• Just less than 90% of the households that rent are in the private rental market.  Single parents, the elderly (especially women) and people with disability also live in the private rental market and they need support to live in safer and more secure conditions.  The singular focus on social housing at the expense of the private rental market lacks sophistication.
• If there is political game playing isn’t it taking away a consumer funded program of advice which helps people to stay privately housed – advice run out of local, outsourced organisations rather than through big government?  The TAAS program philosophy seems to fit well with ideas in the Queensland Commission of Audit so why is the program being discontinued?
• Even though the State government says the Commonwealth should direct fund TAASs if they want them to continue, the State knows that’s not possible because of constitutional issues.