Redfern
Waterloo Authority
8.15 The Redfern Waterloo
Authority (RWA) was established under the Redfern Waterloo
Authority Act 2004. The Act sets out the aims and objectives of the RWA and contains
provisions directed at overcoming Indigenous disadvantage in the RWA’s
operational area.751 In 2006, the RWA entered into a formal
partnership agreement with the Federal and New South Wales State Governments
for cooperation ‘on enhancing the economic and social revitalisation of Redfern
Waterloo in relation to the Indigenous community.’ According to the RWA submission
this agreement states that the ‘two governments will work closely together on
key areas including employment and enterprise, education, Indigenous housing
and the Block and human services.’752 The Block is an area
in Redfern bounded by Eveleigh, Caroline, Vine and Louis Streets.753
8.16 The RWA has
allocated $35 million to be delivered over the next 10 years for affordable housing
through the RWA’s Affordable Housing Contributions Plan, which includes $16 million
specifically for affordable housing for Aboriginal people; the Minister for
Planning approved the Affordable Housing Contributions Plan in May 2007.754 An additional $23 million
over 10 years is allocated to the Affordable Housing Planning Agreement,
resulting from the redevelopment of the former Carlton United Breweries site in
Broadway.755 The RWA submission does not outline if part of this money was
allocated to affordable housing for Aboriginal people.
8.17 It is not clear
exactly how many additional houses will be made available under these projects,
which form part of the Redfern-Waterloo Built Environment Plan. The Affordable
Housing Contributions Plan was criticised by the Conference of Leaders of
Religious Institutes of NSW (CLRI NSW) for failing to address the Pemulwuy Plan
proposal for redevelopment of the Block area in Redfern. The CLRI NSW wrote in
their submission that this failure indicated ‘…the intrusion of both commercial
and political interests that shame the New South Wales Government and its
professed lack of bias.’756
8.18 The Pemulwuy Plan is
the Aboriginal Housing Company (AHC)757 plan for the
redevelopment of its properties in Redfern with an emphasis on strengthening
Aboriginal cultural values, spirituality and employment through tourism.758 The Aboriginal
Housing Company and its Pemulwuy Plan is discussed later in this chapter.
Report
40 – June 2008 Pages 202 – 203
…
The
Aboriginal Housing Company
8.64 The Aboriginal
Housing Company (AHC) has run the Block area in Redfern since the early seventies.
It is an example of a community housing provider that has struggled with the
quality of the housing it was provided with, combined with the broader social
problems facing the Aboriginal community in that area.
8.65 The AHC has, in the
past, been reliant on assistance from the AHO in order to remain in business.
However, after the AHC was unable to meet requirements associated with the provision
of funds, the AHO discontinued funding.808
8.66 Mr Peter Valilis, Project Officer, AHC, described the
state of the housing after over 30 years of operation in the Redfern area:
At the present moment we have 16 [occupied]
houses, and we have 16 tenants on the Block. As you know, the houses are in a
derelict sort of situation. There is a lot of overcrowding at the moment too.
The houses are in a very bad state of repair… On the other hand, we have 11
derelict houses that have been blocked up. The reason they have been blocked up
is because of drug-related issues. As you know, in the past we had a vicious
cycle of drugs being sold on the Block, and they get raided, and when they get
raided they are classed as drug houses. The new legislation meant that the housing
company itself had to block up the houses. We then relocate the tenants that have
been selling drugs, barricade the houses up, and that is the reason for the number
of derelict houses that we have on the Block.809
8.67 Mr Valilis noted
that without government support the housing could not be re-built and that the
AHC was struggling to survive:
At the present moment we have a concept
development application with the Planning Authority … Even to look at our
concept DA they want us to pay $60,000. As you know, we are a charitable
organisation. We do not make a profit. I believe they should waive the fee. I
think the biggest stumbling block at the moment is the $60,000 that we have got
to pay for our concept development application. The most important thing is
that [Minister] Frank Sartor is a guy who just does not want this new complex to
go ahead.810
8.68 The AHC have, with
the pro bono assistance of professionals and academics, produced a comprehensive
and internationally well regarded plan for the redesign of the Block area to provide
culturally appropriate housing for Indigenous people. Mr Valilis told the
Committee that the Pemulwuy Plan has yet to be implemented, as the Development
Application (DA) requires approval by the Minister for Planning. Attendant with
the DA is a $60,000 lodgement fee, which the AHC cannot afford.811
8.69 Mr Mick Mundine
explained that the Pemulwuy Plan required approval by the Minister for the AHC
to be able to commence redesign:
We have fulfilled the guidelines under the SEPP.
What more do you want us to do? I really think the reason Frank Sartor does not
want to approve our project is because they want the land. People have to
remember that we are a private organisation and this is private land. Anyway,
why can’t we be part of the vision of the State Government? We know they have a
vision, and we are in the main corridor …We are all people who work together
and live together. Everybody knows we have Aboriginal Housing Company housing,
but why can’t we live together as people? It is very sad if Frank Sartor stops
this Pemulwuy project going ahead.812
8.70 The Committee
believes that the AHC cannot continue in its current state of uncertainty. The Committee
notes the burden of the Development Application fee on the AHC and believes that,
given the nature of the AHC as a community-housing provider, these circumstances
warrant re-consideration.
Report
40 – June 2008 Pages 214-215
References:
751 Submission
11, Redfern Waterloo Authority, p 3
752 Submission
11, p 9
753 Aboriginal
Housing Company, <www.ahc.org.au>
754 Submission
11, p 6
755 Submission
11, p 6
808 Standing
Committee on Social Issues, Interim Report into
issues relating to Redfern and Waterloo, Report 32, pp 39-40
809 Mr Peter Valilis, Evidence, 30 April 2008, p 3
810 Mr
Valilis, Evidence, 30 April 2008, p 3
811 Mr
Valilis, Evidence, 30 April 2008, p 7
812 Mr Mick Mundine, Chief
Executive Officer, Aboriginal Housing Company, 30 April 2008, p 5
Source: Standing Committee
on Social Issues Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage in New South Wales Interim
Report June 2008 which can be downloaded from Overcoming Indigenous
disadvantage in New South Wales (Interim Report) (1682
Kb PDF)