← All decisions

1. What was proposedChiaka BarryLiberal · Opposition
   Read the original wording (360 words)

   That this Assembly: (1) notes: (a) the statements made by the Minister for Housing during question time defending the decision to insource public housing maintenance services; (b) the Government’s claim that insourcing will improve accountability and service delivery when no comprehensive public breakdown has been provided detailing the full cost comparison between the outsourced and insourced models; (c) ongoing concerns from public housing tenants regarding repair delays and maintenance backlogs; (d) that any increase in administrative or operating costs must not result in fewer maintenance jobs being completed or longer wait times; and (e) that in a constrained fiscal environment, increased expenditure must be transparently accounted for; (2) further notes that: (a) public housing tenants, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families, people with disability, older residents and culturally and linguistically diverse Canberrans, rely on timely maintenance for safe and dignified housing; (b) recent commentary reported in the Canberra Times, including remarks by community advocate Andy Coogan, noted that participation in the Government insourcing trial had been limited and not improved outcomes; and (c) these concerns reinforce the need for greater transparency, accountability and tenant engagement in decisions affecting the delivery of public housing maintenance services; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) table in the Assembly a detailed cost comparison of ACT public housing maintenance, including: (i) the total annual cost of the outsourced maintenance model prior to the insourcing trial; (ii) the total cost of the insourcing trial, including staffing, overheads, fleet, equipment and transition costs; (iii) the projected total cost of the insourced maintenance model for the period September 2025 to September 2026, including forward estimates; and (iv) a breakdown of administrative costs compared with frontline maintenance expenditure; (b) provide comparative performance data for the 12 months prior to and following insourcing, including jobs completed, response times, backlog levels and tenant satisfaction; (c) provide assurance that higher operating costs will not reduce the total number of maintenance jobs delivered annually to public housing premises; and (d) report back to the Assembly in 12 months on the measurable performance outcomes of the insourced model and how the additional costs are being funded. Debate ensued.

2. Proposed changeShane RattenburyGreens · Crossbench18 March 2026

   Grouped by key words as: changed the background, changed a date or deadline.

   The exact wording of this change

   together: 1. After paragraph (2)(c), insert: “(d) the ACT Government has notified Programmed that its contract for maintaining the public housing portfolio will end on 31 December 2027; (e) the insourcing trial conducted by the ACT Government included the maintenance of two multi-unit properties as well as disability modifications and domestic violence upgrades; (f) the Government Insourcing Taskforce has completed the Assessment Stage for the Disability Modifications, Domestic Violence Upgrades, Customer Service Functions and Financial Arrangement services; (g) no information on the outcome of the Assessment Stage has been made available to understand: (i) what the costs of services under the insourced model will be compared to the existing outsourced maintenance model; and (ii) whether the tenant experience will be better under the insourced maintenance program;”. 2. In paragraph (3)(a), after “Assembly” insert “by the last sitting day in June 2026”. 3. After paragraph (3)(a)(iv), insert: “(v) the total cost of disability modifications, domestic violence upgrades, customer service functions, financial arrangement services and multi-unit maintenance under the outsourced maintenance model;”. Debate continued.

   Agreed on the voices. No individual votes were recorded. Its wording is in the final text.

3. What the Assembly decidedAgreed

   Decided on the voices: no individual votes were recorded, so this doesn’t show that every MLA agreed.

   Final agreed wording, with changes marked

   That this Assembly: (1) notes: (a) the statements made by the Minister for Housing during question time defending the decision to insource public housing maintenance services; (b) the Government’s claim that insourcing will improve accountability and service delivery when no comprehensive public breakdown has been provided detailing the full cost comparison between the outsourced and insourced models; (c) ongoing concerns from public housing tenants regarding repair delays and maintenance backlogs; (d) that any increase in administrative or operating costs must not result in fewer maintenance jobs being completed or longer wait times; and (e) that in a constrained fiscal environment, increased expenditure must be transparently accounted for; (2) further notes that: (a) public housing tenants, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families, people with disability, older residents and culturally and linguistically diverse Canberrans, rely on timely maintenance for safe and dignified housing; (b) recent commentary reported in the Canberra Times, including remarks by community advocate Andy Coogan, noted that participation in the Government insourcing trial had been limited and not improved outcomes; (c) these concerns reinforce the need for greater transparency, accountability and tenant engagement in decisions affecting the delivery of public housing maintenance services; (d) the ACT Government has notified Programmed that its contract for maintaining the public housing portfolio will end on 31 December 2027; (e) the insourcing trial conducted by the ACT Government included the maintenance of two multi-unit properties as well as disability modifications and domestic violence upgrades; (f) the Government Insourcing Taskforce has completed the Assessment Stage for the Disability Modifications, Domestic Violence Upgrades, Customer Service Functions and Financial Arrangement services; and (g) no information on the outcome of the Assessment Stage has been made available to understand: (i) what the costs of services under the insourced model will be compared to the existing outsourced maintenance model; and (ii) whether the tenant experience will be better under the insourced maintenance program; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) table in the Assembly, by the last sitting day in June 2026Rattenbury, a detailed cost comparison of ACT public housing maintenance, including: (i) the total annual cost of the outsourced maintenance model prior to the insourcing trial; (ii) the total cost of the insourcing trial, including staffing, overheads, fleet, equipment and transition costs; (iii) the projected total cost of the insourced maintenance model for the period September 2025 to September 2026, including forward estimates; (iv) a breakdown of administrative costs compared with frontline maintenance expenditure; and (v) the total cost of disability modifications, domestic violence upgrades, customer service functions, financial arrangement services and multi- unit maintenance under the outsourced maintenance model; (b) provide comparative performance data for the 12 months prior to and following insourcing, including jobs completed, response times, backlog levels and tenant satisfaction; (c) provide assurance that higher operating costs will not reduce the total number of maintenance jobs delivered annually to public housing premises; and (d) report back to the Assembly in 12 months on the measurable performance outcomes of the insourced model and how the additional costs are being funded.

   Original and final wording compared

   taken out put in

   That this Assembly: (1) notes: (a) the statements made by the Minister for Housing during question time defending the decision to insource public housing maintenance services; (b) the Government’s claim that insourcing will improve accountability and service delivery when no comprehensive public breakdown has been provided detailing the full cost comparison between the outsourced and insourced models; (c) ongoing concerns from public housing tenants regarding repair delays and maintenance backlogs; (d) that any increase in administrative or operating costs must not result in fewer maintenance jobs being completed or longer wait times; and (e) that in a constrained fiscal environment, increased expenditure must be transparently accounted for; (2) further notes that: (a) public housing tenants, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families, people with disability, older residents and culturally and linguistically diverse Canberrans, rely on timely maintenance for safe and dignified housing; (b) recent commentary reported in the Canberra Times, including remarks by community advocate Andy Coogan, noted that participation in the Government insourcing trial had been limited and not improved outcomes; [taken out: and](c) these concerns reinforce the need for greater transparency, accountability and tenant engagement in decisions affecting the delivery of public housing maintenance services; [put in: (d) the ACT Government has notified Programmed that its contract for maintaining the public housing portfolio will end on 31 December 2027; (e) the insourcing trial conducted by the ACT Government included the maintenance of two multi-unit properties as well as disability modifications]and [put in: domestic violence upgrades; (f) the Government Insourcing Taskforce has completed the Assessment Stage for the Disability Modifications, Domestic Violence Upgrades, Customer Service Functions and Financial Arrangement services; and (g) no information on the outcome of the Assessment Stage has been made available to understand: (i) what the costs of services under the insourced model will be compared to the existing outsourced maintenance model; and (ii) whether the tenant experience will be better under the insourced maintenance program; and](3) calls on the Government to: (a) table in the Assembly, [put in: by the last sitting day in June 2026,]a detailed cost comparison of ACT public housing maintenance, including: (i) the total annual cost of the outsourced maintenance model prior to the insourcing trial; (ii) the total cost of the insourcing trial, including staffing, overheads, fleet, equipment and transition costs; (iii) the projected total cost of the insourced maintenance model for the period September 2025 to September 2026, including forward estimates; [taken out: and](iv) a breakdown of administrative costs compared with frontline maintenance expenditure; [put in: and (v) the total cost of disability modifications, domestic violence upgrades, customer service functions, financial arrangement services and multi- unit maintenance under the outsourced maintenance model;](b) provide comparative performance data for the 12 months prior to and following insourcing, including jobs completed, response times, backlog levels and tenant satisfaction; (c) provide assurance that higher operating costs will not reduce the total number of maintenance jobs delivered annually to public housing premises; and (d) report back to the Assembly in 12 months on the measurable performance outcomes of the insourced model and how the additional costs are being funded. [taken out: Debate ensued.]

   Compared word by word by computer, ignoring punctuation. It shows what differs, not which change made each difference; the steps above show that.