Gimme Shelter …

Margot Giblin

Inside the Town Hall, and symbolic of the Council’s status and its decision making power, are the comforts of thick carpets, draught blocking walls, doors that close, functioning toilets, comfortable chairs, connected phones, large areas of purely decorative foyer space, a sweeping staircase, gilt edged art work, deeply polished woodwork and room to spare for entertaining — all of this under a non leaking roof. Outside — a hard, bare footpath represented the starting and finishing point for some people in Hobart, every night, when they look for somewhere to sleep. For a multiplicity of interconnected reasons, often related to health and income, some Tasmanians find themselves without a safe, dry place to live, day or night.

THE midday action, in relation to Affordable Housing, by the Tenants’ Union, Tasmanian Greens and HCC Alderman Helen Burnet took place on the footpath outside the Town Hall in Macquarie St.

Concerned individuals arrived in pyjamas, nightdresses and dressing gowns to ‘sleep’ in their symbolic cardboard boxes shelters.

They lay outside the building in which the decision was made by nine out of eleven aldermen to challenge the Resource Management and Planning Appeals Tribunal’ decision to overturn their refusal of an application for a 27 bed boarding premise for homeless people in Sandy Bay by taking it to the Supreme Court.

Inside the Town Hall, and symbolic of the Council’s status and its decision making power, are the comforts of thick carpets, draught blocking walls, doors that close, functioning toilets, comfortable chairs, connected phones, large areas of purely decorative foyer space, a sweeping staircase, gilt edged art work, deeply polished woodwork and room to spare for entertaining — all of this under a non leaking roof.

Outside — a hard, bare footpath represented the starting and finishing point for some people in Hobart, every night, when they look for somewhere to sleep.
For a multiplicity of interconnected reasons, often related to health and income, some Tasmanians find themselves without a safe, dry place to live, day or night.

The proposed facility in Star St. would be run by Anglicare with a resident caretaker.
This fits with the State Government’s affordable housing strategy, a policy designed to provide relatively low cost accommodation for disadvantaged members of the Tasmanian community.

According to Alderman Helen Burnet the main arguments against allowing the application, on a property that has access from both Star St. and Fitzroy Place, were related to traffic and parking. She and Alderman Philip Cocker supported the application.

Given the unlikely event that many of the residents would have a car to park, (supported by the experience of the Anglicare facility in Burnie as referred to in the Tribunal’s decision) the outcome is ironic, and in Burnet’s words, ‘sad’.

‘We have a moral responsibility to house people who can’t afford it and to that end I will be putting a motion at the next Council meeting that we drop the Supreme Court action,’ she said.

Because the motion deals with a potential court case it will have to be put to the closed portion of the meeting on January 29th.

Pattie Chugg, executive officer of Shelter Tasmania, was present at the ‘Pyjama Protest’ and expressed her concern to Tasmanian Times that with the continued loss of inner city boarding houses and low rental, shop-top accommodation nothing has been provided to replace them in Hobart despite the Affordable Housing Strategy of 2003 which aimed to establish boarding houses state-wide.

Sandy Duncanson, principal solicitor for the Tenants’ Union was there to support the action and expressed the view that the cost of the Hobart City Council taking the case to the Supreme Court would run into ‘tens of thousands of dollars’.

It seems a lot of money to spend to prevent development of a site for people who aren’t in a position to afford one night, let alone ten days accommodation and all because there’s nowhere to park the cars they don’t own.

To base arguments on housing on the assumption that every individual would have a car if they could, and should be counted as having one even if they don’t says more about the world view of the decision makers than about that of those they are representing.

Helen Burnet summed up her views to the attending media at yesterday’s action —

‘I would like to think we could explore a more compassionate solution.”