Legislative Council Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1) 54 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time 1000 Homes in 1000 Days 1000 Homes in 1000 Days The Hon. E.S. BOURKE Legislative Council 1000 Homes in 1000 Days The Hon. E.S. BOURKE (14:30): My question is for the Minister for Human Services. Will the minister confirm the findings of the former Housing SA board who, in April this year, determined the 1000 Homes in 1000 Days program, in conjunction with other programs, including Renewing Our Streets and Suburbs, to be on time and on budget. Given the minister's public commitments in recent days, can she update the house as to how the 1000 Homes in 1000 Days program has come unstuck in just eight months? The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK Legislative Council Minister for Human Services 1000 Homes in 1000 Days The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (Minister for Human Services) (14:31): I thank the honourable member for her question. The quote that the shadow minister for housing gave to The Advertiser, I understand, was that it was her understanding that—I can provide a direct quote from Sunday's Sunday Mail: Labor human services spokeswoman Nat Cook said the program was on schedule before the March state election, with 527 homes 'already completed or under construction and tenders awarded for the remaining homes'. I can advise the chamber that under that same measure that figure is now 964. The 40 remaining homes, there are some complexities, because it is part of a particular complex which is taking longer to get those approvals, and that is a matter beyond our control. This program, let's face it, was a slogan of the former government. I think anybody who knows anything about construction of properties and demolitions would have recognised that. It was announced in the Mid-Year Budget Review in December 2015. It was not to actually build 1,000 additional homes; it was to replace homes, and in fact it resulted in a net loss to the system of properties in the public system. It has never been on track, according to the now Labor opposition's own measures. It was an unrealistic time frame. It underestimated the extent and number of houses required to be demolished in particular. There were matters in relation to approvals for internal financing. The Hon. C.M. Scriven Legislative Council The Hon. C.M. Scriven: The board said it was on time and on budget. On time and on budget. The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK Legislative Council The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: The second matter is that there were additional builders who were brought onstream, because it was confused between being an economic stimulus and an improvement of housing program, so the new builders weren't used to the processes, and not all of them performed to time. Anybody would tell you that it was unrealistic, and if I can once again—I am sorry, Mr President—respond to a disorderly interjection, I am not sure if the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is hard of hearing, but according to the measure that they have applied, which is 527 homes, at the March state election, already completed or under construction and tenders awarded for the remaining homes, under this government that measure—already completed or under construction and tenders awarded for the remaining homes—is at 964. I know that the Labor Party opposition is both innumerate and lacks any capacity to understand governance arrangements, but they are simply wrong. It is an increase of 433 from the state election, according to their own measure.