Nicholas Cowdery slams Rees government on Ferguson amendment

Nicholas Cowdery, the NSW Director Public Prosecutions, has criticised the Rees Labor Government's amendment to the Housing Act for the sole purpose of evicting Dennis Ferguson from public housing.

Addressing Politics in the Pub last Friday on the topic of "Police Powers Out of Control", Mr Cowdery decried what he called "an appeal to populism" and "quick political point-scoring by appealing to the lowest common denominator" in "the mindless belief that this will solve social problems".

Mr Cowdery reminded the audience of a history of similar single-target populist attempts by NSW Labor, including the legislation to extend the detention of Gregory Wayne Kable, later struck down by the High Court, and the more recent Bikie Legislation.

Mr Cowdery called for a national charter of human rights to counter short-sighted government erosion of civil rights.

OK, enough with this desperate attempt to sound like a cadet reporter with the SMH, and back to DH-ese.

What most shocked DH in Mr Cowdery's presentation was his revelation on the legislative precursor to Hitler's horrific "Final Solution to the Jewish Question". HItler's justification for his anti-jewish legislation was that he was forced to apply a legislative solution to hose down vigilantism in the community provoked by the presence of Jews, failing which, "a final solution" would need to be applied. Now there's a slippery legislative slope to hell!

Maybe those young whippersnappers, Nathan Rees and David Borger, (purportedly Leftists yet!!!) should learn some history! Generation X politicians are such a disappointment to DH. They seem to have entirely forgotten the terrible history of the early 20th century...

Why are they allowing the Daily Telegraph to dictate legislation?

All these pieces of legislation have achieved bugger-all beyond eroding the civil liberties of future generations. Makes yer heart bleed, dunnit?!

Dennis Ferguson Dilemma

The broader context of the Dennis Ferguson story is that as a culture, we do not know what to do with the mentally ill, the criminally insane, or the radically neurologically different, and we know damn well that there are no easy answers.

We do not believe in dedicated psychiatric hospitals. Yet we dump people with psychiatric problems in public housing with who knows what support. If public housing fills up with enough mentally ill, aren't we going to end up with Claytons Psychiatric Hospitals, the psychiatric hospitals you have when you don't believe in having them, which means psychiatric hospitals with no services, no staff, no central office, no resources, no nothing. Apologies to the advocates for the mentally ill, but nothing describes it better than Free Range Psychiatric Hospitals

Both David Borger and today Barry O'Farrell have been grandstanding on this issue. You have to feel sorry for them, because whichever way you look, there are no easy answers, but leading populist stampedes, and giving aid and comfort to lynch mobs does neither of them credit.

Predictably, the vigilante role of the gutter press is despicable. How's this for a title from the Daily Telegraph: " Paedophile: Beware of the devil Dennis Ferguson next door"

Meanwhile, Callan Park, a sacred space, some say, for the mentally ill, is slipping out of the public's grasp. Here is an opportunity to do something creative, to create supported homes with communal facilities, perhaps onsite employment opportunities and support in place.

DH Comments on SMH Website here

Public Housing tenants in my experience are extraordinarly understanding, patient with and tolerant of their troubling neighbours, despite the fact that public housing estates have become dumping grounds for mentally ill people, drug addicts, and released prisoners, without sufficient investment in support services for them. Part of the reason is a decade's neglect of public housing by the Howard Govt, [who over its tenure ripped $3 billion out of the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement which funds the states social housing programs, and led to the current triage policy targetting housing to "those most in need"]. Partly it's the red tape associated with setting up the necessary support services, with years of pilot projects and evaluation reports. Nevertheless we as tenants understand better than most, and accept with good grace, that everyone has a right to accommodation.

There is no easy answer, but a decent society will not get off on hounding a few unfortunates while taking a "beggar my neighbour" approach, ie refusing to pay the taxes that support adequate solutions.

Mystery deepens as 30,000 NSW renters simply vanish!

Shock figures released at yesterday's Housing Budget Estimates committee meeting reveal that 30,000 people have vanished from NSW Public Housing waiting lists in the space of 1 year!

But only about 110 new dwellings have been built.

So where did they all go?

Did they manage to find suitable accommodation in the midst of this nation's greatest housing crisis, when the eligibility limit for public housing hovers near the poverty line?

Did 30,000 BMW owners fess up during the Tenant Fraud Amnesty and voluntarily make way for those "more in need"?

Did those waiting more than 10 years give up out of sheer frustration?

Snatched wholesale by aliens?

Responding to a question from Greens Senator Sylvia Hale about whether the numbers had declined due to frustration at the long wait, or due to tightening of eligibility requirements, new Housing Minister David Borger replied that the decline was thanks to regular surveys to determine ongoing eligibility and better matching of applicants to criteria (which are tighter). In addition, Mr Borger stated that "a number" of products like Rentstart, others products unspecified, allowed renters to make choices in relation to private housing. Umm, Rentstart applies to people with savings of less than $1000 dollars, pays 75 percent of bond, then you're on your own in Sydney's ferocious rental market, and if you're not mentally ill, disabled or aged, but merely on a low income, you haven't got a snowflakes of getting public housing in less than 8 years. In short, we're talking about closer applicant matching to the complete non-availability of housing to anyone on a low income who can still crawl.

What it's all about is that 40,000 sounds a lot better than an embarassing 70,000, and a positively excruciating 100,000 the year before. It reduces the pressure on governments to cough up a greater share of the national cake to help struggling renters.

But before you get up in arms about Housing NSW, who struggle gamely with inadequate funding, blame the Howard government. No wonder there's no new housing. They robbed Public Housing of $3 billion worth of funding over their miserable tenure. And alas, $3 billion these days wouldn't buy you a magnum of bubbly at a Bank Holiday picnic...