The following residents of the ACT draw the attention of the Assembly to the history of contamination of a large number of Canberra houses with loose-fill asbestos “Mr Fluffy” and the subsequent programs in 2005 and 2014 to eradicate amosite asbestos.
There is some evidence and allegations that the Government and individuals in the Government had been aware of the presence of asbestos in homes for some time prior to action having been taken to remediate/buyback/demolish Mr Fluffy homes.
In 2005 the Government was warned of the “Mr Fluffy” (Amosite Asbestos) problem in Canberra homes and was advised to disclose to “Mr Fluffy” homeowners the presence of harmful and potentially life-threatening asbestos in their homes. Some contaminated homes were sold and resold on the open market. Many of these homes were renovated and extended.
In 2010 an independent review recommended the Territory strengthen warnings and provide updated information to existing “Fluffy” homeowners, tenants and tradespeople. In 2014 after securing a one-billion-dollar loan from the Federal Government, the ACT Government introduced the “Voluntary” Asbestos Eradication Buyback Scheme. The “voluntary” buyback scheme lacks transparency, accountability, fairness, flexibility and is not on just terms despite this being an expressed constitutional right as an Australian citizen. The buyback scheme was designed to exert maximum pressure on “Mr Fluffy” homeowners to surrender their properties and associated rights whilst maximizing large profits from “Mr Fluffy” land sales, negating their responsibility to “Mr Fluffy” homeowners and the general public.
It is almost a decade since this “voluntary” buyback scheme was implemented. Remaining “Mr Fluffy” homeowners are in the majority elderly citizens, and feel they are being treated as second class citizens and will go to their graves mentally and financially scarred through no fault of their own.
Given the importance of protecting these fundamental core principles our society relies upon accountability and transparency, the significant associated threats posed to these principles by the continued inaction on the part of the ACT legislature, this is a matter of significant public interest.
Your petitioners, therefore, request the Assembly to establish as a matter of urgency a Board of Inquiry (BOI) into the “Voluntary” Loose-fill Asbestos Eradication Asbestos Buyback Scheme to:
• investigate why the ACT Government’s preferred way forward was chosen over compulsory acquisition?
• conduct a financial audit on the sale of “Mr Fluffy” blocks, cost of the scheme and where have the non-spent monies of the one-billion-dollar loan gone.
• Investigate the “Voluntary” Buyback Scheme it’s lack of transparency, fairness, and accountability from its inception in 2014.
• Investigate retrospective legislative changes.
• Investigate harassment of “Mr Fluffy” homeowners, those who have surrendered their properties and those who have refused to sign-up to the Buyback Scheme.
• Investigate the lack of flexibility and willingness to negotiate with individual “Mr Fluffy” homeowners who do not fit within the boundaries of the “Mr Fluffy” Loose-fill Asbestos Eradication Scheme developed and initiated by the ACT Labor/Greens Government.
• Investigate the handling and instructions given to the Taskforce including intimidation tactics used to coerce “Mr Fluffy” homeowners to join the scheme, in particular the elderly.
• Investigate the period 2003 to 2014 what the then ACT Industrial Relations Minister was informed about the degree of contamination and associated risk factors posed by “Mr Fluffy” including:
Why were “Mr Fluffy” property owners allowed to sell and resell their homes without penalty to unsuspecting buyers despite the associated risk and dangers associated to “Mr Fluffy” being known to the legislature and executive?
Why were Mr Fluffy homeowners not informed of the dangers when renovating homes, the moment the degree of contamination became known in 2005.
Why did the Planning Department allow “Mr Fluffy” homeowners to renovate and rebuild in these contaminated homes?
Why were those who surrendered their homes and were unable to afford to repurchase new homes in Canberra not offered the same conditions as homeowners staying in Canberra in relation to stamp duty, or stamp duty already paid on their Mr Fluffy homes returned to their former owners?
Why did the ACT Government take 10 years before action was taken in 2014 to attempt to eradicate “Mr Fluffy” from Canberra properties?
• Investigate why, since 2016, has the ACT Government continually refused to introduce compulsory acquisition to obtain the remaining “Mr Fluffy” homes?
• Determine when “Mr Fluffy” will be eradicated from Canberra homes as promised in 2014.
• investigate why the “Mr Fluffy” chapter in Canberra’s history been allowed to drag on far beyond the set timelines with no end in sight when it was stated in 2015 that “it will take five years to rid ACT of the “Mr Fluffy” legacy.
• determine what plans exist to capture the remaining “Mr Fluffy” homes not surrendered.
• investigate any potential future risks of exposure to Amosite Asbestos.