The asbestos taskforce is still trying to track down 132 owners of Mr Fluffy homes who have not received registered post letters sent in July.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The job has become more urgent as the government moves closer to a decision about the 1000-plus homes that contained the dangerous loose-fill insulation in the 1970s and 1980s, and which now look likely to be demolished.
Home owners must sign for the letters, which tells them their home probably still contains asbestos fibres and urges them to register with the taskforce.
But taskforce head Andrew Kefford said on Tuesday the letters remained undelivered to 132 people, who had not been home when the letter arrived and had failed to pick them up from post offices.
He had written again to the remaining home owners, telling them a registered post letter awaited their attention and urging them to make contact. He said if there was still no response the taskforce would try making contact by phone.
The taskforce is cross-checking the responses to the letter with home owners registered with the taskforce.
Meanwhile, ACT Chief Minister Katy Gallagher said she had heard from some residents who didn’t want their home demolished and was working to meet their concerns.
''I’ve had quite a number of representatives from people who aren’t going to willingly go quickly, they’re going to want to stay in their home,'' she said. ''Perhaps they’ve been there for 40 years, their garden’s established, they feel safe there.''
Asked whether the government would release the list of Mr Fluffy homes if and when it decides to demolish them, Ms Gallagher said she was sensitive to residents’ concerns about privacy, especially in the case of those who would continue living in their homes, at least in the meantime.
''I don’t think we’ll be able to say, 'OK, if a decision to demolish is made, the list becomes publicly available'. I still think there will be some issues we have to work through,'' she said.
''We’re not withholding that information because we don’t want people to be informed about where these houses are. We’re withholding it because people have asked that their addresses not be published, and I think that’s a reasonable request.''
