Page 3108 - Week 09 - Thursday, 13 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
He said, “Why don’t we start talking about the real cause? Rental properties are predominantly supplied by property investors. Governments cannot afford to supply sufficient properties, so they rely on private investment. Private investors have invested in property to gain capital appreciation to build wealth and create financial security for their future. In the current environment, investors are seen as greedy money grabbers. The ACT government has seen them as unlimited cash cows. So over the past 10 years land rates have increased substantially, land tax has been increased significantly, body corporate fees for unit owners have also increased, and tenancy legislation has moved significantly in favour of tenant’s rights. So with all these costs, restrictions on removal of problems tenants, what would a sane investor do?” says Tom.
“They sell up and save themselves a monumental headache. How does that impact the rental market?” says Tom. “Simple, less properties to rent. Less properties means less supply. It doesn’t mean less demand. And with solid demand for less properties, tenants compete to secure a rental. That competition leads to increased rents and that places a burden on those less fortunate, the tenants that cannot afford to buy. What is the solution? Stop making it harder to be a landlord. In fact, we should be making it easier for investors to supply property. The more we increase supply, the more demand is met. The less competition there is for the available properties in regard to the rental market. Then focus on reducing the cost. Once you have increased supply and reduced costs, the demand on individual properties falls and the result at market will lead to rents falling”. That is Tom’s thoughts, in the Riotact.
My view is the residential tenancy changes that come under this portfolio umbrella, or are coming, are being led by this Greens minister, will result in more investors leaving the market. And that will result ultimately in homelessness. The government’s own research, Madam Speaker, indicates that is the case. The government’s own research basically says that this will result in investors leaving the market, before they have even been implemented. So again, I just wanted to raise my concern, because I know there has been a lot of work done under this portfolio umbrella. And there is more work to be done. Certainly the Liberals have great concerns.
I have to again raise the enormous concern that I have at the minister’s insistence we rollout significant changes that he is pursuing in the gaming space. We have already spoken about the Greens attempts to shut down racing in the ACT today. You could be forgiven, Madam Speaker, for believing that the Greens, through this minister, want to shut down the club sector.
When Mr Rattenbury took over this portfolio, I had faith; I genuinely believed he was a man who would consult, who would listen and who, despite his political colours, would be a genuine pragmatist who could work through this complex space and come out the other end with something that was workable. But I do not think that is going to happen. Mr Rattenbury is well aware that his planned legislation is flawed, as evidenced by him dropping the timing of the first tranche of this legislation. The work that the government has done on this legislation is flawed in that the cost estimates for the changes that would be required are a mile out of whack. I think the government knows that. I also suspect the minister is well aware that his pie in the sky idea of who is going to fund all of this is just a complete fairy tale.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video