Page 1122 - Week 06 - Thursday, 27 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Compulsory helmet wearing would be very difficult to enforce by the Australian Federal Police because of the extensive network of footpaths and cycleways that riders can use.
Dog Control
Ms Follett: On 26 July Mr Stefaniak asked a question about the dogs and tenant that reside at 5 Rooth Place, Watson. He asked:
(1) What do you intend doing about ensuring that the dog control authorities take proper steps in relation to the two dogs there?
(2) In relation to the Housing Trust, the tenant in 5 Rooth Place is a government tenant. What do your Government and the Administration intend doing in relation to breaches of clause 7 of the acknowledgment of tenancy in relation to harassment and intimidation of other residents of that street and threats that have been made against them?
(3) Does the Chief Minister have a series of written complaints supplied by several of the residents of that street?
In response to Mr Stefaniak's questions about problems being experienced by certain residents of Rooth Place, Watson, I can now provide the following answers:
Copies of written complaints supplied by the residents of one particular household in Rooth Place, Watson, have been received within my office.
Neighbourhood disputes, by their very nature, are mostly intractable and difficult to resolve. As you will appreciate, there is a limit to what the Government and the Administration can do in these cases.
I am informed that the ACT Housing Trust has thoroughly investigated the complaints against its tenant in No. 5 Rooth Place. This has included writing to the other residents in the street in September 1988 as well as interviewing the tenant of 5 Rooth Place and the complainants. I understand that as a result of these investigations and the responses received from neighbours the Housing Trust wrote to the complainants in November 1988 indicating that their allegations could not be substantiated to the point where any action could be taken under the tenancy agreement. This, of course, does not rule out civil action by the complainants should they consider such action is warranted.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .