Page 4598 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 27 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure, dated 1988, and particularly to page 52 of that report. I know that he is familiar with it. Professor Neutze drew attention in his report to some of the problems with the leasehold system. Of course, this administration has failed to implement the recommendations of Professor Neutze and that parliamentary committee.
Moving on very quickly, it is appropriate to draw attention to the situation at Fyshwick and an article by Philip Hobbs in the Canberra Times on 11 November this year in which he said that lessees get a $30m advantage because the Government bent to the lobbying of the people out at Fyshwick. The article states:
The August measures were aimed at ending this preferential treatment whereby lessees were paying effective interest rates of 10 per cent while reaping capital gains at the same time.
That was the original notion of the Government. They finally started to get something right. The point that is most important is that when you are seeking capital gains on the land in that way, when you are speculating on the land in the ACT, that speculation is something that needs to be looked at very carefully and needs to be assessed.
I could talk about many other sections of the leasehold system. I do need to mention the notion of the private hospital on Lake Ginninderra. The leasehold system here provides us with the opportunity to either allow or prevent a developer building a five-star hotel, condominiums and private hospital, as was suggested by Douglas Moran this morning or yesterday morning on the Matt Abrahams morning show. It is important that the leasehold system be respected, looked after and administered properly to stop that sort of thing.
MR KAINE (Chief Minister) (4.09): Mr Speaker, I must say that I welcome the opportunity to speak to this matter of public importance, but I would have to say that, in terms of a debate, Mr Moore has not made his case. His matter of public importance is "The failure of the Alliance Government to appropriately administer the leasehold system in the ACT". In fact he has not proven anything of the kind. He has talked at great length about the leasehold system and said that there are problems with it. He also quoted Professor Neutze as saying that there are problems with the leasehold system. But I do not recall him saying one thing that would indicate that the Government has failed to "appropriately administer" - whatever that means - the leasehold system. I do not think he has made his case, but I think that there are some things that need to be said.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .