Page 5646 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
three houses on his block, Mr Wood, as I read it, and I think it is the way it comes out at the moment, does not have to pay any betterment. That is the problem we have, and all we are trying to do is to resolve that issue.
Mr Wood: You are not doing it; you are not achieving it.
MR JENSEN: Maybe we are not, but I think it was important to get it on the record. I am interested to see how Mr Wood proposes to resolve this very important problem. I do not care what anybody says; there are enough sharp people out there at the moment to take advantage of every loophole you can drive a truck through. Look at the tax laws; look at how people have used and abused the tax laws. As soon as they find a loophole, through it goes. You can bet your bottom dollar that this sort of loophole will be picked up and a truck will be driven through it. In fact, there will be great lines of trucks driving through it unless you do something about it straightaway.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (12.47): Mr Deputy Speaker, I presume that I can speak twice?
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, you can.
MR KAINE: Mr Jensen has stirred my memory again. What he is purporting to do here is to add to your lease when you renew it a constraint that does not exist now. There is no such constraint on the leases that people have today. What he is saying is that when you come to renew it we are going to put a constraint on your lease conditions that does not exist now. Why? If he wants to put in this proposal that he has in mind, there must be another way to do it, and you should be applying it to all residential leases, including current ones, if that is your intention.
Mr Jensen: That is what it does.
MR KAINE: No, this is only when you come to renew it. It does nothing for existing leases until they come up for renewal, and you are saying that you can have a renewal of your lease provided you accept this new constraint. So, it does not do anything for existing leases until such time as they come up for renewal. If you want to achieve your objective and to impose this constraint on residential leases, you should be doing it to all residential leases and you should be doing it in some other way. This does not achieve your objective. It is discriminatory, in fact, and it relates only to people whose leases run out. A lot of leases do not run out for a long time; so it is going to be a long time before you can catch a lot of people if your objective is to catch people who want to do other things with their property. Think it through.
Amendment (Mr Moore's) negatived.
Amendment (Mr Jensen's) negatived.
Clause agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .