Page 3787 - Week 14 - Thursday, 10 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the previous New South Wales formula is still the formula used to determine the liability of health funds to the Territory under the Ambulance Service Levy Act. The loss of revenue identified by New South Wales is therefore also being lost in the ACT. For this reason, and because it has always been intended that the schemes in New South Wales and the ACT be identically administered, the Bill proposes to align the ACT formula with that introduced in New South Wales. The change will have a positive revenue impact for the ACT - $60,000 in 1992-93 and $360,000 in a full year. To maintain parity with the New South Wales scheme it is necessary for the amendments replacing the formula to take effect from 1 February 1993. I now present the explanatory memorandum for the Bill.
Debate (on motion by Mrs Carnell) adjourned.
UNIT TITLES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
MR WOOD (Minister for Education and Training, Minister for the Arts and Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning) (11.23): Madam Speaker, I present the Unit Titles (Amendment) Bill 1992.
Title read by Clerk.
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Members will be aware of this Government's commitment to urban renewal initiatives. In part, this is being met by the identification of sites within the existing developed area of Canberra for urban renewal developments. Another important aspect of the process involves government facilitating redevelopment activity. Urban renewal policies exist, such as dual occupancy; but the rate of urban renewal could be encouraged through changes to existing arrangements.
The Unit Titles (Amendment) Bill 1992 will reduce the minimum number of units that can be strata-titled from four to two. In its simplest form, this would enable a lessee who builds an additional dwelling, in accordance with the dual occupancy policies, to unit-title the property and sell one or other of the dwellings. This would enable such lessees to meet some of the costs of redevelopment or provide such lessees with some return so that they can continue to live in the area, while reducing the cost of maintaining the property. Whereas before, if a lessee wanted to unit-title a lease, there had to be a minimum of four units, lessees will now have a wider choice of options in further developing their property. This should provide lessees with a greater incentive to upgrade and produce a better standard of development.
The Bill also makes a number of consequential amendments to deal with arrangements for corporations consisting of only two members. I present the explanatory memorandum for the Bill.
Debate (on motion by Mr Kaine) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .