Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4903 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

The Labor Party takes a simple view. We support the leasehold system. We believe that the leasehold system is a good way of administering land in the ACT. We oppose the Liberals' proposals for 999-year leases or freehold, if they could get away with that. We do not believe in them. We do not believe that that is the way to go. But what we do believe is that, if the Government, any government, at any time in the next 150 years or after that, wishes to resume someone's lease for some other reason, they can pay compensation and resume the lease.

That being the case, where the Government wants to resume someone's lease they can resume their lease. They can pay the compensation. They can do whatever they like with the land if they want to. In the meantime, the householder ought to be able to regard the lease as theirs. I see no reason to draw a distinction between people who have 30 years to go on their lease and people who have 60 years to go on their lease, or people who have 95 years to go on their lease. It does not make much difference. I cannot see how saying that you can renew your lease when you have 30 years to go does not undermine the leasehold system, but saying you can renew your lease when you have 31 years to go, or 40, or 50, or 90 years to go, somehow does undermine the leasehold system.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, quite simply, this does not hold water. I think, quite frankly, that Mr Moore has drawn the line in the sand in the wrong place. I understand that he wants to draw a line in the sand. I understand that he wants to say, "We stand up for the leasehold system". Indeed, so does the Labor Party. But he has drawn his line in the sand in the wrong place, and this is not the place to draw it. It is not a proposal that makes any sense at all.

As I said, we will continue to support the maintenance of the leasehold system and we will continue to oppose moves for freehold. We fail to see how the suggestion that renewing a lease is somehow an undermining of the leasehold, any more than me renewing my lease on a rental property somehow undermines the rights of the landlord. It just does not make sense. Despite whatever sympathy I have for Mr Moore's support for the leasehold system, I think he is misguided and ill-judged in believing that this amendment will do anything to strengthen the leasehold system. We will be opposing Mr Moore's amendment, and we invite the Government to join with us.

MR MOORE (10.44): Mr Speaker, I can see that I am going to lose this one. As it applies to residential leases and rural leases, I believe in what I am doing and I will be supporting it, but I will not call for a vote. However, I do intend to call for a vote in regard to commercial leases because, as a paper by Justice Rae Else-Mitchell has shown, there are quite significant differences in commercial leases. I will be trying to encourage the Labor Party to support that one. That is when I will call for a vote anyway.

Debate interrupted.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .