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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1098 ..

Mr Moore: Bill, you will be my age before you see it.

MR STEFANIAK: Hang around, Michael, because you might be in for a nice surprise next week. The Attorney-General's Department, my colleague's department, is working towards tabling the Residential Tenancies Bill on 15 May 1997 for the consideration of this Assembly, and it is intended that the reforms will commence in September 1997.

Ms Reilly: It is commencing in September now; it was June earlier.

MR STEFANIAK: It has to be passed and everything, Marion; so there you go. The Community Law Reform Committee, in its report relating to private residential tenancy law, initially recommended that the proposed Residential Tenancies Act should not apply to ACT Housing, pending a further report by that committee. That committee also recommended that a further period of consultation was required to enable the committee to consider whether the proposed Residential Tenancies Act should apply to public housing; and, if so, whether ACT Housing should be exempted from particular provisions of the Act.

Given the implementation of the competition policy reforms and the necessity to ensure competitive neutrality in relation to residential tenancies, the need to ensure that government tenancies were regulated by the Residential Tenancies Bill had already assumed some urgency. This was so notwithstanding this private members Bill. The Government's policy statement on competitive neutrality adopts two approaches matched with associated structural and financial reforms. These approaches relate to the application of the principles of competitive neutrality to significant business enterprises and activities, and full cost attribution to the ACT.

Since the presentation of the private members Bill to amend the Landlord and Tenant Act 1949, the Community Law Reform Committee has, as part of its ongoing consultations, met with officers of ACT Housing to consider whether the proposed Residential Tenancies Bill should be applied to public housing and whether modifications to the Residential Tenancies Bill are necessary or, alternatively, whether ACT Housing should be exempted from particular provisions of the Bill, having regard to the principle of competitive neutrality and the application of the cost-benefit and public interest tests. I am advised that the Community Law Reform Committee has recommended that the proposed Residential Tenancies Bill should apply to public housing, and that outcome is supported by ACT Housing.

Given, after all that, that the tabling of the new tenancy legislation is imminent, the passage of the proposed amendments to the Landlord and Tenant Act at this time would create significant administrative costs for ACT Housing; and it would be operationally disruptive, without conferring any real benefits on public tenants. There are three areas of administrative processes, Mr Speaker, that would need to be changed and would require new procedures and training to be undertaken by staff. These are: Firstly, Ms Reilly's Bill would require ACT Housing to issue 12,500 receipts per fortnight for rent payments made to tenants, even where payments are made by electronic transfer of funds from tenants' bank accounts. This would be a large and costly exercise and could not be justified. Section 57 of the Landlord and Tenant Act requires that.

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