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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 11 Hansard (6 November) . . Page.. 3763 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

The efficiency and effectiveness of the tribunal will certainly need to be monitored closely to ensure that there are not undue delays. I am also interested to know whether the Government is intending to follow the Community Law Reform Committee's recommendation for application forms and other information to be tailored to specific needs of lessors and tenants, adequate signposting, information in other languages with interpreters available, child-care facilities and ongoing dialogue between the tribunal and the community. I would appreciate hearing from Mr Humphries during the debate on this matter.

As far as the jurisdiction of the tribunal is concerned, I was certainly keen to ensure that the vast majority of tenancy disputes are heard by the tribunal. The Government said they were prepared to ensure that we are in line with New South Wales. The maximum amount of compensation that can be awarded by the New South Wales tribunal has recently been increased to $10,000. The Government is, therefore, prepared to support an amendment to increase the jurisdiction of the tribunal from $5,000 to $10,000.

Another issue of concern for non-Government members was the departure from the recommendation that the legislation contain a standard tenancy agreement. The Government has chosen instead to include a Schedule to the Bill containing prescribed terms. The concerns about the absence of a standard lease were heightened because of the contracting out provision. We have received an informal commitment from the Government to provide free of charge copies of a standard form lease. I would like to hear the Minister confirm this again for the record. I would also like to hear an assurance from the Government that it will make available the necessary resources for government, landlord and tenant groups and other stakeholders to develop information packages and public education campaigns in relation to this new legislation. Measures to increase awareness about rights and responsibilities will certainly not eliminate disputes, but they will assist in reducing the number of disputes.

On the issue of legal representation, I do not think anyone wants this to become an overly legal area. Non-Government members believe that all parties should have the opportunity of representation, however. The Community Law Reform Committee report discussed this matter and concluded that restrictions on representation could result in a situation where the lessor is represented by an experienced advocate, that is, a real estate agent, when the tenant will have little or no experience with no representation. A similar concern obviously arises in the case of ACT Housing. That is why we have taken this approach. Obviously, adequate funding of tenants' representatives such as the Tenants Advice Service and the Welfare Rights and Legal Service, who represent low-income earners, is essential to ensure equity. As the Community Law Reform Committee report says, a prohibition on legal costs will help prevent the process from becoming a place for complex law and lawyers. If one party appears with a lawyer and the other is not represented, the tribunal can ensure that the unrepresented party is not disadvantaged.

Mr Speaker, there are also some unresolved issues still in this Bill - for example, coverage of the community housing sector, boarders and lodgers. There has also been a lot of concern about ensuring that people who are in any kind of supported accommodation are brought under the coverage of this Act. Obviously, we do have to treat crisis accommodation differently, but I think the basic principle that this Assembly

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