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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4946 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

The basic rule is that whilst tenants can make improvements - indeed, they are encouraged to make improvements - normally they are able to take those improvements away, or leave them there if it is impractical to take them away. I will leave it at that, Mr Osborne. You might have a supplementary question but I want to chase up a couple of things in relation to this matter. If there are any more facts and figures you want to put to me, I will be happy to take those up.

MR OSBORNE: I have a supplementary question. If that is the case, if tenants are required to take away improvements, could you tell us why these particular improvements were included as a selling feature in the ad for the house?

MR STEFANIAK: I note from what you say, Mr Osborne, that it is quite clear these tenants have made considerable improvements. I think you might have asked earlier whether there is some question of them being asked to pay to have the improvements taken away. That is something I am happy to look at. I understand that in this case they have made considerable improvements.

Mr Osborne: I am talking about the ad.

MR STEFANIAK: We are certainly not going to make them pay to take improvements away, Mr Osborne.

Mr Osborne: I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not know whether the Minister heard my supplementary question. If he did, he is certainly not attempting to answer it. My supplementary question was: If this is the case, if these people have to remove these improvements, why were the improvements used as a selling feature in the ad? That was the supplementary question.

MR STEFANIAK: I have not seen the ad, Mr Osborne. If you give me a copy of that I will chase that up with Housing and get back to you on it.

MS TUCKER: My question is to Mrs Carnell, the Minister for Health and Community Care. Yesterday I asked whether the Minister would ensure that a copy of the legal advice from the Legal Aid Office regarding the consumer provider arrangements in the disability program would be provided to all parents and guardians concerned. I assume that Mrs Carnell has had a briefing since yesterday. In light of the seriousness of the concerns, I particularly note this point:

The document purports not to create legally enforceable obligations. While this may be stated it is clear that the document will have substantial legal ramifications particularly in circumstances, should they arise, where a disabled person is claiming damages for negligence. To that extent there appears to be a real prospect of this document being used to deny to disabled persons legal remedies available to the rest of the community.

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