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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 2 Hansard (1 March) . . Page.. 518 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

something away from someone. It is important to get it right first. I urge members to be very cautious.

This is a very complex bill. There are many amendment sheets. This is the most complex piece of legislation this Assembly has dealt with since self-government. We are still getting more amendments today. Hopefully that will be it for amendments and there will be no more amendments.

Mr Stanhope: There are no problems-

MR STEFANIAK: I do not know whether you are indicating that you have more amendments, but if there are more amendments get them in now-

Mr Stanhope: They are yours.

MR STEFANIAK: Even if they are ours, and let us all have a chance over the next few days to look at them. Let that be the end of the amendments, because this is already an amazingly complex piece of legislation. Most of the amendments we might debate are contingent on the success or failure of Mr Rugendyke's amendments going to either of the two matters I discussed earlier. Accordingly, to simplify the debate, I propose to move that the mood of the Assembly be tested in relation to those matters at the beginning of the detail stage. Whether my move succeeds or otherwise will determine what happens to the earlier parts of the bill. I think most members are agreeable to my suggestion as a sensible way to proceed.

I was happy to hear Mr Stanhope acknowledge a number of people for the work they had done. Might I join with him in acknowledging the work done by the various staff members-my chief of staff Mike Strokowsky, Geoff Gosling, Bevan Hannan and others-who participated actively in very detailed discussions on very complex amendments. They have put in hours of work, even over the last week, to try to assist the process. I extend my thanks to all of members of staff from all parties and the Independents who were involved.

The bill introduced by the government last year contained a July 2001 start-up date. Delays in debating this matter and now the prospect of extensive modifications to the bill mean that this date cannot be met. Depending on the extent of changes moved in the Assembly, I give notice now that at the end of the debate the government will move a change to either a January 2002 or a July 2002 commencement, whichever is the more applicable.

It is terribly important to get a level playing field. If this is done right, we might come very close to doing that in this most complex and difficult area, an area that has never been easy. I think the landlord side and the tenant side have come together, and we have put a good bill on the table. Anything that goes too far to one side is going to have adverse effects. I would caution Mr Rugendyke. If some of the things he is seeking to introduce are introduced, they may have completely the opposite effect to that he desires, and that is going to hurt the Canberra consumer and ultimately even hurt the little bloke, the tenant, whom he says he is seeking to protect.

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