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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 3 Hansard (6 March) . . Page.. 614 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

This amendment deals with the timeframe in subclause 30 (2). My amendment will bring it back into line with the existing law and market practice. It is an amendment which has been suggested by the Law Society. It will bring it back to seven days. Seven days is existing market practice.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.17): The Labor Party does not agree with this amendment. This amendment that has been proposed by the government shortens the time that a lessor must give a tenant information before a lease is entered into. We do not believe that there is any justification for shortening from 14 to seven days the period of time in which information should be given. I foreshadow a Labor amendment to extend the time. The Labor Party does not support this amendment. It seems to us that we are talking about a reduction in time from 14 to seven days. We think the government's original proposal of up to 14 days was much more satisfactory.

MS TUCKER (4.18): We are also concerned about that reduction in time. The Greens will not be supporting the amendment.

MR RUGENDYKE (4.18): I will not be supporting the amendment to this subclause. I foreshadow that I will be supporting Mr Stanhope's amendment on this issue.

Amendment negatived.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.19): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 4 part 1 at page 720].

This amendment omits from subclause (3) of clause 30 the term "one month" and substitutes with "3 months". The effect of this amendment is to allow a tenant that extra time to ask for a disclosure statement from the lessor when considering a renewal of his lease. We think the time of one month is unnecessarily short. Three months does not seem to us to be onerous. In the view of the Labor Party, the extension of the time of one month to three months provides an appropriate balance between the interests of the lessor and those of the lessee.

Amendment agreed to.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Attorney-General) (4.20): I move amendment 11 [see schedule 1 part 1 at page 679].

This amendment will probably suffer the same fate as the previous one I moved. It omits "14" and substitutes "7". It is similar to my amendment No 10. Again, we would say that the timeframe would be brought back in line with existing law and existing market practice.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (4.20): I repeat the Labor Party's opposition to the proposition to reduce the time.

Amendment negatived.

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