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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 3 Hansard (6 March) . . Page.. 634 ..

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (5.35): I move amendment No 18 circulated in my name [see schedule 4 part 1 at page 720].

This is one of the great beauties of legislation and parliamentary drafting. This looks much longer and looks intimidating, but it has exactly the same effect as the previous amendments. It achieves the same purpose.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 87, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 88.

MS TUCKER (5.36): I move amendment No 11 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 part 1 at page 690].

I will speak to my amendment No 12 as well. These two amendments provide some guidance for the court as to the basis on which a lessor can determine that damaged or deteriorated premises are not to be repaired.

My amendment No 11 requires the lessor reasonably to consider that repairs to the premises are impracticable. A lessor might put forward any reason to argue unreasonably that repairs are impracticable. "Reasonable" is a fair and minimum threshold.

These amendments also take out "undesirable" as a rationale for not repairing premises. Again, "undesirable" is such a catch-all term. A lessor may find repair undesirable simply for the reason that they do not like the lessee or that they are bored with the whole responsibility of property management and they want an excuse to terminate the lease. It seems to me that the term "impracticable" is also quite broad and would cover all genuine reasons for a lessor not to repair damaged premises.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Attorney-General) (5.38): The government will be opposing this amendment. Ms Tucker is removing the lessor's discretion not to rebuild if it is undesirable. We believe the owner should continue to have a discretion not to be forced to rebuild if that is impracticable or undesirable. This amendment would impose unreasonable restrictions on a landlord, and we oppose it.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (5.38): The Labor Party supports the amendment. We think the introduction of "reasonableness" into a provision such as this is appropriate. I am concerned by the subjectivity of the concept of undesirability in relation to this sort of clause. "Undesirable" is an unnecessarily subjective term to introduce into a consideration of this sort.

MR RUGENDYKE (5.39): I too will be supporting this amendment, for the reasons outlined by Ms Tucker.

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