Page 170 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 15 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
would get their toilet fixed, their carpet replaced, their kitchen upgraded or their stove repaired for the next three years—or we could sell 200 to 300 properties to fund the program, or we could just appropriate the extra money and have other areas of the directorate just simply do without. Then there are the water efficiency standards—the new showerheads and toilets—that would cost $300-plus. Heating standards, over $2,500; security measures, deadbolts, $200-plus—keyed window locks, security doors, security windows—and this does not include the cost of any remedial work required at the same time.
I am sure that the Greens will say that the bill does not cover all these things, but it is their bill. If they are to propose a law to enforce higher security standards, higher energy efficiency, then they should spell out exactly what that is. I want to quote from Mr Rattenbury in the Hansard:
… the bill is to set specific minimum standards for energy efficiency and water and then create a requirement for the minister to set other minimum standards in a range of other areas such as security, sanitation and drainage, ventilation and protection from damp.
He went on to say, “It is fair enough that properties should be well ventilated, have flyscreens and deadlocks.” Mr Rattenbury then went on to say:
The bill requires the minister to set standards in relation to a range of other areas, such as ventilation and damp, construction and condition, supply of hot and cold water, heating, laundry and cooking facilities, lighting, hard-wired smoke alarms and electrical safety. We have now included security in this list as well … to determine the kinds of locks and other security devices that should be utilised.
I also paid attention this morning to the explanatory statement, and I will refer to that. The bill covers energy efficiency, water efficiency, security, construction and safety of premises, sanitation and plumbing, ventilation and protection from damp and electrical safety. When I went to the process around rectification it goes on to say that the lessor, the tenant, has a right of appeal or to seek rectification should a property not meet these standards. Remember that Housing ACT is estimating about 10,000 properties would require some work. It goes to ACAT and then we will be provided 90 days to fix the problem—90 days to retrofit and fix 10,000 properties.
Mr Rattenbury interjecting—
MS BURCH: Well, it is in here. Perhaps you can define the rectification period and how long people then have to fix that. The provision outlines a range of orders that are available to ACAT should either the tenant or the commissioner apply for an order. It states:
ACAT are able to make one or more of the following orders:
…
- an order that rent should be paid into the ACAT until the premises comply with the stated minimum standard;
- an order directing payment out of any amount paid into ACAT as appropriate;
- an order for the rent payable to be reduced until the stated minimum standard is met …
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video