Page 3274 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 August 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
retirement villages. These meetings included discussing what legislative model could be adopted that will provide both minimum disruptions to operators and maximum benefits to residents.
Although the bill today is reasonably different to what was originally proposed, the Greens support it as a step forward in providing surety to the industry and increased rights for residents. From our meetings we understand that both the industry body and residents support the current bill.
Concerns were raised by a specific retirement village in the last couple of days. These were around the definition of “retired person”, the subletting of properties by residents, operators’ budgeting requirements and association requirements including rules, by-laws, annual meetings and the tenure of officeholders. My office discussed these matters with the industry body, the Retirement Villages Association, and found a number of the operator’s concerns were not accurate. In the case of budgeting and association provisions, there are existing requirements on operators. We advised the operator to contact the Retirement Villages Association for assistance with the provisions of the bill and to discuss any ongoing concerns they may have.
I am informed that the Retirement Villages Association actively encouraged its members—of which the operator who raised concerns is one—to be involved in their consultation prior to debate on this bill and prior to a meeting I had with the Retirement Villages Association. I am confident the bill’s transition process in conjunction with the government’s information sessions for the retirement villages will more than adequately address any concerns operators may have.
In looking at the detail of the bill, there are a number of positive aspects to point out. Residents will be provided with standard form contracts, making them easier to understand. There will be a settling-in period of 90 days. After a resident passes away or moves out of a unit, their financial liability to the operator will only exist for six weeks as compared to the current six months. Operators will be required to prepare written safety and emergency procedures and take reasonable steps to ensure that residents and staff are familiar with such procedures. Residents’ financial interests are protected if a village folds. Their interest is given priority over certain other creditors. Disputes can be taken to ACAT rather than just the code administration committee. There is clarification about which capital items are the responsibility of the village operator and which are the responsibility of a resident. There is greater transparency about how an operator must set aside money for long-term maintenance. Accounts are to be provided readily to residents and be audited annually. Governance requirements are to be established for residents’ committees.
In conclusion, the Greens, as I have already said earlier, will be supporting this bill. It makes the necessary advancements in the rights of retirement village residents. We are pleased to see the bill being passed, as are many retirement village residents. I acknowledge that we have representatives from the Retirement Village Residents Association here today, and I congratulate them on the bill passing. I obviously also congratulate Ms Porter and her office on their work and for working cooperatively with the Greens and stakeholders on this bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video