Page 583 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I do not actually know what it is like to rent. I will be the very first member of this particular Legislative Assembly to admit the fact that I have never rented. I hear of the struggles out on the streets. I hear of the struggles when I doorknock renters. They tell me how terrible some landlords can be. But they also tell me great stories, fabulous stories, about some landlords—some landlords that actually get it, that actually understand what it is like to be in the rental market. Mind you, they are few and far between. But there are some.
As a mum, I have a son who rents. I wish he was paying only $150 a week, let me tell you. It would be so much better for both of us if he could pay only $150 a week. But, no. He works in a small country town in New South Wales, where he pays $320 a week for a room in shared accommodation—shared bathroom, shared kitchen, shared dining area, $320 a week! And he has zero rights as a renter.
What this bill is trying to do is allow some of the niceties that people living in a house deserve, whether they own it or whether they rent it. People deserve to have a roof over their heads. People deserve to be able to come home and call the place they live in a home. They deserve to be able to hang a picture. They deserve to have the love and affection of a pet that does not just offer companionship; it can often offer stress relief, and there are a whole number of service animals out there that offer support to their owners.
Mrs Dunne—through you, Madam Speaker—is saying that she believes that no-one should have a pet in a rental property. Let me say this: the law does not force any landlord to accept a renter with a pet. The law is simply asking that it be considered for everyone to feel at home, to feel the love of an animal, to feel that their house that they pay a motza for in rent is able to be called a home. It is very, very important—and I am sure Minister Ramsay will wrap up with some more comments about this—that tenants are given the option to have a house that meets their requirements. I think these changes to the Residential Tenancies Act go some way to offering that. They go some way to ensuring that everyone that rents a property is able to call it their home.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (11.56): Under standing order 47, I seek leave to explain certain words that may have been misunderstood.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne.
MRS DUNNE: Thank you. I do not know whether Ms Cody was getting carried away, but I did not at any stage say that I believed that renters should not be allowed to have dogs. In fact, I highlighted circumstances where I thought that it was a possibility. But I did raise the issue of where people should have the right to decline to have a dog. And I think that the notion that Ms Cody put forward needs to be put to bed.
MR RAMSAY (Ginninderra—Attorney-General, Minister for the Arts and Cultural Events, Minister for Building Quality Improvement, Minister for Business and Regulatory Services and Minister for Seniors and Veterans) (11.57), in reply: I am pleased to speak at the conclusion of a particularly heated debate which was at times rather disconnected from the bill that is before us. Access to housing is fundamental
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video