Page 584 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
for human rights and human dignity, and what this bill does is make significant inroads into providing a fairer housing system for tenants in the ACT.
Given that the recent figures show close to a third of Australian households rent their housing, what these amendments will do is improve the lives of a significant proportion of people in our community. These changes are timely. They closely align with the goals and objectives in the new ACT housing strategy that was launched by the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister in October last year.
In short, the bill amends the Residential Tenancies Act to make it easier for tenants to keep pets in their rental property and to make modifications to the property. It also balances the rights of tenants and landlords in relation to ending leases and changing rental rates. For many people, having a pet is a crucial part of making their house a home. Animal companions are often part of our family. Recognising this, the bill provides that the standard residential tenancy terms will include a clause giving tenants the right to keep a pet. This will be the default option for new tenancy agreements going forward.
Despite the assertions of the opposition, as with other aspects of the bill the new framework will take into account the interest of landlords. In fact, I wonder if Mrs Dunne has even read the bill that is before the Assembly. The tenant may be required to seek written consent to keep an animal on the premises. A landlord can give consent with reasonable conditions in place in relation to the number of pets allowed or the cleaning or the maintenance of the premises. The landlord can impose additional or different conditions, with the approval of the tribunal. And the landlord can only refuse consent for a pet altogether if they seek and obtain the approval of the tribunal.
The amendments recognise that decisions regarding pets in rental properties should be made on a case-by-case basis instead of having blanket conditions. For example, a landlord may not be concerned about a tenant keeping a small pet, but they might apply to the tribunal for consideration if a tenant wants to keep a German shepherd in their studio apartment. It is a clear and comprehensive framework overseen by an independent arbiter, and that strikes the right balance between the genuine interests of landlords and tenants and it recognises the value of pets in many of our lives.
The bill introduces reforms that will make it easier for tenants to make modifications to a rental property. Landlords will need to seek an order from the tribunal to refuse consent to minor or other prescribed special modifications. Special modifications include those that are made to support the safety and security of the premises, as well as those that would assist tenants in relation to their disability. By example, a tenant may wish to anchor a television. The landlord can impose conditions on their consent provided that those conditions are reasonable.
In relation to modifications that are not minor or special, a landlord cannot unreasonably refuse consent. If a tenant believes that a landlord has done this, they can apply to the tribunal for an order that the request was unreasonably refused. This new framework for modifications in the bill gives tenants more choice and control in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video