Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 7 Hansard (23 June) . . Page.. 2251..
MR PRATT (continuing):
graffiti. So I cannot understand why the Stanhope government has cracked down on one and not the other.
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Supplementary answers to questions without notice
MR HARGREAVES: During question time today, I took on notice a question from Mrs Burke relating to the tenancy of David Harold Eastman. The answer is definitely no, Mrs Burke. Housing ACT has not authorised the lease of a unit to persons other than the tenant. I would be interested to know the source of your information.
Ms Gallagher, on behalf of Mr Stanhope, presented the following paper:
ACT Criminal Justice Statistical Profile—March quarter 2005.
Civil Law (Property) Bill 2005
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Acting Attorney-General, Minister for Education and Training, Minister for Children, Youth and Family Support, Minister for Women and Minister for Industrial Relations): For the information of members, I present the following papers:
Civil Law (Property) Bill 2005—
Explanatory statement to the exposure draft.
I ask for leave to make a statement in relation to the paper.
MS GALLAGHER: Mr Speaker, the Civil Law (Property) Bill 2005 is the culmination of a 10-year program to consolidate the law of property in the ACT. The government has been committed for some time to simplifying ACT property law. Members of the Assembly will remember that, in the first session of parliament, the government introduced legislation that consolidated that part of the civil law that dealt with wrongs and, in doing so, rewrote almost the entirety of ACT law in that area.
Calls to undertake a similar program in property law were first initiated in 1976, when the Blackburn commission reported to the commonwealth Attorney-General about the need to reform ACT conveyancing law. The commission stressed the need for fundamental review of the law relating to real and personal property in the ACT. It saw that theoretical structure of property law as it stands, that is, based in the view that land is primarily the economic basis of the hereditary family group, as being irrelevant to the needs of the Australian community, which views land primarily as a commodity.