Page 344 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 20 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
pressures of family and business it is not always possible for these people to attend.
To sum up, and in view of my previous comments, I consider that the drawing up of a code of practice by both landlord and tenant organisations is of utmost importance to the industry. The committee has allowed six months for the industry to achieve this, and I believe that considering that New South Wales has already negotiated a draft code of practice, which I believe is awaiting the ratification of the New South Wales Government, this should make it somewhat easier for ACT organisations. (Extension of time granted)
As I stated at the outset, I believe it would be beneficial to landlords and tenants if a code of practice is negotiated and agreed upon between the parties, as they are the ones who must use it on a daily basis. New South Wales has shown that it is possible, and I hope that the ACT can follow its lead. Mr Speaker, I commend the report to the Assembly.
Debate (on motion by Ms Follett) adjourned.
PRIORITIES REVIEW BOARD
Ministerial Statement and Paper
Debate resumed from 15 February, on motion by Mr Kaine:
That the Assembly takes note of the following paper:
Priorities Review Board - Ministerial statement, 13 February 1990.
MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (8.27): Mr Speaker, I will direct my comments to those already made in this chamber on this important topic. Before I refer to the various comments made by other members, I should like to say firstly that based on the years that I have lived in Canberra, I think there is nothing new in there being a Priorities Review Board or something of that nature, howsoever named.
One of the principal criticisms of that report has been that it is unrepresentative because on the board are persons who are principally skilled in finance, public administration and economic and commercial affairs. I think that is unreasonable criticism. When I look through the reviews - and I have done that casually this evening - I think of, for example, the Block report on the future of the National Capital Development Commission. That was a one-man exercise carried out by a person whose views and attitudes on a variety of processes were already known because that gentleman had already headed the Block review in the public administration area.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .