Page 1132 - Week 04 - Thursday, 21 March 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

---

Question put:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

The Assembly voted -

AYES, 15  NOES, 1 

Mr Berry Mr Stevenson
Mr Collaery
Mr Connolly
Mr Duby
Ms Follett
Mrs Grassby
Mr Humphries
Mr Jensen
Mr Kaine
Ms Maher
Mr Moore
Mrs Nolan
Mr Prowse
Mr Stefaniak
Mr Wood

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

CITY AREA LEASES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991

Debate resumed from 14 March 1991, on motion by Mr Kaine:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR MOORE (10.58): The very principles of the leasehold system are under challenge by this amendment Bill. The notion that there is a presumptive right of a leaseholder to have any form of right in terms of development is an inappropriate concept and is not part of a proper understanding of our leasehold system. The presumptive rights should remain at all times with the landlords. Those landlords are, of course, the people of Canberra.

I see Mr Jensen immediately reach for his copy of the report on the Canberra leasehold system, normally referred to as the Langmore report. He would find that term, "the presumptive rights", there in evidence to that committee. In the in-principle stage of this debate today I will rely heavily on that report on the Canberra leasehold system by Mr Langmore and the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure, and on the report on the leasehold system that it

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .