Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 4389..
MRS DUNNE (continuing):
We all know that, if they succeed in building in the Molonglo Valley, this government and successive governments will make a motser in revenues. The payout to the rural lessees in the area will be an insignificant sum compared to the amount of money made by the sale of land, on the exchanges of property and on the stamp duty, et cetera. These are the issues we need to take into account. We have to have financial rectitude, but we also need to act with justice.
Motion agreed to.
Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill 2004
MS TUCKER (8.11): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 4466].
Do members want me to explain what is happening or is everyone happy with this?
MR SPEAKER: I think you should, for the record. This member would like to know.
MS TUCKER: This rescinding process is to correct a technical problem with my amendment to propose new clause 30, relating to section 102 of the act, which was passed with the support of the government and Ms Dundas last Tuesday. No one else spoke on that particular amendment and there was no division. Unfortunately, there was some confusion on the morning of last Tuesday, and my amendment was written in a way that incorrectly inserted the new subclause 3 within the existing subclause 2. I apologise to members for this oversight. This amendment today instead correctly inserts a new subclause 3 after subclause 2.
To recap the arguments briefly, my amendment, which is an alternative to the government's amendment No 3 to clause 30 of the bill, ensured that the tribunal could reconsider a termination and possession order that is subject to a condition precedent, defined at section 42 of the act-whether or not a notice had been issued under section 42 (1). This notice is the eviction notice served when the registrar has evidence that the condition has been breached. It only allows two days for appeal so, unfortunately, the crisis of receiving an eviction notice had to be reached before the tribunal could consider any changed circumstances.
The clause inserted by my amendment makes it clear that the tenant, realising that their circumstances had changed, could take the responsibility of bringing it to the attention of the tribunals as a motion to vary the order, given the changed circumstances, rather than as a consequence of the eviction order.
Amendment agreed to.