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

None . . Page.. 1256 ..

I might say that there have been questions raised in recent days about the effectiveness of orders made under the Land Act generally and some questions about whether they are fully enforceable and whether they are sometimes particularly capable of being used quickly to head off some particular issue that is of concern because it offends the framework of, say, the Land Act’s planning requirements, protection of the environment or wherever it might be. I think that we need to be sure if we have a gun in our armoury that we know it will work when we pull it from the holster and shoot. The Government will therefore be taking seriously the question of examining the efficacy of those orders and ensuring that they are in fact capable of being used when required as required. But that is an issue to do more with the land planning side of this legislation than the environment side.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.


Debate resumed from 1 June 1995, on motion by Mr Humphries:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR WOOD (4.10): Mr Speaker, it is a little time since Mr Humphries gave the introductory speech on this Bill. The Bill deals simply with mobile homes - to put it into layman's language - and the ability of people in mobile homes to get greater security for their investment and their residential lifestyle. Quite a number of people have been waiting patiently for the Bill to be passed, and today some people will be pleased to know that it has been passed. I believe that it is an important measure. Members may recall that when I was Minister, not very long ago, in December, I introduced this Bill into this Assembly; but it was not dealt with in the last days of sitting, and now it emerges again, quite properly.

It is important that people who choose this lifestyle have greater protection for their property. The mobile homes can cost quite a deal of money, and people need to know that they can site them and that they are not going to be removed arbitrarily. I think it is also appropriate that those people who invest in the van parks - whatever term we might give to these locations - also have that level of security for their investment. It is of dual benefit both to the people who live there and to the people who own those places. We have heard stories around Australia that all is not well on occasions - and I suppose that difficulties inevitably arise - between tenants and landlords. This Bill will go a long way towards giving protection.

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