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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (26 February) . . Page.. 428 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

vested interests which their parties have traditionally served and look, instead, to their constituents. It is quite clear, under the Hare-Clark system, that individual members will be able to be held accountable for the way they vote on this issue, as on many other issues. I commend this Bill to the Assembly.

Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.

MS REILLY (10.39): I present the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Bill 1997.

Title read by Clerk.

MS REILLY: I move:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

I am presenting this Bill because an anomaly has arisen in tenancy legislation in the ACT and I am sure that all of us here - particularly the Minister for Housing, as a responsible landlord and, in fact, the biggest landlord in the ACT - would like to address that issue. As the situation stands at the moment, we have the Landlord and Tenant Act of 1949, but one section of that specifically excludes ACT Housing from its conditions, and this is particularly important in relation to evictions. This has arisen through some cases that have come before the courts. In one particular case, referred to as Pearce and Little, in 1994, it was found that there was a lack of information. This was considered again before the Supreme Court.

What is important is ensuring that the public landlord in the ACT, ACT Housing, does not end up with broader discretions than a private landlord. I am quite sure that no-one here would want to have this difference. When a private landlord reaches a situation where he or she wishes to evict a tenant, for whatever reason, the private landlord is required to give the tenant reasons for the eviction. If you consider this, this is fair and aboveboard, because a tenant then is well aware of why the eviction procedure is commencing. Then there are several different legal processes that have to be gone through. But, if you look at ACT Housing and through that to the landlord, the Minister for Housing in the ACT, he or she is not required to give any reasons for eviction.

Mr Stefaniak: But they are told, Marion. You know that.

MS REILLY: They are not required to give reasons for eviction. The Minister, as landlord, can be justly proud that in most cases reasons are given. We are not looking, in this Act, at the internal processes of ACT Housing. In fact, some of the processes and procedures that ACT Housing work under are excellent. This is not looking at the public servants who work in Housing; we are looking at the legal processes, the requirements of the law, in relation to tenancy in the ACT for public housing. All that this amendment

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