Page 933 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 25 February 2009
The government is more than happy to be involved in this two-stage process. I am more than happy to accede to this refining amendment which Ms Le Couteur has moved by which there will be twin processes—one by the government, one by the committee. We are happy to contribute to a continuing conversation, discussion or consideration of issues in relation to live music.
I think it is a really good initiative that Ms Le Couteur raises through this motion, an area that is in need of government, community and broader support and understanding. It is one of those issues where we do need a deeper understanding, but we also need a signal that this is an issue of genuine concern and a gap in service or capacity that we really do need to fill. The government is really happy to be a part of that and we will accept the dual approach that Ms Le Couteur proposes.
Ms Le Couteur’s amendment to Mr Barr’s proposed amendment agreed to.
Mr Barr’s amendment, as amended, agreed to.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
MR SESELJA (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (10.18): I move:
That this Assembly:
(1) notes with concern:
(a) that the land rent scheme has failed to deliver a real and substantial improvement in housing affordability;
(b) the failure of the government to clearly identify to the Assembly and the broader community which financial institutions will support the land rent scheme;
(c) that a number of those contracted to the scheme have or will accrue a stamp duty liability;
(d) the potential for those contracted to the land rent scheme to experience negative equity;
(e) the public comments made by the government in relation to the liability already accrued by some involved in the land rent scheme; and
(f) the distress those Canberrans involved in the scheme have experienced as a result of the land rent scheme stalling; and
(2) calls on the government to:
(a) reveal to the Assembly and the broader community who the lender is that has provided in-principle support;