Page 238 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 February 2016

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


MR GENTLEMAN: It allows them to move into the land rent scheme. What the opposition has done—remember that this has been passed by the Assembly—is move to disallow to hold off that process. So all of those affected—

Opposition members interjecting—

MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: We went through this the other day, Mr Gentleman. You do not need to sit down. You can continue speaking. If you are sitting down it implies that you are finished.

MR GENTLEMAN: What it does is allow those affected owners to enter the land rent scheme on those blocks that they have been so entrenched on over such a long time. As I said, we had touched base with Mr Coe’s office. He advised that he was not going to bring it on. What that meant is that 343 would be disallowed if we did not bring it on. There is a choice here and we made the choice to bring it on and to have the debate today to give surety for those people that are Fluffy block owners who want to get into the land rent scheme.

In passing the Building (Loose-fill Asbestos Eradication) Legislation Amendment Bill in October last year, the Assembly agreed that land rent leases should be made available for those former home owners of loose-fill asbestos insulated homes who exercise their first right of refusal to purchase the remediated block and are eligible for land rent.

Once again in his conversation Mr Coe raises an individual who is a Fluffy block owner who, if this DI is passed, will not be eligible to enter into the land rent scheme. We are trying to make it available for that person to enter into the land rent scheme. Whenever possible, the application of the land rent scheme is the same for the former affected blocks as for all other land rent blocks. The eligibility criteria are the same. The rent of the block is calculated at the same rate.

While the eligible former home owner remains on their affected block, they will enjoy the benefits of the land rent scheme, paying land rent at two per cent of the unimproved value of the block. However, there are some key differences between the former affected blocks and other land rent blocks which need to be recognised in extending the scheme to this group.

In passing the bill—and I reiterate that it has passed—the Assembly agreed that these differences should be reflected in the way that the land rent scheme applies to former affected blocks. These differences in applications apply only at the point that the former home owner chooses to sell the affected block and/or exits the land rent scheme.

The act included changes to the Land Rent Act 2008 to not allow the transfer of a land rent lease granted on a former affected block to another person. This departure from the usual land rent conditions recognises that land rent is intended to assist the former owner to exercise their first right of refusal and is not intended to benefit any subsequent owners of that remediated block.


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