Page 1837 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 8 June 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This bill, if passed, has the potential to greatly affect the lives of individual Canberrans without providing them with reasonable protections.
I would like to note the government’s ongoing efforts to identify appropriate options for strata reform, including reforms that will benefit and better regulate mixed use developments.
I do want to thank Mr Coe for bringing this issue to the forefront of discussion in this place, and it is important, I think, that we develop a reform package which addresses all the issues which I have outlined today, to the benefit of all tenants, and which addresses the issues associated with mixed use developments. The government will not be supporting this bill today.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (3.21): The bill proposed by Mr Coe is intended to address a problem emerging in mixed use unit title properties, where a commercial business may use a large amount of water and individual residents in the unit complex end up having to share the costs. That is certainly the specific issue that has brought this to the fore, although I know there are other issues emerging around mixed use developments as well, which constituents have raised with me.
The specific issue arises because there are not individual water meters in these properties, so it cannot be determined how much water is being used by each title holder. I agree this is a problem, and it is not ideal that individuals living in unit title complexes should be paying for potentially very large water usage by a business such as a restaurant.
The problem, however, is that I do not believe Mr Coe’s proposed solution, as presented in this bill, is an appropriate solution to the problem. It proposes to allow individual unit owners in unit complexes to install their own water meter, and it allows owners corporations to require unit owners to install a water meter.
The problems that this approach creates include inconsistencies with the current act. For example, usually when the owners corporations require the installation of infrastructure, they must be satisfied that the long-term benefit outweighs the infrastructure’s costs for installation and maintenance. Under the proposal, this would not be required when a body corporate requires the installation of individual water meters. Similarly, especially in older unit complexes, substantial works may be required to install submeters. These costs could be quite prohibitive. To allow such works via a general resolution is not compatible with the rest of the Unit Titles Act. The bill allows for the possibility for owners corporations to impose very high costs on unit owners, potentially arbitrarily.
I think there are problems with the part of the bill that allows the executive committee to essentially impose a submeter installation on a unit title holder even if they do not agree, including to authorise an installer to enter the property and install it. There are privacy and human rights issues to work through with this proposal.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video