Page 575 - Week 02 - Thursday, 21 February 2019

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


Whether it is same-sex marriage or pill testing, the Greens are consistently leading the way. I am confident that in the future the other parties in this place will get around to recognising that in Canberra, as with the rest of the world, renting is an option that many people use and they need to have their rights protected.

I do not think that anything that we are suggesting would be a problem for any decent landlord. All we are trying to do is introduce more fair play and better processes and slightly balance the significant power imbalance that comes from a rental market with a less than one per cent vacancy rate.

MR PARTON (Brindabella) (11.20): The Canberra Liberals will not be supporting this bill in its entirety. There are some aspects of it that will get our support. It must be said that at another time, if we were not in the dire circumstances that we find ourselves in as a city in regard to our rental market, quite a number of these changes would get our support. But today is not the day, and this time is not the time to do it.

Despite what the sham Greens organisation Better Renting may have told you—and I note the presence of Mr Dignam from Better Renting in the gallery—I rented in this city for the best part of 20 years. I rented until three months ago. Until three months ago I had the regular inspections and I had to put up with the rent rises. I am a dog lover, and we made numerous requests to our landlord about having a dog at our house, and these were rejected. That was a bit of a pain for me and my family, but it was not my house. It was owned by someone else, so we abided by those rules. When we exited the lease while it still had months to run, we copped a hefty penalty for doing so, and we knew that was the case. I can report that we did get the entire bond back.

The rental market in the ACT served us well, but it was time for us to move on, late last year. So I think we should dismiss this absurd argument that somehow people who own a home, or, worse, people who own an investment property, are not qualified to talk about the rental merry-go-round. It is like suggesting that unless you have been sick in the last 12 months you cannot discuss ACT Health. It is absurd. There are twice as many Liberal MLAs renting as there are Labor MLAs renting, based on the numbers that I have.

I might point out that, according to that Greens report—sorry, that Better Renting report—House of Lords: Landlords and Tenants in the Legislative Assembly, on a per capita basis in this Assembly it is the Greens MLAs who are the biggest landlords. But I do not really think that has anything to do with the debate on this bill. This bill and its amendments have been put forward by those opposite primarily for the purpose of electoral dog whistling. Labor and the Greens, again, as was the case yesterday, are trying to outdo themselves in the progressive stakes. They are trying to convince renters that they are looking after them. This bill will do the exact opposite.

We have the tightest rental market in any capital city in Australia. We have the highest rents in Australia. And everybody in this chamber is smart enough to know that the biggest single effect of this bill will be a further tightening of the market. They are already leaving the market. They are already getting out. This bill will result


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