Dalziel Lianne: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Dalziel Lianne: Retirement Villages Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:612;Page:9419] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I particularly wanted to follow Murray Smith to thank United Future for requesting that this bill be dealt with within the urgency motion. I also thank Mr Smith for his very helpful contribution not only on the Justice and Electoral Committee which was very ably chaired by my colleague Tim Barnett but also in assisting the Government in developing a Supplementary Order Paper to deal with the matters he has just addressed. The Government is very happy to support those amendments in respect of the involvement of the statutory supervisors. 
I should say by way of a little bit of background in the Committee stage that it was actually in my previous capacity as Minister for Senior Citizens that I introduced this bill and now I take it through its Committee stage and third reading as Associate Minister of Justice. It was interesting to reflect back over the last few days on the original letters I received when I became the Minister for Senior Citizens and the kinds of examples that were given to me of people who really had no idea of what they were signing up to. The tragedy was that many of those who signed up to entry into retirement villages had actually taken legal advice before they put their signatures on the bottom line. Unfortunately what we discovered pretty soon was that in fact a number of lawyers had no real understanding of the whole concept of a licence to occupy and that a large number of people living in retirement village complexes from one end of the country to the other thought they owned a piece of property that they themselves could sell. I tried to encapsulate the burden placed upon those people in a simple phrase so that I could communicate it to others as I spoke at meetings around the country and the very point I made was that by investing in a retirement village one is not buying property one can sell. 
What is so good about this legislation is that all that information is explained in plain language upfront so that right at the very outset people know they are not buying property that they can sell. They know they have a licence to occupy and they know what monies will be deducted from their investment should they leave the retirement village or with regard to their estate should they die. I think Dail Jones made some very good points. He is right that many of the debates that have occurred in terms of retirement villages have not occurred with the individual who entered into the agreement; but with the family who has inherited the estate of someone who has passed away. 
I wanted to clarify matters in respect of Supplementary Order Paper 157. A lot of the provisions are minor technical amendments and I think the member would agree with that. But I take on board his comments in respect of clause 29A and refer him to new subclause (5) which will provide the clarity he is seeking: “For the purposes of this section a contravention of a particular provision is a contravention of that provision in a substantial respect if—(a) the contravention involves a significant detriment to the resident; or (b) the contravention is otherwise material and is not solely technical or minor in character; or (c) the contravention involves deliberate misconduct on the part of the operator.” With that clarity in the legislation I do not think the clause itself will have much difficulty in being interpreted. It is not intended to catch technical and minor defects in approach or contraventions of the particular provision; it is designed to catch material breaches that have an impact on the resident—particularly if there is deliberate misconduct which would not be excluded either. 
I wanted to acknowledge the work of the Justice and Electoral Committee. The select committee has played an amazing role in hearing submissions. Often it has been a case of trying to balance competing interests. We have had Grey Power representing consumer interests on one side of the equation and the Retirement Villages Association on the other. I have seen the competing interests try to find a workable solution that works on both sides of the equation—a position of balance. I congratulate all members of the Committee on their contributions on this important legislation.