Today in Parliament Abigail spoke in support of the Government's well-overdue rental reforms bill, which will finally end no-grounds evictions and introduce some crucial protections for renters. Unfortunately, the bill falls short in properly ensuring pet-friendly rentals - Abigail spoke about the implications this will have on victim-survivors of domestic violence with pets, pets who themselves are victims of violence, and all renters seeking to find a rental that accommodates their pets.
Abigail said:
On behalf of The Greens, I support the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill 2024. At long last, we are pleased to finally see the end of no-grounds evictions in New South Wales. That reform does most of the heavy lifting in this bill. I acknowledge my colleague the member for Newtown, Jenny Leong, who is in the gallery for the debate. I remember the first time I met Jenny at a Greens State delegate committee meeting—I know that the members of the House love it when I talk about Greens procedures! She was putting on a workshop for members about rental reforms in 2016. I recall a list of 10 things that she and her office had worked up into a policy initiative. Ending no-grounds evictions was one of the main things, as well as finally getting some form of equality between owners and tenants when it comes to pets in rentals. I will talk a bit more about that later. The point is that these reforms have been Greens policy for a long time.
We have worked with stakeholders to try to push for reforms for a very long time. As is the case for a lot of the reforms that we put forward, we get told that we are being radical or socialist or whatever it happens to be, but those reforms then find their way into major party policy. It is a bit of a bittersweet moment to see it being adopted today. It is a really important reform and we thoroughly celebrate its arrival. That excitement is coloured by our knowledge of the deep sadness and frustration of the countless people who, in the meantime, have had their lives up-ended, their connections to community shattered and their financial wellbeing thrown into disarray as a result of predatory and unfair actions of landlords, which were undertaken under the protection of the law for so many years when it could have been changed a long time ago.
The unfair power dynamic has resulted in more than 28,000 renters in New South Wales being booted from their homes every year without a reason. For many others, the looming threat is sufficient to prevent them from requesting basic maintenance or repairs. That results in people living in squalid conditions, in mould-ridden homes, in properties that fail to meet accessibility requirements and countless other inappropriate and dangerous circumstances. This reform will help deliver some small measure of security and stability to the tenants of this State who have, for too long, been denied the dignity and safety they deserve.
The bill also requires landlords to offer tenants a free and convenient way to pay rent; limits the frequency of rent increases for all lease types to no more than one every 12 months; appoints the NSW Rental Commissioner to the Rental Bond Board; and clarifies that limits apply to the amounts a prospective tenant can be required to pay before a residential tenancy agreement begins. We are happy to support those reforms. I put on record again my gratitude to my colleague Jenny Leong, who led for The Greens in negotiating our position with the Government. I will not repeat the incredibly fair and well-reasoned comments she made about the bill in the other place. Through those negotiations, we successfully inserted a statutory review into the provisions of the Act, to ensure that the policy objectives remain valid. It is a clear and important admission that the process of reform to make the rental market a bit more fair is far from over.
Unfortunately, amendments put forward by The Greens that were not supported by the Government include closing clear loopholes identified by the Tenants' Union and others with regard to the ban on no-grounds evictions. Those amendments put forward by my colleague, and not agreed to by the Government or Opposition, included ensuring that there was a hard deadline for the implementation of the reforms. We also sought to introduce provisions for compensation for tenants. The bill makes provision for penalties for landlords that game the system and fudge certain evidence, but the bill has no scope for compensation to tenants, who are the ones who will suffer at the hands of a dodgy landlord. That leaves us in the unenviable position of the State potentially profiting off the misery of tenants.
Importantly, The Greens also sought to require a landlord, when seeking to evict a tenant, to provide evidence backing up their assertion of the reasonableness of their decision to evict. As the bill is currently drafted, one could easily imagine a situation where a landlord claims that they are going to sell the property or move their family in, or uses any of the other justifications provided to them under the legislation. Then, when the tenant has been successfully evicted, they can "change their mind" or say their circumstances have changed. All of a sudden, they are readvertising the tenancy, probably at an even more inflated rate. Unfortunately, we were unsuccessful with that amendment as well, but I acknowledge the Minister's response in the other place that the intention is that some evidence be provided and that there are compensation pathways available through NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal for those renters with the wherewithal and resources to pursue them.
We also moved amendments that would have removed the inclusion of the proposed sale of a residential premises as a specific ground for termination. That position has consistently been Greens policy, based as it is on the simple principle that a house is a home and not simply a rent-accruing investment to be liquidated whenever it suits the owner. But, more technically, it is unclear at what stage the sale of a property is so-called "proposed". The Greens moved a bill that would have made that exclusion clear, and the provisions of that bill were thoroughly interrogated through a parliamentary inquiry. In its submission to the inquiry, Shelter NSW was adamant that the preparation for sale, as opposed to the actual sale, is not good enough to evict a household of any type, highlighting existing provisions in the Act that enable termination if vacant possession is required at the time of sale. Shelter NSW went on to explain that evicting tenants on the basis of an intended sale:
… reduces the utilisation of existing housing stock, results in unnecessary forced moves (as the property may be sold to a residential investor who would have happily retained the tenants), and opens more possibilities for fraudulent terminations.
The inconvenience to a landlord or selling agent of having to navigate home viewings and interior decorations around the incumbent household must not win out over the inconvenience to the incumbent household of being evicted (potentially into homelessness).
The Greens agree with that analysis. We share its position that a ground that does not require actual sale and the premises to be vacant will be prone to abuse and should not be included in the bill. I note that the Minister in her seconding read speech did not focus much on the pets in rentals aspect of the bill. That is proportionate to the impact that that part of the bill will have. I share wholeheartedly the concerns expressed by the Hon. Emma Hurst about the way in which this Government appears to have turned its back, again, on people fleeing domestic and family violence. It would make such a monumental difference.
Similar to the stories that the Hon. Emma Hurst said she had heard, my office hears from women fleeing domestic violence on a daily basis. We hear a number of stories about people being unable to flee an abusive relationship because they have a pet they want to protect and cannot find a rental. Given that so many refuges and emergency accommodation settings will not take pets either, the result is those women, their children and their pets are living in abusive relationships far longer than they should have to. As we know, from the story the honourable member told but also from the news, a number of women, who have pets, are killed before they make it out of the home, and we know or can reasonably suspect that their pets were a contributing factor. It is not a rare thing and the statistics back that up. That is why Domestic Violence NSW, Lucy's Project and a bunch of other very credible, reputable, well-researched advocacy bodies have been calling on this Government not only to act far more quickly but to act in a way that is much more courageous.
I understand that there was some compromise made within the Labor Party to introduce this legislation and, again, I am very pleased to see that we finally have legislation to ban no-grounds evictions. But to call this anything approaching the fulfillment of an election commitment to allow pets in rentals is misleading in the extreme, because it does not do that. Again, I share the views of my colleague that people will find that out pretty quickly. When they find a new property and want to have their pet in that property, and when they have read the headlines that Labor has provided this great new reform that allows pets to be more easily kept in rentals, they will be sorely disappointed. It is an incredible shame that there was an opportunity to make such a significant difference to victim-survivors of domestic violence and it has not been taken.
It is an incredible shame that, similar to what we saw with the previous Coalition Government at times, we are presented with a bill that has both good and bad in it and we are asked to accept the bad to get the good. I live in hope that the Labor Government will make good on all of its commitments. So I ask that it does not let this one drop and that, when we pass the bill—as I hope we do—work begins immediately on preparing a new piece of legislation that will do what is required to create a level playing field between owners and tenants when it comes to the keeping of animals. It is literally a matter of life and death. I will not beg the Government, but I plead with the it not to drop this now. Put another piece of legislation together. It has majority support in this House. We have already passed legislation in this House that will create that. The Government does not need to worry about it not passing. If Labor wants to do it, it will pass. Please do it. I end by saying again that, despite all those comments about the pets in rentals part, I am very pleased. The Greens are delighted that one of our policy positions has finally made its way into a bill that will be accepted. That is very good news for renters across our State. I congratulate the Minister on bringing that part of the bill. We support the bill.
Read the full debate in Hansard here.
24 October 2024