Debate resumed from 14 May 2024.

Mr ADAM CROUCH (Terrigal) (20:06): On behalf of the Opposition, I speak in support of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. This is excellent legislation and I acknowledge the great work that was done by so many people. The review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act has been a long time coming. I acknowledge all of the residents in my electorate who have been affected by the loopholes in that legislation. I have had the privilege and pleasure of meeting with so many of them over a number of years. It is interesting to see the stark contrast between those who do the right thing for their residential tenancies and those who do not. By way of history, the original legislation was introduced in 2013 to improve governance of residential land leases and to establish a framework, which did not exist, for the relationship between community operators and home owners.

Like all legislation, it is not perfect. Sadly, over time we have seen unscrupulous operators utilising loopholes in the legislation. That has led us to now amending the Act to close those loopholes for the many people who have been affected by them. In 2021 a review of the legislation was conducted and 48 recommendations were put forward as part of that deep review. It should be made clear that 95 per cent of land leases are located in regional New South Wales. As a regional member I have a very large number of those housing estates in my electorate. The majority of the operators do a fantastic job of looking after people who cannot necessarily afford their own homes. I acknowledge the outstanding work that is being done by my local residents in bringing forward feedback on this piece of legislation. In particular, I highlight the great work done by Bob Morris, one of the residents of Kincumber Nautical Village. Bob is a true superstar. He and I spoke a few minutes ago. He is watching us tonight on one screen and at the same time watching an event that is almost as important as this bill on a second screen. Bob has been working on this bill tirelessly. He has wanted these changes and amendments since 2019. Bob and I have spent a lot of time together, along with other residents at Kincumber Nautical Village, discussing the proposals.

The land lease communities in the Terrigal electorate include: Broadlands at Green Point, Greenlife Erina, Pine Needles Village, Terrigal Sands Lifestyle and Retirement Village, Karalta Court Erina, and Kincumber Nautical Village, where Bob lives. These are just some of the many land lease communities in New South Wales. I note the member for Tweed is in the Chamber. He has similar villages in his electorate. I believe the member for Ballina will be making a contribution to this debate. She also has these types of housing estates in her electorate.

The statutory review found that over 50 per cent of occupants had a positive experience living in these communities, 35 per cent had a negative experience and 11 per cent had a neutral experience. Sadly, it is the 35 per cent who have had to live with a negative experience who have been the most severely impacted by the acts of rogue operators who take advantage of the most vulnerable in our community. I have sat down on many occasions with Bob and other residents of Kincumber Nautical Village going through areas where they have been consistently extorted. These people are in the later years of their lives. They should be looked after and provided with a hassle‑free, easy lifestyle to enjoy.

The statutory review concluded that the Act, in general, was doing a good job. But some unscrupulous operators have obviously spent time looking for loopholes in the legislation. We have seen this with many other Acts of Parliament. It is unfortunate that people look for ways to get around a piece of legislation that is supposed to help people who are struggling with the cost of living and who need to be protected and provided with a safe, affordable housing option.

The bill implements 21 of the 48 recommendations from the statutory review into the Act. Entry and exit fees will be prohibited in site agreements. Operators will be required to test emergency evacuation procedures at least once a year. I am reliably informed that residents of Kincumber Nautical Village have never had an evacuation procedure carried out before—another example of how the operators were not doing the right thing to protect the people they are supposed to look after. The bill limits the circumstances under which the operator can enter a home on a residential site to when the home owner has given consent, in an emergency to avert danger to life, or in accordance with an order of the tribunal.

The proposed reforms will allow home owners to make mild alterations or additions to their homes without requiring the operator's approval. Most home owners would consider that to be relatively standard. The bill restricts the circumstances under which operators can issue home owners notices to fix dilapidation. The bill mandates that operators inform potentially affected residents before submitting a development application or planning proposal that could impact the community or residential sites. That will give comfort to residents who live in these facilities. The bill restricts fixed method site fee increases to once per 12‑month period and stipulates that the calculation of these increases can rely on only one fact. This importance of this proviso was raised by the residents of Kincumber Nautical Village, Pine Needles Village and other villages.

I note that the member for Lake Macquarie is in the Chamber. I understand that he will be moving an eminently sensible amendment to the bill that will require operators to review site fee increases within one year after the commencement of the amended Act. The Opposition is fully supportive of that proposed amendment. It was outlined in the statutory review that it should have been a three‑year period, but we know that time duration is not necessary. These are people who need protection now. I am pleased that amendment will be moved. I look forward to hearing the member for Lake Macquarie speak to it.

In addition, the bill makes changes to the billing and charging procedures for utilities, particularly electricity. It requires operators of communities and third‑party suppliers who operate embedded networks to give home owners and tenants written notices of the charges payable for the supply of electricity. Also, the selling entity for a community must be reviewed at least once per year. The bill extends the notice period for vacating a residential site and increases the home owner's compensation entitlement if a termination notice is issued due to the site being unlawfully usable for residential purposes. It also prevents the termination of a site agreement based on the residential site not being used as a place of residence for three or more years.

As I said earlier, one of the best parts of the bill is that it requires operators to review site increases within one year after the commencement of the amended Act. This is a key amendment to the Act. It will provide comfort and protection to people like Bob Morris and the hundreds of residents at Kincumber Nautical Village. Over many years, I have met with them to discuss their concerns. They have faced numerous site fee increases, due to loopholes in the Act which have been utilised by the operator. The stories are harrowing. These people should be enjoying their twilight years and not having to stress about the actions of an unscrupulous operator. The average site fees for land lease communities range from approximately $170 to $200 per week. At Kincumber Nautical Village, site fees have been increased to up to $371 per week. On 2 April 2023, not long after having received a pension increase of $37 per week, 190 residents received notification that site fees would increase by $26 per week on 8 June 2023. Almost all of their pension increase was swallowed up by a site fee increase.

Despite fees being raised every year, some of the most basic infrastructure of this village is in a state of disrepair. I have been there multiple times. There are potholes in the roads within Kincumber Nautical Village and the swimming pool is cracked. The most basic facilities are not being looked after by the operator. This bill sends a very clear message to those people that their behaviour will have to stop. They are being called out. I am pleased that the amendments to the Act, while they might have been a long time coming, are being considered tonight. It is important. The contrast between the good operators and those who try to dodge their responsibilities is stark. A good example is the contrast between the operators of Pine Needles Village and Kincumber Nautical Village. The two facilities are run in a similar fashion, to provide housing, but by different operators. The difference is like chalk and cheese.

The operator of Pine Needles Village respects the residents, treats them with care and dignity, looks after them and works with them, and does the right thing to ensure they receive the appropriate level of care. In stark contrast, we have heard about what has gone on for years at Kincumber Nautical Village. The story has been made public and played out in the media, but no level of public embarrassment has been enough to pull the operator into line. I am really pleased that tonight we are helping to right that wrong. It is cold comfort, of course, to the hundreds of residents of Kincumber Nautical Village. I have sat with them and listened to their stories. To say that they are emotional is an understatement. The lack of respect being shown to the residents is galling. I am very pleased that we are bringing these proposed changes to the Act to the House tonight, because they have been a long time coming.

The importance of the statutory review was to bring the bill introduced in 2013 up to date. We amend bills in this place all the time. It is part of what we do as legislators. I am pleased that we are able to close the loopholes. The objects the Act are still relevant to land lease communities: to improve governance; to set out particular rights and obligations of operators of the communities and home owners; to enable prospective home owners to make informed choices—and they should be able to make those choices freely, clearly and concisely; to establish procedures for resolving disputes between operators and home owners; to protect home owners from bullying, intimidation and unfair business practices; and to encourage continued growth and viability of residential communities in New South Wales.

The bill cleans up the legislation, so I will be pleased to see it go through. I say to the Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading that there is more to be done. There is a great opportunity to continue to revise and streamline the legislation. One thing I strongly suggest to the Minister is that where a fixed method currently allows for more than two variables, a new agreement between affected home owners and the operator must be in place before the next site fee increase. The Minister should consider that as part of the review. It would continue to strengthen the Act to provide additional protection to home owners, whether it be at Kincumber Nautical Village, Pine Needles Village or any of the other estates across regional New South Wales. I could stand here all night and relay stories of how residents have been poorly treated. It is an absolute disgrace. I know that the member for Ballina joins with me. She has had similar issues in her part of New South Wales. The stories are true. They are real and consistent.

Ms Liesl Tesch: The Liberal Government did nothing to fix it. A Labor Government was needed to make the changes to protect those people.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: I note the interjection by the member for Gosford. We have the ability to upgrade, update and change the issues, as there is a statutory review.

Ms Liesl Tesch: The Liberal Government has had the ability since 2021 and did not do a thing.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: I continue to note the interjections by the member for Gosford. She will have her turn to speak and I am sure she will be listened to in silence, which is the courteous way we conduct debate in this Chamber. Whether it be Helena Conway, Bob Morris, Kristy Lee, Trevor, Peter, Janelle, Nina or Troy, those people deserve to have this legislation cleaned up and improved. I note that people were called to sit in the gallery yesterday and then had to make the trip back home because the bill was delayed. I was heartened to see the submissions made to the statutory review by those residents and others—I think the member for Ballina made her own submission—because that is how we do legislation. It is frustratingly slow at times. I say to Government members that they have an opportunity to continue this.

Ms Liesl Tesch: You should have done it.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: I note the continued interjection by the member for Gosford. The member for Gosford can take this up with her Minister.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): The member for Gosford will cease interjecting.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: Where a fixed method currently allows for more than two variables, a new agreement between affected home owners and the operator must be in place before the next site fee increase. If the member for Gosford is so gung-ho about doing everything straight away, she can bring that up with her Minister and see if he would like to introduce it. It could provide extra protection to residents. Even the amendment does not close every loophole. If the member for Gosford spent time with people, she would understand that. Rather than throw spears across the Chamber, the member for Gosford could do more too. One option is to talk to her Minister about going further. She has every opportunity to do it.

Ms Liesl Tesch: The hypocrisy. Opposition members had three years.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: To be frank, it has been an arduous process for everybody involved, not just on the Central Coast but also in Ballina, the Tweed and Lake Macquarie. All members in this place have seen the frustration and are doing everything we can to make sure that the loopholes are now closed. It is incumbent upon us to continue to modify and amend legislation to protect vulnerable people who need our support from the rogue, predatory behaviour of those who seek to wrong them. I am pleased to see the review brought forward. Government members have had 12 months since the election. They could have introduced the bill in that time. They cannot lecture me about doing things quickly. They had 12 months since coming into government and they could have introduced it earlier. I wrote to their Minister multiple times, as I did to mine, asking for it to be introduced. They should not lecture me about timing. They have sat on this issue for 12 months, despite my multiple representations to their Minister and to the previous two Ministers. That was before a review.

The Government has an opportunity to go further if it wishes, and if it can, regarding what I have highlighted. I strongly suggest that the Minister consider it as an improvement to the bill. Members know that no legislation is perfect, and the bill is far from it. People up and down the coast have been taken advantage of, and it is absolutely disgusting. I am pleased that the changes are being introduced and people will get the additional protection they need. I will stand with them every single day, as I have done and will continue to do. The way those people have been treated is appalling. I have not wavered once in supporting them and approaching the previous two Ministers and the current Minister to highlight the same issues. The bill is a good step forward, but there is more to be done to give additional protections to those people.

I acknowledge the Minister for introducing the bill 12 months after the election. I acknowledge the fact that we have had incredible consultation with many local stakeholders up and down the east coast who have been affected by this issue. We need to ensure that this sort of behaviour to the most vulnerable in our society is never allowed to continue anywhere. I suspect that we will continue to amend the legislation because people spend a lot of time looking for loopholes, and that is not in the spirit of why we legislate. I am pleased to support the bill and the amendment being moved. Let us be serious: A Government amendment is being moved by the member for Lake Macquarie because it still did not get it right. Government members cannot lecture me. They had 12 months and they still needed to move an amendment to cover the fact that they did not get it right. They should not lecture me. They talk about hypocrisy; that is hypocrisy. The main thing is that we are getting this done for the thousands of people who live in residential land lease residencies, to make sure it never happens again.

Ms Liesl Tesch: We are getting it done. Opposition members did nothing.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: The member for Gosford says that, but the Government has had 12 months as well. She cannot lecture me.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): Members will come to order.

Mr ADAM CROUCH: I thank Bob for all the time he has spent working with residents and coming up with the suggested amendments and changes. I thank the residents tenancy council. We must continue to stamp out recalcitrant behaviour. I am proud to stand with my residents on this issue. It has been disgusting to see and the sooner we can stop this behaviour anywhere in New South Wales, the better. We must continue to monitor the legislation, because as long as we make legislation, people will try to find loopholes. We must make sure that if a loophole opens up, we make another amendment and shut that one down as well. I commend the bill to the House. I commend the Minister for bringing it to the House. I commend the member for Lake Macquarie for the amendment that he will move, albeit on behalf of the Government.

The fact is the amendment is being moved. I again thank Bob Morris and the residents of Kincumber Nautical Village and Pine Needles Village who have come to see me. I thank all the residents who live in residential tenancy communities on the Central Coast for coming forward with their stories. Those stories have been incredibly confronting. We need to ensure we never allow this to happen to anyone else.

Ms JULIA FINN (Granville) (20:29): I make a contribution to the debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. This bill is a long-awaited, incredibly important piece of legislation. The Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 regulates the relationship between operators and people who live in residential land lease communities. These communities include residents who usually own the homes they live in but lease the land on which the homes sit from a community operator. Traditionally, these were caravan parks, and many have been operating for decades. More than 34,000 people across New South Wales live in 518 residential land lease communities. They are mainly in coastal areas, but 23 of these communities exist in Sydney. Some residents of these communities are also tenants who rent their homes from home owners. The communities are distinguished from holiday parks, where occupancy is limited to 180 days per year. Residential land lease communities represent an important facet of our housing landscape, offering an alternative for those seeking lower cost housing or who want to live in a community.

A statutory review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act was completed in 2021, with the review report tabled in Parliament in November 2021. The report was based on responses to a discussion paper published in late 2020. When that discussion paper was published, I was the responsible shadow Minister. I spoke with many residents and operators about the issues raised in the discussion paper. The review found that the Act generally remains valid and fit for purpose, but also made 48 recommendations to improve the Act's effectiveness. Notably, 35 per cent of respondents to the discussion paper said they had negative or extremely negative experiences of living in residential land lease communities. The Government hopes to address those issues. The former Government failed to introduce any legislation to implement the recommendations of the review, despite residents and stakeholders calling for change for years.

The New South Wales Labor Government has listened and acted. The bill before the House implements 21 of the 48 recommendations of the statutory review. It is the first stage of the Government's plan to improve residential land lease community laws in New South Wales. At its heart, the bill seeks to maintain the relevance and effectiveness of our residential land lease community laws, ensuring they remain fit for purpose and support vibrant and sustainable residential land lease communities across New South Wales. The bill also demonstrates the New South Wales Labor Government's commitment to help people across the State with cost-of-living pressures.

The bill will introduce a range of reforms that will significantly benefit operators and residents. Firstly, the bill will make fixed method site fee increases clearer and easier to understand for residents. It limits operators to use a single element to calculate a site fee increase under the fixed method. Operators will need to review and update any existing agreements that do not comply with these new requirements. This is important because home owners now face convoluted and confusing fixed method calculations for site fee increases. In fact, it is only by talking to neighbours that residents find out how divergent the mechanisms for site increases are, as they change over time with new entry contracts. Increases are often calculated by multiple different methods across a community.

Second, the bill will mandate that when an operator issues a by-notice site fee increase, they must set out more information about the reasons for the increase. This will foster transparency and accountability between operators and residents. Third, the bill enhances the enjoyment of home owners of their homes by granting them greater autonomy and allows for certain minor changes to their homes without the need for operator consent. Fourth, and crucially, the bill introduces a price cap for electricity charges in the 40 per cent of communities with embedded networks. This is an important reform that stakeholders have strongly advocated for over several years. Residents have been subjected to price gouging, unmetered supply and no options to shop around for cheaper energy suppliers.

The bill will also make utility billing in residential land lease communities consistent with the requirements under national energy rules. This will ensure that residents in communities have the same transparency and clarity about their utility bills as everyone else. The bill also brings more transparency to communities by requiring operators to disclose information about proposed developments that may impact residents. This will foster a culture of informed decision making and community engagement. Additionally, the bill improves the voluntary sharing arrangement provisions, striking a balance between flexibility and protection for vulnerable homebuyers. This supports fair and equitable transactions. The bill also safeguards the rights of home owners facing termination due to circumstances beyond their control, ensuring that they are treated justly. The bill includes other minor amendments to modernise and clarify the laws.

One of the main concerns that stakeholders brought up during the statutory review of the Act was operators' use of complex calculations when increasing site fees under the fixed method for site fee increases. There are known cases where convoluted formulas were used to determine increases in site fees. This has made it difficult for home owners to anticipate and budget for future fee increases, leading to uncertainty and financial strain. Multiple submissions to the review referred toKincumber Nautical Village Pty Ltd v Morris & Ors, where a group of residents disputed a very convoluted mechanism for site fee increases: The fixed method used by the Kincumber community provider at the time of the dispute included any positive change in the CPI, plus 3.75 per cent; plus a proportional share of any increase in costs incurred by the operator since the calculation of the last site fee increase; plus a calculation for electricity and water; plus gas; plus communications; plus insurance; plus rates; plus any other Government charges or taxes other than company tax; plus the effect of any change in the rate of GST or a similar tax that is included in the site fees. It was a long and very complicated list of possible reasons for fee increases.

On 14 September 2021 the appeal panel of the tribunal set aside the original decision made inKincumber Nautical Village Pty Ltd v Morris & Ors that the fixed fee method breached the Act. The tribunal found that it is irrelevant if a fixed fee method has multiple components as long as the increase in any given year can be calculated or ascertained definitely and is a "fixed calculation". Submissions to the review argued that such complex calculations do not enable certainty for many home owners and have led to compounding increases that make sites unaffordable as the increases vastly exceed inflation. Moreover, a number of home owner submissions claimed that most site agreements are offered on a take it or leave it basis, with little or no opportunity for the home owner to negotiate its terms.

The bill will limit operators to use a single element to calculate fee increases under the fixed method for site fee increases. This will enhance clarity and predictability for home owners, allowing them to accurately forecast and plan for future expenses. Furthermore, the bill requires operators to review and update existing site agreements that use multiple elements for fee calculations. The bill will also limit the number of times that site fees can increase under the fixed method to once per year, aligned to the existing 12-month limit for by-notice site fee increases. This limit does not extend to increases tied to the age pension, which will be limited to twice per year.

Electricity charging in communities with electricity embedded networks has been a complex problem for decades and has posed significant challenges for residents and operators. In 2018, the NSW Court of Appeal held in the case ofSilva Portfolios Pty Ltd trading as Ballina Waterfront Village & Tourist Park v Reckless that an operator cannot charge a home owner more than the operator has been charged for electricity that the home owner consumes. This was an important decision that should have triggered immediate action from the former Government. Instead, we had a series of perverse outcomes that failed to address the underlying issues with embedded networks. This has resulted in complex electricity charging that is hard for residents to understand and budget for. Operators are not able to recover justifiable business costs to administer and maintain their embedded networks, and third-party suppliers have taken over the running of electricity embedded networks. They are able to charge residents any prices that they want.

It is imperative that we tackle this issue now to ensure fairness and better outcomes for all stakeholders involved. By introducing a new price cap for what operators and third-party suppliers can charge for electricity in communities with embedded networks, this bill will finally resolve the longstanding electricity-charging issues that the sector has battled with. The cap will be set at the median market price and end price gouging. The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal will set this price for each relevant distribution area in New South Wales. The NSW Fair Trading Commissioner will publish this information online, so all operators and residents are made aware of the prices. The IPART has recently considered reforms to the regulation of embedded networks as a whole. The electricity charging reforms in this bill are an interim measure while the Government considers how best to address recommendations from IPART's review. This will benefit all residents who rely on embedded networks for their energy needs. [Extension of time]

It is vital that residents have enough information to support them to advocate for their interests and enable them to make the best decisions. More transparency between home owners and operators fosters cooperative relationships and reduces the frequency of disputes. In line with the statutory review recommendations, the bill introduces small changes to require operators to share more information with residents. For example, an operator will have to give written notice to potentially affected residents where an operator seeks to lodge a development application or planning proposal that may affect the community. That means that an operator may need to advise residents about a proposal that could result in residents no longer having access to certain facilities or that could impact day-to-day living in the community.

The Government acknowledges that the new information‑sharing obligations on operators, although likely to increase their administrative work, are important. When I discussed the 2020 discussion paper with residents of land lease communities, many raised concerns about not knowing about development applications for their communities. I was alarmed to hear of residents who, in one instance, had been sold homes and leased sites where there was no development application in place, which resulted in council ordering that the homes be removed because they presented a flood risk.

The bill aims to ensure any administrative burden is limited as much as possible. The Government wants to support operators to get on with the day-to-day business of ensuring that their communities are running well so that residents can enjoy their time living there. The proposed reforms in the bill represent a significant step towards enhancing the rights of and protections for residents in residential land lease communities. However, the bill recognises the important role of operators and also takes into account operators' needs so that they can continue to provide that important housing option in New South Wales. By improving transparency, promoting clarity and safeguarding fairness in those communities, the Government upholds its commitment to ensuring thriving and equitable communities across New South Wales. The Government looks forward to continuing to engage with stakeholders on the remaining recommendations of the statutory review so it can continue to support both operators and residents.

Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (20:41): I am pleased to speak in support of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024 and I thank the Minister and his team for the work that they have put into the bill. Residential land lease communities are found mostly, although certainly not exclusively, on the coastal strip of New South Wales. In my electorate of Lake Macquarie there are many, but I recognise that there are many on the Central Coast and the North Coast. Along with the member for Wyong and the member for Gosford, I am well versed in the situation and familiar with the frustration and despair that we find when we talk to the residents of some of those communities. The bill will be well received and much appreciated by many of those towns. The electorate of Lake Macquarie has been grappling with the issue for some time. I have been dealing with a number of people who understand it, but they are getting older. It is so frustrating that they should have to do this. They do not have the energy anymore. It is heartbreaking for them to have to go through this year after year, so this bill is a great outcome.

Residential land lease communities have historically provided an affordable housing option, particularly for those over 55 years of age, in rural and regional areas. They can play a significant role in assisting with the housing crisis in this State, but reform is needed to encourage the growth and viability of this housing option and to ensure that homeowners and residents, many of whom are elderly and reliant on government support payments, are protected from unfair business practices. The statutory review of the Residential Land Lease Communities Act was undertaken in 2021, nearly three years ago. The review made 48 recommendations to ensure that the Act provides better and fairer outcomes for homeowners, residents and operators. The almost 41,000 residents of land lease communities in New South Wales have now been waiting for nearly three years to see the reforms implemented. I congratulate this Government on doing the work to implement the reforms since it was elected last year.

Land lease communities have changed over the past 10 years. Many large multinational corporations are moving into the sector and the communities are increasingly profitable for operators. On the flip side, many residents and landowners are on fixed incomes, reliant on statutory increases. Site fee increases in many communities are set by the operators and are non-negotiable. Many are also tied, in part, to the consumer price index [CPI]. With significant CPI increases in recent years outpacing increases in statutory income rates, my constituents are telling me that site fees are becoming increasingly unaffordable.

While the proposed amendments in the bill will not address all the recommendations of the statutory review, they do address significant issues, which will, I hope, ease some cost‑of‑living pressures for vulnerable residents. Those include introducing a price cap for electricity charges in communities with embedded networks for electricity. That will provide greater certainty for residents and operators. The bill also aims to reduce complexity and uncertainty around site fee increases by limiting operators to using a single element to calculate site fees under the fixed method and requiring operators to provide more information about reasons for increases, where increases occur by notice. As has been mentioned by the member for Terrigal in his wideranging contribution, I foreshadow that I will move an amendment relating to the proposed transitional period for operators to enter into compliant agreements, noting that operators have been on notice of the proposed changes for almost three years. The amendment will set the transitional period for entering into compliant site agreements from three years to 12 months.

I understand that the proposed reforms in the bill are just the first step in the reform process, which will implement further recommendations made in the 2021 statutory review. I accept that some of the reforms are complex and it will take time to ensure that they strike the right balance and do not lead to unintended consequences. The bill is a good start but there is more work to be done. However, I am confident that the Government recognises the importance of housing reform in this State. I encourage the Government to press on to ensure that the next tranche of residential land lease community reforms occur in this term of government.

I acknowledge the contributions from the member for Terrigal and the member for Granville. It is heartening to see the understanding of the members, and I can assume that that will be a continuing trend as members speak tonight. I know that the member for Gosford in particular and the member for Wyong are very well versed on this issue. It is so pleasing that we can come together, although there was a little bit of argy-bargy across the table from the member for Gosford and the member for Terrigal. We are all on a unity ticket in this. It will be a great outcome for many people living in residential land lease communities.

Ms LIESL TESCH (Gosford) (20:47): It gives me great pride to speak on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. The bill represents a significant step forward in improving transparency and safeguarding fairness for residential land lease communities across New South Wales. I acknowledge that there many members in the Chamber tonight who believe this matter is important for our communities. We have heard about the problems in those communities for some time, at least since the legislation of the Carr Labor Government was—in the words of one the residents of a land lease village in my community—murdered by the Liberal Government. It is time to get things right again. I am glad to be part of a government that is righting a wrong that has impacted so many vulnerable people across our communities.

I acknowledge Kevin and Rodney, who came down from the Kincumber Nautical Village yesterday to watch the bill be debated. I am sad for them because they were in the gallery, waiting and waiting. I thank them for being here last night. The member for Terrigal mentioned Bob Morris, who has been a real champion for change and the voice of residential land lease community residents across New South Wales. He is an amazing man who went into the tedium, the nitty-gritty and the fine print of the previous legislation—or the lack of fine print of the previous legislation that allowed the absolute exploitation of poor residents living in the land lease villages. The Kincumber Nautical Village in the Terrigal electorate is possibly the most exploited community among the land lease communities across New South Wales.

I am sad to have to say such things in Parliament on behalf of the people in that Terrigal village, but it takes a Labor Government to make the changes. There was a statutory review in 2021, but that review sat on the desks of Coalition Ministers and nothing was done. I am glad to be part of a Labor Government that is making changes that are supported by Liberal and Nationals members. The Greens members and the member for Lake Macquarie also support the changes. Bring it on and let's put things in place. I thank the member for Lake Macquarie for pushing the amendment to bring those changes forward and put further protections in place to make sure the residents are protected as early as they possibly can be.

The bill implements 21 of the 48 recommendations of the statutory review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013, and there is more to come to provide as much support as we can for people living in affordable housing across New South Wales. This is a really important component, with approximately 40,000 people living in that sort of legislated space in our State. The bill follows the inaction of the previous Government. While the residents of the Kincumber Nautical Village may have been visited by the member for Terrigal, he did nothing to make any changes. The former Liberal Government listened but did nothing, so it is important that changes are being made on behalf of the people living in residential land lease communities across New South Wales.

In 2020 I used parliamentary privilege to speak against the owner of the Kincumber Nautical Village, Theo Whitmont, who has abused his power and has shown the utmost disrespect to the residents of that village. He has also disrespected the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal [NCAT]. I said that in 2020 and I back it up. The owner's father, the owner of a mobile home park, hosted a fundraiser for Liberal MP Chris Hartcher. An article inThe Sydney Morning Herald in 2014 speaks of the owner's father sitting in the gallery whilst Anthony Roberts, the Minister at the time—in the words of a resident of the village—"murdered" the good legislation that had been put in place by the Carr Labor Government so that the owner of the land lease village in Kincumber could exploit the residents by charging them more than he needed to for living in their own homes. Those people bought into their homes in good faith.

Nothing has changed since that review in 2021. Despite numerous visits to NCAT and even the Supreme Court, the owner continues to exploit vulnerable residents with absolutely unfair price hikes using the supposed fixed method of price increases. It includes a number of variables that lead to very high price increases and very inconsistent practices. That was enabled by poorly written legislation that was introduced by the Liberal Party, to which the park owner's father donated. It is almost a tragedy in corruption.

I thank the Kincumber Nautical Village Residents Committee, led by Bob Morris and Terry Davidson, who have fought tirelessly for changes and were ignored by the previous Government. I also thank the Tenants' Union of NSW for its work supporting tenants of land lease communities across New South Wales, particularly Bob and the residents of Kincumber Nautical Village in their numerous journeys to NCAT and the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Kincumber Nautical Village is home to approximately 500 residents. Those wonderful human beings include some of the Central Coast's most vulnerable community members—seniors, people with disabilities and single‑parent families living on very low fixed incomes, supported by the Government. The village is in a beautiful location and it is their home, their dream, their retirement luxury and possibly their final destination. It is their piece of paradise.

Whilst the owner makes a considerable profit—with $4.2 million collected from residents and a total cost of only $1.1 million—the roads are left potholed, the tennis court has weeds growing out of it and the swimming pool is full of cracks. There is a deep unhappiness because of the financial actions of owner and Liberal Party donor Theo Whitmont. Approximately 40,000 people live in land lease villages across New South Wales. They are an important part of our affordable housing jigsaw, especially for our seniors. But these days, more and more young people who cannot afford to get into the housing market are moving into residential land lease villages, so anything we can do in this place to protect those families and individuals is really important.

The bill will implement 21 recommendations of the statutory review, making fixed-method site fee increases clearer and easier to understand while limiting operators like Theo Whitmont—who exploited poor legislation implemented by the previous Liberal Government—to a single element to calculate site fee increases. The bill will also require operators to review and update existing agreements that do not comply with that requirement. It will also require that information be provided about the reasons for the increase when an operator issues a site fee increase by notice. I encourage all interpreters of the legislation to be very precise when overseeing the dodgy Theo Whitmont, given his previous hopeless effort to justify increasing prices. If members look into that case in further detail, they will see his financial exploitation of those residents.

The implementation of the amendments to the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 will make a huge difference to the lives of the many residents across New South Wales—including the Kincumber Nautical Village—who are currently on a fixed method of site fee increase, which involves the aggregation of 10 separate elements. Limiting fixed-method increases to one element only will fundamentally improve the predictability of cost‑of‑living increases in the lives of residents.

The impact of a bill such as this is sometimes lost in complex detail, so I will share some personal stories of the residents of Kincumber Nautical Village to illustrate what the changes will mean for them. Daryl Rowe is a proud Wiradjuri man who moved into the village in February 2016, and I thank Daryl for sharing his story. After purchasing his house, Daryl was faced with two separate increases, meaning that he was paying over $26 a week more in site fees by November 2016. That is an increase of more than 15 per cent for the smallest site in the village. Daryl is on a disability pension and half his pension goes to site fees, leaving him to make difficult decisions about food, medicine, heating, home maintenance and insurance. There is not enough money for everything. In November 2023, Daryl faced another site fee increase of $25 per week. Abolishing the multi‑element method will give Daryl a glimmer of hope for the future. [Extension of time]

Colleen Butcher moved into the village in March 2018 with her husband, Barry. After Barry unfortunately passed away early last year, Colleen found herself on a single pension income and not able to cope financially. She is now facing difficult decisions about her future living arrangements. The majority of residents in the village are single welfare recipients like Colleen. I have previously spoken in this place about Leni, a single mum with two kids who receives a carer's pension. Her seven-year-old daughter has Down syndrome and significant medical concerns. She is a fantastic mother and a qualified social worker, and yet still only has $40 per week left to feed her family of three. If the site fees had not increased then she would have had, in her words, plenty to feed the family.

Finally, Noleen Smith retired to Kincumber Nautical Village and received a letter saying she was on a notice method. Last year she received an increase of $53 a fortnight, taking her site fees to half her pension. It becomes very clear to me when I am out and about in my community and going to places where food banks operate. No matter where I am across my electorate—which is not even the Terrigal electorate, where the Kincumber Nautical Village is located—I often see people from the village collecting food because they cannot afford to pay for food as well as the site fee increases on their own homes.

The bill addresses the concerns of residents about operators' use of complex calculations when increasing site fees under the fixed method and will limit operators using a single element to calculate fee increases under that method, thereby enhancing clarity and predictability for home owners. Under the bill, site fees will only be increased once per year, further increasing financial predictability. The bill will grant greater autonomy, allowing for minor changes to residents' homes without the need for operator consent. Finally, the bill introduces a price cap for electricity charges in communities with embedded networks.

The Minns Labor Government has delivered on what the former Coalition Government failed to do. A resident of the Kincumber Nautical Village described the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024 as "a lifeline of hope for some of the most vulnerable in the community". The bill addresses 21 of the 48 recommendations and the Government will work with the residents of the Kincumber Nautical Village, the Tenants' Union and other stakeholder groups across New South Wales to further improve the lives of people living in residential land lease villages.

Once again, I thank the Minister and his team—some of whom live on the Central Coast. The New South Wales Government will deliver for the community, providing certainty to residents and an opportunity to live out their years free from the burden of unsustainable and unfair business practices. By improving transparency, promoting clarity and safeguarding fairness, the Government is committed to ensuring thriving and equitable communities across New South Wales. In closing, I also thank those very good, reputable land lease village owners who really look after their residents.

Mr GEOFF PROVEST (Tweed) (20:59): I am pleased to contribute to debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. At the outset it must be noted that 95 per cent of land leases are in regional New South Wales. In the Tweed there are a large number of residential land lease communities. Importantly, the bill will enhance the rights and protection of home owners in those communities. In a residential land lease community, you own the home you live in but you lease the land from the community operator. The bill implements 21 of the 48 recommendations made by the 2021 statutory review of the Act initiated in 2020 by former Minister Kevin Anderson. I note that the current Minister in his second reading speech indicated that the Government will continue to engage with stakeholders on the remaining 27 recommendations not included in this bill.

One of the key issues addressed in the bill is the way in which electricity charges are applied within communities with electricity embedded networks. Embedded networks are private energy networks for services such as electricity, heated and chilled water and gas. I served on the Committee on Law and Safety with the member for Mount Druitt and the member for Kellyville. The way a lot of the residents were being ripped off by unscrupulous dealers was quite disgusting. Many residential land lease communities use an embedded network for their electricity needs. The community operator is usually responsible for the supply of electricity through the network. Residents generally cannot choose to get their electricity from someone else. Given that lack of consumer choice, I completely agree with the Minister that it is critical that those consumers are protected from excessive prices and can understand the pricing in a clear and transparent manner.

Electricity charging in communities with embedded networks is complex, time-consuming and uncertain for operators and home owners. As a result, some operators have outsourced to third-party electricity retailers. Due to a gap in the law, third-party providers can charge residents as much as they want for electricity. The bill implements a price cap to ensure that residents in communities with embedded networks are not paying excessive electricity charges compared with residents in communities without an embedded network. The bill will also reduce the complexity of billing for operators, allow operators to recover the costs of maintaining their embedded networks and give residents much-needed clarity and certainty about how much they can expect to pay for their electricity.

Importantly, the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal [IPART] will set the median market price in New South Wales. The supporting regulation will require IPART to determine that price every 12 months and give notice of that to the Fair Trading Commissioner. The commissioner will then have to publish the required information on a publicly available website, making it accessible for operators and third parties. At least once a year, the electricity supplier for the community must give written notice of the charges they pay for the electricity supply to residents. At least once every two years, the electricity supplier will need to review and compare their electricity supply contract with at least one other comparable offer from another electricity retailer. If the contract is more than two years, then the supplier will need to review the contract after its expiry before a new one is entered into. The supplier will also need to give each resident written notice of their review. Those changes are commonsense and improve transparency between home owners and operators.

Another issue raised by residents of land lease communities in my electorate concerns site fees and methods of increase. I note the bill restricts "fixed method" site fee increases to once per 12-month period and stipulates that the calculation for those increases can rely on only one factor. The single factor could be, for example, a percentage of the aged pension, a fixed percentage amount or an increase in proportion to variations in the consumer price index. That will increase certainty and clarity on how the fee was derived. The bill will also require operators to review and update all existing agreements that use more than one factor to calculate a "fixed method" site fee increase within three years of the commencement of the amendments. The Coalition broadly supports those changes to the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 and the positive impact the amendments will have on the safety and privacy of home owners, particularly in the Tweed. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr EDMOND ATALLA (Mount Druitt) (21:04): I make a brief contribution to debate in support of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. The bill introduces amendments to the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 for the purpose of improving the legislative framework and regulatory framework for residential land lease communities and to provide clarity on the rights and obligations of the people who live in and the operators of those communities. The bill permits operators to increase site fees by using either the "by-notice" method or "fixed" method. The "fixed" method makes the increases easier to understand and more predictable for the home owners, while the "by-notice" method provides more information to the home owners about the reason for the increase of the site fees.

When entering into a site agreement, the operator and the home owner will be required to agree to the use of one of those methods. The purpose of that change is to eliminate confusion. It is the case that some operators use complex calculations to increase their site fees. Under the "fixed" method, operators will be restricted to using a single element when calculating a site fee increase. The bill requires operators to review and update all existing agreements that use more than one element to calculate a "fixed method" site fee increase within three years of the commencement of the amendments. That means that home owners and operators need to agree on a new way to increase the site fees.

If an agreement is not entered into within three years, the "by-notice" method will become the default method. Site fee increases made by the "by-notice" method must provide more information to the home owner about the reasons for the increase. If fees increase due to a higher cost for specific items, the operator must provide the relevant information to the home owner, such as the item details, how much those costs have gone up since the last fee increase and the details of how the operator has calculated those costs in relation to the increase.

The bill addresses issues with electricity charging in communities with electricity embedded networks. Embedded networks are privately owned energy networks that provide services such as electricity, heated and chilled water and gas. Residents of that community do not usually have a choice as to where they get their electricity from. As such, it is important that consumers are protected from excessive prices and that they understand the pricing. The bill introduces a new price cap that operators and third parties can charge residents for the use and supply of electricity in communities with embedded networks. That change will ensure that residents are not paying extreme electricity prices compared with those in communities without embedded networks. It will also allow the operators to recover the costs of maintaining their embedded networks.

Currently the Act does not specify requirements about what information an operator is required to include on a resident's utility bill or how often those bills can be issued. The bill outlines the minimum information required to be set out in utility bills. It requires that utility bills be issued to the home owners and tenants at least once every three months. That is consistent with the requirements that apply to gas and electricity bills. In order to create a separation between home owner rights and the rights of the community and operators, the bill allows for home owners to make minor changes to the property without the consent of the operator.

Further, the bill states that operators are only allowed to enter a home in certain situations, being when a resident consents or in an emergency situation where it is necessary to avoid danger to life. The bill requires an operator to give written notice to all potentially affected residents when they are seeking to lodge a development application or planning proposal that may affect the residential land lease community. They must give notice at least 30 days before they lodge the proposal and are required to include a summary of the proposal. The bill makes changes to the voluntary sharing arrangement provisions of the Act. It requires operators to provide prospective home owners with written information regarding the costs of a voluntary sharing arrangement and the costs of a rent-only agreement.

The bill mandates that operators must test a community's emergency evacuation procedures at least once a year and keep a record of those tests. If a site is not allowed to be used as a residential site under relevant laws, the operator could terminate a site agreement. However, the operator must pay the home owner compensation if they did not know that the site was not to be used for residential purposes at the time they signed the site agreement. Further, the bill increases the time to vacate a residential site from 90 days to 120 days after the home owner receives a termination notice. The amendments in the bill aim to protect both residents and operators of residential land lease communities. It supports the growth of those communities in New South Wales by providing balance to the legislative framework. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr TIM JAMES (Willoughby) (21:11): I lead for the Opposition in debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. I indicate the Coalition's support of the bill. The Liberals and Nationals acknowledge Labor's support of aspects of the Coalition's reform work that was aimed at maintaining the regulatory standards for land lease communities and operators. The reforms are aimed at enhancing the rights and protections of home owners in residential land lease communities. The bill originates from the statutory review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 that was initiated in 2020 under the leadership of then Minister Kevin Anderson.

I put a few clear facts on record. The review aimed to ensure that the Act's objectives continued to meet contemporary standards. A 47-page discussion paper was released, and the review generated 350 submissions and 100 survey responses over two rounds of public consultation. The final report of the statutory review was published in November 2021. It was a 54‑page report containing 48 recommendations. The review confirmed that the legislation was functioning effectively, with over half of the residents reporting a positive living experience in those communities. However, 48 recommendations were made to further enhance the legislation's impact on those communities.

Much was said by the Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading and those opposite about the previous Government's urgency or, they might submit, lack thereof in implementing the findings of the statutory review. I say once again that there were 48 recommendations, hundreds of submissions and a lot of work to get through. The Government has now taken well over a year when the work had already been done. The Government has opted for the easy approach and left out 27 of the 48 recommendations. When the Minister speaks of taking action, I assume that he means delayed, lazy Labor policymaking. It should be noted that at no stage over the course of 12 years did those opposite seek to amend or update the legislation.

Mr David Harris: I will give you a history lesson about 1998.

Mr TIM JAMES: I will not be lectured to by those opposite when it comes to taking action on these matters. There are another 27 recommendations. My helpful advice to those opposite is to get on with it. They are doing less than half of the job.

Mr Edmond Atalla: Why didn't you do it when you were in government?

Mr TIM JAMES: You are in government. You have had over 12 months.

Mr Edmond Atalla: You had 12 years.

Mr TIM JAMES: We did the homework. The hard work has been done. Members opposite should now get on with the job.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Ms Donna Davis): Order! Members will come to order.

Mr TIM JAMES: I urge the Government to proceed with the remaining recommendations because they reflect the wishes of the land lease communities. With more than 500 communities across Australia, and over 40,000 individuals occupying homes, residential land lease communities play a crucial role in housing diversity in New South Wales. As house prices continue to soar and the cost-of-living and housing crises worsen under Labor, an increasing number of individuals are seeking accommodation in land lease communities. Some 95 per cent of those communities are located in regional and rural New South Wales, and the bill significantly impacts areas such as the Central Coast and the Shoalhaven.

The bill proposes to make a variety of amendments that include 21 of the 48 recommendations made by the review. It proposes to make changes to voluntary sharing arrangements in site agreements whereby home owners will no longer have to pay entry and exit fees to the operator. Operators must also first offer a rent‑only site agreement to new residents before offering an agreement that includes a voluntary sharing arrangement. Operators must also provide information to new residents about the cost of both the rent-only option and the voluntary sharing arrangement.

The bill mandates that community operators must test emergency evacuation procedures at least once per year and maintain a record of those tests, ensuring enhanced safety and preparedness for all residents. Entry to a home on a residential site is now restricted to three specific conditions: with the home owner's consent, in life‑threatening emergencies or under an order from the tribunal. The Coalition agrees that the provisions enhance the privacy and security protections for residents. Home owners now have more freedom to make minor modifications to their homes without needing the operator's consent. Although, it is the Coalition view that the alterations must not invade the privacy of neighbouring homes.

Issues have been raised by various stakeholders regarding the site fee increase being reduced to a single factor. The Caravan and Camping Industry Association NSW [CCIA] has highlighted the importance of a two‑factor site fee increase to allow operators to be fairly compensated for community upgrades. In addition to the site fee increases, it was recommended by the statutory review that operators have a transition period of three years from the commencement of the proposed amendments to identify and modify all existing site agreements that employ multiple elements in calculating fee increases. The amendment to have a 12-month, not three‑year, transition period is accepted by the Coalition. It should be noted that it is not supported by all stakeholders. As my colleague the member for Terrigal eloquently explained, the Opposition understands and supports the amendment in the circumstances and given the broad consumer support.

Further, some of the amendments in the bill focus on ensuring fair electricity charges for home owners and tenants in residential communities with embedded networks. The bill establishes guidelines to prevent excessive charges, requiring operators to provide written notice of electricity fees and periodically review contracts. Additionally, it sets limits on late payment fees and mandates compliance with billing regulations. Provisions for a review within three years have been included for those measures to ensure that they remain effective and relevant.

The Coalition is in broad support of the amendments that relate to utility charges in land lease communities, as they attempt to improve transparency between home owners and operators. Both the Affiliated Residential Park Residents Association and the CCIA raised concerns about the omission of the "principal place of residence" test from the bill. Understandably, there is a concern that land banking is happening with respect to those precious sites. I encourage the Minister to tackle and address that concern in the second tranche of reforms to come. I thank the Minister for the conversations that we have constructively engaged in.

The Coalition broadly supports the amendments to the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 that emphasise increased safety and privacy for home owners. I thank the various stakeholders for their engagement and advice during the consultation process, including the Affiliated Residential Park Residents Association, in particular Gary Martin; the Caravan and Camping Industry Association NSW, in particular Bob Browne; and the Tenants' Union of NSW. As others have, I acknowledge the significant, tireless work of Bob Morris from Kincumber Nautical Village. I spoke to Bob the other day. I commend and thank him for his hard work over a long period. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr DAVID SALIBA (Fairfield) (21:19): I support the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. I commend the Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading for his work in this space. The bill seeks to amend the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 to implement various recommendations arising from the statutory review of the Act. According to data from Fair Trading NSW, close to 500 land lease communities in New South Wales accommodate about 34,000 residents, from permanent home owners and tourists to long-term casual occupants. All land lease communities are covered by the Act.

A statutory review report of the Act was tabled in Parliament in November 2021 and identified 48 recommendations for improvement of the Act. The bill implements 21 of those recommendations and will implement numerous changes, including the requirement of site fee increases to be made by notice that includes reasons for the increase, allowing home owners to make certain minor changes to their homes without operator consent, requiring operators to test their emergency procedures at least once a year to ensure they are prepared to respond to emergencies, and changes to termination provisions requiring operators to give home owners 120 days' notice rather than 90 days' notice of the end of their agreements.

Electricity reforms are also included in the bill as a temporary measure until the recommendations of the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal have been considered by Government and implemented. These much‑needed changes balance the rights and responsibilities of home owners and operators, and provide fairer outcomes for all parties. The changes enacted by the bill improve the operation of the Act so it better balances the interests of residents and operators, and supports land lease communities as a viable housing option in New South Wales. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr MICHAEL REGAN (Wakehurst) (21:20): I support the member for Lake Macquarie's sensible amendment to the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. I am very supportive of the bill, which covers 21 of the 48 recommendations from the five‑year statutory review of the Act. However, I note the review was tabled in Parliament in November 2021 and since then inflation has trended higher. I understand extensive stakeholder consultation has taken place. However, I cannot support giving operators three years to phase in the very sensible pricing reform of restricting fixed‑method site increases to one element. I believe one year is more than sufficient.

Some land lease agreements are currently determined by multiple elements, one of which is often the rate of inflation. Since the statutory review report was tabled in 2021, domestic inflation is up 13 per cent and the Reserve Bank currently forecasts inflation to rise another 11 per cent over the three years to 2027. I do not need to go on about the cost‑of‑living and housing crises. Giving operators three years to transition to a fairer model is just not the right thing to do. The residential land lease industry has changed a great deal over the past decade, with large multinationals moving into the sector, buying up communities across the State and developing new communities.

Just last week Stockland announced a $1 billion capital partnership with United States player, lnvesco Real Estate, to pursue growth in whatThe Australian Financial Review called "the red hot land lease communities sub‑sector". On the other side of the coin are the home owners who are primarily over 55. Many are on fixed incomes and site fees are becoming increasingly unaffordable, impacting their ability to pay for other essentials. Three years is too long to transition from the fixed method with multiple variables to a fixed method with a single variable. I simply support the member for Lake Macquarie's amendment.

Mr DAVID HARRIS (Wyong—Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Treaty, Minister for Gaming and Racing, Minister for Veterans, Minister for Medical Research, and Minister for the Central Coast) (21:22): I support the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. I have a number of villages in my electorate, in particular the Heritage village, Palm Springs, Central Coast Mobile Village, Meander Village, and the Oasis Caravan Park. I have been a supporter of reform in this area for a long time. I remember visiting Heritage Caravan Park with former Premier Kristina Keneally and Minister Virginia Judge before the 2011 election to make some commitments about reform. Unfortunately, we did not win government at that stage, so we have waited a very long time for these reforms to come through.

I know that some members opposite who have spoken in the debate have not been in the Parliament for very long, so I will talk a little bit about history so that they understand what has happened in this case. They may or may not know that in 1998 the Carr Labor Government introduced legislation that protected tens of thousands of park residents, mostly pensioners, from sharp increases in rents through a consumer tribunal. At that time the Liberal Party opposed that bill. The parliamentary records show that some of the people who had ownership in Kincumber Village included my grandparents. After my grandmother and grandfather passed away, my mother and her sister sold the house. I know that village very well.

Mr Whitmont sat in the public gallery on 12 November 1998 as the lower House debated Labor's law and the then member for Gosford, Chris Hartcher, spoke against the bill. At the time, the then member for Wyong, Paul Crittenden, who is my esteemed predecessor, commented:

The CCIA is calling the rune of the opposition and has the … honourable member for Gosford [Mr Hartcher] dangling on a string.

We then moved on to the 2011 election and found out afterwards through an ICAC investigation called Operation Spicer, which looked into donations to the Liberal Party on the Central Coast and resulted in 11 members of Parliament resigning and not recontesting, that Norton Whitmont hosted a fundraiser in his Darling Point home for Mr Hartcher and donated to Mr Hartcher's 2011 election campaign. He stood to gain from a law change introduced in 2013 by the then new Liberal Government, which critics said gave landowners the upper hand in raising rents.

In 1998 Labor put protections in place. The Liberal Party was elected in 2011 and brought in laws that put residents at a huge disadvantage. The record shows that—and this is no reflection on then Minister Anthony Roberts because he was not involved in this—other members took donations and influenced that change in policy. The then Liberal Party members, in particular the Liberal member for The Entrance, spoke in support of the Liberal bill and talked about all the parks in his electorate, so obviously was not interested in his constituents. Mr Darren Webber, who defeated me in the election by using a whole lot of money that was improperly gained in terms of running his election campaign, also voted in favour of that legislation. It turns out that Theo Whitmont heavily influenced the new law, and is quoted in all press releases about it.

Mr Whitmont's submission, which was released under freedom of information law, criticised the tribunal reviewing rent increases and called for park owners to be allowed to share in the sale price of residents' homes. That just goes to show that the introduction of the bill has taken the re-election of a Labor Government. It has upset me that members opposite are saying it has taken the Government 12 months to bring forward this legislation whereas this issue goes back as far as 1998. The Liberal Party changed the rules to affect residents negatively and now criticise this Government for putting the balance of power back with residents. I suggest Opposition members learn the history and understand that they conducted a review in 2021 and did nothing. Opposition members should not lecture the Government about how long things have taken because the Liberals changed the law to benefit those residents but it also left those laws in place for many years. Finally, they conducted a statutory review but still did not put any legislation before Parliament. Yet Liberal members come into this House and criticise the Government because we have acted within 12 months.

Mr Tim James: No, not within 12 months.

Mr DAVID HARRIS: Members opposite are a disgrace. I have to say that Government members do what is right for people. We do not take donations that influence policy. What happened in Operation Spicer and the way those people I mentioned took donations—not just from them but from other developers—was an absolute disgrace. Members of this House should never forget that. ICAC now has such a strong presence because of all those things that happened. We now have a Government that wants to do the good things. I hope that members opposite have learnt their lesson from those donations. They should not come in here and lecture us on right and wrong when their history on this issue is so tarnished.

Ms TAMARA SMITH (Ballina) (21:29): The Greens support the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. I have learnt a lot this evening. As the member for Ballina, many of my constituents have come to me over the past nine years with horror stories of what has happened to them and of the treatment of vulnerable people by unscrupulous operators. I thank them. I am not going to name them—I am not judging anyone who is—because, unfortunately, their fear of retribution from those operators is so high that I want to protect them. Recently, one of the operators anonymously defamed me quite significantly and distributed that to hundreds of residents. If they are watching, I am stewing on that. But this is not about me, and it is certainly not about a contest of what has or has not been done.

For eight years I watched the Coalition's glacial pace on this issue. I made a submission to the review in 2021, and I know that my constituents are very happy to see this legislation before us. I commend Labor for getting on with this immediately. Even though many of the review's recommendations have not been implemented yet, I am persuaded by the Minister that a second tranche is coming. The Greens will certainly be monitoring that, but we did not want to do anything that would delay the immediate implementation of this bill. There are 29 residential land lease communities in the Ballina electorate. That is a lot. There is an estimated population of 750 in my electorate who reside in those villages and are affected by the operation of this Act. Since I was elected in 2015 I have met with dozens of constituents who have invested their superannuation in dream locations with like‑minded people and who tell me that what should be a period of joy and peace for them in retirement has instead become a time of financial stress and anxiety due to the behaviour of some of the people and organisations that manage residential land lease communities.

It was interesting to hear from the member for Gosford and others how insipid this is and about the capture by former Ministers and Governments in setting up a system that has so failed vulnerable people. I thank everyone who has spoken to me. There is a particular champion in Lennox Head who has, at huge personal expense and stress, taken on so many cases and supported so many residents going to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Each resident has had to do that every single time. Not only are they intimidated by the operator and not only are they frightened to raise any issues because they may face recrimination, but they also have had to take each matter to the tribunal off their own bat. Add to that the fact that a number of these residential land lease communities in my electorate were severely flood‑impacted. I give a shout-out to Craig Copeland, because he was an extraordinary citizen who, off his own bat, went in to look after some of the residents of Cedars Caravan Park in particular. I saw an absence of leadership from some operators, not all. Add to that mix a severe flood in West Ballina, and it has been horrendous for people.

Members would know that, in our area, due to lack of availability, the cost of rental properties is astronomical for a regional area. Once people have been dispossessed or displaced from those communities, it is very grim indeed. The Greens raised the issue of unreasonable and unjustifiable site fee increases and that residents were not protected by the legislation as it stood. We are glad to see that this legislation sets out particular rights and obligations of operators, including increasing site fees, and that it is simpler and more certain for them. I also give a shout-out to the Tenants' Union and to The Greens spokesperson in the other place, Cate Faehrmann. We had a detailed briefing with the union. We said, "Do you want us to push harder?" and they said, "We are basically satisfied that, at this stage, the changes the bill makes are so important that we want to see it happen as quickly as possible."

One of the big issues was the lack of transparency: the fact that operators do not have to share the financial state of their affairs in terms of the managing of these sites, and the fact that residents do not have any oversight of what is being done with the finances. Any changes that will improve transparency are welcome. As we have heard, the bill implements 21 of the 48 recommendations. The Greens will continue to watch. I thank the Tenants' Union and the residents in my community. We have spoken with Douglas McCloskey from Public Interest Advocacy Centre Ltd, who has said that their concerns were the energy-charging measures. We have heard about the changes to the embedded networks. I had to go in to bat recently for a couple of tenants who wanted to have solar energy; you would think they were asking for the moon. It is absurd that people who are so vulnerable and who do not have any wriggle room are being charged. These people are on pensions or they are self-funded retirees, and there is no buffer zone for many people in these communities. I also hear from retirement villages that what happens to many of those people is homelessness. The genesis of residential land lease communities was affordable housing.

We cannot keep moving the goalposts. I would argue that there is a minority of unscrupulous operators. We have heard about some of them today. I say to the residents in all of my communities that we believe them and hear them, and we are not giving up on this issue. Well done to them for all of their advocacy. I say to that minority of unscrupulous operators that their days are numbered, because once we finish this process we will be attracting more genuine community members who understand the custodianship they have of the people in these communities. The Greens commend the bill to the House.

Ms KATE WASHINGTON (Port Stephens—Minister for Families and Communities, and Minister for Disability Inclusion) (21:39): I make a contribution to this debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024 because residential park residents are a very important constituency of mine in Port Stephens. They are a large cohort of good people, many of whom have experienced challenges where they live due to insecure, unclear and complex laws regulating their lives. Too many of them have experienced exploitation at the hands of unscrupulous park operators. In Port Stephens we have more than 13 residential parks—places that more than 1,300 locals call home. Most of these residents own their home and lease the land on which the home sits from the owner of the site.

Residential parks are a very important part of our community in Port Stephens and an important part of our State's housing mix. It was once the domain of more affordable housing, like Banksia Grove in Williamtown or Sea Winds at Anna Bay. But in recent years we have seen an increase in other housing models operating under the Residential Land Lease Communities Act 2013, the legislation that we are seeking to amend. The housing provided under these newer models can hardly be described as affordable. Relatively new, resort‑style local developments like Latitude One by Ingenia Lifestyle and Sunrise by Hometown are also land lease communities, meaning the laws governing ownership of residents' homes in Latitude One by Ingenia Lifestyle and Emerald Tiki Village are one and the same.

To be clear, the laws that apply to home ownership in these land lease communities are not the same laws that apply to people buying homes where they have full ownership of the house and land. By virtue of this different type of home ownership and land lease, the relationship between residents and the owners of the parks has to be regulated carefully and respectfully. Unfortunately, care and respect have been sorely lacking in the past regulation of this relationship. It is the laws governing residential park residents, who are vulnerable to the actions of owners and operators, that we are seeking to amend today to restore the balance in favour of the residents.

That vulnerability gave rise to an important organisation in Port Stephens that advocates for residential park residents. It gives advice to residents on their rights and represents them when legal proceedings need to be pursued. I am so grateful to the hardworking team at the Port Stephens and Affiliated Park Residents Association Incorporated who voluntarily give residential park residents a voice. I place on the record my thanks to the association's president, Trevor Sullivan; treasurer, Phillip Haslem; secretary, Anne Haslem; advocate, Gary Warfield; and the current committee members, Leon Fitzgerald, Chelsea McMahon, Lois Uebergang and Lorraine Samuels. Over the years, Trevor, Phillip and Anne have been raising issues with me about residential parks and their residents, some of which relate to the laws governing residents' rights and protections, some of which today's legislation will address and some of which we will continue to work on.

After years of hearing local residents' horrible harrowing stories of exploitation by owners or operators of parks, neglect of common facilities and denial of residents' rights, it is time to act. The former Government failed to care for the residents of these villages and to protect their rights. Instead, it sprouted platitudes and unfulfilled promises, which left residents vulnerable instead of protecting their rights. I recall going to a meeting of the Port Stephens Park Residents Association with the former Liberal member for Port Stephens in the lead‑up to the 2011 election. He stood there and told the meeting, "We will introduce laws that restore the balance of power and give residents rights."

The former Government then introduced the Act that we are seeking to amend, and it does exactly the opposite. Hearing the member for Gosford and the member for Wyong today give a bit of the background to the introduction of the 2013 Act, where we landed starts to make a whole lot of sense. Quite frankly, what has been revealed today in this House has shone a light on the legislation that I did not really appreciate, but in Port Stephens the residents of the residential parks felt the impacts immediately.

The contributions by the member for Wyong and the member for Gosford have reminded me of something I have said often in this place—corruption is not just a headline in a paper; corruption affects people on the ground. It has a serious impact on people's lives, and to hear that what happened in the Central Coast area may have led to the laws that have ruled and governed these people's lives for a number of years, courtesy of a former Coalition Government that did not care about their rights in the most fundamental way, is most disturbing. But I am pleased that the New South Wales Labor Government is taking action, because we do care. We are acting on a statutory review of the Residential Land Lease Communities Act 2013. The review was completed in 2021 and the report tabled in Parliament in November 2021.

The statutory review made 48 recommendations to improve the Act's effectiveness, which the former Government failed to implement despite residents and stakeholders calling for change for years. The bill before the House implements 21 of the 48 recommendations of the statutory review. It is the first stage of the Government's plan to improve residential land lease community laws in New South Wales. At its heart, this bill seeks to ensure that residents living in residential parks have clarity and certainty as to their rights, fostering vibrant and sustainable residential land lease communities across New South Wales.

The bill also demonstrates the New South Wales Labor Government's commitment to helping people across the State manage cost‑of‑living pressures, which is impossible when there is so little certainty about what fees and costs residents may be hit with from one week to the next. The bill introduces a range of reforms that will significantly benefit residents and operators. Firstly, the bill will make fixed method site fee increases clearer and easier to understand for residents. Home owners who currently face convoluted and confusing fixed method calculations for site fee increases will benefit from the bill's reforms. Secondly, the bill will mandate that when an operator issues a "by notice" site fee increase they must set out more information about the reasons for the increase. This will foster transparency and accountability between operators and residents.

Thirdly, the bill enhances home owners' enjoyment of their homes by granting them greater autonomy, allowing for certain minor changes to their homes without the need for operator consent. Fourthly, and crucially, the bill introduces a price cap for electricity charges in communities with embedded networks. This has been a significant issue across many of the residential park communities in Port Stephens. It is an important reform that stakeholders have been strongly advocating for over several years. The bill also makes utility billing in residential land lease communities consistent with the requirements under the National Energy Rules. This will ensure that residents in land lease communities have the same transparency and clarity about their utility bills as others who do not live in such communities. The bill also brings more transparency to communities, by requiring operators to disclose information about proposed developments that may impact residents. It will foster a culture of informed decision‑making and community engagement—unlike the stories I have heard from many park residents in the past.

Additionally, the bill improves the voluntary sharing arrangement provisions, striking a balance between flexibility and protection for vulnerable home buyers. It supports fair and equitable transactions. The bill also safeguards the rights of home owners facing termination due to circumstances beyond their control, ensuring that they are treated justly. There are other minor amendments that the bill makes to modernise and clarify the laws. For greater detail on the reforms, I defer to the second reading speech of my hardworking colleague, the Minister for Fair Trading. I thank him for listening and for acting to improve the lives of people living in land lease communities.

The reforms in this bill represent a significant step towards enhancing the rights and protections for residents in residential land lease communities, whilst also taking into account operators' needs so they can continue to provide this important housing option in New South Wales. This Government is getting on with the job of rebalancing the rights between residents and owners and operators—an issue that I heard former Liberal Government members speak of but never act on. By improving transparency, promoting clarity and safeguarding fairness in these communities, we will improve people's lives. [Extension of time]

We also reduce anxiety and stress. We increase dignity and respect for those who have worked hard for a roof over their head and we support thriving and equitable communities that have a big footprint in communities like mine. Finally, once again, I thank the impressive Port Stephens and Affiliated Park Residents Association for its many years of advocacy and support for people who felt afraid, exploited, frustrated and disrespected—all of which the former Government ignored and in many ways facilitated by the laws it oversaw.

Mr Tim James: That's not a fair comment.

Ms KATE WASHINGTON: The truth hurts. Regardless of where people live, they ought to be treated with respect and dignity, allowing them peaceful enjoyment of their homes. The bill is a big step towards achieving that for people who have not felt heard by their government for a long time. Our Government is acting. Our Government is listening and our Government cares. The Labor Government members respect and value residential park residents; we always will. We look forward to continuing to work with residents and stakeholders on the remaining recommendations of the statutory review. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JENNY LEONG (Newtown) (21:50): I contribute to debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024 and acknowledge the contribution of my Greens colleague, the member for Ballina, on behalf of The Greens and her community. The Greens support the bill, which implements 21 of the 48 recommendations from the 2021 statutory review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013. We understand that the bill will be followed by a second tranche of reforms that will implement the remaining recommendations of that review. We look forward to considering those reforms closely in due course.

The bill makes a series of amendments that will improve clarity and certainty for the roughly 40,000 people who live in land lease communities across New South Wales. The amendments include clarifying the rights of home owners to make certain minor changes to their homes, such as installing door locks or window screens, without a site operator's consent, and setting clear limits on the method and frequency with which site operators can increase site fees. The bill also sets out a clear framework for how electricity charges are calculated and applied to all parties in a land lease community—being the operator, the home owner and the tenant if applicable—where electricity is supplied through an embedded network. The Greens know that embedded networks are a source of confusion for residents whether they are in strata schemes or land lease communities and welcome reforms that improve transparency and certainty in that space.

We certainly enthusiastically welcome the bill's introduction of a cap on how often and by how much a site operator can increase site fees. The bill makes clear that site fees can only be increased using one of two fixed methods—the consumer price index [CPI] or variation in the age pension. Where the CPI is used to calculate an increase, only one increase is allowed in a 12-month period; where a variation in the age pension is used, two increases in a 12-month period are permitted. As the cost of housing continues to climb and more people turn to residential land lease communities as an alternative to the overheated private rental market, that is a sensible step that will provide certainty for land lease community residents and protect them from excessive hikes in their housing costs.

The Greens welcome the sensible step of the New South Wales Labor Government in introducing a cap on fees based on the consumer price index and ensuring that there can only be up to two increases every 12 months. But we ask the Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading, who is also responsible for the Residential Tenancies Act in New South Wales, why stop at land lease communities? If the Labor Government can accept that it is appropriate to restrict increases to housing costs in certain situations, then why not act to regulate runaway private rental increases, which are plaguing communities across the State? There are 40,000 residents living in land lease communities in the State. The Minister has prioritised and made changes to address the cost-of-living pressures on them. The Greens and I support that bill. Over one-third of the population in New South Wales lives in private rental homes, and yet we do not see the same commitment to capping rents in line with CPI or limiting rent increases to once every 12 months or aligning them with age pensions, given that the cost of living for older women and the increase of older women in rental properties continues.

Currently, landlords in New South Wales are empowered to increase rents by whatever amount they choose, with no regulation—something that undoubtedly contributed to rents rising by up to 7 per cent in some parts of the State over the past year. Nearly 60 percent of very low to moderate income rental households across the State are in housing stress, and renters desperately need protection from further excessive rent increases. In the Australian Capital Territory [ACT], the Labor-Greens Government has implemented rent control mechanisms that are not dissimilar to the provisions in this bill being offered to land lease communities. Landlords in the ACT can only increase rents by 110 per cent of the rent component of CPI, which sounds very similar to this bill that only applies to land lease communities, not people in the private rental market. In the ACT if, for example, the CPI is 8 per cent, landlords can only raise the rent by 8.8 per cent. For anything larger they must go to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which allows some check on rent increases.

Since that mechanism was implemented in late 2019, the sky has not fallen in in the ACT. We have not seen mass disinvestment of landlords from the ACT rental market. All that has happened is that tenants have been insulated from the worst of skyrocketing rents, while the cost of renting has risen sharply across the country. The Greens hope that the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill is the start of the New South Wales Labor Government recognising that regulating the cost of housing is not some crazy, unworkable idea, but something we need to do to protect vulnerable communities and people suffering with housing insecurity and cost‑of‑living pressures. Accordingly, we urge the New South Wales Labor Government, particularly the Minister introducing the bill who recognises the need for protection for land lease communities, to extend that protection, certainty and housing security to private rental tenants in this State.

I understand that the member for Lake Macquarie will move an amendment to reduce the transitional period within which operators must become compliant with the bill from three years to 12 months. At this point, I offer The Greens support for that amendment. I share the eagerness of the member for Lake Macquarie, stakeholders within the sector and community members for operators to improve their practices as soon as possible, given this has been a long time coming. I commend the bill to the House, and I look forward to a similar bill on private rental regulation in the future.

Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields—Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading, Minister for Industry and Trade, Minister for Innovation, Science and Technology, Minister for Building, and Minister for Corrections) (21:57): In reply: I thank members for their contributions to debate on the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Amendment Bill 2024. In particular, I thank the members representing the electorates of Terrigal, Granville, Lake Macquarie, Gosford, Tweed, Mount Druitt, Willoughby, Fairfield, Wakehurst, Wyong, Ballina, Port Stephens and Newtown. I acknowledge the comments of my ministerial colleague, Minister Harris, about the history of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act and all of the changes that have been made since Labor first introduced it in the late '90s.

I also acknowledge the comments of the member for Newtown and clarify a misunderstanding. This is not a price cap as such. It is a mechanism by which an operator can choose an element that will determine the site fees. It is important to note that and clarify a potential misunderstanding by the member for Newtown. I also make the point that a residential land lease community is very different to a broader residential market, given that the community only has the one operator and one owner. That is unlike the residential market, which has mum‑and‑dad owners making their way through life.

This bill marks a crucial first step in the long journey to improve residential land lease community laws in New South Wales. For too long, residential land lease communities and industry stakeholders have been calling out for action, only to be met with inaction by the former Government. Residential land lease communities represent a unique and vital component of our housing landscape, providing affordable housing options for many people in our community. Achieving a harmonious balance between the interests of operators and residents within these communities is paramount to ensure their long-term viability. This bill seeks to achieve that balance by implementing sensible measures that promote transparency, fairness and accountability.

By enhancing the regulatory framework governing residential land lease communities, we aim to safeguard the rights of residents while also recognising the legitimate business interests of operators. The introduction of this bill demonstrates the Government's unwavering commitment to balancing the rights and obligations of the operators of these communities and the people who live in them. I will now respond briefly to points made by other members. The political spear‑throwing from the Opposition is unbecoming and unfortunate. The Government is focused on delivering affordable housing options for the people of New South Wales. I am somewhat surprised the member for Terrigal lectured the Government about the timing of the bill. I recall that the member for Terrigal told the ABC that the former Government "went into caretaker mode" before they were able to update the legislation, despite the statutory review being completed in 2021. Last time I checked, caretaker mode does not go on for nearly 18 months.

I am also somewhat disappointed by the tone of some Opposition members. The shadow Minister, the member for Willoughby, chose to continue the baffling criticism of the Government for taking action to support residential land lease communities. My Opposition colleagues want to claim work they could not and did not deliver. This Government is delivering for affected residential land lease communities. Members opposite can deliver their political insider mansplaining, but I will deliver on the mandate to improve housing arrangements for everyone in our community, regardless of where they live.

The member for Willoughby also raised concerns from the Caravan and Camping Industry Association that the bill only allows operators to use one component—not two—under the fixed method for site fee increases. The Government understands that a key concern with calculations for fixed method site fee increases that use more than one element is that they can be very complex. This complexity created confusion for homeowners about what a site fee increase would be, and it meant they were unable to budget for them going forward.

Recommendation 10 of the statutory review was to limit the number of elements that can be used to a single variable. The bill implements this recommendation. First, simple and predictable methods for calculating increases in site fees that are not likely to result in a compounding effect are preferred, especially for residents who are on low fixed incomes. Secondly, operators who are concerned that a single component will not cover their costs can choose a percentage increase instead or use the by-notice site fee increase method. As other members have already indicated, there is a proposed amendment to reduce the transition period from three years to 12 months. The member for Lake Macquarie has proposed an amendment to reduce the transition period from three years to 12 months. I will address that amendment during the consideration in detail stage.

This bill is a testament to the Government's commitment to address the challenges faced by residential land lease communities. By passing this bill, we are sending a clear message that the voices of residents and operators have been heard, and we are taking meaningful action to respond. This bill will start to build a brighter, more equitable future for operators and residents in residential land lease communities. I again thank the key stakeholders who have worked so closely with the Government on this bill. The bill would not be possible without their input.

I thank the Caravan and Camping Industry Association, the Affiliated Residential Parks Residents Association, the Tenants' Union of NSW, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, the Independent Park Residents Action Group, and the Energy and Water Ombudsman NSW. I thank also the wonderful team at NSW Fair Trading for their hard work to bring this bill to fruition and help so many people in our community. I especially want to thank Katerina Pavlidis, Diana Holy, Corena Sloper, Hooma Mishra, Gumneet Mangat, Ellen Temby, Jaque Owens, Leslie Barraclough, Susan Kim and Jasmin Chin. I thank my staff members, Alicia and Ivy, who are in the Speaker's gallery. I commend the bill to the House.

TEMPORARY SPEAKER (Mr Jason Li): The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Consideration in detail requested by Mr Greg Piper.

Consideration in Detail

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Jason Li): By leave: I will deal with the bill in one group of clauses and schedules. The question is that clauses 1 and 2 and schedules 1 and 2 be agreed to.

Mr GREG PIPER (Lake Macquarie) (20:05): I move my amendment No. 1 on sheet c2024‑072A:

No. 1Transitional period for entering into compliant site agreements

Page 14, Schedule 1[33], proposed clause 21, definition of transition day, line 18. Omit "3 years". Insert instead "12 months".

This amendment reduces the current transitional period for entering into compliant site agreements in schedule 1 [33] of the bill from three years to 12 months. The proposed amendment will require operators to review and update all existing site agreements that provide for increases in site fees by a fixed calculation that uses more than one element and to vary agreements so only a single element is used in the calculation within 12 months. It will also require operators to review and update all site agreements containing fixed method site increases to ensure site fees can only be increased under the fixed method once per year or, where increases are tied to the aged pension, twice a year.

I note that the statutory review of the Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act was finalised in November 2021. That is more than three years ago. Operators have been on notice for the proposed reforms for almost three years. I understand anecdotally that only approximately five per cent of operators use a fixed method of site fee increases with multiple components. With approximately 41,000 people permanently living in residential land lease communities, fewer than 1,000 agreements will need to be reviewed and amended. I believe an additional 12 months is more than sufficient time to ensure agreements are compliant with the new provisions.

Fixed fee methods of site fee increases with multiple variables can be complex and create uncertainty for often vulnerable residents. The Government has agreed that reform is needed. Homeowners and residents have been waiting for this reform for long enough—indeed, too long. They should not have to wait a further three years for the reform to take effect. Without being presumptuous, I understand that the Government intends to support this amendment. I thank the Minister and his excellent team for listening to my concerns and those of my constituents and for their willingness to consider and support this proposed amendment.

Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG (Macquarie Fields—Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading, Minister for Industry and Trade, Minister for Innovation, Science and Technology, Minister for Building, and Minister for Corrections) (20:08): I thank the member for Lake Macquarie for moving this amendment and acknowledge the collaborative approach the crossbench has taken on this bill. I appreciate the willingness of the member for Lake Macquarie to engage with the Government in a constructive manner. The Government is committed to improving the lives of residents in residential land lease communities, while supporting operators to ensure their businesses are sustainable and can grow. We will always seek to consult with and listen to the people who will be affected by the changes to the law to ensure that they are balanced and sensible. That is why the Government will support the proposed amendment of item 33 of schedule 1 to the bill.

The bill will limit operators using a single element to calculate a site fee increase under the "fixed" method. Currently the bill gives operators three years to review and update all existing agreements to comply with the new requirement. The proposed amendment will reduce the statutory transition period to 12 months, which means that operators will have 12 months to review and update all existing agreements to ensure they do not use a "fixed" method for site fee increases that uses more than one component.

The bill will continue to provide that if a variation agreement or new compliant agreement is not entered into within the 12 months, then the "by‑notice" method of site fee increase will become the default method. I thank the Speaker and all members of the House for collaborating on the bill. I know what a difference the changes in the bill will make for residents and operators in New South Wales.

Mr TIM JAMES (Willoughby) (22:10): As I indicated in my earlier remarks, I confirm that the Coalition supports the amendment brought by the Speaker and notes the Government's willingness to amend its own bill. Once again, it has our support for the reasons that I have outlined.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Jason Li): The question is that Government amendment No. 1 on sheet c2024‑072A be agreed to.

Amendment agreed to.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Jason Li): The question is that clauses 1 and 2 and schedules 1 and 2 as amended be agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2 and schedules 1 and 2 as amended agreed to.

Third Reading

Mr ANOULACK CHANTHIVONG: I move:

That the bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.