Your views: on no cause evictions and more
Today, readers comment on a rental laws review, Kimba and nuclear waste, a hydrogen ‘gold rush’ and lobbying.
Photo: AAP/James Ross
Commenting on the opinion piece: Why we should throw out no cause rental evictions
I find it difficult to understand the point of a lease if at the end of the lease the landlord decides not to renew but is prevented because of no cause eviction.
The tenant has the same option to decide not to renew. Regardless, it’s not an eviction, it’s the end of a lease – an agreement to lease a property for a period of time between a landlord and a tenant.
A more sensible solution to security of tenancy would be leases that came with options to renew i.e. a one year lease with 2 x 1 year options with agreed rent increases. Security of tenure for both the tenant and landlord. – Ivan Tanner
Commenting on Your views and the story: Govt reveals bill for dumped Kimba nuclear facility
Comments by Andrew Williams are a little way off the truth and to just have a comment from Rex Patrick alone is a bit mischievous. The proposed waste to be stored is low level waste with intermediate waste stored temporarily only, and in sealed vessels. No fuel rods.
Kimba’s community is very much in favour of hosting the facility, and we are the people who actually live here. – Graeme Baldock
Commenting on the story: Law change to open SA up to renewable and hydrogen ‘gold rush’
As a person involved in estimating the total cost of large projects I always get a little suspicious when I see an estimate in the many hundreds of millions ending in a three. – Wayne Steele
Commenting on the opinion piece: Heading off scandal: Why ICAC is taking a close look at lobbying in SA
Unfortunately lobbying takes many forms and don’t think that these guys are not aware that if they are exposed, they would be in a lot of trouble.
If ICAC has found examples of bad practices that means they have only found the careless ones. Lobbying can take the form of being given positions on boards, positions on committees that meet only six times a year and get paid $200,000 per annum, promised jobs in major companies when the politician retires.
Before the Commission can make legislative recommendations, which by the way I commend Ann Vanstone for looking at this, the Commission needs to fully comprehend where the corruption comes from and the differing forms it can take. Risk assessments in the areas identified should then by undertaken together with mitigation strategies. It is these mitigation strategies that where possible can be turned into law.
The problem is more than likely bigger that what we all think, but if you don’t try to remedy it, corruption through lobbying gets even more entrenched, to the point that it becomes a means of existing in politics. – Mario Bruno