#20091
Kangaroo
Flatchatter

    Minister Roberts actually said: 

    While many schemes would be happy to allow pets, it is often the default rule that they be banned, and potential owners and tenants are not always in a strong position to see the by-laws changed.

    SMO makes a valid point.

    Mr Roberts used the word “banned” and that is not the current default.

    The good news is that your reportage was correct.

    But SMO’s real point was that if Mr Roberts only changes the default By-Law for new schemes, how does that help existing owners with existing situations.

    Seeing as he’s changing the Act, could he not require all strata schemes to register (free of charge) a replacement By-Law concerning pets?

    But, he’d better give everyone some better options.

    Birds in particular like to have a companion. Why do the pro-forma options limit it to one bird? And why only one of each species? Why not one of each species? And some fish in an aquarium. At least fish is plural. But perhaps the size of the “secure aquarium” should be limited, lest the 5,000 gallon wall-to-wall aquarium break and cause problems for the downstairs unit.

    And, shouldn’t “acceptable” animals be defined? What about reptiles (snakes), rodents (rats), and arachnids (spiders)? I’m planning on getting a donkey myself (personal use only).

    And, if he wants By-Laws to reflect current community thinking, why not make it easier to change By-Laws by requiring only an ordinary resolution rather than a special resolution?