I am a permanent member of the Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee which sat for estimates hearings on Friday, 24 July 2026.
I asked the Director General of the Department of Justice about the government's commitment to reforms to protect apartment buyers from unfair sunset clauses, and for better regulation of strata/body corporate managers.
You can read our exchange below or in the official Parliamentary transcript of proceedings here.
Mr BERKMAN: Director-General, the government’s consultation on reform to sunset clauses finished in October last year. As of now, apartment buyers are not covered by any sunset clause protections, which is an issue that I raised when it was not included in Labor’s reforms in 2023. How many submissions to the government’s review called for apartment buyers to be protected from unfair sunset clauses?
Ms Cruickshank: I may have to get some additional information. I am not sure I have detail on specific submissions and which ones called for the question that you asked. I will do my best to get that for you before the end of this session. To be clear, it was how many submissions contained—
Mr BERKMAN: How many of those submissions called for apartment buyers to have protections in respect of sunset clauses?
Ms Cruickshank: I will do my best to find that. I suspect that might involve a very speedy re-reading of every single submission, but I will see what I can find for you, member.
Mr BERKMAN: Certainly. If it is possible in whatever review is happening, can you identify whether anyone other than developers was arguing to keep sunset clauses in place without protection? I am interested to know if anyone in that particular interest group is making a case.
Ms Cruickshank: I am very happy to look into that. I will ask my team to see what they can find as we are doing this. If it is helpful, I will give a little more information around it. The Department of Justice undertook public consultation to inform the review, and that ran from 1 September to 10 October last year. They did two online surveys, one aimed at obtaining consumer views and one aimed at obtaining property developer views. I suspect that partly answers your question. There is definitely a desire to understand the views from all across the sector and community.
There were 206 survey responses received: 178 were consumer responses and 28 came from the property industry. Peak organisations for consumers, property owners, the property and development industry and also the legal sector were invited to make written submissions to inform the review. Actually, I am told there were only seven written submissions received. Two additional submissions were invited and received from individuals in the legal and finance sectors to seek specialist input. The work in finalising that review is ongoing. That is as much context as I have. If I have anything additional, I will come back.
Mr SPEAKER: Member for Maiwar, does that clear up your question?
Mr BERKMAN: If there is further information that the director-general can come back with then that would be welcome.
Director-General, you would be well aware that Queensland has a community titles working group whose role is to review and advise on strata laws. How many times has the Community Titles Legislation Working Group met since October 2024?
Ms Cruickshank: I am just checking I have the right working group. There are a number. Yes, I do have the information. The Community Titles Legislation Working Group has met twice—once on 30 May 2025 and once on 25 February 2026. The comment I would make is—and this goes for a lot of the work that my agency does—there are formal meetings such as the ones I have just referred to and then there are a lot of individual discussions and one-on-one engagements with representatives from the community, the legal fraternity, industry, whatever the issue might be, so I would not want the perception to be that just because there were two working group meetings that is what happened. There would have been ongoing work with the group and with my policy team throughout that period. But the specific two meetings are those dates I just provided.
Mr BERKMAN: Accepting your answer as stated, how is the community and interested stakeholders supposed to know what is going on with the working group if there have only been those two formal meetings and the rest of the work happens outside the formal structure of the working group?
Mr HUNT: Point of order, Mr Speaker: under standing order 115(b)(ii) that is an argumentative question—‘how can they’.
Mr SPEAKER: I am happy with it. I call the director-general.
Ms Cruickshank: I suspect a big part of the answer in that would be the representatives who are on that working group actually have responsibility to engage with their own members and stakeholders in bringing their views to that working group. In terms of how broad a community, business, legal, whatever, those members would have a responsibility to engage. If I cast my eye down the stakeholder groups, we have the College of Strata Lawyers, we have the Resident Accommodation Managers Association, the Owners Corporation Network, the Law Society, the Real Estate Institute,
the Strata Community Association, the Unit Owners Association and the Urban Development Institute, and I think those are expanded members, so there must be some other core members that I do not have in front of me. With the breadth of those organisations—and, as I say, they would have a responsibility to bring the views of their members and where they have garnered their positions from— I think we can be confident they would be bringing their responsibilities to the working group meetings.
Mr BERKMAN: Director-General, New South Wales, I understand, recently legislated principles for strata managers that, among other things, required them to disclose potential conflicts and vendor commissions in order to protect unit owners from getting ripped off. Is the department working on, and is the government considering, similar laws for Queenslanders?
Mr HUNT: Point of order, Mr Speaker: that is asking for a policy matter from the director-general. I think she would be aware of that, too.
Mr SPEAKER: I am sure she is aware of that. I call the director-general.
Ms Cruickshank: I am always so cautious about being repetitive. Yes, I would say I do not want to be drawn on any particular policy position, but I would like to reassure the member the people who are engaging in the working group and leading that policy work would have an eye to all of the feedback that comes from those working groups and from those members, and also would have an eye to what is going on in other jurisdictions. I am sure that will all be factored in, in terms of putting advice to government which, as others have indicated, I clearly will not step into the space of what decisions government might make and what advice we give them to inform that, but it is a broad and extensive process that has been ongoing.
The Director General returned to my question later in the session.
Mr SPEAKER: I will just remind you: we have very little time and we have a question that you were going to see if you had any more detail on. I think it was the member for Maiwar’s question, was it? Did you have any more to add to that?
Ms Cruickshank: I do. Yes, I am happy to switch to that one now if you would like me to.
Mr SPEAKER: Yes, because we have less than two minutes left.
Ms Cruickshank: The only extra information I have, which I suspect is not very different to what I have said before, is that the scope of the review was to look at the effectiveness of the 2023 sunset clause reforms specifically on sunset clauses for the sale of off-the-plan land. Submissions are currently under consideration on the effectiveness of the sunset clauses on the sale of off-the-plan land and any policy or response informed by the review will end up, as I said before, being a matter for government. I am afraid that is the only extra information I have.