Page 331 - Week 03 - Thursday, 1 June 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
one where accusations will be made, with the old routine practised for so many years in Queensland, of put up or shut up, across the floor from the Deputy Chief Minister. The fact is that it is reputable people such as John Haslem, who first used the term Canberra Incorporated, who said on a celebrated program that some people in this city are just a little too friendly. White-collar crime is a particularly pernicious problem in society, and there is no reason to believe that Canberra is exempt. The Rally believes, as do many in this community, that those in government, who cannot speak out, know the details. There have been conflicts of interest, declared and undeclared, in the administration of the leasehold system, our prime revenue base.
The Rally asks the Canberra people to consider the implications of an official responsible for, amongst other things, business lease management - that is, regulating commercial landlord and tenant relationships - being a significant commercial landlord at the relevant times.
For example, did Ros Kelly, a subsequent Federal Minister, who promised so much to commercial tenants to regulate some oppressive commercial landlord practices in this city, know that one of the principal ACT Administration advisers was a commercial landlord? Why did the long-promised business leases review committee take so long to get through the ACT Administration?
We all know that the retail heart of this city is sick at the moment. There are pockets of desperate small traders facing ruin. I am sure the Deputy Chief Minister will appreciate my comments. In many cases, high commercial rents, not mismanagement, are a significant factor in ruined profitability.
Commercial retail rents in some parts of the ACT are significantly higher per capitalised dollar than in many other parts of Australia. In recent months the President of the Retail Tenants Association of Australia, John Bradford, has twice addressed significant protest meetings of Canberra retail tenants. The squeeze comes from artificially contained shopping areas and regulated releases of commercial development sites.
The result is that owners of modest little shopping centres sited in Canberra suburbs can demand rents comparable with interstate central business district rent levels. That is a disgrace. This is a commercial planning disaster which is costing the retail community of the ACT a lot of money. Why was the landlord contribution to the business leases review committee during those days not revealed? Why have some of the most iniquitous commercial tenancy lease clauses in Australia been allowed to flourish in the ACT?
Only 100 or so metres from here, there are retailers with lease clauses that require them to relocate, move out, if the landlord wants to renovate the premises, for instance,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .