Page 333 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 20 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
not only to encourage small retailers with problems to come forward, but also to protect them. All information received in closed session was treated in the strictest confidence. The various procedures that were implemented received wide publicity. However, despite these precautions the response from retailers in the number of submissions was disappointing.
The committee also held informal discussions, as I have already mentioned, with representatives of government and landlord and tenant groups in Melbourne and Sydney. The committee visited these States as two differing situations exist. Commercial tenancy relationships are subject to legislation in Victoria, while New South Wales has prepared a code of conduct negotiated between parties and backed by fair trading legislation.
The submissions to the inquiry focused on retail space. Throughout the report the term "commercial" was used to refer to office space to distinguish it from retail space. I believe I must mention that most of the tenant submissions the committee received came from very small retail groups and local centres. Submissions were received from traders in Civic, Aranda and Manuka, with few from major shopping centres. There was only one from Westfield, two from former traders at Woden Plaza and none from tenants at the Tuggeranong Hyperdome.
On the basis of these submissions it appears that the perceived problem is essentially, although by no means exclusively, one between smaller tenants and their landlords and it exists mainly in local and group shopping centres. This reflects the experience in Victoria, for example, where about 95 per cent of arbitrations to disputes are for local and group shops. The smaller the shopping centre or outlet seemingly the greater need for mediation and or arbitration. The problem is not as great in the larger shopping centres because they generally act to maximise competition. The committee heard from the Westfield group that the more competitive the retail environment, the more customers will be drawn into the shopping centre and the greater the benefit for each retailer.
The committee considered that the majority of complaints fell into two broad categories, complaints against centre management and lease-specific complaints. The committee's view was that complaints and grievances in themselves do not represent examples of harsh and unconscionable practice. Fundamentally, the committee rejects the notion that the survey of about 30 tenants out of the 2,790 individual businesses in the ACT proves that the problem exists in the proportion it is claimed, or that the parties themselves are incapable of resolving problems. The committee itself received, as I said before, such a small number of submissions.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .