Page 340 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 20 February 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In my additional comments on the need for disclosure statements I am concerned that some of the landlords have an attitude that the tenant does not have a right to know what the future could be for a centre before the tenant signs a new lease or renews an old one. Obviously, the tenant should and does have a legitimate right to this sort of information if it is known by the landlord. I accept that there will be times when the landlord is not aware of this information. Such information may be just the detail that stops a prospective tenant from committing himself or herself to an impossible situation because the projected sales figures or business plan could be seriously jeopardised by a change in plans for a centre. Failure to divulge this information because the landlord wants to keep the space filled regardless is morally wrong and reprehensible. My comments on this issue take the acknowledgement of this problem in the report in paragraph 2.11 one step further and suggest that the use of disclosure statements must be one of the issues to be included in the code, as it is fundamental to the development of the landlord-tenant relationship.
My comments on paragraph 2.13 acknowledge that some leases may not be appropriate for a fixed five-year term. Any proposal to vary this term or lease, or lease with an option for renewal from five years, should have the agreement of both parties. Naturally, Mr Speaker, this applies if both parties agree to a longer period than the five years to ensure that agreement for a variation from an accepted standard is formally acknowledged by both parties. This is really here to allow the smaller tenants to amortise their costs over a reasonable time.
A matter of considerable concern to me was the evidence that some tenants were not prepared to come forward to speak to the committee, despite the protection of parliamentary privilege, because they were concerned for their future. In some respects this problem identifies how much the relationship between some tenants and their landlords has broken down. Such tenants may have either experienced this sort of standover activity personally or seen others lose their livelihood and often their homes because of such activity. While acknowledging that the sort of evidence provided could not win in a court room, even one case, to me, is too many, and action must be taken to stop it. I believe and expect that the code that we will see developed will go a long way towards that.
In my closing remarks on this report, I indicate my full support for the recommendations and trust that both groups of players in the debate will now get on with the job of establishing a code of practice with which they both can work. I have no doubt that it will not fully meet the requirements of either party. However, this work must be done if we are to go any way towards improving a relationship. (Extension of time granted) The ball is now in the court of these two main groups, and they should get on
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .