Page 959 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 31 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE: From Mr Berry's interjection, it would appear that Labor is interested only in those who voted for them and not in anybody else. That is not a bad way to increase your number of votes, Mr Berry.
Many may be curious as to why the Labor Party sought not to raise this issue when in government, only to feebly present it when in opposition. They may also ask why, now that the Labor Party is in government again, Mr Connolly has taken the soft option of reluctantly including the commercial tenants in the Fair Trading Act under a code of conduct - - -
Mr Connolly: No, not reluctantly.
MR MOORE: I withdraw the word "reluctantly" - when he knows that it does not have the teeth required to solve adequately the disputes that are rampant due to a lack of specific legislation. Mr Whalan went on to say:
We believe that a tribunal without power to arbitrate on rent will be a toothless tiger.
In fact, in defence of criticisms from the then Government, he blamed Mr Jensen for stymieing the legislation by coming up with a code of practice solution. Referring to a committee, he said, as recorded on page 607:
... we were stunned and dismayed by the wimpishness of the recommendations. This is a wimp recommendation.
I could not have said it better myself. However, the tenants and residents of Campbell also said it when they passed a unanimous resolution on Wednesday, 10 March 1993. This resolution states:
We, the residents of Campbell, call upon the ACT Government to introduce, as a matter of urgency, the legislation necessary to protect the retailers in Campbell and other centres in the ACT in a way that will enable them to trade equitably and with security of tenure.
Madam Speaker, with the leave of the Assembly I will table that resolution.
Leave granted.
MR MOORE: Thank you, members. Over the past two sittings we have been inundated with petitions which urge the Government to develop the very legislation they raised in 1990 - a tiger with some teeth. The question for Mr Connolly in particular is: Why have you opted for the toothless variety when your own party recognised the futility of such a move, as do the commercial tenants in the ACT? "We believe that any system relying on a code of conduct is not sufficient to ensure that all relevant parties adhere to the standards of fair rentals and security of tenure". It is a pity you missed that meeting, Mr Connolly. You would have been able to relive the old times, when your party was not in government and expressed solid support for small business. My mind goes, of course, to some words of Mr Humphries under these circumstances, but I shall not quote them.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .