Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 6 Hansard (22 May) . . Page.. 1577 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

There is already a huge oversupply of retail space in the ACT. We have probably at least twice as much retail space as we require and possibly as much as is required for a population of up to one million people. We really have to ask the question: How much more retail space do we need in the ACT; and, more importantly, how much can we sustain? We have over 260,000 square metres of floor space in the four major town centres. In light of the current freeze on public sector jobs in the ACT Government and the big cutbacks at the Commonwealth level, I think this adds further weight to the argument that the ACT economy simply cannot sustain any more retail expansion. Even the Government's own pre-business seminar service says that there is too much retail space in the ACT. In Tuggeranong, the Conder shops are about to be developed. This will add about 3,500 square metres to the amount of retail space that is available to people in the Tuggeranong Valley. This development certainly needs time to settle down before we even consider further expansion.

I would like to conclude by saying that the greatest irony of all is that this Government goes on and on about competition and how wonderful it is. In fact, later in the day there will be debate on competition policy reform. This begs the question: What is real competition? We are being told that it is anti-competitive for a government business to have a monopoly position. Why should national shopping chains be allowed to have a monopoly? This is what is happening in the ACT.

When it comes to the private sector - the same private sector as this Government and most governments around Australia, including Labor governments, think should be a model for public sector operations - governments fail to take action to regulate this sector in the best interests of promoting fair competition. The whole concept of competition is based on a level playing field. There is no such level playing field in the retail market in the ACT. There is a distinct lack of real competition. The market is controlled by the big majors, and they have significant advantages which are quite unfair to smaller retailers. As the big players compete to grab the biggest slice of the market, the small traders, both inside and outside the town centres, suffer. Concentrating a large component of retail space in four large centres is not good for competition; it is not good for the economy of the ACT; it is certainly not good for the sense of community in our suburbs. I would very strongly urge members to support this motion.

MR KAINE (10.47): This is an interesting debate, because when we look back we always see that things were so much more attractive than what we have today. I look back with some nostalgia at the days when we had general practitioners that made house calls; I remember fondly the days when bakers and greengrocers knocked on your door and delivered their goods to your door. Very often the greengrocer was a local who had his market garden on the outskirts of town, grew his fresh vegetables, knocked on your door and offered them to you at the doorstep. That was very attractive; but, in today's world, it is impractical. I submit that those small businesses which existed in those days have gone out of existence because people have voted with their feet as to how they do their shopping and where they do their shopping; their shopping preferences have changed.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .