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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 8 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 2256 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

More than 2000 new stores will be opened in the next five years, across all sectors of the retail industry excluding cars and finance. Shopping-centre owners are feeding the industry's new-store addiction with plans to add about 1.5 million square metres to Australia's existing retail floor-space. Retail industry analysts are asking how many new stores Australia needs and how many it can support. The answer is simple: not as many as retailers and shopping-centre owners plan to open.

It is an epidemic. It is happening right across the country, and nowhere is it more apparent than in the ACT. The article goes on to say:

The new-store frenzy comes at a time of flat retail sales and negligible growth in Australia's population and Australians' disposable income. Traditional retailers also face a range of increasingly feisty rivals, including shop-from-home services such as the Internet and direct mail. Some retailers believe Australia is heading for an oversupply of stores and shopping-centre space, raising the spectre of half-empty centres and struggling retailers ... retailers and shopping-centre owners have one thing in common: unshakeable confidence in the wisdom of their expansion plans.

I am very disappointed that the Liberal Party will not support the moratorium on retail trading hours, but I am extremely disappointed with the Labor Party for not supporting it because they do not seem to have any answers at all. To give the Liberal Party some credit, they are putting forward a very difficult proposal. They know that it has huge political backlash - it has had for them already - but they also know that they do have the support of small business and they do seem, at least, to care about small business, which the Labor Party does not.

Mr Whitecross seemed to be a bit confused, saying that the helpShop measures, for instance, could not be implemented while this inquiry was going on. Well, that is not what the motion says. He needs to read that properly. It will not prevent the Government from getting on with the helpShop program. It asks the committee to look at all these other issues which are absolutely critical. It is not putting Striking a Balance on hold. It is saying, "Let us implement that, and let us look at all these other related issues". It is said time and again that we cannot support struggling small businesses if they are simply not viable; we cannot give small business in the ACT a free lunch. Well, that is interesting, because as it stands at the moment it is the corporate giants who have a free lunch in the ACT. They definitely have a free lunch. I read again from this article:

Shopping-centre owners say retailer demand has triggered their expansion plans, but competition to find anchor tenants for big centres is intense. Department-store chains are asking for, and getting, long rent-free periods -

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