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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (12 November) . . Page.. 3978 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

On 4 September 1996 the Assembly chose not to support those amendments. On this occasion I am not seeking to repeat that exercise, although I would be willing to prepare amendments to this legislation should enough members have a change of heart on that issue.

Let me make myself perfectly clear about the purpose of this Bill. This Bill is not to broaden access to the tribunal so as not to discriminate against those businesses that entered into a lease prior to 1 January 1995. These people who are still experiencing disputes have nowhere to go for justice. I am open-minded on that issue. The legislation today expands access by people to the Tenancy Tribunal in two ways. Firstly, it removes all size restrictions on who can appear before the tribunal. All commercial and retail tenants will be able to approach the Tenancy Tribunal. Secondly, it specifically addresses the issue of excessive rents. A large number of small business people have approached me from the time I was first elected in 1989 seeking a way to challenge the charging of excessive rents. I believe that the same must be true for all members of this Assembly.

For too long we have failed to protect small businesses at the mercy of landlords who simply want to move small businesses out or take advantage of their monopoly status in a particular area. Nowhere is this more obvious than in large shopping malls. I hasten to add, Mr Speaker, that I am aware of a range of landlords in Canberra who have looked after their tenants in a very positive way. I do not for a moment suggest that all landlords are rapacious. However, in a monopolistic situation we have an important role to play to ensure fair competition. With so much emphasis on competition and competition policy over the last few years, it is now time to review the approach we take to the prime issues facing small business. Rent is one of the major factors in the failure of businesses to survive. The tribunal is there to hear disputes and decide a course of agreement what will be fair to both the tenant and the landowner. It is unconscionable that small businesses subjected to excessive rents have not had a guaranteed right of access to a fair hearing. We can remedy that now with this amendment.

In 1995 Mr Gary Humphries informed us that a review of the Tenancy Tribunal Act was then not feasible as only a handful of people had applied to the tribunal for a hearing since the legislation had been passed in 1994. Surprise, surprise, Mr Humphries! Could that be because the bulk of tenants who really needed this access were already in lease agreements and had been denied access? If the Assembly of the day had not denied them this access, I am sure that the tribunal would have received many more requests for a hearing. Indeed, had my legislation passed last time, we would also have seen many more applications. It was those people for whom the legislation was constructed in the first place. It was those tenants, like the former supermarket owners at Campbell and the many small businesses in shopping malls, that needed the tribunal's assistance. Where are they now? Unfortunately, they do not exist anymore. They have gone out the back door. They have been replaced, often by large franchisees. So much for pledging support for small business.

In both cases - access for people who entered into a lease before 1 January 1995 and for those who have been subjected to excessive rents - the Tenancy Tribunal has not been available. Now is the time to make it available for as many people as possible.

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