Page 3271 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 21 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
But all this Bill does is provide for a dispute mechanism that, first of all, starts with mediation. Certainly, from our experience, according to my briefings in Queensland where a mediation process has been used, over 90 per cent of cases are resolved at that point - at mediation. So, when we have small businesses, small tenants, out there suffering as we do at the moment, then we ought to be able to ensure that the leases that are entirely inappropriate are dealt with by that tribunal.
So, we get a situation, Madam Speaker, where, when it is a ratchet clause like we have spoken of before, the situation gets worse and worse every year for the tenant, and the Government backs down because the landlords claim that they are being ripped off in turn by the banks or financiers. Madam Speaker, there is a whole range of impacts that have effect because of leases, and that is why it is that we need such a complicated and extensive code of practice. The final version has been tabled today, although even in this case we note that it is subject to change. It is subject to change in two ways - by the Government itself, with the lobbying; and by the ability of the Assembly to move disallowance in order to be able to amend any part of that, should we so wish.
Madam Speaker, in my first amendment - to the definition of "key money" - the change is to ensure that we include not only rent but anything other than rent that is, in the circumstances, excessive, because there is a whole range of ways in which the owners have been able to take advantage of the tenants. In fact, the same applies right across the six amendments. In each case we are talking about a situation where, I believe, the balance of power between the owners and the tenants ought be moved a little closer to the tenant. That is the import of those amendments.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General and Minister for Health) (5.06): Madam Speaker, the Government will not be supporting these. It does, as Mr Moore says, shift the balance somewhat. We respect Mr Moore's very genuine commitment to do that, but the package has been negotiated over these many years. We are not prepared to change it at the moment.
MR HUMPHRIES (5.06): Madam Speaker, I should put on the record, in case Mr Moore has another fit, that we do believe that, despite the misgivings we have had about the way in which some aspects of this legislation have come out, it is important to understand that this is the result of a process of negotiation, albeit that it might not satisfy both sides entirely. We think there is some argument for letting this agreed arrangement apply at least for a period of time - perhaps only a short period, but at least for a period of time - to see how it impacts on the dealings between landlords and tenants. It seems to me that Mr Moore does have an agenda which he wants to follow, and it is not the agenda that has been agreed between parties in other places. I think the fact that we have agreement already achieved, which is reflected, broadly speaking, in what is in this package, should be respected and honoured, and we should work within that framework at least for the time being.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .