New compliance red tape for stall holders and market/event managers overview

I will update this blog as information helps define the issues

This Market issue with the new precedents set by the ERD court are causing division, where there should be unity.

The findings have changed only one thing, a technicality in fact, they have determined a stall to be a shop, in the definitions of the development act.

There are people saying this does not affect them, or this is not an issue, or where the links are, a lot of miss information is undermining our ability to unite and tackle this issue in a timely manner.

Here is a link to the outcome.

The next link is to my initial argument to the ERD court

Stalls, Markets and fetes were considered merit use, so all approvals of present and past events like these were approved by councils and development panels as “Merit applications” they were all supported by development law.

The findings in the ERD court have now defined stalls as “Shops” and a group of stalls as a “shopping centre” if they are set up to display or retail goods of any kind.

This finding can affect development approvals Australia wide.

Shops and shopping centres are NOT Merit use in most locations present markets and community events are held. They are now considered “Non Complying” so neither envisaged nor encouraged.

Here is a link to how non complying applications are handled;

I have spoken with lawyers, development experts, MP’s and interested parties, so we are still trying to work out the implications for every small to large community event.

At this stage we all have a few options, many events and markets like mine, are currently approved, but none would have gone through that process as a shopping centre, so most of us are at risk wither now or into the future, future applications under these findings will be in a heap of trouble.

The first option is to take the finding to court and appeal it, to make a stall a stall again and of merit to the community, but only myself or the council can make that application to the full bench of the Supreme Court, and we only have 21 days from the 21st of January.  is the link to help fund a court challenge

The second option is to lobby government to amend the definitions, I have been at that for some time, well before these findings, Mark Parnell from the greens put up an amendment and will again at the next sitting of parliament, last time Labor and Liberal did not support the amendment.

The third option for us all is to comply and when councils receive a complaint, each of us will have re-apply for approvals as “non complying” unless of course you are situated in an area zoned retail, but change of use might still get you.

There are sections in the development act to deal with trifling matters, which may protect single fund raising stalls, but that is a guess at this stage, the courts and development panels will have to deal with that.

There also may be massive issues with event insurance and stall holder insurance costs, again, too early to tell.

My suggestion is to continue to lobby parliament, and to lodge an appeal to ensure common-sense has the best chance.

I meet with the council on Friday, and I believe Salisbury council and several others are to lobby parliament through the minister to amend the definitions in the act.

These are the facts so far.

Mark Aldridge


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: