Page 2081 - Week 07 - Thursday, 17 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (6.08), in reply: I thank members for their contributions, particularly Mr Westende's very impassioned contribution. The Liberals, predictably, are opposed to government intervention in a market by price control, or intervention to attract independents into a market. They are opposed to any intervention in a market. That is a predictable response from the Liberal Party, and it would be a predictable response in relation to a government that was seen to be intervening in a free market. What was surprising in the Liberal Party's contribution, in particular Mr Humphries's contribution, was his acknowledgment that we do not have a competitive and free market in the ACT and that we have, in his words, a cartel. I am not sure that even I have used the word "cartel" in relation to the oil industry in the ACT, but it is an accurate assessment. I suspect that Mr Westende's impassioned opposition to this - and we acknowledge that he has operated very innovatively and successfully in business for many years - is because he has operated in a business environment which is a free market and which is not dominated by cartels. As such, he has done very well, and all strength to his arm.
The oil industry in Canberra is not a free competitive market. It is a market which exhibits all the hallmarks of the uncompetitive price fixing of a cartel. We see no distinction between the prices throughout Canberra. We are all familiar with the arguments. What does Government do to respond to that? This Government has taken a broad approach. We have, firstly, proposed price control legislation, which is now finally before the Assembly, that would give the Government power to intervene at each stage in the process to set a maximum wholesale price. The PSA approves a wholesale price. The legislation under which that is structured is not legislation, on the advice I have had and on the view of the ACT Government, that sets a maximum wholesale price. Therefore, on the advice before me, the ACT Government does have power to set a maximum wholesale price which differs from the PSA price. We do believe that we have that power and we may choose to exercise that. We clearly have power to set a retail margin and a maximum retail price.
An attempt to evade ACT laws by simply signing a contract in New South Wales for the supply of petrol into the ACT would be easily subvertible by ACT law. We clearly have power, as does every parliament in Australia, to pass laws for the peace, order and good government of the Territory, however they impact upon the Territory. Therefore a contract in New South Wales for the supply of goods to Canberra is amenable to ACT law. This Assembly has power to control such transactions.
Mr De Domenico: What about a contract overseas?
MR CONNOLLY: That would be more difficult to enforce. However, it would be impossible to physically arrange the supply of refined petroleum from Singapore to Canberra, other than at vastly great expense. We think we have the legal power to achieve what we want to achieve, but we have always said that we do not intend to have price control 365 days a year. This is very much a reserve weapon. There have been occasions when it would be most appropriate to use it, and I doubt whether anyone would have disputed my exercise of these powers, if I had had them, in April of 1991, when we saw the extraordinary
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .