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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 8 Hansard (24 October) . . Page.. 1920 ..

MR DE DOMENICO (continuing):

as Mrs Carnell and Mr Wood said, when Ms Follett was Chief Minister of the Territory from 1991 to 1994 and, finally, at the first COAG meeting Mrs Carnell went to in April this year all she did, literally, was to sign off what had already been agreed to by two previous Chief Ministers of the ACT, every other State and Territory government and the Federal Government over a period of about five years.

In summary, the Bill was not developed overnight or in isolation. As everybody would be aware, it is the result of considerable analysis and debate by the Commonwealth, all States and Territories over a significant period of time. This is significant in that it now shows the degree of bipartisanship on the issue. The benefits of increased competition were clearly shown by the Hilmer Committee in its report, and this legislative package is a culmination of those recommendations. The development of the policies and the supporting legislative package has been the subject of much community and industry consultation. The process that brought this Bill to the floor of the Assembly can therefore be described as evolutionary rather than revolutionary. The Bill provides the legislative base for achieving and maintaining consistent and complementary competition laws and policies, which will apply to all businesses in Australia, regardless of whether they are publicly or privately owned.

Under this Act, ACT government business activities will face the same conduct provisions of Part IV of the Trade Practices Act as their private sector rivals - if there are any, and I stress that. The community will see the benefits of the application of this law in more efficient government business activities and greater choice due to greater opportunities for competition. It will also result in better accountability as the cost of producing goods and services commercially will be more transparent. It is important to stress that this legislation extends coverage of Part IV of the Trade Practices Act to government business activities. It does not apply to the normal functions of government. Mr Wood stressed that, and he was right. For the edification of the Greens, it does not apply to the normal functions of government. These are specifically excluded in the legislation.

In implementing national competition policy, we will not be introducing competition for competition's sake. I repeat, for those people who might not have heard it the first time, that in implementing national competition policy all governments, including the ACT Government, will not be introducing competition for competition's sake. We will pursue competition only where the public benefit outweighs the costs. We will take into account, as the competition principles agreement requires us to do, the interests of consumers. We will have regard to economic and regional development and ecologically sustainable development, and issues such as occupational health and safety, industrial relations and access and equity will not be overlooked. This Government has always maintained a commitment to community service obligations being served, and this Bill will not compromise that commitment. So it is nonsense for the Greens to stand up in this place and suggest that the only people in Australia who have any notion of ecologically sustainable development, or all those nice warm and fuzzy things the Greens think of from time to time, are the Greens. That is just not the case, and had you been in this place long enough you would have realised that most of the things we do in this place we do with cooperation and bipartisanship.

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