Page 4880 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I will turn to some of the substantive parts of Mr Seselja’s motion that go to these issues. He raised Mr Graeme Samuel and his appearance before the Senate estimates committee on 22 October, and I am pleased he did. Mr Samuel was asked by Senator Bushby, Liberal senator from Tasmania, whether he was aware of the review of the ACT supermarket policy—great to see a Tasmanian Liberal senator taking an interest in ACT matters—conducted by John Martin. Mr Samuel replied that he was aware of the review but was not involved at all—not involved at all—in the preparation of the report.
Mr Seselja: Well, why wasn’t he? That’s a good question.
MR STANHOPE: My information, Mr Seselja, and I am glad you asked again, is that, contrary to that assertion, there has been considerable consultation with the ACCC and indeed with Mr Samuel in the context of the review.
Mr Seselja: So is he lying? Is he lying?
MR STANHOPE: Just listen to this. He said that he was aware of the review but was not involved at all. My information is that issues relating to the review of ACT supermarket competition policy were discussed at a meeting between John Martin and Graeme Samuel, attended also by ACCC Commissioner Joe Dimasi and General Manager, Mergers, Tim Holland, on 7 July 2009 at the ACCC offices. I understand that Mr John Martin has a record of that meeting.
Mrs Dunne: Graeme Samuel has lied? Is that what you are saying?
MR STANHOPE: What I am saying is that I think some further explanation from Mr Samuel would be warranted in that he informed the Senate that he was not involved at all in the preparation of the report. Mr John Martin has a record of a meeting held on 7 July between him, Mr Samuel, Commissioner Joe Dimasi and General Manager, Mergers, Tim Holland at which the issue was discussed and, further, the ACCC meeting of 7 July did discuss earlier advice the ACCC had provided to David Dawes, Deputy Chief Executive of the Chief Minister’s Department, in a letter dated 11 February 2009 referring to the possible Woolworths bid for the Kingston car park site. The letter from Mr Samuel’s organisation, the ACCC, to the Chief Minister’s Department stated:
… notwithstanding a decision by the ACCC not to oppose a proposed acquisition under s50, the ACT Government may still independently form the view that a direct sale—
these are the words of the ACCC—
or some form of modified bid process is appropriate. For instance, it may form the view that this is likely to result in an increase in supermarket competition in the ACT when compared with the alternatives.
There was the ACCC explicitly endorsing direct sales in some circumstances to enhance competition.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video