Page 4882 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
ACT government’s policy enabling Aldi, Supabarn and Franklins to expand their presence in the ACT would force the two supermarket giants, Coles and Woolworths, to lower their prices. Professor Zumbo also said that Graeme Samuel’s criticisms of the ACT policy were, the Canberra Times reports, “not warranted’.
I assume that when Mr Seselja refers to supermarket industry concerns and confusion in relation to certain recommendations contained in the review of ACT supermarket competition policy he refers, quite specifically or most specifically, to recommendations 6 and 8. It is a pity, perhaps, that the wording of Mr Seselja’s own motion is so confusing as to make this a matter for conjecture rather than certainty. But we must assume that this is what the Leader of the Opposition means.
In relation to recommendation 6, a number of local players in the ACT supermarket sector have sought and been given clarification from the government on this wording, as has Mr Seselja himself in a personal briefing from Mr Martin. What the recommendation is seeking to support—this was essentially half of Mr Seselja’s presentation just now, which misrepresented what we are seeking to achieve, and which through our more detailed response we will achieve—is a process whereby genuine independent operators are given maximum opportunity to participate in future site allocation processes.
As you would be aware, Metcash is the dominant wholesaler to independent supermarkets outside the operations of Coles and Woolworths, but Metcash also supports some IGAs and retailers more directly. Since the release of the Martin report, the local supermarket sector has advised my department that none of the local IGAs in the ACT are Metcash controlled, so it follows that no existing operators would be precluded from any site eligibility process.
The ACT government has also agreed to endorse appropriate competition criteria which are transparent and objective as outlined in recommendation 8. The Supermarket Competition Coordination Committee is currently reviewing the competition and assessment criteria in the Martin review, including the length of experience by a supermarket operator. My department is liaising closely with the industry to develop the assessment criteria and you can be sure that they will be robust and transparent.
The government recognises the important contribution that small independent supermarket operators make to the grocery sector in the ACT and to the ACT economy more broadly. Indeed, it does not require Mr Seselja to remind the chamber of this. The thrust of the government’s new policy does so in no uncertain terms. The Martin review noted that there are more than 50 smaller independent supermarkets in the ACT. These supermarkets make an important contribution in terms of convenience shopping, particularly at local centres. The ACT government has agreed to remove some of the planning constraints that prevented some of the successful local supermarkets from expanding.
Similarly, in relation to the Leader of the Opposition’s next point, the thrust of our new supermarket policy is to promote competition and diversity to provide downward pressure on grocery prices, reduce queues and provide better levels of service for
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video