Page 4144 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 21 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
planning policies and through other policies to encourage greater competition when it comes to food retailing in the ACT. We know what the dominance is of the major retail players, and we know that we need to continue to provide for opportunities for greater competition in the market.
The government does not resile from the steps it has taken to date, but it recognises that those steps will need to continue to be refined and improved in response to changes in the market and to changing perceptions in the community. But this government has been prepared to make supermarket competition policy an issue. It has been the Labor government that has been prepared to put it on the agenda and it has been the Labor government that has been prepared to show the leadership on the issue of trying to create greater competition when it comes to supermarket retailing, because that is what our community expects.
There is a lot of discussion in Ms Le Couteur’s motion about the recent approval that I made as the responsible minister for the redevelopment of the Giralang local centre. I think it is entirely inappropriate that Ms Le Couteur seeks, through the Assembly, to have some sort of review or examination of the decision making in relation to that matter. It is inappropriate because, as Ms Le Couteur knows and as she knew before she put this motion on the notice paper, this matter is subject to an application before the Supreme Court for a review of my decision.
That is an entirely appropriate course of action for those who are dissatisfied with my decision to seek. The government stands by its decision. It will reiterate to the court that we believe the decision is valid and it will be up to the court to determine those matters. But it is not the place of this Assembly or the Greens to try to use an inquiry or a debate in this place to second-guess or pre-empt the outcome of the Supreme Court application. The government will not be supporting the motion for that reason, as well as the other reasons that I outlined.
The government is undertaking a review of the way our commercial zones in the territory plan currently operate. That review will consider the uses permitted within various commercial zones, the geographic coverage of each of the zones, building heights, parking and access, as well as the introduction of a limit on the size of supermarkets at local centres. I anticipate that a draft variation to the territory plan’s commercial policy will be released for public comment in 2012.
The government is not standing still on this space. The government has been taking a broad range of actions to look at its policy settings and to encourage greater competition in the ACT supermarket market. We have done this through direct grants of land and sales to other competitors, such as Aldi and Supabarn, as well as to IGAs to encourage their future development and strengthen their role in the market.
We have approved redevelopments that include the development of new supermarkets, such as Aldi at Jamison and at Cooleman Court, and we have identified the release of sites for other supermarket development that preclude further acquisition of those sites by the big, dominant retailers of Woolworths and Coles. These are policies that we stand by because they are encouraging greater diversity in our supermarket offer here in the ACT, and we believe that is ultimately to the benefit of consumers. The government will not be supporting this motion today.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video