Page 290 - Week 01 - Thursday, 14 February 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The explanatory statement claims that this will give context for consumers to allow them to make a comparison between the stocking density listed on the carton and the ACT government’s preferred maximum stocking density. I think it could equally cause confusion, to be frank, or give a false impression.
What is clear, though, is that the Greens member of the government is being forced to comply to a large extent with the national standard and is pretty cranky about it. All retailers will now have to share and promote this information in the ACT when there is an endeavour to have a national standard. We will not be opposing this today but I do not think that it is necessarily helpful.
The other substantive amendments relate to fuel and the signs that are at the front of service stations. They prevent retailers from displaying a conditional discount on the fuel price board. This amendment I think has more legitimacy, to be frank, than the previous one.
Under the bill, the fuel price board at the petrol station must display the actual price of the fuel as it is being sold at the pump, not as it includes any discounts that may or may not apply to the customer as they approach the station. I filled my car up this morning and was not sure whether I had any Woollies points on my card, so I did not know what price of fuel I would be paying, whether it was the 141c or the 145c per litre, regardless of what was on the board.
The bill also requires that, as the fuel prices change, the changes must be applied to the pumps and the fuel price board in a prescribed order to ensure that the price at the pump is always the same as or lower than the price on the board. As fuel prices are becoming a growing area of concern for Canberrans, laws that promote frank, direct and, most importantly, consistent information on petrol pricing are a worthwhile step forward in helping Canberrans get the best possible deal.
Noting all of the above comments, we will not be opposing this bill.
MS CHEYNE (Ginninderra) (4.33): Many of us are trying our very best to make more informed decisions when it comes to purchasing groceries at the supermarket. We care about what we place in our baskets and our trolleys and we care about the food that ends up on our plates.
If there is one scenario where consumers will often go the extra mile to understand where their produce has come from and how it has been produced, it is in the selection of eggs. Walk down any aisle and you will see various labels on egg cartons, including caged eggs and free-range eggs. But these labels do not quite paint the full picture.
The introduction in April last year of the mandatory Australian Consumer Law (Free Range Egg Labelling) Information Standard 2018 meant that a carton of eggs could be labelled free range if it was produced by hens subject to a maximum stocking density of 10,000 birds per hectare. We do not think that is good enough. The ACT government has long supported a maximum standard of 1,500 hens per hectare.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video