Page 3418 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 17 September 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
recommendation, which is introducing a real-time mandatory price monitoring scheme, akin to what is in New South Wales with their FuelCheck model.
While we currently have a number of privately operated apps like MotorMouth, Gas Buddy and Petrol Spy, not one of these accurately captures the market, or indeed all of the ACT market. Having a system which is trusted and comprehensive would enhance the transparency of prices and consumers’ confidence in them, enabling consumers to more easily shop around and take advantage of cheaper fuel.
The NRMA, which runs the New South Wales scheme, has stressed that extending the existing scheme to the ACT would be easy to do. We expect it to be at low cost to government and industry, given that the vast majority of the ACT fuel service station industry already participates in this scheme in New South Wales.
We have also recommended that the ACT government be proactive in approaching independent operators directly when considering the addition of new service stations in the ACT and consider setting aside highly visible land for independent service stations and investigating whether concessions for independents would be worthwhile. In recommending that the government consider setting aside highly visible land, we urge the ACT government to proceed with caution and have the utmost consideration for community values and expectations.
Finally, we have recommended that the ACT government review the level of rates, taxes and charges on service station operators in the ACT. The committee heard claims from industry that it can be expensive to do business in the ACT. We believe that a comparison of costs, taxes and rates that service stations are paying within the ACT and outside it needs to be completed to determine the accuracy of these claims and whether any changes to policy settings need to be made.
Importantly, the committee believes that any comparison should be done of like sites—that is, sites with similar visibility, market catchment and drive-by traffic. We have asked the government to report back to the Assembly on this by early next year.
I need to stress that there are only so many regulatory settings and policy approaches that we can recommend and have the government take up. We believe that in creating both greater competition and transparency we will be arming consumers with better choice and information in making fuel purchasing decisions. But consumers must take the next step and make behavioural changes. It is the implementation of our recommendations combined with consumers taking the next step that we believe results in the greatest opportunity, and the greatest chance, of ACT consumers ultimately paying fairer fuel prices.
In closing, I want to extend my thanks to the committee secretary, Andrew Snedden, who, in addition to his usual duties as a secretary, had a bloody tough job in trying to wrangle many of our witnesses to appear, but he was consistently dogged in his attempts. I thank those witnesses and submitters who contributed to this inquiry, including some who did so multiple times or had a number of ongoing queries from us. I also thank all those who we visited in Melbourne and Perth and who spoke very candidly with us. It was extremely helpful and contributed a great deal to our thinking.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video