Page 4879 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Stanhope in his press release says, “This is about protecting Woolies and Coles.” What a ridiculous statement. The press release that was put out by the Chief Minister is a work of fiction. It is not based in fact at all. He either did not read the motion or he chose to deliberately misrepresent it completely. Either way, he is not interested in a rational debate, which is what we had the last time this was considered. The last time this was discussed in the Assembly it appeared we could have a rational debate. But instead the Chief Minister has gone and simply made things up because he believes it suits his argument. We have a very clear position that says do not squeeze out our independent local operators. Do not make it harder for them to expand their businesses.
Make sure if there is any ambiguity that you clear it up, that you ensure that these concerns are addressed and that when we see some of these sites released we have the maximum number of independent operators being able to bid. We have to ensure that we do not exclude Supa IGAs because someone may not have been running a full-line supermarket for 10 years. Why would we put in that kind of restraint? Why the tie-in to Metcash? Why would we want, simply because Metcash is the wholesaler for these independent operators, to exclude them from bidding?
These are serious concerns. They are concerns that not just local small business operators have but the ACCC has, that the association that represents independent grocers has and that we in the opposition have. We in the Canberra Liberals believe very strongly in the role of small business. We do not want to see competition artificially constrained in this way. We do not want to see them discriminated against.
That is why this motion should be supported. We look forward to the support of the Assembly for this very important motion. (Time expired.)
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Minister for Transport, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs and Minister for the Arts and Heritage) (5.18): There should be no misunderstanding about what would happen today if the Leader of the Opposition’s motion was passed. It would be the end of supermarket competition reform in this town. It would be the end of the reform which we are seeking to achieve now and into the future. It would, for the sake of a tiny short-term political advantage, mean the end of an exercise in quite robust policy development—policy overwhelmingly applauded and embraced by almost everyone in our community, from grocery buyers to the business community, mums and dads and local shop owners.
The government rejects this motion and rejects it in its entirety. It is a motion that puts the truth out there for every Canberran to see—that Zed Seselja and the Liberals want to protect or stand up for or stick up for or continue to stick up for Woolies and Coles. But this government, the Stanhope government, is on the side of the consumer. It is that simple: the Liberals are on the side of the big boys; Labor is on the side of the mums and dads, those that are out there pushing the shopping trolleys; on the side of working men and women popping into the local shop for a litre of milk on the way home from work. That is who we are sticking up for.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video