Senator»«JOYCE» (Queensland) (Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) (5:30 PM) —On behalf of the Chair of the Senate Economics References Committee, I present the final report of the committee on the GROCERYchoice website together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.
Ordered that the report be printed.
«Senator»«JOYCE» —I move:
That the Senate take note of the report.
When the Labor government came to power, one of their cries to the electorate—and probably a worthy cry—was that they were going to ease the squeeze on working families and be part of a mechanism to reduce the amount of money working families were then expending on groceries. In Australia we live in a nation that has the highest food inflation in the Western world, which is not something to be proud of; it is actually disgusting considering that we are one of the food baskets of the Western world. Through this process, the government believe that through an element of transparency consumers could become more discerning about where they could purchase their groceries from, and as such a GROCERYchoice website was suggested.
That is where the story comes unstuck, because like everything Labor touches it went to mud. It was an absolute fiasco. The GROCERYchoice website was, from go to whoa, a great metaphor for how the Australian Labor Party work. It is one of the reasons that we have to be so suspicious and circumspect about their grand visions in other areas, especially the proposed emissions trading scheme. The GROCERYchoice website, to give you just a few of the areas, brought in an issue where you could find out the price of groceries all right, but the price of groceries could be up to almost two months old—hardly worthwhile. It was ridiculed because it was open to ridicule. It was one of the most ridiculous concepts that ever had breath put into it. What became very peculiar was that, when the Labor Party were given the capacity to turn this into something that might actually have worked, they ran a thousand miles from it. They acceded to the lobbying that came to them from the major retailers and basically rolled over, and we scrapped the whole idea.
In the initial website we had the ridiculous issue of the regions, and I just want to give you some idea of the regions that they had. If you were looking for groceries, in the one region you could find Dalby and Charleville—or Kulpi, I imagine. I do not quite know how that worked when people wanted to go shopping. They could find the best deal, but the deal might be hundreds of kilometres away. Cairns was in the same region as Mount Isa. Another thing to note is how much this debacle cost. Of a possible appropriation of $12.8 million, the government appropriated in this farce $7.693 million.
«Senator» Barnett —With a $700,000 contingent liability.
«Senator»«JOYCE» —A $700,000 contingent liability. That money is now blown. That money could have gone to so many other, better causes: treatments for cancer, work on roads or a whole range of things. But that is the sort of cost that you now associate with the Labor Party. That is the completely inept sense of management that is so ably personified by GROCERYchoice. If you want to know how the Labor Party works, it is like this: splendid, soaring rhetoric, marvellous statements and a sense of an overwhelming desire to bring betterment. Then, when it comes to the point where the rubber hits the road, you get such things as GROCERYchoice.
I have no doubt that «Senator» Guy Barnett, who will be following up, will go through some of the intricacies, especially the queries in regard to Retail*Facts and exactly what happened there and how there remain serious queries on the actual process that the government has gone through in coming up with this fiasco. We did not ever really get choice. Australia still has to suffer the sins of having the highest food inflation in the Western world. The Labor party have sneaked away from one of their major election commitments, and this is what we are going to see now: a plethora of election commitments the Labor Party leave behind.
What are they going to do to ‘ease the squeeze’, to use their rhetoric, on working families? This seems to go hand in glove with their other statements. We see that the ACCC, under their guidance and instruction, has been completely and utterly destitute in pursuing the law in such things as section 46(1AA) of the Trade Practices Act, the Birdsville amendment. It is almost as if the ACCC are under instructions to do nothing. Where they do get involved, what we see is such things as GROCERYchoice. When is the Labor Party going to be part and parcel of the instructions to the ACCC to actually go in there and protect competition and bring about an outcome? When is the Labor Party going to be able to ask the ACCC to enforce the laws of this nation? When does that happen?
In 2007, with the introduction of section 46(1AA), we had the capacity to outlaw predatory pricing. As of this moment that we stand here there has not been one case that has gone to court. I think it was back in June that I asked the responsible minister in this chamber to tell me how many cases had been pursued under section 46(1AA). Since that time, what answer have I had? We are now in November and they have never even got back to my office. They have never responded. It goes to show you the sort of diligence about detail that is in the Labor Party: we asked a question on notice, they took it on notice and we got no response. This is the process that they follow in the Senate. It is a form of contempt. They do not want to get to the bottom of issues—and this is the party that we are going to make responsible for the emissions trading scheme, the CPRS.
Is the CPRS going to be a more dramatic and dynamic form of the GROCERYchoice debacle? How could we possibly, as a recommendation of their capacity, capability and diligence, give them the responsibility to divide such things as an emissions trading scheme when with GROCERYchoice, which was an absolute free kick in front of the post—Choice actually came out and was willing to take it on and go forward with it—they dropped the ball even when it was handed to them. They dropped it bang in front of the post. This is what the voting public has to recognise: the Labor rhetoric and the Labor delivery are vastly different animals. If you become part and parcel to it or if you sign up to say that you think that they are the mechanism of diligence, that they are the mechanism of capability, that they have the capacity to actually bring about an outcome—when you are thinking about that, think about GROCERYchoice.
Where does GROCERYchoice leave the independents now? Where does it leave the consumer? The consumer is sitting back, still waiting. The Labor Party’s soaring rhetoric has passed and what has the consumer been left with? The consumer in Australia has been left with the highest food inflation in the Western world and a government without any capacity, any desire or any motivation to do anything about it. When we look at the farming sector, are the farmers getting a better deal? No, the farmers are not getting a better deal. The farmers are still being screwed down to the bare minimum in dairy prices. Shops are basically being overtaken by imported products. Australian products are being moved off the shelves, farmers are being screwed down, consumers are being done over—and where are the Labor Party on this?
What have the Labor Party done about all of this? They used soaring rhetoric to get themselves elected and then we had the absolute debacle which was GROCERYchoice. It is the greatest metaphor for what this party are, but we are about to see the next stage of it. The next stage of this metaphor, of the debacle of Labor Party management, will be the emissions trading scheme, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme—whatever you want to call it. That is chapter No. 2, and chapter No. 2 will be the same. It will just come in pictures and have about 5,000 times the extent of what we had with GROCERYchoice and infinitely more effect. I look forward to using this to drive a nail through everything that the Labor Party do from this point forward. (Time expired)