Chris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

The honourable member clearly did not listen to the 13 hours of evidence before Senate estimates—four hours from Treasury and, I think I am right in saying, a full day of evidence from the ACCC. Both the Treasury and the ACCC made it clear that the econometric analysis shows that even if the assumption is that 100 per cent of people buy on the cheapest day of the week, which is generally Tuesday, then they will be better off—less better off than the others who buy on expensive days of the week but still better off. The honourable member for Cowper indicates that the government should compensate people for being better off. That is a concept I have some difficulty with because, as I said, the econometric analysis shows that even people who buy on the cheapest day, even if the assumption is built into the model that 100 per cent of people buy on the cheapest day, are better off.

As I have pointed out in the House, and as both the Treasury and the ACCC pointed out in very considerable evidence against which the opposition was not able to land a blow of any description as to the econometric analysis or the ACCC’s recommendations, the reasons for Fuelwatch are threefold. Firstly, it provides consumers with a lot more information about where they can buy the cheapest petrol. The difference between the cheapest and most expensive petrol in any city on any given day is substantial. It can be as high as 30c a litre. If you can find petrol which is 30c a litre cheaper, that is a considerably greater saving than, say, 5c a litre. That is a considerably greater saving which Fuelwatch would give people the opportunity to make.

Secondly, it deals with information asymmetry, what the ACCC has called as close to collusion as you can be and still be legal, which the ACCC has identified in its very substantial report into the petrol industry in Australia. The third reason is that the econometric analysis showed a slight downward pressure on prices. As I have said several times, and as I indicated even on the day we announced this, you would do this even if there was no downward impact on prices, as long as you reassured yourself there was no upward impact on prices. You would do this even if there were no downward impact on prices, because of the information asymmetry and because of the much greater information given to consumers which currently retailers share amongst themselves. I can confirm the government will not provide compensation to people, because they are actually better off under the modelling.

See this speech in context