Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Leader of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Hansard source

May I say at the outset that we on this side of this House welcome the statement by the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs, albeit with some reservations. Indeed, we welcome all practical and sensible measures to reduce the diversity of legislation currently operating in the states and territories. I have said many times that the Australian economy is handicapped by a lack of uniformity, particularly in legislation that affects business. Not only does it result in increased costs for companies that operate interstate—costs that feed through to the consumer—but it also weakens our competitive position internationally. There is also a cost to the taxpayer in maintaining separate bureaucracies in each state.

The diversity of legislation makes it harder for companies to compete and grow their market share abroad. We do not have a large internal market in Australia, unlike the European Union, the United States, China and India. For our economy to prosper, we need to be competitive in export markets and competitive with those countries which have single national legislation covering the conduct of business.

I note the estimate by the Productivity Commission that these reforms will produce a net gain to the community of between $1.5 billion and $4.5 billion. I would remind the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs that, as long ago as 2006, the Productivity Commission calculated that a reduction in regulatory compliance costs would result in a saving of $8 billion a year, or 0.8 per cent of GDP, through developing a national approach to policymaking in a range of areas. This would be a significant bonus for the national economy, and I hope that the minister and his colleagues bear that in mind in their negotiations with the states and territories on other important matters such as workers compensation and occupational health and safety.

In this case, it is not just business that benefits; consumers will also enjoy rights that are consistent across Australia. With the huge growth in e-commerce over the last few years, we owe it to consumers to deliver consistency within our national boundaries, even if we cannot guarantee it in international transactions. Consumers will, of course, also benefit from the ban on unfair contract terms and the provision for action for damages for classes of consumer affected by unfair terms.

We also welcome the efforts made to ensure that, having adopted the single national consumer law, the states and territories stay in step with each other and that the law remains consistent across the land. I trust we will see this admirable approach followed when it comes to other parts of the government’s agenda on the seamless economy. After years of stalemate at the Council of Australian Governments, with the states and territories refusing on principle to agree to rationalisation, I sincerely hope that they continue to act in the national interest so the Australian economy and all Australians can benefit from greater consistency and efficiency.

Talking of consistency, we are on the record as favouring the enforcement of consumer law being placed solely in the hands of the ACCC rather than the proposed joint arrangement with the state and territory fair trading offices. That remains the case. Not only would a single national enforcement body be more efficient with lower costs to the taxpayer but it would also ensure consistent enforcement. It is one thing to have a single national consumer law, but if that law is not consistently enforced then many of the benefits to businesses and consumers will be lost. Both groups need to know that the same interpretation of the law will apply on both sides of a state border. I would welcome further information from the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs on how he intends to deliver consistent enforcement.

Reform of the Commonwealth and state legislation has the potential for huge benefits. What we are really talking about here is nothing less than the modernisation of the Australian economy. Until recently the government has had the benefit of dealing with Labor administrations in all states and territories. I am sure that we can count on the new administration in Western Australia to do what is right for Western Australians and all Australians when it comes to practical and sensible reform.

Consumer law may well prove to be the easiest of areas to rationalise and yet the government did not go far enough on the matter of enforcement. The next challenge for the government is to ensure that a single national consumer law and product safety regime is drawn up on the basis of best international practice and that consumers and Australian businesses are not left with a second-best or lowest-common-denominator approach. We welcome this first step. The government has laid the foundations for reform. We will watch closely in this and other areas what the states and territories allow to be built on those foundations.

See this speech in context