Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That these bills be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speeches read as follows—

AUTONOMOUS SANCTIONS AMENDMENT BILL 2024

Australia's autonomous sanctions framework is a critical tool of foreign policy which the government uses to demonstrate to the world that we will not tolerate human rights abuses, flouting of the international rules-based order, and the undermining of international peace and security.

In a challenging global environment, with new and emerging situations of international concern, sanctions are a potent tool to reinforce the values to which Australia ascribes.

Australia's sanctions are a highly targeted and effective. Through the imposition of travel bans and targeted financial sanctions, we hold actors to account for their egregious behaviour, and prevent illegal activity by imposing costs on those who transact with them.

Australia's sanctions framework provides the Government with the ability to respond quickly and flexibly with our international partners to apply sanctions, exert pressure and effect change across the world.

Since being elected in May 2022, as of 12 February 2024, this Government has been decisive in imposing nearly 500 sanctions under the autonomous sanctions framework for a range of matters including flagrant human rights violations, nuclear proliferation, significant cyber attacks and threats to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries.

We have demonstrated our leadership in imposing autonomous sanctions on 190 individuals and 102 entities in connection with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, including those linked to Iran's provision of drones to Russia, and human rights abuses against Russian opposition figures.

We have sanctioned 40 individuals and 20 entities for their involvement in the oppression of women and girls in Iran, and the violent crackdown on protesters since protests began on 16 September 2022.

We have sanctioned 29 individuals and 69 entities for their involvement in the nuclear and missile programs of Iran and North Korea, and for their destabilising activities in the region.

We have also imposed sanctions on 16 individuals and 7 entities responsible for the coup d'état and ongoing repression and violence in Myanmar and for providing funding to the military regime.

Recently, we have also imposed Australia's first ever autonomous cyber sanction on an individual for their role in the compromise of the Medibank Private Network in 2022.

In the face of an increasing need to respond to situations of international concern, it is necessary to ensure that Australia's autonomous sanctions framework is robust and clear. The Bill will help us do this.

The Bill amends the Autonomous Sanctions Act to remove any possibility of doubt that individuals or entities can be validly sanctioned based on their past conduct or status. Imposing sanctions based on past conduct or status is an effective way to reinforce the message that actions have consequences, not only to the individual or entity targeted, but to others now and in the future.

The Bill also clarifies the validity of sanctions listings that rely on the Minister's discretion to impose sanctions. In doing so, the Bill provides certainty and transparency to the Australian community, so that they can effectively comply with sanctions laws.

I commend the Bill to the chamber.

COMPETITION AND CONSUMER AMENDMENT (FAIR GO FOR CONSUMERS AND SMALL BUSINESS) BILL 2024

One of the summer's box office hits is Wonka—the prequel to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. Without giving too much away, it's the tale of how Willy Wonka takes on the chocolate cartel of Slugworth, Fickelgruber and Prodnose.

Between them, the cartel controls the chocolate market. Prices are kept high. Innovators are kept out. Big chocolate has the police in its pocket, and is willing to use every bitter trick to preserve its sweet control over the market.

For many Australian consumers, Wonka will resonate. Over recent years, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has taken action against anti-competitive behaviour in pharmaceuticals, finance, waste disposal and building construction. When so-called competitors collude, the public pays the price.

As Wonka vividly shows, a lack of competition isn't just bad for consumers—like the chocolate-loving public. It's also bad for innovators, such as a new entrepreneur who uses giraffe milk. In the Australian economy, robust competition has been a major driver of economic growth. During the early-1990s, competition reforms helped unleash a surge of dynamism in the economy, leading to a rapid increase in productivity. Wage growth followed, and the income of the typical Australian household rose by around $5000.

Whether it is airlines, telecommunications, supermarkets, franchisees getting an unfair deal, or small businesses' cash flows suffering due to slow payments, we have seen too many examples of consumers and small businesses not getting a fair go.

Competition brings out the best from our companies. Innovation is more likely to emerge when firms test themselves against competitors, not when a monopolist dominates the market. Uncompetitive markets aren't just bad for growth, they're bad for fairness too.

When consumers lack choice, prices tend to be higher and service levels tend to be lower. When big business can push around small suppliers, consumers suffer as well. When workers lack choice, wages tend to be lower.

Uncompetitive markets hurt the most vulnerable and worsen inequality. If you don't have a car, it's harder to shop around for the best deal. If getting a fair price from your supplier involves an annual phone call, then the well-heeled are more likely to make the call. It's no accident that payday lenders and door-to-door water cooler salespeople tend to proliferate in low-income communities.

Over recent decades, the problem of market concentration in Australia has become worse. Market concentration has risen. In 2001-02, the market share of the largest four firms averaged 41 per cent. By 2018-19, this figure had risen to 43 per cent. Price markups have swelled. Meanwhile, the number of new firms with employees has fallen, at least as a share of the total pool of businesses.

These declines in market dynamism have coincided with a lousy period for productivity. In the decade before Labor took office, Australia recorded our worst productivity performance in the post-war era. Real wages flatlined. And because earnings are the main source of income for most households, real household income growth was painfully sluggish.

In 1992, Prime Minister Paul Keating tasked competition expert Fred Hilmer to lead reforms that would collaborate across federal, state and territory governments to boost competition.

In themselves, many of the reforms were small. In one case, a state law that banned bakers from starting their ovens before a particular hour in the morning was abolished.

But by focusing attention on competition, the reforms added up. Assessing their impact in 2005, the Productivity Commission concluded that National Competition Policy had been a major driver of the 1990s' surge in productivity.

That analysis estimated a permanent increase of 2.5 per cent in Australia's national income from competition reform. Today, that lift equates to around $50 billion a year, or around $5000 per household.

The challenges the Australian economy faces today are different from those of a generation ago.

We need to make the most of artificial intelligence and digitalisation. It's vital to support the net zero transformation. We need to ensure that workers aren't unfairly prevented from shifting to a better job. And we must look after the most vulnerable.

Since coming to office, the Albanese government has been hard at work examining Australia's competition law and policies.

We have increased the penalties for breaches of competition and consumer law. It is hard for small businesses to compete if larger companies use sneaky tactics to try to dominate the market. That's why Labor increased penalties for corporations engaging in anti-competitive behaviour from $10 million to $50 million, ensuring the price for misconduct is high enough to deter unfair activity.

We have strengthened protections against unfair contract terms to help level the playing field in negotiations between big corporations and both small businesses and consumers. These reforms gave regulators the power to seek a court penalty for businesses that include unfair terms in standard form contracts. Small businesses and consumers often lack the resources and bargaining power to negotiate contracts, and previous laws against unfair terms did not provide adequate protections. While big businesses previously only risked an unfair term being declared void, our stronger protections means that businesses can now face substantial penalties for using unfair terms and therefore will be more motivated to ensure their contracts are fair.

We have appointed former competition minister Dr Craig Emerson to lead a review of the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct, to ensure that the supermarket sector is working as it should. With many families feeling the squeeze, it's vital that Australians pay fair prices at the checkout and suppliers get a fair price for their products. Dr Emerson will bring his wisdom and compassion to this vital area of economic reform.

We have directed the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to investigate pricing and competition in the supermarket sector to ensure Australians are paying a fair price for their groceries.

The inquiry, the first of its kind in over a decade, will investigate the competitiveness of retail prices and allegations of price gouging in the supermarket sector. It's an important part of the Government's broader efforts to boost competition and put downward pressure on the price of essentials for Australians. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission will produce an interim report in 2024 and final report in early 2025 which will provide the Government with findings and recommendations.

We have agreed to deliver respected consumer group CHOICE with funding to provide price transparency and comparison reports on a quarterly basis for three years. Starting from the second quarter of 2024, CHOICE will provide shoppers with better information on the comparative costs of grocery goods at different retailers, highlighting those charging the most and the least. The provision of this information will empower Australian consumers to make informed choices about food and grocery purchases.

We have established Competition Taskforce located in the Commonwealth Treasury, to foster greater dynamism in the economy. Staffed by a crack team of competition experts, the Taskforce's role is to produce practical policies that will boost competition and help fuel innovation and wage growth.

We need to ensure our competition policy settings are fit for purpose in the face of the big shifts underway in our economy, so we can make the most of digitalisation, the growth in services, the net zero transformation, while supporting our nation's most vulnerable.

The review will look at competition laws, policies and institutions to ensure they remain fit for purpose, with a focus on reforms that would increase productivity, reduce the cost of living and boost wages.

Among the Competition Taskforce's first priorities is to look at Australia's merger laws. When big firms join forces, the resulting entity has better economies of scale, which gives it the potential to benefit consumers. But if it wields significant market power, it can also drive up prices. At a time when many other countries are reviewing their merger codes, it's only sensible to consider whether Australia's laws need an update.

The Taskforce is also examining 'non-competes' and related clauses that restrict workers from shifting to a better-paying job. According to a recent survey, one in five workers has a clause in their employment contract that makes it harder for them to move to a better job. These 'non-compete clauses' used to apply only to well-heeled corporate executives, but in recent years, they're being used to prevent early childhood workers and hairdressers from switching firms. When employees have fewer choices of where to work, they're less likely to earn a fair return for their labour. We will have more to say on restraint of trade clauses in the coming months.

More competition means better prices, which is why Labor committed to establishing a 'designated complaints' function within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Fair Go for Consumers and Small Business) Bill 2024 delivers on this commitment, with designated complainants being able to raise significant or systemic complaints with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission from July 2024.

Consumer and Small Business advocates have expressed the need for a consumer complaints framework that allows certain designated entities to bring evidence of significant or systemic market issues to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for consideration.

In cases of significant or systemic market issues affecting consumers and small business, it is often consumer and small business advocates who play an important role bringing publicity and attention to governments, policy makers and the community on serious and systemic issues impacting Australians.

This Bill provides the framework to empower designated consumer and small business advocates to bring forward evidence of significant or systemic market issues to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for a response in a timely and transparent way.

A range of entities may apply to the Minister to be approved as a designated complainant, including a corporation, an individual, or an unincorporated association. This provides an opportunity for entities that represent the interests of consumers or small businesses in Australia to become designated complainants, regardless of the entity type.

Upon receiving a designated complaint, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission will be required to assess the complaint and notify the designated complainant within 90 days of any action they intend to take.

If the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission proposes to act on a designated complaint, they must commence that action as soon as practicable and within 6 months. Any response by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission will be based on their existing powers and functions under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and may include education, research, compliance and enforcement functions, or a combination.

The designated complaints function will promote transparency and accountability, with the Minister and Australian Competition and Consumer Commission being required to publish certain information on the Department of the Treasury or Australian Competition and Consumer Commission website.

During stakeholder consultations a number of consumer and small business advocates have indicated that they support the establishment of a designated complaints function within the ACCC.

Full details of the measures are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.

Ordered that further consideration of the second reading of these bills be adjourned to 14 May 2024, in accordance with standing order 111.

Ordered that the bills be listed on the Notice Paper as separate orders of the day.