I love going to the Gabba in Brisbane to watch the Brisbane Lions or the Queensland Bulls, or even going to Lang Park to support the Broncos. I have even been to see some Brisbane Strikers’ games in recent years. Unfortunately, as a politician I do not have a lot of time to do that nowadays. But anybody who has been to the Gabba or to Lang Park and bought a pie knows something about the concept of a monopoly. A simple pie and a drink will set you back quite a hefty sum; you almost have to take out a mortgage.

I love a meat pie, and it is for a captive audience so it just goes with the sporting event. I know that stadium owners need to make a quid, but it is obvious to all sporting fans that when there is no competition consumers lose out.

That is why it is so important that in the broader marketplace, beyond pies at the footy, that we have strong and effective competition policy. That is what our economic system is based on. We need strong competition laws to keep down grocery and fuel prices and the many other cost-of-living pressures. I should go on the record and say that my pecuniary interests state that I am a shareholder in one of the major supermarkets. Nevertheless, I think there was a Choice investigation that showed whenever you have Woolies and Coles it is almost like a duopoloy. But when you put an Aldi in the same area, the prices go down at all three supermarkets. It just goes to show that it is not even simple enough to have Woolies and Coles, or two competing people; you need a real market. A real market is where you have the best possible price for the consumers.

This is why the Rudd government made an election commitment in 2007 to address threats to market competition such as creeping acquisitions. It is where the market is not operating as it should. These are acquisitions that of themselves are no threat to competition, but together with a number of small acquisitions over time actually lessen competition. That is when the economic system breaks down and we end up paying too much for goods.

The bill before the chamber amends section 50 of the Trade Practices Act to ensure the courts and the ACCC have the power to consider local or geographically confined markets. This will enable individual acquisitions to be assessed in small markets under section 50 of the act. Section 50, subsection 6, of the Trade Practices Act limits the power of the court and the ACCC to substantial markets, so this bill before the chamber will remove the word ‘substantial’ to ensure that even geographically confined markets are covered by the act. In doing so, this bill removes any legal doubt about the power of the ACCC or a court to look at creeping acquisitions in small local markets, as detailed by the member for Werriwa, in the merger guidelines publication.

The bill also clarifies that a court or the ACCC can consider the impact of a proposed acquisition on competition in any market—that is, a local market, a regional market or a national market. It ensures that a court or ACCC ruling cannot be challenged on the grounds that competition would be impacted in markets other than the primary market.

This bill also implements the recommendations of an expert panel set up to investigate the benefits of introducing a statement of principles into the Trade Practices Act. Workable unconscionable conduct provisions are important in trade and commerce to ensure that no party is disadvantaged in dealings with another party. It is a basic tenet of law. I would differ with you slightly on a couple of these points, Madam Deputy Speaker Moylan, but it is not appropriate while you are sitting in the chair, I guess, that we have that exchange. The bill amends the unconscionable conduct provisions of the Trade Practices Act and the ASIC Act to cover both supply and acquisition of goods under the one provision. It also expands what a court should consider when judging whether conduct is unconscionable. The bill also attempts to mirror the principles previously applied by the courts when making rulings on unconscionable conduct.

The interpretive principles do not change the effect of the law but will help the court interpret and apply unconscionable conduct laws. The principles include: (1) unconscionable conduct is not limited by the unwritten law, (2) the prohibition on unconscionable conduct may applied to systems of conduct or patterns of behaviour, and, (3) the court may consider the terms and progress of a contract—because it is important that we see it in the particular circumstances. As well as helping courts interpret the law, these principles will give all stakeholders a clearer understanding of the meaning and scope of unconscionable conduct law.

The Rudd government is committed to putting downward pressure on the cost of living. That is what Labor governments do. It might have escaped the media’s attention, or your attention, Madam Deputy Speaker, but to do that we have proposed a resource super profits tax. This would give tax relief to the 770,000 companies throughout Australia, bringing down their company tax rate from 30 per cent to 28 per cent, something that could then flow on to people at the petrol pump, flow on to people in the small businesses, flow on to people at the supermarket. There is an alternative policy, obviously, about whacking two per cent on top of it—the maternity leave for millionaires rate, which would then flow on to people at the checkout—but that is an alternative policy that hopefully will not see the light of day. We are also, as part of the RSPT, talking about tax breaks for the 2.4 million small businesses throughout Australia who, as anyone knows, are the drivers of our economy—the people who get tangled up in red tape, the people who are benefiting from so many of the initiatives that we have put forward.

What else do you do to apply downward pressure? You look after people when times are tough. That is why we have been able to come through the global financial crisis with an unemployment rate of only 5.2 per cent. When you look around the world you see it is a disaster in the OECD countries. If we had not brought the stimulus into the economy when we did, we would have had 200,000 extra people out of work—200,000 households, 200,000 families, 200,000 sad stories spread throughout the community, 200,000 people who are not going into the shops, the small businesses and the companies that we need to tick over to keep the economy strong. It is only a few days until the tax cuts will kick in, from 1 July, which will benefit many people throughout Australia to keep the pressure down.

You thank the government; that is who you thank. Someone making over $50,000 will effectively have received about an 18 per cent cut from about three years ago, and that obviously helps to make sure that households can manage the cost of living.

It is true that in our global capitalist market there are many pull factors that influence local prices. World commodity prices can impact on things—the terms of trade, local demand et cetera. Most of these factors the government cannot control. There are not a lot of levers we can pull. However, what government can do—and good government does—is to ensure that our regulatory bodies have the power to ensure that real competition exists in our local markets. This bill gives the ACCC the power to reject acquisitions that would substantially lessen competition and ensure that Australian workers and their families get the best deal possible. That is what capitalism is about. You must make sure that the market is real and where the market fails you step in and have some guidance and control. Do not just let it rip. That is a system that brings tears to families.

Finally, I thank the Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs for introducing this bill and, in doing so, recognise his strong commitment to Australia’s 2.4 million small businesses—and 770,000 companies—and to competition in the marketplace generally. I know he has a PhD in this and he is quite passionate about small businesses and the economy generally. I look forward to hosting the minister in my electorate next week when he will address the South-West Chamber of Commerce at the Pat Rafter tennis centre in Tennyson, a beautiful place to visit. I recommend you come up there next January if you have any time on your hands—

and if we are not getting ready to come back to parliament, to look at the Brisbane tennis tournament. I will be happy to host you.

The South-West Chamber of Commerce does great work. Under its president, Alice Langford, who is a quality community leader on Brisbane’s south side and a great supporter of the local business community, the chamber has been getting on with the job of making sure small businesses are supported and guided through the tough times. I particularly commend them for their work during the global financial crisis. More importantly, they also make sure that local businesses are ready to take advantage of the good times—or perhaps I should say the less bad times. This has also been the approach of the Rudd Labor government. We have learned from the efforts of governments during past downturns: do not just stand back and let the market rip; step in and help when you can. Look at some of the things we are doing for small businesses. We have standard business reporting, which will start on 1 July; the superannuation clearing house, which is obviously a good thing for some of the smaller businesses; and the national small business name registration, to name just a couple of the efforts of Minister Emerson in terms of reducing red tape.

I have already touched on the RSPT earlier in the speech, but I am sending a letter out to my small businesses talking about it because there is obviously a lot of misinformation out there. Not a lot of the small businesses are aware of the tax breaks that will be in it for them, the benefits for the 2.4 million small businesses—and the companies, for that matter—with the tax rate going down from 30 per cent to 28 per cent. Obviously it is hard sometimes to get the message through, because the fear campaigns can be strong, but if we had gone the way of those opposite and, obviously, the people who voted no all the way through to the economic stimulus package, our local council would not have benefited. I have a Liberal local government, a Liberal lord mayor—

They love it. Every local government throughout Australia loved it—the infrastructure project and the libraries. We have 2,000 libraries. What did the Howard government give the Australian public? He gave 2,000 flagpoles. We believe in education, knowledge and the future; they believe in symbolism. I love the flag and a flagpole but you have to have a better plan than just having flagpoles. We give language centres and classrooms to schools such as Gracefield State School, Kuraby State School, Eight Mile Plains State School, Southside Christian College—just to a name a few that I have been at in the last couple of weeks.

The Competition and Consumer Legislation Amendment Bill is a fantastic piece of legislation which goes a long way towards cutting the red tape. I commend the bill to the House.