STEPHEN CENATIEMPO:
Time to talk federal politics with the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury and the Member for Fenner, Andrew Leigh. Andrew, if this was a Labor or Liberal candidate, it just wouldn’t be tolerated.
ANDREW LEIGH:
I think that’s right. I haven’t seen the comments directly, but I think the Greens certainly need to answer for all of their candidates.
CENATIEMPO:
I just find it extraordinary that we’ve gotten to a point in Australia now where, you know, we used to have robust discussion and you know, Question Time was always lively and animated and there was always robust disagreement between the major parties. But we seem to have these fringe elements coming into our body politic now that are just dragging the level down to something that we’ve never seen before.
LEIGH:
We find it very hard as the Labor Party in Parliament when we have the Greens agitating alongside people who are vandalising the electorate offices of Labor MPs. And then on the other side of us we’ve got the Coalition who are more extreme than our ally, the United States. Our Labor government has signed on to a joint statement with the UK, the US, Canada and New Zealand calling for a ceasefire and the Coalition won’t support that. So hard to be a centrist in Parliament.
CENATIEMPO:
Which let’s be fair. Fair. When you call for a ceasefire and a ceasefire, you’re calling on Israel to bring in a ceasefire because you’ve got to realise that terrorist organisations like Hamas, Hezbollah and even the rogue state of Iran are not going to adhere to any call for a ceasefire.
LEIGH:
I know that there has been an international consensus among many G7 countries and Australia has joined that consensus. We want to see the killing stop and we support a two‑state solution. But when we brought a motion to the floor of the House of Representatives for a two‑state solution, we had both the Coalition and the Greens voting against it. So yes, Labor is in lockstep with our allies and the Coalition and Greens are well out of step with that position.
CENATIEMPO:
But isn’t this isn’t that the same of, you know, if somebody robs a house blaming the homeowner for not locking the door and not blaming the criminal.
LEIGH:
It has been an international call just to stop the violence. We need a ceasefire in order to build a lasting peace in the region. Peace for Israel only comes with a two‑state solution. I think that is broadly recognised by the international community with which Labor stands strongly and with which the Coalition and the Greens in their own different ways are out of step.
CENATIEMPO:
Well, good luck convincing the terrorists of that Andrew. And I think we’ve got to look at the latest Newspoll, which now puts the Coalition in 51, 49 lead on a two‑party preferred basis. Surely the sentiment or the lack of leadership from the government on this is starting to bite?
LEIGH:
We want the de‑escalation in the region. We want to listen to our security agencies and ensure that there is peace in the Middle East. We’ve condemned Iran’s actions. We’ve stood clear with allies making it absolutely clear that we want hostages to be immediately released, civilians to be protected and a ceasefire. And in terms of the performance of our government, I’m pretty proud of being part of a government which has delivered 2 budget surpluses, created almost a million jobs, been part of ensuring that we boost…
CENATIEMPO:
So why isn’t resonating with voters?
LEIGH:
Well, I think that polls often tighten as you come close to an election. I think as people look at Peter Dutton, one of the most extreme Liberal Party leaders in modern times and the man voted worst Health Minister in Australia’s history by Australian doctors, they’ll start to wonder whether this bloke really is up to being Prime Minister or whether he’s too angry and too extreme to lead a moderate, sensible country like Australia.
CENATIEMPO:
At the moment they’re asking the question whether the current bloke is fit to be Prime Minister, but let’s talk about something we can agree on and normally, you know, your job, your portfolio would be one of the quieter ones, I would have thought. But there’s been a lot of action lately, particularly around this Live Nation and Ticketmaster situation. There’s a law firm looking at launching a class action against this tour mob, and it follows the Four Corners story earlier in the week. I’m not I don’t understand this dynamic pricing, so I don’t go to a lot of major concerts because clearly when you get up at 3:00 in the morning, you can’t. But people are going online and the price is changing while they’re waiting to buy tickets.
LEIGH:
It sounded infuriating. These are accounts of people buying tickets in the United States rather than Australia, but they’re enormously frustrating. And one of the things that we’ve been doing, as you know, Stephen, in the competition portfolio is really trying to tilt the scales and so consumers get a better deal. We banned unfair contract terms and increased the penalties for anti‑competitive conduct. My colleague Stephen Jones is looking very carefully at ban on unfair trading practices, which would go to practices such as drip pricing and potentially even dynamic pricing if it was misleading consumers.
CENATIEMPO:
So my understanding is here in this particular case is that, you know, say to Taylor Swift concert or ICE is going to be the next big one. Apparently, if the thing turns out to be particularly popular, will they just keep putting the price up until people stop buying tickets? I mean, I know that market rules, but there’s got to be some parameters within that, within an organ that it operates within, so to speak.
LEIGH:
Yeah, I think it’s enormously tough for fans. You know, you’re effectively finding yourself in an auction scenario rather than a fixed price purchase. If companies are saying that they’re auctioning tickets then that’s one thing. But if they’re saying we’re selling tickets at a fixed price and then they start changing those prices, then that that could well be misleading consumers. As I’m aware, we haven’t seen the conduct of this sort of conduct in Australia, but the competition watchdog is looking very carefully at it and I’m in constant contact with them about what more we can do.
CENATIEMPO:
Alright well, let’s hope that it doesn’t show up on our shores. Now, you and I have talked about these non‑compete clauses and the government’s view on phasing them out. Economists are now urging the government to restrict them rather than ban them altogether, much like the United States have done, because it might have impacts on productivity. What are your thoughts on that?
LEIGH:
We haven’t formed a settled position. But the research that came out yesterday from the think tank e61 really did suggest that they’ve got a pretty big hit on wages. Their estimate was that a non‑compete clause is drove down wages by 4 per cent, which is over $2,500 for an average worker. That’s a big hit in your wage and means that there could be millions of dollars being lost out of the economy result of non‑compete clauses. They may do the damage in 2 ways. They could stop workers from moving jobs, which is often how people get some of the biggest pay rises of their career. And they could stop startups from getting the workers they need to get going, which means there’s a productivity drag on the economy.
CENATIEMPO:
Wouldn’t it be as simple as putting a – and I guess any figure you put on it is arbitrary, but picking a wage level. So I mean, because the reality is and if you’re talking CEOs or people in the entertainment industry in these kind of things, there’s an intellectual property element to this. But if you’re talking about hairdressers or cafe workers, well, there’s no excuse for it. So it couldn’t you set just a dollar figure?
LEIGH:
Some people have suggested that. Part of the challenge is that there’s those 2 elements that I talked about. And so if you’re worried about the hit to wages of early childhood workers, then a wage threshold would deal with that. If you’re worried that we might be stopping the next tech start up, then that might be high‑wage workers that they’re looking to poach from other firms. The argument that many people have made is that you can protect intellectual property directly. You don’t have to do it indirectly by saying that workers have to sit on the sidelines for 6 months.
CENATIEMPO:
Yeah, yeah, I know. But and when we talk about gardening leave, they generally been paid for that.
LEIGH:
Sometimes they are, but in many cases, these non‑compete clauses aren’t compensated. Other countries do have rules that require compensation. They say if you want to have a non‑compete clause, you’ve got to compensate the worker by at least 40 or 50 per cent of their wage. So there’s a whole range of approaches that have been suggested which are working our way through and we’ll announce the position in due course.
CENATIEMPO:
Andrew. Always good to talk to you. We’ll catch up in a couple of weeks.
LEIGH:
Likewise. Thanks.
CENATIEMPO:
Andrew Leigh, the Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasurer and the Treasury and the Member for Fenner.