Ross Solly:
Here’s a couple of thoughts on what makes Australian values on the text line. ‘Mateship, not taking ourselves too seriously, respect for individual differences, inclusivity, having a crack and kicking against the pricks.’ Oh yep – no that’s fair. David Torrens; ‘The politicians and others that seek and call for immigrants to accept Australian values are just dog whistling their racist ideas, and in some cases policy.
It’s such a sad and tragic pronouncement to hear in our multicultural communities’. Well let’s go to Andrew Leigh. Andrew Leigh is the Member for Fenner and Assistant Minister for Competition and we’re going to talk about the ACCC versus Coles court case. But Andrew Leigh, good morning to you. Do you feel that we’re losing our way in regard to Australian values and what it means to be Australian?
Andrew Leigh:
I’ve always thought there’s 3 big values that define Australia, Ross. Egalitarianism, mateship – updated for a modern era – and the fair go. They encapsulate a lot of what has traditionally been recognised as what made Australia different, even going back to convict times. And also I think appropriate for a present in which so many of us are either migrants or the children of migrants.
Solly:
So when Angus Taylor said on Friday, and he said it again over the weekend that one of the things he wants to see is a return to Australian values and people that are stopping him on the street and saying, ‘Oh, I don’t think that, you know, we’re recognising any more or promoting what it takes to be Australian’. Do you think he’s right?
Leigh:
Well, putting Angus Taylor’s comments to one side, I think people who rail against immigration are in some sense campaigning against a fundamental Australian value. Given that Australia has been such a successful multicultural democracy. That is very much a part of modern Australia and if you can’t accept that, then you’re missing much of what makes modern Australia strong.
That ability to welcome successive waves of migrants into an egalitarian multicultural democracy, who’s enjoyed growth and living standards which are the envy of many countries around the world.
Solly:
Let’s talk about this court case. Allan Fels today is describing it as the court case of the century. That might be a bit of an overstatement, Andrew Leigh. But as the Assistant Minister for Competition, the ACCC taking on Coles this week in the courts, there’s a lot riding on this. It is an important case, isn’t it?
Leigh:
It is indeed. And we’ve provided the ACCC an additional $30 million to address harmful or misleading conduct in the supermarket and retail sectors. That’s enabled them to do a lot of this important enforcement work, alongside the work that they did for us in putting together the first major review of supermarket competition in 16 years.
We’ve got a consultation out right now, which closes tomorrow on price and loyalty program transparency, which will look at whether supermarkets should be required to publish prices in stores, whether large supermarkets should have to publish prices online, and about whether we need more information about loyalty programs in the supermarkets.
Solly:
So do you think this court case might influence your future direction no matter which way the result goes?
Leigh:
Well, I welcome the ACCC taking a robust approach to enforcement. Obviously, the details of that case are before the courts.
Solly:
Yeah.
Leigh:
But it sits very much in line with what the government’s done. We’re strengthening the Unit Pricing Code to tackle shrinkflation. We’re making supermarket price gouging illegal. We’ve just toughened up the Food and Grocery Code so it’s not the toothless code it was under the former government, but now is a mandatory code with multi‑million‑dollar penalties and we’re funding CHOICE to give shoppers more information on supermarket prices.
Solly:
Allan Fels says that this result – no matter what happens, the result could have big ramifications for other businesses which claim they’ve discounted products but that might be questionable. Do you see this, Andrew Leigh, as an important moment in terms of shoppers being able to believe what they’re paying is in fact what they’ve been told they’re getting for their product, for their money and that it is a discount? I mean, do you see this as being a pivotal moment in this battle?
Leigh:
It’s a significant case for us and certainly I support the competition watchdog bringing cases of this kind. If there are penalties to be put in place, then those penalties will be higher as a result of Labor having increased penalties for breaches of competition in consumer law, right back in 2022 after we came to office.
We’ve been very focused on ensuring that farmers get a fairer deal and that families get a fair deal at the checkout. The supermarket sector is a pretty concentrated sector. The top 2 have 2 thirds of the market share. And so I think it’s appropriate for there to be strong enforcement around competition in the market sector.
Solly:
On the flip side of the coin though Dr Andrew Leigh, what happens if Coles wins this case?
Leigh:
Look, cases will come to trial and the competition watchdog will win many of them, but not all of them…
Solly:
But the ramifications for this though would be surely that companies and businesses can be a little bit loose with how they describe discounts, that there is less pressure on them to make sure that they are absolutely giving what they’re promising they’re giving?
Leigh:
Well Ross, I’ve talked to you about a lot of the other things we’re doing alongside this court case. So this is an important case but it’s not the only game in town. The consultation that closes tomorrow on price and loyalty program transparency, the making of supermarket price gouging illegal, the work we’re doing on strengthening the Unit Pricing Code – all of that is directed towards ensuring that supermarkets do the right thing and that families get a fair deal at the checkout.
Solly:
So you won’t lose too much sleep if Coles wins this case against the ACCC?
Leigh:
In general with regulators, it’s important to recognise that a regulator that only wins cases is probably not bringing enough enforcement actions. It’s not reasonable of governments to expect a 100 per cent success record because sometimes cases won’t be able to be stood up, even when there’s a strong case being brought. So, I welcome what the regulator is doing. I welcome the actions that they’ve taken –backed by the additional $30 million of funding that we gave them to address harmful and misleading conduct in the supermarket sector.
Solly:
I have to say Dr Andrew Leigh, you’re not sounding that confident this morning. You’re not sounding that confident that there might be a good case here, because you’ve been there at the forefront. You’re not sounding that confident that there might be a good case against what Coles has been doing?
Leigh:
Ross, I’m respecting the independent process of the courts. My role as a member of parliament and as the assistant minister responsible for competition is to ensure that the resources are there for the watchdog to bring cases of this kind. But as somebody who’s served as a High Court associate and understands the separation of powers well, I’m conscious of the importance of those judicial proceedings taking their own path.
Solly:
Alright. Well, it’s going to be a fascinating week of hearings. Appreciate your time this morning Dr Andrew Leigh, thank you.
Leigh:
Thank you Ross, take care.
Solly:
That’s Dr Andrew Leigh who is the Member for Fenner – he’s also the Assistant Minister for Competition.