❓ A WA parliamentary question regarding the decision to retain the Potato Marketing Corporation's powers and the role of the National Competition Council in national competition policy, with the Minister providing clarification and updates on the matter.
AnsweredQoN 1105Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I congratulate the minister - which is unusual for me - on his media statement of 5 August announcing state Cabinet’s decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation. (1) Can the minister outline the reasons this decision was made? (2) Can the minister outline the new process since the role of the National Competition Council in overseeing the rollout of national competition policy has ceased? (3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(1) Can the minister outline the reasons this decision was made? (2) Can the minister outline the new process since the role of the National Competition Council in overseeing the rollout of national competition policy has ceased? (3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(2) Can the minister outline the new process since the role of the National Competition Council in overseeing the rollout of national competition policy has ceased? (3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(1) Can the minister outline the reasons this decision was made? (2) Can the minister outline the new process since the role of the National Competition Council in overseeing the rollout of national competition policy has ceased? (3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(2) Can the minister outline the new process since the role of the National Competition Council in overseeing the rollout of national competition policy has ceased? (3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(3) Will the federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, now be making the final decisions to reward or punish States and Territories with regard to any remaining issues associated with national competition policy tranche payments, such as the decision to retain the marketing powers of the Potato Marketing Corporation in the public interest? Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied : I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
I express my deep appreciation to Hon Dee Margetts for her compliment, but I also thank her for drawing attention to this matter, because elements arose from the question that I was not certain about until we researched the question. I am sure other members also will be interested. (1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(1) The main reasons for continuing the regulated marketing system are to maintain industry stability in regional areas of the State and provide reliable supplies of potatoes to Western Australian consumers. Deregulation would disadvantage smaller growers who have no market power against major retailers who market approximately 80 per cent of the total production. Consumers would be unlikely to benefit from lower prices given this imbalance in market power, even if the market were deregulated. I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
I found particular interest in the next two parts of the question. (2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
(2) The National Competition Council remains in place and I am advised will continue until at least 2005. Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon Peter Foss: That is my understanding. Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Hon KIM CHANCE: Just when we thought we were safe. I did not say that. The council will continue to assess the State’s performance in competition policy reform and its gatekeeping role in reviewing new legislation. The NCC has not yet made an assessment of the State’s implementation of reviews of existing legislation under clause 5 of the competition principles agreement, but will make recommendations for performance payments based on its assessment. (3) Yes, this is the case, but subject to the NCC’s recommendation, which should be made in the next month or two.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.