Peter Dutton's Supermarket Strategy Sparks Internal Liberal Controversy
Source: The DairyNews
Several Liberal MPs have raised concerns over the Coalition’s proposal to introduce compulsory sale powers for supermarkets, fearing increased regulatory burden and questionable benefits. Senior Liberals argue the divestiture threat could stimulate compliance without legal action.
Peter Dutton's latest plan to enforce the sale of stores by large supermarket chains has ignited intense debate within the Liberal Party. Some members believe the initiative prioritizes political gains over core principles.
Dutton’s announcement, which aligns with Nationals leader David Littleproud’s long-standing advocacy, has drawn sharp criticism. The proposal, revealed yesterday, resulted in the most heated partyroom discussion under Dutton’s leadership, according to one MP.
Liberal MPs Alex Hawke, Maria Kovacic, Rowan Ramsey, Dave Sharma, and Keith Wolahan expressed concerns during the meeting, with several others describing the proposal as a surprise move.
"It felt like an ambush," one MP stated, while another accused Dutton of compromising Liberal values to appease the Nationals.
The dissenters argue that the divestiture plan may lead to costly legal battles with minimal benefits. The plan empowers the ACCC to force a supermarket or hardware store to sell assets, provided the sale meets competitiveness, workforce impact, and public interest criteria. Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor assures these criteria, modeled on international precedents, will prevent adverse community impacts.
However, opponents caution that competition law proceedings are notoriously complex and expensive, often involving conflicting claims about market conditions. They believe the policy introduces unnecessary red tape with little practical benefit, a heavy-handed approach some Liberals feel contradicts party principles.
Senior Liberal sources counter that the policy’s strength lies in its deterrent effect, encouraging voluntary compliance fr om supermarkets. This strategy mirrors the “big stick” approach Taylor advocated for gas regulation during his tenure as energy minister.
Liberals argue that divestiture could dismantle barriers for new competitors, thwarting incumbents from “land banking” to stifle competition. They cite Woolworths' struggle against Bunnings’ land banking tactics in the hardware sector as a relevant example.
Yet, questions remain about the availability of buyers for divested stores. Former Labor minister Craig Emerson doubts the policy’s effectiveness, though Coalition members remain optimistic. They highlight Aldi’s successful entry into the Australian market as proof of potential improvements and competitive opportunities.
The proposal specifically targets supermarkets and hardware stores, distinguishing them from other sectors like banking and aviation, wh ere divestiture is not currently considered. This limited scope has garnered support from Liberal leadership, refuting claims that Dutton capitulated to the Nationals or that Taylor was undermined, as suggested by Treasurer Jim Chalmers.
Some Liberal MPs believe big businesses' support for the Voice referendum has diminished their standing within the party, altering the traditionally pro-business stance. However, there is resistance to extending divestiture to other industries, with MPs emphasizing a focus on small business without penalizing compliant large enterprises.
"We are very focused on small business, but that doesn’t mean we punish big businesses that are operating as they should," one concerned Liberal noted.
Dutton’s announcement, which aligns with Nationals leader David Littleproud’s long-standing advocacy, has drawn sharp criticism. The proposal, revealed yesterday, resulted in the most heated partyroom discussion under Dutton’s leadership, according to one MP.
Liberal MPs Alex Hawke, Maria Kovacic, Rowan Ramsey, Dave Sharma, and Keith Wolahan expressed concerns during the meeting, with several others describing the proposal as a surprise move.
"It felt like an ambush," one MP stated, while another accused Dutton of compromising Liberal values to appease the Nationals.
The dissenters argue that the divestiture plan may lead to costly legal battles with minimal benefits. The plan empowers the ACCC to force a supermarket or hardware store to sell assets, provided the sale meets competitiveness, workforce impact, and public interest criteria. Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor assures these criteria, modeled on international precedents, will prevent adverse community impacts.
However, opponents caution that competition law proceedings are notoriously complex and expensive, often involving conflicting claims about market conditions. They believe the policy introduces unnecessary red tape with little practical benefit, a heavy-handed approach some Liberals feel contradicts party principles.
Senior Liberal sources counter that the policy’s strength lies in its deterrent effect, encouraging voluntary compliance fr om supermarkets. This strategy mirrors the “big stick” approach Taylor advocated for gas regulation during his tenure as energy minister.
Liberals argue that divestiture could dismantle barriers for new competitors, thwarting incumbents from “land banking” to stifle competition. They cite Woolworths' struggle against Bunnings’ land banking tactics in the hardware sector as a relevant example.
Yet, questions remain about the availability of buyers for divested stores. Former Labor minister Craig Emerson doubts the policy’s effectiveness, though Coalition members remain optimistic. They highlight Aldi’s successful entry into the Australian market as proof of potential improvements and competitive opportunities.
The proposal specifically targets supermarkets and hardware stores, distinguishing them from other sectors like banking and aviation, wh ere divestiture is not currently considered. This limited scope has garnered support from Liberal leadership, refuting claims that Dutton capitulated to the Nationals or that Taylor was undermined, as suggested by Treasurer Jim Chalmers.
Some Liberal MPs believe big businesses' support for the Voice referendum has diminished their standing within the party, altering the traditionally pro-business stance. However, there is resistance to extending divestiture to other industries, with MPs emphasizing a focus on small business without penalizing compliant large enterprises.
"We are very focused on small business, but that doesn’t mean we punish big businesses that are operating as they should," one concerned Liberal noted.
