Grocery Industry Competition Bill

Good morning, everyone. I hope everyone slept well, ready for another good hard day at the office. We are in the first reading of the Grocery Industry Competition Bill, and the next speaker, I believe—is someone going to take the call?

Hon Todd McClay: Yes. Mr Speaker.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Hon Todd McClay.

Mr Speaker, thank you very much. This is an important issue, although I would say I’m not sure the legislation is as important or will achieve as much as the Government and the Minister say. We are supporting it because we think it’s important that, you know, there’s discussion around this, and that a select committee will have an opportunity to dig into it much deeper. But, unfortunately, in this area, the Government doesn’t have a good record because what they’ve done is solely pointed blame towards the supermarkets, who do have responsibility, and as the Commerce Commission found, there are things that could be done. But what the Government hasn’t done is looked at the impact or effect they themselves, through their own decisions and regulations, are having upon costs across the board in all parts of our economy, and particularly for consumers of food in New Zealand.

When the Government first announced that they were instructing the Commerce Commission to do an inquiry into the supermarkets at the time, I was our spokesperson, and said, “Well, actually, New Zealanders don’t need to wait a year for findings and then another year for the Government to take action. There are things the Government could do on that day that would have a direct impact.” And if we look at all the decisions they’ve made that, to one degree, are well meaning—extra holidays, more sick leave, all of these other things—they come at a cost, and inevitably businesses either have to absorb costs, which is not possible in New Zealand any more for large or small businesses because there have just been so many as a result of regulation from this Government. Businesses must pass them on.

I challenge the Minister, when next he has an opportunity to speak on this issue, to explain to the public why, on the one hand, the cost of food and supermarkets has gone up, and he is saying this is how he will fix it and it’s nothing to do with the Government, but in the fish and chip shops and the takeaway shops, and in the markets, the farmers markets, costs have gone up equally—often to the same amount—and yet he’s not talking about that or saying there should be an inquiry elsewhere. There are things that need to be looked at: the code of conduct, I think, is a good idea; we see it overseas and we don’t have one here. That we very much support. But the Government can’t be allowed to get away with saying it is all the responsibility of one part of the economy—in this case, the supermarkets themselves—when, actually, costs have gone up across the board everywhere for every type of food production and every type of outlet that sells food, not just the supermarkets.

It’ll be very important that we dig into this when we get to committee and see exactly what is going on, and the reason for that is it’s a little bit like when they did an inquiry into fuel, and I know we’re going to be debating that later on, it was all the fault of the fuel companies. On the one hand they were saying this; behind the back of the public, they were raising taxes on fuel as fast as they could.

So we’re supporting it, and I commiserate with the Minister because I think, in the end, he’s been passed a challenge greater than this legislation is going to fix—not because there aren’t solutions there but because of, actually, what the Government has done elsewhere that drives cost. This may well get on top of costs as the food cost increases in supermarkets, to some degree, but it will only be to some degree. It’s a little bit like the overall cost of living and inflation: the Government talks about what’s happening around the rest of the world, and fuel prices and the war in Ukraine and all of these other things, and so on; they will not talk about what they are doing that pumps up domestic inflation and domestic cost increases, which is the largest part of why we have such a high inflation rate—in this case, the Government is saying if we do what the Commerce Commission has said, all these things, everything will be OK. But, actually, much of the cost increases of food is a result of decisions this Government has made, and those costs are being passed on to consumers. This bill doesn’t do anything about that.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Grocery Industry Competition Bill will trigger an unprecedented shake-up of the grocery sector and deliver New Zealanders a fairer deal at the checkout and help tackle the cost of living pressures. If there was ever a bill that everybody should be taking note of, it is this one. Every household, every family, everybody who goes to the supermarket knows when they go in there that there’s not enough competition and that prices are being driven up. I was absolutely astounded when I found out that $1 million a day in extra profit—$1 million a day extra profit—is what the supermarket industry is making that they don’t need to.

This bill will go through a four-month submission process. We are making some world-leading legislation through the backstop regulatory law we’re putting through, and the backstop regulator is something that’s going to be of real interest to New Zealanders, and I absolutely hope that lots of people take notice of this. It’s good to see this Government getting on with the work that needs to be done. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The supermarket duopoly has been ripping our communities off for far too long—at a time when inflation is rising, people are struggling, the supermarket industries are making record profits. For too long, they’ve exploited the workers—they’ve paid them too low wages—but the dial is now finally shifting. Our unions on the ground are securing historic record wage increases for supermarket workers, and the Government is introducing legislation that will start making a difference.

The Grocery Industry Competition Bill finally puts in place some of the more immediate recommendations of the Commerce Commission to ensure that our communities and food producers have a fairer deal. Some of the things that this bill will do is create a two-part regulatory regime to establish requirements around the commercial supply of groceries; establish an enforceable backstop, with additional wholesale obligations that may be imposed in major grocery retailers if normal commercial behaviour isn’t delivering outcomes for smaller grocery retailers; create a whole grocery supply code, which is something the Greens have been calling for for so many years; extend protections in the Fair Trading Act to cover the relationship between major grocery retailers and their suppliers; enable suppliers to collectively negotiate terms and conditions of supply with major grocery retailers; and then also establish that Grocery Commission within the Commerce Commission, so it means we will now have an entity that will be looking very specifically at the behaviour of the supermarket industry. This is very much something that we support.

It is worth noting that, right now, only Foodstuffs and Woolworths will be covered as part of this legislation—yes, and with the provision of exploring who else may need to be added. As we’re looking at new competitors entering the market, I think there is a conversation to be had about: is it just these two players or is it the nature of the supermarket industry in general? Because, if we look overseas, there does seem to be a trend where big supermarket players do seem to be ripping our communities off at the expense of people, and it is not just a matter of these two players; it seems to be a broader, systemic issue.

Again, the Greens do support finally taking action to introduce fair competition laws and more oversight about the behaviour of our supermarket industry. But it is very clear that, looking beyond that, what the Government needs to also focus on is addressing the inequality crisis by lifting incomes, securing workers in the supermarket industry have fair wages—and I hope fair pay agreements play a big role in that—but also to put in place policies that look at food as something of a fundamental human right and not something that we’re just leaving supermarkets to deliver. Such a strategy could involve investing adequately in mahinga kai, farmers markets, urban food markets and publicly owned venues for growers to sell their produce directly to people.

We do need to be exploring, as well, what else we can do, but I do commend that this bill will finally start doing some of the more serious recommendations by the Commerce Commission, as we look at de-commodifying food and making it a human right. The Greens support this bill to the House.

Thank you. The bill is to address supermarket competition and the duopoly, but it’s using the smokescreen of supermarkets’ excessive profits to justify its existence. I’d like to get that number checked at some stage, before the select committee or during the select committee, because I believe that was a COVID number. We handed the mandate to the supermarkets to actually keep the system going.

This, to me, is just another dangerous stunt policy that’s made for PR but sure to backfire. Labour wants to distract from the real cause of rising food prices, i.e. that they’ve created rampant inflation and a recession by their economic management. The Government has announced that it will force supermarkets to supply wholesalers, and it shows they completely understand why groceries are expensive. Mr Clark has managed once again to adopt and overlay his central planning model, which takes competition out of the market. Who would’ve believed that the way to regulate an increased competition in the supermarket sector would’ve been more regulation? That’s an outstanding solution to what is going on here. Only Labour could think more rules will increase competition when those rules will require them to price perishable goods in highly variable circumstances. In reality, they’re disincentivising ambitious people from entering the industry and creating more competition.

The Commerce Commission actually rejected this idea when it was tasked with investigating the grocery sector, stating that the regulation could reduce, rather than improve, competition and induce significant additional costs. The commission also said it had little support from submitters and was subject to well-founded concerns from the two supermarket chains.

Whether the Government is capable of executing this plan is another question. In the supermarket sector of thousands of products that range in cost and quality by the day, policing such a regime when these products are distributed in a fair and equal fashion has the potential to be a bureaucratic nightmare. For the regime to work, the commission will have to ensure that the groceries are sold for a fair price to potential distributors. How much should six pottles of yoghurt be, Minister Clark, for them to be sold? Does it matter how close their expiry date is? What if their location is more or less remote, and does the size of the order count? What about the condition damage in refrigeration? Policing supply contracts for fast-moving consumer goods is something no Government would try if they thought about it logically.

Faced with this bureaucracy, new players considering entering New Zealand and the market here will be dissuaded. What will happen to Costco? Having invested into New Zealand, will they have to become a distributor? So many questions unanswered. If not, how can an exemption be justified? If yes, what message does that send to any other entity ever considering entering the New Zealand market? This is just another dangerous stunt policy that is made for PR but sure to backfire. Labour wants to distract us from the real cause of food prices: the rampant inflation that it’s caused by its economic mismanagement.

Don’t get me wrong—ACT agrees that the supermarket sector needs more competition, but dividing up the existing cake is not the solution. In order to achieve this, we need to make New Zealand an attractive place for direct investment. ACT would repeal and replace the Resource Management Act to make it easier to build new supermarkets, logistics infrastructure, and farm improvements. We’d exempt OECD members from the Overseas Investment Act, allowing foreign supermarket chains to invest in New Zealand with certainty—otherwise, we’d just end up with a hybrid version from The Warehouse. We’ll also make our society productive again by tackling the labour shortage that is reducing production and pushing up prices. We’ll do this by dumping the labour market test, industry-specific wage requirements, and transfer restrictions. Foreign workers should be able to work for accredited employers as long as they’re employed consistent with the New Zealand law. If we want more competition, it must be possible for investment to come into this country, sites to be developed for property and their properties, and skilled people to come through the border and new employees to employ people without endless bureaucracy.

It’s time to move on from toothless stunt policies and start thinking practically to address the cost of living crisis Kiwis are battling in this recession. The Government should take another look at the supermarket sector regulations in the Grocery Industry Competition Bill. ACT will not be supporting the bill at this stage. We look forward to hearing more detail at the select committee.

Thank you. I am always perplexed by ACT’s position on things like this because they’re supposed to be a party about competition and freeing things up. What I’ve seen in my career is the squashing of the little fledgling suppliers by the current regime and the hiking up of prices to the consumers.

Recently we have had a real challenge to our way of life because of the price of things. This is actually an incredibly creative and brave move. It goes further than the Commerce Commission went in terms of recommendations. It’s not pussy-footing around the issue. We’re going to free up this market. We’re going to get it right. We’re going to respond. I am proud of this bill and commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, this is straight out of the standard playbook of a Government that is struggling with out-of-control prices. What do they do? They certainly don’t take any responsibility for Government actions; they look for scapegoats, and the supermarket duopoly in New Zealand is certainly not blame-free and it’s a good target for the Government to go after.

And look, there are elements of this bill that we support, in terms of the code of conduct that makes sense. There are other elements of this bill that we’re a bit anxious about, a bit worried about. Because, fundamentally, the Government needs to be focused on the many drivers of costs across the economy, and while they’re doing this, and sort of coming up with complicated arrangements to try and lead to greater competition, which may or may not work, it could very easily have the opposite outcome to what is intended. They are still passing many pieces of legislation which are continuing to add cost and that actually benefit the big players. So, the fair pay agreements, for example; it won’t be the small retailers that have an influence on how it’s shaped up, it will be the duopoly that controls it. So that legislation will certainly make things relatively easier for the big companies. And you go through the COVID reaction, where the big supermarkets were left open, but the small competitors were closed down for months on end.

So half of what the Government does makes it easier for the big players to do well, and then the other half of the time they’re bringing in legislation to try and make it more difficult—and they wonder why things are confused and complicated.

So we look forward to the select committee discussion around this legislation. There are parts of it that make sense. There are parts of it which we need to look at very closely. But one thing is for certain: the Government needs to take its responsibility for the cost of living pressure that New Zealand families are facing right here and right now, and they haven’t been doing that.

This call is a remote call. Rawiri Waititi, five minutes.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. I take this opportunity for a short call on the Grocery Industry Competition Bill on behalf of Te Paati Māori. While the rest of Aotearoa is experiencing the worst cost of living crisis in a generation, corporations, including supermarkets, are making record profits of the back of the misery of working people.

This Government has been consistently warned about the impact of rising food prices on grassroots communities, and yet prices continue to skyrocket. Food prices were at 10.1 percent higher in October 2022 compared with October 2021; this was the highest annual increase since 2008. The annual increase was due to rises across all the broad food categories we measure. Grocery food prices increased by 9.7 percent; fruit and vegetable prices increased by 17 percent; restaurant meals and ready-to-eat food prices increased by 7.5 percent; meat, poultry, and fish prices increased by 10 percent; and non-alcoholic beverage prices increased by 8.7 percent.

Food is a right and a necessity for all whānau. We must remove the barriers that are preventing our whānau from putting healthy kai on the table for their kids. That is why we acknowledge the introduction of this bill, which we will be supporting. While it doesn’t go far enough in terms of breaking up the market duopoly once and for all, it does increase competition in the sector and should help independent grocers to get into the market.

This, of course, follows on from the Commerce Commission report released in March, which showed how the duopoly had a stranglehold on the market, with competitors wanting to enter the retail grocery market facing significant challenges, including access to groceries and the impacts of the imbalance in negotiating power between major grocery retailers and their suppliers. The commission found that the current market locked out the potential for tangata whenua to own supermarkets that operate with Māori values—which would truly transform the market for communities across Aotearoa. Our people are eager for the opportunity to lead our own solutions in this space. One thing people talk with me about is the need for a Buy Māori Made licensing regime along our own grocers and suppliers.

This bill opens the door for independent grocers, but it needs to be more aggressive and more ambitious for our whānau. Independent grocers also need start-up funding and ongoing and productive regulatory support, but even increasing competition doesn’t go far enough. We need regulation to prevent supermarkets hiking prices unreasonably and making excessive profits, and, crucially, we need to remove GST from kai.

I call on the Government to support my member’s bill, which is in the ballot and ready to go. GST is a regressive tax that targets lower-income whānau who are forced to spend nearly every cent they earn. Meanwhile, the wealthy have untaxed wealth accumulating in housing, trusts, and investment funds. The main argument that is used against removing GST and supermarkets not passing on the savings would be dealt with if we added food price regulatory controls into the bill before us today. This Christmas will be one of the toughest for our whānau. The least we can do is lighten the burden so they can feed their families well over the holidays.

I urge this Government to use urgency on something that is actually urgent and would make a real difference for people over the holiday period. I challenge the Government to adopt my bill and pass it in time for whānau to see the benefits this summer. Our people have been through so much over the last few years and they deserve a break. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Firstly, I want to thank ACT MP Damien Smith for offering his considered perspective on the problems with this Government’s Grocery Industry Competition Bill. If you think about the title—just starting with the title—“Grocery Industry Competition Bill”, well, if we really wanted to foster competition in the New Zealand grocery sector, those places like supermarkets, quickie markets, truck stops, food-to-go—

Stuart Smith: What about the polar bears?

Simon Watts: You can buy those at the supermarket!

SIMON COURT: Of all the things you can buy in a supermarket freezer, which don’t include polar bears, Mr Stuart Smith, but until recently did include Eskimo Pies, one of my favourite ice creams—but the problem that the Government is trying to solve here is competition in the grocery sector, so that Kiwis can have access to lower-priced groceries.

That’s laudable. We represent an organisation—Damien Smith and myself, Simon Court—called the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers. That’s the ACT Party. But we fundamentally disagree with the direction set out in this bill, because we don’t think it’s necessary to establish a Grocery Commissioner, someone to mystery shop the supermarkets, with their own little magic laser scanner wand, to check whether the prices are fair or not—whether someone’s paying, maybe, 10c too much for a loaf of white bread. I mean, I checked the price of a loaf of bread yesterday; for a loaf of Nature’s Fresh bread at Countdown, in the past six months it’s gone up from about $3.20 to over $5—over $5.

Simon Watts: I can’t believe you shop at Countdown!

SIMON COURT: The member Simon Watts from the North Shore, that suburb that benefits from a wonderful piece of infrastructure called the Northern Busway—which I must say we don’t have in West Auckland; we’ve got a bus stop on the side of a motorway off-ramp, courtesy of Labour’s Michael Wood—asks, “Why do you shop at Countdown?” Well, because it’s convenient, Mr Watts. It’s 200 metres from my home. It’s within walking distance—

Hon Dr David Clark: Because there’s no competition, they go to the closest place.

SIMON COURT: Actually, I was going to use the example of my local Countdown in Te Atatū Peninsular as an example of how misguided this legislation is and what the opportunities are that could actually foster competition. I want to contrast it with the opening of the new Costco mega-market at Westgate in West Auckland, because this is where we’ll find the truth of why New Zealanders are facing higher grocery prices.

I’ve had a long and evolved discussion with the landowner that the Countdown in Te Atatū leases its site from. Listen to this Mr Clark, this is important—this is important. The Countdown supermarket would like to expand, and their landlord, the lovely lady who owns the land, would like to let them expand. Between the two of them, they’ve approached Auckland Council and Auckland Transport, and they’ve said, “We’d like to build a bigger supermarket because, while we’ve got a large footprint here, it’s not very effectively laid out. Our trucks need to do a three-point turn in the carpark or back in off the road. That’s not safe.” Auckland Transport has said, “Actually, you’re going to have to do all your truck turning inside the site, which means now you’re going to lose half your car parks.” That’s if they want to expand the supermarket.

Now, it’s quite a small supermarket; from memory, it’s think it’s probably only about 10 aisles. So it’s much smaller than a large supermarket like a Costco, or even a big Pak ‘N Save, which must have 20-plus aisles. But they’re not going to be able to expand, Minister, because the Resource Management Act (RMA) gives Auckland Council and Auckland Transport the right to veto them from actually setting up a driveway system that would be left turn in, left turn out, one-way route through the site, which is the safest way for trucks to come and go—very large articulated truck units—from the site. The neighbours agreed to sell them the land. The landlord said, “Countdown, please, please, build a better, newer supermarket.” The people of Te Atatū—all of the people who have come to live there, like me, in the last 10 or 15 years—want a bigger, better supermarket, but it’s the RMA and the councils and this Government which will continue to empower the veto of nimbies, who say no.

That’s what we’ve seen through their proposed environmental reforms, the proposed Natural and Built Environment Bill—and, just to clear up any confusion, when that draft legislation was presented to the Environment Committee last year, the Natural and Built Environment Exposure Bill didn’t include the word “built”, but they may have corrected that recently. We’re talking about infrastructure, Mr Clark. If my local Countdown can’t get permission, even with the land they own and from the neighbours, to build a new driveway so they can get trucks turning safely, left turn in, left turn out, make it safer for workers, safer for customers, preserve the carpark—and, actually, there’s the opportunity for a 20-aisle Countdown in Te Atatū Peninsular. Now, if they can’t get permission from consenting authorities to do that, you’re not going to have more competition in the grocery sector. Who’s going to invest—who’s going to invest?

Then I want to come to the actual Costco—Costco in Westgate. Costco in Westgate is very, very popular, and MP Chris Penk knows that, because Chris Penk is the MP for the Kaipara ki Mahurangi electorate, where Costco Westgate is located. Now, the problem with Costco in Westgate is that it’s built in a brand new town centre that was established over 20 years ago, between Waitakere City Council and the Auckland Regional Council—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have a point of order from Rawiri Waititi.

Rawiri Waititi (Remote): Point of order, Mr Speaker. Although the name “Eskimo” was commonly used in Alaska to refer to the Inuit and the Yupik people of the word, this usage is now considered unacceptable by many, or even most, Alaskan—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Waititi, that is not a point of order, I’m afraid. If you want to take that up, there are other ways in which you can take that up. So, continue, Mr Court.

SIMON COURT: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Rawiri Waititi: Point of order.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’ve made a ruling, Mr Waititi, unless it’s a new point of order. There are other ways that you can take that matter up.

SIMON COURT: Mr Speaker, thank you for clarifying that, because the “Eskimo Pie” that I referred to is actually an ice cream.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I’m sorry, Mr Court, I will have to deal with this point of order, but the clock has stopped. A new point of order, Mr Waititi.

Rawiri Waititi: A new point of order, Mr Speaker. Under Standing Order 120 of offensive words, I am within my rights to move this point of order because it is an offensive word. It is a racist word. The word “Eskimo” is a word that has been invented by non-indigenous peoples for indigenous peoples of Alaska—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK. Mr Waititi, I’ve made a ruling. I’m inviting you to take that matter up elsewhere with the Speaker and the decision can be made. At this stage, I’m going to go back to the speaker. Sorry. Carry on, Mr Court.

SIMON COURT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. And look, I just want to come back to the issue of Costco and the infrastructure that enables Costco in Westgate. Many of you will have read about the long traffic queues for people not just from West Auckland, but within a 15 to 20 kilometre radius, so taking advantage of the fantastic competition and low prices offered by Costco in West Auckland. But the traffic queues that have resulted because when people have driven there—because you typically need a car if you’re going to Costco, you want to fill your boot or fill the back of your ute with groceries. But when they get close, they find themselves in a big, long traffic queue, Minister Clark. And that’s because between the New Zealand Transport Agency and local council, they have failed to deliver the roading infrastructure that would actually allow free flow of traffic around the Westgate precinct, that wonderful precinct developed by the New Zealand Retail Property Group on the understanding that the Transport Agency would complete the motorway overbridges and the off-ramps on the State Highway 16 extension between Westgate and Brigham Creek.

Now, I’ve asked Minister Michael Wood: when will the bridge and off-ramps be completed? Because right now there’s traffic jams, there’s traffic backing up kilometres on the north-western motorway, Minister Clark, which makes it dangerous to get to Costco. And actually, the key to unlocking competition is to complete the motorway interchange next door to Costco so that more people can come and go from Costco. Instead, you bring this farce of a bill telling us that a Grocery Commissioner is somehow going to wave a magic wand and the New Zealand grocery market will become more competitive while all of these other barriers, like the Resource Management Act and whatever this Labour Government’s attempt at replacing it—what I would call RMA 2.0-plus-some-more-people-allowed-to-object-to-what-you-want-to-do-with-your-private-property. Fix that, we say.

The ACT Party says, “Fix the resource management laws in New Zealand. Liberalise the way we fund finance and deliver infrastructure.” Stop pretending, Minister, that you can solve problems like lowering prices for consumers with a bill that establishes a Grocery Commissioner. And you know, when I think of “Grocery Commissioner”, I think of Dr David Clark in a white coat with a little scanner and a clipboard recording those prices, and then going back to Cabinet to report on whether his legislation is successful. But I’ll tell you what, if he’s going to Costco on a Saturday morning, he’s going to have to wait about 45 minutes in traffic, probably queuing on the motorway off-ramp, because this bill won’t do anything. But ACT’s resource management, infrastructure reform that we’re announcing next Tuesday, that is the solution, Minister.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I rise to talk on behalf of the Grocery Industry Competition Bill first reading. As has been noted by prior speakers, National will be supporting this bill through to select committee process. We are keen for that select committee process to thoroughly review this bill, because I think the points raised that the cost of living crisis that Kiwis are facing is caused by the grocery duopoly are absolutely rubbish, right? That is absolutely rubbish. Don’t forget the role which this Government has played to shut down all those small butchers and bakeries and fruit shops while Auckland was in lockdown. We heard the member for Auckland Central before articulate, “Don’t worry, this is a winner.” It was their decisions that shut down all those small businesses. You know what? In my electorate of the North Shore, a number of those businesses no longer exist. They were pushed out of business because of decisions made by that Government to allow only the duopolies to operate and no one else, and that is a decision that that Government made. So to stand up and say that this is going to solve all the problems, the cost of living, is absolutely rubbish.

This is the politics of envy. This is a socialist Government playbook to try and distract everyone else and say “Those guys over there there—or girls—are causing the problem.” It is absolutely a load of rubbish.

Are there issues and a discussion and debate required in this sector that needs to be had? Yes. The Commerce Commission’s done the work, done some review, made some recommendations around a code of conduct. That aspect sounds sensible. But to think that this, in terms of putting in place a regulator and all that and bringing in other elements is going to solve the problem, it’s simply not going to be the case.

No one talks about the 24,000 Kiwis, many of which are on minimum wage, who work for one of the duopolies that is 100 percent owned by New Zealanders. No one talks about those 24,000 workers on that side of the House. They’re meant to represent many of those workers, but I think they’ve forgotten that. So they’re quite happy to talk about competition, and we absolutely support competition in the free market. But don’t forget, the major players who can have scale to create competition will be overseas entities. They’re going to come into the market under this Minister’s proposal, and they will cause a number of Kiwis in that area to potentially lose their jobs. So I think we’ve got to be very open around the fact that actually, 24,000 Kiwis that work within one of the companies that are 100 percent Kiwi-owned are impacted. So this is not just some big international beast.

The cost burden and regulation imposed by bills like this also needs to be thoroughly discussed at select committee. What is the implication and what is the cost flow on to consumers? Because you can’t introduce regulation without introducing cost, and someone has to pay for that cost.

Lastly, the aspect is around the commissioner that they’re going to look to put in place. It is absolutely essential that the select committee review and make sure that that role is independent—not some ex - trade unionist. No one like that. Someone who is politically independent to the market, because it is critical to make sure that that role—and I’m sure on that side they’ll probably try and make it so it’s not. But we need to make sure that the security around making sure that that role is independent is critically important.

Lastly, the aspect around profit. We heard this “million dollars a day” - type conversation. I know that some of the grocery firms are actually transparently publishing the impact of supply chain inflation caused by a number of decisions made by that side of the House in the public domain. The inflation of food prices is not driven by the duopolies. It’s driven by supply chain challenges that are impacting the economy and other decisions that this Government has made. But this whole conversation around profit is about greed. That is an ideological socialist position. They believe any firm that makes profit is greedy. So just don’t be tricked by that type of narrative when you hear this. This is the politics of envy. This is a socialist Government on the ropes. We will be supporting this through the select committee. Thank you.

I’d like to leave the House with this thought: that Countdown recently announced a net fall of 12.5 percent; Consumer New Zealand has said that is the early effect of moves to tighten regulation of the industry. This bill is about correcting market failure. It is the next step in that process. I commend it to the House.

The question is, That the Grocery Industry Competition Bill be considered by the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee.

Instruction to Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee