Jo Briskey (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I want to start not with a discussion on the legal framework but with a memory that I think many Australians can relate to. It's early 2020. A virus that most of us had never heard of a few weeks earlier is spreading across the world. Australians are watching the news. They're worried about their families; they're worried about their jobs. Then they go to the supermarket and the shelves are empty. Toilet paper, pasta, hand sanitiser—gone. It wasn't because there wasn't enough to go around; it was because our systems weren't built to move fast enough to respond. The supply chains were there. The products existed. What we lacked was the ability to coordinate quickly and decisively.

That experience—that image of bare supermarket shelves—is part of what this bill, the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Responding to Exceptional Circumstances) Bill 2026, is about. It's about making sure that when we're next confronted by global events we are better prepared. It's about making sure that when the next crisis hits, and there will be another crisis, we are better prepared; the businesses and the federal government can work together at speed; and the legal frameworks that govern competition don't become the very thing that slows our response to an emergency. This bill makes two practical changes to our competition laws, but I want to first focus on how our existing laws work.

Australia has world-class competition laws. The Competition and Consumer Act is a framework that, for the most part, serves us well. It protects consumers from price fixing and prevents some businesses from colluding against the public interest. These are important protections, and nothing in this bill weakens them. But here's the problem. The same laws that prevent bad businesses from ripping off consumers can, in certain circumstances, prevent good businesses from coordinating to help them. In an emergency—whether it's a pandemic, a fuel crisis or a supply chain shock caused by conflict on the other side of the world—there are moments when we need competing businesses to talk to each other, to work together, to share information and to make sure the essential goods get to the people who need them.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, ACCC, already has the power to authorise this kind of coordination. The mechanism exists; however, in its current form, that process is simply too slow for a fast-moving crisis. How slow is it? Well, in 2020, when COVID was sweeping through our communities and supermarket shelves were bare, it took the ACCC six months to deliver a final authorisation which allowed supermarkets to coordinate their grocery supply—by which point the worst of the initial crisis had already passed. The mechanism worked, technically speaking, but it just didn't work in time. This bill seeks to amend that. It will give us the tools to act with the speed that a crisis actually demands.

The first schedule of this bill creates a new mechanism—the exceptional circumstances declaration. Under this framework, the Treasurer, subject to clear public interest tests, can declare that exceptional circumstances exist. But let's be clear: it isn't a blank cheque. The bar indeed is high. The Treasurer must be satisfied that the circumstances are causing or are likely to cause significant harm to the Australian economy. The declaration is disallowable by the parliament and sunsets at six months. An extension is capped at three months and is also disallowable by the parliament. These are real checks and balances, which are also a necessary step in crisis management. Once a declaration is made, the ACCC gains streamlined powers to authorise specific targeted coordination between businesses.

Given the substantial change this bill is making, we should be very clear about what that means but also about what it doesn't mean. It doesn't mean businesses get a free pass and it doesn't mean they can use a crisis as a cover to price fix or exploit consumers. The authorisation will be narrow and specific. If we're facing a fertiliser shortage affecting farmers in regional Victoria, for example, the ACCC might allow fertiliser companies to coordinate supply to address that shortage. That's it. They can't use the authorisation to then coordinate on pricing or to engage in any other conduct that harms competition. Those guardrails remain firmly in place.

The bill also provides for streamlined class exemptions, which are a mechanism that allows multiple businesses to self-assess whether their proposed conduct is covered, rather than each having to individually apply for authorisation. Again, this comes down to speed. In a crisis, every hour matters and reducing red tape is a necessity.

There's one other aspect of this schedule that I want to address because it deserves a clear explanation. The bill allows for temporary confidentiality around authorisation, applications and decisions during an exceptional circumstances event. Now, transparency is a core principle of good governance, and rightly so. But think about what full transparency in real time could mean in a crisis: news breaks that the government is urgently facilitating talks between fuel suppliers about a potential shortage; what happens next? Well, the behaviour we saw from those opposite earlier this year is a prime example. Bad-faith actors will use that sort of information to trigger the very panic we're seeking to prevent. We saw people rush to the petrol stations, forcing some to run out of fuel despite there being enough supply. So the cure becomes a part of the problem.

This is not about hiding things from the public. Within seven days of an exceptional circumstance event ending, all applications and authorisations must be published in full. Australians will be able to view this information, and the relevant accountability is applied. But, in the heat of a crisis, a short window of operational confidentiality is a sensible and proportionate measure.

The world right now is not a stable place. The conflict in the Middle East is creating real pressure on global supply chains. Fuel supply chains, in particular, are subject to disruptions that can flow through quickly to prices at the bowser and costs for businesses across the economy. We are already seeing this. Australia's fuel supply is currently operating normally. There is no immediate crisis. But the Treasurer intends to make an exceptional circumstances declaration following the passage of this bill to facilitate protective coordination with industry in responding to the challenges from the current conflict. We're not waiting for things to go wrong. We are preparing now while there is still time to get ahead. Quite frankly, this is what Australians should expect and do expect of everyone in this place.

The second schedule of this bill is more straightforward in its mechanics. At the moment there are no penalties in the Oil Code of Conduct, and any penalty added to the code is limited to a maximum of $198,000. It feels inadequate. For a large fuel company turning over hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars a year, that is not a deterrent. It is barely a slap on the wrist. For many, it's just a cost of doing business. Think about that for a moment from the perspective of a trucking operator transporting supplies from manufacturing hubs in Tullamarine, in my electorate, or a farmer who depends on diesel to run their machinery. If the fuel company breaches the code, engages in unfair conduct, withholds supply, exploits a shortage, the consequences for that farmer or that truckie can be severe. Their livelihood can be at risk, and yet the company responsible faces a fine their lawyers would describe as negligible. This bill changes that.

Under the new framework, penalties for bodies corporate can reach $10 million or the court can determine the financial benefit the company gained from the breach three times that benefit. If the benefit can't be precisely determined, 10 per cent of the company's annual turnover will be applied for the relevant period. This is a substantial shift in how we hold companies accountable. These are the kinds of penalties that actually change board-level conversations about risk and compliance. They seek to align the oil code with the penalties framework that already applies to the food and grocery code and the franchising code. Now, we have consistency across our major industry codes. Infringement notice penalties issued by the ACCC are also being lifted, from $19,800 to $198,000 for corporations. Again, this is about making sure the consequences of breaching the code are felt, not just noted in a report.

Most Australians hear about competition law, but, let's be honest, it's not something they think about from one year to the next. But the effects of competition law impact every Australian. They are felt at the petrol station and the supermarket checkout. They are felt by the family who can't find formula on the shelf. They are felt by the small businesses that depend on those supply chains to survive. When those systems come under pressure, like they did during the pandemic or when the war in Ukraine sent shockwaves through global supply, Australians need to have confidence that our frameworks can respond fast, because, if they don't, it has real consequences on the lives of all Australians. This bill is about making sure that, when the next major crisis arrives—and we as parliamentarians cannot bow our heads and say that it won't, because it will—Australians can have faith that our laws can move at the speed that helps us as much as possible to stay ahead of that crisis, that businesses can work with government quickly and within a clear legal framework, that the protections of consumers remain intact and that those who would seek to exploit a crisis for profit face penalties that actually mean something. It is practical in its aims and it is proportionate in its penalties. It's the kind of legislation that doesn't necessarily grab headlines but quietly makes Australia better prepared and better protected for when the next headline-making crisis comes. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context