Lee Melissa; Webb DuncanMELISSA LEE (National): Thank you. I thank the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs for suggesting that things will actually start to get cheaper from now. But it is ironic that the examples that he actually gave in terms of Costco and other competitors coming in they actually began before this bill has come into force so I think the competition has already begun before this bill. So I think using this bill as an example of actually creating more competition is rather an empty answer.I wonder if the Minister could look at the role of the Commerce Commission in Part 1 clause 4(2)(d) I think it was. It basically talks about the Commerce Commission's objective in performing its monitoring and reporting functions under this Act is to promote the purpose of this Act including by … (d) contributing to a trading environment in which businesses compete effectively and consumers and businesses participate confidentially". The Minister talked about the best way for someone to actually try and get cheaper groceries is potentially looking around. Having said that I think everyone does nowadays considering how expensive it is—whether it's Countdown New World Pak 'N Save Costco or even the local markets in our communities. But it is so very expensive. So the question that I actually ask is: how will this promote that? I'm not so sure if the Minister actually answered that. Providing wholesale supply to other competitors is one way but I'm not quite sure that it has immediate effect.The question that I would like to ask is in terms of the trading environment and promoting competition effectively in terms of the Commerce Commission being triggered when there actually is a complaint about a bad activity. Before someone complains about it how will those bad behaviours be brought in line? So it's based on somebody complaining. So whatever we're doing here yes that's usually the case but immediately it has no impact or effect on consumers who are literally crying out for cheaper products at our supermarkets. I'm not so sure if it is actually quite the answer.Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs): Thank you Madam Chair. This is a debate on the preliminary provisions at the moment so it's not appropriate for me to get into the detail of the substantive matters raised.In terms of clause 4(2) which both members identified they're the objectives of the commission. The further provisions are how those are achieved and it's appropriate to debate those when we examine them.In terms of designation which was Mr Bayly's other point that isn't in Part 1 either.It clearly is appropriate for the commission to have the objective as Melissa Lee identified to contribute to a trading environment in which businesses compete effectively and consumers and businesses participate confidently. If the member wants to debate whether that's a good objective or not I'm happy to do so but I would be surprised if she thought otherwise.Similarly Mr Bayly referred to I think it was clause 4(2)(b) "promoting transparency" that also is an excellent objective. I'd be surprised if he were to debate that that wasn't the case.But the time for debating the substance of the issues is when we get to the substantive parts."