Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
Copeland Gordon: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Question No. 5 to Minister Questions to Members 
[Volume:607;Page:4972] 
12.  
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Commerce 
: Does she agree with Tim Hazledine’s statement in the  
Independent 
 on 2 April 2003 that the “deep seated presumption” driving our competition policy is that “competition is good and monopoly is bad” and that “the burden of proof must lie with those who would find market failure in competition and seek to remedy this through monopoly or cartelisation”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister of Commerce) 
: 
 No. I refer the member to the purpose of the Commerce Act which is to promote competition in markets for the long-term benefit of consumers within New Zealand. This means that under the Act practices that would have the effect of substantially lessening competition cannot be undertaken unless authorised on the basis that the resulting benefit to the public outweighs the lessening of competition. In such a case the applicant for the authorisation has the burden of proof. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Can the Minister explain why the Commerce Commission allowed Air New Zealand and Qantas consultants the Network Economics Consulting Group to delete key data from the public version of its submission to the Commerce Commission making independent analysis by Tim Hazledine and others of the airlines’ proposal “unnecessarily difficult and imprecise”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No I cannot explain why the Commerce Commission made a particular decision in a particular case although I am advised that under the Commerce Act the commission is permitted to provide for the withholding of certain information on the grounds of commercial sensitivity. The withholding of information I am also advised can be challenged by other parties through a process of judicial review. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: What role does the Minister have under the Commerce Act in respect of authorisations and clearances for restrictive trade practices? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have none other than the power to transmit a Government statement of economic policy to the commission which I have not done in this case. 
John Key 
: Can the Minister assure the House that she will not propose enabling legislation to allow the Air New Zealand – Qantas deal to go ahead when it finally gets canned by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the New Zealand Commerce Commission tomorrow? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I think the member is attempting to speculate on a matter that we will know a good deal more about tomorrow. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Is the Minister concerned that the Travel Agents Association of New Zealand opposed the proposed Qantas – Air New Zealand operation because it removes all effective competition and replaces it with a joint airline operation that will have market dominance and mean consumers will have none of the benefits of choice or the honesty and effectiveness that choice brings to any market? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have already made it clear in one of my supplementary answers that I have no role under the Commerce Act in respect of this matter other than the power to transmit a Government statement—something I have not done in this case and will not be doing.