Sponsor speech Supports
Bob Katter
Bob Katter strongly supports the bill and says it gives Parliament a chance to act on supermarket dominance and price gouging after years of inquiries and inaction.
Read in Hansard ↗Reducing Supermarket Dominance
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Government & democracy
What does this bill do?
Australia’s biggest supermarket groups would have to cut their national supermarket share in stages to 20 per cent within five years, with forced sell-offsForced sale of stores or assets to shrink a supermarket group's market share and bring it under the legal limit. if needed.
Why was it introduced?
Australia’s grocery market is highly concentrated, with supermarket giants holding an estimated 65% share in 2023, squeezing local competitors and leaving suppliers afraid of retribution. The bill cuts big chains’ supermarket and wider retail market shares to 20% over five years and creates a Food Retailing Commissioner to enforce fair competition and supplier treatment.
Broader context
By 2023, Australia’s grocery market was described as one of the most concentrated in the world, with the biggest supermarket chains holding about 65 per cent of the market, expanding across other retail sectors and leaving suppliers reluctant to speak out for fear of retribution. The bill responded by proposing to force large chains down to 20 per cent market shareThe share of sales a business controls in a market; here it is the measure used to decide whether a supermarket group is too large. over five years and create a Food Retailing Commissioner to police competition and supplier treatment, but after being introduced and debated in March 2024 it was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward. in November 2024 without becoming law.
Key criticism
The collected source set for this run does not include a sourced public criticism of the bill. The page therefore does not identify a verified case against it from the available evidence.
Who supported it?
Bob Katter MPMember of Parliament, meaning an elected federal parliamentarian such as Bob Katter. introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Katter's Australian Party, some crossbench members.
Introduced in House 25 Mar 2024
Failed in House 19 Nov 2024
Did not reach Senate —
Did not become law —
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
239 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Australia’s biggest supermarket groups would have to cut their national supermarket share in stages to 20 per cent within five years, with forced sell-offsForced sale of stores or assets to shrink a supermarket group's market share and bring it under the legal limit. if needed.
-
Large supermarket groups would also face a 20 per cent cap across their wider retail businesses, such as liquor, hardware and petrol, over the same five-year period.
-
A new Commissioner for Food RetailingThe proposed regulator that would watch supermarket market shares, investigate complaints and enforce the bill's rules. would police these limits and could investigate suspected unfair treatment of suppliers and anti-competitive conductBusiness behaviour that makes it harder for rivals to compete, which the commissioner could investigate under this bill., including from confidential complaints.
-
Supermarket operators that stay above the legal market-share caps could face a $500 million penalty.
-
The Commissioner for Food RetailingThe proposed regulator that would watch supermarket market shares, investigate complaints and enforce the bill's rules. could order supermarkets, middlemen or related companies to stop conduct or take action if it fits the bill’s competition and fairness rules, with a $1 million penalty for ignoring an order.
Show source excerpts
-
The Bill reduces the market share of Australia's supermarket oligopoly by reducing the market share of supermarket businesses to 20% (via enforced progressive divestiture where necessary across a 5 year period). The Bill also establishes a Commissioner for Food Retailing to administer the limits on market share for supermarket businesses and to promote the competition and fairness principles, which include, inter alia:
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum -
Australia's supermarket giants are also opening oversized, unprofitable stores in growth areas and rural centres, which is killing off competition and obliterating local small businesses. There exists an under-reported impact on small businesses, employment and local communities across Australia, which substantially lessens competition in local markets. The rise of home brands is further squeezing out competition and reducing consumer choice. Supermarket suppliers, farmers and producers are reticent about criticising the supermarket giants, in fear of retribution. This Bill provides powers to the Commissioner for Food Retailing to ensure that Australia’s colossal supermarket giants’ market share is progressively reduced to 20% of the total Australian supermarket market share throughout a 5 year period. It also addresses the supermarket giants’ intrusion into hardware, liquor and petrol retail markets, department stores, office supplies, licensed venues and gaming, plus operations in financial services, credit cards, coal mining, energy and investment banking. This Bill also aims to ensure that the supermarket giants’ vast operations in “household retail businesses” are progressively reduced to 20% total market share throughout a 5 year period. There is a clause to ensure that if operators have a smaller share of the supermarket market share in Australia, then businesses can have a bigger share of the household retail business market share. This will extend access to market-expanding tools, used by the supermarket giants, to independent stores.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum -
The Commissioner for Food Retailing also has powers to ensure that the colossal supermarket giants treat suppliers fairly and lawfully, and do not engage in predatory practises which may lessen competition. The Commissioner also has the power to launch investigations into suspected breaches, including those arising from confidential complaints.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum -
The purpose of this section is to limit supermarket operators’ market share of supermarkets operating within a group of companies. The penalty is $500 million.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum -
A person commits an offence if the person was given these directions (directing the person to take or cease to take action) and the person failed to take or cease to take action as required. A penalty of $1,000,000 applies.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
By 2023, Australia’s grocery market was described as one of the most concentrated in the world, with the biggest supermarket chains holding about 65 per cent of the market, expanding across other retail sectors and leaving suppliers reluctant to speak out for fear of retribution. The bill responded by proposing to force large chains down to 20 per cent market shareThe share of sales a business controls in a market; here it is the measure used to decide whether a supermarket group is too large. over five years and create a Food Retailing Commissioner to police competition and supplier treatment, but after being introduced and debated in March 2024 it was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward. in November 2024 without becoming law.
- 2023
Supermarket giants hold about 65 per cent of the grocery market
The explanatory memorandumThe document that explains what the bill is meant to do and how its clauses are supposed to work. said Australia’s largest supermarket chains had an estimated 65 per cent grocery market shareThe share of sales a business controls in a market; here it is the measure used to decide whether a supermarket group is too large. in 2023, framing the market as unusually concentrated.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum ↗ - 2023
Suppliers and small competitors are described as being squeezed
The explanatory memorandumThe document that explains what the bill is meant to do and how its clauses are supposed to work. said suppliers feared retribution for criticising the major chains while oversized store rollouts and home-brand growth were hurting smaller rivals and local choice.
Reducing Supermarket Dominance explanatory memorandum ↗ - 25 Mar 2024
Bill introduced to force supermarket sell-offs and create a regulator
The bill was introduced with a plan to cut major supermarket and broader household retail market shares to 20 per cent over five years and establish a Commissioner for Food RetailingThe proposed regulator that would watch supermarket market shares, investigate complaints and enforce the bill's rules. to enforce the limits.
Parliamentary timeline ↗ - 25 Mar 2024
Second reading speech ties the bill to grocery prices and supermarket profits
During the second reading debate, supporters argued that weak competition was helping keep grocery prices high while Coles and Woolworths recorded large profits and stronger margins than supermarkets in the more competitive UKThe United Kingdom, used here as a comparison point for supermarket margins and competition. market.
Hansard ↗ - 19 Nov 2024
Bill removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward.
The parliamentary record shows the bill was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward., ending its progress without the proposed divestitureForced sale of stores or assets to shrink a supermarket group's market share and bring it under the legal limit. and commissioner scheme being enacted.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 25 Mar 2024
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 25 Mar 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Scrutiny of Bills review 16 May 2024
The scrutiny committee recorded that it considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024.
Considered
Collected source bundleRemoved from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward. in accordance with (SO 42) 19 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The collected source set for this run does not include a sourced public criticism of the bill. The page therefore does not identify a verified case against it from the available evidence.
No sourced criticism was collected in this run; this should not be read as proof that no criticism existed.
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Lead non-major voice Supports
Andrew Wilkie
Wilkie strongly supports the bill, saying it is needed to break up supermarket dominance and force real competition so grocery prices come down.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Minor parties and independents
2 speakers · 2 support
Minor parties and independents
2 speakers · 2 support
-
Bob Katter ★ Bob Katter strongly supports the bill and says it gives Parliament a chance to act on supermarket dominance and price gouging after years of inquiries and inaction.
“We are moving a bill here, and I'll bet everyone on the crossbench votes for it. But the people that are on the gravy train getting the handouts from Woolworths and Coles—they won't be voting for it.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Andrew Wilkie ★ Wilkie strongly supports the bill, saying it is needed to break up supermarket dominance and force real competition so grocery prices come down.
“This is why I rise to second the member for Kennedy's bill, which would reduce the market share of any supermarket to no more than 20 per cent, via enforced and progressive divestiture over five years. This may sound like a drastic measure, but the fact is that this bill was first introduced 10 years ago, and 10 years later the problem still has not been fixed. In fact, the situation is even worse, demonstrating clearly that governments, indeed this parliament, must stop tinkering around the edges and instead make bold changes to the supermarket sector.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 25 Mar 2024
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 25 Mar 2024
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 19 Nov 2024
House · Removed from the Notice Paper in accordance with (SO 42)
Removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary schedule of business; if a bill is removed from it, the bill stops moving forward. in accordance with (SO 42)
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Considered
The scrutiny committee recorded that it considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024.
Considered by scrutiny committee (16 May 2024): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024
Collected source bundle