Xenophon: Give it up. Grocery Choice was a lame duck.
The Rudd government has sensibly scrapped Grocery Choice. It was never going to work.
See 42south147east.info/2009/06/27/rudds-grocery-choice-the-colocation-effect.aspx and 42south147east.info/2009/05/29/the-frog-lady.aspx and 42south147east.info/2009/05/29/grocerywatch-open-letter-to-duncan-kerr-mhr.aspx for reasons why.
Xenophon reportedly stated that "...we can't even get some basic pricing information out to consumers..." (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/28/2610475.htm)
Well, that's because it's not one of the roles of Government to do that. Two reasons why it's not.
a) The big supermarkets advertise their prices. Consumers can go where it's cheapest. Or not.
b) Because the Grocery Choice scheme was so large it actually promoted Coles and Woolworths.
On point b) I contrast the Rudd version with original scheme by Duncan Kerr.
In Duncan's version local shops were surveyed, and although the info was still old it at least indicated trends in retail outlets. So, you would know that your local shop had competitive prices for milk and bread but knew that for breakfast cereals Coles was much cheaper. Knowing this, the consumer might shop locally most days and then shop at Coles less often to buy, say breakfast cereal.
Grocery Choice was not going to do this. So effectively it promoted the big two at the expense of local shops.
Finally, shoppers are probably a fair bit smarter than the government gives them credit for. They don't live in bubble-worlds, they experience prices for themselves, they have collegues, friends and relatives who can provide alternate views on pricing. And they probably see adverts.
See 42south147east.info/2009/06/27/rudds-grocery-choice-the-colocation-effect.aspx and 42south147east.info/2009/05/29/the-frog-lady.aspx and 42south147east.info/2009/05/29/grocerywatch-open-letter-to-duncan-kerr-mhr.aspx for reasons why.
Xenophon reportedly stated that "...we can't even get some basic pricing information out to consumers..." (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/28/2610475.htm)
Well, that's because it's not one of the roles of Government to do that. Two reasons why it's not.
a) The big supermarkets advertise their prices. Consumers can go where it's cheapest. Or not.
b) Because the Grocery Choice scheme was so large it actually promoted Coles and Woolworths.
On point b) I contrast the Rudd version with original scheme by Duncan Kerr.
In Duncan's version local shops were surveyed, and although the info was still old it at least indicated trends in retail outlets. So, you would know that your local shop had competitive prices for milk and bread but knew that for breakfast cereals Coles was much cheaper. Knowing this, the consumer might shop locally most days and then shop at Coles less often to buy, say breakfast cereal.
Grocery Choice was not going to do this. So effectively it promoted the big two at the expense of local shops.
Finally, shoppers are probably a fair bit smarter than the government gives them credit for. They don't live in bubble-worlds, they experience prices for themselves, they have collegues, friends and relatives who can provide alternate views on pricing. And they probably see adverts.
Comments