Supermarket inquiry's lack of consensus is disappointing

With three "dissenting reports" the committee failed to reach consensus on many key recommendations including the possibility of "divestment powers" that could be used to break up the dominant duopoly of Coles and Woolworths in the event they were found to have engaged in "unconscionable conduct".

While the inquiry was not without its moments - a threat to jail the outgoing Woolworths chair Brad Banducci for not providing information being one of them - it is unlikely to contribute to a fall in prices at the checkout anytime soon.

That's already happening as a result of public pressure and traditional market forces in any case. The general view is that the rate of food inflation peaked in mid-2023 and has been easing ever since.

While that's not always obvious, it does seem the days of an iceberg lettuce being an unaffordable luxury are behind us. Meat prices have also eased, but not to anywhere near the fall in saleyard prices.

Woolworths, in its response to the report, said it was committed to continue to "work hard to help customers find the best possible value". Coles, on the other hand, said while it noted the review's recommendations it would not support any it considered likely to "adversely impact the operation of open and free competitive markets in the provision of food and grocery in Australia".

The only significant recommendation to receive unanimous support from Labor, the Greens and the LNP was to make the guidelines regulating the relationship between suppliers and the supermarket chains mandatory.

That simply echoes the interim recommendation made by Craig Emerson as part of his inquiry into the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct. Coles and Woolworths have already agreed to this.

In the face of the Albanese government's entrenched opposition to divestiture laws, it's difficult to see how, the elephant in the room - Coles' and Woolworths' dominance of two thirds of a grocery market with a limited number of players - can be addressed.

Without the threat of divestiture laws such as those favoured by committee chair Nick McKim and former ACCC boss Professor Allan Fels there is little that can be done to stop the big two from "land banking" key commercial sites to keep competitors out of areas where they are operating.

While Aldi, Costco and smaller, mainly regional, operators such as IGA and Spar have an important role to play, they just don't have enough stores in the right places to take the fight up to Coles and Woolworths.

While the PM has repeatedly dismissed anti-monopoly laws as "Stalinist" the truth is they are anything but. This type of legislation was first introduced in the United States in the late 19^th century in order to protect free enterprise and market competition against gargantuan conglomerates that trampled on consumers and competitors alike.

It also seems unlikely another of the recommendations backed by Senator McKim and his fellow Greens will ever make it into law. That is the call to make price gouging - the practice of ramping up the cost of a product during a time of scarcity - illegal. In short, profiteering by another name.

Many Australians will still recall exorbitant prices being asked for masks and hand sanitiser in the early days of the pandemic.

To curb the power of the supermarket duopoly would appear to require a far greater strength of political will than this government possesses.

While Labor is more than happy to talk about the issue it needs to take decisive action as well.