I have been calling for a transparent public water register for several years now. There are too many dodgy dealings happening in the Murray Darling Basin including water possibly held by politicians.
Our view on this aligns with the ACCC who have also backed a public water register. It is simply common sense.
Transcript
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you Chair and thank you for attending tonight. In reference to your report of the Murray-Darling basin water markets inquiry, is it a fair representation of your findings to say, “There is a lack of quality, timely and accessible information for water market participants. The ACCC’s analysis has highlighted the need for significant improvements in the consistency and completeness of Murray-Darling basin water market trading?”
Sounds like what we’ve found Senator, that rings a lot of bells. It’s obviously a very complex market and it’s grown up. I guess it just sort of evolved and water administrators have been much concerned with the allocation of water rather than the trading of water, so, I think, general judgement is, there’s a range of things that need to be done to get the market working really properly and addressing the problems you’ve just correctly summarised ’cause it is such a fundamental market for farmers.
[Malcolm Roberts] I haven’t read your report, but one of my staff who is intimately involved with the Murray-Darling basin says gives you A plus.
Oh, very good Senator, I appreciate that. I should pass it on to the team.
[Malcolm Roberts] We’ve been all over the basin and we’ve listened to a lot of people and it makes total sense.
Thank you.
[Malcolm Roberts] The Water Act 2007, schedule three specifies that all trades should be recorded in a register for water trades, register of water trades. Your report notes the failed attempt by the Murray-Darling basin authority to introduce a national water market following which they just gave up trying. Is implementing this 14 year old law compatible with the findings in your report about the need for improvements in water trading data transparency?
I’m gonna pass to Mr. Betsy, who’s the person most familiar with this, so.
If I understand your question, Senator, you’re asking me whether the recommendations in our report will improve transparency in the water market? And yes, our answer to your question is that’s what they’re intended to do, that’s the big problem that, or one of the big problems that we think need to be addressed. There are some other issues as well, integrity of some of the mechanisms to ensure that people have confidence in the integrity of market and the conduct of the players in the market, making data available more generally in a more consistent way across the whole market so that people can use it for their purposes. There’re whole range of different recommendations that we think will be carefully considered by the implementation panel over the next year or so.
[Malcolm Roberts] I didn’t wanna interrupt because it was music to my ears but specifically what I was after was, is a register of water trades consistent with your report?
Yes, absolutely, well, and either a single register or registers that are compatible and that record data in a consistent way.
But that’s a classic example of what’s missing so there’s no doubt about that. And that again, reflects the way it’s evolved and why it needs very much to improve.
[Malcolm Roberts] From page 182 of the report, “89% of the volume of all large investors spot allocation purchases and 67% of the volume of all large investors bought allocation sales in the Southern connected basin in the 2018 and 19 water year, were attributed to one investor, can you indicate who that investor was?
I don’t think it would be appropriate to do so.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, and that’s why we need a register.
Yeah.
[Malcolm Roberts] But we would know the answer if we had a transparent water register, correct?
Yes.
[Malcolm Roberts] And so without, this is just a statement, without a water trading register shady or crooked operators can hide. And I’m not saying that they’re shady or, but someone could.
The difficulty is that we don’t know whether they are shady or crooked operators.
Exactly, but that’s the problem, that’s the problem, we don’t know and if the market was working with all the normal regimes then, that would make bad behaviour much, much, much harder. So we don’t know about the system, opens itself to that.
[Malcolm Roberts] I’ll bring the cupboard, the cockroaches scatter when the light hits them. Page 185 of your report indicates that in 2018 and 19, 63 gigalitres of water was traded from above the Barmah choke to below the choke, is this correct?
There’s only 700.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, it is, so.
If it’s in the report, if it’s in the report it’s very likely to be correct is correct.
It’s correct, right, thank you.
[Malcolm Roberts] It’s correct, yeah, okay. Is this figure net or gross? In other words, we know that 63 was traded from above and moved to below the Barma choke. Was there a corresponding trade moving water from below the choke to above the choke?
That’d be taking the water upstream.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes.
And that’s a very difficult thing to do.
[Malcolm Roberts] it is, but…
I mean, conceptually, there are ways in which trades can occur where that happens.
[Malcolm Roberts] But that figure would be…
Yeah, I expected it’s a gross figure but it would be pretty close to being a net figure but we can take that on notice.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. In senate estimates last Friday, Andrew Reynolds, the chief executive director of the Murray-Darling basin authority testified that there was no transfer of water from above to below the choke since any trade below was matched by a trade back the other way. This is not what your thorough and detailed investigation has found according to my staff, is that correct?
Look, I think it’s best we take it on notice.
[Malcolm Roberts] Yes, okay.
We’ve got the question that we’ll certainly get back to you and we should have the information.
[Malcolm Roberts] Your data came from voluntary information disclosures. So put simply the trades you examined were the trade people wanted you to see. Is there a chance that trades were hidden from the ACCC inquires?
That’s not correct senator, we use compulsory powers to compel the production of a large amount of the data and the information we received. Some of it we did receive voluntarily from state government agencies, but a very large proportion of it we obtained using compulsory powers.
Paint a picture that others couldn’t because we had the information gathering powers. That’s why we were able to put all the data together in the way we did. Without the powers, the study wouldn’t have had the same thoroughness.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you. Moving onto a separate topic now, this is to do with market power. The Commonwealth bank has announced that they are investing $30 million in e-commerce startup little birdie, so far so good. Now the bit that concerns, the Commonwealth will add the little birdie e-commerce portal directly into their banking app. Is the Commonwealth bank using its market power to grow a business that it has an interest in?
Look, I think Senator, I don’t know if any of my colleagues have comment, but, I mean the Commonwealth bank is, don’t know, its probably got 25% of the home loan market. It’s obviously the biggest bank but in terms of what they’re doing, there’s a lot of other players in the market. So certainly happy to keep an eye on it. But I think with all else going on in the market it would be a bit early to call that market power. It’s, you know, it’s an interesting development. They’re trying to match a range of other digital players, fintechs offering various services. So I think, we almost see it as an encouraging sign to improve the mix of economic activity But I accept they’re a big player and when big players do things like that we have to monitor it carefully.
Senator, if you don’t mind, it seems we have a dedicated unit within our agency that focuses on financial services, competition issues and actively monitors this sorts of developments and reports to a financial services competition board. And that, I think it’s a very good mechanism for really tracking what’s going on in competition in financial services.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, it’s just that the banks, as Mr. Sims pointed out have got enormous power, the four of them have got enormous power. And if they get behind something.
They’ll do the same thing, senator, that’s a different matter, as I understand, it’s the Commonwealth bank on its own, making that move. If they all did it collectively that would a very different matter and that could well bridge competition laws.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, so, next question Wespact are now, Westpac is now offering private label banking services after pay, as their first customer. Does Essec have a point at which the banks could be considered to be misusing their market power? You just mentioned one example.
You mentioned Essec, I think you meant ACCC, again, I think fairly early days, I don’t know whether my colleagues have. I think it’s part of all the rich developments that are going on that we’re monitoring very closely.
And there are a number of white label services provided by various banks. Citibank, for example provides white label credit card facilities. And in a sense, what Westpac is doing is a pro-competitive thing entering into an activity that enables after paid provide a full range of services than it currently does. And we see that as a way for them to become a more viable competitor within the financial services market.
[Malcolm Roberts] Okay, how about the last question on ACCC, how about Westpac shutting down banking facilities for cash handling companies so that it can direct their retail customers to use one specific cash handling company that they have a financial arrangement with essentially De banking, where does this slippery slope end if we let banks do this and they will eventually own everything and force companies that don’t own out of business?
I’m not aware of that particular issue, Senator, happy to take that on notice and have a look at that. We certainly are interested in De banking. And we made recommendations about that when we did an inquiry into foreign exchange because we think there’s got to be rules that people can meet so that they can’t be Di banked in an ad hoc way. So we’re very concerned about Di banking but I’m not aware of, I don’t think we’re aware of that particular
Yeah, no, we are, sorry Mr. Sims, we are aware of certain commercial arrangements that have been made that have been having an impact in the cash delivery market. There’s a couple of firms that dominate that market and we’ve had a close look at some of the arrangements there. It’ll be interesting to understand whether your referring to one of the things that we’ve looked at or whether it’s a new issue. And that might be based on by taking on others of you questions.
[Malcolm Roberts]Would you like one of my staff to contact you?
Yes, yes, that would be helpful.
[Malcolm Roberts] Thank you, thank you very much, Chair.
