Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) Chair Rod Sims delivered a keynote address at a conference in Sydney on Thursday, November 29, debating whether competition law’s purpose should be expanded in light of the “hipster antitrust” movement.
“For the last few decades there has been a broad consensus among those in the antitrust community around the world that competition law should promote some concept of ‘consumer welfare’; that competition law is primarily about making markets work for consumers,” Mr Sims said. “This has also been the position in Australia.”
Mr Sims said the foundations of competition law were now being called into question, with some commentators calling for its objectives to be broadened to public policy issues such as income inequality, protection of democracy, financial stability, or promotion of environmental outcomes.
“At its heart, the hipster antitrust movement is a critique of the consumer welfare standard,” Mr Sims said.
Mr Sims spoke at length regarding the history of competition law, and his opposition to introducing broader public interest considerations into the core of competition law enforcement.
“In my view, it is inadvisable and counterproductive to import these considerations into the core of competition. Competition law and policy should be first and foremost about protecting and promoting competition for the welfare of consumers.
“Just because an instrument is targeted at one objective, however, does not mean it cannot benefit other objectives. I strongly believe, for example, that properly applied competition law can greatly assist income distribution; but this is a significant side benefit. We are not solving for income distribution and there are much better instruments to use to do this (such as the tax and welfare systems),” Mr Sims stated.
Other public policy issues should be addressed with their own policy instruments, Mr Sims said. “It is bad public policy to attempt to achieve these goals with the single instrument of competition or consumer policy.”
Mr Sims said the debate about competition law was valuable, but would not change the ACCC’s approach. “We at the ACCC believe in the power of competition to deliver good outcomes for consumers and for the Australian economy. Virtually all of what the ACCC does fits neatly within a framework of promoting consumer welfare and making markets work for consumers,” Mr Sims stated.
“If consumers are to be harmed by laws we can enforce, we will act, and strongly.
“The current debate about the foundation of competition law is valuable and intellectually important, but it will not change what we at the ACCC do.
“This does not mean we will not be vocal advocates for any need for change in the law given evolving circumstances or judicial interpretation. It does mean that our objective is clear,” Mr Sims stated.
Featured News
Athletes Behind NCAA Antitrust Settlement Push for Collective Bargaining Rights
Dec 11, 2024 by
CPI
Big Tech Stocks Surge as Trump Names Ferguson to Lead FTC
Dec 11, 2024 by
CPI
Synopsys Proposes Divestitures to Secure EU Approval for $35 Billion Ansys Deal
Dec 11, 2024 by
CPI
Renowned Antitrust Expert and Former Morgan Lewis Chair John Shenefield Passes Away
Dec 11, 2024 by
CPI
Trump Taps Mark Meador for Federal Trade Commission Post
Dec 11, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Moats & Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Assessing the Potential for Antitrust Moats and Trenches in the Generative AI Industry
Nov 29, 2024 by
Allison Holt, Sushrut Jain & Ashley Zhou
How SEP Hold-up Can Lead to Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
Jay Jurata, Elena Kamenir & Christie Boyden
The Role of Moats in Unlocking Economic Growth
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Overcoming Moats and Entrenchment: Disruptive Innovation in Generative AI May Be More Successful than Regulation
Nov 29, 2024 by
Simon Chisholm & Charlie Whitehead