The ‘Yes’ vote lost the referendum on retail trading hours despite early polling indicating 70 per cent public backing, a supportive premier and a big budget for its campaign. Jane McNamara reports on what caused the public to vote ‘No’.
The ‘Yes’ vote lost the referendum on retail trading hours despite early polling indicating 70 per cent public backing, a supportive premier and a big budget for its campaign. Jane McNamara reports on what caused the public to vote ‘No’.
Curtin University political analyst David Black believes the success of the ‘No’ vote in the retail trading hours referendum was an entirely predictable result, with the weight of history against change through this forum.
Dr Black said referendums were, in the main, not supported (nine of the past 10 have been negative) and therefore extended retail trading hours was “doomed to defeat” from the beginning.
“The only referendums that do pass are the ones that tighten controls,” he said.
“Referendums of other kinds, which look at changing the laws or broadening things, usually fail.”
Dr Black said the retail trade referendum had been defeated by businesses that already traded on Sundays – the group with the most to gain from resisting change.
“These staff wore ‘No, No’ shirts and posted shop signs. A huge campaign without the cost,” he said.
“There were several reasons for voting ‘No’ but not many for ‘Yes’, except for greater choice.
“Church groups would see themselves as winners, as would people [small retailers] in big shopping centres who might not want to open but would have had to,” he said.
It seems clear that the ‘No’ campaigners were better at raising support at grass-roots level, joining disparate groups such as churchgoers opposed to Sunday trading with local retailers who already open on Sundays.
Those opposed to change played the local card well, according to MJB&B Marketing and Advertising managing director Craig Billings, who thinks they had a well timed campaign to beat a complacent ‘Yes’ campaign that simply believed it would get its view across the line.
Mr Billings said the big issues that the ‘No’ campaign raised included the effect extended retail trading hours would have on family time.
“People see Sunday as a day of relaxation and this influenced people,” he said.
“There was also the issue of the big guy versus the little guy. People don’t like seeing the little guy suffer. These points were well portrayed by the ‘No’ campaign.”
Mr Billings said people were also concerned about how longer trading hours would affect prices and, ultimately, their hip pocket.
“What points did the ‘Yes’ campaign raise?” he asked.
It is an argument supported by WA Retail and Small Business Association (WARASBA) chief executive Brett Dunstone, who lists myriad reasons for the ‘No’ campaign’s win.
Along with grassroots links into church and sporting groups, Mr Dunstone highlights the use of Western Australian achievers such as former Perth Glory coach Mitch d’Avray, ex-Hockeyroos captain Rechelle Hawkes and tennis icon Margaret Court in the campaign.
He also focuses on the many business groups that will breathe a sigh of relief from the defeat of the deregulation campaign – underscoring a key message of his campaign that big national chains threatened the survival of home-grown operators.
“The Chemist’s Guild, which has 400 chemists statewide, the Newsagents Association, which has 750 newsagents in the state, independent supermarkets and liquor stores and the Australian Hotel Association are the major winners,” Mr Dunstone said.
“Also, supply chains including WA dairy and fruit growers are big winners.”
While Mr Dunstone and his colleagues may be basking in the glory of a roughly two-to-one winning ratio, they may well need to keep on their toes, with some of the losers keen to regroup and continue the fight.
WA Independent Grocers Association (WAIGA) president John Cummings said it was the actions of many people, not one or two, that led the ‘No’ campaign to victory.
Mr Cummings said WAIGA ran its own campaign, at a cost of $160,000, because of its size.
“We thought we were a big enough group to have our own voice and to represent ourselves,” he said.
“We supported the same ‘No’ outcome but had our own reasons and wanted to put across our case.”
Franchisees Against Inequitable Retailing (FAIR) spokesman Paul Plowman said the debate failed to incorporate all retailing categories because it was hijacked by the supermarkets – a view he believes gives some hope for other retailers that the referendum result did not end the possibility of some change to the rules.
Mr Plowman, whose group has the backing of national chain Harvey Norman, said the referendum only indicated that the majority of WA consumers did not want the two grocery giants, Coles and Woolworths, dominating the local market.
“The ‘Yes’ campaign driven by the Retail Traders Association, which was funded and directed by the two major grocers and the Shopping Centre Council, was only focused on gaining a greater market share in the grocery category and for the affiliated retailers of Coles and Woolworths located in shopping centres,” he said.
“The ‘No’ campaign was driven by a group of independent grocers who were only interested in protecting the positions of advantage they already enjoy by being allowed to trade under extended weeknight hours and on Sundays.
“Neither campaign reflected the interests of retailers which do not trade in the grocery sector, are not situated within shopping centres and are not in a position to dominate the market.”
FAIR would continue to lobby the State Government to have a special category (called homewares) added to retail trading laws to allow franchisees to open on Sundays.
“The current legislation is fundamentally flawed and does not allow shops that are selling the same products next door to each other, across the street from each other or in the same building as each other to trade in a fair and competitive marketplace on Sundays,” Mr Plowman said.
But despite FAIR’s harsh view on the campaign run by the key funders of the ‘Yes’ campaign, the WA Retail Traders Association rejects the notion that the deregulation push, thought to have had twice the budget of the No’ vote, miscued.
“It was a very professional campaign which sought to demonstrate in an honest manner the benefits including jobs, choice and convenience,” WARTA director Brian Reynolds said.
He said that the ‘No’ campaign used scare tactics and intimidation.
“The ‘No’ campaign spooked WA voters and the Government 18 months ago that extended trade would see the world collapse, that there would be no sport and no church. But we know none of that is true.”
Referendum Outcome
• The retail trade referendum vote count recorded by the WA Electoral Commission on March 7 showed how convincing the ‘No’ campaign was.
Question one: “Do you believe that the WA community would benefit if trading hours in the Perth metropolitan area were extended to allow general retail shops to trade until 9pm Monday to Friday.”
Votes: No 643,091; Yes 452,180.
Question two: “Do you believe that the WA community would benefit from if trading hours in the Perth metropolitan area were extended to allow general retail shops to trade for six hours on a Sunday.”
Votes: No 666,394; Yes 418,117.