Dr Parmjeet Parmar: ACT proposes to keep credit card surcharges

In July the Government announced a ban on surcharges on credit card payments in-store from May 2026 at the latest.

ACT is attempting to block this ban by allowing credit card surcharges, as long as other payment options are offered- such as cash or eftpos.

They suggest the ban will either increase prices for customers or unfairly punish businesses. 

ACT Commerce and Consumer Affairs spokesperson Dr Parmjeet Parmar said to Heather du Plessis-Allan that ACT's proposal was creating with 'cost and choice' in mind.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from News Talks be follow
this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
Acts looks like it might kill off the planned surcharge ban. Now,
the plan was to ban retailers from putting a surcharge
on contactless credit card purchases so that they use to
cover the fees that they pay. But Act is written
to National proposing to actually allow businesses to continue with
the search charges as long as they give customers an
alternative way to pay, like cash or fposs ax, PALMG
parmas with us. Now, Hi Palmeg Hiada. Is this a

(00:40):
proposal that you may or may not go with or
is this a line in the sand and this is
what you want?

Speaker 3 (00:46):
So the bill is going through the Select Committee process.
So I have put this idea to the Select Committee
at the start of the process. And as you know
that many bills have been adjusted in the Select committity process.
So I'll be really looking forward to seeing what submitters
have to say on this amendment. Oh that I have propose.

Speaker 2 (01:03):
If National says to yet not, we're not going to
do that. It's a ban on everything all surcharges. Will
you support that?

Speaker 3 (01:09):
So this bill is a government policy and actors committed
to supporting a government position, but that doesn't mean that
we can't put our ideas forward. So I have done
that and now it's in the hands of the Select Committee.

Speaker 2 (01:21):
Have you heard back from Scott Simpson on this, not
yet directly. Are you convinced of the merits of banning
all surcharges?

Speaker 3 (01:30):
So what I've heard from businesses is this that it
is going to impose a huge amount of cost on businesses.
Obviously that depends on businesses turnover, and that's where I
have come up with this position because my position is
about choice and cost. It's about saving Different modes of
payment are also stopping inflation because if businesses can't search
charge for PAYWAF, they will build the cost of that

(01:52):
in their products and then everybody who is using other
modes of payment will also end up paying the cost
towards that, and that will result in higher prices for everybody.
And I want to stop that.

Speaker 2 (02:02):
So that's the idea, be okay, and you I agree
with you on everything you just said, So how can
you support the search then?

Speaker 3 (02:10):
So what I'm saying is that if a business is
not providing any other choice, then the band should be applicate.

Speaker 2 (02:17):
Yes, I know, but I asked, shouldn't for if they
don't accept this proposal, will you still support the surcharge banning?
You said yes, but how can you if you know
that it's going to impose costs on businesses?

Speaker 3 (02:27):
It is going to and as I said, the bill
is government policy and Actors committed to supporting the government position.
But as I said, many legislations have been changed in
the Select Committy process and that's what I'm looking forward
to this bill.

Speaker 2 (02:39):
Beings for you. Okay, So alternative theory, have you given
Scott Simpson a way out of this little conundrum that
he's found himself in.

Speaker 3 (02:48):
So I have put my idea forward to the Select
Committee because now the bill is in the Select Committee,
not with the Minister, so it will be reported back
and we'll have to see what form it is reported back.

Speaker 1 (02:57):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
Palm Jed appreciated. Pumjet Palmer ACT Party Commerce and Consumer
Fair spokesperson. I have a suspicion, I just think just
alternative theory here that maybe ACT has just given Scott
Simpson a way out of a terrible policy, because at
the moment, if he imposes this policy, he is going
to be getting a lot of retailers offside just before
the election, so it might have given him a little

(03:19):
out here quarter past. Helen, I've got to get you
across as a terrible sports clash that's happened. I'm going
to run you through that. Just a bit of an
update really quickly on the Tom Phillips case. The mother
of the three children has now joined the legal proceeding
proceedings to keep that information you know that we all
know about secret. It was originally brought by Tom Phillips's mother,

(03:39):
with Linda Clark as her lawyer. Now the mother of
the three children has joined different lawyer, Michael Bott knows
his way around a courtroom, so he'll be good. The
information still remains suppressed. This is the third time the
judge has suppressed it. She says, this is Justice Cull
that she's going to release a minute based on her
decision today, which I think we will all be pleased
to understand what's going on here. But apparently there is

(04:01):
no end inside here and this suppression may go on
for a very long time.

Speaker 1 (04:05):
For more from News Talk, said b listen live on
air or online and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio,