We are against the amendment because the proposed clause 5(b) reads that when competition and market forces do not allow the objectives to be met, at that time, the government should intervene. That is the rationale for clause 2(b): when the market does not produce the expected results, we use regulations or government investment to get there. I think that what Mr. Julian wants to achieve with his amendment is already in clause 2(b). The same part, in English, reads as follows:
cannot be achieved satisfactorily by competition and market forces and they do not unduly favour, or reduce the inherent advantages of, any particular mode
Then the government intervenes through regulation or public investment so that we step in and provide the services that are required or subsidize services that are required.
So proposed paragraphs 5(a) and 5(b) complement each other. First and foremost, competition market forces should be providing; and secondly, when that can't happen, the government can intervene.