Proposals for a sweeping change to regulation of the franchising industry are unlikely to proceed after a parliamentary committee opposed the plan.
In a report tabled on Wednesday, the Economics and Industry Standing Committee opposed the Franchising Bill 2010, which had been introduced to parliament by Liberal backbencher Peter Abetz.
The Bill was aimed at addressing the perceived imbalance in the relationship between franchisees and franchisors, which Mr Abetz said resulted in the exploitation of small business owners by 'rogue' franchisors.
The majority of the Committee, chaired by Liberal MP Mike Nahan, said it was not convinced that the Bill was an appropriate measure at this time.
Reasons for opposing the Bill included the adequacy of existing Commonwealth franchising legislation, the lack of compelling reasons to introduce state legislation and the cost of enforcing the Bill - a minimum of $4.2 billion over the next four years.
Mr Abetz was seconded to the Committee, which allowed him to be involved in all the hearings and deliberations, but he was not able to vote or put his name to the report.
His Bill was based on similar legislation that was introduced into the South Australian Parliament last year by Labor backbencher Tony Piccolo.
Despite the Committee's opposition to the Bill, Mr Abetz remains optimistic.
"I am hopeful that it won't be too long before West Australian franchisees will enjoy the benefits of an 'obligation to act in good faith' clause in the Franchising Code of Conduct, and the deterrent benefit of courts being able to impose fines for breaches of the Code."
