Alan, you note that "Market forces will always unravel consumer exploitative monopolies." More broadly, whenever there is an unexploited profit opportunity, an entrepreneur will find a way to exploit it. As you suggest, this acts as a constraint on potentially anti-competitive collusion so long as there is an opportunity for entry or innovative alternative provision of services.

This article touches on the very important issue of the actual content of the so-called "public benefit test" that the ACCC is expected to supply in assessing competition policy.

I have not seen the detail of what these involve but it is highly unlikely that such a test currently includes a proper modelling of the impact on the circular flow of money.

A proper consideration of public benefit in relation to competition policy should include not just the national economic flows but also state, regional and even subregional flows, over time.

At the moment we can get blatantly stupid public benefit tests that allow price drops in retail milk to below that of bottled water and that ignore the longer term impact of the extinguished capital of the disadvantaged producer. If they go out of business there is no demand for the herd of milkers so they are sold off at beef prices and the surplus plant has only marginal value.

You don't need many million dollar capital losses to completely negate any marginally enhance consumer purchasing power from cheaper milk. The shipping conferences are a similar case. Model the whole impact before making any decision to inflict detriment on anyone.