I think at times the Commerce Commission has an easy job in the sense it starts out life, in appearance anyway, as being on “our side. "Our” side being the people's side. 

We need a hero, a protector to keep the big bad boys away from our lives and wallets. 

Lately though, they look like they might have a large legal budget that someone has told them to spend or else they will lose it. 

So out come the lawyers to take on Starlink over their claims about being able to text anywhere in the country. 

This case looks literal. You can't say you can text from anywhere if I can literally find a place where you can't. 

The room for adult interpretation appears to be devoid of presence in this case. 

Then we get to Foodstuffs, who are to appeal a ruling by the Commerce Commission on its merger. 

The interesting bit about Foodstuffs is that they unfortunately are a supermarket, and supermarkets are hated because they sell stuff at prices we have decided are too high. 

They are in the same category as banks, telcos, petrol stations, and airlines, who are all out there to rip us off, bleed us dry, and generally make life miserable. 

Foodstuffs have two bits in the North Island and the South Island. They want to join the two bits together. From a business perspective it makes perfect sense because you are playing with scale and scale is generally good. 

But scale also reduces numbers in the market, and it may well reduce competition. 

Where we appear a bit stuck in this country is that very fine and, quite probably, indefinable line between letting people get on with business, creating an environment in which business prospers, more businesses wanting to open, and killing business by over regulating it, driven in part by fear over lack of competition and the punter being ripped off. 

What will be interesting is whether Foodstuffs can argue their case on fact, or on what clearly is an overarching zeitgeist. 

The banks appeared in front of the Government committee into banking. They made a very plausible and reasonable case around their profits. It will make no difference though because the Government doesn’t want to hear it. 

Maybe Foodstuffs are the same. What is a decent price? What is a decent margin? 

What is the choice for a punter who sees a can of beans at a higher price in one place, so goes elsewhere? 

Is a court even required if the zeitgeist around business and its success is predetermined, whether sensibly, logically, or not?