Jennie George (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Environment and Heritage) Share this | Hansard source

I take the opportunity this evening in this debate on the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Amendment (Security Plans and Other Measures) Bill 2006 to again raise my concerns and protest about this government’s failure to provide the necessary maritime security that this nation requires and its failure to provide protection for our communities, particularly communities like mine, which is centred on a port in the electorate of Throsby. The member for Lingiari was absolutely right to draw attention to the totally inadequate response from the other side of this chamber. There is one speaker on the government side today compared to 12 speakers on this side of the chamber. I dare say that intelligent members on the government benches are embarrassed about the totally inadequate performance of the Howard government in many areas of concern identified in our amendment. They must be embarrassed otherwise they would be in here defending the government’s record in light of the many areas of inadequacy that our shadow minister has brought to the attention of the chamber in the amendment he has moved.

I take the opportunity to speak on maritime bills when they come before the parliament because they are of great importance to Port Kembla, to the suburbs and communities that live in the vicinity of the port and to the workers that are employed at the port and their families. Last year when I spoke on the Maritime Transport Security Amendment Bill I drew the parliament’s attention to a comprehensive report on Australia’s maritime security issued by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. I want to quote a paragraph from that report which sums up the concerns of a credible independent body. It said:

A terrorist attack on Australia’s maritime interests is a credible scenario. We have high dependence on shipping and seaborne trade, and are adjacent to a region where terrorist groups have maritime capabilities.

…            …            …

Australia still faces major institutional and operational challenges in reducing the risks of maritime terrorism. We haven’t met these challenges fully, and we lack consistency in the response across the states and territories.

These are the words of an authoritative and independent body that is there to provide fearless advice to the government. The Howard government has failed to appreciate the seriousness of the situation. Labor’s amendment to this bill, outlined in detail by the member for Brisbane, indicates significant areas of government failure in providing necessary maritime security and condemns the government for its failure and inaction in regard to many of the concerns highlighted in that amendment.

I want to again take the opportunity to repeat some of the concerns I have previously raised in the House, particularly with regard to the ready availability of single and multiple voyage permits for foreign vessels which, as we know, carry dangerous materials in our waters and into our ports. The government is abusing the rules for the granting of these permits. This is a very important matter, for about 1,000 coastal permits are now issued each year for foreign ships carrying oil, chemicals, LPG and dry cargo between our ports. Very alarmingly, an investigation by the Australian newspaper last year found that foreign ships with foreign crews were carrying explosive cargo, such as fuel or fertiliser, and that they could have lodged fraudulent documents to obtain voyage permits for coastal shipping trade. The headline of the article that appeared in the Australian said it all: ‘Lax ship checks expose ports to terror threat’. In this article the Australian revealed details of an internal audit of the Howard government’s administration of coastal shipping under the Navigation Act. The audit of the administration was obtained under freedom of information laws by the freedom of information editor of the Australian, Mr Michael McKinnon. He did the community a great service in pursuing the outcome of this audit.

The audit was conducted by KPMG, a very reputable body, for the Department of Transport and Regional Services and it was completed in October 2004. It delivered a damning assessment of the government’s performance, finding that the administration of coastal shipping licences and permits for foreign vessels is a shambles. The audit revealed that one in six coastal shipping permits is granted without a signed application, which according to KPMG meant that ‘the department risks granting a permit based on a bogus or unauthorised application’. The audit revealed that inadequate financial controls mean that the government may be unaware of fraud, errors or other irregularities relating to the licence and permit applications, that poor record keeping means data relating to more than one in five approved licence and permit applications is ‘absent or incorrect’ and that existing regulations are, in KPMG’s words, ‘out of date’ and ‘do not reflect current operating procedures’.

If all that was not enough, the report also found that the department has breached the navigation regulations and ministerial guidelines by failing to properly establish if a licensed Australian ship is actually available before issuing permits to foreign vessels. Single and continuous voyage permits are supposed to be issued only when a licensed ship is unavailable. The minister also has to be satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so. As we know, unlicensed foreign ships are not required to pay their crew Australian wages when trading on the Australian coast. Many foreign ships—many of them ships of shame, flag of convenience vessels—undercut Australian wages and conditions. It is a sad indictment of this government that it has presided over the demise of the Australian coastal trading fleet while giving a leg-up to foreign shipping that uses substandard vessels and engages cheap foreign labour.

A recent story on The 7.30 Report by Heather Ewart showed clearly that Australia’s remaining merchant fleet is under severe threat as a result of the abuse of this permit system. Under the Howard government, half of Australia’s fleet has already been decimated. We are now down to 50 Australian vessels. MT Stolt was the last Australian flagged chemical carrier. The vessel, after a dispute in Tasmania, is now to be reflagged from Australia to the Cayman Islands and the 18 sacked Australian workers are to be replaced by foreign seafarers. It is of no surprise that on The 7.30 Report one of the MUA officials, Mick Doleman, said that single voyage permits are now being handed out by this government like ‘confetti at a wedding’. On that program, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services put an entirely new construction on the issuing of permits to foreign vessels, saying that an Australian vessel must be available and ready to operate under ‘reasonable terms and conditions’.

We know from this government’s position what ‘reasonable terms and conditions’ means: a drive to the bottom in competing against foreign crews and foreign labour. The result of that policy position is becoming manifestly clear, and that is that the remaining Australian merchant fleet continues to remain under direct threat from foreign competition through the abuse of the permit system.

It is important to understand why the government’s failure to properly administer the cabotage system in this country really matters. First, it is clear from the findings of the audit that the lax administration of foreign ships on the Australian coastal trade places Australia and its citizens at a heightened risk of maritime terrorism. The Department of Transport and Regional Services has been issuing permits, as we know from this audit, in response to unsigned applications, which in the restrained words of the audit report means it has risked granting a permit based on a ‘bogus or unauthorised application’.

It is no secret that the international shipping industry has a dark side. During the course of its inquiry into the introduction of maritime security identification cards, the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee had evidence that made this very clear. International maritime security agencies now accept that Osama bin Laden owns a fleet of cargo ships all flagged under the flag of convenience system. As we know from the very important Ships of shame report, this system allows for the evasion of taxation and most other regulated costs. But, more importantly, it provides the beneficial owner with the most effective veil of anonymity available in international trade. In my view there is no more effective veil of anonymity than a blank application form. In fact, I can hardly think of a way to make Australia more vulnerable to terrorist attack than by permitting foreign ships to sail from port to port without the inconvenience of lodging a signed permit form. As we know from the KPMG audit, that has occurred.

The latest Australian maritime transport compendium commissioned by the Australian Shipowners Association contains a telling statistical tale about the growing use of foreign ships to transport goods around Australian ports. It reveals that since 1991-92 the number of permits issued to foreign ships has grown by over 325 per cent. In 2003-04, the last full year subject to the report, foreign vessels were permitted to carry almost 30 per cent of the Australian interstate and intrastate sea freight trade. As we know, foreign seafarers are not subject to the same rules that apply to Australian seafarers serving on Australian ships. Not only are foreign seafarers denied Australian pay and working conditions but they are not subject to the same security regime as Australian seafarers. I want to commend the Maritime Union of Australia for the way it has willingly and efficiently cooperated with the government in introducing the maritime identification card system and other very important measures that it understands are necessary to secure and protect Australia’s maritime trade. It is just a great pity that this government is letting the shipowners, the seafarers and the Australian community down so very badly in the many areas that were identified in our amendment.

The Labor Party has continued to argue that the carriage of highly dangerous goods, like ammonium nitrate, by foreign ships around our coastline must stop now. I commend the Leader of the Opposition on the many important contributions he has made in this chamber highlighting the grave dangers that exist in allowing foreign vessels to transport ammonium nitrate around our coastline. As I said earlier, the MT Stolt was the last Australian flagged chemical carrier and it has now gone. It should be clear to everyone that the safest way to transport high-consequence dangerous goods around Australia is obviously on Australian ships crewed by Australian men and women subject to appropriate security screening. Secure ships and secure seafarers mean better protection for the Australian community. It is bad enough that this government has facilitated an explosion in the number of single and continuous voyage permits issued to foreign ships; it is worse that the government is leaving Australia vulnerable because it will not or cannot regulate a coastal trade according to the rules.

It is not just a matter of supporting Australian shippers and Australian maritime workers, as important as that is. It is not just a matter of keeping dangerous substances like ammonium nitrate out of the hands of terrorists. The increasing carriage of sea freight around our coast by foreign ships, many of them flag of convenience vessels subject to very minimal regulation, also puts our natural environment at risk. Mr Deputy Speaker Quick, I know you will be very concerned about that, coming from the island state of Tasmania. It is in my view a matter of good luck not good governance that Australia has not seen a major environmental disaster associated with the carriage of chemical or petroleum products by one of these ships of shame.

The Howard government’s neglect of shipping policy threatens our economy, it threatens our national security and it threatens our natural environment. It is well and truly time that the Howard government ceased abusing the cabotage system. There is a real threat of a ship being used as a weapon in a terrorist strike, just as we saw jet aircraft used in the disastrous 2001 World Trade Centre attack. A maritime vessel could be used against a population centre, like the one that I represent, adjacent to a port facility, or it could be used in shipping channels with frightening consequences.

The Leader of the Opposition has referred to what happened back in 1947, and I will remind people again about the explosion on the SS Grandcamp in Texas City. The vessel was carrying 2,300 tons of ammonium nitrate, and it gives us an idea of the horrendous consequences of what might happen. That explosion on the vessel was heard as far as 150 miles away, with a mushroom cloud rising 2,000 feet. Locals thought it was a nuclear bomb. The Grandcamp’s 1.5-ton anchor was flung two miles and was embedded 10 feet into the ground. Texas City was devastated. The explosion killed at least 567 people. As I indicated, the Leader of the Opposition has raised that incident to alert the community about the possible dangers of these very dangerous chemicals being transported around our coastline.

The Australian parliament passed legislation in 2004 to provide for better exchange of information between state and federal agencies on users of ammonium nitrate. But this government has done nothing to prevent the carriage of ammonium nitrate by foreign flagged ships, often crewed by unidentified seafarers, with all the possibilities of terrorist infiltration and attack that this might allow.

Given the known business links between Osama bin Laden and shipping, this is an area of serious vulnerability that demands urgent and immediate attention. Coupled with the high incidence of piracy in our near northern waters and the operation of terrorist groups in islands bordering those waters, the government’s complacency is so negligent and so appalling. In the same way, it is inexcusable that ships arriving from overseas are not being required to meet their notification obligations. I pursued this matter with the Minister for Justice and Customs and, in the replies that I received, it is clear that nearly eight per cent of ships in 2004 failed to provide details of crew and cargo until after arrival. It is too late then if they are carrying explosives, a dirty bomb or worse.

The requirement to identify vessels and cargo before arrival is a thoroughly sensible procedure. Labor supports it. Indeed, we have been critical of the government’s failure to properly implement it. The government needs to make clear how this reporting requirement will be implemented in future to ensure complete compliance with the legislation. It could take a leaf out of the book of the United States, where these procedures are strictly enforced. Ships that fail to provide necessary identification there are denied access to ports and are interdicted if required.

The situation at our ports is serious when, as we know, currently only about 10 per cent of inbound containers are screened. With more than 20,000 ship arrivals and over 3½ million movements of loaded containers in Australia, there is plenty of room for error when 90 per cent of containers go unchecked.

I want to conclude by saying that the member for Lingiari was absolutely right to draw attention to the vulnerability of the Top End of Australia in particular. We have had about 13,000 cases of suspected illegal fishing boats in Australian waters. Only 200 of those were apprehended. Even if they double that target, that still leaves about 12,600 boats that go free. Our northern border has become so porous that illegal vessels are now routinely sighted on our mainland and even upstream, where camps have been found.

In conclusion, let me repeat the words from the report of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute:

A terrorist attack on Australia’s maritime interests is a credible scenario.

The government should urgently address the deficiencies that we have pursued in our amendment to this bill.

See this speech in context