Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Bendigo on raising this, not just as a nicety but because this is the kind of measure that she is always very active on. I want to speak firstly about my experience with Viridian, a plate glass manufacturer which no longer exists. It was part of CSR. I am not saying for a moment that its collapse was in any manner crucially related to anti-dumping. But its experience with the system in this country drives home that it is certainly not world's best practice. After it was found to have suffered from dumping but not as a material cause of the price situation it faced, the company said that the investigation was 'based on judgements rather than sound analysis and conclusion'. It went on to say that any appeal would suffer from the fact that it would be an admission of failure on its part. That inquiry was initiated by the company in February 2010. It was only on 25 November that year that the call for submissions closed.

In the quicklime industry in May this year there were comments that the inquiry had taken three years without a decision. I do not want to say that this is a problem that just emerged with the current government. It has been there for quite a while. The previous government put $27 million into this sector. But we have a situation where Australian companies are required to spent thousands of dollars of their own money to establish a case. They have to go and pretend that they are an Australian buyer, get the responses from Chinese companies as to what they are selling for and then go through the paperwork—hours and hours of work—and basically wait for many months for a decision. As I indicated, in that case in one sense the decision was that there was dumping. Material injury was found. But the authorities concluded that dumping was not the cause of significant material injury. Whilst dumping is not illegal, GATT article VI does give governments the power to act in this sector to overcome it. I do not think this is a matter of red tape; it is a matter of protecting Australian industry.

I want to talk briefly about the attempt earlier this year by the government to abolish the International Trade Remedies Forum. Those who said it should continue were not only the CFMEU but included the Australian Industry Group—not renowned for protectionism, the Food and Beverage Importers Association, the Australian Forest Products Association, the Australian Steel Association; the National Farmers' Federation et cetera. As I understand it, this forum had not been convened for a year and a half. Those on the forum are industry experts. They are people who do the job for nothing. There is industry consultation. In the end, abolition of the forum was not pursued. But I would note that, even at a public hearing of a Senate committee in Canberra, the Anti-Dumping Commission itself said that the work of the International Trade Remedies Forum was 'absolutely relevant to the work of the antidumping system'. This was a very unfortunate attempt, under the guise of red tape, needless meetings et cetera, to abolish a forum that Australian industry saw as being necessary.

It is all right to boast that trade agreements are going to allow this government to undercut Australian conditions, that we will facilitate the entry of people with lower standards into the labour market and that we will not have testing of Australian industry about the availability of Australian workers. There is much boasting about that, but there is very little action in this sphere. If it takes three years to get the issues of quicklime on the agenda, quicklime being crucial to a large number of industries, it is deeply disturbing. We know that China uses prison labour in some employment sectors. It is not only a question of undercutting through a very low wage market; it is also a situation where enforced labour is utilised to undermine Australian conditions.

I believe there is a need for a very vigorous antidumping system. Dumping undermines Australian industry. It is very real and it is of deep concern to Australian industry.

See this speech in context