Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—The government believes that our nation's best days are ahead and is working to keep the Australian economy strong.

While the fundamentals of our economy remain strong, some sectors of our economy are under pressure.

There are additional challenges for Australian industry because of the rise in value of the Australian dollar and uncertainty in the global economy.

There are global forces impacting upon the Australian economy, which is in transition. Our terms of trade, climate change, the advent of new technology, and the drive for knowledge and innovation all represent profound challenges in the context of the global economic landscape.

That is why the government is supporting Australian industries to innovate, transform and meet the challenges in a range of ways.

We are acting to lift productivity, investing in innovation and skills, reforming the tax system to encourage investment and improve participation, and assisting businesses to access opportunities in Australia and overseas.

And our reform agenda is helping businesses to move to a modern, high-skill, high-tech, clean energy economy which will create Australian jobs into the future. As part of the reform agenda, the government is also supporting Australian business to remedy the harmful effects of unfair trading practices like dumping and the subsidisation of goods by other countries. We are doing so through the most significant improvements to the antidumping and countervailing system in a decade, which I will outline to the House.

When we came into government, we inherited an antidumping and countervailing system that needed reform. The antidumping system under the Howard government became overly complex, time consuming and difficult to access. Antidumping investigations were at historically low levels.

The government asked the Productivity Commission to review the operation of the antidumping system, and in June of this year the Minister for Trade and I announced the government’s response to that review. In developing a package of improvements we listened to manufacturers and their workers, to producers and importers, to members of parliament, and to industry associations and to trade unions.

We will continue to work with all parties involved in the antidumping system on the implementation of the government’s reforms through the new International Trade Remedies Forum. The forum will help ensure that the antidumping system continues to reflect industry experience and the international trading environment.

The first meeting of the forum occurred last month and I thank all those who attended and contributed.

Faster r esolution o f d umping c omplaints

The government’s improvements to the antidumping system are designed to deliver faster resolution of complaints about dumping.

The government is increasing staff in the International Trade Remedies Branch of Customs and Border Protection over the next 12 months by 45 per cent, from 31 to 45 staff, to ensure cases are resolved as quickly as possible. Recruitment of additional staff to work on dumping complaints has already commenced, with new staff starting shortly.

Legislation introducing a 30-day time limit on minister’s decision-making has already passed the House. No longer will we see the long delays we saw under the Howard government when a minister repeatedly refused to decide antidumping cases for more than a year. From more than 365 days to 30 days—this will help faster decision-making.

The changes will also enable consideration of the need for provisional measures at the earliest opportunity in the investigation, if there is adequate information to do so, rather than waiting until verifying all data, as has been the case historically.

Better d ecision -m aking

It is not just about making decisions faster, it is about improving the quality of decisions in the interests of the Australian economy, and Australian jobs. Antidumping cases are complex matters and I commend the work of the branch for the diligence with which they apply themselves to an often thankless task.

The government will be providing additional resources to support them in this difficult work. Specialist knowledge of particular industries and particular countries and experts in forensic accounting will supplement existing staff knowledge in complex cases and provide advice on key issues. The government is settling a protocol with the forum for accessing the right expertise in the right cases.

The government is also making significant changes to the appeals process. The use of an appropriately supported panel of review officers will ensure a review officer with appropriate skills and experience hears appeals in a timely manner. The review officer will be able to make recommendations directly to the minister, supported by targeted reinvestigation of particular findings.

Work has commenced on reviewing the effectiveness of Australia’s 'particular market situation' provisions, with a newly formed working group to report to me by the end of this year.

The definition of what constitutes material injury caused by dumping will be amended to allow a more inclusive consideration of the impact of dumping on employment and investment, and I will issue a direction to clarify that profits forgone and other injury caused in new or expanding markets are relevant injury considerations. The branch will also clarify how it determines whether dumping or other factors have caused injury.

Improved a ccess

The government will improve access to the antidumping system for Australian businesses. For example, more practical support will be provided to small and medium enterprises, who face the greatest barriers to accessing the antidumping system. We are funding a small and medium enterprise support officer within industry to assist more businesses make effective use of antidumping measures. That officer will work with businesses, helping them to prepare applications, including through compiling evidence that may be needed for investigations to be initiated, and then working with other businesses that wish to participate in ongoing investigations.

The government is working with the forum to determine the best way to resolve the particular problems faced by primary producers in accessing the antidumping system.

Parties will also more easily be able to update measures that are already in place because of changes that will allow a partial review of these measures, instead of requiring a de facto reinvestigation.

Comparable c ountries

The government is ensuring that Australia's antidumping system is administered more in line with comparable countries, taking into account relevant cases and practices in other countries.

We are strengthening the approach to parties who choose not to cooperate in antidumping investigations. This will ensure that parties do not manipulate the antidumping system by not participating or by engaging in selective participation, and that the branch has the best information available to make a decision about the existence of dumping.

The branch will take a more flexible approach to determining the appropriate form of a dumping or countervailing duty, and in the method used to determine the non-injurious price. This will ensure that dumping remedies more effectively prevent further injury to Australian industry.

The government is also clarifying that the parties permitted to participate in investigations, including by making submissions, include relevant industry associations, unions and downstream industry. This will make sure people and businesses affected by dumping get a real say in dumping decisions.

Stronger c ompliance m echanisms

The government will ensure there are stronger compliance mechanisms in place, so that Australian industry actually gets the protection of measures where dumping or subsidisation has caused them material injury.

There will be increased monitoring of compliance with antidumping measures with the creation of a dedicated position to develop and implement an improved and proactive monitoring program. Further, the government will work with the forum to develop a framework to prevent the unfair circumvention of measures by the modification of products, sending products through third countries or exporters with a lower duty rate, or assembling parts in Australia.

Conclusion

The government’s reforms get the balance right for a modern antidumping system and bring Australia into greater alignment with the practices of comparable trading nations.

The comprehensive package of improvements the government is implementing re-affirm the commitment on this side of the House to the world trading rules, while better serving our industries and helping our workforce enforce their rights against unfair dumping practices.

We are providing better access to antidumping remedies for businesses, irrespective of their size, and will support the branch to resolve investigations more quickly. Greater resources and expertise will improve decision making.

Our suite of improvements will help keep our economy strong and provide greater certainty for Australian business, including manufacturers, primary producers and importers and, importantly, their workers, families and communities.

The government wants to maintain confidence in the benefits of international trade, and that means everyone having confidence that everyone follows the rules of trade.

We will support local business and give them confidence to invest in the future.

I present a copy of my ministerial statement and I ask leave of the House to move a motion to enable the member for Indi to speak for 10 minutes.

Leave granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Mrs Mirabella speaking for a period not exceeding 10 minutes.

Question agreed to.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to say I am not really sure what the point of that ministerial statement was because it was largely a rerun of the same themes from the speech of the Minister for Justice on the Customs Amendment (Antidumping Improvements) Bill 2011 a few weeks ago. There was nothing new in anything we have just heard although there was an interesting statement when he said that the changes would bring Australia's antidumping regime into greater alignment with the practices of comparable trading nations. If only the government would apply that standard to the current carbon tax proposals they are wanting to introduce. If we were to have a system comparable with our trading nations then we would not be having this job-destroying, economy-crushing carbon tax. So that is a welcome standard that the minister has applied.

I do find it curious that the minister is becoming increasingly aggressive in his language around these issues and everyone else is apparently to blame including now blaming the Howard government. We have mentions of the high dollar but we have no mention of the IMF and the RBA both saying that if we were in surplus then interest rates would not be as high and of course the dollar would not be as high. So getting the basic fundamentals of the economy right does affect Australian manufacturers.

It is actually quite ironic that, given all these criticisms, given the Rudd and Gillard governments did everything possible they could to evade making changes to Australia's antidumping system until they were shamed and panicked into it in June because almost every single affected stakeholder was demanding that they lift a finger and finally do something about it, we had the announcement at the end of the day trying to perhaps hide the announcement, not maximise its publicity and be proud of it.

From 2008 to mid-2011 they strenuously avoided any action. Let us bear in mind that the minister who is now complaining about inaction is also the same minister who did everything in his power to defer any government decision about all of this until both the 2010 election and the 2011 budget. Now methinks he doth protest too much. What I suspect the statement is all about is that the government is now desperate to try to appear as if it is doing something to help Australian manufacturing, with the tidal wave of criticism of its obviously atrocious record in this area and its refusal to subject its record to examination in a formal national inquiry. Sadly, it appears the government also wants to hide its rejection of the eight-point plan on manufacturing policy that the opposition last week invited it to adopt in a bipartisan effort to immediately improve the current policy framework for Australian manufacturers. In trademark style and with trademark spin, its main aim seems to be simply to be seen to be doing something, and the customs minister's increasing interest in playing the role of a wannabe hard man is an obvious pointer to the ALP's increasing frustration about its complete lack of success in the area of industry policy.

Anyway, he has effectively decided to rehash the debate on the Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill. Let me take the opportunity to restate the coalition's position as well. In general terms, we are happy to support the changes the government is making, not least because many of them are obvious and represent a long-overdue response to the pleas that key stakeholders have been making. If we do not agree to these modifications to the system now, you can also be sure that it will take years for the Labor Party to do anything about the issue of anti-dumping again. So the timing to do something now is obviously preferable.

It is also worth restating that there has been considerable and growing frustration over recent years in Australia with the lack of timeliness and effectiveness of the investigation process undertaken in Customs and the significant costs imposed on businesses which wish to raise possible cases for consideration under the current anti-dumping regime. The system is widely regarded as being too expensive to access and largely unworkable. The minister says he is providing additional resources to Customs, but essentially he is shifting employees in Customs from one area to the anti-dumping regime. What will happen with increasing border protection problems is what has happened elsewhere in the world where the anti-dumping regime is administered by customs departments: resources get taken out of the anti-dumping section to be applied to border protection. I am sure we will see that pattern followed here, as has been the case.

The current structure of the system also typically works against the best interests of Australian manufacturers. It represents another burden on them at a time when they are already encountering a range of unwanted costs and pressures, a series of poor and clumsy policies from a government that simply has no empathy for their plight, and a Prime Minister who says, 'Manufacturers will just get on with it; they'll innovate; they'll do what they've always done,' without having a genuine understanding of the problems these businesses face at the coalface of their industry. They want a system that works for them, not one that thwarts them, especially at a time when they are already confronted with so many pressures and so many regulatory costs.

Against that background, anything that can be done to strengthen the integrity and quality of the administration of our anti-dumping regime, of course, should be supported. However, there is still plenty of work to do, and I am disappointed that the minister's statement today provides no indication of when most of the proposed changes will be legislated. I am worried that the government, despite promising change, has again reverted to its normal modus operandi and is now intent on dragging its feet again.

I had also hoped, when I heard last night from the member for Gorton that he was planning a ministerial statement on anti-dumping, that he might finally be relenting on the government's decision to not allocate a single extra dollar to Customs as part of its anti-dumping changes. I had heard that he was providing a ministerial statement, and I had great hope. I was bitterly disappointed—but, then again, we must always have some hope that eventually something positive will come from this government in a real sense, in providing real resources to this very important issue of anti-dumping. It would have been appropriate for him, rather than continuing to pretend he is increasing Customs resources, to have been upfront today and specified exactly where the cuts were being made to other parts of the agency to fund the changes to the structure of the trade measures review branch.

Today's debate on this ministerial statement also represents a good opportunity to point out that, in the time since we were here debating the anti-dumping improvements bill, new figures released by the ABS show that the total number of manufacturing jobs in Australia has now plunged to 945,000; that over the past 3½ years 136,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Australia; that over the past year, from August 2010 to August 2011, 53,800 manufacturing jobs have been lost; and that over the last six months almost 49,500 manufacturing jobs have been lost. Over the past quarter, from May to August, 30,700 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Australia. That is a rate of more than 2,500 manufacturing jobs lost a week. That is one gone every four minutes. The new Treasury modelling released this morning also points to even worse outcomes under existing policy settings for sectors like aluminium than have been admitted previously.

It is a record of unutterable shame, and the ALP must move beyond its modest and straightforward anti-dumping changes to embrace a more comprehensive industry policy—indeed, any industry policy at all. Australian manufacturers are suffering and the government remains paralysed in responding to their problems, whether in the area of coming up with a robust and genuinely reformed anti-dumping regime, in axing unnecessary regulatory costs or in actually engaging in genuine tax reform. Wasn't it ironic yesterday when there were reports of the Prime Minister saying she wanted to help manufacturing and industry with genuine tax reform? I have an idea for her: she can start with a very simple action. She could axe the carbon tax. That would be a very simple, very commendable first step in tax reform in helping industry and the manufacturing sector in this country.