Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Hansard source

We have here an amendment from the Democrats, in relation to the Accredited Client Program, which is somewhat different from what the opposition is proposing by way of duty deferral in subsequent amendments. Nonetheless, both the opposition and the Democrats have indicated that they believe the government’s Accredited Client Program is not adequate and that there should be changes to it.

I have outlined to the Senate the benefits, as we see them, of the Accredited Client Program and how we propose it will work. I would certainly say to the Senate and those here today that I am going to watch very closely how the Accredited Client Program works—in particular, the benefits it delivers to industry. I am very keen to get feedback from industry. I have met on several occasions with industry stakeholders in relation to this program. The government have made a decision in relation to this program and we are putting it forward in the form presented. I have outlined the benefits as we see them.

I will leave for a moment my comments about duty deferral and the opposition amendments. In relation to the Democrat amendment, can I point out that the program was designed to apply only to highly compliant companies whose internal systems and practices would be able to take advantage of streamlined import and export processing arrangements. On the face of it, that is fairly straightforward. The program will also apply only to goods that are considered low risk in terms of protection of revenue, border security and quarantine interests. Again, that is fairly straightforward. Entry into the Accredited Client Program is dependent upon the chief executive officer of Customs entering into an import or export information contract with a person upon being satisfied that the person meets the requirements of the business rules. There is some scrutiny by the CEO of Customs in relation to whether or not the company concerned is appropriate for this program. This sort of control ensures that only the most highly compliant companies will be accepted into the program. I think that is a fairly straightforward and sensible premise.

While this program has been designed to facilitate trade, the World Customs Organisation framework of standards to secure and facilitate global trade, which primarily addresses terrorist threats, will be incorporated into the Accredited Client Program business rules. We are taking note of the World Customs Organisation but we are still mindful of the threats posed at our border and we have to balance those against the facilitation of trade. We believe the proposed amendment by the Democrats to the definition of ‘accredited client’ undermines those requirements by allowing any foreign customs administration to decide if a company is an accredited client for the purposes of the Customs Act. This would take control of the Accredited Client Program out of the hands of the Australian Customs Service and the Australian government.

The amendment also proposes extending the participation of the Accredited Client Program to any party involved in the importing or exporting of goods. Again, we believe this would undermine the work of the Australian Customs Service by severely limiting its ability to risk-assess the information received with regard to goods and, if necessary, examine the goods while they are subject to the control of Customs. The government, therefore, cannot accept the proposed amendment to the definition of ‘accredited client’. We believe this amendment looks more at the supply chain security requirement of the World Customs Organisation. We believe it takes away from Customs the ability to address the border threat, which we have to balance against the facilitation of trade. We believe the definition as proposed by this amendment would therefore be too broad. We believe we have the balance right. We have carefully considered it and, on that basis, the government do not support the amendment.

Question negatived.