Senate debates

Tuesday, 15 September 2009

Export Control (Fees) Amendment Orders 2009 (No. 1); Australian Meat and Live-Stock Industry (Export Licensing) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1); Export Inspection (Establishment Registration Charges) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1); Export Inspection (Quantity Charge) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1)

Motion for Disallowance

5:20 pm

Photo of Richard ColbeckRichard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Export Control (Fees) Amendment Orders 2009 (No. 1), made under regulation 3 of the Export Control (Orders) Regulations 1982, be disallowed.]

At the request of Senator Fielding, I also move:

That the following legislative instruments be disallowed:
(a)
the Export Control (Fees) Amendment Orders 2009 (No. 1), made under regulation 3 of the Export Control (Orders) Regulations 1982 [F2009L02097];
(b)
the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export Licensing) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2009 No. 108 and made under the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997 [F2009L02110];
(c)
the Export Inspection (Establishment Registration Charges) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2009 No. 109 and made under the Export Inspection (Establishment Registration Charges) Act 1985 [F2009L02113]; and
(d)
the Export Inspection (Quantity Charge) Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 1), as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2009 No. 110 and made under the Export Inspection (Quantity Charge) Act 1985].

Mr Acting Deputy President Hutchins, as we discussed at the tabling of the report on the disallowance of AQIS fees and charges yesterday, it is with no pleasure that we do this, but we find it necessary because of the complete and utter mismanagement of this process. There are real concerns about the way that the minister has negotiated this process, right from the time that we first put a disallowance on the table.

We are genuinely concerned about this process. If the government had been prepared to have or were interested in a genuine reform process, it would have adequately resourced it right from the start. It would not have come as a complete surprise, out of the blue, from the Beale process. The industry understood that Beale was reviewing AQIS in respect of imports into Australia. Industry told us at the inquiry last week that they had no expectation at all that Beale was going to make a recommendation to remove the 40 per cent rebate on AQIS export fees and charges; therefore, they did not engage with that issue. Had they known that it was going to be a problem, they would have engaged with it and put their point of view. The first the meat industry knew about it was at a meeting with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Mr Burke, in February. They told us that at the meeting on Friday.

Over the last 24 hours, when the minister has suddenly realised that this is going to go pear shaped, there has been this frantic process to try to negotiate a way out of his problem. Again, it is a demonstration that the government has no real plan for reform. It has tried to cobble together a deal at the last minute. In fact, as late as two o’clock, when the beef industry found out that there was supposedly a deal floating around—they had not been consulted—they were trying to negotiate an outcome on behalf of their industry with the minister. But what about the fishing industry? What about the horticulture sector? What about those small abattoirs who still do not know, under this alleged deal that Minister Burke has done with the Greens, whether they are still paying an extra $50,000 a year? This does not demonstrate that. All that we know will happen under this deal is that the fees and charges will go up. We do not know how it is going to be applied. The government said in the budget that by going to full cost recovery there would be a $43 million a year saving in the budget. That is what the budget papers said. The government put $40 million on the table. Supposedly that $40 million is going into ‘effectively allowing a rebate on fees’, but what does that mean? Nobody knows what it means. Nobody knows what the bottom line of the deal is. We cannot tell the abattoirs in Victoria who look after the emu industry or the ostrich industry—the only abattoirs that do that—whether they are going to have to pay a $50,000 registration fee or whether the only export abattoir in Western Australia is going to be charged extra. We do not know.

The industry has put to the minister a list of demands. We do not know whether the minister has signed that off or not. He was almost promising them anything they wanted at one stage during the afternoon, but they have not had that signed off. He has looked after the big guys, but what about the rest? Those that ring up and complain might get some attention. Yet the Greens call this a great deal. They are prepared to sell-out agriculture for a bit of publicity. Granted, there is some money attached to this, and we said all along that there should be some more money put into this process.

Comments

No comments