Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to make a very brief contribution on the ANL Legislation Repeal Bill 2019. As previous speakers have said, this is merely a clean-up bill. The ANL was sold a long time ago under the Howard government, as those opposite correctly noted. However, I think it is appropriate to put a little bit of context, a little bit of history, into this debate, particularly given some of the other things that were said.

The decision to sell the Australian National Line was actually taken under the Labor government. In fact, in 1991 the then Labor government declared that they wished to sell it. I would bring to the attention of anyone who's listening an article by Mr Keith Trace, who was an associate professor of economics at Monash University at the time. It's a very interesting article because it sheds light on the trouble that the Labor government had in carrying through on its policy in the face of an intransigent and highly militant union in the MUA. It is a tale of both the destructiveness of the union movement and the inefficiency—the terrible inefficiency—of government owned enterprises in certain sectors.

I'll just highlight one thing from this article, and I note again that this took place over the period of the Labor government. The ANL had an operating profit of around $40 million in the early eighties when Labor came to power. It ranged between $20 million and $40 million from the period 1984 to 1986. Then it basically fell off a cliff. By 1994, due again to the gross inefficiencies within the system, the ANL—and, remember, this is in 1994 dollars—had sunk to a $120 million operating loss. That is quite an extraordinary trajectory, particularly for a government owned enterprise. What did ANL actually own at this point in time? It only operated 12 vessels, four of which it owned outright. So, owning four vessels outright and operating 12 vessels, it managed to achieve a net operating loss of A$120 million in 1994 dollars. As I've said, this article is a litany of aggressive union tactics basically designed to drive this business out of government ownership. I find it very, very surprising that those opposite don't remember this history, because, Senator Sterle, I think some of you were around at the time. I note, this is just a clean-up bill. I do commend all those who will support the bill.