Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

in reply—The Trade Marks Amendment Bill 2006 amends the Trade Marks Act of 1995, which is now over 10 years old. The amendments arose out of regular reviews of the act which were carried out by IP Australia, the government agency with responsibility for administering the Trade Marks Act. There was extensive consultation with the public and stakeholders as part of that review. During this consultation, IP Australia utilised the expertise of an industry reference group to help assess the merits of the issues that were raised. The industry reference group comprised dedicated representatives from key stakeholders who willingly contributed their time, and I thank them for their efforts.

I thank the member for Oxley for his comments today. In a total of eight minutes, the only part of the bill that he addressed properly was the title and his concerns about the time frame. He said that it had gone on too long. The government has a general policy of reviewing legislation every five to 10 years. This review was undertaken as a part of that general policy. This review commenced in 2002 and took a considerable time because of the extensive consultation with industry and with the people whom we seek to represent in the trademarks area. We make no apology for being thorough in our job.

In contrast, the member for Mitchell is one of the most passionate advocates on IP and trademarks that I have seen in this parliament. The gall of the member for Shortland to stand up and ask the member for Mitchell to be brought back to the bill shows her ineptitude—she did not even read the bill. Unlike the member for Oxley, who only addressed the bill in title, the member for Mitchell went through and analysed aspects of the bill and the requirements of his constituents, such as the Piratelli family, on whose behalf he has passionately advocated. He made representations to my office and had a partial result on that in the previous IP bill, which amended parts of the Freedom of Information Act.

There is no greater passionate advocate for intellectual property or his constituents’ rights than the member for Mitchell. That stands in contrast to the ineptitude and arrogance of the member for Shortland, who is nothing more than a time waster in this parliament and in the community broadly. The member for Shortland, who did not even bother to read the bill to familiarise herself with its content, then raised questions against the member for Mitchell. This shows her absolute arrogance, illiteracy and ineptitude.

Getting back to this bill, the Trade Marks Act provides for registration of trademarks and sets out and protects the rights derived from the registration. Trademarks assist Australian businesses to increase their competitive advantage. Trademarks signify the origin of goods or services to the public so the public can recognise the trade origin of the goods or services. The member for Mitchell correctly said that trademarks are an asset of the business. Recently, IP Australia held a contest for the favourite trademark of the century. The trademarks entered were narrowed down to 10 finalists: Qantas, the Wallabies, Arnotts, Weet-Bix, RM Williams, Penfolds, David Jones, the ABC and Woolmark. They were judged and assessed by outstanding people, such as Ken Done, Carla Zampatti, George Gregan—the Wallabies captain—and Simon Reynolds, who is an industry leader in this area. They understand the value of a trademark—and so does Coca-Cola. A trademark can be valued in the billions of dollars. That is not something that is easily given away. It is a critical asset, a bottom-line measure to a company.

I am glad that the public voted for Weet-Bix as the top Australian trademark of the century. We understand the value of trademarks. We also understand the need to protect trademark rights. This bill makes a number of changes to the act that will simplify aspects of the trademark system, particularly for small businesses. Over 50 per cent of trademark applicants are self-represented. Many of these applicants will benefit from the changes that clarify and simplify provisions in the Trade Marks Act. In general, the amendments made by the bill will improve the administration of the trademark system to make it easier to use. The bill reflects the government’s commitment to encourage stronger trademark rights that meet the needs of all Australians.

I thank all of the members for their contributions. As I said, the most outstanding contribution, delivered with passionate advocacy, was that of the member for Mitchell. I enjoy working with him—in particular, I enjoy the forthright way in which he represents his constituents on issues such as this—

See this speech in context