Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in this cognate debate on the Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) Bill 2012, the Shipping Registration Amendment (Australian International Shipping Register) Bill 2012, the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Bill 2012, the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2012 and the Tax Laws Amendment (Shipping Reform) Bill 2012, which are before the House.

I take a particular interest in the legislation because my electorate of Swan contains Perth's major freight and distribution hubs in Kewdale and Welshpool, and this area has a symbiotic relationship with the shipping industry. The freight network must be linked up and operating well to take advantage of the boom and reduce cost-of-living pressures in Perth which are higher because of the distance goods have to travel to get to the second most isolated capital city in the world. It is therefore important that steps are taken to help revitalise the shipping industry. However, one of the major problems with this legislation is that it is projected to increase shipping costs and freight rates by up to 16 per cent, which will be passed on to the consumers and will be an additional cost-of-living impost on top of the carbon tax for my constituents of Swan. I will go into some more detail on this later in my contribution.

I know that the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, understands the importance of the hubs in Kewdale and Welshpool as he has visited the area on a number of occasions since the last election, speaking to industry and transport services. By the way, I can say to the government members that the carbon tax has not gone down very well at all in this freight and distribution hub among the thousands of workers employed or the industry leaders. In fact, Tony Abbott was cheered by the workers on the shop floor during one particular visit that we did.

For a seafaring nation with a rich seafaring history, one would have thought that Australia would have a more prosperous shipping industry. However, while Australia has the fourth largest shipping task in the world, there has been a decline in the number of Australian registered ships over the last decade. In fact, there are currently only 22 Australian registered ships and, with Australia's freight task set to double by 2020, and travel along the eastern seaboard, this decline creates a certain amount of pause for thought. From Perth you can see the boats queuing offshore near Cottesloe all day and it is remarkable to think that across the country there are only 22 registered Australian ships and only four Australian flagged vessels participating solely in the international trade which, with sea transport carrying over 99 per cent of international cargo by weight and about 75 per cent by value, seems for Australia to be strikingly low.

Perhaps part of the issue facing the industry is that, traditionally, the Australian shipping industry has been uncompetitive internationally and the higher cost of running an Australian vessel as opposed to a foreign vessel has been prohibitive. It is in this context that in recent times there have been a number of calls to address this situation. While the idea of shipping reform has been around for many years and a number of inquiries and reports have occurred, these bills today are the government's attempt at addressing the situation.

In essence, the five bills before the House today are designed to provide a regulatory framework for coastal trading in Australia which will stimulate growth in the number of Australian ships on our coast and maximise the use of Australian flagged vessels. Yet the comments and submissions received suggest that there are a number of groups with serious concerns about the package—concerns which are wide-ranging but centred around the belief that these bills cannot meet the objective of revitalising the shipping industry and in fact may hasten its decline. I think that, after all the disasters and stuff-ups that this government has presided over, there would not be many members of the public who would be surprised that the Gillard government could create legislation that would do precisely the opposite of what it was intended to do. We in the coalition will do all we can to make the government see sense on these bills. The legislation has been rushed and proper consideration has therefore not been able to be given to the major issues in this bill. For example, the first draft of the Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Bill that was released in December required a major redraft, along with the other bills comprising the total package, yet only a few weeks of consultation were undertaken before the package was introduced into parliament. When the coalition referred the bills to the House committee for scrutiny, the bills were given only a brief consideration and sent back with a dissenting report.

With the concerns that have been raised by the industry, it is clear that some scrutiny is needed. Given the reluctance of the government to use the committees for this purpose, I agree with the suggestion that has been made for a Productivity Commission investigation. This suggestion of a referral to the Productivity Commission was made, in part, because of the regulatory impact statement deficiencies, with customers and industry participants wanting to know basic details about the financial implications of the package—which you would have thought the government would have provided prior to introducing the legislation into parliament.

Another reason for a potential referral is the unfinished compact between the shippers and the unions which remains uncompleted, despite Minister Albanese having said it is vital for productivity. At this point, we do not know what, if any, productivity gains are likely to be made from this package of bills. As the coalition dissenting report notes, any improvements in productivity cannot be guaranteed, because they 'depend on yet to be concluded negotiations with notoriously militant unions such as the MUA'.

In asking the parliament to pass these bills, the government is effectively saying: 'Trust us. Trust us to keep our word and to confidently deliver a negotiated result.' I do not think there is anyone left in Australia who has any level of trust in the government—and the coalition will certainly not be affording the government this trust.

See this speech in context