Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I start my contribution to the debate on the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2014 by saying that I know that there is little time left to speak on this legislation today. I hope to be able to make a major contribution to this debate on the next sitting day. It is very important legislation and it is related to the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013. This legislation replaces legislation that was tabled by the former government and legislation which lapsed in the last parliament.

The main purpose of the bill is to implement the TRIPS protocol, which would enable manufacturers of generic pharmaceuticals to apply to the Federal Court for a compulsory licence to make and export patent pharmaceutical products to address health crises in developing countries. This is a very important aspect of this legislation; it is very important that we as a nation are able to fulfil this obligation. This would deliver on the government's commitment to the World Trade Organization TRIPS protocol. Countries that implement the TRIPS protocol are able to export patent medicines under compulsory licence to countries in need.

Other minor aspects of this bill include extending the jurisdiction of the former Federal Magistrates Court, the Federal Circuit Court, to include plant breeders rights matters. Once again, that may seem inconsequential, but that is a very important aspect of this bill and has enormous ramifications, allowing for a single trans-Tasman patent attorney regime, a single patent application and examination processes for Australia and New Zealand as part of the broader single economic market agenda.

The bill makes minor administrative changes to the Patents Act, Trade Marks Act and Designs Act to repeal document retention provisions already governed by the Archives Act 1983, and minor amendments to the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012. The bill is similar, as I already mentioned, to the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 introduced by Labor in May of that year. The main difference between Labor's bill and the coalition's bill is that the provisions regarding amendments to Crown use in the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 have been removed. Other changes are minor and/or drafting error amendments.

I know my time is very short tonight and that we will be going to the adjournment debate—

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context