Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I present the reasons for the House of Representatives disagreeing to the amendments of the Senate and I move:

That the reasons be adopted.

Question agreed to.

The statement read as follows—

Senate Amendment Numbers (1), (2), (3) and (4)

These amendments would propose retaining the Product Stewardship Advisory Group (PSAG), the Oil Stewardship Advisory Council (OSAC) and the Fuel Standards Consultative Committee (FSCC) and disallowed an alternative public consultation process that applied with respect to the grant and variation of approvals.

The repeal of these bodies would not prevent the Department of the Environment from consulting and engaging with industry experts on an as-needs basis without the need for costly permanent structures. The proposed abolitions would not preclude the Department of the Environment from seeking views from a broader range of organisations, experts and the community in a more flexible and targeted way. A statutory process is not required to facilitate this engagement.

Accordingly, the House of Representatives does not accept these Amendments.

Senate Amendment Numbers (5) and (6)

These amendments would disallow the removal of the requirement to publish certain notices under the Fuel Quality Standards Act 2000 and the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989 in the Commonwealth Government Gazette and instead allow the publication of the same information on the Department of the Environment's website.

These measures do not remove the publication requirements from those Acts; rather they require the information to be published in a more accessible location (on the Department of Environment website, rather than the Commonwealth Government Gazette). As a result, the measures enhance transparency and community participation in the policy development and decision-making process.

These amendments would also disallow a number of measures to the Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989 (HW Act) including:

Hazardous Waste (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1989

Publication requirements for regulations have not been removed; rather they require the information to be published in a more accessible location (on the Department of Environment website, rather than the Commonwealth Government Gazette). As a result, the measures enhance transparency and community participation in the policy development and decision-making process.

The requirement that a person hold an Australian-OECD transit permit, where the transit is from one OECD country to another and the Minister is satisfied that the transit proposal does not pose a significant risk of injury or damage to human beings or the environment is unnecessarily duplicative. The current requirement to hold an Australian transit permit is effectively duplicative of the requirement that Australia provide consent (as required by the relevant OECD Decision) to the exporting country for the movement to transit through Australia. The measures would not lessen the environmental protections as the Minister for the Environment would need to be satisfied that the transit does not pose a significant risk of injury or damage to human beings or the environment in order to exempt a person from a requirement to hold an Australian-OECD transit permit.

The requirement to specify the level of detail in Basil import and export permits currently required by the HW Act has resulted in situations where permit holders are required to apply for a variation to their permit as a result of changes that occur after the permit is issued that do not substantially change the nature of the proposal. For example, because the HW Act currently requires the place of import/export to be specified, a change in the port to which the hazardous waste is to be shipped due to changes in shipping routes would require a variation to the permit. Clarifying these matters will reduce the cost to business arising from the need to apply for a permit variation when details of a movement change. The environmental protections are not lessened by these measures as:

The Hazardous Waste Technical Working Group is being retained as it advises the Minister on technical matters that have commercial implications (for example, whether a particular type of waste is hazardous and therefore subject to the hazardous waste regime). The measure clarifies the maximum period of a member's appointment to the Working Group is three years. As members are appointed based on their expertise on matters relating to the management of hazardous waste, clarifying the period of appointment ensures that the members' expertise and experience remains current. The Minister would not be prevented from reappointing a member for a further period of three years if the Minister is satisfied that the member's expertise remains current.

The measure to enable the Minister for the Environment to delegate his or her functions and powers under the HW Act to an APS employee who holds, or is acting in, an Executive Level 2 (or equivalent) position will enable Executive Level 2 officers to exercise the Minister's functions and powers where administrative necessity dictates that decisions be made at this level. This may include:

Delegating functions and powers to Executive Level 2 officers is consistent with other legislation which contain permit regimes, including the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 which enables the Minister to delegate any or all of his or her powers and functions to an officer or employee in the Department. The Australian Administrative Law Guide also provides that it may be appropriate for junior officers to make decisions involving a limited exercise of discretion, or under provisions which will give rise to a high volume of decisions. The delegation of these powers to an Executive Level 2 employee would not prevent significant decisions being made by more senior officers or the Minster for the Environment personally.

Accordingly, the House of Representatives does not accept these Amendments.

Senate Amendment Number (7)

The amendment proposes amendments to the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act (PGPA Act). These amendments would prescribe the process for entering into a contract for the design and building of a submarine, or a substantial part of a submarine, as part of the future submarine project (SEA 1000 in the Defence Capability Plan as in force on 1 December 2014).

In-line with advice from the Department of Defence, the Government is pursuing a competitive evaluation process as part of the acquisition strategy for the Future Submarine programme. This process is consistent with the PGPA Act (specifically the Commonwealth Procurement Rules issued under Section 101) and the Defence Procurement Policy Manual.

Accordingly, the House of Representatives does not accept these Amendments.

See this speech in context