Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Industry, I present the committee's report entitled Circumvention: Closing the loopholes: Inquiry into Australia's anti-circumvention framework in relation to anti-dumping measures, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Manufacturing in Australia has for many years been coming under increasing pressure from imported products. Some cheaper goods given access to our markets are unfairly subsidised and sold to our customers at less than the cost of production. This dumping of goods on Australian markets may cause material injury to the Australian industry, resulting in reduction in selling prices, profit or market share. This can lead to a transfer of jobs offshore with no guarantee the goods in question will continue to be supplied below production costs when the local production is driven out of business.

Australia now has an antidumping framework and has appointed an antidumping commissioner. While some manufacturers are concerned that the task of launching an antidumping action is too onerous, many have done so and had successful outcomes with duties being applied to the offending goods. Manufacturers have been generally pleased with this process but have become increasingly dismayed as they have watched the entities which have had the rulings placed against them indulge in a raft of activities that circumvent or avoid the duties and thus the intention of the action.

Following numerous approaches from affected industries to the Australian government and to me as Chair of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Industry, the Minister for Industry and Science, Ian Macfarlane, asked the committee to investigate the prevalence of circumvention activity, whether recent changes to the antidumping regulations are effective, and if anything further could be done.

It was quite clear from our earliest submissions that the issue of 'like product', or the minor modification of goods to avoid duty, was at the forefront of industry concerns. It is highly likely that the committee would have recommended strong action in this area if it were not for the announcement in March by the Department of Industry and Science that regulations had been altered to empower the Anti-Dumping Commissioner to deal with this issue. While the ruling on slight modification will take a while to digest, I understand that some applications have already been lodged as a result.

Overall the committee is of the opinion that most of what can be done at the moment has been done and that it is prudent to observe the effects of the latest rulings before further steps are contemplated.

However, the committee's report does make recommendations on the application of different types of duties and the anti-dumping and anti-circumvention investigation processes. In particular, the time frame requirement for investigations has been exceeded considerably. An average of more than 275 days for seven recent investigations is far beyond the targeted 155-day time frame. The average time frame should be reduced in order for the Australian industry to have confidence in the frameworks and the Anti-Dumping Commission itself.

The committee recognises that the rewards for circumvention of anti-dumping actions are high and that those intent on circumvention have proved enormously resourceful and adaptable. It is for this reason the committee believes all concerned, including the committee, should keep a close watching brief on the situation. To this end, the committee recommends that the Anti-Dumping Commissioner provide a briefing to the committee every six months for the remainder of the 44th Parliament. The briefings should include any proposed legislative or regulatory changes, progress on anti-circumvention cases, and any changes to Anti-Dumping Commission processes.

The committee recognises and appreciates that the establishment of the Anti-Dumping Commission, the appointment of an independent commissioner and the changes recently implemented with respect to circumvention are producing a different environment for Australian businesses dealing with the act of circumvention. The declaration by the commissioner around the classification of 'like goods' is warmly welcomed by the committee as a watershed moment, but it will take a little while before a clear assessment can be made of its effectiveness.

I would like to thank all those who made their time and resources available to participate in this inquiry. I would like to thank my fellow committee members, including my deputy chair, the member for Hotham, who is in the chamber at the moment, for their application to the task, as I thank the secretariat staff, who ably assisted in this inquiry. I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context