Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, let me clarify something, because my advisers think I may have said something that I did not intend to say in relation to the large cruise vessels that are exempt, under the previous arrangements, from the requirements of the act. Under our act, of course, they are actually brought into the act, but they will be eligible for their 12-month permits, so it will have no impact on the composition of the cruise.

Moving on to the commentary about North Star cruises, frankly, all the information that anyone could want to see is available on the public record. What was not provided or listened to during the Senate hearings was sought by the member opposite through a freedom of information request, and those documents were all provided. So there is nothing being hidden whatsoever. I can do little more than repeat the comments that I made previously. My department has confirmed to me in writing—and the shadow minister has seen the letter—that at no stage was Mr Milby advised of any course of action. Being apprised of the various options available does not constitute advice of a particular course of action. I confirm again today that at no stage was Mr Milby advised—and I quote from the shadow minister's speech in the second reading debate:

… he should re-register his vessel overseas and sack his 50 Australian staff and replace them with cheap foreign labour.

Departmental officials testified as such before the Senate committee hearings into this bill, and this was reaffirmed by written advice from my department to me, which, for the benefit of the House, I will quote:

Commercial advice was not provided and no particular course of action was recommended to the company.

Ultimately, of course, these are commercial decisions for the owners of Mr Milby's company to make. The company has been competing with international cruise vessels for a long time, and I am sure it will continue to be able to do so into the future.

Additionally, I should note that under the government's proposed reforms it is not an option for someone to put a full foreign crew on a cruise vessel in Australia if they want to operate year-round on Australian shores—that is not permitted under the act. So that casts some doubt on the veracity of the testimony.

Finally, I reject any suggestion that I have been critical of Mr Milby. I admire the work that his company does and I think that it adds a dimension to a cruise in that part of Australia that adds significantly to our tourism reputation. I certainly wish him well for the future. It is true that a number of the state governments, and the Northern Territory in particular, want to open up that business to competition from vessels that may have a foreign flag. They think it is rather silly that someone has to travel up to Timor or Singapore or Indonesia to bring on provisions and load the vessel when they could do that in Darwin and therefore Australian jobs would be created on the land in the Northern Territory.

Those are the competing interests that are brought up in these kinds of debates. What we want to do as a government is provide a fair opportunity for all businesses to prosper in this country and to take advantage of the opportunities of our market, and to ensure that other people around the world as well can enjoy the magnificence of the north-west Australian scenery, and indeed other parts of regional Australia. So having more vessels operating around our shores will certainly create jobs in the tourism industry on land, and that also has to be taken into account in assessing the value of particular options. But, from my perspective, I was not present at the conversations that were allegedly held, but I have been given the word of my respected senior officers and I have no reason to doubt it.

See this speech in context