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

I am of the understanding that the shadow minister is only going to make one further contribution. There are a number of issues. Firstly, let me go back to the so-called nationality issue. When he asked the question, I was assuming that he was talking in normal terms about what a person's nationality was. I assume, following his subsequent statement, that he was talking about the nationality of the ship. That is dealt with in section 14 of the Navigation Act 2012. That definition applies in all circumstances, including where references are made to matters of that nature in this legislation.

Regarding the question about national interest and the importance of having Australian shipping, I referred to this issue in my opening remarks some hours ago, and I have referred to it subsequently. I agree very strongly. I said similar words to the shadow minister in relation to the importance of Australia having skilled maritime personnel who are able to act as pilots through the Great Barrier Reef and some of the narrow channels that we have around the country, and to be our tug crews and provide maritime services to our nation into the future. I agree that we want more people who have maritime skills in this country. I recognise that there are crossovers of skills from the Navy to the merchant fleet, but also from the sort of people who become our pilots who have usually been captains on vessels and have had some experience around our sea lanes. For that reason it is important that we have a strong and viable shipping industry. I do not think that there is a philosophical difference between the opposition and ourselves on that point. The difference is how we get there. My concerns are that the current arrangements have not worked, and we need to therefore find a better way of dealing with things.

The second issue which he raised concerned the importance of having Australian ships to supply our markets, and he particularly made reference to fuel. I would remind him of my remarks right at the beginning when I quoted from a number of people who raised this very point, and the point that the current arrangements are not serving that objective. Cristal Mining said in their submission to the Senate committee:

The Act, in its current form, puts Australian industry at risk of operational shut downs and possible job losses.

The shadow minister was referring particularly to the petroleum industry. The Australian Institute of Petroleum, who ought to have some authority in the field, said:

The current cumbersome and inflexible regulations impede the efficient operation of domestic refineries and petroleum supply chains around Australia, do not facilitate liquid fuel supply security, and do not advance the objectives of the coastal trading legislation or the local shipping industry.

Here you have people who are directly involved with the supply of petroleum around the country saying the current system is not working, and therefore we have to do better. Fortunately, our waterfront has been relatively peaceful industrially, but there are people around who can remember when it was not like that, and I am not sure that they would have regarded it as being a particularly desirable option to only have Australian ships being able to bring petroleum to this country. We have sometimes needed to have other vessels because of the fact that local people did not want to do the job at the time.

In my remarks, I also refer to the question of the deficiency rate on ships. The shadow minister misquoted me somewhat. I never suggested that foreign ships were better than Australian ships—some will be good and some will be not so good just as some Australian ships are good and some are not so good. The point that I made—an undeniable statistical fact—was that in 2014 the AMSA Port State Control statistics show that the deficiency rate on Australian ships was higher than the deficiency rate on foreign flagged ships. That is probably a coincidence—I sincerely hope that is the case. If not, we have an issue that we really have to seriously address—if there is a systemic problem. I suspect that it was something of a statistical abnormality, but the point that is made by those statistics is that there is no evidence to suggest that foreign flagged vessels have more deficiencies than Australian flagged vessels.

In relation to the Shen Neng, I referred to that also in my earlier remarks and made the observation that that was on an international voyage, not a coastal voyage, and this legislation is not going to affect the international vessels undertaking a voyage of that nature. So, while the case is interesting and important and demonstrates to us why we need to have a high standard of port state control, it does not of itself prove that foreign vessels operating around the Australian shore are going to make any real difference. That is a matter of how effective our port state control is, and certainly the safety and the proper operation of our shipping industry is a key objective of this legislation.

In relation to the wages that are paid, it was the previous government that introduced the modern award part B into the legislation, and we are picking up that system and therefore using the same conditions, pay and arrangements that the previous government thought were acceptable when they introduced that legislation into the parliament. Of course, underpinning all of this is the Maritime Labour Convention, which puts in place minimum standards. I accept that Australian standards are higher than the minimum standards that are laid down by the International Labour Organization member states, but I would also remind you that Paddy Crumlin has been president of that organisation and seemed to be satisfied that those sorts of standards were reasonable for international mariners at that time. I am not advocating that those would be the wage levels that we would set for the workers in Australia, but the reality is that there are some safeguards in place.

Our regulator has proved itself to be efficient and competent in dealing with any vessel that is deficient. When one is hauled up, the union usually have a story about it in the paper the next day, and so the public are well and truly aware when there are foreign vessels in our waters that do not meet appropriate standards. I for one will not stand for vessels that are a danger to our environment or do not provide appropriate working conditions for those on board.

Let me sum up and make it clear where the government's position is. The reality is that Australia as a country makes its own laws, and what has been effective in some places is not effective in other places. What is absolutely clear is that the current arrangements are not working and we need do something better in the future. The shadow minister did indicate a willingness to consider some amendments and improvements to the bill.

See this speech in context