Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Medicare) Share this | Hansard source

The Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Amendment Bill 2017 further deregulates and erodes what is left of a once strong and vibrant Australian shipping industry. With coalition governments having, over the years, already decimated the Australian shipping industry, the Turnbull coalition government is still not content and is determined to wipe out the last remnants of this industry.

The destruction of the Australian shipping industry by coalition governments is a short-sighted national disgrace. It is in keeping, however, with coalition government philosophy of destroying unionised labour, driving down workers' wages and fair conditions, and attempting to weaken the Labor Party by weakening the union movement. This is a government which has intentionally destroyed Australia's auto industry for the same reasons—an industry which underpinned much of Australia's manufacturing industry for decades—and is now on the verge of doing the same with the Australian shipping industry. And it does that in pursuit of its blind ideology. It's a blind ideology of coalition governments who are prepared to destroy Australian jobs, destroy Australian families, diminish Australian national security, and in doing so damage the Australian economy and the nation's future.

As so many other speakers on this side have said, Australia is a land surrounded by sea. Every day over $1.2 billion worth of goods are imported and exported through Australia's 70 trading ports. Yet today Australia has only 11 or 12 trading vessels employing full Australian crews, a figure down from hundreds in the 1980s. In addition to the economic consequences for Australia that the demise of Australian shipping has caused, it has also created a national security risk, because, in times of national crisis, the merchant fleet can assist the Navy with supply of provisions, aid, fuel and surveillance. Furthermore, Australian crewed and operated vessels are much more likely to operate with the broader national interest in mind: abiding by Australian rules and protecting the coastline environment. Indeed, much of the damage that has occurred from time to time on the Australian environment when shipping has been involved has been because the ships were not Australian crewed vessels.

There is also the likelihood that we will see less illegal activity or unethical operations if vessels are crewed by Australians. With respect to the Australian Border Force's searches of Australian vessels, I note that last year there were some 15,700 vessels that came to Australia and of those just over a thousand were searched by the Australian Border Force. I understand that, and I understand that they have limited resources, but the reality is that each and every day there are vessels docking on the Australian coastline that are not inspected and not searched, and we really don't know what is on board those vessels.

I turn to another matter relating to Australian shipping, a matter that is before the parliament right now: the live sheep export trade. If the livestock vessels carrying Australian animals to the Middle East had been crewed by Australian seafarers, the horrific conditions that those animals were subjected to may not have occurred. Australian crews would not have tolerated the situation—not for themselves or for the animals. I note that the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources is at the table, so my remarks are very much directed for his benefit. To my understanding, all of the vessels used for livestock transport in recent years were flagged in low-tax countries, owned by overseas registered entities—sometimes entities which Australians have an interest in—and crewed by foreign seamen who work in atrocious conditions simply to make a living. Not surprisingly, the operators of those vessels have, for years, thumbed their nose at Australian authorities, ignoring the horrific conditions that crews and livestock endure, because they know that the crews will remain silent about what they experience and see. The live sheep export community backlash and the parliamentary debate about live exports may never have become an issue if Australian crews had been used on those vessels.

Of course, with respect to the use of foreign vessels, the wider loss is to our economy, because foreign flagged vessels are crewed by foreign crews who do not employ Australian labourers and don't pay Australian wages and therefore don't pay income tax to the Australian tax office. Furthermore, on many vessels, crews are exploited. They have to work under terrible conditions for minimal wages—as low as $1.25 per hour.

No other mainland industry would be allowed to operate in the same way that shipping is allowed to operate, yet shipping operates within Australian waters. Australian waters are part of Australian territory. The kinds of activities and rules that apply to shipping that we are currently seeing are not ones that we as a nation would tolerate in a similar industry operating on the mainland. They don't operate in the road vehicle transport industry and they don't operate in the airline industry, but the shipping industry, because it is on water, is treated differently. It is simply wrong and it is, in fact, foolish. I understand that there are some differences with respect to the cruise vessel sector, which is somewhat protected at the moment, and I understand that there may be some changes in respect of that sector. But, putting that sector to one side, we seem to have a different standard when it comes to industrial laws for the shipping sector, for the larger vessels, compared to other sectors in the rest of the country.

In introducing this legislation, the minister said of the current rules:

They are pushing costs up for businesses.

This legislation will mean lower costs for big business, including the nation's biggest exporters of minerals and gas, who are making huge profits right now. Indeed, only this week they put out a statement highlighting the level of profits or activities that they are generating economically in this country—and quite properly, just to highlight the importance of that sector to the Australian nation. They are making a lot of money, yet that is the sector that is probably going to benefit the most from the changes in this legislation proposed by the government. They will profit the most because, ultimately, the additional savings that they make—and I understand that some estimates have put the figure at about 88 per cent—will come from the lower wages that they will pay. In other words, the savings that they will make will arise from the exploitation of labour.

It seems quite ironic to be doing that at a time when we have before the parliament a modern slavery bill. The exploitation of crews on foreign flagged vessels is indeed modern slavery. But then, of course, there is a long history of slavery in shipping. The fact that it still occurs does not justify it. In fact, the long history of slavery in shipping is even more reason why we should be trying to ensure that anyone who works on board a vessel, whether it is Australian flagged or foreign flagged, should be treated appropriately and paid accordingly.

There is another serious matter with regard to the demise of Australian shipping that has also been part of the national debate in recent times. I refer to the reliance on Australian shipping in conjunction with our nation's ability to meet our oil and other fuel requirements. Australia as a signatory to the International Energy Agency has an obligation to hold oil stocks equivalent to 90 days of the previous year's daily net oil imports. The reality is that that is not happening right now. In the year 2000, there were some 11 or 12 Australian crude oil tankers supplying fuel to Australia. Today, there are none. We have also had several oil refineries close since then. National fuel and oil stocks are down to just over a month's supply, somewhere between 30 and 40 days, if the two weeks of stocks that are on sea are included. But those stocks on sea are on board foreign vessels. In the event of a major international conflict, Australia has left itself entirely dependent on foreign vessels to deliver fuel. It is a most unsatisfactory situation because, in the event of a major conflict, there is no guarantee and, indeed, very little likelihood that those foreign vessels would make Australia a priority. We need to have some control of our own fuel supplies because, in the event of a major conflict, fuel supplies would be critical to this nation's ability to defend itself.

As other speakers have quite rightly pointed out, the situation with respect to this legislation is that the government previously tried to bring it before the parliament and it was rejected. It was rejected because logically it is a proposition that leaves Australia much more vulnerable than it already is.

That is not in the national interest at all. I doubt that any other country would be so foolish as to do the same, particularly given Australia's circumstances of being so dependent on shipping for its imports and exports, and being so far away from other allies that we work together with. The USA has what they refer to as the Jones Act, which ensures that, within their waters and ports, only American flagged ships crewed by Americans can operate. I totally understand that and it makes a great deal of sense. It is not unreasonable to do that, because it simply ensures that that country is looking after and putting its own interests ahead of anyone else's. Time and again around the world foreign ships in most cases are flagged in very low-tax jurisdictions in order to pay even less tax, crewed by people from predominantly Third World countries who are desperate to seek some income, and managed and operated in a way to simply serve the interests of the shipowners. It is not in the interests of this country to allow itself to go down that path, as it already has done.

It's more in the interests of Australia to, as Labor was attempting to when last in office, revitalise the Australian shipping industry by changing the laws that would support the growth of the Australian shipping industry. The Australian shipping industry is not some minor little industry to one side; it is not only a major economic contributor because of the transport that it provides to the goods and services that we need but also a contributor to shipping construction and to ship maintenance and stocking each and every time they come into our ports. It would be a major economic driver for this nation. For all of those reasons Labor has quite rightly opposed this legislation. Labor believes there is a better way to deal with the Australian shipping fleet of this country. Labor believes that it is not in the national interest. Labor believes we need to have a long-term strategy to ensure not only that this shipping industry survives but also that the economic and security future of our country comes first and foremost.

See this speech in context