Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Hansard source

Again this is an important change. Under the Product Stewardship Act as it was, there was a requirement for a five-year statutory review, and in the first form of the bill it was suggested that that be moved to 10 years. We think, and I believe the sector is strongly of the view, that there should be a five-year review. The assistant minister made the point that as the phased introduction of the different material bands comes into place there'll be some that have only really been introduced close to the end of the five-year period. In reality, it's not the export ban part of this bill that is the big issue; that's pretty straightforward and most people agree with it. It's the product stewardship changes—we say relatively minor product stewardship changes—that are really the issue, and it's utterly appropriate that they be looked at sooner rather than later.

It does have to be noted that the review of the Product Stewardship Act as it was commenced in 2011, was due in 2016, and occurred and was delivered woefully late. That's another reason why we don't really want to see a five-year review changed to a 10-year review. Obviously, this is the last amendment, and we believe that this amendment, along with the previous 15, makes some meaningful changes to the package.

I've said a number of times, and I'll repeat it, that I'm grateful to the assistant minister and his office for the way they've engaged with us. It was courteous and professional all the way along. We didn't agree about a number of things but it was good that we could agree about some of them, and I do think they will result in a better piece of law. The changes in relation to the minister's priority list are the particularly important ones. We believe that, considering where Australia has got to, it's past time for us to do a lot more on producer responsibility. It's past time for us to realise that voluntary arrangements aren't effective and that co-regulatory arrangements and mandatory arrangements are really the way to go. The government are essentially giving voluntary arrangements one more go, one more opportunity to prove themselves, and that's their call. There hasn't been a lot to give us encouragement on that front. I don't think anyone could make that argument. Whether the minister's priority list is just that little bit of extra encouragement that the producer world and the industry need remains to be seen. That will be in the hands of the government. I'm glad that the assistant minister and the minister, in speaking about these amendments and the bills to which the amendments are being made, have made it clear that they intend to push on in an area where there has been much too much delay for too long.

So I welcome this amendment. Labor supports it. I hope that by the time we get to the statutory five-year review the things that we need to see have either occurred or are very close to occurring. We will be in 2025 by then. The targets that have been set are ambitious ones. We're a long way from achieving them. The assistant minister did say informally that if they weren't to occur I could shout across the chamber at him. I wouldn't do that. I know he's committed to seeing this change occur. I know that he feels it. He's wearing his tie with fish on it. I know he understands how important it is to get better waste outcomes for our environment as a whole, particularly for our marine environment. He gets that. People around Australia get that. We wish these changes well. We don't think they're as strong as they could be, but the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

See this speech in context