Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010 is a bill to amend the National Measurement Act 1960. This legislation will make changes that have been deemed appropriate for the long-term operation of Australia’s new national system of trade measurement.

The government is committed to reducing the regulatory burdens on Australian business and through the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) is pursuing a business regulation reform agenda designed to advance Australia towards a seamless national economy. Trade measurement is one of the regulatory hotspots identified by COAG as an area where overlapping and inconsistent regulatory regimes were impeding economic activity.

Trade measurement is the use of measurement as the basis for determining the price in a transaction. A trade measurement system is the infrastructure needed to ensure that a trade-measuring instrument is sufficiently accurate to give a fair result to both a buyer and a seller. We are all familiar with everyday aspects of trade measurement, even if we do not realise it. Any purchase of, say, fruit and vegetables, or petrol, or precious metals has a price set by the product’s weight or volume.

In Australia, an estimated $400 billion worth of trade based on some kind of measurement takes place annually, with around 75 per cent of transactions being business to business, and 25 per cent between business and consumers. Businesses and consumers have always placed a high degree of reliance on trade measurement systems to provide confidence in all transactions based on measurement.

Clearly, with the level of economic activity involved today, it is vitally important that 21st century Australia has a single efficient and uniform trade measurement system to give confidence across the nation to business and consumers.

The establishment of a national system of trade measurement on 1 July this year was an important part of the government’s business regulation reform agenda. The new national system introduced significant deregulation benefits by reducing the previous eight systems of trade measurement in Australia down to one. The national system will produce long-term benefits to business and consumers by reducing regulatory burdens and compliance costs. These advantages are gained through having a simplified system that operates with nationally consistent rules.

Trade measurement is an example of government establishing the infrastructure that makes it possible for markets to operate both efficiently and effectively in a country as large and geographically diverse as Australia.

In 2008, amendments were made to the National Measurement Act 1960 to give effect to the 2007 COAG decision to create a national system of trade measurement by providing its legal framework. This was well supported by Australian industry.

In respect of legislating for a national system, the Commonwealth’s approach was to assimilate key features of the model Uniform Trade Measurement Legislation (UTML) used by the states and territories. The 2008 amendments also incorporated consumer protection principles (based on the states and territories fair trading legislation) and allowed for the voluntary use of the internationally accepted Average Quantity System for packaging.

As has been the case in state and territory trade measurement systems, the government performs the all-important inspection function in the new national system to ensure that traders and licensees are maintaining the accuracy of trade-measuring instruments.

Although welcomed by Australian industry as a whole, after the amendments to the National Measurement Act were made in 2008 some industry sectors expressed concerns about the application of a small number of the new provisions. It turned out that the translation of the trade measurement provisions of the state and territory UTML into the Commonwealth environment has resulted in some unintended uncertainty for the measurement industry.

It is common for measuring instruments used for trade to be supplied, installed and verified—that is, tested to determine that the instrument works correctly—by different people and at different times. Therefore, it is often impractical and/or inappropriate for a measuring instrument to be verified until it is installed on site in the actual location where it will be used. In recognition of this, this bill amends offence provisions currently associated with the installation or supply of unverified measuring instruments. The penalty for the installation or supply of measuring instruments which are not of an approved pattern remains. The bill will also explicitly state that it is an offence to let for hire or loan unverified measuring instruments used for trade. The law should be completely fair and transparent in this respect.

The government takes seriously the concerns of industry and, on balance, decided that there is a need to provide legislative certainty. These amendments will ensure that if a measuring instrument is installed prior to its verification but is of an approved pattern then no offence will have been committed. Further, if a measuring instrument is sold to an intermediary before its final installation and use for trade, the strict liability provisions will not make the original supplier liable to prosecution for the supply of a measuring instrument in an unverified state.

The National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010 introduces amendments to the National Measurement Act 1960 which will make these circumstances clear in law. Other amendments will allow for the explicit recognition of prior knowledge and experience in making appointments of trade measurement inspectors, replace or redefine particular technical terms and make some minor clarifications.

The bill will also assist by making greater efficiencies possible in the operation of the national system of trade measurement, by providing a greater role for the Chief Metrologist in determining various procedures of a technical nature that would be administratively complex and slow to be determined by legislative amendments.

This government has resolved to create a seamless national economy unhampered by unnecessary duplications, overlaps and differences in regulation. In particular, we are determined to remove those inconsistencies that create unnecessarily complex and costly burdens on business. This legislation is a further step in the pursuit of the government’s much needed business regulation reform agenda.

I am pleased to introduce the National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010, a bill that will bring appropriate and desirable changes to the trade measurement provisions of the National Measurement Act 1960. I commend the bill to the House.

Leave granted for second reading debate to continue immediately.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Opposition has no objections to the National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010. Essentially the changes to which the bill seeks to give expression are uncontroversial. They are a range of minor corrections in the application of the National Measurement Act as it relates to the new trade measurement system. Ideally, these changes should have been introduced prior to the operation of the new national system on 1 July this year, but I do acknowledge that, as can often be the case in the political world, the government was pre-occupied with some other pressing party-political issues at the time that were consuming its immediate attention.

The current legislation assigns responsibility for a large number of technical decisions to the minister that need not be referred to him and which are of course more practically assigned to the Chief Metrologist at the National Measurement Institute. It is appropriate that the government seeks to clarify some definitions and regulations and it is also clear that a number of offence provisions need to be altered. Of course, the decision to create a national trade measurement system was made during the years of the Howard government, and we in the opposition support the continued development and evolution of the system. The coalition is happy to vote in favour of the bill and to assist the government in ensuring that all of the unintended consequences, outlined in greater detail elsewhere, are remedied.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to also speak in favour of the National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010. This bill amends the National Measurement Act 1960 to correct some of the unintended consequences arising from the translation of the trade measurement provisions of state and territory legislation into the Commonwealth legislation. Quite simply, the government has listened to the concerns of industry and business and has acted in a very prompt way to rectify this situation.

Trade measurement is the use of measurement in determining price. The primary purpose of a trade measurement system in this country is to ensure that the pricing of traded goods is based on accurate measurement. Trade measurement covers both business-to-business transactions as well as business-to-consumer transactions. This may appear to be a complex and somewhat irrelevant concept for many who may be, for example, listening in Fowler at the moment, but these are issues that are more familiar to people than they actually realise. Every time we go out and buy our groceries at the supermarket, our meat from the butcher or our seafood from the markets we are relying on accurate trade measurement instruments to determine the correct price on weight for those goods. So in terms of the day-to-day aspects of this piece of legislation, whilst trade measurement might seem unimportant to some people, for those who go and buy food to support their families these are things that are probably taken for granted but which are nevertheless very important.

The trade measurement system contained in this bill ensures that trade-measuring instruments are sufficiently accurate to give a fair price to both buyers and sellers. Essentially, the national trade measurement system, which came into effect in July this year, provides confidence to buyers and sellers that the instruments made for trade anywhere in this country are both consistent and accurate. The establishment of a national trade measurement system, which has been implemented by this Labor government, is one step in moving towards a seamless national economy.

The national system came about thanks to an agreement through the Council of Australian Governments and has been welcomed by industry at large. When the legal framework for the national trade measurement system was established in 2008, the weighing sector of the industry highlighted some serious concerns. Those concerns arose as a result of unintended consequences when the strict liability clauses that existed when the state and territory legislation was translated into the Commonwealth arena. The changes to be introduced in this bill will correct and clarify the areas of concern to the weighing industry.

The bill will narrow the circumstances in which some offence provisions may apply by removing doubt about the application of offences to inappropriate people. For example, if a measuring instrument is sold to an intermediary before its installation and used for trade then the strict liability provisions of this bill will not make the original supplier liable to prosecution. It will not be an offence to supply or install an unverified measuring instrument provided there is a reasonable belief that a measuring instrument will be verified before being used for trade between a supplier and seller.

The bill will, however, explicitly state that it is an offence to let for hire or to loan an unverified measuring instrument for the purpose of trade. Whilst the wording is clearer, it is not a new penalty. Such behaviour would have been subject to penalties in terms of its wider wording when originally contained in both the state and territory counterpart legislation.

The bill will also assist in making greater efficiencies possible in the operation of the new national system of trade measurement by: allowing for the explicit recognition of prior knowledge and experience in making appointments for trade measurement inspectors; ensuring that the secretary of the department appoints only competent verifiers of utility meters; making clarifications, replacing or re-defining a number of technical terms; and providing a greater role for the Chief Metrologist in determining various procedures of a technical nature that, quite frankly, would be administratively complex and for which legislative amendments would be very slow and burdensome. A greater role is given to the Chief Metrologist, in that respect, to be able to resolve those matters through regulatory processes.

The government is determined to create a seamless national economy unhampered by unnecessary duplications, overlaps and differences in regulation. We are also determined to remove those inconsistencies that create unnecessarily complex and costly burdens on business. This legislation is another step on that path. It is a step that has been pursued by this government to give business a greater degree of certainty and more support in business regulation reform. I commend this bill to the House.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise in favour of the National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010. This bill may not be the most glamorous piece of legislation to come before the parliament, it may not be the most famous and it may not be the most controversial, as the member for Indi has acknowledged, but this piece of legislation is incredibly important to reducing the regulatory burden on Australian business and the cost of compliance. It is incredibly important to streamlining the way we trade in this country, and it is incredibly important to ensuring business and consumers have access to reliable and uniform measures in all their transactions, no matter where they live.

This bill is the kind of legislation that many in the Australian community rely on every day, but probably only a few people know that it exists and that it is enshrined in our Constitution. I am reminded by this bill of the work I did when I was in Foreign Affairs and Trade in the nineties to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the United Nations. I was not aware, as most Australians were not, of the fact that the UN is involved in a number of laws that control the law of the sea and a range of other areas. These are invisible laws that have an impact on our life every day and that are just there quietly going about their business, as is the work that is being done around this bill. But this legislation impacts on an estimated $400 billion worth of trade each year, so it is very important and significant.

Everyone benefits when correct measurement is applied in trade. Customers benefit by receiving the actual goods they have ordered and paid for, sellers benefit by not giving product away in excess of the stated measurement and the whole community benefits through customer confidence in a trade measurement system that delivers consistency, reliability and verification to international standards—and that is the most important thing.

Going back to mention of the UN, I am reminded of the people who are involved in ensuring that trade measurement is consistent and accurate across the country—the invisible heroes I referred to in my first speech. Those invisible heroes are our public servants, who make up about 50 per cent of Canberra’s population. They are people who are dedicated to the service of his country, to improving people’s lives, to improving the economy, to keeping our country safe, to protecting our children’s toys and to a range of other things. As I said in my first speech, they are often derided by people in this House and by people around Australia. I find that really sad. These people should be lauded for what they do. They are dedicated to improving people’s lives and to public service, as is the gentleman in the advisers box. This bill reinforces the fact that we have this range of invisible heroes who are doing work which is very much buried in everyday life but which has a huge impact on our economy, on business and on the lives of consumers.

Trade measurement—along with ‘lighthouses, lightships, beacons and buoys’ and ‘astronomical and meteorological observations’—is the responsibility of the Commonwealth under section 51 of the Constitution, which says:

The Parliament shall … have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:

               …            …            …

(xv.) Weights and measures …

The need for a harmonised and national trade measurement framework was identified by COAG in 2007 and, I understand, teased out by a working group. That group was chaired by the former member for Melbourne and the member for Rankin and continued the long Labor tradition of economic reform and deregulation, particularly in the business sphere. The group identified the need for a range of reforms to the regulatory environment:

• to accelerate and broaden the regulation reduction agenda;
• to accelerate the existing COAG hot spots—

they have been referred to a number of times this morning—

• to improve processes for regulation making and review; and
• to deliver significant improvements in Australia’s competition, productivity and international competitiveness.

One of the top priorities of that meeting was the need to harmonise occupational health and safety laws. I applaud the Gillard government for its reform in this area.

The transition to a national system of trade measurement came into effect in July this year. The national framework introduced significant deregulation benefits and streamlined and reduced eight different state and territory systems down to one national system. The framework is managed by the National Measurement Institute, whose purpose is to:

… deliver capability for measurement in Australia that is world class, increases national economic efficiency, enhances export trade prospects, empowers sound environmental regulation, and enables effective social and health policies.

When the framework was introduced the former ACT Chief Minister, and now CEO of the Australian Food and Grocery Council, Kate Carnell, said:

The new single national system will allow industry to improve efficiencies through reduced regulatory burdens on manufactured food and groceries.

The CEO of the National Measurement Institute said in his guide to the new trade measurement regulations:

Consumers and businesses alike rightly expect that goods that are sold on the basis of such measures as length, weight and volume, are accurately and faithfully represented. Suppliers of measuring instruments expect clear and comprehensive regulatory requirements. Governments and the economy as a whole require a trade measurement system that establishes and maintains a national and international reputation for equitable trading.

A trade measurement framework gives buyers and sellers confidence that their transactions are accurate and consistent anywhere in Australia; so in December 2008 the National Measurement Act 1960 was amended to make way for the framework. The corresponding National Trade Measurement Regulations were made in September 2009.

The new framework has broad industry support. However, there have been some unintended consequences of the amendments and the government has introduced these changes in response to industry concerns and to reduce uncertainty. This amendment bill addresses these concerns. The bill will narrow the circumstances in which some offence provisions may apply by removing doubt about the application of offences to inappropriate people if a measuring instrument is sold to an intermediary before its installation and use for trade. The strict liability provisions will not make the original supplier liable to prosecution. It will not be an offence to supply or install an unverified measuring instrument provided the measuring instrument is of an approved pattern. If a measuring instrument is sold through an intermediary before its final installation and use for trade, then the original supplier will not be liable to prosecution. The bill will explicitly state that it is an offence to let for hire or loan an unverified measuring instrument used for trade. This wording is clearer, but it is not a new penalty, as such behaviour would previously have been subject to penalty under broader wording.

The Attorney-General’s Department has been consulted regarding the offence provisions in these amendments, as has industry. The bill will also assist by making greater efficiencies possible in the operation of the new national system of trade measurement by allowing for the explicit recognition of prior knowledge and experience in making appointments of trade measurement inspectors and by ensuring that the secretary of the department appoints only competent verifiers of utility meters. It also clarifies, replaces and redefines a number of technical terms. In making these changes, a careful balance has been struck between the operational and practical needs of those in the industry and the needs of consumers and end users for a fair and reliable system of measurement.

This bill also provides for an expanded role for the Chief Metrologist. The 2008 amendments contemplated a number of technical standards and procedures that were to be set out in the regulation or determined by the minister. However, it has since been found that these regulations may need to be updated on a more regular basis. Given the administrative complexity and nature of the legislative process, and the technical nature of the changes, this bill seeks to provide the Chief Metrologist with powers to make certain alterations. This change is made all the more practical as the Chief Metrologist has the expertise in this area.

This bill represents part of the ongoing commitment by the Gillard government to reducing the regulatory overlap between the states and territories and reducing the regulatory burden on business, while at the same time ensuring a fair, single national framework for business and consumers. In my first speech I mentioned my own experience of too much government intervention in my posting in India. I have seen firsthand the effect of overregulation. I have seen firsthand how economies and innovation can be stifled by too much compliance, red tape and disparity between states and territories. I believe that government and this parliament have a dual role—that is, not only to reduce the regulatory burden on business and the community but also to ensure Australians get the right outcome from its regulations. I believe this bill gets that balance right. I am proud that the Gillard government has committed to reducing regulation and protecting business and consumers. I am also proud that we have listened to the concerns of industry and acted on them to deliver a better system. I hope we continue to listen to industry, continue to streamline our regulatory frameworks, continue to reduce the cost of compliance, continue to protect business and consumers and continue to improve and grow the Australian economy. I commend this bill to the House.

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

in reply—I would like to sum up by thanking all those who participated in this debate. The government is very pleased with the smooth transition that occurred from 1 July this year from the eight former state and territory based trade measurement systems to the new national system of trade measurement. The new national system is a substantial outcome of the government’s business regulation reform agenda. The advent of a new national system has removed the previous inconsistencies in trade measurement, will reduce costs to companies operating nationally and will allow Australia to adopt new technologies and processes that will assist in making our industries compete better internationally. This is an outcome that all sides of politics, I think, can be pleased with.

The National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010 will amend the National Measurement Act 1960 in order to correct some unintended consequences of the translation of trade measurement provisions of state and territory legislation into Commonwealth legislation. The bill clarifies the application of strict liability offences and narrows the circumstances in which some offence provisions may apply. This will remove doubt about the application of those offences while upholding the requirement that only verified measuring instruments are used for trade. These amendments will bring the certainty desired by Australian industry. The bill will also improve the operation of the National Measurement Act in a number of respects, including by the delegation, as noted by speakers in this debate, to the Chief Metrologist of the determination of various test procedures.

In closing this debate, I think it is appropriate to mention how Australian industry has reacted to the government’s policy of introducing a national system of trade measurement. I am pleased to report that industry responses have been extremely positive. Accord Australasia, the peak industry group for the consumer, cosmetic and hygiene products sector, for example, stated in a press release earlier this year that the new national system will address the longstanding problem businesses faced in having to deal with separate and often inconsistent requirements of state and territory legislation and that it will introduce greater clarity for industry and assist Australia’s trade position by introducing an average quantity system. In summary, the National Measurement Amendment Bill 2010 will bring legislative certainty to the application of strict liability offences and will assist in making greater efficiencies possible in the operation of the new national system of trade measurement.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.