Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports the passage of the Export Market Development Grants Amendment Bill 2014. The Export Market Development Grants Scheme encourages small and medium Australian businesses to develop export markets, supports small and medium export businesses by reimbursing up to 50 per cent of expenses related to export promotion and provides up to seven grants to each eligible applicant. In this current period of economic transition, it is critical we continue to develop and support measures that open up export opportunities for new and existing export businesses. Labor has a proud record of supporting trade as a way of boosting economic growth and supporting our local industries. In fact, the Export Market Development Grants Scheme was originally a Labor initiative, established by the Whitlam government in 1974. The Export Market Development Grants Bill 1974 was introduced by the then Minister for Overseas Trade, Dr Jim Cairns, on 28 November 1974. In introducing the bill, Dr Cairns noted that existing export incentives provided the bulk of benefits to large companies. The then government wanted to provide more support to small exporting firms and decided 'the emphasis in a new export incentive scheme should be on market development.' Like many initiatives of the Whitlam government, the Export Market Development Grants Scheme, with its emphasis on small business and new markets, has endured.

The bill before the House aligns the Export Market Development Grants Scheme rules to a revised level of scheme funding, and implements some technical and simplification changes. The bill will also: increase the number of grants available to be received by an applicant from seven to eight; reduce the minimum expenses threshold required to be incurred by an applicant from $20,000 to $15,000; reduce the current $5,000 deduction from the applicant's provisional grant amount to $2,500; prevent the payments of grants to applicants engaging an export market development grant consultant assessed to be not a fit and proper person; and enable some grants to be paid more quickly. Some of the measures in the bill are similar to measures contained in an amendment bill introduced by the former Labor government but not passed prior to the dissolution of the last parliament. In particular, we note that the new 'fit and proper person' provisions in the bill largely adopt the provisions in the lapsed amendment bill previously proposed by Labor. These provisions add to an important quality check on those seeking to access government funding and obtain a fee for doing so. The accompanying guidelines will provide useful information to consultants on the level of conduct that is expected. The guidelines will also guide the assessment of the Austrade CEO, whose decision will also be subject to administrative review.

While affirming Labor's support for the bill, I also want to express our disappointment with some aspects of the reform proposed by the current government. Labor recognises that Australia's future prosperity will be underpinned by our engagement with our region. By the end of this decade, our region is expected to overtake the combined economic output of North America and Europe. Businesses will have access to expanded and emerging markets, with Asia set to become the world's largest consumption zone by 2030. That is why Labor implemented a policy agenda which supported Australia making the most of the emerging opportunities of the Asian century. The Labor amendment bill introduced in the last parliament sought to realign the Export Market Development Grants Scheme to support small businesses exporting to East Asian and frontier and emerging markets. It is disappointing to see that the Abbott government has walked away from these proposed changes. I certainly believe that it must be possible to find a way to leverage this public investment to further the nation's strategic objective of a much deeper engagement with our region. Not only has the realignment of the scheme been abandoned; the government has scrapped the Australia in the Asian Century white paper engagement process as a whole—the whole thing has basically been sent to the National Archives.

Labor recognises that Australia is already deeply invested in global affairs. We also recognise that taxpayer dollars should be allocated in a way which provides our businesses with even better access to markets which are expanding at a very considerable rate and which gives those business every opportunity to compete in the region.

The Abbott government's failure to embrace Labor's realignment says much about its lack of understanding of our region and the tremendous opportunities that we have. Jettisoning a policy agenda which sought to deepen and strengthen our relationships with our neighbours in Asia is not just short-sighted—it is reckless.

While concerned that the bill fails to focus the scheme on emerging markets in our own region, we recognise the important financial support these grants provide, and the bill will act to provide certainty for business ahead of the new financial year. Accordingly, Labor supports the bill.

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me enormous pleasure to rise this evening to speak about what is indeed an important bill. Having been involved in the export area for many years of my working life, I am very pleased to speak on the Export Market Development Grants Amendment Bill 2014, particularly given that this falls under the purview of the Minister for Trade and Investment, Minister Robb. In the short time that the government has been in office he has been doing fine work to deliver the white paper, contrary to what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested. Talking about engagement is indeed one thing. Talking is fine, and, while planning was not a hallmark of the previous government, talking about engagement is indeed important. I suggest that realigning is also important. But doing is actually far more important. Delivering on free trade agreements with countries like South Korea is the sort of thing that will get this country going again.

I want to dwell for a short period of time on the free trade agreement with South Korea. Over a period of time, it will eliminate tariffs on many of our main exports to that very important market. It will also open up new opportunities for Australian services as well as support our more traditional industries, including agriculture. Critically, it also puts us back on a level playing field with our competitors in the United States, the European Union and Chile, which already have free trade agreements with South Korea.

The modelling that has been done around this program suggests that, between 2015 and 2030, it will be worth $5 billion per year to Australia. Beyond 2030 it really kicks in, and the modelling shows that the benefits that will flow to the Australian economy—both in cities, in terms of the services that can be provided, but also in regional Australia, which is particularly important to my state and my electorate—will amount to around $650 million a year. This is so important. Indeed, Korea is our fourth-largest trading partner. Korea is Asia's fourth-largest economy. Having visited South Korea many times over the years, trying to sell Tasmanian wool and Australian wool, I understand what an important and sophisticated market South Korea is.

In my home state of Tasmania, particularly in my electorate of Lyons, exports are a huge contributor to a healthy economy in our state. Last year alone food exports were worth in excess of $520 million. Non-food products—a variety of machinery, transport, equipment, mining ores and concentrates, wood and paper products, processed metal and metal products—returned more than $2.5 billion. A $3 billion injection every year into the economy of Tasmania is indeed critical.

I have spoken in this place in the past about the importance of the seafood industry and the aquaculture industry in my state. Be it live or processed abalone; fresh, chilled or frozen Atlantic salmon; ocean trout, the best in the world, some would say; rock lobster; or mussels off the east coast—our exports are increasingly enjoying a growing reputation around the world as high-end food experiences not to be missed. It has been suggested in recent years that the value of the salmon and aquaculture industries to the state of Tasmania is growing by $1 million a week. When it comes to food, and indeed high-quality food, my state, Tasmania, punches above its weight.

I note that prior to Christmas the Minister for Trade and Investment, who I have a great deal of admiration for, and also the Prime Minister made particular mention of an abattoir based in Cressy in my electorate—Tasmanian Quality Meats—a family owned business which was successful in winning the regional exporter of the year award at the Business Council of Australia's export awards night prior to Christmas. Tasmanian Quality Meats is a business owned by Mr Brian Oliver and Mr John Talbot. They rightly deserve that award because of the growing quality and success that they have achieved in exporting lamb, mutton and veal. The export business has grown in a very short space of time, in 15 years, from almost nothing in terms of export income, not to mention domestic sales, to in excess of $12 million worth of exports—all with absolutely no government support. They have done it all on their own, but it is fair to say that as an exporter it is not easy. There are challenges. The deregulation agenda that this government has embarked on will no doubt help exporters.

The export market development grants that we are talking about here tonight are also another practical measure that will provide benefits to the many exporters in my state of Tasmania, including in my electorate. There have indeed been challenges. The global financial crisis was a challenge. The strength of the Australia dollar has been a challenge to exporters, be they miners, agriculturists or manufacturers and the like. We have the double whammy, though, in my home state in that we live on an island—a small island at that. That body of water across Bass Strait is an enormous burden; it is an increased cost that exporters in my state have to struggle with. I applaud and welcome the Productivity Commission-ACCC draft report into the Bass Strait that has been circulated for comment within my state. My colleagues from Tasmania, the member for Bass and the member for Braddon—

Debate interrupted