Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. The bill before the House will allow for time-limited trials of trade and customs practices with approved entities in a controlled regulatory environment known as a regulatory sandbox. The bill contains two schedules: schedule 1, which contains the provisions relating to the regulatory sandbox framework; and schedule 2, which contains technical amendments which, amongst other things, relate to the process in which notices of intention to propose customs tariff alterations occur.

In speaking to this bill I note that the coalition introduced the Customs Amendment (Controlled Trials) Bill 2021 in the previous parliament, with that bill dealing with the same subject matter as this bill. The bill the government has introduced is for all intents and purposes the same bill the coalition introduced, especially those provisions at schedule 1, with the only additions being those technical amendments incorporated into schedule 2. I'd like to thank the minister for the government's ringing endorsement of our simplified trade system agenda, of which this bill formed a part.

The bill encourages innovation in testing new business models and regulatory approaches with appropriate safeguards through allowing the modification or waiver of existing licensing, importing and exporting obligations under the Customs Act 1901. The Comptroller-General of Customs, under these amendments, will be provided with the power to vary, suspend or revoke an entity's approval to participate in a controlled trial. In doing so, they must provide the entity with a written notice, along with a minimum of seven days before the notice takes effect.

Taking part in a controlled trial is voluntary, with the trials themselves restricted to a maximum limited duration of no more than 18 months, with no imposition of penalty or sanction for failure to comply with the trial. However, the comptroller-general has the ability to suspend or revoke an entity's approval, as previously outlined, and this is not subject to merits review. By placing the qualification criteria and rules for controlled trials in delegated legislation, it will allow for controlled trials to be undertaken with a greater degree of certainty and can be administered effectively and in a timely manner.

I note that the previous bill was referred to the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, which recommended that that iteration of the bill be passed. Labor members of that committee at the time complained that aspects of the bill, such as the qualification criteria for participation in controlled trials, would be administered through delegated legislation rather than primary legislation. Despite belonging to the same party which voiced these complaints, the minister has now proposed the exact same bill. I note my colleague the member for La Trobe, who was the responsible assistant minister at the time, aptly responded to these complaints, noting that flexibility is required in a dynamic trade environment and that the use of delegated legislation means changes can be made more expeditiously, as opposed to bringing new legislation through the parliament each time. Delegated legislation is also subject to parliamentary oversight through disallowance processes. If we came to this place to amend the Customs Act 1901 each time a controlled trial was being considered, it would defeat the very purpose of having controlled trials.

This bill marks the new minister's ringing endorsement of the coalition's simplified trade system, known as the STS agenda. I appreciate she has seen the value of a more flexible and productive trade system. The coalition's STS agenda aimed to make cross-border trade for Australian businesses easier and less costly. The STS agenda will mean businesses are more productive, supply chains are more secure and the ABF can direct more attention to addressing higher-order threats.

The Home Affairs portfolio was leading a number of initiatives under the STS agenda and making a significant contribution to supporting whole-of-government efforts to simplify the end-to-end trade environment for business. I sincerely hope that the home affairs department is able to continue this contribution, given that the portfolio was gutted by this government when it came to power.

I sincerely hope that the work we did continues, but very little legislation has come through from this portfolio area. We note that the minister responsible for this area has refused to back legislation, particularly in relation to ransomware, and, as we saw this week, she let the ball drop on a key pillar of Operation Sovereign Borders. I am glad that with this bill at least they've seen the value of the work that was already done and brought this forward.

Given the economic conditions being created under this Labor government, businesses will need every support and every opportunity to keep their heads above water. Rising energy prices, rising interest rates and the rising cost of living are putting the squeeze on household budgets. These will all have an impact on our businesses. We certainly are in for some challenging times under this new government. The coalition, however, will always support good policy that seeks to make life easier for businesses, and for that reason I commend the bill to the House.

James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. I will to make a brief contribution with two points. Firstly, I really hope that the adoption of this legislation, and the flexibility that it creates for the department to look at a whole range of trials within the prescribed format of this legislation, leads to broader change around the administration of export regulations within our government. Hopefully, it will provide a good opportunity to show that we can simplify things, make things more straightforward for our exporters and, in particular, look for ways to digitise processes and make things as smooth as possible.

I have a lot of experience in export documentation. Regrettably, most of it does not evoke pleasant memories. We understand the need for a very robust framework, particularly around things like biosecurity, and we want to make sure that all of our compliance is where it needs to be. Certainly, in my experience, all of the general bureaucratic processes around exporting tend to lag way behind technology. This is an opportunity for the department to proactively take opportunities suggested to it and undertake trials within the sandbox that the legislation envisages.

I hope that we see this driving broader change in the way in which the bureaucracy operates. We're here as a government to make it as easy as possible for people to export from our country. I really urge the government and the department to take any opportunity we have to learn from this and make exporting easier for everyone.

Secondly, because I have the opportunity in this debate, I want to make sure that we're always remembering how common it is for other nations—I won't name any of them—to use bureaucracy and administration to frustrate market access. This is something that happens very regularly. From a policy point of view, we think we have free trade agreements in place. We think we have World Trade Organization rules and frameworks that mean there's certain market access.

However, both in my previous career and since being a member here, I've dealt with many examples where this is not the case. In some of the markets that Australian businesses are exporting to, their governments and bureaucracies take every opportunity they can to frustrate and limit opportunities for good Australian exporting businesses, which are legally entitled to access their markets under the international trade frameworks we're all part of.

One of the most ridiculous examples was the changing of species definition of seafood from the original Latin designations to a vernacular designation; the exact same product was suddenly held at the border. Seafood in a cold chain storage environment was held at the border and and/or not released into a freight corridor because of that kind of a change. It was absolutely designed to attempt to destroy that business that was succeeding in that market. I think that that government absolutely did what they could to punitively make an administrative change that could have meant—thankfully it didn't—that that business was going to go to the wall. They were going to implement some protectionism around their domestic producers through that underhanded way.

Because this really talks about export measures, in conclusion I would also ask the government, when we are negotiating free trade agreements and doing the important work we do at the World Trade Organization at a multilateral level, to reflect and think about and pull together these examples of the frustrations that are put in place at the border, at the points of entry, by certain nations that are not playing within the spirit of the agreements we've got. That's relevant to this legislation because, obviously, we are looking for opportunities to make it easier and streamline processes for our exporters, and there are absolutely opportunities to put some stronger and more robust frameworks in place and some consequences for our partners in these agreements to make sure that they are purporting to want to provide market access to certain producers, like we do in return.

We are never guilty of this in our country, I might add, despite some of the outrageous claims about our important, strong biosecurity framework. We absolutely have a very clear, transparent set of rules and procedures around that. But I think we should be looking for ways of putting a bit more pressure on some of these markets that are using that sort of trickery like the example that I have just outlined to frustrate market access. We all want to play by the same rules. We all want it to be a fair, open competition. Australia has never been frightened of a fair contest when it comes to the industries that are so successfully exported from our nation. All we want to do is play by the rules. With those comments, I commend the bill to the House.

Clare O'Neil (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the previous speakers on the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. I think the member for Sturt gave a really interesting contribution. I know he comes from a state where exports are a critical part of the local economy, in particular in relation to food and produce. The points he makes are really valid. We do face really significant issues around non-trade barriers in our dealings with other countries. We have furious debates in this parliament and around the world about trade agreements, but often it's the things that are not in those agreements that are used to inhibit our great exporters in this country selling their goods to the world. It's a really important point that I'm glad he has raised in this debate.

I caught part of the contribution of the shadow minister for home affairs. If you strip out some of the political rhetoric from it, I think the shadow minister made some really good points. I would hope that as a parliament we have our fierce disagreements about various things, but making sure that basic functions like our customs and border control work for Australians and Australian businesses is an area where we don't have to fight. I'm really glad we've got strong bipartisan support for the direction the government is taking, which is the direction that was also supported by the previous government.

In that vein, I will just quickly outline the bill. The Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022 will amend the Customs Act 1901. The bill will support the development of new regulatory approaches and business models in customs and trade, with appropriate legislative safeguards. It will also enable the Australian Border Force, in partnership with industry, to test new customs practices and technologies. This bill will create a legislative framework to enable time limited trials with approved entities in a controlled regulatory environment. This bill also modernises Customs law to align with current legislative practice. The amendments will provide more certainty to the process for altering Customs tariffs. The ability to trial innovative regulatory approaches is an essential tool to guide reform initiatives. Running trials through a regulatory sandbox will enable the Australian Border Force to partner with industry to develop the evidence base to inform regulatory reform over the long term.

The controlled trials bill is an important enabler for the whole-of-government simplified trade system agenda. It will assist the government to test new approaches within the Australian Customs framework while maintaining and achieving Australia's border security objective. The bill deserves support, and I commend it to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.