Senate debates

Wednesday, 9 September 2009

Uranium Royalty (Northern Territory) Bill 2008

In Committee

12:34 pm

Photo of Nick MinchinNick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

As I said in relation to amendment (1), our general view is that this bill is not the appropriate mechanism for these additional functions. This is a bill about the royalty arrangements relating to uranium and should not be encumbered by other agendas. The defeat of the Greens first amendment renders this second amendment partly redundant in that, in relation to the Auditor-General’s functions, it refers to the ‘adequacy of the remediation fund’, which of course has not been established because that amendment has been defeated. I do not think the amendments can any longer stand the way they are, from a practical point of view.

I do not believe it is appropriate to draw the Auditor-General into this purpose. It is not the function of the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General’s role is in relation to direct government programs and direct government spending, not ensuring that profits or income from mining operations are adequately reported. All uranium is exported and all sales contracts have to be provided to the government. I think that the arrangements at the moment are adequate. Certainly it is not the role of the Auditor-General to get involved in that matter. In any event, as I said, this amendment is made redundant by the defeat of the first amendment.

Again, this is not the vehicle for seeking to expand the responsibilities of the Supervising Scientist. I note and welcome Senator Ludlam’s remarks about the Supervising Scientist, given that it was the Fraser coalition government that established that office in 1978. I agree with him—I think it was a good policy initiative that has, by and large, worked very well. There is only one uranium mine in the Northern Territory. Were any additional mines to be established then the role of the Supervising Scientist in relation to any future mine and any approval processes for an additional mine could be considered at that time. But this is not the appropriate vehicle to address that question.

Comments

No comments