Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Now you would not necessarily know it from the title of the Product Stewardship Bill but, yes, this bill is largely about waste and largely about the management of it. So why have we wasted so much time in getting to this point? Why have we wasted so much time when the Howard government supported the concept of a national scheme to reduce the impact on the environment and on health and safety of products and substances during their life and then at the end of their life? The Howard government supported that principle and that concept yet it is some years upon years later that we finally find ourselves in this place in the noncontroversial section of the legislative consideration hopefully poised to give passage and implement such a scheme.

Why has it taken so long? Why have we wasted so long in working out what to do nationally with our waste when, for example, the television and computer industry, largely composed of manufacturers and importers wanting to do the right thing, has recognised that we still use TVs with hazardous substances in them and we need to take TVs and computers off the footpath and get them out of landfill? That industry is one that has been working for a long time towards an industry resourced national scheme. The unnecessary distress caused to that industry and its largely well-meaning and hardworking people, when it needs some legislative enablement to get its scheme up and running before the end of this year, because this government has left its run until the 11th hour is indeed regrettable.

We know that we are about to be at a happier place in terms of the bill. Thanks to the departmental officers, and Ms Kelly Pearce and Dr Wright in particular, for their constructive engagement with us as members of the opposition, under of course the fine tutelage of the Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water, Senator Farrell. Thank you for your consideration of our views but also those views of industry. Taking so long in the gestation of what to do with our waste, the government claimed it had extensively consulted with industry last year culminating in the putting out of the discussion paper, which the government tried to say resulted in a whole lot of submissions as the precursor to this bill. The problem is that the government dumped—talk about waste—this bill in the House of Reps in March this year without having the forethought, the preparedness to release an exposure draft of the bill. It dumped the bill on the House of Reps in March and then thankfully, it decided to refer it to a Senate committee for inquiry.

But having referred a bill of that sort to a Senate committee inquiry without the benefit of an exposure draft, the man in the street would not know what product stewardship is when it is at home. Most people would not know. The man in the street would not know it if he fell over it. So it was all very nice for us to get excited as members of the Senate committee and say, 'Whoopee, we are having an inquiry into this bill, so it will all be sorted.' The trouble is even some of the stakeholders involved in the process through government last year were caught unawares by the inquiry and indeed the relevance of this bill to them and their industries. Product stewardship has existed as a term, no doubt, in the industry, bureaucratic and probably government vernacular for quite some time but, as I say, the normal man or woman in the street would not know it if they fell over it. The Senate Environment and Communica­tions Legislation Committee inquiry heard from a range of witnesses, who did realise that product stewardship had some consequences for them and their respective industries. They drove home mainly two messages: firstly, that the criteria that a product or substance has to meet before being able to be subject to the voluntary co-regulatory or mandatory regime set up by the bill were so wide you could drive a truck through them—the department did a very brave job giving evidence and suggesting that the criteria were filters, but in my warped interpretation of the English language filters reduce things that come through the other end and the trouble with these criteria is they do none of that—and, secondly, the bill gives industry no practical place to start. It potentially says that every product and every substance under the sun—indeed, every product on the supermarket shelf, so said witnesses—is potentially subject to this bill. Those in industry want to do the right thing, but they know not where to start as the bill gives no suggestion—in the language of some witnesses, 'Pick the low-hanging fruit; please suggest where we might start.' It leaves industry swinging in a stewardship wasteland.

Thankfully, following the Senate inquiry, as I said, the government has taken quite some note of the Senate committee's report and that has resulted in discussions taking place. It also resulted, very importantly, in belated consultations with industry stake­holders including between the government and industry stakeholders. For example, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry became far more involved in consideration of the bill and was able to contribute constructively in where we find ourselves today.

In looking forward to supporting the bill and supporting a range of amendments that have been tabled and circulated, I also hope that the government will learn some lessons from this process. This should be and will be not only a bipartisan but a tripartisan or a quadruple-partisan policy. It is a good thing, but just because something sounds good does not mean that it will do good unless you make sure that you implement it the right way. That means—please, government, and please, Senator Farrell—that the message for your colleagues is explain things to the people, to the stakeholders, consult with the stakeholders and do as the Prime Minister says: let the damn sunshine in. We are all deprived of vitamin D these days, did you know? Let the sunlight in; do not leave it to the last minute to consult with those who could help you achieve a constructive outcome.