Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

These are the same amendments that were proposed in the House by the Leader of the Opposition. We did not support them during that debate and we do not support them now. I repeat: the industry wants certainty and these amendments would undermine that. They create ambiguity. Senator Joyce's specific concern is about temporary licences being valid for 12 months. He suggests that applicants will not know in advance the number of voyages they require for an entire 12-month period. The temporary licence is valid—he is right—for 12 months. The bill provides that the applicant only applies for those voyages which they know the details of. For example, if a company's planning horizon is for three months, they can submit an application with the detail of those voyages for this period, with a minimum of five voyages of course. The applicant then applies for the next package of voyages when they are known. This issue was raised during the exposure draft consultation, and the government amended the bill to provide this flexibility.

Where the general licence holder does not have sufficient knowledge to know whether to nominate to undertake voyages, as is being proposed by the opposition, these amendments would serve, if accepted by this chamber, to maintain the current situation whereby there is a lack of transparency in the coastal trading arrangements. This would continue the status quo, as I said in my previous contribution, of an unlevel playing field for Australian vessels. Australian goods carried by ships with an Australian flag and crewed by Australian workers on the Australian coast is what we are seeking to achieve, and we would ask the opposition to reconsider their position. We certainly call on the chamber to reject these amendments.