Senate debates

Monday, 18 June 2012

Bills

Shipping Reform (Tax Incentives) Bill 2012, Shipping Registration Amendment (Australian International Shipping Register) Bill 2012, Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) Bill 2012, Coastal Trading (Revitalising Australian Shipping) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2012, Tax Laws Amendment (Shipping Reform) Bill 2012; In Committee

1:43 pm

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

I have indicated, Senator, on numerous occasions that there is a minimum requirement of five, and companies can seek additional licences. As to beyond five, they are not required to have only five but I have made it very clear that the policy position is to encourage longer-term planning, and the minimum requirement can use a shipping agent to reduce the number of licences. Of course, Senator Joyce's proposal would take us back to a system which undermines the efficiency of the industry. This is about trying to reduce the process of single voyages and of single shippers trying to game the system. Senator JOYCE (Queensland—Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (13:44): It is quite obvious that this is mass confusion. This is how the government works. In the last 10 minutes we have had three different government positions.These are the same people running your debt, by the way. This is the same group that is apparently going to cool the planet. It is a very interesting day when, in 10 minutes, I can have three different positions.

You all heard it. We had a position at the start where you could not go beyond five—and then the minister answered that you could. Now we are back to the confusing position of not knowing whether you can or you cannot. We now have two completely different positions. We have the position, 'We'll just file it under the answer yes'. And we have the palaver we heard about three minutes ago. So I do not know the position. Who would know? Who out there in radioland would know what the government's position is? This is a quite simple question. There was nothing Socratic about what I asked. Let us have another crack at it. Let us refer to your answer 'yes'. Is that answer now really supposed to have been no?

I have nothing further to add, Senator. You are going around in circles. You are obviously seeking to filibuster this issue. I presume your intention is not to get a vote on this matter before question time. I am afraid I cannot add anything more to what I have answered. I answered the word 'yes' to a specific question in relation to specific measures on the advice of the officials. I have no reason to change that.

Comments

No comments