Senate debates
Wednesday, 10 October 2012
Bills
Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2011, Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2012, Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2012, Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 3) 2012; In Committee
6:35 pm
Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source
And I thought that Senator Feeney with his long history in the Australian Labor Party would know all, being almost omnipresent when it comes to key and strategic decisions. Very well, that is a matter that needs to be looked at. The other matter that I would like to raise is in respect of the issue of noncooperation. What is the government's position when an importer does not cooperate in an investigation? In other words, what are the thresholds to say that there is a mature level of noncooperation in relation to that?
Also, what happens when an importer starts playing the system? I will give you an example that was put to me by the Australian Steel Institute. Concerns were raised by the Australian institute regarding the capability of Australia's antidumping and countervailing system to deal with ongoing issues. For example, duties were placed on certain types of imported steel products including pipes.
Once the duties were applied, the manufacturer simply added a cheap bracket to the pipe—a $10 bracket—changing the product category and therefore avoiding the duties.
The Australian Steel Institute also provided examples of manufacturers changing factory locations in other countries and swapping between two factories in different countries to avoid duties. Their concern, and I think the general concern, is that Australia's system is not working efficiently in relation to the constant monitoring of products and that Australian manufacturers have to make additional applications with additional cost and additional damage to their industry, given the time it takes to process a new application, to address any avoidance on the part of exporters. The example was given about pipes with brackets on them: whack on a $10 bracket from a Bunnings or a Mitre 10 store or wherever and suddenly it is in a whole new product category and they can avoid duties. Is the government familiar with that particular instance and would that be seen as an example of noncooperation in the context of the dumping regime?
No comments