Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens amendments (3) and (9) to (18) on sheet 7202:

(3) Clause 7, page 4 (line 24), at the end of the definition of due diligence requirements, add:

  ; and (c) for supplying timber products—has the meaning given by section 18E.

(9) Clause 13, page 9 (line 12), before "A", insert "(1)".

(10) Clause 13, page 9 (after line 21), at the end of the clause, add:

  (2) The form of declaration prescribed by the regulations must require the person to include the following information:

     (a) the name of the person importing the timber product;

     (b) the name of the person who supplied the product to the person importing the product;

     (c) the botanical name and the common name for the timber used in the product;

     (d) the cost of the product to the person importing the product, in Australian dollars;

     (e) the country or countries of origin of the product;

     (f) the region or forest coupe, or any other information that identifies the site, where the timber for the product was logged;

     (g) details of the logging permit, logging approval or harvest concession in relation to the timber for the product, issued by the country or countries of origin;

     (h) the name and voyage number of the vessel on which the product is being imported;

     (i) the number of the shipping container in which the product is being imported;

     (j) any consignment identifier, bill of lading number or invoice number in relation to the product;

     (k) a description of the product;

     (l) the type of product being imported and the trade name, if any, of the product;

     (m) if the product is comprised of more than one kind of timber or is comprised of timber and one or more other materials—the kinds of timber and other materials that the product is comprised of;

     (n) the customs tariff classification to which the product belongs;

     (o) the quantity of product covered by the declaration;

     (p) the due diligence system, and any components of the system, in the country of origin used to verify that the timber for the product has not been illegally logged;

     (q) an assessment of the level of risk that the timber for the product has been illegally logged, as either a low, medium or high risk;

     (r) any other information prescribed by the regulations.

  (3) A declaration made by a person in accordance with this section must be published on the internet within 7 days of the Customs Minister receiving it.

(11) Clause 14, page 9 (lines 29 and 30), omit "may include requirements in relation to one or more of the following", substitute "must include requirements in relation to the following".

(12) Clause 14, page 10 (lines 1 to 9), omit paragraph (3)(a), substitute:

  (a) gathering information for the purposes of assessing that risk;

(13) Clause 14, page 10 (line 18), at the end of paragraph (3)(i), add ", including statements of compliance".

(14) Clause 14, page 10 (lines 20 to 29), omit subclauses (5) and (6), substitute:

  (5) The regulations must provide that evidence of compliance with the laws, rules or processes under laws, including certification schemes, in force in a State or Territory or another country may be taken into account as part of the evidence demonstrating compliance with due diligence requirements for importing regulated timber products.

(15) Clause 18, page 14 (lines 3 and 4), omit "may include requirements in relation to one or more of the following", substitute "must include requirements in relation to the following".

(16) Clause 18, page 14 (lines 5 to 13), omit paragraph (3)(a), substitute:

  (a) gathering information for the purposes of assessing that risk;

(17) Clause 18, page 14 (line 20), at the end of paragraph (3)(h), add ", including statements of compliance".

(18) Clause 18, page 14 (lines 22 to 29), omit subclauses (5) and (6), substitute:

  (5) The regulations must provide that evidence of compliance with the laws, rules or processes under laws, including certification schemes, in force in a State or Territory may be taken into account as part of the evidence demonstrating compliance with due diligence requirements for processing raw logs.

These amendments relate to due diligence and the declaration form that is required in relation to the import of timber in a determination of whether or not that timber has been illegally logged.

This is a critical provision as far as the Greens are concerned, because the current provisions relating to the declaration form are very unclear. When the officials from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry were in a working group meeting in August 2011 they proposed, without prejudice, a declaration form that was modelled on the Lacey Act.

It required information regarding the species and genus of the timber, the country of origin, the value of the import and other information critical to satisfying due diligence. But it is not clear what the declaration form in the current bill is going to be. It appears to be primarily a declaration of legality.

Whilst we support a declaration of legality, it is not clear what other information is going to be on that form. I am asking for the minister to be very specific about this level of information, because one of the very key things for the Greens is that you must be able to trace the timber in any timber product back to the coupe. If you cannot do that then you are never going to prove that it has been illegally logged. I make that point very strongly.

Most of the areas in the world from which you secure timber are going to have legal operations as well as illegal operations. Unless you can trace the actual timber back to the coupe, you might as well give up on this; it is just a piece of window dressing unless we can do that. The Greens are saying the form should include the following:

(a) the name of the person importing the timber product;

(b) the name of the person who supplied the product to the person importing the product;

(c) the botanical name and the common name for the timber used in the product;

(d) the cost of the product to the person importing the product, in Australian dollars;

(e) the country or countries of origin of the product;

And I say 'countries of origin' because timber is often logged in one country and sent to another country, where it is made into a product and then sold into a third country. So timber illegally logged in Indonesia could find its way through Singapore or into China and back into Australia as a piece of furniture or some other product. Unless you have the country or countries of origin, then it would be just a piece of furniture 'made in China' and the actual origin of the timber would not be known. The form should also include:

(f) the region or forest coupe, or any other information that identifies the site, where the timber for the product was logged;

As I indicated in my second reading speech, this is absolutely critical. I go back to 'forestry law 41' in Indonesia, which was a forestry law that protected forests. The mining industry in Australia got it overturned.

If you go down to the coupe level, that will tell you who has the licence to log. If it is illegal, that is one thing; but you also need to be able to know whether a deal was done, with local government or the national government or whatever, in order to give a licence to somebody. That would be consistent with the law but nevertheless would be illegal, because it was delivered in relation to bribery or because it actually sold off land that did not belong to the person involved in the first place. So you need to be able to go to the corruption as well as to the notion that it was illegal. They are the two things and that is why you have to be able to go back to the coupe.

The point is that with DNA testing, you can do this. One of the brilliant things about science now is that, if you go to the coupe level, you can actually do DNA testing. You can cut down a tree in the particular coupe and you can do the DNA testing. If it turns up in some piece of furniture, you can determine exactly where it came from, providing you do the original work in the first place. This is the issue for me. The form should also include:

(g) details of the logging permit, logging approval or harvest concession in relation to the timber for the product, issued by the country or countries of origin;

(h) the name and voyage number of the vessel on which the product is being imported;

(i) the number of the shipping container in which the product is being imported;

(j) any consignment identifier, …

(k) a description of the product;

(l) the type of product being imported and the trade name, …

(m) if the product is comprised of more than one kind of timber or is comprised of timber and one or more other materials—the kinds of timber and other materials that the product is comprised of;

(n) the customs tariff classification to which the product belongs;

(o) the quantity of product covered by the declaration;

(p) the due diligence system, and any components of the system, in the country of origin used to verify that the timber for the product has not been illegally logged;

(q) an assessment of the level of risk that the timber for the product has been illegally logged, as either a low, medium or high risk;

(r) any other information prescribed by the regulations.

That is the kind of brief you need if you are going to get serious about tracking products or illegal timber that comes into Australia. If you do not do that—and you just go with what appears we are going with, which is basically a certification system, just saying that due diligence could be satisfied by reliance on certification schemes or on the laws of the country in force at the time—then the standard being imposed on importers is a negligent standard. It requires that importers make informed decisions regarding the nature of the evidence that must be provided in order to reasonably assure legality. Allowing existing schemes to replace the obligations on importers, in my view, runs contrary to the bill.

So, from my point of view, we need to be very specific, and I would like the minister to stand up and tell us now: what is actually going to be on the declaration form? Will it go down to the forest coupe level? Will it have DNA identification? If no, why not?