Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave, I move amendments (2) and (4) on sheet 7782 revised.

(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 54 (after line 16), after subsection 67(1), insert:

  (1A) If:

  (a) the significant action is to acquire an interest in Australian land; and

  (b) the land is agricultural land;

then, in determining whether taking the significant action would be contrary to the national interest for the purposes of subsection (1), the Treasurer must have regard to each of the following matters in so far as the matter is relevant:

  (c) national security issues, including Australia's ability to protect its strategic and security interests;

  (d) the impact the significant action will have, if any, on the following:

     (i) competition, global industry or market outcomes;

     (ii) Australian tax revenues;

     (iii) Australia's food security;

(e) the impact the significant action will have, if any, on the Australian economy, including whether the significant action will, or is likely to, result in;

     (i) the creation of new job opportunities in Australia, or the retention of existing jobs in Australia that may otherwise be lost; or

     (ii) the introduction into Australia of new technology or business skills; or

     (iii) increased export receipts for Australian exporters; or

     (iv) additional market competition, greater efficiency or productivity, or enhanced domestic services, in Australia; or

     (v) the introduction into Australia of additional investment for development purposes; or

     (vi) increased processing in Australia of Australian primary products;

  (f) whether Australia's economic interests are adequately safeguarded and promoted;

  (g) whether the significant action will, or is likely to benefit Australia generally, or any part of Australia or group of Australians;

(h) whether the foreign person has demonstrated financial commitment to the interest;

  (i) whether the foreign person has business experience and acumen relevant to the interest;

  (j) whether the foreign person is of good character;

  (k) any other matter the Minister considers relevant.

(4) Schedule 1, item 4, page 59 (after line 36), after subsection 71(1), insert:

  (1A) If:

  (a) the variation or revocation is of an order under section 67; and

  (b) the significant action to which the order relates is to acquire an interest in Australian land; and

  (c) the land is agricultural land;

then, in determining whether the variation or revocation is contrary to the national interest for the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), the Treasurer must have regard to each of the following matters in so far as the matter is relevant:

  (d) national security issues, including Australia's ability to protect its strategic and security interests;

  (e) the impact the variation or revocation will have, if any, on the following:

     (i) competition, global industry or market outcomes;

     (ii) Australian tax revenues;

     (iii) Australia's food security;

  (f) the impact the variation or revocation will have, if any, on the Australian economy, including whether the result will, or is likely to, result in;

     (i) the creation of new job opportunities in Australia, or the retention of existing jobs in Australia that may otherwise be lost; or

     (ii) the introduction into Australia of new technology or business skills; or

     (iii) increased export receipts for Australian exporters; or

     (iv) additional market competition, greater efficiency or productivity, or enhanced domestic services, in Australia; or

     (v) the introduction into Australia of additional investment for development purposes; or

     (vi) increased processing in Australia of Australian primary products;

(g) whether Australia's economic interests are adequately safeguarded and promoted;

  (h) whether the variation or revocation will, or is likely to benefit Australia generally, or any part of Australia or group of Australians;

  (i) whether the foreign person has demonstrated financial commitment to the interest;

  (j) whether the foreign person has business experience and acumen relevant to the interest;

  (k) whether the foreign person is of good character;

  (l) any other matter the Minister considers relevant.

Amendment (2) relates to the Treasurer's power to make orders in respect of a significant action. If a significant action is in relation to agricultural land, then the Treasurer is required to have regard to Australia's national interest when deciding whether or not to make the order. The current bill does require the Treasurer to have regard to the national interest but there is no detail as to the kinds of factors that should be considered in the context of the national interest.

Item 2 of my amendment removes this ambiguity by clearly setting out what factors the Treasurer can have regard to. This is based on New Zealand's Overseas Investment Act of 2005, which has worked very well for our neighbour. New Zealand is open to foreign investment but also considers very clearly a national interest test, which they exercise on a regular basis because—and it is much more prescriptive, which I think is desirable to the current rules, which are as clear as mud.

The Treasurer will need to have regard to each of the listed matters in so far as a matter is relevant to the order being made in respect of the agricultural land The types of matters include national security issues, the impact the significant action will have on Australian tax revenues and food security and whether the significant action will result in the creation of Australian jobs or if it will result in increased export receipts for Australian exporters. These are very clear, key issues that ought to be considered, by setting out in the act what matters are relevant to the national interest—again, modelled on New Zealand, which has a tried and proven method and one that has worked. I know that Prime Minister Turnbull is a close friend and an admirer of John Key and the New Zealand government. This amendment proposes that we do what they have been doing for a number of years under both New Zealand Labour and New Zealand Nationals administrations. We are safeguarding Australian agricultural land by ensuring that any purchases will not be against our national interest. It will mean that purchases will not be affected by any political whims of the time but have the same criteria that will be applied to a prospective purchase of agricultural land in relation to the threshold.

I will also speak to amendment (4), which relates to orders made in respect of agricultural land, except in this instance the Treasurer must have regard to the national interest criteria if the Treasurer is considering whether to vary or revoke the order. Once again, this amendment sets out what matters should be included in any consideration of Australia's national interest. Amendment (4) is necessary because it ensures that the national interest is taken into account when varying or revoking an order in respect of agricultural land. So it is a technical amendment in nature.

These are sensible amendments, with a threshold value of $15 million—notwithstanding my preference of $5 million—to activate the Treasurer's obligation to analyse purchases of agricultural land. These amendments also provide clear advice as to what matters need to be considered in the context of the national interest. I have given a number of examples of that. As much as it hurts me to say so, the Kiwis have got it right. The Kiwis have had it right for a number of years. They have a better system—one that is efficient, one that is clear and one that genuinely considers the national interest in a much clearer fashion.