Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

Because it's similar to the previous bill in 2018, that means there is no reduction in Senate power, Senate authority and Senate oversight. I want to respond to Senator Whish-Wilson's comments, because this bill simply makes it easier, as did the 2018 bill, for Australian producers to export. It does not change the Senate's power. The Labor Party amendment duplicates what is already in place, so it's superfluous.

I want to comment, though, that we welcome the Greens' statement and their position on the free trade agreements in general, and I would welcome the opportunity for One Nation to talk with the Greens about future free trade agreements that come into this chamber with regard to coming up with a strategy to stop these agreements going through, because, once we have Labor and Liberal and the Nationals together, it is hard for nine plus two to beat that number. We have to come up with a strategy, because the free trade agreements that Labor and the Liberals push through the Senate are destroying this country. So we are with the Greens party on that. We acknowledge that they've been on that for a while, and so have we, and we want to do something about that, despite the numbers.

Minister, these are the conclusions that we came to as a result of discussions with the crossbenchers and the representatives from the department: if a rule change by the World Customs Organization results in a material change to a free trade agreement, that's a change in our country's commitment, which means that we lose money or opportunities or we lose control as a result of that change, and then the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties is required to examine the change and recommend yes or no, and then the parliament can scrutinise their finding, which is presented as a legislative instrument. Is that correct?