The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 10:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Labor acknowledges the independent decision of the board in relation to the departure of Michelle Guthrie as managing director.
To clarify various media reports, the Board received a letter from the former Managing Director late on Friday 21 September 2018. In that letter, Ms Guthrie responded to several issues that the Board raised with her. In addition, the former Managing Director raised other matters that she requested the Board investigate on a confidential basis.
The Board resolved on Sunday 23 September 2018 to appoint an external, independent expert advisor to investigate these matters.
That the Senate take note of the statement.
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Hinch from moving a motion relating to the consideration of a matter, namely a motion relating to discrimination by independent schools.
Nothing in the Bible or in Catholic teaching can be used to justify prejudicial or discriminatory attitudes and behaviours.
… … …
We did not seek concessions to discriminate against students or teachers based on their sexuality, gender identity or relationship status.
The Senate divided. [11:11]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That general business order of the day no. 76 (Criminal Code and Other Legislation Amendment (Removing Commonwealth Restrictions on Cannabis) Bill 2018) be considered today at the time for private senators' bills.
Criminal Code and Other Legislation Amendment (Removing Commonwealth Restrictions on Cannabis) Bill 2018
… the reality is that, contrary to frequent assertions, drug law enforcement has had little impact on the Australian drug market or for that matter, on the drug markets of most, if not all, countries in the world.
Australian police are better resourced, better trained, and more effective than ever and yet their impact on the drug trade, on any objective assessment, has been minimal.
Cannabis use is less harmful than alcohol use and tobacco use. Legalising cannabis would improve access to cannabis for recreational, medicinal, industrial and other purposes. Access for medicinal purposes is currently hamstrung through excessive regulation.
As the first legislation to propose the removal of Commonwealth restrictions on cannabis, there is a case to examine: the merits of legalisation, law enforcement issues, extradition issues, constitutionality, treaty issues, trade rule issues, Commonwealth-state issues, and budget issues.
Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation) Bill 2018
… seek to avoid accepting provisions in trade agreements that confer additional substantive or procedural rights on foreign investors over and above those already provided by the Australian legal system.
There does not appear to be an underlying economic problem that necessitates the inclusion of ISDS provisions within agreements. Available evidence does not suggest that ISDS provisions have a significant impact on investment flows.
Experience in other countries demonstrates that there are considerable policy and financial risks arising from ISDS provisions.
—The provisions depart from national treatment principles by affording substantive appeal rights to foreigners not available to domestic firms, risk impeding domestic regulatory reform …, include safeguards and carve-outs of uncertain effect, lack transparency and have inadequate parliamentary scrutiny.
… trade agreements that deepen economic relationships with Asia lead … to higher net imports of manufactured products.
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:
(1) acknowledges that this preferential trade agreement cannot be amended by these bills, only accepted or rejected;
(2) is of the opinion that:
(a) the way Australia negotiates trade agreements of this type needs to change,
(b) the role of Parliament in trade negotiations should be strengthened by increased oversight of trade negotiations by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, including providing the committee with:
(i) the government's statement of objectives for negotiation for consideration and feedback, and
(ii) regular briefings at the conclusions of each round of negotiations; and
(3) calls on the Australian government to:
(a) seek to remove Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms and reinstate labour-market testing for contractual service suppliers in existing trade agreements,
(b) ensure that future governments are prevented, by legislation, from including ISDS mechanisms or waiving labour-market testing in future trade agreements,
(c) establish an accredited trade advisers program to allow industry, unions and civil society groups to provide real-time feedback on draft trade agreements during negotiations,
(d) subject all new trade agreements to an independent national interest assessment to examine economic, strategic and social impacts before they are signed,
(e) enforce mandatory skills testing in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and all future trade agreements, and
(f) fix the problems in the existing skills testing regime by ensuring that the skills of foreign workers are tested by qualified professionals and required to meet current Australian standards and not by immigration officials."
At a time when farmers around the country are experiencing crippling drought, deals like TPP-11 give hope for a long-term sustainable future.
Australian workers, jobs and business will benefit significantly from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP-11) trade agreement, with increased national income, exports, investment and wages …
The committee correctly identifies that the scope and complexity of 'modern trade' or 'partnership' agreements—such as the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement—makes the case for reform compelling.
The incursion of modern trade or partnership negotiations into matters of domestic policy and public interest is such that they now function as a 'de facto level of government'.
(a) Litigation using ISDS has proliferated in recent times and this is likely to increase into the future.
(b) ISDS clauses have outlived their usefulness and are now under review in a number of countries and trade negotiations, including 10 countries in Latin America, South Africa, India, Indonesia and the European Union …
(c) There is no evidence that ISDS clauses have any economic benefits for trade or investment, however the risks of using them are clear and supported by evidence and numerous case studies.
(d) Trade deals are changing from historic "market access trade" … considerations to facilitating … "foreign investment" … laws and policies in a wide range of areas, including public health, patents on medicines, the environment, food labelling, Internet use and privacy and local media content …
This makes the inclusion of ISDS more dangerous.
… … …
(f) There was strong evidence presented to the inquiry that ISDS "safeguard" clauses can and have been reinterpreted and overturned through the arbitration process.
(g) Parliament has no oversight or control over the inclusion of ISDS in trade negotiations—
The report hasn't even been considered by Cabinet …
With the funds from the EMDG, I've been able to secure a highly experienced UK-based General Manager Sales, and ramp up the marketing.
Frankly, it's been a game changer. Matchboard is self-funded and without the EMDG, I'm not sure we could have afforded to take the leap internationally so fast.
… could register a substantial protest vote against the government or any other candidates that don’t understand the magnitude and urgency of the climate change challenge.
If the Liberal party doesn't stand up and argue the case on this, I think people should be encouraged to vote against them.
But to put their head in the sand on this issue – they just fobbed the IPCC report off, like it doesn’t matter – it's a pretty unsatisfactory position.
Is it going to take a drubbing in a byelection to get them to do something on climate?
That so much of the standing orders be suspended, as would prevent me from moving a motion relating to consideration of a matter, namely a motion relating to an order for the production of a document.
The Senate divided. [15:22]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Communications and the Arts (Senator Fifield) to a question without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Wong) today relating to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
… there was no request or suggestion by the former Prime Minister or any Government Minister to terminate the employment of a journalist or ABC staff member.
I indicated to the chair that I respected the managing director's position was, under the legislation, a matter for the board.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Small and Family Business, Skills and Vocational Education (Senator Cash) to a question without notice asked by Senator McKim today relating to asylum seeker children on Nauru.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Polley from 15 to 18 October 2018, on account of parliamentary business.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Steele-John from today, 15 October, to Thursday, 18 October, for personal reasons.
That the Senate:
(a) notes that:
(i) Veterans' Health Week 2018 was held from 22 September to 30 September 2018 with a theme of Nutrition, following last year's theme of Physical Activity,
(ii) the Invictus Games, which use the power of sport to inspire recovery, support rehabilitation and generate a wider understanding and respect for wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women, will this year be held in Sydney from 20 October to 27 October 2018, and
(iii) this high-level sporting event will host some of the world's elite athletes, at the same time highlighting some of the difficulties faced and sacrifices made by men and women who have served their country; and
(b) congratulates all athletes selected to represent Australia at the 2018 Games and conveys its best wishes for their success in and enjoyment of the competition.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) today marks International Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day,
(ii) on this day, parents, families and friends will memorialise babies they have lost through miscarriage, stillbirth and infant death, and
(iii) Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day is an opportunity to officially acknowledge the losses experienced by parents and families across Australia;
(b) acknowledges that in Australia:
(i) it is estimated that one in four pregnancies result in miscarriage – that is 103 000 every year,
(ii) in 2016, 2 849 lives were lost due to stillbirth or newborn death,
(iii) despite medical advancements, the stillbirth rate has not changed in two decades,
(iv) the rate of stillbirth and newborn death is 70 per cent higher in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and
(v) Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day is an opportunity to raise awareness of this difficult reality and start a conversation about miscarriage and infant loss;
(c) expresses sympathy to all families who have suffered a miscarriage, a stillbirth or infant death; and
(d) commends each and every person who has supported parents and families through their journey from the loss of a baby.
A Fair Go for Australians in Trade Bill 2018
That the following bill be introduced: a Bill for an Act to give Australian workers a fair go in trade agreements and to fix the way the Commonwealth negotiates them, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
No one doubts that trade is essential to the prosperity of this country.
The Centre for International Economics estimates that one in five Australian jobs is linked to trade.
That means 2.2 million Australians work in a trade-related job.
67 per cent of mining jobs and 41 per cent of manufacturing jobs are trade-related.
Because trade is so vital, we must ensure that any trade agreements we negotiate with other nations do not disadvantage Australians.
In seeking to gain access to new markets, we must not surrender the rights of Australian workers and those who depend on them.
We must take no action that limits the ability of Australia's national government to make policy and to legislate.
To do so would effectively undermine Australian sovereignty.
For these reasons, the way Australia negotiates trade agreements needs to change.
Many people are sceptical about the value of existing trade agreements, and about the proposed Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, known as TPP11.
Many people believe that the way we negotiate free trade agreements must be made more transparent.
Labor agrees with them.
This government continues to trade away labour-market testing in the agreements it negotiates.
It also includes Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, regardless of the growing opposition to them, in Australia and overseas.
The government's attitude is not acceptable.
That is why I have brought this bill before the Senate.
The bill will provide a fairer, more transparent approach to the negotiation of trade agreements.
And that will lead to better outcomes.
The bill prohibits the waiver of labour market testing in trade agreements.
The policy of Coalition governments has been that labour-market testing is required before a foreign worker can be employed in Australia, unless an international obligation applies.
That policy has allowed the government to use trade agreements to waive requirements for an employer to first check if an Australian can do a job before bringing in a worker on a skilled visa.
An employer who wants to bring a plumber, mechanic, electrician or other skilled worker from overseas into Australia, should first check whether there is an Australian who can do the job.
That is basic justice.
Trade agreements should not trade away Australian jobs.
The bill also prohibits the government from signing trade agreements that include Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions.
These provisions provide foreign corporations with the right to sue the Commonwealth for legitimate policy decisions taken by the government.
That surrender of sovereignty would rightly be viewed as outrageous by most Australians.
The bill therefore makes clear that Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions should not be included in Australian trade agreements or bilateral investment treaties.
The bill makes it mandatory for governments to enforce, in all future trade agreements, practical and theoretical testing of the skills of foreign workers.
To get better outcomes from trade agreements and to ensure proper consultation and scrutiny of trade agreements, the bill provides for the establishment of an Accredited Trade Advisers program.
The Minister would consult with Accredited Advisers from unions, civil society groups and industry.
The Accredited Advisers will be able to provide feedback on trade agreements as they are being negotiated.
The bill also requires the Minister to commission an Independent National Interest Assessment of each agreement.
This assessment would provide independent analysis of the economic, strategic and social impacts of a trade agreement. These social impacts include, but are not limited to, an agreement's impact on workers, the environment and gender.
This analysis would have to be tabled before an agreement is signed.
The bill legislates a number of policies that Labor has already announced, and which a Shorten Labor government would implement.
In addition to these measures that require legislation, we have also announced that a Shorten Labor government will end the secrecy surrounding trade negotiations.
To do this we will strengthen the role of the Parliament and provide the public with more information.
At the conclusion of each round of negotiation, members of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties will be provided with a briefing and a public update will be released.
Where feasible, a draft of the negotiated text will be tabled in the Parliament.
In addition, members of the JSCoT will be provided with the government's Statement of Objectives for negotiations, for examination and report prior to the commencement of formal negotiations.
4 This will give the Parliament, industry, civil society and the wider community an opportunity to tell us what they want out of trade agreements.
It is possible that the government could sign new trade agreements between now and the election scheduled for next year.
Any trade agreements signed by the government in the next few months are unlikely to come before the Parliament before the next election.
That is because the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties requires 20 joint sitting days to consider trade agreements before it reports and enabling legislation can be introduced.
However, if between now and the election the government does sign a new trade agreement that includes an ISDS clause or waives labour-market testing, a Shorten Labor government would renegotiate that agreement.
We would remove those clauses before bringing legislation before the Parliament.
The bill also prohibits the Government from signing trade agreements that require the privatisation of any public services, as trade agreements should not affect these services.
And, the bill prohibits the Government from signing agreements that would undermine the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, so we can ensure that all Australians have the best access to life saving medicines.
This bill prohibits the Government from signing any trade agreements that would undermine our anti-dumping laws.
Dumping is not trade, it's cheating. It's why strong anti-dumping laws are so important.
The bill also prohibits the Government from signing trade agreements that would limit the right of the Commonwealth to regulate in the interest of public welfare or in relation to safe products including stopping the importation of unsafe products.
The bill prohibits the Government from signing any trade agreement that includes procurement provisions that would restrict our ability to:
(a) protect Australia's essential security interests; or
(b) 5benefit local small and medium enterprises; or
(c) protect national treasures; or
(d) implement measures for the health, welfare and economic and social advancement of Indigenous people; or
(e) promote ethical standards and sustainable development though ethical procurement; or
(f) provide for the full, fair and reasonable participation of local enterprises in government contracts as outlined in Commonwealth, State and Territory industry participation policies and successor programs and policies; or
(g) maintain the Australian industry capability programs and its successor programs and policies.
High quality trade agreements should also lead to better working conditions and labour standards, not worse.
That's why this bill also requires the Australian Government to include in all bilateral trade agreements a labour chapter with internationally recognised labour principles.
The Bill also sets out that the Australian Government should seek to include a labour chapter in any regional or multilateral trade agreement it signs.
Labor will be announcing other measures before the end of the year to:
Labor will not abandon Australian workers or surrender Australian sovereignty, as the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison governments have done.
Labor understands that there can be no prosperity without justice for all.
That understanding will always guide the trade policy of a Labor government.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, by 10 am on Wednesday, 24 October 2018, any reviews or reports relating to the implementation of the recommendations made by the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody.
That the Senate acknowledges:
(a) the deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilisation; and
(b) that it is okay to be white.
The Senate divided. [16:18]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) Adani Mining, as part of the Adani Group, is currently being investigated by the Department of the Environment and Energy for potential breach of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Carmichael Mine approval conditions, for alleged unlawful clearing of vegetation and sinking of groundwater dewatering bores, and
(ii) Adani Infrastructure, as part of the Adani Group, has applied for EPBC Act approval for a pipeline to bring water to the mine site for washing of the coal; and
(b) calls on the Minister for the Environment, or her delegate, to not make a decision on the pipeline application until the results of the investigation and subsequent decision on whether to take enforcement action into the alleged mine site breaches has concluded.
The Senate divided. [16:26]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) has recommended, in draft amendments, that organisms that have been altered by SDN-1 techniques (site directed nuclease techniques without a repair template) not be considered as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for the purposes of the Gene Technology Act 2000 ,
(ii) if this recommendation is adopted, traceability of SDN-1 altered organisms will not be required,
(iii) SDN-1 altered organisms will be considered as GMOs within the European Union as a consequence of a recent European Court of Justice ruling,
(iv) the European Union has zero tolerance for unapproved GMOs and the presence of unapproved GMOs in any food product, and therefore traceability for all food imports into the European Union will be required,
(v) a failure to regulate SDN-1 technologies and their presence in the Australian food supply chain could, therefore, potentially jeopardise billions of dollars of agricultural exports to the European Union, and
(vi) adopting the recommendations of the OGTR and removing traceability for SDN-1 techniques could also undermine the state-based moratoriums in place in South Australia and Tasmania on GMOs; and
(b) calls on the ministerial members of the Legislative and Governance Forum on Gene Technology to delay any consideration of the recommendations of the OGTR until the impact of this amendment on the sustainability of Australian agricultural exports and our state and territory GMO moratoriums can be clarified.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The failure of the Government and the Opposition to protect Australian workers from the negative impact of international trade agreements.
That the Senate take note of the document.
These provisions need to be altered to ensure that the Commonwealth law does not purport to override the State law where the donation concerned is used for the purpose of State electoral expenditure. Certainly, if it is used for Commonwealth electoral expenditure, then the Commonwealth law should prevail over the State law.
Telecommunications Legislation Amendment Bill 2018
Dear Mr President
I write with regard to a question I took on notice from Senator Watt on Thursday, 20 September 2018 on the matter of responses to the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee inquiry into Allegations concerning the inappropriate exercise of ministerial powers, with respect to the visa status of au pairs, and related matters.
I am advised that on Wednesday 5 September 2018, officials from the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) attended a three-hour public hearing of the Committee. A total of 27 Questions on Notice (QoN) with multiple subparts were received by the Department in relation to the inquiry. Of these, 24 QoNs resulted from the Department's attendance at the public hearing, with a further three QoNs received by the Department on Wednesday 12 September, Monday 17 September, and Tuesday 18 September.
On Tuesday 11 September, the Department provided responses to the Senate Committee regarding the QoNs that resulted from the Public Hearing on 5 September, including an interim response to QoN IEMP/022 entitled "DLO emails". The interim response indicated that the request for information was being actioned, noting that due regard was being given to the privacy of individuals, names and contact details of Australian Public Service staff referenced in the emails.
On Wednesday 19 September (at 8:46AM), the Department provided a finalised response to the Senate Committee to QoN IEMP/022. This response included all information and departmental records — including emails — from the department official relating to the so-called 'Brisbane' and 'Adelaide' cases. This totalled 167 pages of redacted Departmental records and correspondence.
I therefore reject Senator Watt's assertion that the Department acted disrespectfully towards the Committee or the Senate. I believe that the Department answerts3 the Committee's questions appropriately given their complex and sensitive nature, and that therefore there is no reason for the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to pursue this matter.
I have copied his letter to the Minister for Home Affairs and Senator Watt.
Kind regards
From the Minister for Finance and the Public Service, Senator The Hon Mathias Cormann
That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees, as follows:
Electoral Matters—Joint Standing Committee—
On 30 October 2018—
Discharged—Senator Waters
Appointed—Senator Steele-John
On 1 November 2018—
Discharged—Senator Steele-John
Appointed—Senator Waters
Privileges—Standing Committee—
Discharged—Senator Kitching
Appointed—Senator O’Neill
Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2018
Customs Tariff Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation) Bill 2018
It beggars belief that the Labor caucus would sign off on ratifying the TPP given it's against the party's own policy. The TPP-11 is a disaster for Australian workers.
The TPP is a bad deal for medicine: it's bad for humanitarian medical treatment providers such as Medecins Sans Frontieres, and it's bad for people who need access to affordable medicines around the world …
The revised "Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership" will add US$12 billion per annum to Australia's national income in 2030, or 0.46% of forecast income, an increase described by the report's authors as "relatively modest". It is also forecast to increase overall foreign investment into Australia by just US$6 billion.
… no one ever mentions the additional imports that arise from them, despite the benefits of cheaper imported goods for Australian consumers and business.
Recent changes to Australian gas export and taxation policy serve as reminders that the protections afforded to investors under investment treaties are not only relevant to investors in emerging markets. Investment treaties are also relevant to investors in modern and developed jurisdictions …
The TPP puts globalisation before Australian workers and threatens the fundamentals of our democracy. By destroying thousands of Australian jobs and driving down wages we believe the TPP will lead to higher levels of inequality.
The TPP is a toxic combination of globalization and more power to multinationals ahead of democracy for Australian workers.
Australia must turn away from trade that puts profit before people.
Trade agreements should not undermine the ability of Governments to regulate in the public interest, particularly in regard to essential services like health, education, social services, water and energy.
… it prioritises the interests of private corporations over those of communities. The TPP-11 is not democratic; the negotiations were held in secret to the exclusion of communities and their elected civil society representatives (such as unions), hampers government regulation, and will allow corporations to sue democratically elected governments. The TPP-11, through these negative impacts, will hamper development and will hamper the regions capacity to meet the UN's Sustainable Development Goals.
… … …
Despite repeated claims that the TPP-11 does not affect public services it is clear that the intent of the TPP-11 … is to expand market access and liberalise trade in services, the key policy ingredients required to advance privatisation.
It beggars belief that the Labor caucus would sign off on ratifying the TPP given it's against the party's own policy.
Swiss Pharmaceutical company Novartis is suing the Colombian government over the plans to reduce prices on a patented treatment for leukaemia. The US firm Bilcon won its claim against the Canadian government for US$101 million after a provincial government refused to approve a quarry in an ecologically sensitive area. The French company Veolia is claiming compensation from the Egyptian government for a rise in the minimum wage.
Even if a government wins a case, defending it can take years and cost millions. The US tobacco firm Philip Morris shifted some assets to Hong Kong and used ISDS in an Australia-Hong Kong investment agreement to claim billions in compensation for Australia's plain packaging law. It took more than four years and reportedly cost A$50 million in legal fees for the tribunal to decide that Philip Morris was not a Hong Kong company.
Well I have had concerns about these so called free trade agreements for a number of years. They are not really free trade agreements. Technically they are bilateral preferential trade agreements, so people trade off bits and pieces and it's not true free trade and I have always been concerned that workers need to be considered, the social impact needs to be considered as well as the economic impact.
Labor will oppose low-quality piecemeal trade agreements in favour of fair and transparent multilateral agreements. When multilateral trade negotiations are not making satisfactory progress, Labor will consider high-quality regional or bilateral trade agreements that are in Australia's national interest and that support the multilateral trading system. Trade agreements must be consistent with Australia's social and economic values, be based on widespread consultation, provide for appropriate minimum and enforceable labour and environmental standards, take account of social and economic impacts and allow sovereign governments to make decisions and implement policies in the interests of their citizens.
The Turnbull Government's blind pursuit of the troubled Trans Pacific Partnership agreement will sacrifice workers and Australia's sovereignty for the profits of multinational corporations.
Steve Ciobo has said that the deal is "18 free trade agreements". The Australian people haven't seen the text of one agreement, let alone 18. This process is a mess and makes a mockery of our democratic principles.
The current LNP TPP waives labour market testing and includes clauses that allow foreign companies to sue the Australian government. These clauses are known as ISDS provisions. To waive labour market testing does not put Australian workers first and, quite frankly, is absolutely nonsensical.
We should have a trade agenda that puts working people and fairness at its core. But the Turnbull Government has only ever looked after big business in its trade negotiations.
The TPP is a bad deal that hands more power to big business. It's bad for working people, it's bad for people who rely on affordable medicine, and it's bad for our sovereignty. The only winners are corporations.
We urge parliament to oppose unfettered corporate greed by voting against this deal, and to adopt a trade agenda that will deliver real benefits for working people.
… are disappointed by the ALP's decision to vote for the TPP enabling legislation.
This dodgy deal is opposed by the majority of the Senate crossbench—
meaning it can only pass through the parliament if Labor gives it the green light … The opposition not only has an unprecedented ability to demand a better deal, failing to do so will see them forced to accept responsibility for the significant failings of this agreement. The TPP is all about looking after the big end of town, maximising profits for multinational corporations at the expense of what is best for the Australian public.
We know that there is potential for corporations to use the threat of an investor-state dispute settlement case to deter governments from going down the path of introducing strong new public health measures, and that is a major concern.
We had this debate when Whitlam cut tariffs and again when Hawke and Keating did. We can't go ahead with our broad-based Asia plans by opposing trade liberalisation.
The Senate divided. [21:21]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
Omit all words after "that", insert:
", further consideration of the bills be postponed until the Senate passes a resolution that it is of the opinion that each of the following conditions has been met:
(a) the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation has been re-negotiated to include improved protections for labour rights and the environment;
(b) the Parliament has legislated a prohibition on including investor-state dispute settlement provisions in future trade agreements; and
(c) Australia has a settled climate and energy policy."
The Senate divided. [21:25]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
The Senate divided. [21:29]
(The President—Senator Ryan)]
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (cell at table item 2, column 2), omit the cell, substitute:
[commencement]
Dams do not stop the most severe floods. Wivenhoe Dam did not save Brisbane from flooding in 2011. Flood control dams lead to downstream development on the floodplain that increases risk.