|
representatives vote 2019-09-09#3
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-09-20 17:07:54
|
Title
Bills — Customs Amendment (Immediate Destruction of Illicit Tobacco) Bill 2019; Second Reading- Customs Amendment (Immediate Destruction of Illicit Tobacco) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Criticism
Description
<p class="speaker">Richard Marles</p><p>I rise in support of the Customs Amendment (Immediate Destruction of Illicit Tobacco) Bill 2019 and move:</p><p class="italic">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</p>- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2019-09-09.108.1) to amend the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*". Agreeing to read a bill for a second time is the same as agreeing with the main idea of the bill.
- ### Motion text
- > *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:*
- >
- > *"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House is of the opinion that the Government, by failing to bring forward the appropriate legislation in a timely manner, has undermined the bill’s objective of significantly reducing the operational burden on Australian Border Force of implementing the illicit tobacco reforms".*
<p class="italic">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House is of the opinion that the Government, by failing to bring forward the appropriate legislation in a timely manner, has undermined the bill’s objective of significantly reducing the operational burden on Australian Border Force of implementing the illicit tobacco reforms".</p><p>As members of this House will recall, the government announced in the 2018-19 budget that it would tighten tobacco border controls as part of the black economy package. A range of bills relating to the black economy package were passed during the previous parliament. As a result of that package of bills, tobacco importers are now required to pay customs duty on tobacco products upon importing them into Australia. In other words, there is no longer an option to import tobacco products and hold them in a licensed warehouse to defer the payment of duties.</p><p>From 1 July 2019, tobacco products became prohibited imports, and tobacco products can only be imported into Australia with a valid import permit. Tobacco products imported without a valid permit will be seized at the border. To ensure that efficient border operations can continue under these arrangements, additional amendments to the Customs Act are proposed in the bill currently before the House. The Customs Act currently requires seized prohibited imports to be stored for a minimum of 30 days before they can be disposed of. Managing tobacco products as a prohibited import will result in a demonstrable increase in work at the border that may impact the government's ability to effectively regulate tobacco permit conditions and other border operations. So this bill seeks to remedy that and allow for the timely destruction of seized tobacco. In fact, in the last parliament, this very same bill's explanatory memorandum stated that this bill:</p><p class="italic">… would empower the Comptroller-General of Customs to cause tobacco products seized as prohibited imports—</p><p>from 1 July 2019—</p><p class="italic">to be dealt with in a manner he or she considers appropriate, including the immediate destruction of the goods.</p><p>The explanatory memorandum also said that the bill would:</p><p class="italic">… significantly reduce the operational burden of implementing the illicit tobacco reforms.</p><p>Labor supports this bill. We support the effective disruption of illicit tobacco supply chains and efforts to deny criminal groups access to illicit profits that fund other criminal and black economy activities. And we support the important work of our border protection personnel. But it should not go unremarked by this House that we are well past 1 July and only now is the parliament dealing with legislation to allow the Comptroller-General of Customs to do their job effectively.</p><p>As I've said in the past, this is a government that finds itself completely surprised to be sitting where it is, and with no real idea what it's going to do. It's a government without an agenda and without a vision. And here we are today with another example of the government asleep at the wheel. Instead of ensuring that the necessary legislation was in place to reduce the operational burden on Australian Border Force from changes to illicit tobacco arrangements, the government dropped the ball. Instead of ensuring that this legislation was passed expeditiously by the previous parliament, the government let the bill lapse. Those opposite appear to have forgotten that the fundamentals of government are not about winning elections, not about scare campaigns and not about endless spin; the fundamentals are about actually governing, and that means competent management of basic legislative tasks—basic tasks that seem to be beyond this government.</p><p>What confidence can Australians have that this government is looking out for their interests when it seems incapable of managing these most basic tasks? While the government is asleep at the wheel, Australians are facing very real challenges: the cost of essentials is skyrocketing, electricity prices are increasing, child care has become unaffordable, working families are struggling and parts of this great country are living through the worst drought on record. And all of this is happening at a time when our economy is facing significant challenges, yet this government doesn't have a genuine plan to protect jobs, to stimulate the economy and to promote economic growth. It doesn't seem to understand that people are worried about their wages and their job security, and it doesn't even appear capable of effectively managing basic legislation through the parliament.</p> <p class="speaker">Mark Coulton</p><p>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order—on relevance. The shadow minister is straying way off the topic of the bill here in front of us at the moment. I ask that he return to the bill in front of us.</p> <p class="speaker">Kevin Hogan</p><p>I take the point of order, and I'll listen more intently to the member for Corio.</p> <p class="speaker">Richard Marles</p><p>Australians deserve better than this, and it's high time this government got on with governing in the national interest and not its own interest.</p><p>Notwithstanding the government's tardy handling of this legislation, Labor will always work constructively on issues such as those contemplated in this bill. Disrupting illicit tobacco supply chains is unquestionably in the national interest, and it is critical that our border security officials have the powers they need to do the job we ask of them efficiently and effectively. That is why Labor supports this bill.</p> <p class="speaker">Lucy Wicks</p><p>Is the amendment seconded?</p> <p class="speaker">Andrew Giles</p><p>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</p> <p class="speaker">Lucy Wicks</p><p>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Corio has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Craig Kelly</p><p>I am pleased to rise this afternoon to speak on the Customs Amendment (Immediate Destruction of Illicit Tobacco) Bill 2019.</p><p>We need this bill because we in this nation have decided, correctly, that we want to crack down and reduce the consumption of tobacco. We know of the adverse health effects that it has upon the Australian population and the costs that it puts on our hospital and medical system. What we've done, in a bipartisan policy from both sides of this House, is decide to increase the retail price of cigarettes through increasing the excise and the duty. So the price of cigarettes in Australia is now the dearest in the world.</p><p>As an example: a pack of 20 Marlboros in Australia costs $27. For a smoker who has one a day—one packet at a day, that is—that's a cost of close to $10,000. However, that exact same packet that costs $27 in Australia costs the equivalent of $16.67 in the UK and $9.51 in the USA. In Vietnam, the packet of cigarettes that retails for $27 in Australia is available retail for the equivalent of A$1.47.</p><p>Going down this track has been good news for the budget. We've had smokers add an extra $12.5 billion a year to our government's bottom line. But in doing so, our history tells us that whenever you put high rates of duty and high rates of tax on something—when the government steps in like that does—you create a dangerous black market. And that's, unfortunately, what has happened. But we knew that.</p><p>I have just a few recent examples. Last week, Australian Border Force officers intercepted 670 kilograms of tobacco illegally shipped from China. It was rough-cut tobacco that was found in a shipment of floor tiles in a container that arrived on 30 August. The Australian Border Force says that an examination of the consignment revealed that 672 kilograms of tobacco was 'hidden inside boxes between layers of tiles', representing 'more than $800,000 evaded in duty and GST'. So the more we put the price of cigarettes up with the taxes, the more incentives we give to the black market and we give to criminals to get involved in this illicit trade, so we have to have the response from the policing end, and there is a significant issue with this.</p><p>A recent story from the <i>Australian Financial Review</i> reads:</p><p class="italic">Illegal tobacco sales are flourishing in suburban and rural shopping centres, outraging retailers and frustrating renewed government efforts to crack down on a trade estimated to cost taxpayers up to $3.8 billion a year.</p><p class="italic">A <i>Weekend AFR</i> investigation reveals well-stocked retail outlets offering a wide range of cheap illegal Asian and Middle Eastern and untaxed popular brands, such as Marlboro, selling for a fraction of the price they would in legal outlets.</p><p>I can vouch that in my electorate, I think in almost any suburb, I could go and find a retailer that is selling illegal product, and I'm sure that most of those here in this chamber would be able to do exactly the same thing. That's why this legislation is necessary.</p><p>The Customs Act 1901 currently requires seized prohibited imports to be stored for a minimum of 30 days before destruction. This storage requirement, together with the legislative and administrative requirements for prohibited imports, impacts upon border operations and limits the ability of the government to regulate and manage illicit tobacco effectively. This bill will amend the Customs Act to empower the Comptroller-General of Customs to deal with seized tobacco in a manner that she or he considers appropriate, including immediate destruction of the goods. Similar controls already exist for other products, including seized psychoactive substances and prohibited serious drug alternatives. These amendments will improve the handling of seized illicit tobacco, resulting in effective regulation of tobacco permit conditions and enabling greater focus on targeting illicit tobacco. This bill will improve financial outcomes for the government and will enhance the implementation of new tobacco measures.</p><p>This simply can't be about revenue raising. The ultimate goal is to drive down the rates of smoking. Thankfully, we have the recent KPMG reports which show that under this government there has been a recent significant decline in smoking rates across the nation. The government is having success. Our policies are working, but we need to continue to look at the law-enforcement side to make sure we give our law-enforcement agencies the ability to crack down on these illegal syndicates that are continuing to exploit our laws, to exploit smokers and to engage in this illegal activity. Therefore I'm pleased to commend this bill to the House.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|