|
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Additional comments by the Australian Labor Party
1.1
Labor Senators agree with the committee's majority
report and broadly endorse the committee's comments and recommendations.
However, Labor Senators wish to make some additional comments in relation to
the Accredited Client Program (ACP).
1.2
Labor Senators question the merits and effectiveness of
the revised ACP, as proposed in Schedule 5 of the Bill,
particularly given the lack of industry support. Labor Senators are particularly
concerned that the Bill contains what can only
be described as a complete about-face by the Federal Government in relation to
duty deferral. Such a major change to a fundamental part of the original ACP
proposal, which has been provided for in legislation since 2001, is undesirable.
1.3
The fact is, the proposed scheme is a broken promise to
industry which is at odds with both the consultation process and commitments
contained in existing legislation. It is also a change of much greater
consequence than the committee was led to believe during the course of its
inquiry. Moreover, Labor Senators believe that the practical repercussions of
the changes are exacerbated by the failure of the Federal Government to fully engage
all relevant areas of industry, beyond a highly select group, in consultations
on the revised model.
1.4
Labor Senators consider that the ACP would be more
successful in achieving the aims of trade and security benefits for government
and industry if it were designed to attract the participation of all companies,
both large and small. This is particularly relevant in a security sense since
small volume importers may carry large security risks.
1.5
In this context, Labor Senators note the combined
effect of the US Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) and Customs-Trade
Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) systems with its two distinct arms for
meeting the requirements of the WCO Framework. That is:
-
real incentives to enter the ACE scheme,
including a monthly statement and payment capability, which potentially allows deferral
of duty payments for more than 45 days; and
-
a strong focus on security through C-TPAT, the joint
US Government-business initiative which aims to build cooperative relationships
in order to strengthen overall supply chain security (with strict security
standards applicable to all relevant 'links' in the import chain) and border
security, with corresponding additional trade facilitation benefits for C-TPAT
members (for example, less inspections and priority processing).[168]
1.6
When contrasted with the clear trade and security
benefits of the US
systems, the obvious weaknesses and vulnerabilities of the Australian equivalents
– Cargo Management Re-engineering (CMR) and the proposed ACP – are heightened
even further. In the case of the ACP, Labor Senators are of the view that there
are few, if any, incentives to attract participants at the outset. This will do
little to facilitate trade and, perhaps most significantly, will do even less
to enhance supply chain security. Implicitly, an ACP tailored towards large
high-volume importers can degrade the strength of supply chain security since other
relevant 'links in the chain' will not be required to adhere to relevant ACP
security standards. As a result, Labor Senators are unconvinced that the
proposed ACP will provide anything more than lip-service to the requirements of
the WCO Framework.
1.7
Labor Senators also question how the Federal Government
intends to develop the ACP further from this point. Since essential elements of
the ACP are yet to be finalised, it is unclear what steps will be taken to
achieve the final product. This is particularly pertinent given the low
industry support for the scheme. Labor Senators strongly encourage the Federal
Government to issue a public statement of direction with respect to the ACP and
to encourage full-scale industry involvement in future development of the
scheme.
Senator
Patricia Crossin
Deputy Chair
Senator Linda Kirk
Senator
Joseph Ludwig
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 2 August 2006 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
