Mr LEE(5.23 p.m.) —Like the previous speaker, the honourable member for Isaacs (Mr Wilton), I would like to express a number of concerns about the measures which the Minister for Transport and Regional Development (Mr Sharp) has brought before the parliament. I want to begin by saying that from our perspective it appears that there is no rational basis for the government's bringing forward of these measures. We can have no conclusion other than that this minister is driven by an ideological obsession with the Maritime Union of Australia.

The minister has had many opportunities when in opposition to attack the MUA and look at ways he could try to undermine the previous government's attempts to improve efficiency on the waterfront and amongst Australian flag and crewed ships. The Howard government now having been elected, this minister is attempting to set out on a strategy that will have a number of very deleterious effects for the Australian economy as a whole and for many people who are concerned about the future of the Australian shipping industry. I would like to make a few comparisons between the quite modest protection provided to the Australian maritime industry and the protection provided to other industries in the Australian economy.

Mr Sharp —Modest?

Mr LEE —The minister interjects sarcastically, implying that the assistance provided to the maritime industry is not modest. I can certainly say that if you compare it with the assistance given to the car industry or for textile production it is modest. Why do we on this side of the House think it is important to have a deliberate industry policy that encourages investment in motor vehicle manufacture, in parts production and exports, and in textile production? The answer is that we think they are an essential part of the Australian economy and that a lot of jobs and investment can flow and a lot of export dollars can be earned for Australia by having viable motor vehicle and textile production industries. That is why we have a special tariff protection scheme for those two industries. We have a special tax concession to encourage people to invest in research and development—150 per cent tax deduction for investment in R&D. We think it is good for the economy to encourage investment in scientific research and development.

The previous Labor government tried to encourage investment in lots of information technology industries, a policy I hope this government continues. The great irony for us, throughout this whole debate, is to see National Party member follow Liberal Party member. They represent rural electorates and on many previous occasions have been in this chamber arguing for special assistance for rural industries because, they argue, they are important for the Australian economy. Naturally, being the reasonable people we are, on occasions we are convinced that various important sections of the rural industry do need special assistance at certain times of international cycles and demand for commodities.

We say that the maritime industry is at least as important as the car industry, the textile industry or the agricultural industry and as important as the encouraging of investment in research and development. For all those reasons we argue quite strongly that the measures the government has introduced into the House will undermine for all time one of our most crucial service industries. It is going to be a backward step if implemented by the government. If it can persuade the parliament to agree to these measures that will be regretted for decades to come.

In some way the minister has tried to suggest that the capital grants provided to companies that invest in new ships is, in some way, special assistance to the Australian maritime industry. The Labor Party has argued throughout this debate that many OECD countries provide these capital grants. Even your conservative brothers and sisters in the United Kingdom provide grants to British shipowners when they go out and invest in new shipping.

It has been very important for the Australian maritime industry that we have tried to encourage investment in new plant and equipment and in new ships and that we have tried to ensure that we move towards having the most efficient ships possible. That could only be achieved by encouraging the updating and modernising of our fleet. That went hand in hand with the reduction in the average number of seafarers on our ships. The number has fallen from an average of 31.6 in 1986 to only 18.4 in 1995 as a result of an investment of over $2 billion which has been committed to investment in new ships. As a result, we have an Australian fleet that is half the age of the world fleet.

Having that government industry policy has been good for Australia. It has encouraged investment in new ships. I have to say that the impression the minister for transport tries to encourage, that we have an inefficient shipping fleet, is just not true. Our manning levels have improved dramatically, particularly when you look at the LNG vessels carrying our LNG to markets in Japan. The Australian ship that is owned and staffed by Australian seafarers is able to provide a much lower cost structure than that provided by Japanese seafarers—no offence to our Japanese customers.

That is a clear demonstration of the fact that in Australia in the 13 years of Labor government we were prepared to implement reforms that allowed the Australian maritime industry to become more efficient. The fact that the minister for transport gives no credit to the sacrifices that have been made by people involved in the Australian maritime industry does him little credit.

I say to the seafarers living in my electorate who have had to undertake new training and to change the way they work when they are on vessels at sea that it is to their great credit that they have been prepared to work, often in cooperation with employers, to help develop a competitive industry and to make these sacrifices over the last 13 years. But I bet that when this minister for transport sets out on an ideologically driven campaign to destroy the Maritime Union of Australia there will be no further reason for cooperation between sea farers and employers and no further reason for cooperation between seafarers and the Howard government. I am very concerned that it is going to result in stoppages and in disruption to Australia's exports in future years, because of this ideological obsession that this government and this minister have.

I think there is a tremendous amount of confusion in the wider community about the former government's proposal to provide employers—shipowners—with a taxable grant equal to the PAYE tax, which would otherwise be paid by seafarers. The Liberal and National parties try to create the impression that in some way the seamen are no longer paying PAYE tax. They try to create the impression that in some way the seafarers are getting some tax concession, because of discussions that took place in the last parliament between the ACTU, the government and shipping owners. Every member of this House should understand that the grant was payable to the shipping owners, not to the seamen. The grant was payable to allow the shipowners to have a lower cost structure to allow them to be more competitive with other ships that are competing on the routes to and from Australia.

We think it is important that Australia does not have a massive deficit in services. We know that through the massive growth in the tourism industry in the last 13 years, and I hope it continues to grow, Australia has a services surplus. If this government and this minister seek to undermine the efficiency of the Australian maritime industry, we will no longer have all of those Australian flag and Australian manned ships generating export dollars for Australia. What will happen is that those ships will be replaced ship by ship by vessels that have foreign flags and by vessels that have foreign seamen.

All of us know that there have been a number of reports by committees of this parliament that have expressed great concern about the ships of shame and about the levels of safety that exist in some ships that have foreign flags. Despite the intensified efforts of people who are concerned about the safety of those ships, you can never ensure that foreign flag ships are as safe as Australian flag ships. You can never ensure that the seafarers who are working on those ships have the same very high standards of training that the Australian seamen have.

For all of those reasons, we can quite rightly be greatly concerned about the environmental threat that will be posed by more foreign flag ships plying their way around the Australian coastline in future years as a result of measures this government has introduced. For all of those reasons, those of us on this side of the House will strongly oppose these measures. The minister at the table, through this ideological obsession he has of trying to destroy the Maritime Union of Australia, is embarking on a path that will do Australia great damage in future years. He will have to answer to this parliament in future days about the damage he causes to industrial relations in this industry and in many others.