Mr SIDEBOTTOM (4:49 PM) —Let us note the litany of alleged mistakes related to this issue. Let us give the Minister for Forestry and Conservation the benefit of the doubt that this was indeed just a mistake, a blunder—inadvertent and dumb but not deliberate or deceitful. Firstly, what do we make of the Prime Minister's media release of the 31 May 1999 noting the change of policy regarding the GST package which proposed to extend the off-road uses of diesel which would qualify under the DFR? Not only does the PM's release identify concession industries which specifically do not include the forest industries but, as if to reinforce the point, to specifically exclude the timber industry, it is actually named or identified as not to receive full credits—`but not for construction, power generation, manufacturing or forestry'. No benefit of the doubt here, Minister.

What of the Customs and Excise Amendment (Diesel Fuel Rebate Scheme) Bill 1999, which was passed by the Senate on 28 June 1999? This bill specifically limited the amount of rebate to 35/43 of the diesel used in forestry. No benefit of the doubt here, Minister. What of Minister Anderson when he commenced the second reading speech by stating that the Customs and Excise Amendment (Diesel Fuel Rebate Scheme) Bill 1999:

. . . implements changes to the Diesel Fuel Rebate Scheme agreed with the Australian Democrats as part of the package of environmental measures that will now accompany the introduction of the new tax system on 1 July 2000.

No interjection from our Minister for Forestry and Conservation. No shouts from the floor of, `Hey! Hang on a minute, there's a mistake here. Hey John! You've missed out the forestry industry. Stop your speech and save me having to be humiliated by introducing an amendment. Hey, stop!' No benefit of the doubt here, Minister.

What about the media release issued by Chris Althaus of the Forestry Protection Society on 3 July 1999? I quote:

FPS members are outraged at an apparent backroom deal with the Democrats that has singled out forestry for an 8 cents per litre penalty on the diesel fuel rebate whereas all other users of diesel such as primary producers receive the full rebate of 43 cents per litre.

This is Chris Althaus, who, like his colleagues in Tasmania, Barry Chipman and Christine O'Connor, is alert to impediments to the operations of the forestry industry and is `committed to encouraging regional, economic and jobs growth in an innovative timber industry, whilst also balancing responsible environmental concerns'—the very objectives the minister lists in the amendments. The FPS saw the dud, but the minister didn't. Surely this defies belief. Didn't the minister see the FPS media release condemning the Democrat-Coalition deal? Didn't he receive a copy?

I know how effectively the FPS lobby their cause. You, Minister, would have been a prime target and let me assure you they rarely miss their target. No benefit of the doubt here, Minister. This clearly demonstrates the truth of the situation: (1) the Democrats demanded the exclusion of the forest industry from the full DFR; (2) the PM and Minister Anderson dudded the timber industry, either with your complicit knowledge, Minister, or despite you; (3) the Democrats were appeased by this exclusion and the deal was done; (4) the FPS, CFMEU, AMU, NAFI and supporters of the forest industries strenuously objected to this discrimination against the timber industry and forced the government to correct its discriminatory exclusion of the timber industry from a full credit of the DFR; and (5) the government has now reneged on its deal with the Democrats. Its `mistake' has been publicly acknowledged. Minister, you cannot expect the benefit of the doubt on this issue. It is either incompetence or complicity.