Senator MARGETTS(12.24 p.m.) —These amendments from the opposition relate to salt, as does opposition amendment No. 15. Fundamentally, if things are either included or excluded from the rebate on an arbitrary basis, which we argue, salt production is included. But, if we are going to include it, it seems somewhat superfluous and illogical to say that salt production attracts a rebate but then say that taking it through to the final value added phase of beneficiation is not included. Most beneficiation involves a preparation of minerals to a form which is marketable.

There is no substantial market for dirty salt, as there is little market for low grade ore. There is a substantial value adding in the process of washing salt and a substantial market for clean salt. The government, in an effort to justify cutting out the second washing of salt, has created an amendment that says that no regard is to be had to any market considerations. What does that mean? There is a market for bauxite and a market for alumina. In fact, bauxite is exported from Weipa while WA aluminium ores are almost all exported as alumina. This is a market consideration, since there is clearly a market for both. But the Weipa bauxites run to a tonne of alumina per two tonnes of bauxite and the WA alumina runs to a tonne of alumina to three tonnes of bauxite.

The reason it is processed to alumina is in large part because the ore is of low grade and it is cheaper to remove the two tonnes of red mud from the tonne of alumina before you ship it. In addition, Weipa exports bauxite because there are other refineries for conversion of bauxite to alumina much nearer than for the producers of bauxite in south-west WA other than the ones they have built for themselves. There is also the ready availability of power and infrastructure for refining which is available in WA and not in Weipa, which is another market consideration.

The conversion or non-conversion of bauxite to alumina is almost solely a market decision. Is it therefore the case that such a conversion is not a beneficiation? The point is that almost any beneficiation has regard to market considerations. A purer form of a substance is nearly always more valuable but various market considerations—transport distance, labour costs, available infrastructure, tax regimes which differ from nation to nation—are all commercial considerations which affect whether beneficiation is done here or elsewhere.

A purer form of substance may also have other uses. Clean sea salt is different from unwashed salt and has different uses. High purity silica has different properties and can be converted to special ceramic products like bearings and hip joints. High purity silica is not a final product, and I would like to think that the process of producing it is beneficiation. On the lack of logic of the government's approach, I would like to say that the Greens (WA) will be supporting the opposition's amendment in this regard.