Senator STOTT DESPOJA(8.11 p.m.) —by leave—I move:

(1)   Clause 11, page 8 (lines 23 to 26), omit paragraph (a).

(2)   Clause 12, page 10 (after line 13), at the end of the clause, add:

   (5)   The fourth exception is that the principle does not affect the operation of any laws of an Australian jurisdiction regarding the goods themselves, including, for example, requirements relating to their production, composition, quality or performance, so long as:

      (a)   those laws apply equally to goods produced in or imported into the jurisdiction; and

      (b)   those laws are directed at matters affecting health and safety of persons in the jurisdiction or at preventing, minimising or regulating environmental pollution (including air, water, noise or soil pollution) in the jurisdiction.

First of all, the first amendment omits paragraph (a) of clause 11, which contains requirements for goods that do not need to be complied with such as standards for the `production, composition, quality or performance'. This arguably includes product safety standards, which are set out in the Trade Practices Act. The Democrats and I think it is essential to remove this paragraph.

Clause 10 of this bill is the operative provision while clause 11 adds further requirements. These requirements should not include standards with the effect of ignoring goods standards about safety, production, composition, quality or performance, et cetera. Excluding paragraph (a) will not change the effectiveness of the operative clauses of this bill but will require those laws which are to be repealed by the operation of this bill to be identified.

I have actually sought from the government, in particular from Minister Moore, a list of all the laws which are affected by this particular paragraph. I have been informed that there is no such list and that there is no certainty as to which laws will be overwritten by this particular paragraph. So, to get around this problem, I have proposed an amendment to clause 12 which would maintain the goods model proposed by the bill. Clause 12 sets out criteria that need to be complied with unless specifically excluded from the operation of this bill.

Finally, the Australian standards are a minimum requirement. Any goods that meet this lower standard will not be affected by this particular amendment. However, this amendment will make sure that all those laws which are affected by this provision which have not been identified will not be done away with. I have undertaken a cursory review of the Commonwealth laws that will be affected and the amendments proposed by both the Democrats and the Greens show that there are laws which would have been overridden by this bill.

Amendment No. 2, if I may address that now, adds a new subclause to clause 12 which excludes the production, composition, quality or performance of goods from the operation of the TTMR principle. This maintains the goods model proposed by requiring goods to comply with Australian standards about safety, production, composition, quality or performance, et cetera, as those laws relate to health, safety and environmental pollution.

I have set out before the reasons I believe this clause is essential, and I did so mainly in my second reading address. I do not believe it will alter significantly the goods model proposed by the bill. I say again that, unless this provision is included, a range of unidentified laws will be overridden by this bill.

The Trade Practices Act amendment that I propose proves that there are laws which should have been maintained but would have been lost. I do not accept that this Senate would consider it appropriate to introduce legislation that will have unknown and mostly unwarranted effects. To make sure this does not happen, I urge all senators to support the amendments I have moved, particularly this one which recognises that it does not alter significantly the effect of the goods model that is set out in this bill.