Senator WATSON (4:30 PM) —It is well known in financial and manufacturing circles, and particularly in Amcor itself, that had it not been for the strong action of the Liberal government, Tasmania would have lost two paper mills and the associated jobs. Today we have one of the most hypocritical and inaccurate urgency motions that has ever been presented to this Senate.

We have Senator Murphy portrayed as the great white knight of the wood and paper industry. However, Senator Murphy, I submit to you, apart from a small core within the Amcor group, is a bit of a joke—the man who promises a lot and delivers little, the man who has been responsible for more loss of jobs at those factories than anybody else in Australia, and everybody knows it. The sad joke is the loss of jobs. The other joke is his lack of knowledge about the industry. His continual references to shiny paper, rather than coated paper, are a source of amusement amongst the blue-collar workers at the paper mill.

I suggest in kindness, Senator Murphy, that this urgency motion is not of your own writing. It is my suggestion that the motion came from Mike O'Connor of the CFMEU, who is leading the charge against Amcor and the government. Your comments regrettably come too late.

The CFMEU have at last come out of the woodwork. They did not put a great deal of effort into saving jobs before today. Where were they on the anti-dumping issue? The paper industry lobby group TasPEAC were here in Canberra, but the CFMEU were absent and calm on the issue and it was at the time of mill workers greatest need.

The AMWU fought for its workers; so has TasPEAC. These unionists want to protect their industry. They do not want any regulation that will close the industry down. They are fearful for their jobs. They are fearful of the consequences of action that is being taken today. The workers are fearful of the ultimate ramifications of the CFMEU action because, if we stop that paper pulp coming in, Amcor will walk away as they proposed to do and close their mills. It was the Liberal government that retained those factories—unfortunately, in not the same employment numbers as we would have hoped.

No, Senator Murphy, you are not the spokesman for the electorate at large. You are the spokesman for the CFMEU and sections of the labour movement only. You have created a great amount of havoc through strike action around the country. Who cares if Amcor uses the blocking of imported pulp as an excuse to shut down the remaining Amcor investments at Burnie and Wesley Vale so long as the CFMEU wins? Is this your aim? Is the wellbeing of the people of Burnie and Wesley Vale and their jobs and the welfare of those in the 250 jobs that have been lost at the Burnie pulp mill your aim, or is it is the CFMEU winning at any cost?

When in government in 1992-93, when the pulp mill reduced its work force by 600, Labor took no action at all. Again, in 1995, when the titanium plant closed costing 225 jobs, the Labor Party took absolutely no action. Where was this man who is the originator of this motion? He was at the barricades himself, inciting action, and what was the result? APPM walked away from its investment, and what followed was a substantial downsizing—

Senator Abetz —Six hundred jobs lost.

Senator WATSON —There were 600 jobs lost in a fragile part of Tasmania. And who was responsible? Here we see a man initiating action that could result in the complete closure of that mill, despite the positive actions of the Liberal Party. The Liberal government is committed to working closely with the wood and paper industries. The government wants to encourage investment and create real, long-term jobs, particularly in regional areas.

The wood and paper industry make a substantial contribution to the Australian economy and the Tasmanian economy. The annual turnover exceeds $10 billion, which is about seven per cent of the manufacturing industry, and there are currently 60,000 people employed in this industry. And yet you, Senator Murphy, want to take action that is going to destroy many more of those jobs. The dumping of paper products in Australia has impacted particularly hard on the Tasmanian paper operations. The government's reform of the anti-dumping laws will provide welcome assistance in responding to future dumping cases.

The Liberal government came to office with a commitment to reform the anti-dumping system, a system criticised by the industry on many counts. Our government has delivered on that commitment and the industry now has the toughest anti-dumping legislation deliverable in the world. Prior to that, in supporting anti-dumping action, we arranged for up to 80 per cent of customs officers to be directed to work urgently on assisting Amcor to defeat dumping practices.

The Senate may be interested to know that Senator Murphy and I had a bet about the success of our anti-dumping legislation. Senator Murphy was so dubious about us getting such a bill through parliament by 30 June that he and I had a friendly bet. He did not believe that the Liberal Party could deliver on a successful anti-dumping bill. Now I say to Senator Murphy, put your hand in your pocket and pay up that $5 that you owe me. We got the legislation through. We delivered on our election promise, but yet again Senator Murphy fails to deliver.

In stark contrast with Labor's abysmal record at Burnie, within 48 hours of Amcor announcing the closure of the pulping section, the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) had acted. A cabinet delegation consisting of the Minister for Finance and Administration (Mr Fahey) and the Minister for Social Security (Senator Newman) visited the city to hear the concerns of the workers and the communities. Where were your shadow ministers in similar situations? A package of $600,000 to generate new employment and business opportunities in Burnie has been announced and there will be more initiatives to come. This government is committed to ensuring that the Burnie region has a long and sustainable future. People within the community are working to provide medium- to long-term solutions, and the community welcomes this sort of action. (Time expired)

Senator Ian Campbell —On a point of order, Mr Acting Deputy President, is it against standing orders to have a wager with a presiding officer on a subject before the chamber, and do you have a conflict of interest in making this ruling?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Murphy) —There is no point of order, but I will take advice on that matter later.