

- Title
DAIRY PRODUCE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMENTARY ASSISTANCE) BILL 2001
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
25-06-2001
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
39
- Electorate
Queensland
- Interjector
CHAIRMAN, The
- Page
25026
- Party
AD
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Woodley, Sen John
- Stage
In Committee
- Type
- Context
Bills
- System Id
chamber/hansards/2001-06-25/0120
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- BUSINESS
- DAIRY PRODUCE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMENTARY ASSISTANCE) BILL 2001
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
High Court of Australia: Decisions
(Ludwig, Sen Joe, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Economy: Government Policy
(Watson, Sen John, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Business Tax Reform
(Sherry, Sen Nick, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Industry Development: Technology
(Lightfoot, Sen Ross, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Business Tax Reform: Survey
(Schacht, Sen Chris, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Telstra: Job Losses
(Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Business Tax Reform: Survey
(McKiernan, Sen Jim, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Medicare: Prenatal Genetic Screening
(Harradine, Sen Brian, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Business Tax Reform
(Collins, Sen Jacinta, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Australian Federal Police
(Payne, Sen Marise, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Business Tax Reform
(McLucas, Sen Jan, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Roads: Scoresby Freeway
(Allison, Sen Lyn, Macdonald, Sen Ian)
-
High Court of Australia: Decisions
- ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
- PRIVILEGE
- ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- PETITIONS
- NOTICES
- LEAVE OF ABSENCE
- COMMITTEES
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- WHALING
- PARLIAMENTARY ZONE
- COMMITTEES
- DELEGATION REPORTS
- PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS
- APPROPRIATION (HIH ASSISTANCE) BILL 2001
- TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 3) 2001
-
APPROPRIATION (PARLIAMENTARY DEPARTMENTS) BILL (NO. 1) 2001-2002
APPROPRIATION BILL (NO. 1) 2001-2002
APPROPRIATION BILL (NO. 2) 2001-2002 -
DAIRY PRODUCE LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMENTARY ASSISTANCE) BILL 2001
- Second Reading
-
In Committee
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Woodley, Sen John
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- Woodley, Sen John
- Harris, Sen Len
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Harradine, Sen Brian
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- Woodley, Sen John
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Woodley, Sen John
- Harris, Sen Len
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Harris, Sen Len
- Woodley, Sen John
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- Woodley, Sen John
- Harris, Sen Len
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- Forshaw, Sen Michael
- Harris, Sen Len
- Woodley, Sen John
- Macdonald, Sen Ian
- ADJOURNMENT
- Adjournment
- DOCUMENTS
- PROCLAMATIONS
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
Treasury Portfolio: Motor Vehicles
(Cook, Sen Peter, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Minister for Forestry and Conservation: Chairmanship
(Brown, Sen Bob, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Office of Film and Literature Classification
(Greig, Sen Brian, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Defence: Supersonic Missile Launch Facility
(Brown, Sen Bob, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Drugs: Premarin
(Bartlett, Sen Andrew, Minchin, Sen Nick)
-
Treasury Portfolio: Motor Vehicles
Page: 25026
Senator WOODLEY (8:12 PM)
—I have listened carefully to the minister and I understand the government's reticence at this point, but the reason I am supporting the opposition's amendment and have proposed my own is that the evidence was very strong. The interesting thing is that the evidence came from the industry, and particularly from the Queensland Dairy Organisation. The submission from them was signed by Mike Prendergast, the CEO of that organisation, whose chair is Pat Rowley, who was the architect of the original package. If anyone would know where the flaws are in the original package, it is certainly the QDO, Pat Rowley and Mike Prendergast.
While I hear what the minister is saying, I do not think those two persons are irresponsible. In fact, they proposed that the bottom figure be 18 per cent. So in proposing 25 per cent I can hear what the minister is saying, but I am not persuaded to fall back from this amendment. I might add that the peak body in South Australia supported the proposition as well. I am not sure what figure they put on it but they certainly criticised the 35 per cent. I spoke to farmers in New South Wales who also supported the fact that 35 per cent was just too high. That includes people from the Australian Milk Producers Association, AMPA. Across the industry—not just individual farmers but across the industry—those peak bodies that were intimately involved in the formation of the original package have come to us and put a very convincing case for the 35 per cent to be lowered. I have been prepared to fall back from the 18 per cent and go with the opposition's 25 per cent as the lower threshold. But the industry itself was seeking a lower threshold than the 25 per cent, so I am not sure that we can go any lower than that. Whilst not wanting to hold up the committee, I thought I would just offer that in the debate.
Can I indicate that when I said that I would not put my amendments listed in that first section of the running sheet, those are my amendments Nos 1 to 4. My amendment No. 5 deals with another issue, and I would need to put that after we have dealt with these particular amendments.