Senator RIDGEWAY (Deputy Leader of the Australian Democrats) (2:52 AM) —Mr Acting Deputy President, I also want to seek leave to have my remarks on the Export Market Development Grants Amendment Bill 2002 incorporated in Hansard, but I want to seek some advice from you first. I have a second reading amendment. In the context of incorporation, how might that be dealt with?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Ferguson)—You can seek leave to incorporate your speech and then move the amendment.

Senator RIDGEWAY —I seek leave to have my speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

I rise to speak in favour of the bill and to suggest some additional changes.

The EMDG Scheme has been in operation since 1974 providing funds to small and medium size businesses in order to assist them with the cost of promoting and developing export markets.

A range of industries, small and medium, have already accessed these funds.

While we would commend to the Government, the need for investment in small export businesses, the Australian Democrats believe that it is also vital that there is also long-term investment in health, education and the environment.

My colleague Senator Bartlett has previously raised the matter of inclusion of exemptions in the assistance package recognising these same concerns.

The amendment I will move today is an attempt to do the same. The Democrats want the Export Market Development Grants Scheme to represent a more comprehensive collection of community values.

Currently, the scheme allows support of businesses that export products made from native forests.

Currently the scheme also allows support of industries that develop, produce and export fossil fuels—therefore increasing our greenhouse emissions. Such a scheme should not be used to assist business operations which could cause long-term environmental damage.

Although there is no indication that fossil fuel exports comprise a major part of the Scheme, grants to the fossil fuel industry have occurred. The Australian Democrats believe this practice must not continue into the future.

Currently, the scheme provides no ethical framework for assessing grant applications. This means exporters of guns are just as likely to be funded in the same fashion as exporters of educational software.

This situation demonstrates that there is a need to have an ethical framework within which the funding decisions are made.

Accordingly I put forward a second reading amendment to reflect this, and has already been circulated in the chamber.

Having said that, it is important to remember that the program has changed in structure and orientation. It is not set in stone.

And with each review, the focus of the scheme has been modified to assist SMEs and improve the effectiveness of the scheme as a trade stimulant.

We are aware that the Scheme itself has been operating for over 25 years. It has obviously been successful at many levels, but the Australian Democrats believe it is time for such subsidy schemes to become smarter and more representative of community concerns and values.

Regarding the amendment in front of us to increase the minimum grant from $2500 to $5000, I believe this offers a welcomed increase in support for businesses who are able to access this scheme.

By most accounts the EMDG Scheme has been a success. Recent reviews indicate that the Scheme has helped develop an export culture, has assisted businesses establish products and reputations and has resulted in an increase in export earnings.

The Australian Democrats believe further increases in export opportunities are to be commended and supported.

Again, the Australian Democrats will support the passage of this amendment bill.

Senator RIDGEWAY —I move this second reading amendment, which has been circulated in the chamber:

At the end of the motion, add “but the Senate is of the opinion that export market development grants should not be used to facilitate the depletion of fossil fuels, the logging of native forests or the promotion of unethical business practices”.