Mr TRUSS (Customs and Consumer Affairs) (9:31 AM) —I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

The proposed amendments to the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Administration) Act 1992 will, if enacted, provide five years protection for undisclosed test and/or other data submitted to the National Registration Authority for agricultural and veterinary chemicals for the evaluation of a new active constituent for an agricultural or veterinary chemical product. Such data will not be available for reference by a commercial competitor—for example, a generic product manufacturer—without the agreement of the originator of the data.

In the vast majority of cases the five-year data protection period will lapse before the expiry of the patent term, thereby having no effect on the marketing of generic products. It will, however, remove any doubt about whether Australia is fulfilling its obligations under article 39(3) of the World Trade Organisation Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.

The government announced on 11 December 1996 that it interpreted article 39(3) of TRIPs as requiring Australia to provide protection from unfair commercial use for undisclosed test and/or other data submitted in an application for approval in respect of a new active constituent, that is, a new chemical entity.

This bill also repeals the Dried Vine Fruits Equalization Act 1978. The repeal will cease the current equalisation of export returns for dried vine fruits from 1 January 1999. As equalisation currently occurs over the course of a season, with returns calculated at the last export of fruit from that season, the repeal allows for the continued operation of equalisation for the previous 1998 season.

The dried vine fruits industry is the only commodity which continues to operate an equalisation scheme. The industry now contends that, in the prevailing market circumstances, equalisation arrangements are inappropriate and mask market signals and inhibit industry and marketing innovation. The industry peak body, the Australian Dried Fruits Association, has requested the termination of the scheme.

The bill amends the Export Control Act 1982 to ensure that Australia's export control legislation provides appropriate coverage for contemporary administrative arrangements. Under current export inspection arrangements there is a strong move for exporters to assume more responsibility for the quality of their product under quality systems approved and supervised by AQIS.

The amendments to the Export Control Act 1982 in this bill seek to facilitate this move by allowing for the appropriate coverage of these systems in delegated legislation and by strengthening the enforcement powers in the act in line with Commonwealth law administration policy.

The purpose of the amendment to the Imported Food Control Act 1992 is to clarify some aspects of the act which have previously been confusing and to enable consistent application of the act across areas which have previously been left open.

The amendment is sought by the government as a result of inconsistencies being found by officers working with the act. As a result of the amendment, AQIS anticipates a more effective and efficient service to industry as it clarifies areas of the act that have previously been in doubt.

The specific issues which will be addressed by these amendments are as follows. The compensation amendment will allow importers to claim recompense from the government for food which, as a result of the inspection, has been rendered unfit for the purpose for which it was imported. This will mean that where, as a result of sampling, the food cannot be sold on the market or has been damaged significantly, the owner of the goods can claim compensation for the value lost.

The offence amendment will cover a procedural loophole in the legislation. At this time a penalty exists for dealing with a food before a food control certificate is issued and a penalty exists for dealing with a food contrary to a direction under the act after the inspection advice is issued. However, the time between the issue of a food control certificate and the issue of the inspection advice is not covered by the act. This amendment will cover that loophole.

The amendment addresses the position of food imported as trade samples. Often small quantities of food are brought into Australia to evaluate their market potential. The samples are not, however, released onto the domestic market. The samples generally exceed the volume and weight prescribed in subsection 7(2) of the act as food imported for private consumption.

It is considered appropriate for the secretary of the department to have the power to permit the importation without inspection of trade samples with a weight/volume limitation of 20 kilograms/20 litres, except in the case of concentrated liquids and moisture reduced foods where 2 kilograms/2 litres should apply, and spices for which the limit should be 1 kilogram, as in regulation 4 of the Imported Foods Control Regulations.

Although it may be argued that provision could be made for trade samples in section 7 in the same manner as provision is made for food imported for private consumption, AQIS would prefer the introduction of a system involving specific approval of particular samples for importation without inspection to ensure strict control is maintained.

The amendment relating to publishing of information ensures that section 35 specifically permits the publication of information relating to food which has been released and is subsequently reported, after sampling and analysis, as failing food. Further specific permission is provided in this amendment to specifically permit the secretary to publish importer and brand name information in relation to failing food.

Minor amendments are also necessary to provide for a specific power for the secretary to approve an overseas food processing operation for the purpose of part 2 of the act, even though this power is already implicit, and to amend a drafting error in section 42 which currently gives an incorrect paragraph number.

All food imported into Australia must firstly comply with the requirements of the Quarantine Act 1908 before being inspected against the requirements of the Imported Food Control Act 1992. Accordingly, the proposed amendments to the Imported Food Control Act 1992 will have no effect on Australia's quarantine standards

The purpose of the proposed amendment to the Plant Breeder's Rights Act 1994 is to make naming of new varieties easier. Currently, an anomalous restriction exists which precludes any duplication of plant variety names, regardless of whether varieties are protected or currently in commerce. The need not to repeat a name makes the checking of proposed names to ensure novelty an unnecessarily laborious process for both the applicant and the PBR office.

Therefore, it is proposed to allow limited duplication of variety names, provided varieties with the same name are from an entirely different plant class and are unlikely to be confused in the marketplace. For example, the same name could be accepted for a variety of turnip as well as for a variety of tulip. Duplication of names in closely related cereal crops such as wheat, barley and oats would not be accepted as it would be likely to cause confusion in the normal course of commerce.

A list of plant classes maintained by the PBR office will be accessible to prospective PBR applicants free of charge. The proposed amendment is in conformity with the international standards on the matter and will promote the use of a single name for each vari ety, regardless of the country in which it is marketed.

I commend the bill to honourable members and present the explanatory memorandum.

Debate (on motion by Mr O'Connor) adjourned.