Mr VAILE (Trade) (10:56 AM) —in reply—In concluding the debate on the Ozone Protection Amendment Bill 1998 [1999] , I thank all speakers from both sides of the chamber who have made a contribution on this bill. It is an important one and it indicates the government's commitment in this area.

As a party to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, known as the Montreal protocol, in 1987 and to its subsequent amendments and adjustments, Australia is required to phase out the consumption and production of ozone depleting substances. Australia implements the Montreal protocol through the Ozone Protection Act 1989. The act ensures Australia complies with the Montreal protocol's phase-out schedules through the operation of licensing and quota systems which regulate the import, export and manufacture of ozone depleting substances.

The Ozone Protection Amendment Bill 1998 [1999] aims to improve the operation of the Ozone Protection Act's licensing and quota systems. The amendment bill will ensure that applications to manufacture HCFCs or methyl bromide in Australia can be more effectively considered, and takes into account the fact that these ozone depleting substances are currently not manufactured in Australia and are scheduled for phase-out in 2020 and 2005 respectively. The bill will also ensure Australia's phase-out of HCFCs continues in an orderly and predictable manner by providing scope to better regulate the quantity of HCFCs any licensee may import in a given quota period.

The decision to implement the legislative changes contained in the Ozone Protection Amendment Bill 1998 [1999] was taken following consultation with industry, state and territory governments and relevant sectors of the community. The Office of Regulation Review was also consulted on these changes. It is important to note that industry is particularly supportive of the proposed amendments and has anticipated them for some time. The amendments contained in the bill will enable a more effective and targeted regulation of ozone depleting substances, and reflect the government's commitment to maintaining Australia's status as a world leader in ozone protection.

In commending the bill to the House we should also note that, whilst we support the measures taken and the protocol, there are side effects for other parts of our economy. For instance, with regard to the wind-down of production of CFCs across the world, one of the by-products of CFCs is a chemical called Frenic, which is used extensively in agricultural industries. We have to find a replacement product because that will not be produced. It is not an ozone depleting chemical but it is a by-product of these chemicals. So there are other effects. We support this bill, we support the intent of the Montreal protocol, but we should also be cognisant of some of the side effects of these changes in other industries. As a government we certainly are, and we are working in an area where we can develop replacement products and replacement controls that can be used. With those comments, I commend the bill to the House.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. I.R. Causley) —If no member wishes to consider the bill in detail, I will put the report question forthwith. The question is that the bill be reported to the House without amendment.

Question resolved in the affirmative.