Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 8 February 2017
Page: 387


Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (18:34): I thank the minister for his answer, but there was a concern from Australian Made Campaign Limited about uncertainty in terms of whether a claim could be made or not. The minister did make reference to some of the matters. Could he give some particularity on the types of resources that would be employed here and on whether the guidance tools—the online mechanisms that he referred to—would have any administrative force or give any protection to manufacturers? It would be short of an administrative mechanism or a natural determination as such—it seems to be a web tool that would give some guidance. What would happen if a manufacturer goes online, ticks all the boxes and it comes up as saying that they have reached this threshold, but then they are involved in a legal dispute, perhaps even with the ACCC? What protection do they have from that?

The other issue—this is not a trick question; this is a genuine question that I seek guidance from the minister on—is what are the fundamental differences on substantial transformation. Given that you say the previous regime, the 51 per cent, does not include slicing and dicing, can you give some detail to crystallise what the key differences are so that there is some greater meaning in terms of what Australian made actually means?