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

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Tuesday, 19 August 1980
Page: 438


Mr Kerin asked the Minister for Trade and Resources, upon notice, on 1 May 1980:

(1   ) Has his attention been drawn to reports that, by means of Presidential Instruction No. I of 1980, dated 29 January 1980, the Indonesian Government has banned the importation of certain aircraft into Indonesia.

(2)   If the situation is as indicated, does this ban include the Nomad aircraft.

(3)   Is the ban consistent with the rules of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

(4)   Did the Indonesian Government consult with the Australian Government before imposing the ban.

(S)   Has the Australian Government raised the question of the ban with the Indonesian Government; if not, does it plan to do so.


Mr Anthony - The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

(1)   Yes.

(2)   Yes. The Nomad is specifically listed as one of the prohibited imports as are other makes similar to aircraft produced in Indonesia.

(3)   Import prohibitions are prescribed by the GATT except when applied for certain specified purposes and under specified conditions. These purposes include Governmental assistance to economic development by developing countries and measures taken for essential security purposes.

The ban by the Indonesian Government on the importation of certain aircraft into Indonesia has not been notified to the Contracting Parties of the GATT.

(4)   No.

(5)   No. After examination of the circumstances and recognising that Indonesia is a developing country attempting to establish a viable aircraft industry the Government does not intend to pursue the matter formally at this stage. However, should Indonesian import policy on aircraft change and the import of aircraft similar to, and competitive with, the Nomad be permitted then the Government would review its position in the light of such a development.







Suggest corrections