Views on the bill

2.1        All stakeholders that provided submissions to the bill supported the proposed introduction of measures to strengthen Australia's anti-dumping system.

2.2        BlueScope Steel explained how the anti-dumping system had been gamed by international steel exporters and noted that the bill was:

...designed to address the unintended consequences of this gap in existing legislation that allows exporters to subvert and undermine the intent and integrity of Australia's anti-dumping system.[1]

2.3        Similarly, the Manufacturers' Trade Alliance, an informal group of Australian manufacturers and producers that have applied experience with the Australian anti-dumping system, believed that the bill would:

...reduce the incidence of exporters and importers exploiting Australia's anti-dumping system and restore confidence among manufacturers of its effectiveness.[2]

2.4        Likewise, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Unions (AMWU) concluded that:

This legislation improves Australia's anti-dumping system by ensuring a more transparent and efficient review mechanism to avoid circumvention.[3]

2.5        In terms of how the bill addresses the problem identified, the Australian Steel Institute considered that the proposed response:

...is proportional in that it would only affect the relatively few instances [where an export price cannot be determined] and is only a small change to how reviews are currently undertaken.[4]

2.6        A number of stakeholders also noted that the bill will more closely align the Australian anti-dumping regime with its peers. For example, the Australian Steel Institute commented that:

This amendment brings Australia more closely into line with the antidumping rules of other comparable jurisdictions and will help ensure Australian manufacturers access timely and effective redress from injurious dumping in line with Australia's WTO [World Trade Organisation] rights and obligations, thereby helping to support local jobs and investment.[5]

2.7        While supporting the bill as a step in the right direction, some stakeholders noted that other legislative measures may be required to further strengthen the anti-dumping system.[6] The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) submitted that:

...a lot more can and should be done to make Australia's anti-dumping and countervailing system as responsive to the needs of local industries as systems in the United States, Canada and the European Union.[7]

2.8        In addition, the CFMEU considered that:

...further regulatory action could need to be implemented in the near future particularly if the exporter behaviour continues or the new approach outlined in the bill to prevent the circumvention of the intent of duties through the review method fails or the circumvention occurs by some other way through the review method.[8]

2.9        The CFMEU went on to highlight that:

With the results of the United States Section 232 Investigation into steel imports likely to be released soon it is time that Australia strengthens our regulatory arsenal when it comes to the prevention of the dumping of goods which cause material injury to local firms, and certainly prevents the circumvention or other avoidance of anti-dumping duties we have in place.  If this does not occur it is conceivable that excess global capacity will find its way to Australian shores, devastating local industry.[9]

2.10      The AMWU also indicated that it remains 'open to further changes to the anti-dumping system to ensure that injurious dumping is stamped out'.[10]

2.11      Further, the AMWU recommended that the proposed review of measures system be reviewed after two years, noting that:

Given the length of time required to move to retrospective duties, waiting five years before initiating a review of the current system could mean we are stuck with this system for the best part of a decade even if it fails to stop exporters gaming the system.[11]

Committee view

2.12      The committee believes that free and fair trade is important to economic growth and provides very real benefits for Australian businesses and consumers. However, current dumping and government subsidisation of goods exported to Australia does not represent genuine competition and can distort markets, injure Australian manufacturers and put Australian jobs at risk.

2.13      The committee recognises that aspects of the anti-dumping system are not working as intended and agrees with stakeholders that the proposed measures to address gaming of the anti-dumping system are necessary to protect Australian industry. The committee is also confident that the new measures will not diminish the international perception of the integrity and transparency of Australia's anti-dumping system.

2.14      The committee notes that the amendments proposed by the bill will only change the review of measures process and recognises the need for governments to work closely with industry stakeholders to regularly assess opportunities for further reform to strengthen Australia's anti-dumping system.

Recommendation 1

2.15      The committee recommends that the bill be passed.

Senator Jane Hume
Chair

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page