1.1
On 1 December 2022, the Senate referred the provisions of the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 (the bill) to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee (the committee) for inquiry and report by 2 March 2023. Subsequently, the committee sought an extension to 6 March 2023.
1.2
The reform of the Safeguard Mechanism proposed in the bill is part of a wider suite of measures designed to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and, in doing so, contribute to Australia’s climate change mitigation commitments. Australia has these commitments as a signatory to the 2015 Paris Agreement, as well as enshrined in domestic legislation in the Climate Change Act 2022 (CC Act).
Background to the bill
1.3
Before considering the provisions of the bill, some contextual information should be provided on Australia’s obligations to reduce emissions, and the role of the Safeguard Mechanism (and other related policies) in achieving these obligations.
Australia’s international and domestic emissions obligations
1.4
Australia is a signatory to the Paris Agreement, under which countries are taking action to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change and to limit global warming levels to well below 2, and preferably 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels.
1.5
Participants are required to set out their emissions reduction ambitions in a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), which is communicated to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). On 16 June 2022, the Australian Government committed to a new, more ambitious NDC, which commits to reduce national emissions to 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.
1.6
The Government has also reaffirmed Australia’s commitment to achieve the Paris goal of achieving net zero by 2050, which was legislated in late 2022 in the CC Act.
1.7
On 23 October 2022, Australia committed to the Global Methane Pledge, a voluntary commitment by 122 countries to work collectively to reduce global methane emissions across all sectors by at least 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030.
The Safeguard Mechanism
1.8
The Safeguard Mechanism was introduced by the former Coalition Government in 2016. It was a central component of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), which was in turn a key element of the former Government’s emissions reduction strategy. The primary features of the ERF were:
a voluntary carbon crediting scheme, where participating emitters could earn an Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) for every tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO₂-e) of emissions stored or avoided by a project;
a process administered by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER or the Regulator), in which participants could use ACCUs to generate income, selling them to the Australian Government through a carbon abatement contract, or to companies and other private buyers in the secondary market, as well as to offset their own emissions; and
1.9
Under the Safeguard Mechanism, the Regulator sets emissions baselines for ‘designated large facilities’ (facilities) that emit more than 100 000 tCO₂-e per annum, which cannot be exceeded by participating facilities. This limit includes Scope 1 emissions (i.e. direct emissions)—apart from some exceptions such as the electricity generators (which have their own sectoral baseline)—and not Scope 2 and 3 emissions (respectively indirect emissions from consumption of energy products such as fossil fuels, and emissions generated in the wider economy).
1.10
Facilities covered by the Safeguard Mechanism include fossil fuel operations (such as gas extraction sites, liquified natural gas processing plants and coalmines), steelworks, aluminium smelters, cement producers, chemical manufacturers, major transport companies and airlines.
1.11
The CER is the Commonwealth agency responsible for administering the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting scheme (NGER scheme, outlined below) and the Safeguard Mechanism. It states that:
Under the safeguard mechanism, facilities are given a baseline which is the reference point against which net-emissions levels will be assessed. Net‑emissions are the covered emissions from the operation of the facility plus any Australian carbon credit units (ACCUs) issued in relation to abatement activities occurring at the facility, minus any ACCUs surrendered for the facility, for that year. Facilities must keep their net emissions at or below their baseline.
1.12
Currently, the Safeguard Mechanism covers around 215 facilities, which collectively produce 137 million tCO₂-e, or 28 per cent of Australia’s total emissions.
1.13
Some commentators have observed that the Safeguard Mechanism settings put in place by the former Government allowed too much ‘headroom’ in the baseline levels for covered facilities, and consequently, overall emissions from industrial facilities have increased rather than decreased. For example, recent Parliamentary Library analysis suggests that the current Safeguard Mechanism settings have not achieved the stated goals:
The Safeguard Mechanism was intended to ensure that the emissions reductions purchased through the ERF were not displaced by significant increases in emissions elsewhere in the economy.
However, the Safeguard Mechanism has been allowed to operate in a manner such that the emissions of covered facilities have increased in accordance with ‘business-as-usual’. It has essentially operated as an additional reporting mechanism, rather than requiring covered facilities to reduce operational emissions. More specifically, the emissions of covered facilities have increased by 7% since the commencement of the Safeguard Mechanism in 2016.
1.14
Without adjustment to the Safeguard Mechanism settings, the Parliamentary Library notes that emissions from large facilities are projected to increase further by 2030, to 151 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂-e); an increase of 13.3 per cent on 2016–17 levels.
1.15
During the 2022 election campaign, the then-Labor Opposition committed to a suite of reforms in its Powering Australia policy, including to:
Adopt the Business Council of Australia’s recommendation for facilities already covered by the Government’s Safeguard Mechanism that emissions be reduced gradually and predictably over time, to support international competitiveness and economic growth—consistent with industry’s own commitment to net zero by 2050.
1.16
The Government’s reforms, of which the bill is one component, aim to build on the existing Safeguard Mechanism to reduce industrial sector emissions. Under the proposed reforms ‘safeguard facilities will deliver a proportional share of the national [43 per cent] 2030 target’. As a consequence the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (the Department) has indicated that:
…net emissions covered by the Safeguard [will] fall from a projected 143 million tonnes in 2022-23 before the reforms start [in July 2023] to no more than 100 million tonnes by 2030… The reformed Safeguard Mechanism is expected to deliver [on aggregate] an estimated 205 million tonnes of abatement by the end of the decade.
1.17
The Department noted that many Safeguard Mechanism facilities have already committed to equivalent or more ambitious long-term emissions reductions than Australia’s climate targets. As a result, the Department submitted that:
The Safeguard reforms will provide a supportive policy framework for industry to meet these commitments, with the right signals to drive investments in emissions reductions, and flexibility so that businesses find the lowest cost abatement, wherever it occurs.
1.18
It should also be noted that, although the current Safeguard Mechanism arrangements can set baselines for emissions, they cannot create tradeable credits that incentivise covered facilities to reduce emissions below their baselines.
1.19
Further details on the proposed Safeguard Mechanism reforms are set out below.
Provisions of the bill
1.20
As mentioned earlier, the bill is one component of the broader Safeguard Mechanism reforms, which would:
amend the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (NGER Act) to clarify that an object of the Act is for a net decline in emissions from large facilities and require the Minister to be satisfied that the safeguard rules are consistent with the objects of the Act;
enable the creation of Safeguard Mechanism Credit Units (SMCs), a new type of prescribed and tradeable carbon unit; and
convert the Safeguard Mechanism from being essentially an emissions reporting mechanism for industry, to a system that incentivises ‘facilities to generate tradable credits where their emissions are below their baseline’.
1.21
The bill would enable:
the proposed crediting element of reforms announced by the Government on 10 January 2023, noting that the NGER Act already contains rule-making powers that would allow the proposed baseline decline rates to be implemented; and
a Safeguard crediting mechanism, that extends the proposal contained in the former Government’s August 2021 discussion paper to be implemented by legislative rules (noting that the ambition for the Safeguard Mechanism remains the subject of disallowable legislative rules, as discussed below).
1.22
The Explanatory Memorandum sums up the bill’s provisions as follows:
The proposed changes include reducing Safeguard Mechanism baselines and enabling Safeguard facilities that stay below their baselines to generate tradable credits, known as Safeguard Mechanism Credits or SMCs. The purpose of the Bill is to enable the crediting element of the reforms.
The Bill will amend the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (NGER Act) and Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011 (ANREU Act) to establish the framework for creating SMCs, covering how credits are issued, purchased, and included in Australia’s National Registry of Emissions Units. These credits each correspond to a tonne carbon dioxide equivalent of emissions (or difference in emissions compared to a facility’s baseline) and can be traded and used by other facilities to reduce their net emissions.
1.23
SMCs will be able to be traded, and/or used by facilities to comply with their emissions baseline, in the same way as the current ACCUs.
1.24
The bill also would make amendments to the role and powers of the CER, including:
an anti-avoidance mechanism to determine that a facility is covered by the Safeguard Mechanism, where the CER is of a view that the enterprise has been structured in a way to avoid coming within the scope of the Safeguard Mechanism;
enabling legislative rules to allow regular publication of information by the CER about ACCUs and SMCs unit holdings and the holders of relevant accounts, to ensure consistency across different types of carbon credit units, and for market transparency, as well as for the appropriate treatment of this information; and
enabling legislative rules to prevent the CER from entering carbon abatement contracts that would reduce covered emissions of Safeguard Mechanism facilities, and ensure the CER considers the Safeguard Mechanism when assessing the regulatory additionality of proposed offsets projects.
Further detail on Safeguard Mechanism reforms contained in rules
1.25
The bill would amend relevant Acts to enable the crediting element of the reforms, while leaving other details—such as baseline decline rates, limits on banking, and treatment of new entrants—to be set out by the Minister in subordinate regulations (rules). The Explanatory Memorandum states that ‘consultation will be undertaken in developing or amending any such legislative rules, and the usual disallowance processes apply’.
1.26
The Government is currently consulting on a Position Paper and a series of draft rules released in January 2023 (discussed below). When taken as a package, the reforms set out in the bill, the Position Paper, and the draft regulations would establish an emissions management framework where:
facilities will be able to surrender SMCs, as an alternative to or in addition to ACCUs, as prescribed carbon units
facilities will be moved to production-adjusted baselines using site‑specific emissions intensity values, with a transition to industry average emissions intensity values by 2030; no other types of baselines will be available
eligible facilities, who have hard-to-abate emissions but a credible plan to reduce emissions, would be able to access extended multi-year monitoring periods of up to 5 years (but not past 2030)
facilities will able to borrow up to 10% of their baseline in SMCs through to 2030
facilities will continue to be able to purchase ACCUs, including from the Government with a capped price of $75/tonne (adjusted for inflation).
1.27
A key element of the Safeguard Mechanism reforms—the framework for declining facility baselines—is contained in the proposed changes to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (Safeguard Mechanism) Rule 2015 (Safeguard Rules). The Department explained that the Safeguard Rules set out the detail of the crediting framework:
The Bill provides for subordinate legislation to detail the crediting framework such as application processes, the number of SMCs to issue, how that number is worked out, conditions that may be imposed, and audit requirements. This structure is necessary because the crediting framework is closely linked to the technical details of how Safeguard baselines are determined, which are also set out by the Safeguard Rules.
Previous relevant reviews and consultation
1.28
This section sets out some recent reviews and consultation undertaken by the Government that provide context for the bill, namely the:
expert panel report on low-cost abatement opportunities to provide incentives for industry to reduce emissions, led by Mr Grant King, released in May 2020 (King Review);
independent review of carbon credits undertaken by Professor Ian Chubb, which reported to Government December 2022, and publicly released in January 2023, (Chubb Review);
Safeguard Mechanism Reforms Consultation Paper (August 2022) and exposure draft of the bill currently under consideration, as well as the Draft Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Amendment (Safeguard Facility Eligibility Requirements) Rules 2022 (October 2022); and
Safeguard Mechanism Reforms Position Paper and draft regulations and rules (January 2023).
The King Review
1.29
In October 2019, the former Coalition Government appointed an expert panel to provide advice to the then-Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, the Hon Angus Taylor MP, on:
…how to incentivise low cost abatement opportunities from across the economy, with a focus on the industrial, manufacturing, transport and agriculture sectors, and energy efficiency.
1.30
One of the recommendations of the King Review was the establishment of a crediting arrangement to incentivise emissions reductions below the Safeguard Mechanism baselines, which the panel noted had wide support from business stakeholders. The former Government agreed to this proposal, stating:
The Government agrees that establishing a low-emissions technology deployment incentive scheme to reduce emissions from Safeguard-covered facilities would help realise abatement opportunities that are not being accessed by the ERF.
As noted by the Panel, substantial consultation will be required with industry on how to best implement such a scheme and maximise co-investment.
In this context, the Government will undertake further consultation with affected businesses and other stakeholders on the detailed design and implementation arrangements.
1.31
As noted above, the former Government embarked on consultation process on a below-baseline crediting scheme in August 2021. This included foreshadowing legislative change as follows:
Some enabling changes to primary legislation will be needed to implement the crediting mechanism, confer property rights and enable appropriate tax treatment of SMCs (consistent with arrangements for other units, including Australian Carbon Credit Units). The NGER Act and the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011 will be amended to provide for the issue of credits, with details about how this would work being provided in subordinate legislation.
1.32
These changes were cast as necessary to enable a below-baseline crediting arrangement for emissions reduction under a reformed Safeguard Mechanism:
Legislative changes are necessary to allow for the creation of a new form of credit, to be a ‘safeguard mechanism credit unit’ and for the existing legal architecture for credits to be applied to this new unit type. The details of the Safeguard Crediting Mechanism would then be built into legislative rules. The NGER Act could be amended so that these legislative rules could provide for the issuance of credits to persons with a Registry account and who are registered under that Act. The rules would deal with issues such as Regulator determinations relating to crediting and any relevant application requirements. The NGER Act amendments would allow for the rules to determine the use of credit units to reduce Safeguard net emissions and relevant limits on this (if any). Relinquishment powers for false or misleading information or reporting would be available, similar to the [Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011]. The Regulator’s general information gathering power would include the crediting provisions to ensure it has necessary enforcement information for the scheme. The Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011 could be amended to establish relevant ownership and transfer of the units, equivalent to existing unit types. Information about holdings and cancellations of safeguard mechanism credit units would be published, consistent with other unit types. Further details of this would be in legislative rules under that Act.
1.33
Although this consultation process concluded in October 2021, the former Government did not introduce a Safeguard Mechanism crediting mechanism prior to the May 2022 election.
1.34
Following the election in 2022, the Labor Government accepted the substance of this recommendation, including by introducing the bill currently being considered.
Independent Review of Australian Carbon Credit Units (Chubb Review)
1.35
On 1 July 2022, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy the Hon Chris Bowen MP announced that an independent panel would review the integrity of the ACCU scheme, to be led by the former Chief Scientist Professor Ian Chubb.
1.36
The Chubb Review received over 200 submissions, 162 of which have been published. It also ‘consulted widely across stakeholders involved in or with an interest in the ACCU scheme’, and conducted meetings with representatives of various sectors, including government agencies, state and territory governments, business, industry, agriculture, environmental, academia and research, and First Nations.
1.37
The review provided its report to Government in mid-December 2022, and this was released publicly on 9 January 2023. The key finding of the Chubb Review was:
…that the ACCU scheme arrangements are essentially sound, incorporating mechanisms for regular review and improvement, and recommends a number of changes to clarify governance, improve transparency, facilitate positive project outcomes and co-benefits, and enhance confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of the scheme.
1.38
The review made 16 recommendations to enhance the governance and transparency of the ACCU scheme, including:
separating the multiple roles of the CER and increased transparency of administrative rulings;
re-establishing the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (ERAC) as the Carbon Abatement Integrity Committee (CAIC), with changes in its governance and function, and a six-month review by the Climate Change Authority to determine whether the CAIC should instead be a statutory authority;
amending the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (CFI Act) to:
maximise transparency, data access and data sharing; and
remove conditional registration of projects on Native Title lands prior to obtaining consent;
establishing ‘proponent-led’ method development, including provision for ‘modular’ methods;
clearly defining the Offsets Integrity Standards, including a refocusing of the ‘newness’ requirement;
introducing a scheme-level buffer (mandatory cancellation of a percentage of ACCUs generated under the scheme);
modifying two abatement methods and ceasing the ‘avoided deforestation’ method; and
requiring accreditation and regulation of carbon service providers.
1.39
The Government published its response on 9 January 2023, accepting in principle all 16 Chubb Review recommendations, and committing to consult and work with all stakeholders on both the development of legislation and its implementation.
Safeguard Mechanism Reforms consultation paper (August 2022)
1.40
In August 2022, the Department released a consultation paper and three explanatory fact sheets on proposed reforms to the Safeguard Mechanism.
1.41
The consultation process sought stakeholder comment on possible crediting arrangements (and other reform proposals). Submissions were open until 20 September 2022 and over 240 submissions were received, with all non‑confidential submissions published on the Department’s website.
1.42
Following this initial engagement:
An exposure draft of the Bill was open to public consultation from 10 October 2022 to 28 October 2022. Submissions from over 50 businesses, industry groups and individuals were received during the consultation period and all non-confidential submissions were published on the Department’s website.
1.43
In its analysis of the bill, the Parliamentary Library summarised the key points of the consultation paper as follows:
The 2022 consultation paper set out options for setting and reducing baselines in a predictable and gradual way, with possible rates of decline between 3.5 and 6% per year through to 2030 and further decline rates to be set in 5-year blocks aligned with updates to Australia’s NDC. The paper canvasses a range of issues, including:
the Safeguard Mechanism’s share of the national abatement task (exclusive of the sectoral baseline for electricity generation facilities)
the setting of baselines to achieve an equitable distribution of costs and benefits, including consideration of a fixed (absolute) versus production-adjusted (intensity) framework, the removal of ‘headroom’, and the setting of baselines for existing—and new—facilities
the creation of tradeable Safeguard Mechanism credits, and consideration of international offsets
treatment for emissions-intensive, trade-exposed businesses (EITEs)
availability of multi-year monitoring periods, in light of variation in availability of emissions reduction technologies.
1.44
The Explanatory Memorandum notes the bill currently under consideration incorporates stakeholder comment on the exposure draft:
In response to submissions on the exposure draft, the Bill now includes an amendment to the objects of the NGER Act, and requires the Minister to be satisfied that the safeguard rules are consistent with the objects of the Act. The Bill will add to the second object of the Act a reference to ensuring that the aggregate net covered emissions from the operation of facilities covered by the Safeguard Mechanism decline...
Under the NGER Act, an excess emissions situation occurs if the net emissions of a facility covered by the Safeguard Mechanism exceeds its baseline, and there is a duty to ensure that an excess emissions situation does not exist. In response to feedback that the penalty for an excess emissions situation should reflect the impact on the climate, the Bill now includes provisions that will base penalties for an excess emissions situation on both the size of the excess emissions situation and the number of days in which the excess emissions situation exists.
The exposure draft Bill provided for publication of holdings of ACCUs and SMCs in Registry accounts. Some submissions raised concerns about this provision. To address these concerns, the Bill has been updated so that legislative rules can provide for publication. This will allow for further consultation, to ensure the final settings provide for increased transparency while appropriately addressing matters raised by stakeholders.
1.45
The consultation paper observed that many of the details of the reformed Safeguard Mechanism would be set out in subordinate legislation, including baseline setting and baseline decline rates. Additionally, it noted that ‘[p]rimary legislative changes will be needed to implement crediting and related changes’. Further, it commented:
Feedback on a more detailed design proposal accompanied by proposed changes to the Safeguard Mechanism Rule will be sought later this year [2022] following feedback on this paper. We will then progress the changes to the Safeguard Mechanism Rule in the first quarter of 2023.
Primary legislative changes focused on the crediting aspects of the design would be progressed in parallel.
This is a tight timeframe, but strong institutional arrangements are already in place and businesses are well prepared for the change which was part of the Powering Australia policy announced in December 2021. Safeguard Mechanism facilities have over a decade’s experience measuring and reporting their emissions, a clear understanding of their climate profile and risks, and many are already working towards climate targets of their own.
Carbon Credit Rules and the Safeguard Mechanism Reforms: Position Paper (January 2023)
1.46
On 10 January 2023, the Government released a Position Paper on the Safeguard Mechanism reforms for consultation, alongside draft legislative instruments. The Position Paper states that the Government intends to finalise the Safeguard Mechanism reforms by April 2023, with legislative reforms and rules to commence by 1 July 2023, including the Government’s proposed approach on:
the Safeguard Mechanism’s share of the national emissions reduction target
setting baselines for existing and new facilities, including the rate of decline
arrangements for issuing and using Safeguard Mechanism Credits [as provided for in the bill]
access to flexible compliance arrangements. These include access to credits, offsets, banking and borrowing arrangements, multi-year monitoring periods and a cost containment measure
tailored treatment of emissions-intensive, trade-exposed facilities.
1.47
Feedback on the proposed design, draft amendments to the Safeguard Rule and related draft regulations closed on 24 February 2023.
Human rights
1.48
The Explanatory Memorandum states that ‘the amendments in the Bill will primarily regulate entities or corporations, which are not covered by human rights treaties, rather than individuals’. However, the Explanatory Memorandum acknowledges that the bill ‘engages, or may engage’ the following human rights:
the right to privacy under Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); and
the right to freedom of expression under Article 19 of the ICCPR.
1.49
On the right to privacy, the Explanatory Memorandum notes that relevant changes would build upon existing provisions in the Clean Energy Regulator Act 2011 (CER Act), and would provide a ‘lawful basis for obtaining, storing and sharing personal information appropriately’ and that this is ‘reasonable and proportionate to administering the schemes’. Additionally, it states that the existing secrecy provisions of the CER Act do not authorise release of personal information, and ‘this restriction will be maintained by the bill to ensure privacy of information is adequately protected’.
1.50
On the right to freedom of expression, the Explanatory Memorandum states:
The restrictions are considered compatible with the purpose of protecting the rights or reputations of others under Article 19(3) of the ICCPR because they are reasonable, necessary and proportionate to promote the integrity of audits carried out under the NGER Act, ensure businesses’ commercial-in-confidence information is sufficiently protected and are consistent with other existing restrictions under the NGER Act and CER Act. Further, individual auditors impacted by these provisions participate in the scheme voluntarily, and operate in a profession where maintaining commercial confidentiality is a matter of standard practice.
Other committee consideration
1.51
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills [Scrutiny Committee] considered the bill, and raised several concerns, including that the bill:
…is characterised by the inclusion of ‘framework provisions’ which contain only the broad principles of a legislative scheme and rely heavily on delegated legislation to determine the scheme’s scope and operation. The [Scrutiny] committee has longstanding concerns with framework provisions because they considerably limit the ability of Parliament to have an appropriate oversight over new legislative schemes.
1.52
The Scrutiny Committee acknowledged that ‘it is sometimes appropriate to include certain administrative and technical matters within delegated legislation, particularly when establishing new, or substantially altered, legislative schemes’. However, it highlighted some matters that it considered could be included in the bill’s scope:
For example, it is unclear to the [Scrutiny] committee why an individual’s right to review of a decision under proposed section 22XNA could not be set out within the bill.
The committee does not disagree with the view expressed in the explanatory memorandum that it may be appropriate to include details of the crediting framework within delegated legislation. However, the committee is concerned that much of the crediting framework itself is being left to the rules. Requirements relating to review rights, the basic elements of application processes, the value of an SMC, limits or guidance on the issuing of SMCs, guidance in relation to surrendering SMCs and other fundamental aspects of the scheme are more appropriately characterised as part of the crediting framework and, as such, the committee is of the view that it may be more appropriate to include these details within the bill.
The committee also takes this opportunity to note that consistency with existing legislation is not a sufficient justification for including significant matters within delegated legislation.
1.53
The Scrutiny Committee sought the Minister’s advice on these issues, which has not been published at the time of writing.
1.54
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights made no comment on the bill.
Financial impact of the bill
1.55
The Explanatory Memorandum notes that the bill ‘has no financial impact on the Australian Government Budget’. Further, it states that any financial impacts coming from delegated legislation made under the bill’s provisions would be outlined in the relevant explanatory statement.
Conduct of the inquiry
1.56
In accordance with its usual practice, the committee advertised the inquiry on its website and wrote to relevant organisations inviting submissions by 25 January 2023.
1.57
The committee published 34 submissions, which are listed at Appendix 1 and are available on the committee's website.
1.58
The committee also held two public hearings on 27 and 28 February 2023 in Canberra and via videoconference. A list of witnesses who gave evidence at the hearings is available at Appendix 2.
Structure of the report
1.59
This report comprises three chapters:
Chapter 1 provides background information relating to the bill and outlines the bill’s key purposes, as well as the administration of the inquiry;
Chapter 2 discusses the evidence received on the broader Safeguard Mechanism reforms, as well as the committee’s views and recommendations; and
Chapter 3 looks at the issues raised in evidence on the provisions of the bill, and sets out the committee’s view and recommendations.
Note on references
1.60
In this report, references to the Committee Hansard are to the proof (uncorrected) transcripts. Page numbers may vary between the proof and the official transcripts.
Acknowledgement
1.61
The committee would like to thank those individuals, institutions and organisations that contributed to the inquiry, particularly given the inquiry’s short timeframe.