Prime minister Julia Gillard and federal opposition leader Tony Abbott are finally in agreement on the introduction of a new policy that affects Australian manufacturers: both parties vow they will strengthen Australia’s anti-dumping laws to ensure a level playing field for our suppliers.
In a new Anti-Dumping Policy paper released yesterday, the federal opposition claims it will ensure industry policy certainty on the matter of illegal dumping.
“Australian industries and businesses don’t want government hand-outs or protectionist quick fixes – they just want the Australian Government to understand and respond to the challenges facing Australian manufacturing,” said Abbott.
Under the coalition’s proposed anti-dumping policy, foreign companies suspected of selling goods to Australian businesses at dramatically reduced prices, or through unlawful subsidies from other governments, would have to prove the legitimacy of their exports, Abbott says.
“[Dumping] is a tactic that provides the illusion of a short-term benefit to consumers,” said Abbott.
“In the longer term, international dumping hollows out Australian industry, decreases competition, costs jobs and increases prices.
“International dumping seeks to exploit Australia’s commitment to free trade.”
The coalition has pledged the following actions as part of its proposed anti-dumping regime:
- Transfer anti-dumping responsibilities from Customs to the Department of Industry;
- Reverse the onus of proof in anti-dumping investigations;
- Commit more funding for anti-dumping investigations;
- Hire an additional 20 specialist anti-dumping investigators;
- Introduce more stringent and rigorous enforcement of deadlines for submissions;
- Crack down on those overseas producers who don’t cooperate with anti-dumping investigations; and
- Strengthen enforcement of the provisions of the WTO Agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures.
Gillard’s dumping policy
Back in September, the federal government made a similar vow to protect Australian businesses from illegal dumping, claiming it would overhaul Australia’s anti-dumping policy by fast-tracking dumping investigations and ensuring stronger compliance measures are put in place in areas where Australian businesses have suffered as a result of the practice.
In June this year, the government sought help from the Productivity Commission to review the operation of Australia’s anti-dumping laws.
The government has reportedly consulted with manufacturing business-owners, workers, producers, importers, members of parliament, industry associations and trade unions to come up with a number of reforms it claims will ensure the anti-dumping system continues to reflect industry experience and the international trading environment.
The anti-dumping reforms will be implemented as part of the government’s new International Trade Remedies Forum.
Improvements to be undertaken as part of the reform are:
- Increased staff in the International Trade Remedies Branch of Customs and Border Protection over the next 12 months by 45%, from 31 to 45 staff, to ensure cases are resolved as quickly as possible;
- Legislation introducing a 30-day time limit on minister’s decision-making for investigation into a case;
- Specialist knowledge of particular industries and particular countries and experts in forensic accounting will supplement existing staff knowledge in complex cases and provide advice on key issues;
- Changes to the appeals process, through the use of an appropriately supported panel of review officers to ensure a review officer with appropriate skills and experience hears appeals in a timely manner; the review officer will be able to make recommendations directly to the minister;
- The definition of what constitutes material injury caused by dumping will be amended to allow a more inclusive consideration of the impact of dumping on employment and investment;
- Improved access to the anti-dumping system for Australian businesses; more practical support for small and medium enterprises, who face the greatest barriers to accessing the antidumping system;
- Ensure Australia’s antidumping system is administered more in line with comparable countries, taking into account relevant cases and practices in other countries; and
- Ensure stronger compliance mechanisms so that Australian industry actually gets the protection of measures where dumping or subsidisation has caused them material injury.
The Coalition supported the reform when it was announced, claiming it is long overdue.
Government unites over dumping
Announcing the Coalition’s plan to strengthen Australia’s anti-dumping regime yesterday, Abbott said: “Stronger action against dumping makes the playing field fairer for Australian businesses and ensures the illegal activities of overseas businesses do not undermine Australia’s commitment to free trade.
“The current anti-dumping laws are cumbersome, slow and prohibitively expensive for many Australian businesses to utilise.
“The Coalition will introduce a more effective anti-dumping regime ensuring that good Australian businesses get a fair go.”
Back in June when the government pledged its support for anti-dumping, Brendan O’Connor, Minister for Home Affairs, said the reform agenda would help businesses move to a modern, high-skill, high-tech, clean energy economy which will create Australian jobs into the future.
“As part of the reform agenda, the government is also supporting Australian business to remedy the harmful effects of unfair trading practices like dumping and the subsidisation of goods by other countries. We are doing so through the most significant improvements to the anti-dumping and countervailing system in a decade,” O’Connor said in an address to the House of Representatives earlier in the year.
According to O’Connor, the government inherited an anti-dumping and countervailing system that ‘needed reform’.
Two high-profile metal dumping cases were made public in September, sparking industry concern and calls to the government to step in.
The first was an investigation lead by OneSteel into Chinese and other Asian steelmakers for suspected dumping and subsidisation of “certain hollow structural” steel products.
The second was a case in which union representatives for the steel industry criticised the decision to use cheap Chinese aluminium in the new headquarters for the federal Climate Change Department.