Thursday, 7 April 2022

Bills

Transport Legislation Amendment (Port Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Ms HORNE:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Ms HALL (Footscray) (11:40): I am very pleased to make a contribution to this bill and provide some context about why port reform matters. In my community in Melbourne’s inner west we are very proud of our industrial heritage. Since colonisation our history has been defined by work and by working people. The factories of Melbourne’s inner west have been engine rooms of production, whether it be the meatworks that lined the Maribyrnong or the great manufacturing centres of our national war efforts. From West Footscray to Yarraville, Braybrook and Maribyrnong, the threads of our industrial history are strong, they are powerful, and they are proud. Of course we are also the closest community to Melbourne’s thriving port, and that is where you can see firsthand the booming Victorian economy in action. Like most residents, I am very familiar with the sounds and bright lights of the port. I am very fond of hearing the ships sound their arrival and watching the trains carrying goods from the port and to the port through Bunbury Street’s famous tunnel.

The inner west of decades ago, however, has changed. Our industries have evolved and so have the operations of the port. Many of our factory gates have closed and made way for different but still innovative industries. The trucks moving goods across Victoria and Australia have gotten bigger, and in their thousands they move goods through my community. These trucks, essential to get the things we buy to where they need to go, are travelling on roads that were not designed to accommodate that sort of capacity. A major problem locally for residents has been the movement of empty containers to container parks located on the outskirts of our residential areas.

I recently asked the Minister for Ports and Freight about this issue in a constituency question, and I want to take this opportunity because just this week I received an answer to that constituency question. My question to the minister was about my electorate of Footscray being located next to Australia’s busiest container port, the port of Melbourne. With many warehouses and distribution centres in Melbourne’s west, much of the container movement happens through my electorate, and I am aware of both full and empty container congestion at the port, container parks and warehouses. I asked the Minister for Ports and Freight to provide an update on what the government is doing to mitigate the impact of shipping container build-up in our ports and storage yards.

Today’s bill is one piece of reform that is happening, but I think the minister’s response to that question demonstrates some of the really tangible reforms that are taking place and which are easing the pressure in my community of truck movements from the port of Melbourne. The minister responded by saying that:

Supply chain congestion in Victoria has been driven by unprecedented consumer demand for imported goods, increased export volumes, and low levels of empty container evacuation. These factors have contributed to the build-up of empty containers.

This is not only a local domestic issue at the Port of Melbourne … but extends globally. Container congestion has contributed to extended wait times for consumer goods, increased shipping costs, and challenges in managing empty containers.

The Andrews Labor Government is committed to working with key stakeholders including shipping line operators, importers, stevedores, land transport operators, and empty container parks to ensure Victoria’s containerised freight supply chain continues to operate efficiently and effectively.

To this end, on 11 March 2022, Premier Daniel Andrews announced the formation of a Container Storage Working Group chaired by the Department of Transport with representatives from across the shipping industry, stevedores, transport operators, peak bodies, and government. The working group meetings will measure and analyse current pressures on the storage of shipping containers and provide possible solutions to mitigate stresses on Victoria’s supply chain.

This is fantastic news for my community—that this work is being done to analyse and understand where these empty containers are going and what we can do to reduce that impact on local roads in Melbourne’s inner west.

To mitigate the impacts of container movement, particularly in the western suburbs, the government is working with the port of Melbourne on two rail infrastructure projects designed to improve the efficiency of container movement by encouraging containers onto trains and reducing the number of trucks on local roads. Work has now commenced on the port rail transformation project and the port rail shuttle network. This involves the development and construction of a new rail terminal interfacing with the Swanson Dock East international container terminal and is scheduled for completion in mid-2023. When completed this will connect the port of Melbourne to major freight hubs or intermodal sites, which we have been speaking a little bit about this week in the chamber, in outer Melbourne using existing rail networks, making it easier and cheaper for businesses to use rail freight. Again, this is really exciting news in my community where, coupled with the West Gate Tunnel Project, it will take thousands of trucks off local roads every day, and we will have truck bans on roads that have been heavily congested with truck traffic from the port, including Francis Street, Somerville Road, Moore Street and Buckley Street through central Footscray. As I said, these roads just were not designed to take the kind of freight that is coming through them, and so I think like many people in my community I am eagerly awaiting those truck bans taking place. Not, I should add, because we are anti trucks. This is about getting more of the containers onto rail but also getting the trucks onto the roads that are better for the trucks and the truck drivers and also better for our community.

I think the minister’s detailed response to my constituency question does speak to the broader reform underway to deliver cleaner and more efficient freight movements, moving more freight onto rail and empty containers to where they need to be, and provides a bigger picture of the reform underway. Because what happens at the port does impact the streets and neighbourhoods of my community in Melbourne’s inner west.

This bill embeds the establishment of Ports Victoria in legislation, provides for the abolition of the Victorian Ports Corporation (Melbourne) and the Victorian Regional Channels Authority and tidies up a number of things there. It provides Ports Victoria with the tools it needs to implement improved coordination, resilience and agility in relation to the safe provision of essential port services.

With the time I have remaining I would like to acknowledge the work of the minister. It has been incredibly beneficial for us to have a local resident, someone who has been involved in this issue in our local community for many, many years, as the Minister for Ports and Freight. I think that having that local knowledge has been terrific in responding to some of the local issues. I would also like to acknowledge the work of the Minister for Public Transport. Currently the Minister for Ports and Freight and I are working with the Minister for Public Transport to respond to some of the existing issues that are happening locally as we prepare for the opening of the West Gate Tunnel Project. We are hoping to make some steps forward to improve compliance on local roads with some of the truck movements taking place and to make them safer, especially where we have truck curfews in place on some of those local roads. I would also like to acknowledge the work of the Maribyrnong Truck Action Group, our local activist group—local residents who have been working tirelessly for many decades to resolve some of these issues. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (11:50): I am pleased to rise to make some comments on this alleged ports reform bill, the Transport Legislation Amendment (Port Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2022. It establishes Ports Victoria on a legislative basis. I understand it is currently an administrative unit. It defines some functions for Ports Victoria in terms of pilotage and towage, and it renames and, frankly, severely limits the port of Hastings—the current Port of Hastings Development Authority; it limits that enormously. There are some consequential amendments, and there are a number of random changes to other transport acts. Apparently the only common thread is the fact that they are associated with the Department of Transport (DOT), and that appears to be the ‘Other Matters’ referred to in the short title.

I am glad the member for Footscray says this is an important bill, because it is, and you would never know that from the way the government has approached this issue. This is a serious business. The port of Melbourne puts through $26 billion worth of exports each and every year—$26 billion just of exports, not counting the billions and billions and billions of dollars of imports that go through that port. Yet the government is playing games. They are playing politics with an industry that is absolutely critical not only for trade but for the Victorian economy. It is a central part of the Victorian economy, yet the government is playing games with this whole issue. They have a strategy that simply does not stand up. It does not stand up in any way at all. Then it says, in the second-reading speech, ‘The main purpose of this bill is to get on with the job of implementing commitments made in the response to the independent ports reform’. One of the dot points is:

Implements review recommendations in relation to local ports …

No, it does not. It does not go anywhere near doing that. So it is about playing games. They claim that the government have accepted all 63 recommendations of the independent report. It might be more accurate to say they have not rejected any of the recommendations. When you read through the response document, it is clear they have not accepted them—support in principle or, ‘Yeah, that’s the right direction. We’re heading in that right direction’. That is not what is happening there.

Then we get to the briefing. Now, a few weeks ago I was very complimentary about a briefing the Attorney-General’s office organised for one of the justice bills. It was a thorough briefing and, as I mentioned at the time, conducted very effectively. With this briefing unfortunately I was detained on committee business, and I was not able to attend the briefing. But I understand it was Friday afternoon at 1 o’clock, take it or leave it, and then access to the officers from the Department of Transport was either extremely limited or not available. That is not acceptable in any way. This is not a rubber stamp. We are legislators. Any member of Parliament is entitled to be briefed properly on a bill and have access to the public service to get an honest answer, not filtered through the minister’s office—any member of Parliament. For this sort of game to be played with the opposition, the principal alternate party in the Parliament, is completely unacceptable and should not happen.

I want to make some comments about the impact of this legislation on the port of Hastings. Clause 20 of the bill changes the current definition of the Transport Integration Act 2010. The current definition talks about facilitating:

… the development of the port of Hastings as a viable alternative to the port of Melbourne as a container port in order to increase capacity and competition in the container ports sector to accommodate future growth …

Clause 20 of this bill strips all that out so it is now:

… to manage, develop and operate the port of Hastings consistently with the vision statement and the transport system objectives—

which is already in the existing act. The minister’s press release goes on to say the change will be to:

… reflect its future role and open the potential for investment and development across a range of dry and liquid bulk trades.

In other words it will limit severely the opportunity for the port of Hastings to expand. It does not just limit it, it neuters this organisation. That is effectively what this legislation does. It neuters the port. It is an endeavour, clearly, to promote the government’s harebrained Bay West scheme, which is a political fix. It is just a political stitch-up. It flies in the face of physical reality, of depths of water, of where trade is occurring, and it makes no economic sense. The channels leading into the port of Geelong are 12 metres deep and 120 metres wide. The channel leading into the port of Hastings is 14.2 metres deep and 180 metres wide. It makes no sense to move a whole lot of sand out of Port Phillip Bay, with all the environmental damage that that includes, and starve Hastings of trade, in any other way than in a political fix—and that is exactly what this is. That is exactly what this bill is.

We know Infrastructure Victoria is an apologist for this government. Ministers and members will say, ‘Oh, but it’s independent’. It is not independent. There are some good people there, I do not doubt that for a moment, but their board is dominated by secretaries—secretaries whose job it is to do as the government directs, to follow the policy of the government—so to suggest that Infrastructure Victoria is providing independent advice is complete and utter nonsense.

There are some recommendations in the Independent Review of the Victorian Ports System relating to the need to protect land. Here we go—the need to ensure that there is not inappropriate encroachment on the boundaries of the port environs and to make sure the corridors are retained. The reality is that the corridors and the land were established in Western Port in the 1970s. I am a former member of the Westernport Regional Planning and Coordination Committee. We reviewed that land and those corridors in the 1990s. They were again reviewed under the then Minister for Roads and Ports in the 2000s. All of that infrastructure is in place, yet it is being ignored by this government in a political stitch-up.

The next point I want to move to relates to local ports. Now, the story of local ports is a very sad one, and despite the Minister for Ports and Freight’s claims—I am delighted to see she is at the table—this bill does not implement the review recommendations in relation to local ports. As the Age reported earlier this year, 19 piers and jetties are completely or partially closed in Port Phillip and Western Port. I have spoken recently about Fisherman’s Jetty in the Mornington harbour, which has been closed and, if it is left to the government’s own devices, probably will never open again. The local community has stepped in and is seeking to open it. But the report made clear in terms of local port funding that none of the local ports operations are sustainable without funding administered by DOT and many of the local port assets are now approaching end of life—local port assets approaching end of life.

Then we have the government response, which says absolutely nothing about funding despite a direct recommendation in the review of Victorian ports that funding for local ports needs to be addressed. What is in the response—‘Oh, we’ll get to it. We need a funding formula’. Yes, we do need a funding formula, and we need it now, because the local ports framework talks about all the money they are spending—‘Oh, we’re spending $16.6 million to fund our local ports program’. On $650 million worth of assets that is 2.5 per cent per annum, and the report acknowledges these assets are approaching end of life. So it is not like you are starting with brand new assets and you can work over 40 years, which is what the 2.5 per cent works out to, to deal with those. The government’s own report has indicated these assets are collapsing, they are at their end of life, and this bill and this policy do absolutely nothing to fix that.

There are a number of other changes in regard to the Tourist and Heritage Railway Act 2010, which I think are worthwhile changes, and there is an interesting one that extends to officers of the Victorian Fisheries Authority—or the CEO of the Victorian Fisheries Authority—the capacity to have delegation actions under the Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987, which is interesting in this bill. But this bill as it is presented is a total fraud.

Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South) (12:00): It gives me great pleasure to rise and to speak to the Transport Legislation Amendment (Port Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2022. I do so knowing that the Minister for Ports and Freight is at the table, and I commend her for the work that she is doing in reforming our ports. She is a very strong advocate for the area—obviously as minister but also for her electorate area, as is the member for Footscray—as well as for the ports, with all the billions of dollars of exports that run through them providing jobs for the community of the inner west. I must say I am still not exactly clear whether the opposition are supporting or opposing this bill, but there have been many points raised by them which I think are deserving of some further exploration and indeed rebuttal.

If I could go to the point of consultation, firstly, on the bill. Consultation is something that this government takes very, very seriously. Let us not forget that the whole ball started rolling with an independent review of the Victorian ports system. You do not conduct reviews without having consultation. There were something like 40 targeted stakeholder sessions, and then there were some 80 individual stakeholders with whom consultations were held across the state. In July 2020 the review’s discussion paper was released publicly, and from that there were an additional 70 written submissions received that ultimately helped to inform the final report. Then in February 2021 the initial government response to the review was publicly released at a ports industry round table, announcing the establishment of Ports Victoria, and then in August of last year the full government response was publicly released. The reforms in the bill are focused on greater accountability, ultimately, and greater transparency in our ports system, and that is what our engagement and consultation with stakeholders has absolutely mirrored. So to say somehow that there has been no consultation to get to this point and that somehow there is a cover-up in the minister’s office is just absolutely farcical. It is just not true.

In terms of the points around the transport restructuring order, contrary to the assertion that the opposition has made, the transport restructuring order is actually a valid mechanism for the government to act quickly in establishing Ports Victoria so it can immediately begin the process of greater oversight and transparency in the safe navigation of Victorian waters. Another hallmark of this government is of course safety—safety is absolutely paramount—and that is why the establishment of Ports Victoria was the very first action taken in response to the findings of the independent review. And just on the establishment of Ports Victoria, it is always a plan to provide some time for these new arrangements under Ports Victoria’s governance model to be bedded down before implementing the remaining reforms recommended by the review. Combining those two organisations into one, changing the location of the head office and making changes to executive management all have effects that require change management. Time is needed to be afforded to allow these strategies to be implemented effectively and ensure the organisation is ready to take on the new roles and responsibilities that are specified in the bill.

The legislative changes do formalise the creation of Ports Victoria, which commenced operations on 1 July 2021. These reforms will not change how the commercial ports operate. The changes will enshrine the creation of Ports Victoria in law and adapt its charter to better focus on integration and other transport system objectives. Changes include adapting its charter to promote and facilitate trade, undertake operational activities and provide technical and consultancy services in relation to the whole of the Victorian ports system. As these are part of the bill that is being considered, these have not yet come into effect.

Another point that was raised was the actual productivity of the port. Again the Andrews government has really harnessed the value of the port of Melbourne. It is an economic engine room, contributing some $6 billion to our economy every single year, with, as mentioned a few times now, some $26 billion of exports passing through the port each year. Since the lease of the port it has increased its productivity by 26 per cent, and it is in fact 30 per cent more efficient than the next best Australian port. In terms of that concept of the last mile, we are slashing that with the $125 million investment in on-dock rail at the port. These are significant savings that are being made here. Meanwhile the federal government have stalled on the one commitment—the only commitment—that they made, to review part X of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, surely among the most permissive regimes of shipping liner protections used by a developed country, yet we have been failed there. It has taken this state government yet again to show leadership, and it has taken a Labor government to put rail back at the port, to connect it to metro and regional intermodal hubs to keep freight moving, to introduce a nation-leading pricing model and to keep the port up and running during the pandemic.

The last thing I will speak to in terms of rebuttal is the port stevedore charges. Our stakeholders have told us that stevedore infrastructure charges just were not transparent. We have listened and we have acted. We are undertaking the port pricing and supply chain review and acting immediately on those recommendations. We have developed the first voluntary port performance framework in the country, and now we see fewer increases in charges, more notice of changes and stevedores actually talking to industry about the charges. The government has led the way in fact in increasing pricing transparency, and these protocols have formed the basis of the national model developed by the National Transport Commission. Yet again it has taken a Labor government to put rail back at the port, connected to a series of intermodal hubs to keep freight moving; to introduce a nation-leading pricing model; and to keep the port up and running during the pandemic.

These reforms are very important. We do know that freight volumes are expected to more than double over the next 30 years, so our safe and efficient port operations remain absolutely vital to the state’s economic health, to its growth and certainly to its competitive advantage. This is an excellent bill. I thank the minister and her department for all of the work that has gone into it, and I wish the bill a speedy passage through the house.

Ms STALEY (Ripon) (12:10): I rise to speak briefly on the Transport Legislation Amendment (Port Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2022. We have just heard from the member for Narre Warren South. While almost everything he said suggested that he is living in some sort of alternative reality, I will agree with one point, and that is the importance of the ports to Victoria’s prosperity. But in terms of almost everything else he said, I cannot understand what he said. For example, he talked about the productivity of the port, and yet a recent World Bank and IHS Markit productivity study showed that the port of Melbourne rates 313 out of 351 ports globally that were studied. That puts it in the bottom 15 per cent globally. Other published data shows that the median import time for container ships at the port of Melbourne is three times longer than Japan and twice as long as China, and this is the heart of what is wrong with this piece of legislation.

In itself we do not oppose the piece of legislation before us today, but it is such a missed opportunity and indicative of the failure of this government to reform our ports in any way. The member for Narre Warren South talked about leading the way in increasing pricing transparency. I think he could have left ‘transparency’ off that sentence, because certainly this government has led the way in increasing port pricing but not much else. What we see is the port of Melbourne—which is Australia’s great container port, incredibly important to this state’s exports and to the freight and logistics hub that Victoria is and has been for a long time—is losing its way under this government because the port reforms that are needed have not come through and we do not have the productivity that we need, we do not have the links into the ports that we need and we certainly do not have a government or a minister that is up to the task of making sure that the important growth that the port of Melbourne and ports generally in Victoria will see over the next 30 years is going to occur.

What this bill effectively does is bring a couple of organisations together, change their names and set up a different structure within them, but it is missing a whole lot of other things that need to be done. I of course come from a country electorate, the great electorate of Ripon, and export performance is really important to the farmers, producers and food manufacturers in particular in my electorate. I note that food and fibre remain Victoria’s largest export, at almost $14 billion in 2020–21, and within Ripon we certainly contribute to that export performance with extensive grain growing areas, meat exports and wine exports. Meat alone is $3.3 billion in exports and is Victoria’s largest single export by value. And I think given where grain prices have been recently and that we have had a very good harvest for the second year in a row, we should see further increases in grain exports.

My part of the world cares very deeply about freight performance generally and port performance specifically, but what we have seen when it comes to freight generally is the Murray Basin rail project is stalled. The government has completely botched that project. They have spent almost half a billion dollars on it to get pretty much no improvement, and they are now fixing up the errors they made the first time around, which will not end up with us getting a project that standardises rail, for example, from Dunolly to Maryborough. That part of the project has been entirely abandoned. The parts of the project that would link the port of Portland to Ararat and upgrade that rail have been abandoned.

At every point this government is failing to deliver the freight changes that will move us to where we need to go over the next 30 years. In my part of the world the most important project is that Murray Basin rail project, which the government has botched and is showing no intention of getting back on and completing. Instead, as is usual, they are blaming other governments. I mean, this is the classic government dog-ate-my-homework line. Whenever anything goes wrong it has to be somebody else’s fault. Well, in the case of the Murray Basin rail project, it is entirely their fault.

I note that this bill falls within the general requirement for integrated transport planning and once again is not meeting the act’s requirements for having an integrated transport plan. This government is ad hoc when it comes to freight, when it comes to all of the ports and freight and transport that fit together in that way, which is so important to so many Victorians, whether they work in those industries, whether they work in export-oriented industries or whether they share the roads with the trucks that could be off the roads if the government managed to get its rail freight policy up to speed and going again.

The government has once again missed a massive opportunity here, and it is just all the same. This government really has not delivered when it comes to port reform, and that is why we have Melbourne’s port in the bottom 15 per cent of global ports for productivity. It is just not good enough. I am not alone in noting that Melbourne is currently on track to lose its crown as the major port in Australia for container ports. It will be a tragedy if that happens, and it will be on the head of this government. So while government members get up and congratulate themselves and seek to congratulate the minister for getting a bill to this chamber, I think we are well past that. This government should have done so much more. This is once again a huge missed opportunity by this government to deliver the kinds of port reforms that this state needs.

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (12:17): I rise this afternoon to speak on the Transport Legislation Amendment (Port Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2022. I must say that in reflecting on this bill of course my mind very much turns to the circumstances of Geelong. As people in this chamber would be very much aware, Geelong has one of the oldest ports in Australia, and that port has played a key role in the Victorian and national economies, being a global point of access to Victorian product. I am someone who is very proud to call a port city, Geelong, home in our region.

This provides me a great opportunity to reflect on the broader logistics industry and the profound opportunities that do exist in Geelong. Geelong is the proud home of the Geelong port. We are also of course the proud home of Victoria’s second airport, in Avalon Airport, and both the Geelong port and Avalon Airport provide a strategic advantage to the broader Geelong region and indeed are very profoundly important for driving jobs in our region. I certainly have no doubt that in the years to come the port of Geelong, the maritime industry and indeed Avalon Airport will be major drivers of our region. I know and I am certainly glad that the member for Geelong is here in the chamber, but when I reflect on the port of Geelong and when I reflect on Avalon Airport and those profound opportunities, I think we also need to reflect on the fact that both of those logistics ports sit very close to the Geelong rail network that connects to our national freight network, and both are located conveniently close to the Princes Highway, again creating huge and profound opportunities for logistics in our region. I am someone who has from time to time in my parliamentary career reflected on those economic opportunities that come from Geelong being a maritime city, and I am certainly someone who sees that all of Geelong’s ports do not play a competitive role against one another. They are parts of a system, a network, an ecosystem, that do not compete with one another but work in synergy to help drive our logistics opportunities that exist.

Australia, and indeed Victoria, has always prided itself on being an import-export economy, an economy that very much wants to connect to the global economy, and we need to make sure that our ports and our airports are fit for purpose for that. In order to drive those competitive advantages and those opportunities to create jobs we need to make sure that we have governance arrangements that are fit for purpose and that those governance arrangements that are fit for purpose are not seeing our ports become less competitive. In fact what we want to see is our ports become more competitive so that our competitive advantage against other Australian jurisdictions is maintained. I am proud that the minister has taken us on this reform journey because I think by bedding down these governance arrangements, by prioritising the way we look at the logistics industry and by prioritising the way we look at our ports industry and as a consequence of getting these measures right we can continue to maintain our competitive advantage to make sure that we can get our product to the global economy as efficiently and as effectively as possible. We want to make sure that our ports do not compete against one another.

As I said earlier, Geelong is a maritime city, and historically it has played a significant role. The port of Geelong has over that journey had many facets to its business, and it has changed and it has evolved to reflect the opportunities and the need to not compete against other Victorian ports. I think Geelong as a centre of maritime excellence is something that we should reflect on. There are huge opportunities to look at the role that Geelong plays, to look at the opportunities that exist around training future maritime workers and to look at the opportunity of how we might play a role in training those people so that we can build a strong Australian shipping industry. We have seen in more recent times some of the profound challenges that exist in the logistics chain globally. I think we can have a strong Australian maritime industry with a strong set of Victorian ports that compete as a system against other Australian jurisdictions, making sure that our ports and logistics industry, on a global scale, can be competitive and can provide a huge opportunity for jobs and be a jobs driver in our Victorian economy.

I am very pleased to see this legislation come to this chamber. I hope that it can get through this chamber quickly and through the Legislative Council quickly so that the Victorian government can get on with making the profound and necessary changes to ensure that our ports system and our logistics opportunities are realised, that we create an efficient way to interact with the global economy and that we drive that investment into our ports to make sure that we have got world-class ports here in Victoria servicing not only the Victorian economy but, importantly, the national economy.

I think Geelong can play a profound role in that. I am looking forward to Ports Victoria being located in Geelong. I am looking forward to the opportunities that might come as a consequence of those historic opportunities. I am looking forward to seeing the role of the Geelong port in our Victorian ports network in the years to come. I am looking forward to the maritime industry in Australia being rebuilt, hopefully under an Albanese government. I think these opportunities are profound. I think they are important. I think they are significant. I want to see Victoria at the heart and soul of the Australian maritime industry in the years to come, and I think this reform will underpin that way forward. I certainly commend this bill to this house.

Ms HORNE (Williamstown—Minister for Ports and Freight, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, Minister for Fishing and Boating) (12:26): I move:

That the debate be now adjourned.

House divided on motion:

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Ordered that debate be adjourned until later this day.