Shipping Australia’s submission to the Simplified Trade System consultation, being carried out by the Australian Government, has urged the adoption of the “tell us once” philosophy and that Australian rules should align with global rules.
In the run-up to Christmas, the Federal government announced AUD$137.7m over four years to help revamp Australia’s trade system by simplifying regulation, reducing duplication, and creating a one-stop digital shop for trade.
One is better than three
Shipping Australia’s submission focused on two key areas: a “single window” and the alignment of Australian shipping and maritime rules with global standards.
Regulations that affect cross-border goods are administered by 28 different Commonwealth government agencies. Shipping companies can be required to supply the same information to a variety of different government bodies.
That’s costly and, in this day and age, it’s entirely possible for government agencies to co-ordinate their activities so that shipping companies only have to provide their information to one government contact point, once. The various government agencies should then be able to get their information from that contact point.
Building one industry-government contact makes a lot of sense. Building multiple industry-government points of contact makes a lot less sense. You can probably guess which option Australia is choosing. For more details, see: A solitary guiding philosophy for multiple ‘single window’ projects: “tell us once!”.
Shipping Australia has urged the Simplified Trade System Taskforce to ensure that there is only one contact industry / government contact point.
Align Australian standards with international standards
A somewhat similar idea is that Australia should align its rules and standards with international rules and standards. Ships travel to and from different ports in different countries. If those countries have different rules and systems, then the compliance and administrative costs and burdens increase. If there are a sufficiently large number of differences, or the differences are very large (or both), then those burdens can be substantial.
If the burden is heavy enough, it could lead to a variety of adverse effects. Smaller liner shipping companies that put small numbers of vessels onto the Australian trade, such as one ship in a loop, might choose not to deploy ships here or they might even choose to withdraw them. Bigger liner shipping companies could reduce service levels and / or introduce fees or surcharges to cover the costs. There could be other effects too.
Reduction of services, or more expensive services, are not in Australia’s interests.
Shipping Australia has urged the Simplified Trade Taskforce to align Australia’s rules with international standards.
