When we look at arms and ammunition exports by country, we can see that the DFAT’s trade statistical pivot tables show that in arms and ammunition exports from Australia to the State of Israel, there was $13 million of the kinds of products that I’d just read out between 2018 and 2022, $38 million since 2007, and $1.75 million since Senator Farrell’s government came into office. The most recently released figure for arms and ammunition exports to Israel was released only about a fortnight ago and it said in October of last year another $124,000 of arms and ammunition went to Israel. Are those figures accurate? Is what is on the pivot table accurate?
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: I do.
CHAIR: Okay, I’m going to hand the call to you. We’ve already had half an hour of the coalition, so I’m going to hand over to the Greens.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Thanks, Chair. Thanks, Minister. It’s nice to see you. Could I ask about the trade statistical pivot tables. Who is responsible for those?
Senator Farrell: We’ll find somebody.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: It’s the most exciting start to any question: the trade statistical pivot tables. You’ve been waiting for this all day, I’m sure.
Mr Woods : Very excited to be here, Senator.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Thanks, Mr Woods. You’re the chief economist?
Mr Woods : I am.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Are the monthly annual pivot tables in your patch?
Mr Woods : They are.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: I wanted to focus in on a category of exports headed ‘Arms & ammunition’. It’s my understanding that the statistical pivot tables use the Australian Harmonised Export Commodity Classification; is that right?
Mr Woods : Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: And that’s issued by the Australian Bureau of Statistics?
Mr Woods : Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: The definition was settled in January 2006, I think, so it’s a longstanding definition?
Mr Woods : I don’t have that off the top of my head, but let’s go with it for now.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: The relevant number on the ABS website is 1233.0. It reads: ‘Arms and ammunition; parts and accessories thereof’—that’s the chapter and that’s the heading. It’s military weapons; revolvers and pistols; other firearms and similar devices—shotguns, rifles, muzzle-loading firearms; spring, air or gas guns and pistols; truncheons; parts of all those items that I just mentioned; bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and similar munitions of war; and—perhaps an old part of the definition—swords, cutlasses, bayonets, lances and similar arms.
Mr Woods : I would leave the bayonets out, but yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: It’s also ‘scabbards and sheaths thereof’. It’s weapons. It’s what’s on the box—it’s arms and ammunition.
Mr Woods : Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: You weren’t there when it was defined, but it’s weapons, as set out. As I said, it’s what’s on the box. When we look at arms and ammunition exports by country, we can see that the DFAT’s trade statistical pivot tables show that in arms and ammunition exports from Australia to the State of Israel, there was $13 million of the kinds of products that I’d just read out between 2018 and 2022, $38 million since 2007, and $1.75 million since Senator Farrell’s government came into office. The most recently released figure for arms and ammunition exports to Israel was released only about a fortnight ago and it said in October of last year another $124,000 of arms and ammunition went to Israel. Are those figures accurate? Is what is on the pivot table accurate?
Mr Woods : Let me give a little bit of background to how those numbers are compiled. I think this was caucused at Defence estimates earlier in the week, but from where we are sitting—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: To be clear, the trade statistically pivot tables weren’t. It was the definition of arms under the arms trade treaty—not that definition, a different matter.
Mr Woods : I know obviously the story published in the Guardian—I think it was in November—would be picking up on what we published in those pivot tables, which, as you rightly say, we source from the ABS, who do prepare them against the harmonised standards that you describe, so the framing is all correct. But you have to go the next level and the next level is to say: Where does the ABS get its numbers from? The ABS source their numbers for export purposes from Australian Border Force. Australian Border Force prepare numbers which they then send through to the ABS, who then publish the export data which we in DFAT then publish in our pivot tables. The ABF data is prepared on the back of self-declaration by exporters, again, using the same set of systems that you are describing.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Just to be clear, using the definition of the Australian harmonised export commodity classification description that I’ve read to you, revolvers, pistols, firearms, bombs, grenades, torpedoes, swords, cutlasses.
Mr Woods : That is how the ABS prepares it. I believe that technically what happens at Border Force is against a different typology but one that speaks back to the harmonised standards. So technically—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: To be clear, the harmonised standard is what I read to you—revolvers, pistols, firearms, parts of those, bombs, grenades.
Mr Woods : That is correct and is published by the ABS, as you say. But the data which is collected by the ABF, which is the foundation for what is published by the ABS, I believe, is collected against a different system. Not to challenge the basic point—one system talks to another—but just to be technically correct. But the key part to focus on is that it is self-declaration by the exporter. There is no audit. There is no verification undertaken by ABF for that purpose except through random checks.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Just stopping you there, given you are more likely to have scrutiny if you tick ‘arms and ammunition’, surely there would be on an exporter’s point of view, if it is a self-declaration thing, the moral hazard is they are less likely to tick ‘arms and ammunition’ than otherwise. Would you agree with that?
Mr Woods : You have taken me to a question which I would refer you to the ABF.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Until the most recent conflicts started between Israel and the Palestinian people in Gaza, was there any questioning of the veracity of these figures?
Mr Woods : I would point to the regulatory framework that sits around—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Was there any questioning of the figures for the two decades that data has been produced under this classification? Was it ever questioned until the most recent conflict started?
Mr Woods : I haven’t been doing this job for two decades but—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: In your experience, Mr Woods.
Mr Woods : In my experience, from a DFAT perspective, we source our data from the ABS. We then manipulate the data to make it more user-friendly for our purposes, which we then publish. But we are not in the business, from where we are sitting with DFAT, to go back and question the material that we are getting from ABS.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: When you say that, what you are saying is that exporters self-report. They say that it is arms and ammunition. ABF then take that data and hand it to ABS, which are an incredibly professional and rigorous organisation—
Mr Woods : They are.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: who then collate the data—
Mr Woods : They do.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: and you publish it in a usable form.
Mr Woods : Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Surely that is the most credible data we have about arms and ammunition sales to the State of Israel then. Or do you have another dataset that challenges it?
Mr Woods : I would point you to the regulatory framework that is administered by Defence and the defence export controls—
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Which publishes no details.
Mr Woods : which regulates the export of those materials.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: But they don’t talk to each other.
Mr Woods : That would be a question for Defence and a question for Border Force. It is not a question for DFAT.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: You are pointing me there, but, I’m telling you, they don’t talk to each other; they operate in parallel.
Mr Woods : That, I don’t have visibility of.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: So you are the chief economist for Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade?
Mr Woods : Yes.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Apart from the figures that I have just told you about, millions and millions of dollars of arms and ammunition sales to Israel, including in the last five years, published by your department in your section from credible provided by the ABS, do you have any data or any evidence you can point me to that suggests that they are wrong or that the numbers are different?
Mr Woods : The evidence I would point to is that we have a regulatory framework and the regulatory framework is administered by Defence. They would offer the advice on whether those numbers are consistent with what they administer.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: No, but Defence has no part in this process. This process is from the ABF to the ABS to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, or, to remove the acronyms, from Border Force to the Bureau of Statistics to foreign affairs. There is no role for the Department of Defence in this chain of information.
Mr Woods : It starts with the exporter.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Yes, but it is not related to this chain of information. You pointing to Defence is like pointing to a red herring or a fish; it has no connection with this chain of data.
Mr Woods : I would say that pointing to Defence as the regulator for the export of defence materials is entirely reasonable.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Yes but they don’t have any quality control or role in this flow of data.
Mr Woods : DFAT has no quality control over the data, neither does ABS or the ABF, except to the extent that we have exporters putting the data in.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: I’m assuming we have competent bureaucracy. I’m assuming that they have satisfied themselves that the data they are providing is credible. Do you think that is a safe assumption when we are talking about a Commonwealth government department?
CHAIR: You are asking for an opinion there.
Mr Woods : I would put to you that for all the reasons you have described previously, which is to say the ABS are the authoritative source of data, IF we are receiving data from ABS, then DFAT is not in a position to gainsay that.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Yes, so you have no basis at all upon which you can say that, from a DFAT perspective, the data is wrong.
Mr Woods : That is correct, except to the point of them bringing in evidence from the relevant regulator, who will have a different point of view.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Who has no role at all in this chain of data.
Mr Woods : Who has their own visibility on the export of weapons.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Yes, but to be absolutely clear, you are the chief economist for DFAT and you’re in charge of the publication of this data and the quality control from DFAT. You get the data from the most credible source for data, being the ABS. Correct?
Mr Woods : We’ve been through this. The question is: what’s at the other end of the chain that comes through the ABS, and that is self-reporting. That is truly the issue here. Are we confident that the self reporting is correct, and this is an issue that the ABF are talking with Defence about.
Senator SHOEBRIDGE: Just to be clear, Mr Woods, I asked you earlier if there had ever been a suggestion that this data was not credible or a challenge to this data before the most recent conflict commenced.
Mr Woods : I would say there has been no question or challenge to the credibility of any of the data that we publish, not just this.