Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Here we are yet again fixing up yet another Labor policy disaster. We have ended the carbon tax and we have ended the mining tax. Now the coalition government is reversing Labor's shambolic attempt to fleece hundreds of millions of dollars from the bank accounts of hardworking Australians. This bill, the Banking Laws Amendment (Unclaimed Money) Bill 2015, reverses the former Labor government's changes to unclaimed monies provisions made back in 2012. Labor's changes reduced the threshold at which funds were transferred to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission from seven years to three years.

If ever there was a case study in what not to do when formulating public policy then this is it. To truly appreciate just how appallingly this policy was handled by Labor in government I recommend revisiting Hansard from October and November 2012, when this bill was first introduced. It was introduced to the parliament after 5 pm on a Tuesday and then brought on for debate at 10 am the next day—which, fittingly, considering the appalling ramifications of this bill, was Halloween. There was no committee scrutiny. There was no consultation with the opposition and, more embarrassingly in that hung parliament, there was no consultation with the crossbench. In memorably awkward scenes, it was left to the then member for Lyne, Rob Oakeshott, and the member for Melbourne to point out to the Gillard government that, friends though they were, they were not inclined to support a bill that they had not had a chance to read. When even the Greens think a revenue-raising measure is a bit extreme, it is probably the time to take another look at it. So debate was adjourned while Labor grudgingly trudged off to consult with affected stakeholders.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you will not be surprised to learn that industry stakeholders were not happy with being given no notice and very little time to react to the proposed changes. Organisations such as the Australian Bankers Association, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia and the Association of Financial Advisers all suggested that three years was too short a period of inactivity to deem an account unclaimed. Of course, Labor ignored these objections and pushed on with the bill. But, strangely, when the bill came back on for debate a few weeks later, not a single Labor backbencher spoke in support of the bill. What were they afraid of? If this was such good policy, as suggested by the member for Oxley in introducing the bill, why did they stay silent.

We here in the coalition tried our best to warn Labor about this bill. Speaker after speaker urged Labor to reconsider. In my own speech back then I made mention of the unintended consequences of this bill—that Labor would be inadvertently taking the accounts of people who have been saving money for travel and for university and who have been putting money away for a rainy day. I urged Labor to withdraw the bill in order to facilitate further discussion and consultation.

See this speech in context