Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

This bill, and its associated bills, says everything about this government, to quote the member for Wentworth, being a government of 'slogans, not advocacy'. The bill is about red-tape repeal day. It happened months and month ago, but, finally, we are now dealing with this particular tranche of legislation. The government has waxed lyrical about all of its savings. What it has actually done is normal statute revision work of any government. We did this without much fanfare when we were in government, and it was done almost invariably in the Federation Chamber because it was not controversial, but this government is always about slogans, as the member for Wentworth said. It is all about three-word slogans and catchy little phrases. It talked all about this wonderful piece of legislation—the Omnibus Repeal Day (Autumn 2015) Bill. It sounds impressive, but do you know what? The government estimates that this will result in $41.4 million in deregulatory savings. Why this is not dealt with in the Federation Chamber, I do not know.

Keen listeners will recall that I mentioned there were two deregulatory savings measures in this piece of legislation—and guess what? The explanatory memorandum refers to the other aspect of this legislation. I kid you not, it generates a whopping $3,000 in deregulatory savings. There you have it—the Omnibus Repeal Day (Autumn 2015) Bill. Such fanfare! Wonderful stuff! We have a Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister—it was the member for Kooyong, now it is the member for Pearce—coming in here and talking about it. It creates just over $41.4 million in savings from these two amendments, and the government expects a round of applause.

Put in context, this is less than 10 per cent of the $475.7 million in deregulatory savings the government had reported since last the repeal day, in October 2014. What makes up the balance? I will go through a couple of things. The bill amends and repeals several acts in the agricultural portfolio for nil deregulatory savings. How does this affect primary producers in my electorate of Blair, which is a regional-rural seat? Dairy farmers in the Somerset region can rest easy knowing that the government will appeal the Dairy Adjustment Act 1974, even though the last agreement under that act came into effect in 1976 and the period for new agreements lapsed in 1977. Goodness me, they will be up in arms in Esk and Toogoolawah about that one!

Meat exporters around Kilcoy and Coominya in my electorate will also see absolutely no effect from the repeal of the Meat Export Charge Act 1984 and the Meat Export Charge Collection Act 1984. Those two acts impose charges and applications for the inspection of export meat and meat products. In government, we introduced a new cost recovery arrangement for these inspections under our export certification reform package. The cost recovery arrangements are now detailed under the Australian Export Meat Inspection System and fees are collected under different legislation. Farmers in Blair are unlikely to be troubled also by the Retirement Assistance for Farmers Scheme or the Retirement Assistance for Sugarcane Farmers Scheme from the Social Security Act 1991. These schemes closed—I kid you not, Mr Deputy Speaker—in 2001 and 2007 respectively. Additionally, repealing the Primary Industry Councils Act 1991 will not see these councils furiously updating their profiles across the internet. There are no industry councils existing under the act, and no councils have actually been established since 1993. For the record, the second reading speech identifies that only two councils were established under that act—the Grains Industry Council, which ceased in 1998, and the Australian Pig Industry Council, which ceased in 1999. Members of those councils have, presumably, moved on to bigger and better things some time ago.

This bill also amends and repeals several acts in the Treasury for, again, nil deregulatory savings. How will all of these changes effect the residents in my electorate of Blair? As all of the transactions under the International Monetary Agreements Act 1959 are now complete, I suspect the government's repeal of this act will not make the front, the second or even the last page of The Queensland Times, published in Ipswich in my electorate. The people of Ipswich and Somerset are unlikely to rush to their accountants following the repeal of the Income Tax (Withholding Tax Recoupment) Act 1971, as changes to tax laws in 2006 meant that that type of borrowing taxed under the act could no longer arise. That act is redundant and will be repealed. I could go on and on—and I will.

There are examples in Indigenous affairs—my shadow portfolio. The bill repeals two acts in the Indigenous affairs portfolio. The first is the Aboriginal Affairs (Arrangements with the States) Act 1973. This act enables the appointment of state government employees to the Australian Public Service and APS-permitted persons to perform functions under the state laws relating to Indigenous affairs. This act is redundant as the Public Service Act 1999 has similar arrangements for the transfer of state and APS employees to another state or agency to perform services relating to and including Indigenous affairs. The second act repealed is the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Queensland Discriminatory Laws) Act 1975. This act supersedes certain historical Queensland laws that discriminated against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Thankfully, those discriminatory Queensland laws have been repealed, and the act is no longer needed.

Again, we are not arguing that the government should not be doing this. This is spent legislation—redundant acts. This legislation does not deserve a special stunt day. It should be dealt with in the Federation Chamber. It should be remembered that this legislation will not improve the lot in life or the lifestyle of one Indigenous Australian. It will not restore the more than $500 million that the Abbott government has cut savagely from Indigenous front-line services and programs since the 2014-15 budget. It will not correct for one moment the government's shambolic Indigenous Advancement Strategy, which has left hundreds of Indigenous organisations struggling with ongoing financial uncertainty. It will not erase the self-proclaimed Prime Minister for Indigenous affairs' offensive description of Aboriginal people's right to live on traditional lands as a 'lifestyle choice'.

The second bill, the Statute Law Revision Bill (No. 2) 2015, will have no financial impact on the bottom line. This is the third statute revision bill introduced by this government in this parliament. As I said before, these are not novel; they are not modern legislative instruments. Governments of all stripes have been doing this in the Australian parliament—the place down the road or this place here—since 1934, the year Joseph Lyons was Prime Minister and, I might add, the year the Three Stooges released their first film, so I am told. This is routine government work carried out by all governments. These bills correct spelling, punctuation and other drafting errors in the legislation. They update cross-references. They remove spent or obsolete provisions. It is all worthy work. It is not bold deregulatory reform, no matter what the government would have you believe.

Just like its predecessors, this is a housekeeping bill. It is not controversial or confronting. It does not remove or streamline any operative regulation. If this bill were a colour, it would be faded beige. The member for Pearce and parliamentary secretary sums this up neatly in his second reading speech:

The bill makes improvements to the acts it amends without making substantive changes to the law.

He is right. The bill is no page turner. For example, item 5 of schedule 2 of the bill corrects a typographical error in subitem 20(10) of schedule 2 to the Medibank Private Sale Act 2006 where the first word of subitem (10) does not have an initial capital letter—great regulatory reform! Other corrections include correcting a grammatical error in the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Code Act 1994, which refers to 'an veterinary chemical product' rather than 'a veterinary chemical product'. So, it replaces an 'an' with an 'a'—truly heroic reform! It introduces gender-neutral language into the acts. The bill makes purely technical amendments to the indexation provisions in certain acts that rely on the consumer price index, altering 'reference base' terminology to 'index reference base' terminology.

This act will not affect any pension payments, unlike the government's plan to index pensions to CPI rather than the higher of CPI, MTAWE and PBLCI from 2017, which will erode the value of pensions and make it harder for older Australians to live with dignity. The 15,000 aged pensioners in my electorate would rather the Abbott government left their pensions alone than seek a pat on the back for minor technical change to indexing terminology.

The Statute Law Revision Bill also amends relevant legislation that predates ACT and Northern Territory self-government so that where that legislation binds the states it also binds the territories. The bill repeals spent and obsolete acts, including the Captains Flat (Abatement of Pollution) Agreement Act 1975. For the interest of members with electorates outside the Southern Tablelands of New South Wales, I am told Captains Flat is a town south of Queanbeyan. This is all a worthy purpose, but the act is obsolete and worthy of being repealed. However, it will not reduce the regulatory burden on a single Australian business in a measurable way. It will not create a single job. To my knowledge, no business has contacted my office to demand the repeal of the Captains Flat (Abatement of Pollution) Agreement Act 1975. For the government to elevate and exaggerate this simple housekeeping bill is a stunt—a slogan, as the member for Wentworth has said. It reveals an arrogant government that is out of touch, out of ideas and out of its depth.

The Amending Acts 1980 to 1989 Repeal Bill 2015 is the third bill that this chamber will debate. The bill will have no financial impact. It will repeal about 850 amending or repealed acts enacted between the years—you guessed it!—1980 and 1989. Every one of those acts has been inoperative for at least 25 years. We agree that redundant, unenforced or irrelevant acts should be removed from the statute books. That is what we did when we were in government. But we did so without pretending that repealing the Captains Flat (Abatement of Pollution) Agreement Act 1975 was bold regulatory reform that will 'reduce the regulatory burden on any person or business in the country'.

Soon enough the Abbott government will run out of stunts to pull for these repeal days, and we see that it is already happening. Goodness knows what is going to happen when they get rid of the Amending Acts 2010 to 2015 Repeal Bill. How will that satisfy the Australian public, which has taken repeal days into their hearts and their homes? The government should consider repealing its policies and legislation that hurt Australians—the pensioners, the families, the students in my electorate. They are the ones who need protection. The government should hang its head in shame over these slogans, as the member for Wentworth has said, and these stunts.

See this speech in context