House debates

Wednesday, 21 March 2012

Bills

Corporations Amendment (Future of Financial Advice) Bill 2011, Corporations Amendment (Further Future of Financial Advice Measures) Bill 2011; Second Reading

12:50 pm

Photo of Jamie BriggsJamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Hansard source

I make no deference in that respect. This is an issue we will continue to push because there is a sensitivity. You know there is a sensitivity because, on the very day that the Leader of the Opposition made some very calm comments, the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions was out there trying to blow up the whole thing. It is a very sensitive issue when it comes to what these people are doing with other Australians' superannuation entitlements and how it will affect their financial security in the future. This bill makes it worse, it has to be said.

The provision which needs to be closely examined, and Senator Mathias Cormann has done some very good work in this respect, is the opt-in provision. This is where the favour is returned to the industry super fund network. We know that because the only people during the Ripoll inquiry who argued for opt-in were the industry super network. They were the only group of people who argued for it, but somehow they became a major base of the legislation. They became a major point in this legislative reform. Somehow this opt-in provision, which, of course, benefits big advisers to the detriment of small advisers, became part of this reform. This has to be changed, absolutely. This is one of the major reasons the coalition will oppose this bill, unless the Labor Party and this minister wise up and adopt our proposed amendments. Our amendments will make this bill workable. They will create a reasonable piece of legislation, which is what the industry wants. I am sure many members have received their small business financial advisers' views on this, and they are one and the same. They all say, 'Please, don't tie me up in this red tape. Please, don't drag me down and try to stop me from doing the job that I have been pursuing as an entrepreneur, as a small business person and as a skilled artisan in this field, helping fellow Australian consumers understand their financial obligations and opportunities better.' This piece of legislation does the exact opposite. It seeks to favour the big over the small. It seeks to favour friends over those who are not friends of the Australian Labor Party.

It is a real shame that this piece of legislation has come to this parliament in this way. That is why we oppose it. That is why we say there is a better way to deal with this in the future. But, as I said, this is so consistent with what the Australian Labor Party is doing in government. For instance, we see a start-up date, as the member for Mitchell and the member for Higgins so rightly outlined, which is far too quick. With the industry screaming and saying, 'We can't possibly do this. We can't possibly achieve this start-up date,' this legislation, at the very least, should be put off to take that into account so that the industry can deal appropriately with the red tape nightmare that is being thrown their way.

I say again that the coalition opposes these bills. I congratulate Senator Mathias Cormann on the great work that he has done in this area. I urge the minister, who has so many vested interests, to reconsider the pursuit of this and the pursuit of small business which is making it more expensive for Australian consumers and putting at risk their financial security in the future as it becomes harder for them to get advice. This is too important an area to play politics with, and that is what this minister is doing. It is a great shame. The bills should be opposed.

Debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13 : 02 to 16 : 00

Comments

No comments