House debates

Thursday, 19 June 2014

Bills

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015; Consideration in Detail

10:39 am

Photo of Eric HutchinsonEric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I declare an interest first of all. Up until very recently my wife was a small business owner. She has relinquished herself of that nevertheless quite profitable burden and is now seeking an alternative business. I would like to follow up on a question that I asked the minister in question time the other day. It was in respect of the nearly 8,000 small businesses in my electorate of Lyons. I was replaying the question there because it was an excellent answer from the minister. In the question I did compliment the government on the fact that we now have the Minister for Small Business in cabinet. That is a really important initiative. It was a commitment that we went to the election with.

We made a number of commitments in the lead-up to the election. I would like the minister to reflect on those and then answer some of my specific questions. In relation to paid parental leave, can the minister contextualise the productivity benefits that flow to small business being able to compete with the Public Service and big business on a level playing field and how that initiative is a piece of economic policy as opposed to a welfare measure?

My other specific question relates to one of the commitments we gave—and the minister has already commented on this, and I appreciate that—about a root and branch review of the competition policy in this country. That commitment was part of our 10-point plan to support small business that we took to the election in September. We said we would commit to a review of the competition framework to ensure the Australian law and policy settings promote a vibrant, competitive market in the economy and ensure small business is given a fair go. My question relates specifically to section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act, which relates to the misuse of power. I note the comment you made before with respect to funding. Was it an issue of funding under the previous administration that removed the capacity of section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act to be used in the way that I think those who designed the act always intended it to be?

Those are my two specific questions. If I have an opportunity later on, I will probably have more.

Comments

No comments