House debates

Tuesday, 1 December 2015

Bills

Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2015) Bill 2015, Amending Acts 1990 to 1999 Repeal Bill 2015, Statute Law Revision Bill (No. 3) 2015; Second Reading

8:30 pm

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

Inefficient regulation costs more than time and money. It makes our economy less agile and hinders competition and innovation. Allowing spent and redundant acts or provisions to remain in force on the Commonwealth's statute bo   oks does not serve any purpose. It only makes it more difficult for businesses, community organisations, families and individuals to find out about the regulations that really matter to them. Even worse, outdated and irrelevant laws and regulations make lawbreakers out of decent hard-working people.

I congratulate the assistant minister, the member for Eden-Monaro, because the regulatory cost savings achieved by this Omnibus Repeal Bill are likely to be around $6.17 million, while cost savings for the Amending Acts 1990 to 1999 Repeal Bill will result in deregulatory savings of about $600,000 per year and the Statute Law Revision Bill will result in regulatory cost savings of about $50,000 per year. Sometimes the best thing we can do to make more services more affordable and more accessible for more of those who need it is for government to actually do less.

The coalition government's regulatory reform agenda has been a success. While the regulatory savings in these bills are relatively modest, in a cumulative sense, this bill goes some way to chipping away at the mountain of red tape Labor left in its wake, and it is consistent with the coalition's commitment to red tape reduction by $l billion a year. Clearly, the business community has good reason to celebrate the coalition's record in cutting red tape. In our first two years, for example, we have already achieved more than double our election commitment target—with almost $4.5 billion in red tape savings.

To date and subject to the passage of legislation through parliament, this government has taken decisions to repeal more than 10,000 legislative instruments and around 2,700 Acts of Parliament. For every $1 added to the cost of regulation, the government has made decisions that cut more than $11. These bills are part of the government's efforts to clean up the Commonwealth's statute books. Collectively, these three Repeal Day Bills will repeal more than 900 Commonwealth Acts—making it easier for users of Commonwealth legislation to find and access regulations.

Law-abiding citizens should not have to sift through outdated and unnecessary Commonwealth legislation to determine whether certain regulations still apply. As examples, the Wool International Act 1993 and the Wool International Privatisation Act 1999 are no longer needed, because Woolstock Australia Limited was wound up and delisted from the Australian Stock Exchange in 2001—14 years ago. It also makes sense to wind up the Medical Training Review Panel and simplify approved provider obligations in the area of aged care because the National Medical Training Advisory Network now provides advice on medical workforce planning and medical training plans to inform government, employers and educators. We do not need two bodies to do the same job. The Aged Care Act 1997 will still require approved providers to notify the department of changes in circumstances that materially affects the provider's suitability to provide care. Doing the same thing twice—only to satisfy two different processes—just adds unnecessary cost to the government and provider, which, of course, is then passed onto the taxpayer and the consumer.

Part 3 of the Fisheries Administration Act 1991, which established the Fishing Industry Policy Council, is no longer needed. The council has not convened since it was enacted in 1991—more than 24 years ago—and its functions are now fulfilled by other working groups and committees. The Statistical Bureau (Tasmania) Act 1924 has served its purpose as well. Similarly, the Papua and New Guinea Loan (International Bank) Act 1970 can be repealed because the loan has been repaid in full.

Labor's six years on this side of the House—hard labour for those who must clean up after it—were like a policy of scorched earth for the Australian economy. If no action was taken on Labor's reckless spending commitments, within a decade our interest repayments would have been $3 billion a month. I know that those opposite find it difficult to understand, but excessive red tape does detract from productivity and ultimately lowers the standard of living for all Australians. Bad regulation costs more than just time and money—it is a drag on our economy. Regulatory barriers can also hinder competition and the market forces that push firms to innovate and perform at their best.

When looking at the big challenges facing the Australian government, it is generally a very good idea to first have a look at the legacy of previous governments. In this context, it is worth recalling that, when the Rudd-Gillard government came to office, Labor inherited a surplus of $20 billion with no net debt and $45 billion in the bank. When the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government left office six years' later, it left in its wake 200,000 more unemployed, gross debt projected to rise to $667 billion, $123 billion in cumulative deficits, the world's biggest carbon tax and a mountain of job-destroying red and green tape. Clearly, there was a need to rein in Labor's debt and do whatever we could to grow the economy and create jobs. This government has improved systems for regulatory decision making, with all cabinet submissions now accompanied by an analysis of the regulatory cost and benefit.

In an age of rapid technologically-driven change, we simply cannot 'set and forget' when it comes to rules and regulations. We have changed the way we approach regulation so that it is not seen as a costless way to address policy issues. Here today, with the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2015) Bill 2015, we are again sweeping away more dead and fossilised red tape and uncluttering the Commonwealth's statute books while making other laws more efficient and more productive. In our first two years we have already achieved more than double our election commitment target, with almost $4.5 billion in red tape savings. I congratulate the government on beating our red tape cost saving target by $2.5 billion in just over two years.

I acknowledge that at the table in the House this evening we have the Minister for Resources, Energy and Northern Australia, who in his first role in this parliament was chairman of the red tape reduction committee. In that role he spearheaded the attack on red tape, the attack on unnecessary legislation. The minister, the member for Kooyong, of course played a vital role in initiating what we see before us—$4.5 billion in red tape savings in under three years. It is all very well for those on the other side to detract from what we are achieving, but what did they do? They had time to reduce this regulation, they had time to wipe off our books the unnecessary regulations and bills that have accumulated over the years. They stand here and detract from what we have achieved, and yet they did nothing. They just added to the problem.

I congratulate the member for Kooyong and the member for Eden-Monaro on the work they have done, and I acknowledge the role of the member for Pearce. Red tape reduction goes to the heart of supporting businesses in our community; it goes to the heart particularly of supporting small businesses. I know from having had my own business that the worst thing I had to do was wade through the myriad of regulation and red tape that confronted me all the time. As I said earlier, it has turned honest, law-abiding, hardworking small business people into lawbreakers, because it is so difficult to put up with the regulation, with the red and green tape, that small businesses are confronted with on a day-to-day basis. Ministers like the member for Kooyong and the member for Eden-Monaro have taken away that myriad of tape that has strangled small business, and I congratulate them for saving almost $4.5 billion in just a few years.

Comments

No comments