Ali France (Dickson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026. The government committed to streamlining Australia's financial reporting bodies. The bill delivers on this commitment by creating External Reporting Australia, ERA. ERA will combine the existing standard-setting functions of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council, and be responsible for accounting, auditing and assurance, and sustainability standards. At commencement, ERA's responsibilities will include making and formulating accounting, auditing and assurance, and sustainability standards, and providing strategic policy advice and reports to the minister on its functions. Additional functions, including the making of new kinds of standards, can be conferred by ministerial instruments should they be required in the future.

ERA will not have the current function of the ERC of providing advice and reports to the minister and professional accounting bodies in relation to the quality of audits conducted by Australian auditors. This overlaps with those already performed by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, which has access to compulsory powers and an investigative remit to carry out and report on this work as well as the ability to take enforcement action. As reflected in some feedback received during consultation, without this function, ERA will be better positioned to direct its specialist resources and focus on its primary role of setting standards in its establishment phase.

Transitional provisions provide certainty and continuity between the existing arrangements and the new arrangements. The provisions are designed to ensure that External Reporting Australia can begin operations from the day of the amendments, establishing that the new arrangements take effect and maintaining the validity of any existing standards issued by the existing bodies.

If the bill receives assent before 30 June 2026, a four-month transition period will commence on 30 June 2026, with External Reporting Australia commencing operations on 1 November 2026. The transitional period will provide for sufficient time to transition from the existing to the new arrangements in an orderly way so as to limit disruption.

Integrity in our markets matters because when people trust the system to be fair and honest, they're more willing to invest, innovate and plan for their future. That confidence underpins a strong economy for everyone. The new legislation establishes more adaptable and accountable standard setting through the creation of a new one-stop shop, External Reporting Australia. Our standard setters play a crucial role in supporting the integrity of markets, enhancing investor confidence and ensuring accountability in public sector institutions. The legislation strengthens the existing system by better positioning it to respond to emerging developments both locally and internationally. It provides for the establishment of technical standard-setting boards within ERA, including a dedicated board for developing and maintaining standards for sustainability reporting. Existing standards will continue as standards of ERA until updated or replaced.

The introduction of the bill follows extensive consultation and consideration of feedback. The establishment of ERA has been guided by three key principles: flexibility and removing barriers so that future standard setting so that needs arising in the future can be more easily accommodated; preserving what works and seeking to maintain key benefits of the existing structure; and strengthening accountability by ensuring workable and appropriate governance arrangements are in place, including alignment between responsibility for the body's performance and the capacity to address issues when they arise, while at the same time managing conflicts of interest.

The transitional provisions in the bill will facilitate an orderly process, minimising disruption to the current standard-setting board's ongoing work and providing greater certainty around statutory roles ahead of commencement. This reform helps ensure the governance and structural arrangements of Australia's economic institutions, and that they are best positioned to help build a more competitive, dynamic and productive economy. I commend the bill to the House.

Julie-Ann Campbell (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Strong economies have a foundation of trust—trust in our government and trust in financial institutions. Trust is how decisions are made—trust that the leadership is accountable and trust that the numbers are correct. After all, the integrity of our markets is crucially important. When people believe the system is fair, when people believe that the system is transparent and operating as it should be, they're far more willing to take part in it.

Confidence in the financial system encourages individuals and businesses to invest. Confidence gives people the opportunity to try new ideas and to make long-term plans with certainty. Because if you're thinking about taking the plunge to start a new business—to write out the plan, to put in the loan and to make it happen—it's confidence that will give you the gusto to do it. If you are thinking about investing in new technology, advanced manufacturing—things that will give you a lift to make your business more productive—it's confidence that will allow you to do that too. If you're thinking about hiring more people to expand your business, it's confidence that will get you there. When trust is strong, participation grows. We know that. That collective confidence is what helps drive a resilient and thriving economy that benefits everyone.

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026 builds on this foundation to deliver the biggest reform to Australia's financial reporting standards-setting institutions in over two decades. Put simply, this legislation introduces a more flexible and a more accountable way of setting standards by bringing existing standard-setting entities together under a single streamlined body, External Reporting Australia, or ERA.

For some, financial reporting system reform might seem a bit bland. It might not be the thing that they read about at night before they go to bed—not me! I can tell you that making sure something that can seem complex has clarity, is holistic and is simple for people to understand is what will drive confidence in the business community and what will drive confidence in the market. Instead of navigating multiple agencies and processes, ERA creates a clear one-stop shop for guidance, oversight and decision-making. This new structure is designed to respond more quickly to emerging issues, support better consistency and make the system more seamless.

ERA will combine the standard-setting responsibilities that currently sit across three separate bodies: the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council. By consolidating these functions into a single organisation, ERA will oversee the full suite of reporting standards, accounting, auditing and assurance as well as sustainability. This unified approach means that, instead of navigating multiple different frameworks or interpreting requirements across a number of different agencies, stakeholders will have that one coordinated source of guidance and decision-making. It makes it more simple and it gives people the clarity that they need to have the confidence to make decisions and to have the confidence to plan going forward. This is important because standard-setting organisations have a vital role in supporting the integrity of our markets. Their work helps ensure that the information organisations publish is reliable, consistent and meaningful—the kind of information investors, regulators and the public can genuinely rely on.

When standards are strong and when they're clearly applied, they lift confidence across that whole system and they encourage investment. They encourage people to back our economy and to back Australia. They also reinforce accountability in public institutions, making sure that government reporting is transparent and held to the same expectations of quality and clarity that we know are so critical.

The legislation will strengthen the overall reporting framework so it can more effectively keep pace with new developments in Australia and also overseas. This includes ensuring the system is better equipped to respond to evolving market practices, changes in technology and shifts in international standards. By creating a structure that can adapt more easily, the framework is designed to remain relevant, reliable and aligned with global expectations.

The future is here when it comes to being future focused. We know that technology is moving at an incredibly rapid pace. We see it in the absolute transformation of our markets. We see it in the absolute transformation of business. We see it in the emerging digital assets sector. We see it being used at the checkout, at the pump. Everywhere that is important to everyday Australians we are seeing technology take off, and making sure that our regulation and our laws cover that new technology is incredibly important.

We saw that in some of the financial bills that were moved last year, and we saw it more recently with the Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill. Not only is this a government that is focused on ensuring that the technology that is here now is up to date and that our legislation accounts for it; it's also a government that is focused on setting up systems and setting up regulatory frameworks that allow us to grow and move with that rise and with that change in technology.

It's worth looking at the core principles behind the establishment of ERA. The first is flexibility. A modern reporting system needs to keep pace with a world that is changing faster than ever, whether that's new technologies or emerging business models. ERA has been structured to remove unnecessary barriers and give standard setters the room to respond quickly when new challenges or opportunities arise. A single entity is better placed to operate efficiently in the face of these kinds of changes.

The second guiding principle is preservation and retaining the strengths that have consistently delivered high-quality standards. That means protecting the deep technical expertise and specialist knowledge essential for credible and trusted reporting. ERA builds on the knowledge base that has served business regulators and the community very well, ensuring that the reforms enhance rather than disrupt the qualities that underpin accurate and reliable standard setting. To this end, existing standards will continue as standards of ERA until they are updated or until they're replaced.

Finally, ERA was established with a principle of strengthening accountability. A clear and transparent government framework is critical for any entity that's responsible for setting standards that affect the broader community, that affect Australians, that affect businesses, that affect the market, that affect who we are as a country. ERA has been designed to align responsibility with authority so the people tasked with overseeing performance also have the ability to address issues when they arise. This includes stronger mechanisms for oversight, clearer lines of decision-making and an approach that actively manages potential conflicts of interests.

When an organisation like ERA depends on up-to-date, highly specialised knowledge to produce strong and reliable standards, it's inevitable that many of those experts will also be active professionals in their fields. That reality makes it especially important to handle any potential or perceived conflicts of interest in a balanced but also practical way. This bill supports that by putting safeguards in place so the community can trust both the integrity of the standard-setting process and the quality of the standards themselves. It's about ensuring openness, it's about ensuring clarity, and it's about ensuring confidence at every single step of the way.

The bill also introduces stronger transparency measures for ERA's operations. Any part of a meeting, whether of the governing council or of one of ERA's standard-setting boards, that relates to the substance of particular standards must take place in public. This is an important transparency measure, and it's intended to give stakeholders and the community a clearer view of how standards are discussed, developed and finalised. The legislation will set out the procedural rules that guide how the governing council conducts its work, providing a consistent framework for decision-making. For the technical boards, the detailed rules and processes will be established through legislative instruments. These instruments will be subject to consultation requirements and parliamentary oversight, ensuring that the boards' operational settings are transparent, carefully considered and open to scrutiny. The goal is a system where roles are well defined, accountability is practical and workable and the public can have confidence in how these decisions are made.

A governing council will oversee ERA and serve as the organisation's accountable authority. It will hold responsibility for supervising all aspects of their work. The council's collective decision-making structure is intended to support balanced oversight, helping to ensure that standard-setting activities are not shaped too strongly by the views of any single member or, indeed, by the interests of any particular cohort or sector. It has to be a collective decision. The framework also allows the minister to appoint non-voting associate members, who can contribute additional experience and perspectives to the council's discussions without being part of its formal decision-making authority.

The governing council will also be responsible for creating and appointing ERA's internal technical boards. These boards will focus on the detailed development and refinement of specific types of standards. Under the framework, at least one technical board must be established for each of the main categories currently covered by the Australian Accounting Standards Board and the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. These are accounting standards, auditing and assurance standards, and sustainability related standards. Each board will work within its specialised area, contributing the expertise required to maintain high-quality, well-informed standards.

The legislation also provides flexibility for ERA to evolve over time. Through legislative instrument, the minister may assign additional responsibilities to ERA, such as developing standards in new areas, should the need arise. This approach is designed to allow the system to adapt efficiently, making use of ERA's established government framework and technical capabilities. It's about making sure that it has the flexibility to do what it needs to do, at the same time as having the safeguards in place to make it safe and to give Australians the confidence that they need.

A new requirement is also included regarding appointments to the governing council. When making appointments, the minister must consider whether the council as a whole has an adequate level of representation from individuals who are and are seen to be independent of Australian audit firms. This requirement reflects the fact that auditors are subject to the auditing standards produced by ERA and aims to help manage the risk of actual or perceived conflicts of interest among appointees who work within the auditing profession.

What is clear from this legislation, from the discussions we have in this place and from talking to businesses out in our community, whether they be big or small, is that, when it comes to financial reporting, people want clarity, people want stability, people want to understand what is happening and people want to know how it's happening, and that's what this bill is about. It's about making sure that, when it comes to these standards, there is a single body that allows people to understand what is being reported and how it's being reported, and to have confidence and faith in that system. The establishment of ERA based on principles of flexibility, preservation and accountability will strengthen Australia's standard-setting framework and set these systems up for growth and, importantly, for adaptation.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To quote Oscar Wilde, the bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy. Yes, I am being facetious; it's not normally in my nature to do that. I could also quote the late Bert Lance, a Georgian banker and confidant of the 39th President of the United States of America, Jimmy Carter, who said, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' I think we should take a little bit from both of those quotes from those learned gentlemen when discussing the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026.

Like you, Deputy Speaker Sharkie, when I go home after a parliamentary sitting week, a lot of people ask me: 'What did you discuss in the parliament? What were the big issues at stake?' I look forward, when I attend various events this weekend, to saying, 'Well, I discussed the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026!' They'll say, 'What was that all about?' and I'll tell them it's about bloating the bureaucracy, but what I won't be able to say is that we talked about the issues that are really important to people.

This morning in Cowra, in central-western New South Wales, the price of E10 went up to 207.9 cents a litre. The price of diesel is 219.9c. That's more than $2 a litre for diesel. In regional areas not only is energy the economy but so is fuel, because it powers cars and trucks and anything else to enable people to get places. More importantly than that, it also powers trucks to get food to capital cities. We do it very well in regional Australia—that is grow food and fibre, of course, as well. Those prices are extraordinary. And the mayor of Cowra, Paul Smith, was beside himself when we spoke this morning about it. In Wagga Wagga, the price is significantly cheaper. Indeed E10 is 167.9c, and diesel is 175.9c. That's the cheapest. It does go up from there, but it's nowhere near the over $2 a litre that they're paying in Cowra—so unnecessary.

I know what's going on in Iran; we all do. But the Strait of Hormuz is still operating. I appreciate that it's one of the most strategic choke points in the world, as far as a shipping lane is concerned, between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. But, seriously, we should be talking about what we're doing about the price of petrol, the cost of living and the price of energy, rather than discussing what we are here.

Let's focus on some of the elements of this bill. I do really question why it is even necessary. The coalition will rightly ask the questions in relation to that. The bill ends the Financial Reporting Council, the Australian Accounting Standards Board and the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and is updating them. 'Updating' is not the greatest word I could have used in that sentence. Let's just say it replaces them with a single statutory body: External Reporting Australia. Now, accounting and audit standards may sound mundane, may sound technical, but they underpin the credibility of Australia's financial markets and our international reputation. Those two things are very important. They certainly are.

The coalition opposed the government's 2024 climate related financial disclosure regime on the basis that it went way beyond its remit—way too far. As the environmental social governance reporting requirements are expanding reporting standards, they do become sensitive politically. Absolutely they do. Stakeholder submissions looked at this. It was a rarity, I suppose, for this government to actually do a lot of stakeholder submissions. Normally they don't. They normally just rush things through the parliament and rubberstamp them because of their 51-seat majority in the House of Representatives then hope for the best in the Senate. There were concerns over too much power being concentrated in one entity, which is understandable; the removal of clear separation of oversight between the Financial Reporting Council and the technical decision-making of the Australian Accounting Standards Board and the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board; the risk to technical experts of independence and having that independence they have enjoyed in the past; and the scope of ministerial and board powers, particularly given accounting standards apply to both public- and private-sector accounting.

I said in this chamber yesterday that I'm not against ministers having discretion. I'm not against ministers actually doing what ministers always did in the past under this very good Westminster system we operate under. I've bemoaned, many times since Labor took office, the fact that they are, I do believe, watering down the ministerial responsibility. When you do that, you water down the standards of ministers. Ministers have to make decisions. The buck stops with the minister. I know, having been a minister in various portfolios, that it's important that you read the correspondence you get from bureaucrats. I have nothing against bureaucrats. I do not. I think we've got some outstanding bureaucrats in the public service. I have quoted many times the efforts and work that Steven Kennedy, head of Treasury, and Simon Atkinson, head of Infrastructure, went to during COVID-19. They saved many jobs. In fact, they saved many lives with the work that they did.

Right across the board, our bureaucrats do an outstanding job per se, but they don't run the show, and no bureaucrat is ever going to have their name on a ballot paper. I don't mean this in a derogatory way, but they are faceless people. It's the minister who has been appointed by the Prime Minister and by the cabinet and had that ministerial commission adopted and accepted and acknowledged by the Governor-General of the day who gets to make the final decision. We can't give the final decisions to the bureaucrats. We have to have a minister who is willing to make a decision and willing to buck the trend. I do find that sometimes our ministers are not standing up to the bureaucracy and are just being railroaded into doing what the bureaucracy wants.

Importantly, no compelling case has been established that the current model is failing. I revert to Mr Lance's comment, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it,' because it is an issue. He popularised that term in 1977, and it's true today as it was then. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Why look at it? Why try and adjust it? Why try and amend it? Why try and fix it? If the system is working, leave it well enough alone. The coalition believes that these changes are unjustified.

We believe that there should be Senate scrutiny of governance safeguards, of appointment processes and of independent protections and limits on intervention powers. That's why we've got the Senate there. That's how and why the Westminster system operates so well. Whilst we do have the people's house, the House of Representatives, the house we all belong to, that we were voted to, we've also got the upper house. We've got the house of review, the states' house. They do a mighty fine job in running a ruler over legislation—sometimes before it's even appeared in the House of Representatives, if it's in a draft exposure form. They do a fine job in scrutinising that. They play an important role in overseeing and refining and fine-tuning legislation that has passed the House of Representatives and made its way to the upper house. Then, often it goes to committee to be looked at before it passes the Senate and goes back to the House of Representatives for the final tick-off before it gets to the Governor-General at Yarralumla. That's how the system works.

But, unfortunately, what we've got now is a government which is all too fond, all too keen, to just rubberstamp legislation and push it through the House of Representatives. We saw that yesterday when the member for Lalor, the Chief Government Whip, once again just silenced the debate on an issue, and we saw that with the extraordinary sittings of parliament during January when we were given one day, one morning, to discuss nation-changing legislation—hate speech laws and gun reform. We got very limited time, and very few speakers were able to address those bills. Even those speakers, those members of the House of Representatives, people sent here to do a job by and for and on behalf of their electorates were only given five short minutes to debate what needed a lot longer and probably needed every member of the House of Representatives, all 150 of them, save maybe the Speaker, to talk and discuss and put forward their views on those important nation-changing reforms. But oh no—government doesn't do that.

The coalition does not support reform for reform's sake. We never have and never will. That's what this legislation is. This is just reform for reform's sake at a time when we should be discussing important things such as the cost of living and the outrageous increase in the price of fuel in regional areas. The bowsers from which people are sucking petrol this morning for their cars will not have been affected by anything in Iran yet; that fuel would have been there last week, before Iran was even under attack and when the Ayatollah was, unfortunately, still alive and kicking. We're discussing this bill about changing the bureaucracy—for what reason, I do not know.

This bill abolishes longstanding accounting and auditing standard setting bodies that, I have to say, have served Australia well for decades. The question I have to ask is: why? Why is Labor doing this when we've got so many more important things we could be doing? Is this just a vanity project from some bureaucrat down the hill who's thought: 'Let's just change the organisation. Let's change the letterhead. Let's change the sign on the front door and increase the bureaucracy'? There's been no international credibility crisis—although, I must say, people sometimes must look at Australia and wonder about some of the decisions we take and make. But, anyway, there has been no demonstrated governance failure or international credibility crisis in, I stress, the bureaucratic sense.

Our accounting standards and institutions are respected and internationally aligned—so why change them? To quote Mr Bert Lance, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' Why fix it? If the government wants to dismantle three institutions, it should first show what has in fact failed. What has let the government down so badly that it needs to push these three institutions into one? I do not understand it; I simply don't.

I think that what needs to happen now is that we need to have a good, long, hard think about this. Those who are putting together the legislative framework for and on behalf of the government should think about the things that are important to average, ordinary, everyday Australians—and, at the moment, that's the price of fuel, the cost of living, the price of power and the ability to get things done. But, no, we're talking about bureaucracy. We're taking up the parliament's time talking about putting three organisations into one entity, to satisfy the bureaucratic desires and vanity projects of somebody who will never have their name on a ballot paper. I simply don't understand it. We need to seek a referral to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for some common sense in regard to this legislation.

Jo Briskey (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026, represents an important and timely modernisation of Australia's financial system. It ensures that the institutions safeguarding market integrity are as strong, credible and forward-looking as the economy they oversee. If Australia is to remain a competitive and trusted destination for investment, our financial reporting framework must be clear, coherent and internationally respected.

In a global economy, capital does not wait. Investors compare jurisdictions, markets price risk quickly and businesses operate across borders and time zones. In that environment, transparency and consistency are not optional extras but prerequisites for confidence. Where reporting systems are fragmented or duplicative, clarity suffers. Where responsibilities overlap or strategic direction is diffused, efficiency is diminished. But where institutions are streamlined, accountable and aligned with international best practice, confidence grows. This bill is about strengthening that confidence, because confidence underpins investment productivity, retirement savings and long-term economic stability.

However, we can't discuss this reform and not acknowledge the economic inheritance this government faced. When we came to office we inherited a trillion dollars of Liberal debt, entrenched structural deficits, inflation running at elevated levels and real wages declining. Institutional drift had been allowed to persist in too many areas of economic governance. For a decade, those opposite were comfortable postponing structural reform. They focused on short-term political management rather than long-term institutional strengthening. Overlaps were tolerated. Fragmentation was accepted. Modernisation was delayed. The Liberal and National parties are reckless with the economy, and they are reckless with community safety. They are divided and dangerous, and it is always the Australian people who pay for it—they pay for their dysfunction. They, on the opposite side, are demonstrating they are far more focused on themselves and far-right ideological culture wars than they are on the cost-of-living pressures that are facing working families. They have consistently voted against policies that would take the pressure off ordinary Australians, because they are more interested in their own politics than in your household budget. They stand for higher taxes, lower wages, bigger deficits and more debt.

We have taken a different approach. We have worked hard to turn this around, and we have made real progress together. Inflation has moderated significantly from its peak, though we recognise it remains higher than we would like. Real wages are growing again. Employment remains strong. Participation is at near-record highs. Fiscal repair has progressed. And we are clear-eyed about the pressures Australians continue to face.

In my electorate of Maribyrnong, families speak to me about the price of groceries, electricity bills and mortgage repayments. Small-business owners in Flemington and Kensington talk about cost pressures and access to finance. Retirees in Gladstone Park and Avondale Heights want stability and certainty in their superannuation. Young families in Moonee Ponds are thinking about their children's future and how to make ends meet today. We know Australians are still under pressure, and that is why we are delivering real, practical and ongoing help with the cost of living, including two more tax cuts for every single Australian taxpayer—one this year and another the next. Immediate relief is what Australians need, and that is why we are strengthening Medicare, investing in skills and productivity, backing wage growth and supporting households.

But long-term economic confidence is just as vital. A resilient economy depends not only on fiscal measures but on institutional strength. It depends on credible governance. It depends on clear rules that are consistently applied. It depends on markets that operate with integrity. A strong economy needs integrity, and this bill delivers on that. Integrity in our markets is crucial because, when people trust the system to be fair and honest, they are more willing to invest, innovate, expand and plan for the future. That confidence underpins a strong economy for everyone, from global investors to local businesses to working families.

At the heart of this reform is the establishment of a new body, External Reporting Australia, ERA. ERA will bring together Australia's accounting, auditing and sustainability standard-setting functions within a single coherent institutional framework. It will serve as a one-stop shop that consolidates the functions of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council. These bodies have contributed greatly to the integrity of Australia's financial reporting system. They have helped to build a framework that is respected domestically and internationally. But financial markets have evolved significantly. Global supply chains are more complex. Investment flows are faster and more interconnected. Reporting expectations are increasingly international in scope. Sustainability and climate disclosures are now central to financial decision-making. In that environment, a fragmented structure is no longer the most effective way to deliver strategic coherence. ERA consolidates these standard-setting functions whilst preserving the deep technical expertise that underpins high-quality standards in this country. It reduces duplication, it strengthens coordination, it provides clearer strategic oversight, and it ensures that Australia can engage more effectively in international standard-setting processes rather than simply respond to them. This is structural reform grounded in economic reality.

A central feature of the ERA will be the establishment of dedicated technical boards, including one specifically focused on sustainability standards. This reflects a simple and widely recognised truth: climate risk is a financial risk. Investors increasingly demand consistent, reliable and comparable disclosures about how organisations manage environmental and transition risks. Superannuation funds require that information to assess long-term exposure. Banks and insurers incorporate it into risk modelling. Consumers and shareholders expect transparency about how companies are positioned in a changing global economy.

By embedding sustainability reporting within Australia's core financial reporting architecture, we ensure that these disclosures are treated as integral to financial accountability, not as optional or peripheral considerations. This positions Australia alongside other leading jurisdictions that are modernising their reporting frameworks to reflect global expectations. It provides certainty to business, it enhances investor confidence and it supports capital flowing to productive, sustainable opportunities.

The design of the ERA has been guided by three clear principles: flexibility, preserving what works and strengthening accountability. First, in regard to flexibility, we are removing structural barriers so that future standard-setting needs can be more readily accommodated. Financial markets change rapidly. The rise of digital assets, evolving global disclosure standards and technological disruption require an institutional framework that can adapt without delay. Second, in regard to preserving what works, Australia benefits from world-class accounting and auditing expertise. This reform retains dedicated technical boards and safeguards the rigour that underpins our standards. It integrates expertise within a stronger and more cohesive framework. Third, in regard to strengthening accountability, ERA will operate under workable and appropriate governance arrangements. There will be alignment between responsibility for performance and capacity to address issues when they arise. Conflicts of interest will be managed. Authority and responsibility will be clearly aligned.

This bill also addresses unnecessary overlap. ERA will not assume the Financial Reporting Council's existing role in monitoring audit quality, a function already performed by ASIC. ASIC possesses the investigative powers, compulsory mechanisms and enforcement remit necessary for that role. Clarifying responsibilities reduces duplication and enhances regulatory coherence. Without this function, ERA will be better positioned to direct its specialist resources toward its primary role of setting standards in its establishment phase.

The transition arrangements are orderly and responsible. If the bill receives royal assent before 30 June 2026, a four-month transition period will commence on that date, with External Reporting Australia beginning operations on 1 November 2026. If royal assent is received after that date, commencement will occur on the first day of the first calendar month four months after royal assent. This timeline ensures continuity of expertise and certainty for the profession and the market. Transitional provisions maintain the validity of existing standards issued by the current bodies. This is careful reform, not reckless change.

Financial Reporting standards may not dominate everyday conversations, but they underpin the confidence that allows markets to function effectively. When a worker in Essendon reviews their superannuation statement, they rely on accurate corporate disclosures. When a local business in Moonee Ponds seeks capital, lenders and investors rely on clear and consistent reporting standards. When public sector bodies publish financial statements, communities rely on integrity and transparency. Institutional quality affects economic security. Trust is foundational to economic stability. People plan for the future when the system is predictable. Businesses invest when the regulatory environment is clear. Markets allocate capital efficiently when participants have confidence that the rules are fair and consistently applied. Strong reporting standards reinforce that trust. Transparent governance enhances credibility. Clear accountability strengthens confidence.

This bill does not seek to reinvent Australia's financial system but works to strengthen it. It doesn't disregard institutional knowledge; it integrates it within a more modern and coherent structure. For the people of Maribyrnong, this reform helps ensure that the governance and structural arrangements of our economic institutions are best positioned to build a more competitive, dynamic and productive economy. This is important for retirement savings. It's important for business confidence. It's important for long-term economic security.

A competitive economy requires credible institutions. A productive economy requires coherent governance. A fair economy requires transparency and accountability. This bill advances all three objectives. It modernises Australia's financial reporting architecture. It strengthens coordination and clarity. It embeds sustainability within our core framework. It also positions Australia to remain a trusted, competitive and forward-looking participant in global markets. It is thoughtful reform, it's responsible reform, it is better targeted, it is better balanced, and it's better for Australians. I commend the bill to the House.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026 may, on one level, seem to many Australians to be a mundane piece of legislation, administrative in its nature. But, of course, sitting behind it is a much more significant purpose. Australian small businesses are struggling right now with increasing costs—regulations and industrial relations costs et cetera—across the entire economy.

The problem with this Labor government is they design all law on the basis that every small business, every corner store and every wonderful, hardworking Australian who wants to set up a home business has, sitting behind them, an HR department, a tax and legal department and a regulatory compliance department when, in fact, they don't. They just want to get on with their lives. They just want to grow their business, be successful and support themselves and their families.

Because of this mad approach to regulation and taxation, we've had record small-business insolvencies—41,000 since the Labor government was elected and just over 14,000 last year—and we are on track, in this financial year, to see record small-business insolvencies, in excess of last year. I would be embarrassed if I were part of a government that had overseen record small-business insolvencies. But we know the response from the federal minister; her accusation was that they were dodgy. We've seen all of those livelihoods taken away and a small-business minister who draws a tin ear to any concerns from small business.

One of the problems with the Labor government is that they are not satisfied with putting increased big-business IR law on small business, they're not satisfied with imposing big-business tax laws on small business, and they're not satisfied with imposing big-business regulation on small business. They now want to impose the climate accountability and climate disclosure standards that apply to big business onto small business.

There are two fundamental problems with this. The first problem is that, for a lot of these businesses, this type of regulation or disclosure is far beyond their capacity. It's not within their remit, both in terms of their core purpose and their function. They struggle enough as it is; they're drowning in regulation. The second problem is that there aren't the skills in the economy to provide it. So, of course, the cost structures of it would go dramatically up for small businesses, who are already struggling to keep a profit; there's already a small-business cost crisis in this nation. What's the response of the Labor government? It's, 'Well, we've got a small-business cost crisis in Australia right now, so let's just hit it with speed.' That's where we're currently going under this legislation

I congratulate the Shadow Assistant Treasurer for his efforts in the carriage of this bill, to get it to this point. He's highlighted dramatically the consequences of what will happen if it continues to go forward, how Australians and, particularly, Australian small businesses will be crushed by the consequences of it. Of course, it may seem simple. It may seem that abolishing the Financial Reporting Council, the Australian Accounting Standards Board and the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and replacing them with a new body called External Reporting Australia may actually have some efficiency dividend. What we know—we've seen this consistently with this government—is that it leads to regulatory capture. They get a small number of people in these organisations and they just drive up the cost on small business, which continues to get hit hard. It doesn't deliver any environmental, social or climate benefit, but it does make sure that all those small businesses just teetering on the brink—with heart, sweat and tears and finances keeping them going—are sent to the wall. And that is what is so damaging and dangerous about this bill.

This is a bill designed to capture regulatory standards around ESG compliance and climate disclosure compliance and ram them down the throats of small businesses so they cannot stay alive. They will not be able to breathe, and they will not be in a situation where they'll have confidence in the future. For this government to do that, in an environment of record small-business insolvencies, is, to be frank, a kind of sickness. It also goes to the heart of this government's understanding of small business. They don't understand it. They don't understand what it means to back yourself, to take risks, to employ people and, more importantly, to be able to do it in an environment where there's already a cost-of-small-business crisis.

This morning, the Leader of the Opposition and I were out at a small business in Canberra, and we heard directly about how electricity bills have gone up 50 per cent and how industrial relations regulation has meant not that people are getting paid more, which was the Labor government's intention, but actually that fewer shifts are being offered, because there is no other way they can make ends meet. More importantly, the costs then get passed on to consumers.

So what are consumers doing? They're consuming less. In fact, I hear more and more stories about mums that go to the self-checkout line at a supermarket because they look at what's in their basket and they're afraid it's going to get to a total that they can't afford. If they go to the self-checkout line, they'll be able to return the products without the feeling of humiliation or judgement from the person at the cashier.

This is not a dignified country when we behave in this way. This is not a dignified protection of our way of life, or restoring our way of life, under this government; it's quite the reverse. It's a complete trashing of the Australian way of life. The only answer that this government has is to impose more costs, more burdens and more regulations on small businesses and drive them further to the wall.

This bill might seem anodyne to a lot of the members, who wax lyrical about harmonisation of standards and doing something good for the planet, but I can tell you what it comes at the consequence of: it comes at the consequence of thousands of Australians whose small businesses will be taken from the marginal line of profitability to insolvency. That's why we had record small-business insolvencies last year and that's why, tragically, we're going to have record insolvencies in the year to come. With that is going to be a decline in the standard of living for many Australians, but, secretly, I think that's what this Labor government wants.

Madonna Jarrett (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026 today. For most people, this sort of legislation may be a bit abstract and foreign, but the truth is that every person and every business that puts their money into shares, a business or a super fund is affected by the players who are governed by these laws. These laws are fundamental to our financial system. They provide a common method for recording transactions for corporate reporting and a process for review to verify the accuracy of the report.

Corporate reporting covers two areas. I'm going to try and break it down a little bit here. First is finances. For businesses, it's their budgets—the income and expenditure, the profit and loss. Second, they report on matters that might impact the long-term value of the company, such as their approach to climate and sustainability or the diversity of their workforce, just to name two.

These laws also reform how the guardians of the financial truth conduct themselves, and this is when the auditors come into play. They review the accounts, or 'audit' them, to make sure they're fairly represented. This process helps identify errors, misstatements or even fraud, and auditors provide an independent opinion on the financial report.

Then there's assurance, which looks at the accuracy of the system and processes, or non-financial information, of the businesses. These processes, too, are guided by standards. In actual fact, all the processes I've just talked about are guided by standards that are set by three core bodies. These bodies have evolved over long periods of time—as have the standards—as investor expectations, financial assets and instruments have changed, alongside the volume of money that's flowing around the world.

Basically, audit and assurance mean that an investor doesn't need to take the company's word for it before they put their hard-earned savings into that business. They can look at the audited report and get reliable information. Why is this important? It's because a common language and reporting method, as well as a common review process, means every person or every business that might be investing in another is able to compare apples with apples, not apples with oranges. This builds the integrity of our financial markets, and integrity matters. When people trust the system to be fair and honest, they're more willing to invest, businesses are more willing to innovate and it's easier to plan for the future. That confidence also underpins strong financial markets and therefore contributes to the strength of our economy.

So what is the bill? This legislation delivers the biggest reform to our financial reporting institutions in over two decades. It proposes the merging of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council into a single entity, External Reporting Australia, or the ERA.

The ERA will centralise standard setting for accounting, auditing and sustainability reporting to enhance efficiency and align with international standards. But what are these standards? We have accounting, auditing, assurance and sustainability standards. These standards are frameworks that guide how financial and non-financial data is recorded, verified and reported by a company. They ensure consistency, transparency and trust in corporate reporting. They enable investors and others to, as I said, compare apples with apples.

Now, without being too technical, I'll try and run through these. The Australian accounting standards define how to measure, recognise and disclose financial transactions. For instance, if you're a business and you have property plant and equipment, the standards might outline how this equipment is recognised in the financial report. It would include consideration of its current value, depreciation and impairment loss.

The auditing standards are a framework that guides the auditors on how to examine these reports or the financial information so that they can obtain a reasonable assurance that the report is free from material misstatement. Here's an example. Auditors have to exercise professional judgement and maintain scepticism—we hear that a lot in that world—and they draw informed conclusions and make decisions surrounding factors in the financial statements. So what they might do is question information. They may look at the value of plant and equipment and look at the depreciation value and make a judgement as to whether or not that makes sense given the age of the equipment.

Assurance standards guide practitioners in providing conclusions on the financial or non-financial information provided by the company. For example, for the standard covering assurance reports on controls, they may look at the controls associated with how a particular business manages its IT provider or its payroll assessors.

Lastly, we have sustainability standards. These standards grew out of calls from investors and market players for companies to report on their environmental, social and governance risks—ESG risks. Put simply, these are really about how a company might manage its carbon footprint and how it manages its reputation factors such as how it treats its workforce and its community impact and ethical conduct. For governance, the company's board and oversight practices are good examples. This type of reporting has been voluntary in Australia, largely guided by the ASX corporate principles and other laws like the Modern Slavery Act. However, as others have said, climate disclosure became mandatory in this country last year for large businesses and is now being phased in for medium and small enterprises. We are seeing these standards being increasingly integrated with assurance standards, which now verify sustainability reports, so all of a sudden we have more interconnectivity.

Our financial and capital markets rely on our standards and reporting systems being robust, relevant and reliable. If financial reports are not correct and there are audit failures, then it's everyday mums and dads, retirees, workers, businesses and others that lose out. Companies can fracture and collapse, and those who put their money into that business may not end up getting their expected returns, or, worse of all, they can lose their money altogether, and workers can lose their jobs.

Just last year we saw the collapse of the First Guardian and Shield investment funds. Between the two schemes, 12,000 Australians are facing the loss of more than $1 billion of retirement savings. According to ASIC, these two funds were riddled with conflicts, misconduct and false statements that were made to investors. ASIC is pursuing these funds through the legal process.

Australia has seen even bigger corporate collapses, including HIH in 2001. It's the largest corporate collapse in Australia's history, with an estimated up to $5.3 billion in losses, and involved major failings in auditing and supervision by its auditor, Arthur Andersen. This failure contributed to Arthur Andersen's collapse, not just in Australia but globally. At that time, for those who can remember, Arthur Andersen was convicted in the United States of obstructing justice for shredding thousands of documents and deleting emails related to its audit of the failed energy giant Enron. It lost its licence, investors lost their trust, the markets lost trust, and the firm fell apart. We also saw the collapse of Ansett here in Australia quite a few years ago, which was contributed to by poor financial reporting. Not only were there financial losses; 16,000 workers lost their jobs. These are all sad tales of why we need strong, reliable and trustworthy financial reporting systems. They explain the importance of our standards and our standard-setting bodies as well as the importance of our auditors and why investors need this strength.

I want to quickly circle back to sustainability standards because they're included in this whole big world. These guiding standards require an entity to disclose information about climate related risks and opportunities that could be reasonably expected to affect the entity's financial position in the short to long term. There's also an expectation that they disclose their actions and processes around these. This reporting can include relevant processes, procedures and controls as well as the metrics used to measure them—for instance, greenhouse gas emissions. As I mentioned, ESG reporting started out as voluntary, which contributed to it becoming fragmented and incomparable. As a result, there were also allegations of greenwashing by companies who were competing for sustainability focused investment: market saw companies exaggerate claims that their services, products and operations were more environmentally friendly or sustainable than they actually were. So the introduction of the standards was there to set the benchmark for comparability—apples with apples.

This is extremely important, especially in countries committed to climate action like Australia. Individuals are voting with their feet, acting in a more environmentally conscious way and making specific investment choices that promote sustainability outcomes. Without these standards, consumers can be mislead, legitimate environmental efforts are undermined and companies with legitimate sustainability goals don't get the capital they should.

For the past 12 minutes or so, I've tried to paint a picture of the corporate disclosure regime in this country. It's complex and in need of an upgrade. These changes didn't just happen; they grew out of several reviews. Bringing the standard-setting bodies together was a recommendation of the climate related financial disclosure consultation paper released in 2022. We also saw the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services recommending consolidation of the standard-setting bodies. This committee led an inquiry into allegations of, and responses into, misconduct in the Australian operations of the major accounting, audit and consultancy firms. Long story short, the chairman's report states that 'the resulting scandal shook corporate Australia to its core' and that the professional services firm involved 'became synonymous with a profoundly disturbing breach of public trust'.

I talk about this because it's led us to why we are here today. This bill represents a significant overhaul of Australia's financial reporting governance with the merging of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council into the single entity External Reporting Australia. It's long overdue. There hasn't been a substantial change to the standard-setting framework for more than 20 years. ERA will be governed by a council responsible for oversight of all functions. It's going to be supported by technical boards for the accounting, auditing, assurance and sustainability standards. But the council may also include associate members who might bring additional expertise that is needed.

The pace of change across our financial markets is rapid, to say the least. If we add the technological advancements driving AI, new financial instruments, new digital assets et cetera to the interconnectivity of markets around the world and the need to meet investor expectations and societal expectations to protect our businesses and to protect consumers, we have a very complex environment indeed.

That's why ERA is designed around three principles. The first is flexibility. Being one organisation—and we've heard criticism about this by earlier speakers—ERA can more efficiently respond to emerging issues, evolving priorities and future standards-setting needs. The second is the preservation of expertise. The development and review of standards is very technical. I know; I've been in that world, and it does require deep expertise. That's going to be retained with the specialised boards within ERA and the ability to bring in others as needed. Then, of course, there's accountability. New transparency provisions require that discussions on standards be held in public forums, and the rules around managing conflicts of interest have been strengthened. These include that the governing council be made up of individuals who are independent of the auditing profession, perceived and real. As Minister Mulino said, this bill aims to create a modern, durable and transparent institutional structure that positions Australia to maintain high-quality reporting standards and adopt to global developments.

We've heard a number of those opposite say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it; don't change it. But I ask this question: would they say that about a racing car that's 20 years old and competing against a modern, new, lighter car that they know, even before the key is turned, will do better on the track? I'll leave it at that.

So Australia needs a financial market that's robust, relevant and reliable. This requires a standards-setting system and reporting frameworks that are built for purpose, and this bill contributes to that. Strong, trusted reporting standards are essential to market integrity and trust. When investors trust in our market, they invest in it. It's this trust and confidence that's crucial to Australia's ongoing broader economic strength and Australia's economic growth. I commend this bill to the House.

Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Reporting System Reform) Bill 2026, which represents the biggest reform to Australian financial reporting standard settings in 20 years, and, critically, it marks an important step in embedding sustainability reporting within Australia's core financial reporting framework.

The reforms proposed in the bill will have positive implications for the integrity in our markets, which matters. If we want to encourage people to invest and innovate, to look to the future, to take calculated risks and to grasp opportunities, only the highest standards of integrity in the market will be acceptable. When people trust the system to be fair, transparent, stable and honest, they will invest and innovate. They will look to the market to provide opportunities to invest long into the future. They will look to the market for opportunities in general, and they will take them. A strong and productive economy requires this level of integrity to inspire confidence, and we know that only markets that investors have confidence in will grow. Good governance, accurate and timely reporting, fairness and transparency mean a stronger economy for everyone.

The bill proposes reforms to the financial reporting architecture that will have meaningful implications for sustainability reporting in Australia. Most significantly, the bill proposes the establishment of External Reporting Australia, bringing sustainability standards setting into the same national infrastructure that governs accounting and assurance. The effect of this is that sustainability reporting will be embedded in core reporting systems, rather than treated as an adjunct. This is important because it promotes consistency and comparability, which are essential and useful ingredients for investors in their decision-making.

With respect to the establishment of External Reporting Australia, the bill makes amendments to part 12 of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act to combine the core functions and powers of the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and their respective offices and the Financial Reporting Council relating to standard setting. These will be combined into a single entity known as External Reporting Australia. To achieve this, the bill continues the existence of the Office of the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, a non-corporate Commonwealth entity, for the purposes of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act and renames it External Reporting Australia. The amendments therefore abolish the Australian Accounting Standards Board, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, the offices and the Financial Reporting Council.

External Reporting Australia's responsibilities will include making and formulating accounting, auditing and assurance, and sustainability standards. The difference between the previous system and what is being proposed in this bill is the facilitation of External Reporting Australia as the single source of standard setting. Under the previous framework, various responsibilities in relation to accounting, auditing and assurance, and sustainability standard setting were split across the separate statutory entities, their respective offices and the Financial Reporting Council. Now a single entity, External Reporting Australia, will be responsible for all of these relevant standard-setting functions.

External Reporting Australia will be led by a governing council, the Governing Council of External Reporting Australia, and it will establish internal standard-setting boards that are authorised to exercise the powers and perform the functions in relation to standard setting within the accountability framework of a single entity. The minister may also give External Reporting Australia responsibility for formulating new kinds of standards in response to future needs. External Reporting Australia will be a listed entity, with the governing council as the accountable authority for the purposes of finance law within the meaning of the PGPA Act.

Turning to the governing council, this is a key feature because it is one of the elements in the bill that is designed to instil confidence—in market participants, industry and other stakeholders—that integrity, a commitment to procedural fairness and due process, and adherence to relevant technical expertise in setting standards will underpin the operation of the governing council. The governing council will be a multimember accountable authority to promote collective and strategic decision-making and to ensure that no one particular industry, interest group or cause can unduly influence outcomes. The governing council will be the accountable authority and therefore responsible for approving External Reporting Australia's corporate plan, setting its priorities and ensuring appropriate management of its budget and resources.

With respect to appointments to the governing council, the minister must have regard to the principle that the governing council should contain an appropriate level of representation of persons who are and are seen to be independent from Australian auditors and that it should, as far as practicable, have an appropriate balance of expertise or experience in fields relevant to External Reporting Australia's functions. The governing council is to consist of between five and nine members, including the chair, and the minister may also appoint up to four non-voting associate members to the governing council.

As for appointments to the standard-setting boards, the governing council must ensure, to the extent practicable, that the composition of a standard-setting board reflects an appropriate mix of persons, with experience reflecting both the standards and the board issues, and that reports are prepared in accordance with those standards. In short, the obligation of the governing council is to set up standard-setting boards with the authority to make and formulate standards on behalf of External Reporting Australia to ensure that the day-to-day determination of the technical content of accounting, auditing and assurance, and sustainability standards are tasked to boards with expertise directly relevant to the standards being set.

The proposed governing council is required to include skills in sustainability or climate change, including scientific expertise, to strengthen the technical capability of the standard-setting boards. This is an important signal to the market about the capability of the governing council and the standard-setting boards themselves.

The bill also includes a requirement that certain actions taken by the minister, the governing council and the standard-setting boards be done by legislative instrument, which has the effect that the actions will be subject to appropriate consultation requirements and scrutiny by the parliament. These actions include the establishment and setting of certain procedural requirements for the standard-setting boards, like providing for the broad strategic direction of the board and the manner in which it is to perform its functions, the conferral of responsibility for new kinds of standards or other functions on External Reporting Australia and the giving of any ministerial direction about the role of international standards. Again, this element is another signal to the market about capability.

The bill also signals an important focus on transparency, because there is a requirement for meetings in which standards are discussed to be held in public. This is to improve visibility and to help reduce the risk of late-stage requirements. Early and public consultation will remain critical to ensure standards are practical to implement and to support higher quality reporting, particularly for data systems and controls and assurance readiness. The bill also supports continuity and certainty as reforms take effect and seeks to maintain robust due process in every respect. Further nods to transparency include the setting of rules governing the disclosure and handling of material personal interests by any members of the governing council or the standard-setting boards that adopt and supplement the PGPA Rule, which simply means disclosures of personal interests must be made as soon as practicable rather than waiting for the next meeting. This is entirely appropriate, and it's hard to argue against this reform.

Finally, a code of conduct will be developed, which will apply to people who are statutory appointees within External Reporting Australia, as well as any other staff or other persons assisting who are not otherwise subject to the APS Code of Conduct. Nothing less than a targeted and appropriately tailored code of conduct that meets community expectations will satisfy the level of integrity that must be applied to the External Reporting Australia framework.

As to sustainability reporting, embedding this within Australia's financial reporting system recognises that environmental, social and governance information is now central to business decision-making. It is critical for investors, and it is now business as usual. However, the production of reasonably practicable sustainability reporting standards is critical. We do not want reporting for reporting's sake or something that is no more than a box-checking exercise. This is why it's important that the bill provides that, prior to making or formulating a sustainability standard or in fact before making or formulating any standard on accounting or auditing and assurance, whether or not in reliance on an international standard, External Reporting Australia must, to the extent practicable in the circumstances, carry out a cost-benefit analysis of the impact of the proposed standard.

It is intended that the cost-benefit analysis carried out may consider financial factors as well as other factors, such as anticipated environmental, social or governance costs and benefits. This cost-benefit requirement retains but updates and simplifies to reflect current practices, and it's retaining the pre-existing requirements regarding cost-benefit analysis of proposed setting standards issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board and expands the requirement to also apply to auditing and assurance standards. This requirement supplements whole-of-government regulation impact assessment processes, which may require impacts of proposed regulation to be quantified and published, and ensures that a cost-benefit analysis continues to be required for all standards issued by External Reporting Australia.

In this respect, one of the objectives of the bill is to create a more flexible institutional arrangement for standard setting to ensure the efficiency and adaptability of Australia's financial reporting system. This objective is entirely appropriate to accommodate the development and ongoing maintenance of new sustainability standards, as well as to futureproof Australia's financial reporting system so that it can respond to future standard-setting needs. Sustainability standards produced only after the development of a cost-benefit analysis and reporting against those standards prepared in accordance with the law help maintain and promote confidence and integrity in Australia's capital markets and help users and investors make informed investment decisions.

Sustainability standards and reporting are not, as some might argue, virtue-signalling. It's important to report against meaningful standards so that governments can use the data to determine whether policy objectives are being met, whether they require amendment or improvement, or whether they should be simply cut out. If the data being produced is not capable of meaningful use, then it is not useful data. With useful data, good policy is made when it is relied on in conjunction with facts and evidence. This produces meaningful, sustainable and practical policy.

The creation of External Reporting Australia, through the amendments set out in this bill, will strengthen the framework for setting external reporting standards and ensure those standards are meaningful, produced after a cost-benefit analysis, future focused and dedicated to providing further trust and confidence in Australia's capital markets to encourage further investment. I commend the bill to the House.

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the bill be now read a second time.

Question unresolved.

As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.