Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I am just seeking some information on the second point. On the first one, Senator Milne, I accept that you genuinely believe the opinion of one tax barrister. I accept that entirely. But I guess we are just going to have to disagree from a government perspective, a tax office perspective and existing practice over the last seven years. When you say it mirrors the horticultural provisions—it does not mirror them; it is identical. It has the same impact. So I guess we are going to genuinely disagree about the interpretation. You passionately believe the opinion of one tax barrister, who may be a very eminent tax barrister. That does not mean he is correct. But you believe it, and we accept that you believe that to be the case. We believe differently. We have done everything we can. We have been through this debate a couple of times in the chamber. You have had opportunities to speak to Senate officials about it. We genuinely have a difference of opinion. But yours is based on an opinion you have received from one tax barrister.

On the second point, the section states:

The *Climate Change Secretary must give the Commissioner a notice in writing under this subsection if the Climate Change Secretary is satisfied that one or more of the conditions in subsection (2) have not been satisfied for the trees—

and then it obviously just loops back to subsection (2). I hope that helps.