Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I am grateful to the Minister for Superannuation and Corporate Law for his response in summing up the second reading debate. There is one issue I want to clarify. My concern all along has been that there is not only adequate consultation but also adequate scrutiny—a mechanism to scrutinise any regulations that have been made—and that there is an opportunity for the disallowance of these regulations before they actually come into effect. Given that the context of this legislation is about cost recovery in the event of an EI outbreak, it is important that there is that safeguard. So I am grateful to the minister for his response.

I do raise an issue, and I may need to get advice from the clerk’s office or the Deputy Clerk on this: if the government undertakes that the regulations sit on the table for a certain period—and I think we need to determine that—does there need to be an amendment to the legislation to put that into effect or will the undertaking in itself be sufficient in the context of these particular regulations? My understanding is that the regulations, in their current form, take effect from the time that they are proclaimed or the time they are enacted under the Legislative Instruments Act. Does it need a statutory modification so that there can be a sufficient period to consider the regulations prior to their coming into force? Does the government have a position on an adequate time frame? I would have thought that a reasonable time frame—and I look forward to hearing Senator Colbeck’s view on this—of something like eight sitting days would give that two-week window for there to be appropriate scrutiny by the Senate.