Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Social Inclusion and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Hansard source

I also thank Senator Brown for explaining what it was that he was seeking to achieve through presenting these amendments, which seek to require the commissioner to annually give the Treasurer a report on the activities of the private ancillary funds. Senator Coonan, my understanding, too, is that this information is already publicly available, as you said, by the ATO and the Treasury in a timely way.

I would like to go to the concerns that Senator Brown has raised about transparency around the distribution of funds through private ancillary funds. I advise him of the significant piece of work that has been undertaken this year, in very close consultation with Philanthropy Australia, to review the integrity, I suppose, of prescribed private funds and to improve certainty as to philanthropic obligations when using those particular instruments. The government, as I said in my speech summing up the second reading debate, has been consulting very widely on some draft guidelines, which will be made by legislative instrument. There is wide support for improved transparency and clarity through those guidelines. That has been demonstrated to us through the work being led by Philanthropy Australia.

Having said that, though, what you are seeking to do is less than what is already available. The reporting that is currently in place—actually, the taxation revenue forgone—is reported in the Treasury’s tax expenditure statements released around December each year, as Senator Coonan said. That is something that is required by the Charter of Budget Honesty. Secondly, both the number and the value of the distributions and donations and the range of activities that are supported—reported as per the DGR categories—are regularly published by the ATO around June each year and again in the commissioner’s annual report later in the year.

I am sure Senator Brown would also be interested to know that there has been significant additional consultation and work undertaken through COAG and through the Productivity Commission about the reporting requirements of not-for-profit organisations generally. In a commissioned study into the contribution of the not-for-profit sector, the Productivity Commission has been specifically asked to identify unnecessary impediments to the efficient and effective operation of not-for-profit organisations, which go quite substantially to the issue of access and use of philanthropic funds. The regulation of the not-for-profit sector is being considered by the COAG Business Regulation and Competition Working Group. We think that there is a significant piece of work currently underway that will address many of the concerns that you have and, therefore, we are not supporting those amendments.

Going to the second amendment, as the ATO acts as the primary government agency that oversees the activities of PPFs, it is appropriate that the ATO be given greater oversight of PPFs, including the power to impose penalties and to replace trustees. Therefore, the amendments proposed by the Greens are unnecessary. Again, this information is already being provided by either the ATO or Treasury in line with their existing responsibilities. As your amendments are currently framed, they do not acknowledge the respective responsibilities that already exist in those two agencies or the fact that the information is already being provided.