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

I do note that Senator Carr represents the government on this, but it is Senator Cormann’s amendment. I am not being critical of Senator Cormann or the amendment, but it makes reference to having a risk management approach. I think the government says there will be a risk management approach to dealing with these things. The difficulty I have with the opposition’s amendment—again, not being critical of the intent of the amendment, which I think is a good one—is that simply specifying that there ought to be a risk management approach in the absence of specifying what the parameters of that approach should be, what the criteria would be for that approach and what resources would be employed in relation to that approach does not actually mandate anything. I am not saying the government would do this, but it could comply with this amendment with a one-line document saying, ‘This is our risk management approach’—I cannot think of an absurd enough example, but it could be anything. It does not actually force the government to do anything other than to say, ‘This is an approach.’ But how would you enforce this from that point of view? Again, this is not a criticism; I understand the intent, but I wonder whether putting an amendment in that does not have any framework or context will take us anywhere.