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

I am grateful to the minister for his answer and also for the interchange with Senator Joyce. On balance, I cannot support the opposition’s amendments. I think the opposition has made a fair point—that the government did break a promise in relation to this—but I think the minister has squared off as to why the government considers this to be the best option. For me, this is about what is most convenient for small businesses to discharge the obligation alluded to by Senator Milne in her contributions. There is no question that there is no risk involved in this being dealt with by Medicare. In effect, Medicare is government backed as a clearing house, so there is no risk.

There was an assertion made—not by Senator Joyce—that Medicare’s data requirements are still not finalised. I sought further information about that from the government yesterday, and I am grateful for that information. I have been advised that Medicare has finalised the datasets to be captured from employers and transmitted to superannuation funds and is on track to commence receiving payments from employers on 1 July 2010. So this clearing house is ready to go. If we went through a private process it would take a longer period of time.

In terms of the issue raised by the opposition, which is a valid one in terms of efficiencies, what undertakings and assurances can the government give that this scheme will be as efficient as—or comparably efficient to—those run by the private sector? Secondly, what benchmarks, what devices, will there be to measure that efficiency so that taxpayers can be assured this is the most effective way? Again, to put those questions in context, it seems to me that this is about administrative efficiency for small businesses and an assurance that, once they have made the payments to the clearing house, they will have discharged their obligation without any risk to them or to their employees.