Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the minister's response to the order for the production of documents and the quite frankly minimal and poor response we got from the government. This is an area that has been in need of reform for a very long time, and we all know that the government has been dragging its feet for a very long time. As Senator Bilyk pointed out, they have steadfastly tried, first, to not support the ACNC and then to constantly undermine the ACNC. They are trying to get rid of it and, I would argue, trying to hinder the very important work that it does.

The minister's response was that the government is still considering and consulting with stakeholders on the report's recommendations. They've had 18 months. I would also argue that many of their recommendations would not have been new to the government. These have been on the agenda for a very long time. They then say that the government is finalising its response to the ACNC legislative review and, as part of this process, has consulted closely with the sector on a variety of issues including fundraising. Fundraising has been on the sector's agenda for an extremely long time. How much longer does the government need to consult, when the sector has pretty strong views about it? That is why I find their response to the two recommendations disappointing. The first recommendation from the committee says:

The committee recommends that the Australian government urgently provide a public response to the recommendations made in the review panel's report, Strengthening for Purpose: Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Legislation Review.

That's what the government says they're still consulting about, when they've had the report for 18 months. They're consulting on many points which there is strong consensus on through the sector and which they could progress. Fair enough—maybe there are some tricky bits in it; start working on the other bits. The other recommendation, which I'm particularly concerned about, states:

The committee recommends the Australian Government commit to working with state and territory governments and the not-for-profit sector to develop a consistent national model for regulating not-for-profit and charitable fundraising activities within a time limit of two years.

They're clearly not going to make that time limit. Charities and the not-for-profit sector have been working on this for an exceedingly long time. When I used to work in the not-for-profit sector—in the charity sector—we were trying to get reform in this area for a very, very long time. And there's been a lot of work done within the sector, which is why they want to make sure that the Australian Consumer Law framework is actually used for this purpose. For some reason, the government has been relentlessly opposing that approach. One must ask why they have been opposing it so relentlessly. It virtually implies that getting the states and territories on board with reforms to fundraising and harmonisation across the country are intractable problems. Yet the sector is doing a lot of work on it, because they know it is costing them $15 million. I would argue that that is a conservative estimate of how much it is costing. Perhaps the government wants the sector to be using the $15 million, which they could be using on their work. They are wasting that money on administration, because the government won't get its act together and address the issue.

One of the key reasons we need this addressed now is that we're no longer in the 'string on a can' approach. We're no longer in the horse and buggy approach. We're in the digital age and what is very clear in the evidence we've got during the inquiry is that in the digital age people are—surprise, surprise—raising funds online and are therefore having to comply with up to seven or eight different sets of state and territory laws in Australia. So—and I hate to say this—it is highly likely that a number of charities and not-for-profits are probably breaking state and territory laws, or, as we heard during the inquiry, having to turn down donations because they don't meet the requirements. And if they don't know which state or territory a donation came from, they're in deep doo-doo.

This issue is very important for our not-for-profit and charitable sector, which is why they have put so much time into this for so many years. What does the government say? 'Oh, we're still consulting.' The sector has been consulted and consulted and consulted. They told you very clearly what they need. The ACNC review has told you very clearly what is needed, but you need to consult some more? How about listening to the sector. How about making sure that you are committed to action. We talked about the need for government leadership, but we also need a government commitment to fixing this issue and recognising that it is now seriously holding back our charity and not-for-profit sector.

The ACNC legislative review, which the government has so far taken 18 months to respond to, found that the most appropriate way to reform fundraising laws is in fact through the Australian consumer law framework. The sector is also saying this. Are you continuing to consult, just because you haven't got the answer you want? Is that why? Is it because you don't want to do it? Is that why you've been resisting for so long and not addressing these really important issues?

The sector does invaluable work. Very often, we try to put a value on the amount of work that they do, but, quite frankly, it is invaluable. Without this sector, we wouldn't function as a civil society. Civil society is absolutely critical to the community, to the work of this place and to supporting everything across the community, whether it is sports groups, food relief groups, emergency relief groups or advocacy organisations. We in this place all know that civil society are the leaders, and they are quite clearly the leaders when it comes to changing our fundraising laws, because they've been saying it over and over again. They said it even before we had the much stronger move to the digital space, and that's where a lot of fundraising goes on. Is the government really this slow in being able to respond to what is quickly becoming an urgent situation? Do they really not see that this is hampering the community sector? Is it perhaps that they don't mind the fact that it is happening, because they are certainly trying a lot of other blockages under the wheels of the community sector. They've undermined the ACNC and tried to attack their role of advocacy. There are gag clauses still operating. They've failed to address the ERO issue. There are lots of things that this government is doing to frustrate the role of the community sector. Harmonising our fundraising laws is an essential part of supporting the community and the not-for-profit sector in this country, which they've failed to do. The government need to look at these recommendations. They need to urgently respond to these recommendations. They've had long enough, and they're certainly not going to meet the time frames that were articulated in this committee report. I urge the government to respond in a meaningful manner and actually commit to harmonising our fundraising laws, and that requires their leadership. So they should also commit to taking a leadership role on this issue.