Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) | Hansard source

I know this is going back to the former amendment moved, but there was some confusion, as Senator McKim said, about which was being moved. I just want to put on record the issues around First Guardian and Shield and lead generation that the Liberal and National parties share. It's the concern about practices that led to this terrible fallout on people's lives and their savings. Obviously, there was some conduct that was reprehensible and there needs to be a response to it.

We did oppose that amendment, and I just wanted to put on the record the reasons for that, because we view that the response to these issues should be in laws that principally deal with investor protection, not consumer protection or consumer law. The laws we have here today are ones to protect consumers. There are different issues when it comes to people making investments which potentially put at risk their life savings et cetera compared to some of the other issues we're talking about today—say, signing up to a subscription service. They are two very different consumer activities. That's why we have traditionally had separate laws in regard to those. We recognise and support the efforts the government is doing—there's the, I think, consultation draft they have out on the response to First Guardian and Shield. We will wait to see that legislation to support change.

I'd also like to echo the comments put by the minister that we have to be very careful here that we don't outlaw sales practices—that we don't outlaw people doing basic selling and following up leads and the like as many real estate agents and the like do. It's just a common part of business. There's nothing nefarious per se about that. But, obviously, particularly when it comes to the provision of advice and application of large sums of money for an investment context, there should be a higher bar and obligations placed on salespeople in those environments.