Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

The Minister for Finance has audaciously rolled back the consumer protections contained in the future of financial advice laws. Let's be clear about what has actually occurred. On 26 June 2014 the Corporations Amendment (Streamlining Future of Financial Advice) Regulation 2014 was signed by the Governor-General. But it was not until 30 June 2014—just hours before it was to come into effect—that the regulation was registered on the federal register of legislative instruments. Once the regulation has been added to the register, it must be tabled in the Senate. Ordinarily, this would have happened yesterday—the first sitting of the Senate since registration. But, as we have heard in this chamber again today, it has not been tabled and the government is afraid to tell us when it will be tabled.

What does this mean? Even if a regulation is made and registered and comes into effect, until that regulation is tabled the Senate cannot have a debate about whether it should be allowed or disallowed. The executive's ability to make regulations is an important function of government, but so is the ability of this place to scrutinise these regulations.

In keeping with the Senate's responsibilities to monitor executive action and hold the government to account, yesterday in question time I asked the acting Assistant Treasurer, Senator Cormann, when he would table the regulation. Senator Cormann referred to a press release—not the regulation, but a press release—and told this chamber that the government will table these regulations 'consistent with the laws and consistent with usual practice'.

The minister is determined to drag the FOFA process out. I say to the minister: given the failure of the minister to table the Corporations Amendment (Streamlining Future of Financial Advice) Regulation 2014, the time has come. I refer to Odgers' Australian Senate Practice, which says:

It is not essential, however, that regulations be provided for tabling by a minister, or any other member of the government. Once an instrument has come into effect, it is open to any senator to seek to table it.

I note further—also from Odgers' and recorded in the Journals of the Senatethat on 24 June 2009 an opposition senator, by leave, tabled ministerial directions under the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005. The Senate leader may recall that. Which senator took the unprecedented step of tabling a regulation that had come into effect? It was none other than Senator Abetz, who sits across from us today—now the Leader of the Government in this place. Accordingly, I now seek leave—and the government has been forewarned of this—to table the government's own Corporations Amendment (Streamlining Future of Financial Advice) Regulation 2014.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is leave granted?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will consider the request in due course and get back to the honourable senator.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is not granted.

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unbelievable! The Leader of the Government in the Senate will not even grant leave to table their own regulations. Senator Abetz, you stood up in this chamber and made a speech—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Dastyari, I would like you to refer your remarks through the chair.

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 24 June 2009, Senator Abetz tabled ministerial directions. The government are so scared, so afraid—they know how horrible their own regulations are—they are not even prepared to table their own regulations. It is an indictment of this government, an indictment of these laws and an indictment of your attempt to roll back FOFA.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the second day of the new Senate in our country—a second day that gives effect to the decision that Australians made in September last year—what we have from the Labor opposition is an illusion. They would like you to think that they are concerned for veterans. They would like you to think that they are concerned for superannuants. They would like you to think that they are concerned for illegal boat arrivals. But nothing could be further from the truth. When we look at the facts, they speak very clearly. In September last year, Australians made a clear decision. That decision is reflected on this second day in this new Senate. That decision was to abandon the carbon tax. That decision was to abandon the minerals resource rent tax. That decision was to build roads for the future. That decision was to stop the boats and to protect human life by encouraging people not to take the risky course to our nation by sea illegally. Yesterday you would have heard the Labor opposition talk about other illusions, including the Medicare co-payment illusion. What they do not tell you about is that, in 1991, it was a Labor idea.

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. May the honourable senator address his comments through the chair?

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry; I was distracted. Senator Smith, please address your comments through the chair.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I most certainly will. What we also hear from Labor is the illusion of the concern that the government might be abandoning quality education. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We heard Senator Dastyari a moment ago accuse the government of running scared, but in fact the opposition in this country are being blatantly irresponsible. There is one immediate task confronting us all, and that is to repair the budget mess that was left by the former Labor government. It is interesting how little they talk about the budget emergency. It is interesting how little they talk about the urgent task that is required to fix the budget arrangements in our country. So do not listen to Labor. Do not look to Labor. Look in our national papers to find out what people are saying. Warwick McKibbin in The Australian Financial Review, just recently, talked about the very real international risks that put our country at risk if we do not repair the budget. The head of the Department of the Treasury had this to say about the opposition and what it had been doing in our national parliament.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Stop saying it's unfair'!

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He talked about 'vague notions of fairness'. That may ring a bell with Senator Conroy. 'Vague notions of fairness' may a ring a bell with Senator Conroy.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy might be reminded of the comment at the beginning of this month where the Treasury secretary said:

We have got to do more just to stand still.

He went on to say:

… it's quite another thing to exhort to vague notions of fairness to oppose any form of reform. If you do that, if you use such an argument to defend what is an unsustainable status quo, what you are doing is consigning Australia to a deteriorating future.

That is not your future, Senator Conroy, and not your future, Senator Gallacher, but the future of young Australians.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, just resume your seat for a moment. There are too many interjections in the chamber.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's talking directly to me!

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not think he is, in fact.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's mentioned my name four times.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Names can be mentioned without talking directly to the senator. I will remind all senators to address their remarks through the chair, but there are too many interjections. Senator Smith.

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So the point is clear. The challenge is crystal clear: our country faces a very serious budget emergency, a very, very serious budget dilemma that does not affect my future but affects the future of young Australians, the future of your children and your grandchildren. But what we have from the Labor opposition is denial. They do not want to talk about it. They do not believe it exists. As I said, we have had the head of Treasury. We have had Warwick McKibbin in the Australian Financial Review. We have had the IMF. We have had the OECD. And you want to pretend that there is no problem. You come into this place talking about concern for illegal immigrants. That is an illusion. You come into this place talking about concern for veterans. That is an illusion. You come into this place and talk about concern for superannuants. That is all an illusion. Where is the compassion, where is the concern, for all the lives lost at sea? Where is the concern for the budget position of future Australians?

If I had more time available to me in this brief opportunity, I would reflect on the ALP campaign review and share with people why it is that Labor now finds itself in opposition, why it was that Labor failed at the last federal election—because it did not listen to the concerns and needs of Australians. (Time expired)

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers from Minister Cash on the coalition government's inhumane policies relating to people seeking asylum. Firstly, I want to refute the continual use of the terms 'illegal arrivals', 'illegal immigrants' and the other words that the coalition government use. In using these terms, they show their true colours in this debate. They highlight that they are interested only in perpetuating the fear of the unknown that unfortunately abounds in sections of our community. What we are talking about in this debate is people seeking asylum. They are actually people, real people, who are fleeing their homelands in search of a better life—people who may have children, partners, mothers or fathers here in Australia, people who may have left their family at home in search of a better life. The key thing is that people currently coming to Australia by boat are seeking asylum. They are not doing anything illegal. The government know that.

Worse than all of the propaganda about so-called illegals is the government's secrecy about so-called on-water operations. In the past week, thegovernment's secretive approach to its immigration policy has gone beyond the pale. The silence from the government, led in its secrecy and arrogance by Minister Morrison, is completely unacceptable. The government has thrown out Australia's international humanitarian obligations and refused to provide basic information to the Australian people. Quite simply, the Australian people have a right to know if the government they elected is acting in accordance with our international obligations. Yesterday the government confirmed that 41 asylum seekers were returned to Sri Lanka. These people were reportedly processed at sea, via videoconference, and were asked only four questions. Minister Cash would not confirm that during a question today.

This supposedly enhanced screening process was never practised arbitrarily by Labor on vessels at sea, as Minister Morrison untruthfully said in his statement yesterday. The process used under the previous Labor government was transparent and thorough. Labor used a far more thorough process than the reported four questions which, it seems, were being used by Minister Morrison and the coalition government to assess whether people engage our protection obligations. It is absolutely not the same thing. To be clear: our process was transparent and thorough.

The coalition government's process is shrouded in secrecy. They must be up-front with the Australian public. What little information is available—that the screening was four questions, conducted arbitrarily on board a vessel via videoconference—is in no way comparable to the former Labor government's thorough and transparent screening processes. Labor has strong concerns about the integrity of this new method of processing people at sea and en masse. Labor has strong concerns about whether the coalition government's latest exploits comply with Australia's international obligations under relevant conventions.

Criticism of the coalition government's approach has come not just from within this parliament. Yesterday we saw a statement from 53 of Australia's leading international legal experts citing their profound concern about reports that asylum seekers had been subjected to rapid and inadequate screening and then a prompt return to Sri Lanka. I acknowledge the two faculty members from the University of Tasmania's law school who were signatories to this letter and thank them for their action. The letter raised concerns that Australia has breached at least three international laws. The signatories urgently call on the Australian government to make public its legal justification for this operation.

Minister Morrison must explain why the government neglected to act in accordance with the regional resettlement arrangement, which would have provided for people to be processed on Christmas Island with greater efficiency and transparency. Minister Morrison must also explain what process is underway to determine the refugee status of another reported 153 persons aboard a second vessel that was detected near Christmas Island. Minister Morrison cannot continue leaving his country in the lurch. He must provide a transparent account of what has occurred on our seas over the last week and a half. It is clear that the coalition government just want to take any opportunity for political mileage. They mix in a large element of secrecy with militaristic propaganda and potentially unsafe practices such as turning back the boats.

Labor is committed to breaking the people-smuggling trade. We are committed to an orderly migration program. We are also committed to increasing the refugee intake so that more people can resettle here in Australia, bringing with them their skills and experience and adding to our rich multicultural society. (Time expired)

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I congratulate you, Deputy President Marshall, on your election as Deputy President of this parliament. It was a clear victory to you, given that you were unopposed. Well done!

I could come in on many things here. We have heard Senator Urquhart talking about the boats and the asylum seekers. I was doing an interview on Fairfax television this morning with Ms Terri Butler, the member for Griffith. Mr Deputy President, you would be familiar with the former member for Griffith, Mr Rudd. I am sure you are familiar with the man. When Mr Rudd was Prime Minister, in August 2008, he did away with the Pacific solution.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You don't want to talk about FoFA, though, do you?

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will get to that, Senator Conroy. You would have been a naughty boy in your younger days! Some 55,000 people arrived in Australia by boat, which was an enormous cost to the taxpayer. But the sad thing was that, on the best figures we have, some 1,100 people lost their lives. We are a generous country. I am proud that in the town in which I live we have refugees, people from Sudan, who actually lived in a tent for eight years before they could make their way to Australia and go through the hurdles of becoming an Australian citizen—and proud Australians they are.

I want to talk about FoFA, which Senator Conroy just raised, a very interesting matter. I was on the original Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, when we inquired into Storm Financial, Opus Prime, Timbercorp, Great Southern and many other terrible financial products that cost so many people so much. The committee was chaired by Mr Bernie Ripoll, the member for Oxley in the other place, from your side of politics, Senator Conroy.

There is no relaxation of the rules; let's get that straight. Section 961 of the FoFA legislation clearly states: 'Financial advice must be in the interests of the client first and foremost.' That is not negotiable. We are removing part G, a catch-all phrase which, on arguments put forward by lawyers, could leave financial planners open to being sued. That would mean higher insurance premiums, more cost. Currently, just one in five Australians now seeks professional financial advice. We need to raise that number, especially with respect to those with self-managed super funds.

The FoFA inquiry has just been completed. I congratulate Senator Whish-Wilson, who played a major role, and former senator Mark Bishop, from Western Australia, who did a magnificent job of chairing the committee. One recommendation of the committee is that we license every financial planner in Australia and give ASIC the power to suspend that licence with just a phone call. If ASIC gets clear information that wrongdoing or forgery is being carried out, with one phone call it will be 'Charlie Brown, you're down to Centrelink next day.' That is a tremendous power and I am confident that we will get that recommendation through.

But I want to talk about the question I asked Senator Abetz in relation to the signing of the trade agreement today with Japan. What a magnificent presentation by Prime Minister Abe, especially in relation to the Second World War—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Williams, I must remind you that the question before the chair relates to questions asked by the opposition today.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was just trying to swing it the other way, but I will follow your direction, Mr Deputy President.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Williams.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We talked about the budget and my colleague Senator Smith focused on that as well—$320 billion was referred to last week, when talking about getting the budget in order.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We didn't ask about the budget.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Williams, continue, and we will judge the relevance of your contribution in due course.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. We were talking about the questions to the government about the things we are doing to clean up the financial mess we inherited.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They were all Dorothys!

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wonder if Senator Conroy would like to take the call, Mr Deputy President! Continuing on—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about FoFA?

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad to take your interjection, Senator Conroy, about FoFA—

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, Senator Williams, just please continue.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do I have to? Can't I take the interjection?

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you do not have to, but you are invited to.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have had my say on FoFA regulations, and the exaggeration you put forward is amazing. I have said what we have done with the Economics References Committee's 61 recommendations. We talked about a royal commission. I instigated the Senate inquiry into liquidators; 4½ years ago I called for a royal commission into white collar crime, from phoenix and Ponzi schemes right through the system, and, now, from financial planners, we have discovered, and there is more to come out about that as well. So, as I said, we are on a united ticket with Senator Bishop and Senator Whish-Wilson. Senator Dastyari played a major role, and yet here he is today attacking the FoFA regulations. It is a total exaggeration to say that the FoFA regulations have been wound back—a total exaggeration.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

I have followed them closely, Senator Conroy. Perhaps it is not an exaggeration that you might be leaving us soon. Is that an exaggeration, or is that just a vicious rumour around the chamber? You might confirm that. In conclusion, Senator Dastyari's question was a total exaggeration. (Time expired)

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President Marshall, could I also congratulate you. I also note that Senator Williams is lucky he is our favourite National Party senator; otherwise, we would be much harder on him!

I rise to take note of an answer provided by Senator Ronaldson. This government is slashing the pensions of 280,000 veterans, war widows and orphans of veterans. That is what the minister confirmed in this chamber today. You have not heard any trumpets about this one! But that—

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. It is on relevance to the subject. When in government, you would not support the indexation changes we wanted, Senator Conroy.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Williams, that is not a point of order.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are rapidly moving down that list of favourite National Party senators, Wacka! But that will not distract me from pointing out that this government has broken another promise: 'no cuts to pensions'. That is what they told the Australian community, and this is a clear admission by Senator Ronaldson, disguised as cross-portfolio savings measures. He confirmed cuts to 280,000 veterans, war widows and orphans of veterans. That is just disgraceful. That is a lie told by Mr Abbott, by Senator Ronaldson and by all members of the front bench of the government before the election. No wonder the community is so disillusioned with this government.

Let me repeat what the now Prime Minister and the now Minister for Veterans' Affairs would tell anyone who would listen to them before the election: indexing veterans' pensions to the CPI was not good enough. Here is what the Prime Minister said when speaking at the RSL national conference in 2012:

If it’s inadequate just to lift Centrelink pensions by the Consumer Price Index, it’s even less fair to apply solely that index to those who have risked their lives for our country. Loyalty goes both ways.

That is what the Prime Minister of Australia said before the election. But what has happened now? It is not admitted; it has not been stated publicly. It was hidden and disguised heavily in the budget papers. So what we find is that loyalty does not go both ways when it comes to this Prime Minister. The loyalty of this government ran out when it introduced its first budget. What did we see hidden, tucked away, in the May budget? We saw the pensions of 280,000 veterans and their dependants linked to CPI.

What did the Minister for Veterans' Affairs say in June 2013, just on 12 months ago, on the cusp of the election? What did he say about linking pensions to CPI? He said: 'CPI has not been a measure of cost of living for at least 15 years. Age pensioners do not have their pension assessed in this way, so they are falling further and further behind. It is basically unfair, where they are at, and they deserve a fair go and we are going to give it to them.' That is what the minister said. That is what the Prime Minister said. But now that they have been elected the truth comes out, and they slash the pensions of 280,000 veterans, war widows and orphans of veterans. It is a disgrace.

As I said, this is another broken promise; it is another Liberal lie. And there is no-one here who wants to stand up and defend that answer in the taking note of replies so far. Senator Bushby is not going to try and defend this. Senator Cash is not going to try and defend this. And certainly Minister Fifield is not going to try and defend this. They just want to hope no-one notices. Well, it is unfair. They said this before the election, and they have done the opposite after the election. This saving comes straight out of the hip-pockets of veterans, their war widows and their disability pensioners. This is just one in a long line of Liberal lies. They told the Australian public one thing before the election—played them for mugs—and then started slashing in education and health and in pensions to veterans, war widows and orphans. We have had more Liberal lies, time and again. Well, this Senate is not going to stand by and play the cover-up game that those opposite have been trying to play. (Time expired)

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just before I put the question, earlier in this discussion Senator Dastyari sought advice on leave being granted to table some documents. I will now seek some direction again. Is leave granted for Senator Dastyari? Leave is not granted.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek leave to make a short statement.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Senate for its courtesy, but I do think it is important that we mark what has occurred here just now. The government is denying leave to table its own regulations. It is extraordinary, isn't it? The government is denying leave to table its own regulations. What has occurred here is that Minister Cormann has made regulations, which are now in legal effect, to pull back the safeguards, the changes to financial advice, that the former Labor government put in place, bearing in mind some of the inappropriate and unethical behaviour we saw from financial advisers, which has been well-documented.

The government has amended and lessened the protections that Labor put in place. We disagree with that. But, more importantly, the government sought to avoid this Senate chamber in the way it did that. It did not bring through legislation where there would have had to have been a proper debate. The government said that it did it by way of regulation—so gazetted, agreed by the government and ticked off by His Excellency the Governor-General—and has legal effect now. These regulations will have to be tabled eventually and the Labor Party will be moving to disallow them. The government has refused to table its own regulations and, today, it has denied leave for those to be tabled by another party—that is, the Labor Party.

Interestingly, Senator Abetz, the minister who originally denied leave, did precisely the same thing in June 2009 in relation to directions under the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005. He tabled regulations then and sought to disallow them, but it appears what was good when in opposition is not good in government. The government, despite having notice of this and despite this being of public interest, has refused to grant leave to table their own regulations.(Time expired)

Question agreed to.