Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the legislation before the House, and to support it. I would like to make some comments with regard to four of the schedules that are before us this afternoon. Firstly, I would like to comment in relation to the taxation treatment in terms of film tax offsets. One of the great joys of being an Australian is to be able to travel around the world and know that people have seen our country and have some understanding of our quirky sense of humour through the films that we produce. I know, from my own children's viewing habits, that documentaries about places are a really important part of their education about the world.

This particular offset is established to encourage expenditure on films in Australia if they meet certain criteria. It does not seek to define the term 'documentary', but we are responding to ensure that when this tax offset is applied it is genuinely for pieces of work that are documentaries. I doubt that we could ever say that a game show would constitute a documentary in the same sense that you and I might understand the normal use of that word; however, I understand that this piece of legislation ensures that the offsets that we are hopefully going to put through the parliament with the passage of this bill will encourage the sorts of film and television programs that they were intended to encourage rather than genres that were definitely intended to be excluded when the legislation was first put before the House. By our doing so, those who watch us from afar will be able to find out what Australia is really like and get the flavour of Australian documentaries.

The third schedule of the bill is a very significant improvement which answers to a point so often raised in my conversations with local small businesses in my area—that is, the burden that they have carried ever since they were asked, with the imposition of a GST under the Howard government, to become tax collectors. This schedule seeks to amend the GST act to enable those small-business taxpayers who are paying their GST by instalments and subsequently moving to a net refund position to continue to use the GST instalments if they wish to do so. At the moment, small-business taxpayers who are not using the instalment option and are already in a net refund position remain ineligible to pay their GST by instalments while they remain in the refund position. The change we are proposing will allow taxpayers who move into a net refund position to continue to access the instalment system and to retain the accompanying compliance cost advantages of submitting their BAS statement annually if they choose to do so. The great thing about this proposed change is that it has come from the suggestion made by a member of the public through the Tax Issues Entry System. Never let it be said that an Australian with a brilliant idea is unable to participate in the fine processes of this place. Putting ideas forward, looking to the future and solving some of the problems that face our small businesses in order to improve our productivity and the life of those working in small business are all very worthy activities. This government has responded to suggestions from the public for minor tax policy changes.

In the fourth schedule before us in this bill, I, like the member for McPherson, am very pleased to see the Anzac Centenary Public Fund listed. In my own electorate preparations for the centenary of ANZAC are well underway, and the $100,000 grants from the federal government to each of the electorates around this fine country will enable a broad vision of how we want to celebrate. We are beginning a collective journey as a community in our unique and different ways across this country. The Anzac Centenary Public Fund's receiving DGR status will allow those who make contributions to the fund a certain degree of tax deductibility on their contributions.

The conversation trust is also listed in the fourth schedule of the bill. The trust serves a very important public purpose in analysing and providing written commentary by the university and research sectors on current affairs. In a 24/7 cycle of news, of which were all aware and sometimes victims, it is very important that there be those who can stand back, make some considered and sensible observations and contribute their observations to the public space for consideration.

Another listing in the fourth schedule of the bill is for the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples. I do not think there would be any objection to the listing of this agency, which states as its goal a movement towards the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights and towards securing a better economic, social, cultural and environmental future. The National Boer War Memorial Association is listed here with DGR status, which will be provided from 1 January 2013, and so is Philanthropy Australia. Philanthropy Australia is a national membership body which pulls together philanthropic agencies, and it is very helpful for members of our community who are seeking to do good works in the community to be able to find out where they might seek philanthropic grants. Philanthropy Australia is serving a vital role in pulling the goodwill of the larger community together into a place where it becomes more accessible for people right across the country rather than perhaps just people in cities who might, by happenstance or friendship or networks, be able to access the good offers of Philanthropy Australia to improve our national wellbeing in a range of ways.

I am more than delighted to see the Australian Peacekeeping Memorial Project Inc. there. It will create a memorial on Anzac Parade in Canberra for Australian peacekeepers. People who have served this country in international peacekeeping operations will be provided with proper recognition of their service to this country and the cause of freedom and peace around the world. I am in my electorate privileged to know a number of these peacekeepers. Indeed, one by the name of Milan Nikolic approached my office the year before last with an idea to honour and acknowledge all those men and women who have served, by providing a badge of honour for their family members to wear. This was a great initiative. It is like the reform we were talking about before, when an individual Australian saw a way to cut red tape for Australian business, brought it to the government and we put it forward. Milan approached me and asked for my assistance in moving forward. I was able to take it to the Prime Minister, and last year, I am delighted to say, we were able to provide an ongoing recognition, in the form of a badge, for the family members of all of those who have served or are serving in our forces. So the kids whose mum or dad might be serving away will be recognised in their school by their teachers and by their friends as doing their own sort of service by doing without their mum and dad. It is similar for the brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers and partners of those who are serving.

I am pleased to have spoken in this place on many occasions about the very significant reform that this government has undertaken in superannuation. We are the party of superannuation. I grew up in a working-class family. Happily my father was able to start his own business. He worked very hard and became quite successful. But I can tell you we did not have many conversations about superannuation around the kitchen table. Those conversations were certainly happening in other houses around the country. The advantage of careful saving for the future and putting that money aside is obvious to all of us now, with trillions of dollars sitting there as the wealth of this nation and an investment for a dignified retirement. The reality is that, for many people, superannuation was not even a word that they knew about, let alone a reality that they could experience and have the comfort of in their later years.

The amendment in this schedule will place a general duty upon superannuation trustees to identify members who have multiple accounts within their particular fund. They need to do this on an annual basis and consider whether it would be appropriate to merge them, having regard to the best interests of the members. This seems like such common sense. If you are a trustee and you are in charge of making sure that somebody's retirement nest egg grows, it would be a terrible thing to find out that moneys were kept in separate accounts with the deliberate intention of increasing revenue flow to the superannuation company at the cost of the people whose money they were supposed to be looking after. This schedule means that the 32 million superannuation accounts in Australia—roughly three for each worker—should begin to reduce in number. With that reduction in number, there should be an increase in the benefit to those account holders as their money is gathered to one nest egg, under the trustees' guidance, which should grow in value without constantly being eroded by servicing fees.

There are a number of other amendments in the schedules before us. Essentially these amendments refine and clarify the operation of the taxation of financial arrangements regime. They collectively lower the compliance costs and they provide additional certainty to affected taxpayers. They are the outcome of ongoing monitoring and implementation of the taxation of financial arrangements, and they have been achieved in consultation with the industry and the Australian Taxation Office. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context