Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Ryan on many of the points she made in her speech, including the pertinent fact that if Labor had done such a great job with reducing red tape then why have we spent a year going through so many different areas of operations of businesses and organisations to reduce red tape and get some real outcomes? The member for Pearce acknowledged that point as well.

On the subject of how that the coalition has approached this, right from the top down the Prime Minister has been extremely focused, from day one, on getting results in this area. He has the Parliamentary Secretary Josh Frydenberg, and a team of other members, including a number here in the House today. I see the fine member for Deakin. He has covered Victoria. So from a Victorian perspective if there are any types of industry associations or businesses that have had particular issues with red tape and compliance, he has been onto their case. In South Australia, I have talked with many groups, such as the South Australian Freight Council, the resources and energy council, Business SA, the Australian Industry Group and financial services. I have consulted with them, asked them what the challenges are, come back with suggestions, and provided input. We have gone out and tried to amend what we can. We heard the member for Bass earlier. I am sure he did the same thing in Tasmania. The member for Reid spoke earlier and covered New South Wales. It has been very much a team effort, a holistic approach, and I commend my colleagues on the good work they have done around Australia.

I note the member for Kingston is sitting in the House today, and I am sure if there was a matter that come up in her domain or area of interest she would say, 'Yes, can you help? We have had a go. We might not have got as far as we needed, but you are kicking some goals, coalition. You are getting rid of red tape—$2 billion—and maybe you can help on this occasion given that perhaps we did not go as far as we meant to. We made a start but the job is being finished in fine form.'

I know the South Australian Labor government has had a crack at this too, on many occasions. Just recently they got together with accounting firms including KPMG and a local bank, BankSA, and CEDA, and they all came out with a whole lot of points. To their credit, they identified reducing red tape and compliance as an area they must address better than they have in the past. Well done for jumping on the train—but you need to deliver. You cannot just talk about it; you have to get results. That is what we have done in many areas.

I want to make a few points about corporations legislation—these points have been addressed in great detail by my colleagues so I will not go into them in great detail, but I will run through some of the more important aspects of the bill. It is estimated that the reform package in this bill in particular will reduce business compliance costs by around $14 million per year. We are chipping away at so many different areas. Maybe it is not one big headline that might capture the attention of the news of the day, but it is important for the organisations and businesses out there. We are improving the efficiency of government processes. The first one I will talk about is the abolition of the 100-member rule. The government is removing the requirement for directors of a company to hold a general meeting at the request of 100 shareholders. We heard of examples where corporations have been required to spend millions of dollars holding annual general meetings at the behest of a small group of shareholders. We are not saying we should remove the ability of shareholders to propose resolutions or make their case, or have their voices heard. It is important to note that small shareholders will continue to be able to have their voices heard, but in a way that does not impose an unreasonable cost, an unreasonable burden, on the company and other shareholders. Importantly, this measure is supported by industry stakeholders, whether it be the AICD, the Governance Institute, the Business Council or, significantly, the Australian Shareholders' Association.

Another important element of the bill we are addressing is remuneration reporting. The government is improving the disclosure of executive remuneration information in Australia by ensuring that the information provided is useful for shareholders and investors. I want to touch on auditor appointment requirements because of their relevance to not-for-profits. We have to ensure that not-for-profits have as few regulations and compliance obligations as necessary, because they have limited resources. As we often hear, they run very effectively on the smell of an oily rag and they have the great objective of serving the community. This element will assist them by removing the compliance costs burden, to the tune of around $4 million, for certain companies limited by guarantee that are not required to undertake an audit to appoint or retain an auditor.

This bill is another example of us delivering on our commitment to reduce red tape, consulting with industry and getting results but knowing that there is still a job to be done. The government will continue to engage with the community and industry and reduce red tape to make their life easier. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context