Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Was that an interjection, Deputy Speaker? In essence, our doors closed, and what had been quite a successful project for over six months, unfortunately, became too difficult for us. Everyone loses. I would like to believe that the customers that we established in North America were the biggest losers. But, of course, the farmers involved, who were supplying that contract, lost as well. Whilst it was not his bread and butter, the processor that we were dealing with at the time lost another part of his business. It certainly was not the majority of his business; as I highlighted, it was a very small part of his business. That was one example, as I say. We should never assume; I had assumed that I had completed the story.

Indeed, I think this has been one of the areas, as a government, in which the coalition have had real success. We took many commitments on small business to the election in 2013; we said we thought we could improve policy. Not least of all of those commitments was to put a small business minister into a cabinet. Small business is a critical part of the economy, particularly in an electorate like mine. Whether it is Bicheno or whether it is St Helens—and I was there on Friday and Saturday this weekend—there are no big businesses in this part of the world. So support for small business has been very much part of the story of the government since our election, and it has been a story of delivery—as have the free trade agreements that Minister Robb has been responsible for and, indeed, as have the portfolio responsibilities of the Minister for the Environment. It worries me that all three are Victorians! They have had real success. They have really formed part of the success of the government and the things that the government can be very proud of over the past two years. The free trade agreements benefit small businesses in my electorate very much.

We are, as you well know, Deputy Speaker Broadbent, the party of small business. We understand that small businesses are the engine room in the communities that I represent. They are the people that, if they have the confidence, will employ locals. They are people that very often risk everything to start a business. Indeed, they deserve our respect at every stage. In the budget this year small businesses were the winners. Incorporated small business received a 1.5 per cent tax cut. Unincorporated small businesses—and, as we know, 70 per cent of small businesses around the country are unincorporated—will receive a $1,000 discount on their taxable income this year. Of course, there is the instant asset write-off, which has been welcomed. I have mentioned before in this place that the day after the budget of the New Norfolk I walked up the main street with a bit of material, making sure that the hairdressers all knew. They all knew that this was a good thing. They understood that of course they need to make a profit and, of course, that this was for money that they spent after May, which they could write off on 1 July this year. Of course, the same will apply the year after for assets up to $20,000—as many as they like. One of the vital areas within my electorate is agriculture; many of those are small businesses, and they have also benefited enormously—particularly in terms of the opportunity to be able to write off irrigation and water infrastructure. This has so been important. As a government, we have also supported infrastructure in that area by committing $60 million to the Tranche Two irrigation schemes within Tasmania.

As I mentioned before, the essence of this bill is to provide something more like consumer protections for small businesses dealing with big businesses. It does not suggest, though, that small businesses should sign bad contracts. This is not a nanny state. There is a responsibility and it is fundamental. There has been criticism by some that the figure of $100,000 should be raised to a larger number. But, if I am writing a contract for $1 million, I am probably going to get advice there, and one would assume that the advice that I get will be appropriate for an investment or a risk of that magnitude. This is not a nanny state. The provisions of this bill are there to be able to take out terms within an agreement that might, fundamentally, deliver. The interesting thing, Deputy Speaker Scott, as you well know, is that trade only occurs between two parties when there is a benefit to each of those parties. This will allow small businesses to be able, as consumers are, to remove individual terms within a contract agreement that are deemed and seen to be unfair. On that note, Deputy Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution to this debate.

See this speech in context