Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Imagine my shock—imagine everyone else in this chamber's shock—that the Labor Party would oppose efforts which make it deliberately mischievous for litigation funders to be able to turn our court system from one focused on justice to one focused on profit for themselves and for the lawyers that represent them. Imagine my shock when you go through their AEC returns and the same people who benefit from and prey on the misfortune of those with low incomes, the poor and those who have faced challenges also happen to be those who profit from the current law that the Labor Party is seeking to oppose amendment of. Imagine my shock when those same lawyers, those same firms, who take advantage of the misfortune of Australians and profit from it might also be some of the most significant donors to the Australian Labor Party.

Imagine my shock at the motivation of those members opposite, particularly when they sit in this chamber, when they stand in this chamber, and talk about how they worry about a culture of 'don't ask, don't tell' within Australian companies. Yet when the member for Mackellar moved a motion in this chamber this morning, calling out major superannuation funds that choose to keep information secret—not just from their investors, because we know that on the public record they have complained about the secrecy that sits at the heart of these funds, not just from the fund members who invest money in super funds that is then laundered into wholesale funders and who can't get accountability while they pay their fund managers fat bonuses, but imagine when they won't even answer questions to this parliament.

If you want to see 'don't ask, don't tell', just look at what happens in the superannuation industry, where big super actively harvests members' funds for fees and bonuses and then refuses to reveal them to the Australian public. Just look at what happens when fund managers caught up in cases of alleged sexual harassment are boasting to their victims about $36 million bonuses for themselves—the silence on the other side of this chamber. It's not just the bonuses that they brag about in bars late at night but the publicly reported $13 million bonuses collected by single fund managers from Australia's retirement savings.

When this parliament and the committees that represent it ask questions—not just about the bonuses but their structures—it's not just that they refuse to answer, engaging in their own 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, but also that members of the Labor Party, on the other side of this chamber, run interference to try to help block the release. And then they come into this chamber, where we are proposing sensible laws to stop the abuse of people who try to use courts for profit and not for justice, and attack sensible legislation which would enhance the opportunity for all Australians to be treated fairly and with dignity. That is the tragedy of the modus operandi of the opposition and the legislation and how they view it. It is not about what they think they can do to empower the Australian people; it is what they can do to empower themselves. The Australian people see this. Deep down, they will not take action unless it helps themselves—at the people of Australia's expense.

The measures in this legislation are very straightforward. As we know, at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, because we were unable to bring people together for investor meetings and shareholder meetings, we provided a legal vehicle for those meetings to be held virtually and online. And, while this government has a very proud track record of rolling out vaccines, we are not at the end of that journey, and returning to business as normal is not an option. But this is only a temporary measure, and it's a temporary measure not just because we want Australians to come together but because we know that, when the channel through which people can communicate is limited, it favours the boards against investors. We want to empower investors and Australians to make their decisions and hold boards accountable. Even with this legislation, it will still be greater than for superannuants, and investors in Australian superannuation funds can hold many of their funds accountable because they report not to their members—despite the best efforts of this government and legislation—and not to independent directors but, ultimately, to themselves. Then, when this parliament asks basic questions to hold them accountable for the law that compels Australians to give them money, they refuse to answer them. We want to make sure that Australians can hold their corporates to account, but we have to make sure that we can operate in an environment throughout the COVID-19 pandemic so that measures can be appropriately taken.

The other provisions in this legislation relate to continuous disclosure rules, which are not viable for civil penalty proceedings unless companies have acted with knowledge, recklessness or negligence in failing to update the market. The reason for them is simple. We have seen how provisions which have been put in acts which are designed to improve accountability for companies have been used and abused recklessly by law firms and investors who want to turn our system of justice into a system for profit. Let's not mistake what happens when they manipulate our court system for their own ends. It comes at the expense of vulnerable Australians who have a legitimate case for a class action. When they win that case, the money is taken by law firms who seek to use it for their own profit motive.

Mr Gosling interjecting—

Members, including the member for Solomon on the other side of this chamber, claim that they're standing up for workers and standing up for vulnerable Australians, but all they see is an opportunity to enhance the situation for themselves. Even worse than that, those same firms then take that money and donate it to create laws and to foster laws to protect themselves and their interests, and to harvest and to profit from the most vulnerable Australians. It's not for accountability; it's for profit, so that they can pay their bonuses. And then we see in this chamber the member for Whitlam and, I'm sure, other members who will follow him opposing legislation because they know that it will undermine the revenue streams that their paymasters in the union movement and in the law firms take at the expense of vulnerable Australians.

We see this time and time again. It is a pattern of behaviour from the modern Australian Labor Party. They use the law to buffer the profits of financial interests associated with them and then scream, 'Outrage!' when people seek to inquire how those funds somehow seamlessly transfer money to the campaigns and the activities of the allies of the Labor Party on the other side of this chamber. Of course, in a free society, people should follow the law, but that doesn't excuse the unethical conduct of those opposite. It also means that people on this side of this chamber have a responsibility to call it out. Those opposite should support these changes in law because they're good changes. They should support these changes in law because they enhance the power of Australians to be treated fairly and with decency. More critically, they stop the use and manipulation of courts for profit over justice. That is what courts should be used for—not political gains and not commercial profit, but justice. And we're going to call an end to that racket right here.

See this speech in context