Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

In November last year I spoke of my complete disbelief in how the government was pushing through its signature Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022. I said:

I, and every other member in this place, was elected as part of a democratic process that is the envy of many countries around the world. Internationally respected democracy does not and should not stop on election day; however, the treatment of this bill is, in my view, undemocratic and seriously undermines the parliamentary process. The government is deliberately rushing this bill through the parliament.

I said that last year, and here we are again. It's like Groundhog Day. We're commencing the 2023 parliamentary year where we left off in 2022. Again, we're in the position where we have insufficient to no opportunity to properly scrutinise legislation presented by government. Again, we are told that it's urgent and will consequently be rushed through this House with limited opportunity to speak to it. I remember when the government sought to change sitting hours to allow the opportunity to have these urgent bills. They said they would be few and far between—absolute rarities. We are seeing them with enormous regularity in this place, and it is not a good thing. This is not a good practice. This is thwarting democratic process.

I want to work collaboratively with the government, but it is a difficult task when I'm provided with no notice, no briefings and no explanation as to why such bills and regulations must be dealt with in the manner that is proposed today. It's simply not good enough. These regulations seek to unravel changes made by the former government that were introduced to provide greater scrutiny and greater transparency in relation to the reporting of promotional, marketing or sponsorship expenditure by superannuation funds. It's disappointing that the minister isn't even in the chamber for this debate. We've got only an hour of debate. Surely the minister could spend his time in the chamber for that hour.

I ask a simple question of the government. Why would the government wish to remove such transparency? For most workers, superannuation will be their largest asset outside of their home. The industry funds frequently advertise the importance of superannuation and the financial benefits of industry funds over retail funds. They draw attention to savings and administration fees and their impact over time on retirement fund balances. Funds understand the compounding effect that small amounts have over long periods and, through their advertising, industry funds have appropriately educated superannuation fund members. But we need to know exactly what they're spending their funds on.

Sure, we have education, but not all the money associated with promotion, marketing and sponsorship expenditure is well spent. We have to keep reminding ourselves that this is a compulsory product, and we need transparency. Every one of us in this nation has a super fund, and we need to know what these funds are spending their money on.

One Sunday morning, I was watching Merv Hughes Fishing. It's a good show. I love my fishing shows.

See this speech in context