Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering Better Financial Outcomes and Other Measures) Bill 2024 contains a broad set of changes to a number of laws, so I will take these part by part.

Let me first go specifically to schedule 6 and the important and welcome changes to the location and producer offsets. These are of particular interest to my community in Wentworth, many of whom work in, or alongside, the film and television industry. Schedule 6 increases the location tax offset from 16.5 per cent to 30 per cent for an international film and television programs made in Australia and makes changes to the minimum expenditure thresholds for the producer offset. These changes provide support to international film and television producers operating in Australia and match the incentives provided by other countries who are competing against us for these productions. Without these changes, it's likely that international investment would be diverted overseas, harming our screen sector and the economy. The new laws will give greater certainty to both investors and the production industry. These are welcome changes which I and others have been advocating for since early last year.

The film and television sector is an extremely important driver of economic activity across our community. Close to 50 per cent of the industry is based in New South Wales, including over 2,300 screen production businesses that employ over 15,000 people. My electorate of Wentworth has probably the highest concentration of filmmakers and film and television companies in New South Wales, perhaps even in Australia. A simple Google search on film producers in the eastern suburbs of Sydney produces over 400 companies alone. According to Ausfilm, five major international productions have recently spent an estimated $28 million in Wentworth, while engaging more than 480 crew and over 260 businesses. If you haven't seen The Fall Guy yet, I encourage you to go out and see it, not just because of Ryan Gosling but also because of the wonderful Wentworth scenery that is on show.

The measures in this bill will help ensure that international producers keep making films in Australia, providing important investment in state-of-the-art production facilities, like the Disney Studios in Moore Park, and employing our talented crews and tech support. We know that, when large film and television companies shoot here, the economic benefit is felt across the community. It's not just our creatives but also those ancillary people and businesses that benefit, such as caterers, drivers, hotels and restaurants. It is also a great benefit to building skills, including screen skills, in our community. According to Screen Australia's Drama report, foreign dramas that shot in Australia spent a massive $809 million across the country in 2022-23. We must do all we can to ensure that these businesses and people continue to thrive into the future. I'm also pleased that the location offset will require that companies accessing the tax incentive use our digital and visual effects post-production companies, invest in training Australians and develop our infrastructure. These are important conditions that will contribute to the sustainability of our own local production industry.

While I support this legislation, I am concerned by the length of time it has taken to be introduced in the House and disappointed that it has not been accompanied by other measures to support our domestic screen producers. I'm particularly concerned by the delay in implementing Australian content obligations for international streaming services. Streaming services like Netflix, Binge, Apple TV and Disney Plus are at the core of how most people will access creative content in the future. If we want to continue to have Australian stories on our screens, it's essential we place a guarantee or an obligation on these streamers to produce local Australian content.

I've often spoken about how important our homegrown arts and cultural industries are to the health of our community. They help define us as a people, show us who we are to the rest of the world and help us understand the complexities of the world around us in our country. They build connections and a sense of belonging, which has never been more important at times such as these, when social cohesion has become so fractured. The domestic screen industry is just one part of our arts and culture ecosystem that helps build a sense of national identity and togetherness. It must be cherished and protected for the future.

I know the arts minister is dedicated and sincere in his support for the domestic screen industry, but, despite the government promising to bring in content obligations over a year ago, we are still waiting. It's time the government delivered on this promise. I urge them to act quickly so that our creative economy is not left exposed to the whims of international streaming services.

Let me now move to another schedule in the bill. I'd like to talk about schedule 1, about the Quality of Advice Review. Whilst I strongly support the provisions in schedule 6 of this bill, I want to put on record my concerns about schedule 1. Schedule 1 begins to implement the recommendations from the Quality of Advice Review, which made important proposals on how to improve the provision of financial service in Australia, remove unnecessary red tape and reduce the cost of advice to customers. Whilst the intent of schedule 1 has been broadly welcomed by the industry and I also welcome it, it is extremely disappointing to see that this first tranche of reforms has been marred by significant drafting errors. These have been highlighted by submissions to the Senate committee from organisations including the Financial Advice Association, the Financial Services Council, the Australian Banking Association and many others. It appears that there are drafting errors across several aspects to the legislation.

I want to highlight particular concerns in respect of requirements imposed on super fund trustees. As currently drafted, the bill inadvertently sets very strict conditions on trustees to comply with before they can provide advice to members—well beyond what I understand was the intention of the recommendations from the Quality of Advice Review. The Financial Advice Association has said:

In practice, these requirements would significantly increase red tape for both super fund trustees and for financial advisers.

The Financial Services Council has warned:

The unintended consequences of the drafting could undermine the positive intentions of the law.

It is clear that these drafting errors need to be fixed, and I urge the government to do this before it passes the House.

I would also like to raise separate issues in relation to the Quality of Advice Review in the sense that this is just a small selection of the recommendations that the Quality of Advice Review has made. I urge the government to move on the rest, because we have been waiting some time for the first movement, and that is why it is so disappointing that it is badly drafted. But the government still needs to be held accountable for the fact that we have a significantly dwindling number of financial advisers in this country. Part of the concern we have is that lack of financial advisers, which means that many people are not able to access financial advice right now.

That is incredibly challenging given that, firstly, we have a baby boomer community that is retiring and needs that financial advice for their planning and, secondly, so many Australians are struggling with the cost of living right now and actually need that advice to make the right decisions as they try and manage their complicated finances. Many people are losing businesses. This is the time when we need quality financial advice. The government has not moved fast enough and now seems to have taken missteps in its moves in relation to quality of financial advice. The government needs to do better in this area.

Finally, I would like to raise a concern with this omnibus bill and omnibus bills more generally. I want to put on the record my extreme frustration at the government rolling together disparate pieces of unconnected legislation in omnibus bills such as these. It makes no sense that changes to the location tax offset are bundled into the same bill as laws regarding capital allowances for mining and prospecting, as well as changes to implement the recommendations from the Quality of Advice Review. Putting these disparate measures together undermines the ability of the parliament to consider different policies on their merits and can potentially lead to important changes being delayed or inadequately considered by members of this House.

It is a worrying trend from this government. The worst example of this was a recent bundling together of changes to the PRRT and the response to the PwC tax scandal. They had nothing to do with each other, but there was a political reason to put those together. The government said in May 2022 that it was committed to better parliamentary process. I urge them to live up to that commitment and allow the parliament to debate different policy measures on their merits rather than present large omnibus bills combining disparate and unrelated measures.

See this speech in context