Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think the point of order proved my point: they don't actually like it when you talk about their practical record on small business and why bills like this are necessary. We could all argue the point about the second reading amendment, which no doubt, as sure as night follows day, is pretty broad and would cover pretty much whatever you wanted to say. But I'll keep on.

The bill overhauls the Payment Times Reporting Act. It levels the playing field so large businesses have to treat small businesses fairly. It will increase the pressure on big business to pay on time, including name-and-shame provisions for slow-paying big businesses. You don't want to have to use them. The point is to create incentives, through the system, for big business to do the right thing and pay on time. To be fair, many big businesses do pay on time. They get this; they get that there SMEs, their suppliers, are important and that keeping them viable, keeping them afloat by doing the right thing and paying on time, does matter. But the bill will also do this but in a way which reduces red tape, streamlines reporting pressures and removes inefficiencies in the system.

The Payment Times Reporting Regulator is getting $33 million, as a complementary budget measure, to improve its ICT infrastructure. It's part of modern government, really. You can't just design measures like this without the policy going hand in glove with ICT improvements. As we saw repeatedly under the former government—was it $92 million they wasted on the failed visa privatisation through Liberal mate Scott Briggs, and, before that, their first crack at it, another $80 million or thereabouts on a failed ICT project?—it's important, like this measure shows, to get the ICT lined up with the policy changes. The reforms impact the same large business cohort—large businesses with over $100 million—required to report previously but do it in a way, as I said, that cuts red tape and makes it easier for big businesses to comply with their obligations.

There has been a legitimate question raised as to why the minister needs a power to give direction to slow payers of small businesses. Quite simply, the power will shine a light on large businesses that are persistently slow in paying their small-business suppliers. It creates the incentive, as I said, for large businesses to treat small businesses more fairly. Such a direction can also draw attention to the practices of slow-paying large businesses much earlier and with more prominence than just the reporting regime: 'If a large business pays slow, people will know.'

I'll leave my remarks there. I'm sorry to have upset the shadow minister in stating a few facts, but it is a fact that when the Liberals were last elected to government they cancelled the instant asset write-off test. I know it upsets them when you say it. They'll find another point of order. I don't want to upset you. I mean, you can get your steps up. You can jump up and down and take little points of order to stop the truth coming out, Shadow Minister, but it is a fact. Labor are proud of our record on small business. I'm proud of our budget initiatives and I'm proud of the fact that we've found a way, with this legislation and the complementary ICT investments, to get big businesses paying small businesses more quickly, making a real difference to cash flow and such.

See this speech in context