Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with the resolution agreed to, I shall now proceed to put the question on the motion moved earlier today by the honourable member for North Sydney on which a division was called for and deferred in accordance with standing orders. No further debate is allowed. The question is that the amendment moved by the member for North Sydney be agreed to.

Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill and seek leave to move government amendments (1) to (7).

Leave granted.

I move:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2), omit the table item, substitute:

(2) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 25), after item 4, insert:

4A Subsection 69(3)

  After "sums of unclaimed moneys", insert "as at the end of the year".

(3) Schedule 1, page 4 (before line 26), before item 5, insert:

4B Subsection 69(3)

  Omit "higher", substitute "other".

(4) Schedule 1, item 8, page 5 (lines 10 to 13), omit the item, substitute:

8 Transitional—supplementary statement and payment obligations

(1) In addition to its effect apart from this subitem, section 69 of the Banking Act 1959 also has the effect it would have if:

  (a) in subsection 69(3) of that Act, the words "within 3 months after the 31 December in each year" were omitted and the words "before the end of 31 May 2013" were substituted; and

  (b) in subsection 69(3) of that Act, the words "as at the end of the applicable assessment day" were inserted after "sums of unclaimed moneys"; and

  (c) the amendments made by items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 4B of this Schedule had commenced on 31 December 2012; and

  (d) any regulations made, in accordance with section 4 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, for the purposes of any of the following provisions of the Banking Act 1959 had taken effect from the day on which the regulations are registered under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003:

     (i) paragraph 69(1)(b);

     (ii) paragraph 69(1)(d);

     (iii) subparagraph 69(1A)(b)(ii);

     (iv) subparagraph 69(1A)(b)(iv);

     (v) subparagraph 69(1A)(c)(ii);

     (vi) subsection 69(1B);

     (vii) subsection 69(1C);

     (viii) subsection 69(1D);

     (ix) subsection 69(1E);

     (x) subsection 69(3).

No double counting

(2) For the purposes of the application to an ADI of section 69 of the Banking Act 1959 (as that section has effect under subitem (1)), unclaimed moneys does not include any 7 year unclaimed amounts for the ADI.

(3) For the purposes of this item, if:

  (a) an amount is required to be set out in an ADI's statement under subsection 69(3) of the Banking Act 1959 (as that subsection has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)); and

  (b) the ADI is required, by subsection 69(3) of the Banking Act 1959 (as that subsection has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)), to deliver the statement to the Treasurer within 3 months after 31 December 2012;

the amount is a 7 year unclaimed amount for the ADI.

Applicable assessment day

(4) For the purposes of this item, the applicable assessment day for an ADI is:

  (a) 30 May 2013; or

  (b) if the ADI, by written notice given to the Treasurer before 30 May 2013, nominates a day that is:

  (i) not earlier than 31 December 2012; and

  (ii) not later than 29 May 2013;

     the nominated day.

(5) Schedule 2, page 7 (after line 7), at the end of the Schedule, add:

6 Transitional—supplementary statement and payment obligations

(1) In addition to their effect apart from this subitem, sections 51A to 51E of the First Home Saver Accounts Act 2008 also have the effect they would have if:

  (a) in paragraph 51A(1)(a) of that Act, the words "a calendar year" were omitted and the words "the applicable assessment day" were substituted; and

  (b) in paragraph 51A(1)(b) of that Act, the words "within 3 months after the end of the year" were omitted and the words "before the end of 31 May 2013" were substituted; and

  (c) in subsection 51A(4) of that Act, the words "the calendar year" were omitted and the words "the applicable assessment day" were substituted; and

  (d) the amendments made by items 1, 2 and 3 of this Schedule had commenced on 31 December 2012; and

  (e) any regulations made, in accordance with section 4 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, for the purposes of any of the following provisions of the First Home Saver Accounts Act 2008 had taken effect from the day on which the regulations are registered under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003:

  (i) subparagraph 17A(1)(a)(ii);

  (ii) subsection 17A(3);

  (iii) subsection 17A(4).

No double counting

(2) For the purposes of the application to an FHSA provider of sections 51A to 51E of the First Home Saver Accounts Act 2008 (as those sections have effect under subitem (1)), unclaimed money does not include any 7 year unclaimed amounts for the FHSA provider.

(3) For the purposes of this item, if:

  (a) an amount is required to be set out in an FHSA provider's statement under section 51A of the First Home Saver Accounts Act 2008 (as that section has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)); and

  (b) the FHSA provider is required, by section 51A of the First Home Saver Accounts Act 2008 (as that section has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)), to give the statement to ASIC within 3 months after the end of 31 December 2012;

the amount is a 7 year unclaimed amount for the FHSA provider.

Applicable assessment day

(4) For the purposes of this item, the applicable assessment day for an FHSA provider is:

  (a) 30 May 2013; or

  (b) if the FHSA provider, by written notice given to ASIC before 30 May 2013, nominates a day that is:

     (i) not earlier than 31 December 2012; and

     (ii) not later than 29 May 2013;

     the nominated day.

(6) Schedule 3, page 8 (after line 27), at the end of the Schedule, add:

4 Transitional—supplementary statement and payment obligations

(1) In addition to its effect apart from this subitem, section 216 of the Life Insurance Act 1995 also has the effect it would have if:

  (a) in subsection 216(1) of that Act, the words "Within 3 months after the end of each calendar year" were omitted and the words "Before the end of 31 May 2013" were substituted; and

  (b) in subsection 216(1) of that Act, the words "that year" were omitted and the words "the applicable assessment day" were substituted; and

  (c) in subsections 216(4) and (6) of that Act, the words "the calendar year" were omitted and the words "the applicable assessment day" were substituted; and

  (d) the amendment made by item 3 of this Schedule had commenced on 31 December 2012; and

  (e) any regulations made, in accordance with section 4 of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901, for the purposes of subparagraph (c)(ii) of the definition of unclaimed money in subsection 216(15) of the Life Insurance Act 1995 had taken effect from the day on which the regulations are registered under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003.

No double counting

(2) For the purposes of the application to a life company of section 216 of the Life Insurance Act 1995 (as that section has effect under subitem (1)), unclaimed money does not include any 7 year unclaimed amounts for the life company.

(3) For the purposes of this item, if:

  (a) an amount is required to be set out in a life company's statement under subsection 216(1) of the Life Insurance Act 1995 (as that subsection has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)); and

  (b) the life company is required, by subsection 216(1) of the Life Insurance Act 1995 (as that subsection has effect otherwise than under subitem (1)), to give the statement to ASIC within 3 months after the end of 31 December 2012;

the amount is a 7 year unclaimed amount for the life company.

Applicable assessment day

(4) For the purposes of this item, the applicable assessment day for a life company is:

  (a) 30 May 2013; or

  (b) if the life company, by written notice given to ASIC before 30 May 2013, nominates a day that is:

     (i) not earlier than 31 December 2012; and

     (ii) not later than 29 May 2013;

     the nominated day.

(7) Schedule 4, page 11 (after line 11), at the end of the Schedule, add:

8 Transitional—scheduled statement day

Scope

(1) This item applies if an unclaimed money day is 31 December 2012.

Scheduled statement day

(2) Sections 24C and 24E of the Superannuation (Unclaimed Money and Lost Members) Act 1999 have effect as if the scheduled statement day for the unclaimed money day was 31 May 2013 instead of the day specified in the instrument under section 15A of that Act.

The Treasury Legislation Amendment (Unclaimed Money and Other Measures) Bill is intended to reunite Australians with their lost moneys faster and to protect lost moneys from inflation and fees. That is exactly what it does. The Senate Economics Committee has now considered the bill and the majority report made just one recommendation—that the bill be passed. The report found that the reforms will be of significant benefit to consumers, as they help reunite people with their unclaimed moneys sooner and protect the real value of that money while it remains unclaimed. Let me take this opportunity to make the point that the principles on which this bill is based have not changed. They are the same core principles, and it is the same piece of legislation and the same activity in terms of unclaimed and lost moneys as has been the case under previous governments, both Labor and Liberal. What we are doing is making sure it happens in a more timely fashion, ensuring that the real value of people's money is maintained and they reconnect with their money faster.

It is more than curious that the opposition will come into this place, move amendments and support this bill—and, in the end, they have to support this, because it is a good bill. In the end, they support the legislation; they support the principle of what is being done to assist consumers to be reunited with their lost accounts, of whatever form, whether superannuation or a life policy, a bank account or other type of account. So to delay any further would be an absolute travesty.

As I said in my summing up speech, we have consulted widely. We have had consultations with industry. We have agreed that there are some areas where the intent of the amendments can be clarified to improve certainty, and these issues can and will be dealt with through regulations.

Let me turn to some of the detail of these amendments. The government amendments will provide authorised deposit-taking institutions, First Home Saver Account providers, life insurers and superannuation funds with more time for implementation. They will now have until 31 May 2013 to report on and transfer lost accounts and other lost moneys to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission or the Australian tax office as appropriate.

In addition, to reflect the changing range of bank accounts available and their specific terms and conditions, the bill will also allow the government to specify additional requirements that must be met before a bank account will be treated as unclaimed moneys. This amendment will allow the government to improve certainty for industry by clarifying a number of technical issues through regulation.

As I announced yesterday, to avoid capturing accounts unintentionally the government will introduce regulations so that children's accounts will still need to be inactive for seven years before being treated as lost. In addition, regulations will specify that First Home Saver Accounts will be excluded until the requirement to make a deposit in four years has been met. The regulations will also clarify that term deposits remain excluded, and subaccounts will continue to be treated as part of a parent account when determining whether there has been activity on an account in the last three years. Linked accounts—that is, accounts that a customer must hold as a condition of holding other accounts with the same bank, building society or credit union—and mortgage offset accounts will be treated similarly. The regulations will also clarify that accounts that are frozen by a court order or other legal requirement will also be excluded while they remain frozen, and that the three-year inactivity period will restart when the freeze is lifted. The regulations will also clarify that superannuation accounts that have been active in the last 12 months but where the member is uncontactable will not be transferred to the ATO. The amendments include the ability to extend the protection from fees, charges and inflation that this bill will provide to a broader range of accounts with low balances, although, should future governments wish to do this, further disallowance regulations would need to be made.

This bill and these amendments relate specifically to doing a number of core things: reuniting Australians with their lost moneys faster, and protecting the value of those moneys from inflation and fees—and this is a good thing for consumers and should have been done much earlier. Simply to have sat on the core principle, which has not changed in terms of lost money, idly for so many years— (Time expired)

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are going to oppose these amendments, for the perfectly obvious reason that this is just part of a fix from the government to try and keep a surplus promise that is going to be broken at any rate. We know that the fix is on, because this bill was introduced in a slovenly manner in the last sitting week, and the government, after initially refusing to send it to a committee, then sent it to a committee when they were forced into it. After they sent it to the committee, the committee then recommended to support the bill. The government majority recommended to support the bill. The government majority recognised that this is going to cause untold procedural damage to the financial services community, but still the Labor Party majority on the committee recommended to proceed with the bill in its form. Then what did we get yesterday? We got a press release from the government saying, 'We don't really care what our own committee recommended; we're going to come up with a whole lot of new amendments that no-one has previously seen and that have never been to a committee—

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What was the point of the committee?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What was the point of the committee? What is the point of a debate in this parliament? You look at the front bench of the Labor Party, and it is like Davy Jones's crew on the Black Pearlit is exactly the same; it is a freak show. They do not know how to run the country, and they do not know how to run public policy. Whether it be on taxation, where they have no strategy, or on fiscal management, where they have no strategy, or on the basic, day-to-day duties of a legislator in this House, the Labor Party do not know how to govern.

These bills, these amendments in particular, are the perfect illustration of the incompetence of this government. Announce in MYEFO that you have a major funding problem; surprise absolutely everyone with a grab at people's superannuation; come into the parliament with legislation that is much broader than could possibly have been anticipated in the announcement in MYEFO; screw up the legislation; send it to a committee, after initially resisting it; and then, from the committee, get a recommendation to support the bill in full but ignore it and come into this place and move a whole lot of amendments to your own bill!

Even the government's own parliamentary secretary here at the table, the member for Oxley, was meant to move his amendments earlier today—and he forgot to stand up. So the coalition moved their amendments in his place. And then he forgot to speak against our amendments because he was not paying attention. He is not the sharpest tool in the shed, we know that, but he forgot to speak against our amendments, and then, after he failed to speak against the amendments, you know what? He forgot to say he opposed the amendments. He forgot to call it. Then we had an imbroglio in the House, and it was put, out of deference to the Deputy Speaker, back to the House for a second vote. What mayhem! What a joke! Member for Oxley, no wonder you are consigned to a parliamentary secretary—and after doing all that work. I thought the original Ripoll committee report was pretty good on financial advice. No wonder the government ignored it, because it was a pretty good report!

Then they went and completely changed it and delivered a whole lot of new amendments and FOFA legislation. Because the benchmark for this government is incompetence, the Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation is higher than the current Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer. That is the benchmark for good government—absolute abject incompetence! But guess what? This guy is going to get a promotion! Incompetence is the benchmark for performance in the Gillard government, so we now have a parliamentary secretary who does not know what he is doing.

We will not support legislation that is made on the run. We will not support amendments that have not been tested in the broader community. We will not support bad and incompetent legislation and, sure as hell, we will not try to shore up an incompetent government. This is not the way the country should be run. This is not the way public policy should be run. This is not the way the parliament should be run. We deserve competent government in Australia. Sadly, we have not got it. Gerry Harvey nailed it when he said in May this year that an incompetent government is what is holding Australia back. It is not the Australian people; it is an incompetent government that just is not up to the job.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments moved by the parliamentary secretary be agreed to.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will not be supporting this bill because, even though the policy intent is right, this will be a red tape regulation shemozzle on a scale that will set a new benchmark for the incompetence of the Labor Party. I would say to you—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for North Sydney will refer to the bill.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The amendments to the bill will produce such a mess that the frontbench of the Labor Party will look like Davy Jones's crew on the Black Pearla freak show.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for North Sydney got away with it before but he will not now. The question is that this bill, as amended, be agreed to.