Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Statute Law Revision Bill (No. 2) 2014 is the second introduced by the government this year. The parliament has introduced such bills with regularity since 1934. They are, as the Bills Digest notes, a matter of 'housekeeping'. These bills correct drafting errors, update cross-references and remove spent or obsolete provisions. These bills serve a worthy purpose—they maintain the tidiness of the statute book. This is an ongoing task for this and other parliaments.

But this is not bold deregulatory reform; it is routine work undertaken by all modern governments. Among other things, this bill fixes an incorrect cross-reference in the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Code Act 1994; closes a bracket in 474.258(2) of the Criminal Code; corrects the spelling of 'laminated' in a schedule to the Customs Tariffs Act 1995, which presently reads 'laminiated'; and removes a comma from the Surveillance Devices Act 2004, but adds a full stop to the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993.

The bill inserts gender-neutral language into two acts. I certainly thank the government for this. It has quite rightly been the policy of Commonwealth drafters to use gender-neutral language since 1984. I am genuinely very pleased to see that the Attorney-General has not taken the lead of his LNP counterpart in Queensland, who has recently and controversially returned to gender-specific language in legislation, restructuring the Crime and Misconduct Commission. The use of 'chairman' over 'chairperson' is probably the least of the problems of Queenslanders under Attorney-General Bleijie, but I agree with the many lawyers and citizens in Queensland who have objected to this retrograde step. I thank the Commonwealth Attorney-General for sticking to proper modern drafting practice in this regard.

This bill makes other sundry changes. In a number of acts it replaces the antiquated legal term 'servant' with its modern equivalent 'employee'. Again, this is an uncontroversial drafting point, which the Acts Interpretation Act makes clear is of no substantive legal effect. The bill restructures the Veterans' Entitlements Act for better readability. Again, all of this is worthy. None of it is groundbreaking. This bill is not in any sense 'deregulation'. The inclusion of this routine piece of housekeeping in the government's repeal day stunt beggars belief. It is routine housekeeping which has been the practice of the Australian parliament since the first Statute Law Revision Act in 1934. It has been the practice of the United Kingdom parliament since 1861. It is not novel and certainly not some grand act of deregulation. This bill will not reduce in any measurable way the regulatory burden on any Australian business. It will not remove or streamline any operative regulation. That the government would try to dress this bill up into a grand political gesture shows this government's lack of substance.

The Amending Act Repeal Bill, which is also before the House, follows on from the Amending Acts 1901 to 1969 Repeal Act introduced in the government's last 'repeal day' stunt in March. This bill repeals around 650 amending or repeal acts passed between 1970 and 1979. As the amendments or repeals have already taken place, the effect of these acts is spent. Section 7 of the Acts Interpretation Act makes clear that the repeal of an amending or repeal act does not undo its operation. This bill therefore has no effect on the operation of any law.

The explanatory memorandum to the bill claims the repeal of these acts is desirable in order to reduce the regulatory burden and make accessing the law simpler for both businesses and individuals. However, the explanatory memorandum also states that 'the repeal of these acts will not substantially alter existing arrangements or make any change to the substance of the law' and that there is 'no financial impact'. We do not argue with getting rid of regulations that are redundant, no longer enforced and not relevant. It is the same attitude we had while we were in government. We repealed over 16,000 acts, regulations and legislative instruments when we were in office.

Let us not pretend, however, that the removal of these 650 acts that is proposed in this bill does anything to 'reduce the regulatory burden' when the explanatory memorandum to the bill itself says 'the repeal of these acts will not substantially alter existing arrangements or make any change to the substance of the law'. Not a single piece of legislation repealed by this bill has any operation. All of the acts to be repealed have been inoperative for at least 35 years. They do not and cannot have any bearing on the needs of Australian businesses and individuals in 2014.

We will not hear from anyone on the government side in this debate say how the repeal of the Brigalow Lands Agreement Amendment Act 1977 or the repeal of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands Amendment Act 1979 or the repeal of the National Fitness Amendment Act 1979 will affect businesses or individuals because the repeal makes no change at all to the substance of Australian law. This bill is nothing more than a stunt to allow the government to claim that it is cutting regulation while not saving any money or removing any operative regulation.

Louise Markus (Macquarie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 represents an unprecedented initiative of the government to cut $1 billion in red and green tape each year. This coalition government has gone further and more than doubled the target by announcing a net reduction of over $2.1 billion in compliance costs as a result of the 400 proposed measures. This repeal day is part of the coalition's plan to improve and strengthen our economy.

The economic action strategy of this government is indeed making progress. The mining tax has gone and the carbon tax has gone. The government's repeal of the carbon tax and the mining tax has not only reduced cost-of-living pressures and helped create jobs but also saved families and businesses in reduced compliance costs. The budget is bringing expenditure down and restoring the economy after the debt and deficit disaster of the previous Labor government. And continuing on from the autumn repeal day 2014, we are taking scissors to inefficiency and dissolving impediments to thriving business and beneficial reform.

Today, I am pleased to join with the coalition government to introduce legislation to repeal nearly 1,000 pieces of unnecessary legislation and regulations. We are talking about considerably reducing regulatory impediments that are harmful to productivity, deter investment and cost jobs. The Productivity Commission has estimated that regulation compliance costs could amount to as much as four per cent of Australia's GDP. The World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index ranked Australia 124th out of 148 countries for 'burden of government regulation' for 2014. That simply is not good enough. The government is doing something about this.

The business and wider community have communicated for some time and it is very clear in the economy that there needs to be a significant reduction in regulation to improve Australia's productivity and competitiveness. Many of these cuts will benefit the electorate of Macquarie, which is a major region for infrastructure investment, emerging small business, the stunning environment and tourism.

By creating public access to the centralised, online point of access for government services with the myGov account, we make possible a projected saving of $88 million per year. Five million Australians have so far created their myGov account. Similarly, the Australian Taxation Office's new online tax return service, myTax, will save over 1.4 million taxpayers $160 million a year in compliance costs by pre-populating tax returns. A one-stop shop for environmental approvals will save the community $426 million each year and provide an estimated economic gain of $120 billion over the next 12 years. An estimated 447,000 small businesses will benefit from a reduced tax compliance burden with administrative changes to GST and PAYG reporting. That is going to directly benefit small businesses in the electorate of Macquarie. Further, businesses with no GST payable will no longer be required to lodge a business activity statement, saving small businesses more than $67 million each year in compliance costs.

We are creating the Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman, a national advocate which will also assist in the development of small-business friendly laws and regulations. Small business people around Macquarie, particularly family based businesses, have told me their stories of attempting to make ends meet while struggling with red and green tape. This is why the Commonwealth government is working each day to remove the red tape burdens for small business.

Following the autumn repeal day earlier this year, Jo Bromilow, President of the Blaxland and Districts Chamber of Commerce in my electorate of Macquarie, spoke positively about the optimism returning to small businesses as a result of removing the burden of unnecessary regulations. The chamber president highlighted how reducing the constant usage of paperwork allows small businesses to get on with the job of growing their business.

Small businesses play a significant role in our local regional and national economies. Ms Bromilow said, 'It is already apparent that the optimism is returning to small businesses, which will lead on to employment growth and investment in this crucial area of the economy'. Jo Bromilow, as a distinguished and experienced small business manager in my electorate, understands the positive impacts of reducing the constant usage of paperwork and red tape. Ms Bromilow said it allows small businesses to move forward. We are committed to ensuring small businesses can do more to benefit consumers, their businesses and our economy.

The NBN rollout is moving into full swing within the electorate of Macquarie, and currently many residents in South Windsor and Bligh Park localities are making the transition, with Richmond soon to follow. NBN customers can opt not to have a battery backup installed in their home or business, as many customers can use their mobile phone or generator during a power blackout, saving $21.1 million in compliance costs.

Local clubs and organisations registered as a company limited by guarantee in my electorate of Macquarie—who do so much for the community—and make less than $1 million in revenue, will no longer require an auditor. This was previously required even though audited financial reports were not.

There simply is not the time to list all that is being done with this bill today or all of the direct benefits for business, local organisations and the community at large. Continuing on from the repeal of over 9,500 regulations and 50,000 pages of legislation and regulation on the 2014 autumn repeal day—the largest bulk repeal in Australia's history—the government is repealing a further 256 regulations. This will do away with over $700 million of compliance costs. That is $700 million of taxpayers' money that can be reallocated elsewhere: to assist and grow small businesses, to grow tourism in the region, to invest in greater and increased infrastructure, and to help local organisations and communities to prosper. I am pleased to commend the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 to the House.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014. Australia has been blessed. We have achieved an economic position in the world, built on good fortune, hard effort and a good economic platform built by successive good governments—the Hawke-Keating years and the Howard government. It was supported, at least in the Hawke-Keating years, by a reformist opposition with an eye to the future and what was in Australia's best interest. That is in contrast to where we sit today. The Rudd-Gillard years by comparison not only lacked any agenda to increase productivity; it unwound many of the reforms of the previous 20 years.

Disturbingly, the World Economic Forum tells us that Australia has slipped to 124 out of 148 countries on the burden of regulation table. That is a disgrace. It is a clear illustration of why Australia is losing the manufacturing industry out of Australia today. We are losing projects on a world-wide scale because we have lost our competitive edge. The previous government, the Labor government, in just three years—2010 to 2013—introduced 21,000 new regulations. I am not sure if this is a new record but I certainly hope so and I hope it is not one that is repeated soon.

Last year we had our first repeal day; 10,000 acts and regulations gone—that was 50,000 pages. What an achievement. This time it is 1,000 acts and regulations abolished—7,200 pages and, in total, more than $2 billion worth of compliance burden. For me—one who has railed against stifling regulations—it is an exciting time. It is almost an 'Empire strikes back' moment. It is great to see the little guy get a chance to breathe.

Almost instantly when I walk in the door of a small business, the first thing they tell me—after we say, 'How are you going?' and 'Good morning'—is: 'You have to get the red-tape monkey off our back. We are being strangled by red tape, paperwork, workforce compliance, workforce policies—for almost every conceivable occurrence, no matter how remote the possibility—tax compliance, industry compliance.' I have met truckies who are dazed and confused by loading regulations, driver management rules—sometimes policed by zealots who think the country can run without trucks. I have heard from television aerial installers—this is a good one—who are now no longer able to use a ladder to climb on to a roof unless it is tied at the top. Don't ask me how they are supposed to tie a ladder at the top without climbing the ladder in the first instance. The list goes on and on and, depressingly, on.

So today is instalment 2 of a government finally having a red-hot go at trying to get the red-tape monkey off the back of the citizens of Australia. Huge numbers of useless acts and regulations will be going out the door today, delivering $1.2 billion worth of savings. For instance, the one-stop shop for environmental controls will save $426 million upfront. Even more importantly, it is expected that over the next 12 years we will deliver $120 billion worth of benefit to Australia.

For agriculture—an industry I am vitally interested in—improvements to the farm management deposits, implementing the mandatory port access code, and getting rid of a duplicated cattle-tagging system are just a start, but they will all help.

With simplified documents, there is a huge range of issues covered: simplified documents for marriage certificates, a choice as to whether a consumer has a battery back-up on the premises for a fibre-to-the-node connection to the National Broadband Network, e-tendering for defence supply contracts and simplified paperwork for Job Service Providers all provide savings and efficiencies to individuals, business and government, as will speeding up Export Finance Insurance Corporation approvals and PBS medication charts for public hospitals will save $40 million. These are big figures.

The myGov site will make life easier for welfare recipients and save $88 million, and people will be able to lodge their tax returns on this site 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Simplified import permits for defence procurement will save $27 million. Getting rid of the red tape in the VET sector will save $30 million. The government will be reforming the apprenticeship support schemes, aligning state and federal gambling regulation and PAYG thresholds will be adjusted. Better cooperation with the US on tax arrangements will yield $58 million. Duplication for reporting of charities will be reduced. Efic will be simplified and be able to underwrite all supplies and not just capital equipment.

The list goes on but I will hone in on one issue that is of particular interest to me, and that is the move to harmonise Australian design rules with other developed nations' procedures. Last year, I sat on the agriculture committee inquiry into the legislation to amend the Agriculture and Veterinary Chemicals Act. The bill—in the previous government's eyes at least—was aimed to improve efficiency but in fact added considerable cost and regulatory burden to the sector. This government, since that time, has unwound that legislation. But, during the debate, it was made clear to me that Australia faces all kinds of issues in the registration of chemicals for agricultural use in Australia. We think of ourselves as big food producers when in fact we are medium to small food producers. We are big exporters of certain products like wheat, barley, sugar and cotton—even though you do not eat that of course. You may, but it may not be very good for you!

We are big exporters, but we are not a significant market for many other commodities. So when you get a chemical that is registered internationally it costs a lot of money to get it registered in Australia for relatively small markets. As a result of this, Australian farmers are not always accessing the best chemicals on the market. This move that starts to recognise other countries' assurance systems, their registration systems, is a great move for us. It is not in this agvet area yet, but this is one of the things that I will be pursuing, because I believe it is in our benefit. The world is a place that seems to be decreasing in size. We are increasingly linked to our trading partners. We should be recognising each other's standards in the way we do business and in the way we register products. With that, I will commend the bill. I will just point out that this government has commenced this tough job. In contrast to the last six years, where Labor gave us more regulation, more government, more red tape and more strangulation of the economy, it is a breath of fresh air.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with great pleasure that I rise today to speak on the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014. This is another example of this government following up on its election commitments and it follows on our efforts on the autumn repeal day back in March. Fittingly, this spring omnibus repeal day gives us the opportunity to continue the job of the spring-clean of red tape and regulation in our economy. We made a commitment at the last election to cut over $1 billion in red and green tape and with this bill we are continuing to deliver on that commitment. In fact, the reality is that we are more than doubling our commitment by a reduction of over $2.1 billion in red and green tape costs to our economy. With our March repeal bill we repealed some 10,000 pieces of regulation and some 50,000 pages of legislation, removing some $700 million of compliance costs.

This is the first time ever that we have had the two repeal days in the one year. You might ask why this is important. It is important because we need to deregulate to free up the productive sectors of our economy to achieve and grow for the future benefit of this country. This is important because the previous government left us a legacy of red tape and regulation by introducing more than 21,000 additional regulations. In addition to that, there were over 80 examples of noncompliance or exemption from regulatory impact statements in those legislative processes. As a result of the inaction towards reduction of red tape and green tape by the previous government in the years from 2007, multifactor productivity declined by some three per cent.

It is worth noting that in the Financial Review today there was an article about a report that has been released by Deloitte Access Economics, and I will quote from that. It is titled 'Red-tape staff cost $250 billion' and it reads:

A growing thicket of business red tape is creating a new class of workers devoted solely to complying with rules and regulations, potentially costing the economy more than $250 billion a year.

Deloitte Access Economics reveals more than one in    11 Australians are now employed in compliance jobs such as office managers, inspectors, public relations and occupational health jobs.

So it is no wonder we have seen that decline in productivity. This is despite the promise by the previous Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, in 2007 of a one regulation in, one regulation out policy and the then small business minister, Mr Emerson, saying in 2008 that Labor would 'take a giant pair of scissors to the red tape that is strangling small business'. I would suggest you, Deputy Speaker Mitchell, that those scissors went well and truly missing during their term in office and it has taken a coalition government to pull them out of the cupboard, dust them off, sharpen them up and get stuck into the job of reducing red tape and regulation in our economy.

A number of speakers have already focused on the important needs of small business. Why is that? It is because 94 per cent of all businesses in Australia based on turnover, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, are small businesses. They also make up 99 per cent of the some 816,000 employing businesses in Australia. They employ approximately 4.5 million Australians, or 43 per cent of the private sector workforce. Interestingly, this is down seven per cent on what it was prior to the election of the previous Labor government. This government has made it well and truly clear over the past 12 months or so, and even prior to that, the importance of small business to our economy and to employment, growth and innovation. Part of the process of this repeal of red tape and regulation is to ensure that we free up that productive and innovative capacity in our economy.

The Productivity Commission has also estimated that regulation compliance costs could amount to as much as four per cent of Australia's GDP, further identifying importance of going ahead with our deregulation agenda. What is interesting is that if you take the figures from this Deloitte Access Economics report, the reality is that red tape and regulation, both the government level and in the corporate sector, could amount to as high as 15 per cent of gross domestic product. What an enormous drag on our economy.

As with other activities already undertaken by this government, including getting rid of the carbon tax and the mining tax, we are continuing well down the road on our deregulatory agenda. Just briefly in summary, some of the things we have looked at is minimising and simplifying the interaction with government; reducing regulatory obligations and reporting requirements; fuelling economic growth by a one stop shop for environmental approvals based on agreements with every state and territory that alone is estimated to save some $426 million; and making it easier to provide direct finance to our exporters, where we generate an enormous amount of our national wealth.

There are also a number of common sense reforms: Australia were now accept products, systems and services that have been approved overseas under trusted international standards or risk assessments; NBN customers will be able to opt out of having a battery backup installed in their home; the extension of the Do Not Call Register is now indefinite—people will not have to renew at every eight years; beef producers exporting to the European Union will no longer have to tag their cattle with additional tags; for those who love to ride motorcycles—not that I am one of those—they will no longer require a modification to be fitted with an Australia-specific rear mudguard, bringing Australia into line with United Kingdom, France and Germany. That alone is estimated to save the motorcycle industry some $14.4 million in compliance on manufacturing costs. Local clubs and organisations registered as a company limited by guarantee with revenue of less than $1 million will no longer require an auditor where that has been previously required, even though audited financial reports were not.

This omnibus bill I highly commend to the House, as it continues to pursue the deregulatory agenda that this government has set out to free our economy up to be productive, innovative and grow for the future benefit of all Australians.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is great pleasure that I rise to speak on these repeal provisions. Upon reading them a phrase sprung to mind, which is one of those few lovely phrases from Latin at creeps into the law and that you actually remember. The phrase is: 'de minimis non curat lex', which means, in effect, that the law does not concern itself with trifles. In legal principle it essentially means that the law will not usually remedy the injury of an immensely minor type, nor will it make continuous judgements in respect of what are contextually very minor issues. That is a particularly helpful principle to govern the conduct of the law, but it is a terrible principle to govern the conduct of economies.

Having watched this debate occur twice now on two separate repeal days, I must say I have been somewhat surprised by the very strident negative approach taken by members opposite.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, it is that you are dressing it up …

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is something that most people seem to agree is a very good thing, so we have a range of very strong endorsements outside of this place for the agenda. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Australia's largest and most representative business organisation, strongly supports the government's initiative to cut red tape and undertake legislative repeal days. Repeal days just like this one. The basis—as the member for Perth in her very casual and low-key way noted by interjection!—of Labor's surprisingly strident opposition is essentially twofold. The first is that what is contained in this swathe of repeal legislation is just too minor to be bothered with. The Manager of Opposition Business said things such as 'so much hype over so little'. He described it as 'vacuuming the spare room that nobody walks into anyway'. Of course, this was a theme continued by the member for Isaacs, to the effect that all this does is do things that governments usually do, which is to repeal, remove or fix very, very minor problems in legislative instruments. Of course, that is part but only part of what is being done. The only other argument being offered by Labor is, to the extent that there is anything important in this, they did it anyway and did it as a matter of routine. I will address that second argument in a moment.

With regard to this notion that all that is being done is minor, it simply does not bear proper scrutiny when you actually look at what is happening here. The fact is that, yes, there are some matters which would be described as de minimis, and you have got regulatory wolves in this menagerie. You have rats and mice and you even have a few fleas. The member for Isaacs spent many minutes concentrating on the fleas, but the fact is that there are some very significant savings and changes which will help business across Australia. In the first tranche of reforms we had the incredibly substantive removal of a singularly damaging piece of duplication in the environmental sphere. Having a situation where you can have the regulatory assessment of environmental matters according to state legislation and the federal version of that legislation done at one time by one organisation will save $426.3 million a year. That falls certainly into the category of a regulatory wolf or maybe even a tiger: something that is terribly damaging and dangerous to the economy. Then in this tranche of repeals we have other very important matters. The idea now that Australian business will be able to accept products, systems and services that are approved overseas under a trusted international standard or risk assessment is going to be a very significant plus for business.

But, yes, in amongst all of this there are many other smaller, more modest changes, but the point about regulation is that it is the cumulative effect of the regulation that has to be constantly and continually tackled. We are tackling here both the big-ticket items and the composite and cumulative effects of all the minutia which in its cumulation causes immense difficulties. Labor's position seems to be this: there is no point, and we should roundly criticise the person who removes the barnacles from the hull because the things are just so small. But the point is the cumulative effect of all the things that are being done here has a reverberatory effect throughout the economy. There is also the fact that there are some very major and big-ticket items that are being removed.

I will address the second point of Labor's argument—which is completely inconsistent with their first—which is that none of this is really worth doing to any extent but, to the extent that it is, Labor did it anyway. The fact remains that there is probably one genuinely bipartisan measure that both parties have said is a good measure of the regulatory burden, and that is provided by the Economist Intelligence Unit. It looks at regulatory and economic burdens and failures across a range of categories in 144 countries. The Economist Intelligence Unit said that, looking at 144 countries across the world, when you look at the burden for government regulation, when the Howard government finished its term in office Australia was 60th out of 144 on the burden of government regulation. After Labor's time in office we had sunk to 96th out of 144 on the burden of government regulation.

The question begs: if Labor did all this and their deregulatory agenda was so fine, so good and achieved so much with so little fanfare, why was their performance on the best possible measure so terrible? Why did we slip from 60th in the world on the regulatory burden of government to 96th over their period in government? The answer must surely be that they simply did not do enough and that their attitude and culture around these things was not strong enough. That has been very significantly repaired by this government and by the parliamentary secretary, who is doing a very fine job.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise today to speak on this bill, which I and I think many others in this House today believe is important to constituents Australia-wide who seek to reduce the burden and cost of regulation—and that is all of us, including those opposite, I am sure. The Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 is a whole-of-government initiative to amend and repeal legislation in a number of areas.

Today we have heard the other side say there is no value in this bill. I say they have not looked very hard to find that value. If they had done so, they would have noticed a whole raft of amendments. The bill deals with generally benign measures—yes, we agree with that—in order to reduce the regulatory imposition on business, individuals and the community sector, but there are many other, more substantive matters as well. The repeal will make regulation easily accessible, meaning business, individuals and community organisations can spend more time doing what is important for them and less time trawling through regulation and some of its more ridiculous demands.

The omnibus bill deals with a wide range of legislation, in many cases repealing legislation which is no longer relevant, in approximately nine areas. We have seen amendments in the areas of agriculture, immigration and border protection, industry, Treasury, veterans' affairs—even the Prime Minister and Cabinet area gets a haircut. I have a particular focus and objective in recognising and assisting small business to reduce costs and the regulatory burden and to increase efficiency, productivity and competitiveness. We all know that, when small business is not focused on regulation, it can spend more time on business itself.

This government is determined to be a smaller, less interfering government, and this latest reduction in red tape is moving us all in the right direction, especially for the business community. The government does not run small businesses. It has a responsibility to provide the right legislative environment to help improve the business community, not be a hindrance, not be a blocker but be an enabler.

I would like to focus a little on some of the improvements for the small business sector, and it is pleasing to see the Minister for Communications sitting in the House today, because communications is one area I would like to focus on. Schedule 2 will amend legislation in the communications portfolio to streamline statutory consultation and publication requirements and repeal spent provisions. Part 1 deals with the provisions in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 that are redundant now and say that the SBS undertakes television production and supply previously undertaken by the National Indigenous Television Ltd Part 2 will deal with provisions in the communications portfolio requiring rule makers to consult before making certain legislative instruments. This is all very sensible and noncontroversial. Simply, there is a reduced requirement to consult, impacting small business in the communications sector and removing a requirement for ACMA to publish notices in the Gazette; rather, they may use their website, making notification quicker for entities and speeding things up, thereby creating efficiencies and reducing costs.

Now let us have a quick look at the environment. The schedule will repeal and amend provisions in the acts administered in the environment portfolio, making technical amendments to streamline regulatory arrangements. Two items which will reduce the burden for small business are as follows: removing the requirement for duplicate approvals when moving hazardous waste through Australia—hardly rats and mice, I would say—and enabling information relating to the export of hazardous waste to be published on a website rather than the onerous, old-fashioned paper publication requirement. This will remove a compliance burden for hazardous waste exporters. Other items will ensure hazardous waste permit processing can be done more efficiently, reducing the cost to business.

With respect to social services, a notable change is the lower reporting requirements for aged-care providers. This will be extremely well received and is welcome.

A little bit about Durack: we all know that small business is the engine room of the Australian economy, and I am committed to reducing red tape in the sector. The Productivity Commission released in its report in 2013 some commentary on small business that is worth repeating here today:

Small businesses feel the burden of regulation more strongly than other businesses. Almost universally, their lack of staff, time and resources present challenges in understanding and fulfilling compliance obligations.

… … …

Australian studies have found that small businesses spend, on average, up to 5 hours per week on compliance with government regulatory requirements and deal with an average of six regulators per year.

The omnibus bill will have a positive impact on more than 13,500 small businesses in my electorate of Durack which includes the Kimberley, the Pilbara, Gascoyne, the Midwest and the northern wheat belt. Do not forget, many businesses in remote and regional areas of Durack are owner operated, one-person shows. Most of the towns in Durack have commerce or small business organisations and wherever I go in my massive electorate the message is always the same: 'Get rid of the compliance; get rid of the impediments. Help us make ends meet and get customers coming through the doors.' I met with small business organisations recently in Moora and Merredin; and also with John Lally, CEO of Karratha District Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Rob Jefferies, CEO of the Mid West Chamber of Commerce and Industry; and Geoff Herbert, President of the Onslow Chamber of Commerce and Industry. They are all concerned with the current requirements on small business and look forward to a reduction of unnecessary red tape.

It is absolutely essential to build a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia; we have heard that a lot. It is essential to strengthen our rural and regional communities, which of course is our policy. Today we are working at removing nearly 1,000 pieces of legislation and regulation as part of this spring repeal day.

To finish off, here are a couple of quotes from people who have an interest in this matter. The CEO of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia, Deidre Willmott, who is well known in government circles and well informed on the burden on business of overregulation, says:

Western Australian business owners are amongst the cleverest people going around, with a track record of world leading innovation. However, their ability to compete and succeed on a global scale is being hampered by the amount of time and energy they need to spend navigating convoluted, time consuming regulatory processes across multiple layers of government.

And one last quote from Reg Howard-Smith, who is the Chief Executive of the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia, who agrees:

The Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia welcomes the Federal Government's attempts to repeal unnecessary red-tape and duplication.

In particular the resources sector urges all parliamentarians to support the one-stop-shop proposal for environmental approvals.

Despite concerns raised by environmental lobby groups, the one-stop-shop will not see a 'watering down' of environmental standards.

As someone who has worked in the mining industry for many years and has firsthand experience in navigating the torturous environmental approvals battlefield, I believe anything we as a government can do to reduce time frames and get projects off the ground is good for us all. I commend this bill to the House.

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me real pleasure to rise and speak on this bill, the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014, and associated bills. I would like to associate my comments with all of those made on this side of the House today. The very varied contributions made by so many people illustrate the work that has gone into discovering those little things that are, as Christian Porter mentioned, the barnacles on the hull.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Lyons knows to address members by their proper title.

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I beg your pardon, Mr Deputy Speaker. They are indeed the barnacles on the hull of small business and of families. I do my best when I am travelling around an electorate that is not as big as the member for Durack's electorate but one which is, in the Tasmanian context, a large electorate; I try to listen to the small businesses and families that make up that electorate. The small businesses owners, and the employees within those small businesses, are not usually members of unions. That is perhaps one of the reasons why those opposite take so little interest in genuine attempts by this side of government to improve and remove the red tape that is literally suffocating small businesses all around Australia. The contribution from six years of Labor was 21,000 new regulations. It was going to be one in, one out; but 21,000 new pieces of red tape and regulation were introduced during the six years of the previous government.

Small business is indeed in our DNA. A local businessman said to me recently he is not sure that the community fundraising event he has been involved with for nearly 20 years will continue any longer. The event's organisers, all volunteers, have been struggling for several years with the increasing burden of red tape and mountains of applications and forms they now face to get this community event off the ground. Committee members have just about run out of time and energy for the paperwork. It will be red tape that sees many successful community events shut down.

One of my staffers was telling me recently about her 91-year-old father who happily and healthily lives on his own—except for the growing mountain of paperwork that faces him every time he attempts to seek out services to make his life a little easier. It is government getting involved with people's lives. On this side of the House, we want to get out of government; we want to be a small government. A hospital visit, for example, for a minor procedure required 20 or 30 pages of forms to fill out. A change to his Veterans' Affairs pension required 20 or 30 pages of questions to be answered, even though he had answered the questions before on a number of occasions.

We have all heard stories of regulations gone crazy so that we sometimes feel that we are being strangled by paperwork. That is why it is a wonderful thing that the government is doing for Australians with the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014. This is the second such day, which we have promised will be twice-yearly events in parliament focused solely on reducing the compliance burden on individuals, businesses and the not-for-profit sector. I want to acknowledge the work done by all the federal government ministers in bringing to fruition this bill, which will amend and repeal legislation across nine portfolio areas, and the work done by parliamentary secretary Frydenberg to bring this all together. It is a work in progress, because we will not stop until duplication and unnecessary legislation is minimised.

The government has announced more than 400 new measures to cut red tape across the board, from environment to education, health to human services, and Treasury to trade. We are honouring a promise to the Australian people made at the time of last year's election when we said we would cut red tape costs by $1 billion. I am pleased to stand here today and say that the repeal measures thus far will total over $2.1 billion net in compliance costs.

Today, in the second repeal day so far, the government introduces legislation to repeal nearly 1,000 pieces of legislation and regulations and 7,210 pages on the statute books. That is on top of the nearly 10,000 unnecessary or counterproductive regulations and 1,000 redundant acts of parliament that were removed on the government's first red tape repeal day in March this year.

Some of the key reforms from this bill, which will directly benefit the constituents of my electorate of Lyons in Tasmania, include those to do with small business and also the aged-care sector. An estimated 447,000 small businesses nationally will benefit from a reduced tax compliance burden with administrative changes to GST and PAYG reporting. Businesses with no GST payable will no longer be required to lodge a BAS statement. These measures will save small business an estimated $67 million in red tape, which small business operators in Lyons will applaud. I look forward to hosting the Minister for Small Business Mr Billson in a few weeks on the east coast of Tasmania. I know the small business people in that part of my electorate are indeed looking forward to the minister's visit.

Aged-care providers will no longer be required to notify the Department of Social Services—and I note the minister is in the chamber—of key personnel changes unless changes materially affect the provider's suitability to provide care.

Close to my heart are reforms to both the higher education sector and the agricultural sector. Universities are being saved $2.1 million in compliance costs by not being required to complete the Sustainable Research Excellence—SRE—staff hours survey to measure how university researchers balance their time between research and other activities over a two-week period; just pure bloody-mindedness. This was a ridiculous form of regulation, and its scrapping will be applauded by the University of Tasmania's staff, who are looking for ways to save costs. Instead, they can spend money on expanding student services.

Australian beef exporters exporting to the European Union, of whom there are many in my electorate, will no longer have to tag their cattle with lime green tail tags for the European Union Cattle Accreditation Scheme. The reason for this is that we have electronic tags now, and they have been in operation for many years. This will save beef farmers about half a million dollars a year—barnacles on the hull, indeed.

I congratulate my parliamentary colleagues, all of whom worked so hard to produce this common-sense round of reforms, and I commend the bill to the house. I would encourage those opposite, and I would be very interested to see whether the member for Indi and the member for Kennedy, who are most interested in agriculture, support this deregulation measures. The member for Denison must hear from the many small businesses in his electorate in my home state about the burdens that are imposed on small business. I encourage him to support these changes. The member for Fairfax is a businessman in his own right—we all know that—and I encourage him to support these measures as well. I commend the bill to the House.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to rise on the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 and other associated bills. About a fortnight ago I attended the southern Sydney volunteer awards, where I was very proud to hand out the major prize on that day. Amongst the audience were many wonderful volunteers in our society. There were people who volunteered in lifesaving; in the Rural Fire Service; in aged care; and helping our kids with disabilities. On that day the overall prize winner for the best team of volunteers was a group called the form fillers. Their job, their volunteer service to our community, was to help people to fill out government forms. Out of all the valuable efforts of volunteers in our society that was considered the most important service that could be done in our local area. It was a team of 14 people. It is not to question or belittle the great work that they have done in any way but to raise the issue, the problem that we have in this nation—overburdensome government regulations and red tape.

To see the serious problem we have in this nation, we need look no further than the recent study on global competitiveness by the World Economic Forum. Out of 148 nations surveyed on the burden of government regulation, unbelievably, Australia was ranked 124th. So there are 123 other nations that have less burdensome government regulations than we have. The few nations that we were in front of included the Islamic Republic of Iran, which we tied with.

This is not something we should be laughing about, because this government regulation directly affects our economic prosperity and our wealth creation. During the recent MPI, we had members from the opposition coming in here and whinging about how there had been very low real wages growth. The reason for that is that we have not had the productivity increases. While we continue to burden our businesses, especially our small businesses, with more and more red tape, we prevent them from getting on with the job of creating wealth and creating those new businesses that drive our prosperity.

During this debate, I think we have seen perhaps the greatest evidence of the difference between our side and those opposite. The opposition have come in here and ridiculed this legislation. We know the record of the previous government. They used to boast about the number of regulations they had brought in. They actually thought it was a good thing that they brought in 21,000 new regulations. They thought this was wonderful. The simple difference is that the opposition, the modern day Labor Party, believe in central planning. If only they could get another team of government bureaucrats to go into that business to sort them out, to give them more red tape, things would be so much better! After six years of that, what have we seen? As this has always done throughout history, it has ended in tears. The unemployment queues in this nation are 200,000 people longer than when the previous Labor came to office.

Thomas Jefferson perhaps said it best when he said: 'That government is best which governs least'—and that I agree with. Just look at the disaster we have had as a result of previous government intervention. There is a thing called Maudlin's law, which says that for every leftist piece of government law introduced in a hurry to try and address some perceived crisis or remedy there will be at least one or more unintended consequence that has an equal or greater negative effect. This is what we saw during the previous six years. We saw the mining tax, which was supposed to create this wonderful revenue, cost our ATO $50 million in just establishing the compliance requirements—and it hardly collected more than that. We saw the carbon tax, which was designed to lower pollution. But after the carbon tax was implemented, it actually increased air pollution in Western Sydney, my area, to above World Health Organisation standards.

This is a very important piece of legislation before us. We must wind back the ever-growing burdensome obligations upon our business community, especially our small business community. We must have faith in them. We must free their hands to let them get on with the wealth creation that will drive the prosperity of this nation into the future. After all, as a nation, we now have to find $1 billion every single month, $33 million a day, just to pay the interest on the previous government's debt—and most of that goes overseas. We have to start clawing that back. The only way we can do it is by increasing the productivity of this nation, and that starts by this government reducing the burden of red tape that has been placed on our business community. I proudly commend the bill to the House.

Karen Andrews (McPherson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to add my voice to the many in support of the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 and related bills and to indicate my very strong backing for the government's commitment to cutting red tape. This package of Spring Repeal Day bills builds on the Autumn Repeal Day legislation and brings the total in red tape savings to $2.1 billion. This is more than double our election commitment to slash red tape by $1 billion.

Earlier this month, I hosted a number of listening posts throughout my electorate to talk with local residents directly about the things that matter most to them. Overwhelmingly, the underlying message is that they want the government to make things simpler, rather than more complicated. They want to be able to get on with their working lives, they want to run their business or they want to volunteer at the local charity or sporting club, without having to wade through paperwork and without having the burden of regulation to make simple tasks difficult.

During the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments, members opposite used to brag about the amount of legislation that was passed through the House. Indeed, in just over five years, Labor managed to introduce around 21,000 new regulations—but so much of it was unnecessary. I am a firm believer in smaller government. There isn't time in today's debate to go into a philosophical debate about the role of government, but the notion of smaller government is at the heart of the coalition's policy approach. And I think everyone on this side of the House is excited about the fact that, while we are in office, there will be two sitting days every year dedicated to repealing the legislation and regulations that do not serve a positive purpose and that only add to the red tape which individuals, businesses and community groups have to deal with. This legislation will help ensure that, over time, the burden continues to be lifted and that we streamline the work of government into the future. What's more, the coalition is committed to a new approach with every piece of legislation or proposed regulation that we put forward. We must first ask: what is the purpose, cost, and impact on productivity of proposed initiatives before regulating? Only after these questions are answered and only when it is absolutely necessary will we proceed to regulate.

I did want to speak very briefly about the nature of the changes today. The Omnibus Repeal Day (Autumn 2014) Bill 2014 implements 38 measures across nine portfolios. The changes are diverse and give effect to a range of deregulation measures announced since the Autumn Repeal Day. Just one example is the implementation of the government's response to the Review of the Australian Government Building and Construction OHS Accreditation Scheme. The changes to the scheme include removing the costly and time-consuming requirement for builders to be certified to Australian Standard AS4801, or equivalent, prior to applying for scheme accreditation. Unaccredited builders will now have the opportunity to undertake Commonwealth funded building work where they are in a joint venture with an accredited company and operate under the partner's scheme accredited systems. As well as reducing barriers to entry, this change will assist builders to experience best practice safety approaches. A new risk based compliance model will be introduced to better target audit resources at companies requiring support, while reducing the compliance burden for high-performing companies. These measures are expected to lead to savings of $9.7 million in the first year in compliance costs.

One other example—and this one is somewhat reminiscent of an episode of Yes, Ministeris that these bills will also abolish the Fishing Industry Policy Council, which, astonishingly, has never met since being established in 1991. After 23 years of inactivity, largely because successive governments have had a policy of direct industry consultation, it is definitely time to disband this body. Similarly, the Product Stewardship Advisory Group and the Oil Stewardship Advisory Council will both be replaced by direct industry consultation. These are just a few examples; other speakers in this debate have outlined some of the many others.

The bottom line is that our government will continue to work its way through the tangle of red tape and regulation in order to deliver cost savings, which ultimately result in more efficient government and more productive business and not-for-profit sectors. This will improve competitiveness, help create more jobs and also lower household costs—which is great news for my constituents on the southern Gold Coast, as it is for all Australians. I commend these bills to the House.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As long as night follows day there will always be regulations in our society. Whether you work for the public sector, the private sector or for a not-for-profit organisation, you will not escape bureaucracy and you will not escape regulation. That is the reality of business and it is the reality of government. I see the parliamentary secretary in here and I know it is his mission to make it less of a reality and to provide the necessary avenues to enable business to get on with business.

I do not make this statement as a means to criticise either concept, because each has its place and plays an important role in reviewing the work of individual employees and businesses or government markets as a whole, while holding those who do not meet the required standards to account. But while some regulation and bureaucracy is essential for best practice, this government has found thousands of pieces of unnecessary regulation across all government portfolios, and they are strangling the ability of both government and business to work effectively and efficiently. For every piece of unnecessary legislation, hundreds of valuable hours, depending on the size of the business or the department, are wasted every year in employees' time filling in unnecessary and often duplicative administrative paperwork, costing productivity and therefore profit margins much more.

Of course, members in this place know and businesses know that when you hear the word 'regulation' the first word that comes to mind is 'Labor'. As a businessman of 25 years in industry, one of the things I knew, and all businesses knew, was that when the Liberals got in, business was enabled; and when Labor got in, business was disabled. We just had to live in that cycle. That is what the parliamentary secretary has recognised and he has made it his mission to make sure that small business, particularly in Australia, is enabled.

Throughout history, every time the Labor Party has formed government it has systematically destroyed our economy by cash-splashing on ill-informed policies—policies that I can simply highlight: the mining tax, which those opposite could not manage to raise any revenue from, and the carbon tax, which increased costs for every business and household across Australia. These two taxes alone constituted 29 different acts and 1,625 pages of additional burdensome regulation and legislation. They are both gone now: gone from this place and gone from the Australian economy.

This government has promised to cut $1 billion in red tape each year, and the only thing those opposite spent their time doing was imposing onerous red and green tape on businesses who had much better things to do than waste their time and their money filling in duplicative administrative paperwork that benefited no-one. Members in this place know that while Labor has been incapable of supporting business productivity throughout history, no Labor government had ever before reached the level of incessant failure that was seen under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government. Twenty-one thousand pieces of additional regulation: that is the only legacy those opposite can claim. I remember back in 2007 when I ran in that campaign, it was one in, one out and it certainly did not happen once those 21,000 regulations came in from the Labor government during that period of time. I think it was about one to 104—104 in and one out. That is a legacy that I would be embarrassed about, and I would not be standing in this place trying to justify it—as we have seen from every Labor speaker who has spoken on these bills.

On this side of the chamber there are former business operators, fine men and women who understand business. They understand the economy and they understand that where money and time is wasted, it costs Australia's economy as a whole.

I know that the member for Robertson is dying to speak on this bill. I congratulate the parliamentary secretary on the great job he is doing in repealing legislation and regulation in Australia to enable business. I commend these bills to the House and welcome the next speaker.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support this very important second red tape repeal day and, in doing so, commend these bills to the House, because lifting the burden of red tape and regulation will make life easier for residents and businesses on the Central Coast.

Let me give you some examples in the time remaining. For individuals in my electorate of Robertson, we have made it easier for them to get in touch with government services by simply creating a myGov account. With the click of a button there is a centralised online point of access. I understand that more than five million people have already registered. In fact, one of the people to sign up recently was Nicholas Staniford from Killcare, who has told me how much easier it is to have everything in the one place and how he does not need to have several different websites with different passwords. We are also enabling people to complete their tax returns faster. The online myTax system will save over 1.4 million taxpayers nearly $160 million a year in compliance costs by pre-populating their tax returns. Another local resident, Leon Manuela, who is 22 years of age and lives in Tascott, said that for many young people on the Central Coast it has made doing their tax a lot less stressful.

The electorate of Robertson is home to many high quality and innovative aged-care providers. With nearly 20 per cent of my electorate in the over-65 age cohort —the seventh highest in the country—aged-care care providers are an integral part of our community. So, on this important red tape repeal day, I am pleased to say that we have removed the requirement to notify the department of any changes in key personnel within 28 days of the change. Instead, providers will only need to tell the department about a change of circumstances that materially affects the provider's suitability to provide care. Jennifer Eddy, the Chief Executive Officer of Woy Woy Community Aged Care, advised me that far too much time has been spent with excessive and inconsistent reporting and duplication of information to government departments and this is taking time away from the key role of delivering care to residents. Jennifer said that people looking at aged-care services are becoming more discerning because of the cost, which makes it even more important that aged-care services have the time to provide quality care.

It is a similar situation for small businesses, which are the engine room of our economy, particularly on the Central Coast. So to help businesses focus on what they do best, we have removed the requirement to lodge a business activity statement for 32,000 businesses where no GST is payable. A further 447,000 businesses with minimal income are now exempt from pay-as-you-go requirements. Many people living on the peninsula will know Bremen Patisserie at Umina Beach. I dare say many from around Australia will know of Ron and the family business, because last year they were the national award winner for gourmet pies in the Great Aussie Pie Competition. Ron's success as a small business owner speaks for itself. Still, because of the need to stay on top of the red tape and regulation, his wife Helga stays up from 9 pm to l am to complete book work and paperwork. It is not an easy job for anyone, but especially not for a business that starts baking at the crack of dawn. That is why this government is working to lift this burden by having two repeal days every year to tear up unnecessary regulation. We have heard the voice of the community and they agree with us too. Many of these repeals were actually suggested by people, and also business and community groups, and I commend the bills to the House.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hate to interrupt the member for Robertson but, in accordance with the resolution agreed to earlier, I call the parliamentary secretary.

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great privilege to provide the summing up to these repeal day bills that we have been debating today: the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014, the Amending Acts 1970 to 1979 Repeal Bill 2014 and the Statute Law Revision Bill (No. 2) 2014. I thank members on this side of the House who contributed to the debate—the member for Robertson, the member for Swan, the member for Grey, the member for Forde, the member for Bradfield, the member for Dobell, the member for McPherson, the member for Mitchell, the member for Macquarie, the member for Durack, the member for Hughes and the member for Lyons—and members on the deregulation committee on the coalition side: the members for Reid, Bass, Ryan, Deakin, Hindmarsh and Pearce. In every case members on this side of the House gave constructive, concise and comprehensive speeches about why deregulation is important for the future of this country and the health of our economy. We on this side of the House know that cutting red tape matters. It matters to the lives of individuals, the lives of families, the lives and work of small businesses and of course the lives and operation of the not-for-profit sector.

The Amending Acts 1970 to 1979 Repeal Bill will make accessing our law easier. The statute law revision bill will improve the usability and accessibility of our legislation. The omnibus repeal day bill will see, just like the Commission of Audit tasked us to do, the abolition of bodies that are no longer required. The Fishing Industry Policy Council, the Product Stewardship Advisory Group and the Oil Stewardship Advisory Council will all now be abolished. We will also allow ACMA to publish their changes using online services by making amendments to the Broadcasting Services Act. Fuel suppliers and producers around this country will now no longer have to go through the additional requirement of submitting an extra annual report to the Department of the Environment, given that they are already putting in monthly reports.

As we heard from the member for Robertson, aged-care sector processes will be streamlined, thanks to the great work of the member for Menzies, the Minister for Social Services, who is sitting at the dispatch box here. He has ensured that key personnel are not required to phone when there is a change among the many aged-care providers of this country. They are not required to make a phone call to the federal department to say that a nurse has been hired or fired. Last year there were 10,000 such calls. We now will no longer need that red tape requirement.

There are significant changes in these three bills that we have brought on for debate and will vote on now, but they are just a small part of the more than 400 individual measures that we have outlined as part of our repeal day process, with the first repeal day in March and the second now on 29 October. Let me give the headline number—the achievement that the member for Watson hates to hear. We have been responsible for $2.1 billion worth of compliance savings. From agriculture to education, from health to human services and from trade to Treasury we have been responsible for significant red tape cuts right across the economy.

And it matters. That is why groups like ACCI, the Business Council of Australia, Universities Australia, the Australian Industry Group and the Minerals Council of Australia have applauded the coalition for taking deregulation seriously. Those opposite did nothing, despite the pious words from the then member for Griffith, who told us that red tape was out of control. They did nothing but twiddle their thumbs and give us 21,000 additional regulations, tying up the small business people of Australia in red and green tape. Now they have the hide to come into this place and criticise us for making important reforms. On the one hand they say that these are trivial changes and are part of the normal course of business—we are fixing punctuation: full stops and commas—but on the other hand the member for Fraser goes out in print in The Australian saying, 'You are taking away important protections in the financial services sector and you are making some important changes that we do not like in the charities and not-for-profit sector,' when we are getting rid of duplication. You cannot have it both ways.

Why didn't you come up with a proposal to streamline the Comcare scheme and allow companies around Australia who operate in multiple jurisdictions to self-insure under the Comcare scheme? Why didn't you come up with the one-stop shop approval process? Labor states have joined with coalition states in signing onto our one-stop shop, worth $426 million a year in savings. Why didn't you come up with the changes to the Do Not Call Register, which will see more than nine million Australians no longer having to renew their membership of the Do Not Call Register? Why didn't you come up with the changes to the NBN? We are no longer mandating Australian homes have a big, bulky, expensive battery backup because we know that most Australian homes now have a mobile phone. Why don't you accept that we came up with this first and that we have the stomach and the fortitude to make changes in deregulation where you guys patently failed?

When Craig Emerson was the Minister for Small Business he said, 'We are taking giant scissors to red tape' and those giant scissors led to an additional 21,000 regulations.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Assistant Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A giant printing press.

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There was a giant printing press, thank you very much, Minister. We have actually made significant changes. The competitiveness paper which was released just a couple of weeks ago had a landmark change. That landmark change was that we will now accept into Australia product systems and services where they have been approved already by trusted international jurisdictions. And the regulators in this country, whether it is the APVMA, whether it is NICNAS or whether it is the TGA, will only add an extra layer of regulation when there is a proven need to do so.

We had the CEO of Cochlear, Chris Roberts, come out publicly and say this will make a major difference to the operation of his business. The member for Longman, from his own electorate, brought the wonderful example of a company that produces cricket balls and footballs made out of leather. They need to bring in a leather measuring and cutting machine from Italy but then they have to pay $3,000 for that machine to be accredited. Why is that the case? If it has been approved in Italy and Europe is a trusted international jurisdiction, there has to be a very good reason why it cannot automatically be brought into the Australian system. Why does an importer from Europe of commercial cooking equipment that goes to the hospitality and tourism sectors and to the aged care sector have to pay $12,000 per machine to get it accredited in Australia? It is just an extra layer of cost which is then passed on to the consumer.

We have come up with a system and with new processes to bed down this new deregulation agenda. Ministers now have established deregulation units. Ministers have now appointed ministerial advisory committees to advise them on the key areas to cut regulation. We have changed the KPIs for senior public servants to align their best interests with our best interests and the public's best interests—namely, cutting red tape. We have assigned two days of the parliamentary timetable to just cutting red tape. We have set ourselves a target of a billion dollars a year as a net target. It is a big target. We are now $2.1 billion—a number that the member for Watson hates to hear.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How much?

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is $2.1 billion. We tasked the Productivity Commission to come up with a framework for auditing the performance of the regulators, which is now finalised and was released earlier today. It is very significant when we have 150 regulators at the Commonwealth level including major ones like the ATO, ASIC, APRA, ACMA and others much smaller like the Office of Gene Technology or the Passports Office or the like. These are all extremely significant changes and they are changes that are making people's interaction with government that much easier through the myGov and the MyTax site and they are reducing the overall compliance base.

It will be interesting to see whether the member for Watson and those opposite support changes to the corporations law, which will no longer allow 100 shareholders to call a special general meeting of a company like Woolworths, which has over 400,000 shareholders. One hundred shareholders can still put an issue on the agenda at a major special general meeting but they should not be allowed to call a special general meeting in itself. It is a measure which has been warmly received by the business community and will be a test for those opposite to see how job friendly and business friendly they really are.

I could go on. We have made extremely good progress in just the year we have been at the helm. We have got legislation through the Senate and we have banked reforms. Our first omnibus bill went through the Senate, our changes to the agricultural chemicals went through the Senate, our changes around classification went through the Senate, our changes around the future of financial advice went through the Senate and we are hopeful to get our one-stop shops through the Senate shortly. We have banked a lot of reforms that we have already announced but we still have a long way to go.

I want to thank the minister, for example, in job services, who made a very significant reform to ensure that there is less paperwork for job service providers—an incredible reform. To all the cabinet ministers, all the junior ministers and all the parliamentary secretaries who have made extremely significant reforms, we are very grateful. Most of all, can I think the Prime Minister because the Prime Minister has led this agenda. The Prime Minister himself has taken responsibility for the deregulation agenda by making it a standing item at COAG meetings, by driving change with his fellow premiers and chief ministers and by ensuring that his ministers and his Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet maintain the momentum that we currently have to cut red tape.

I also thank the senior members of the public service in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, all the deregulation units in the other portfolios and officers of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel who were responsible for drafting this legislation. This has been a team effort from start to finish.

I must tell you, the finish line is a long way away because the Productivity Commission has estimated that four per cent of GDP at least is tied up in red tape and compliance. Deloittes put out a report saying one million Australians are involved in the compliance sector. Clearly, this is too much. This has to change and, on this side of the House, we are determined to do it. These bills today are extremely important and are just one step along the way to cutting 1,000 pieces of regulation legislation and removing over 7,200 pages from the statute books, giving us a headline figure of $2.1 billion if we combine repeal day 1 and repeal day 2.

This is an important day for the parliament. This is an important day for the families, the businesses and the not-for-profits of the country and for the farmers of this country, who tell us that one dollar in every six dollars that they take at the farm gate is taken up in compliance. This is an important step in freeing up our economy ensuring we have higher productivity, growth, innovation, entrepreneurship and, most importantly of all, that we have more jobs for Australians today and into the future. I commend these bills to the House.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The original question was that these bills be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Watson has moved as an amendment to the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be agreed to.

Question negatived.

Pursuant to the resolution agreed to earlier, I will now put the question on the Omnibus Repeal Day (Spring 2014) Bill 2014 and two related bills. The question is that these bills be now read a second time.

Original question agreed to.

Bills read a second time.