Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) to (3) on sheet 5221 together:

(1)    Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (line 6), omit “small business”, substitute “eligible business”.

(2)    Schedule 1, page 3 (line 2) to page 15 (line 28), omit “small business”, (wherever occurring), substitute “eligible business”.

(3)    Schedule 1, page 3 (line 2) to page 15 (line 28), omit “small businesses”, (wherever occurring), substitute “eligible businesses”.

The opposition seeks to amend this legislation not to alter its impact but to more accurately reflect the sort of description of the businesses which are intended to be assisted. The Australian Bureau of Statistics definition of a small business is one comprising one to 19 employees. Certainly, in rural and regional Australia, it is our view that there are very few businesses approaching 100 employees that would be considered, by any stretch of the imagination in the regions and the economies in which they trade, to be small businesses. The definition proposed—that is, the extension from 20 to up to 100 employees—is not something with which we will quibble. For example, it could be a business with 21 or 25 employees which is in difficulty.

We are not aware of businesses trading in rural and regional Australia with anything approaching 100 employees that would be seeking assistance under this legislation. We believe in accurately reflecting the impact and not discouraging businesses from applying because they would have to almost survive the laugh test in their regions in saying they were small businesses when, in fact, they were the largest in the town. To reflect this, the amendments change the term in the definition from ‘small business’ to ‘eligible business’.

We are not quibbling with the size of businesses being eligible. We suggest that it is in the interests of accuracy to reflect the types of businesses concerned. Also, it does not put those businesses that are never going to be considered small business in these economies in the invidious position of having to claim themselves to be small business to gain assistance. These amendments ought to be supported and we think that it would be a simple proposition for the government to support them. If these amendments are defeated, we will support the legislation but we think it will place some businesses in regional economies in an invidious position, claiming under the legislation to be something that no-one in their community believes they are.