Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. We were having, I thought, a quite sensible debate with Senator Stephens and then Senator Murray. I was making my contribution and Senator Campbell seems to have gone completely troppo over the whole thing.

This is a good bill. Senator Stephens made comments about the government’s amendment. We actually listen. These amendments are a direct result of us listening to small business, and indeed this bill comes about through us listening to small business. I will take the chamber through some of that consultation and find the passage of the government’s Trade Practices Amendment Act (No. 1) 2006—the Dawson act. The government has met with small business groups on many, many occasions. Unlike Mr Combet, we actually are small business advocates, and unlike what the member for Brand said about Labor we have always been a small business party.

If Senator Campbell would like me to repeat it, the member for Brand said, ‘We have never pretended to be a small business party, we have never pretended that.’ Exactly. We on this side of the house unashamedly say that we represent—as the minister said—small business, and this bill is just part of the government’s commitment to small business and to supporting small business. As Senator Stephens has quite rightly indicated, although her pious amendment referred to it—but she knows as well as I do that it has been addressed, so why would you put in a pious amendment? Why would you do that? Because you are not serious, that is why. She knows what is coming in. Senator Stephens knows what is going to happen with jail terms for serious cartel conduct, so why put in the pious amendments in (c) and (d)? Why put them in when she knows full well what is going to happen?