Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Superannuation and Corporate Law) Share this | Hansard source

The two bills that we are dealing with here relate to prudential supervisory compliance issues. They do not relate to the basic parameters of the legislation which has been dealt with on an earlier occasion, although I do not know the date, Senator Ludlam. It is not a criticism of you, but it would have been more appropriate to have moved your amendment to the earlier piece of legislation. We have outlined all the basic parameters of operation. You were not here because you are a new senator, so I understand why that did not occur. I want to point out that it would have been more appropriate to have dealt with this. I accept that technically you can move the amendment to the administration supervisory legislation but it would have been more appropriate on the earlier bill.

Finally, while we are not means-testing, Senator Bernardi has made the point—and I made it earlier in my contribution—that there is a cap. There are a range of restrictions around this account—a $5,000 cap, for one. This is not an account into which a higher income earner can drop $50,000 or $100,000 per year, minimise tax and access the account after four years to buy some million-dollar mansion. There is a cap of $5,000 a year. That, in itself, although not in the same way and perhaps not to the same level that you want, does provide some focus on equity and fairness without doing it through a means test.