Senate debates
Monday, 24 November 2008
National Rental Affordability Scheme Bill 2008; National Rental Affordability Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008
In Committee
5:21 pm
Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source
This aspect of the legislation was a matter of some concern both in the committee inquiry in relation to the legislation and, in advance of that, in discussions over some extended period of time at Senate estimates. In the last sitting weeks the opposition are pleased to see some comment from the Treasurer, Mr Swan, in relation to participation by charities in the National Rental Affordability Scheme. But I must say that in discussions it was a particularly difficult time for those charities seeking to make applications for the NRAS without, it seemed to us, any particular certainty around whether there would be a detrimental impact on their charitable status and tax status as a result, thereby perhaps imperilling their actual operations. As they waited for clarity—which came, I think, the night before the bill came into the Senate—it was a difficult period for some of those organisations. The shadow minister, Mr Morrison, and other senators with an interest in this issue, such as Senator Ludlam, and senators who were part of the inquiry process in this chamber found themselves recipients of a number of approaches from organisations not only keen to participate but also—and not unreasonably—keen for greater clarity around their status if they were to participate in the scheme.
We are concerned that, as it stands, the bill only goes to partly resolving the deep concerns of those charitable organisations in relation to their participation in the NRAS. Given that it is a transitional safety net, as it has in fact been described by the Treasurer, it potentially only provides those organisations with a very temporary reprieve and clarity around their status at this point. I think it highlights the pace at which this legislation was brought together and, as I mentioned in my earlier remarks in the second reading debate, the lack of modelling and the lack of economic foundation to this scheme in and of itself.
The opposition see the doubts around the charitable status of organisations and the potential impact of participating in the NRAS as having had a serious impact on people’s contemplation of take-up in the scheme. As I said, this year we fear a short-term response and we hope that the government can make a much more sure-footed response to the status of charitable organisations in the near future.
No comments