Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Okay. I can stand corrected. But I think that the coalition made a point in their additional comments. The Economics Committee report on this issue is that the devil is in the detail and the issue here is: is it fair? We are not talking about a bottom of the harbour scheme here; we are not talking about some tax scam. They were putting money in super according to Australian law, working in this country, making additional contributions, as they were entitled to, and now that will be taken away from them or they will be paying DASP—a huge tax slug—even if they keep in regular contact with their super fund and maintain their fund so that it is not lost in any sense. To me, that is fundamentally unfair, and that is what the issue is. I think it is good that we are going to have a few days to reflect on this because I would like to hear from the government as to why it says that it will cost so much. I do not think that I am breaching any confidence by saying that in my very useful discussions with the minister today—and I appreciate the time he gave me to discuss this—I did not pursue the compliance issues. I accepted his arguments because I was convinced by his arguments in relation to that. I did not pursue the earlier amendment that would have covered everyone in relation to temporary residents, particularly in relation to the retrospectivity aspect. But this is for people who keep in contact with their funds and it is still a fundamental issue of equity and fairness. That is why I urge honourable senators to support this particular amendment.

Progress reported.