Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Cameron says, 'It's not small business.' Oh, what ignorance Senator Cameron displays, sometimes not on a daily basis; he brings it to us on an hourly or minute-by-minute basis and he has just excelled himself again. The simple fact is that there are huge numbers of men and women, financial practitioners, dotted right around this country—especially in rural and regional communities—who are providing a fantastic service and who will find it even more difficult to compete against these monsters of funds run by the trade union movement.

I do say that the senators who are thinking of changing their minds should come to the government and express exactly the detail of their concern because it is agreed in this chamber that a vast, or a substantial, part of these regulations are in fact good regulations and should remain, but they will all be swept away by a disallowance motion being carried today. So why not come to the government and say, 'We are genuinely casting an independent mind over these matters. We are seeking to make certain changes, to keep the good regulations but change those with which we have some difficulty'?

We can come to agreement. It has been shown in the past we can and I have no doubt, with Senator Cormann's skills, we will be able to do so again in the future. I would invite those senators who I am sure are genuine and sincere in their concerns about the regulations to consider the consequences. If you do defer this issue until next week, nothing is lost but everything is to be gained by allowing you to have the benefit of Senator Cormann's interaction and, more importantly, the men and women from your electorate who practice in this area, who are good, honest, decent Australians earning an honest living assisting people with their financial issues. So I say to honourable senators, please be exceptionally careful in voting for this part motion. I will now move an amendment to the machinery motion before the chair:

That we omit 'determined without amendment or debate'.

In moving that amendment, I believe it is appropriate to highlight the importance of such an amendment because it will enable us to consider any amendments and it will allow us to further debate this issue. When people run away from a debate on a vexed issue such as this, it usually means that they do not have the arguments, or they do not have the reasons or they are very concerned that the numbers might not hold over a particular weekend. That may well be the reason, because if these senators are able to get back to their electorates to hear the views of their community, to hear the views of the small businessmen and women in their community, they may well change their minds and realise that, when they voted for these regulations, not once but twice, they actually did the right thing for their constituents, especially the small businessmen and women who both of them, I understand, seek to champion. I commend the amendment to the Senate.