Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

No, no—I think it is important to understand what would have happened if Senator Di Natale had stood firm on this. The government would have had one of two options. One is that they would have had to bring back their own bill today and they would have accepted what the Senate was going to do and adopted it. He believes they would have gone all the way to $200 million, but they could not possibly have gone to $100 million because those 500 companies need to be protected. Why do those 500 companies need to be protected, Senator Di Natale? Why would you fold on that? Why would you fold on those 500 companies needing to be protected? The other option is that the government would have had to bring back the bill early in the new year because the MAAL bill involved measures they needed to get through for their G20 commitments.

That was the leverage to get a better bill. You have sold out the leverage to get better legislation. That is the con you fell for. They would have had to bring it back early in the new year, at the latest. The fact that they needed that legislation to pass before the budget would have been the opportunity for those of us who believe in transparency, who believe in a better bill and who believe in more accountability to get the best legislation. But at the first chance you got, you went soft.