Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Where was he? He said he hadn't even seen it. He comes into the chamber, expressing such concern about the importance of this issue, and yet he has not even read the exposure draft of legislation that was released by the government last year in response to the inquiry that this government set up into small-amount credit contracts.

This government has taken action in respect of the issue. It's conducted the review. It's received the recommendations. It has responded to the recommendations, as Senator Duniam said before. About the only thing the Labor Party has is some conspiracy about a mythical phantom group that has one member—one member is all we know of. Now, George is a big guy, but he's hardly a group! He's just one person. Just because he's talking about it in the media, it doesn't mean that that's what the rest of us think. We acknowledge that consumers need appropriate protection around this matter. For the opposition to come into this place, complaining about the urgency and the importance of the issue and to then admit that they haven't even seen the exposure draft of the legislation completely puts paid to any semblance of reality about the supposed concerns.

In respect of the government's response to the review on small amount credit contract laws, as Senator Duniam said, the government's response supports retaining existing price caps on contracts, extending protected earnings amount requirements to all consumers and lowering it to 10 per cent of the consumer's net income—and it's a lot higher for some other people in the current circumstances—and introducing a cap on total payments on a consumer release equal to the base price of the good plus four per cent of that price per month. So there are some realistic changes to the way the current process is working, supported by the government: introducing a protected-earnings amount requirement for consumer lease providers of 10 per cent of net income for all consumers, equivalent but separate to the requirements for small-amount credit contracts.

Of course we have released exposure draft legislation. But the opposition claims it hasn't even seen the legislation. I think what we have here this afternoon is little more than a National Party-bashing exercise. That's about what we have: an extension of question time and the events immediately after question time. It is just a National Party-bashing exercise, and the Labor Party has nothing to show for it. It claims that it's concerned about this issue. It puts nothing on the table about that. It talks about development of a private member's bill, yet it hasn't even read the existing piece of exposure legislation that sits there for it to have a look at. What is your perspective on the exposure draft? Do you have a view?

Have you made any comments to the government in respect of the exposure draft that was released on 23 October 2017? What is your perspective? You claim to have real concerns about this matter and yet one of your senators comes into this place today and says that they haven't seen any legislation.

What rock have you been hiding under? Yes, I've been out of this place, but it's clear that the government has had a clear path of action on this matter over a period of time, and the opposition hasn't made a case in respect of the questions asked in question time. (Time expired)