Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

The government doesn't support these amendments. Firstly, in relation to including penalties for noncompliance, the bill should not be amended to include civil penalties for noncompliance. Critically, business feedback shows that market scrutiny as well as reputational risk and reward will drive compliance more effectively than punitive penalties. A penalty regime would be complex and resource intensive, and would likely require a new regulatory enforcement body. Imposing penalties would also not address the most likely reason for noncompliance over the first three years, which is largely implementation. These barriers to compliance are best addressed by providing support to businesses to actually assist them to comply rather than through penalties. This is the exact reason why the government has committed $3.6 million to establish a business engagement unit to advise and support businesses through this process.

The government has also proposed amendments, which have just passed, to strengthen compliance by empowering the minister to require an entity to explain and remedy noncompliance, empowering the minister to publicly name a noncompliant entity and also providing a clear pathway to future penalties if compliance rates are found to be inadequate at the mandatory three-year review. The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee did support the government's approach to penalties and, as recommended by the committee, the proposed amendments specify that penalties will be considered at the three-year review rather than imposing penalties at this early stage.

In relation to the requirement for the minister to report annually to the parliament listing noncompliant activities, the government has moved amendments, which have already passed, to require the minister to report annually to parliament, and the government will also publish lists of all entities that do not report on the central register of statements. The bill should not be amended further to require an annual report to list all entities that have not complied. This is due to a range of practical impediments which have been discussed previously in this chamber. As recommended by the committee, we will continue to explore the options to publish a list in future, once we have compiled the list. This does not require legislation.