Rex Patrick (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move my amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1028 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:

(2) Page 33 (after line 21), at the end of the Bill, add:

Schedule 3—Repaying jobkeeper payments

Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Payments and Benefits) Act 2020

1 After section 7

Insert:

7A Requirements for rules that provide for jobkeeper payments scheme—conduct by entities that indicates jobkeeper financial support not necessary

(1) If the rules provide for a kind of payment that is intended to assist businesses affected by the Coronavirus to cover the cost of wages of their employees (whether known as a jobkeeper payment or otherwise), the rules relating to that kind of payment (the jobkeeper scheme rules) must comply with the requirements in subsections (2) and (3).

(2) The jobkeeper scheme rules must provide that an entity is taken not to be, or not to have been, entitled to a payment under the jobkeeper scheme rules if:

(a) during the prescribed period the entity:

  (i) pays dividends to shareholders of the entity; or

  (ii) pays a bonus to an executive or other officer of the entity; or

  (iii) makes other payments of a similar nature that relate to distributing profits of the entity; and

(b) the Commissioner is satisfied, having regard to:

  (i) the amount of the dividend, bonus or other similar payment and the extent to which it exceeds the amount of the last such payment made by the entity; or

  (ii) any other matters the Commissioner considers relevant;

that the entity's conduct in making those payments indicates that the entity was not affected directly or indirectly by the Coronavirus known as COVID-19 to the extent that the entity required financial support under this Act.

Note: Under section 9 of this Act, if an entity was not entitled to a payment, the entity is liable to repay the amount to the Commonwealth.

(3) To avoid doubt, rules made for the purposes of subsection (2) must be able to apply to an entity that has already received a payment before the commencement of this section.

We've got a situation where taxpayers' money which is designed to support businesses and is designed to support their workers and keep them connected is being funnelled into companies' investors' pockets by way of dividends and is also being funnelled into executives' salary packages by way of executive bonuses. In expressing my concern to the chamber, I'm actually going to read from the contribution of the Hon. Dr Leigh, the member for Fenner, yesterday in the other place. He said:

But a scheme designed to reduce inequality is being misused by a small number of firms, who are channelling it to executive bonuses. Accent Group received $13 million in JobKeeper and gave CEO Daniel Agostinelli a $1.2 million bonus. IDP Education received $4 million in JobKeeper and gave CEO Andrew Barkla a $600,000 bonus. Last year he was Australia's highest paid CEO, taking home $37 million. Star Casino received $64 million in JobKeeper and gave CEO Matt Bekier an equity bonus worth $800,000. SeaLink received $8 million in JobKeeper and gave CEO Clinton Feuerherdt a $500,000 bonus. Then there is 'dividend keeper', diverting money for workers into shareholder payouts. Furniture firm Nick Scali received $4 million from Australian and New Zealand taxpayers. Its increased dividend will deliver $2 million to the Scali family. 1300SMILES got $2 million in JobKeeper and paid out $3 million to shareholders. Managing director Daryl Holmes owns two-thirds of the company and so will get about $2 million, roughly what his company received in JobKeeper support. As Ownership Matters' Dean Paatsch puts it: 'I don't think it was ever the intention of the government to subsidise executive salaries'. If you're getting taxpayer subsidies, the CEO should not be getting a bonus.

My amendment requires the equivalent payment being paid for workers under JobKeeper to be returned by the company back to the taxpayer in circumstances where the commissioner is satisfied, having regard to the amount of the dividend bonus or other similar payments and the extent to which they exceed the amount of the last such payment by the entity, or any other matters that the commissioner considers relevant. There is a caveat in here that the entity's conduct in making those payments indicates that the entity was not affected directly or indirectly by coronavirus, known as COVID-19, to the extent that the entity required financial support under this act.

What this amendment seeks to do—just to be really clear—is stop money that is designed to support businesses, that is designed to support workers, getting taken from the taxpayer and funnelled into the pockets of investors or the pockets of chief executives and senior executives within the company. No-one would have anticipated that this sort of conduct would occur. It's unethical, and we should do something about it. I point out my amendment is retrospective, so we can go back and look at those companies that have reaped a taxpayer benefit whilst claiming JobKeeper. For that reason, I ask that the Senate supports this amendment.