Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

Exactly—a 'hear, hear!' from Senator Scarr, making my point. Big business, through the BCA, does support it, and the Australian Institute of Company Directors do as well—no surprises there. But we know that not all business organisations support it. A 2020 survey of 195 senior company executives, conducted by Mallesons, found that only 21.5 per cent thought the temporary changes should be made permanent. In other words, nearly 80 per cent thought the measure we're debating was a bad idea.

Another argument put forward is that the changes will result in a reduction in premiums paid for directors liability insurance, with the explanatory memorandum to the bill saying that would lead to 'significant savings on the cost of directors and officers insurance'. Evidence at the Senate inquiry into the bill suggested otherwise, with the Insurance Council of Australia saying that, in the industry's view, the statement about significant savings overstates the likely effect of this particular reform. No 'hear, hear!' there, Senator Scarr? Their submission goes on to say:

Industry's expectation is that on its own the proposed legislative change will:

While, admittedly, the Insurance Council does not say that the proposed changes are without merit, they do say that it's not the only thing that will change the premiums. Essentially, they blew a hole through one of the government's key arguments with that evidence.

The proposed changes in schedule 2 are lacking good evidence and broad support. That is why, when we get to the committee stage of the bill, we will be moving amendments to remove schedule 2 from the bill. I also move the second reading amendment that goes to the points that I've made about schedule 2 that has been circulated in my name:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that the Government's measures in Schedule 2 of the bill would strip shareholders of their rights to be adequately informed, damage Australia's corporate governance regime, and allow company directors to get away with failing to disclose important information; and

(b) further notes these measures could damage Australian investment and hurt Australian investors and retirees".

I note the government have moved some amendments to their own bill. We will have more to say about this in the committee stage, but I will flag now that putting in a review two years after these changes to the continuous disclosure obligations take effect will make no difference to what is happening here. Labor have been and will continue to be constructive through the pandemic and we will support good ideas when they are put forward, but we also won't stand by and let such a terrible idea as what is being proposed here with continuous disclosure obligations go through.