Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

I intend to stay slightly less than perilously close. That is my intention. I will come to the substance of the bill, because, while there has been much reflection on that career, what there has not been from those opposite is a focus on the issues that matter in his previous portfolio area. In fact, they gave it so little attention that replacement appointments have not been made. There is a drift. There is lots of throwing of rocks at initiatives that the government undertakes, whether in relation to the area dealt with in this bill or in the other bill that's in front of this chamber. But, on the hard work of engaging with the reform, there has been no appointment, no engagement and no work. We are all aware of the jockeying that's going on around these issues, but Mr Dutton and Mr Taylor, apparently in charge of economic affairs for what passes as the opposition in this place, are unable, because of their internal incapacity, to make a key appointment in this portfolio area of responsibility. That becomes clearer every day—four months, five months and then six months of an incapacity to make that appointment. The 'no-alition's' approach to economic policy, which is to say no to every substantial reform but not to offer any substance in terms of their own approach, becomes starker every day. I know these bits of reform are dry material, but they actually do matter, and it would make a difference if this coalition opposition were up to the task of economic management and making a real, substantial contribution to economic policy in this place.

The Albanese government is all about protecting the interests of consumers. That means safe, well-regulated consumer markets for credit products. That's a core element of a strong and inclusive economy. There's a series of reforms in this bill that go to achieving that broad framework, and I want to take the Senate through those reforms in some detail. Firstly, schedule 1 to the bill introduces new rules that prohibit schemes designed to avoid the application of a product intervention order in relation to a credit facility made under part 7.9A of the Corporations Act 2001. That means that a person or a business can't respond to a product intervention order by engaging in avoidance activity that isn't covered by the order but results in a similar detriment to consumers. This is important reform that delivers certainty and discourages the kind of behaviour that previous royal commissions have called out. Reform has been demanded, and proposals were made but never implemented by the previous government. It's an ongoing pattern—all talk, all press release and no delivery in this area of reform, like so many other areas of reform. You can see it in question time in a whole lot of areas—they're demanding reform from the government in areas where, singularly, over the course of a decade, they were unable to bring themselves to make reforms.

Schedule 1 supplements the Financial Sector Reform Act 2022, which contains anti-avoidance measures to encourage compliance with the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009, and for product intervention orders made under the credit act with a view to minimising consumer harm. Schedule 1 implements equivalent provisions into the Corporations Act.

Schedule 2 to the bill amends the Corporations Act to deliver on this government's election commitment to better recognise the experience of existing financial advisers. It also addresses limitations in the current framework for new entrants. Since the requirement for financial advisers to complete further study was introduced, the number of practising advisors has decreased from approximately 28,000 at its peak to 16,300 advisers currently in the system. In addition, new financial advisers have been unable to meet the education requirements for technical reasons, which has prevented their entry into the industry. The amendments allow experienced advisers with at least 10 years of experience and a clean record, who have passed the exam, to remain in the industry without needing to complete additional education. They will also facilitate entry into the system for new entries. That is achieving the policy objective that was called out so clearly in the royal commission, without providing unnecessary hurdles to growth and turnover in this important sector of the financial services industry. Importantly, in terms of reaching the policy outcome, it will ensure that consumers have access to adequate, properly founded, independent financial advice.

Timely passage of this legislation will give experienced advisers certainty as to their future in the industry—timely passage of the legislation, which is not to be frustrated by full 15-minute contributions over the course of the debate. I am very confident that over the course of today we will see the Senate have a good discussion of these matters and vote in a timely way to ensure that certainty is delivered to this important sector.

It is much maligned, Senator Hume, by people around the place. Effectively, because of the findings of the royal commission, this important cohort of advisers—who play an important function in our economy—were all maligned because of the behaviour of some, and this piece of legislative reform does mean that there will be certainty and confidence for this sector. It will provide a good outcome for consumers and a good outcome for the professionals in this sector. If the legislation were not to pass, though, advisers would need to complete up to eight tertiary-level units before 1 January 2026 in order to keep providing that financial advice to their clients.

Schedule 3, importantly, is designed to facilitate competitive outcomes in the provision of clearing and settlement services for cash equities traded in Australia. The ASX group currently has a monopoly over clearing and settlement services for cash equities traded in Australia. The reforms come from recommendations made by the Council of Financial Regulators following reviews into the market for cash equities clearing and settlement in 2012 and 2015. Subsequent to those reviews, the Council of Financial Regulators published three policy statements, which these reforms in this legislation implement.

The reforms will give the Australian Securities and Investments Commission a rule-making power, and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission an arbitration power, in relation to cash and settlement services covered by ministerial determination and declaration respectively. That rulemaking power will allow ASIC to write rules to ensure that competition, if it emerges, is safe and effective in terms of its outcomes for consumers and for the health of the industry more broadly, and, in the meantime, ensure that outcomes for users of cash and settlement services are similar to those that would be expected in a competitive environment. The arbitration power will allow the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to make binding decisions about the terms of access to cash and settlement services, including price, where negotiations between a provider which has monopoly or significant market power and a user of cash and settlement services have broken down.

Schedule 4 of the bill is about improving the flexibility of the First Home Super Saver Scheme. I listened carefully to the contributions of the two Greens party senators in relation to this matter. Schedule 4 of the bill makes a number of technical amendments that provide users with greater flexibility to correct mistakes made during the First Home Super Saver Scheme release process. Those amendments will increase the discretion of the Commissioner of Taxation to amend and revoke applications to have funds released under the FHSS scheme. This is dry material, indeed, but it's important reform. I commend it to the Senate.