Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Acting Assistant Treasurer, Senator Cormann. Is the senator aware that at the Senate inquiry into the changes to the future of financial advice legislation, a witness representing the Australian Bankers' Association stated that they had an expectation, based on consultation with the current government, that changes would be made or technical amendments would be sorted out prior to 1 July. Can you confirm that your government gave the Australian Bankers' Association this expectation? Is this why you took a regulatory approach to the FoFA amendments rather than introducing contested legislation into the parliament? I seek leave to table a copy of the transcript from the Senate inquiry?

Leave granted.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We gave that commitment to the Australian people before the last election. Indeed, the commitments that we made at the last election to improve our financial advice laws were first announced back in March 2012, more than two years ago. Of course, they were based on the findings of the Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services into Labor's FoFA laws. At the time, we said, very transparently, that Labor's FoFA laws had some good bits in it, but also had some very bad bits in it. We said that we would keep the good bits, like the requirement for advisers to act in the best interests of their clients, and get rid of the bad bits. We said that we would fix the uncertainty that came with sloppy drafting by the previous government. We have said that transparently on the record for two and half years. So the Australian Bankers' Association, the Association of Financial Advisers, the Financial Planning Association, the Financial Services Council, Industry Super Australia, all of them, cannot possibly be surprised by what we were going to do because we laid it out very clearly into the lead up to the last election. It was part of our policy.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I asked specifically whether the guarantee was given to the Australian Bankers' Association for the changes to be made before 1 July this year.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, you had three components to your question. You said: is the minister aware, can you confirm and is this why? It was a very wide-ranging question. The minister is directly relevant. Minister Cormann, you have to call.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have consulted widely in opposition and in government. We have consulted with a range of organisations as you would expect us to do, including the Australian Bankers' Association, the Financial Services Council, the Industry Super Network—now Industry Super Australia—and other organisations, along with all of the Australian people because it was transparently part of our policy. To remove any doubts, on 20 June, I released a five-page statement which seems to have escaped the notice of the Shadow Treasurer and the Shadow Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation because they somehow think that the regulations which took effect on 1 July were a surprise when they were actually based on a very thorough and consultative process. (time expired)

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a further supplementary question. The FoFA laws were designed to restore confidence and trust in the financial services industry, which is also highlighted today as the key objective in the Financial System Inquiry's interim report. Why has the government rushed through FoFA regulations before the Financial System Inquiry's final report? Is this haste why consumer groups such as Choice and National Seniors Australia are in parliament today, saying that you have failed to get their confidence and trust in protecting consumers in this country?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no haste, as I have just indicated in response to the primary question. We first announced those changes in March 2012. We have repeated them ad nauseum from March 2012 at every opportunity, in every speech, in every press release, in the election commitments we put to the Australian people before the last election. Senator Sinodinos consulted widely across industry on an exposure draft of the legislation and the regulations. in March when I came back into this position on a temporary basis as the Acting Assistant Treasurer, I paused implementation of the regulations at that point to conduct some further consultation.

The Senate economics committee inquiry, chaired by my good friend, Senator Bushby, investigated those particular changes and recommended that they be passed by the Senate because we got the balance right. We have been so transparent all the way through about what we are doing in the national interest—that is, keeping the consumer protections that matter but cutting the red tape that is pushing up the cost of advice. (Time expired)

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. On the subject of deals, the Palmer United Party have commented in the media today that they have been in discussions with the government on potential changes to the FoFA regulations. Has a deal been struck between the Palmer United Party and the government to prevent the disallowance on the FoFA regulations? And what are the details of discussions between the government and the Palmer United Party?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As always, I am an open book, Senator Whish-Wilson. I said last week that I wanted to talk to our friends on the crossbench and I have been doing that. Of course I want our friends on the crossbench—whether they be the good senators representing the Palmer United Party, whether they be Senator Ricky Muir, Senator Bob Day or Senator David Leyonhjelm—to be properly briefed on what we are actually doing rather than what the Labor Party and the Greens are misleading people into believing we are doing. Unlike the Labor Party, the Palmer United Party has engaged with the government in a very positive and constructive way and I have welcomed the engagement with the Palmer United Party. In terms of how that—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left!

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Whish-Wilson, indeed Senator Bob Day and Senator David Leyonhjelm have engaged with the government in a very positive and constructive way as well. (Time expired)