Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission annual report gives an outline of the work that the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission have done over the last 12 months. The report shows that they have been extremely busy this year and, I think, highlights the value of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. Their website has been viewed by over 3.6 million people. More than 1.5 million people have visited the Charity Portal. There have been 3,100 new charities registered, there are 60,736 charities on the charity register and there have been 303,158 views of the charity register. What I am trying to demonstrate is that they are carrying out a very important role in helping our charities and not-for-profits in this country.

This is, of course, the body that the government want to get rid of. One of the things they accuse the ACNC of is increasing red tape. We know that charities and not-for-profits in particular are very concerned about the red tape that they have faced around their reporting for the various grants and other things that they do. So, on the surface, you might think, 'The government and Minister Andrews have a point there,' but then you actually look at the details. Bear in mind that the ACNC are the body tasked specifically with reducing red tape. That is very clearly part of their role, and part of the reason the Australian Greens supported them was to reduce red tape for charities and not-for-profits.

I followed up this issue particularly at estimates this year and was very interested in one of the reports that the ACNC commissioned. EY—for those who are not familiar with the new name EY, it was formerly Ernst & Young—carried out a report to look at the red-tape burden. Just wait for this: the so-called red-tape burden that the ACNC is supposed to generate is 0.1 per cent of the total red-tape burden. Guess what the greatest burden of red tape for charities and not-for-profits was? It was government process—not the ACNC but government process. The point that Susan Pascoe, the CEO of the ACNC, made at estimates was that you need to bear in mind that some of this so-called red tape is very important red tape; in fact, it is necessary. When you look at some of the work of charities and not-for-profits, it is important, for example, that charities and not-for-profits working with children carry out the right processes for accreditation of their workers. It was also pointed out that the so-called red tape around keeping appropriate data is actually important in being able to do acquittals, for example, to ensure that charities' tax deductibility is maintained.

The point here is that the minister uses red tape as an excuse to get rid of the ACNC, when it has clearly now been demonstrated that they do not generate red tape and, in fact, help reduce red tape. The red tape that they are creating, that 0.1 per cent, helps them reduce other red tape. The reporting that they do as part of that 0.1 per cent also helps them to do their necessary acquittals.

One of the things that the ACNC has been working on is the charities passport, which is a process that they have been developing to work with government departments to assist charities and not-for-profits to work with government—because, as a charity or not-for-profit, you could be working with a number of government departments. In the past, you had to provide all your details to this department and that department and this department and that department, all of whom require these details. The idea of the charities passport is that you only have to submit your details once. Some government agencies have picked this up and are working with it, for example A-G's, the health department and a number of other departments. Guess what? One of the biggest departments that deals with charities and not-for-profits, the Department of Social Services, has not picked up the charities passport—the one department you would have thought would pick it up.

The ACNC plays a very important role. The government should get over their fixation with getting rid of it, keep it, move on and give certainty to that agency and certainty to the charities and not-for-profits sector. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.