Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Greens oppose schedule 1 in the following terms:

Schedule 1, page 3 (lines 1 to 17), to be opposed.

I listened very closely to Senator Seselja, who was trying to convince us that the provisions that are to be repealed in schedule 1 are unnecessary and burdensome. He failed to convince me of that. I really cannot see how repealing these provisions would result in more people being employed or result in a brand new day of improved productivity. I really cannot see how these regulations are burdensome. The information on the superannuation details has to be calculated. It has to be documented. For a small upgrade in pay slip software, being able to share that information with the employee so they can make sure they are being paid properly seems to be a good thing to do.

This provision did not come out of nowhere. It came out of a review that took place in a period of over a year. The provision was there, as I said in my previous speech, for good reason, with the aim of ensuring that workers are being employed under fair conditions and being paid properly, knowing their super is actually being paid. I think there is a very good case as to why these regulations should stay. Omitting schedule 1 would enable the regulations that came from the super review to stay in place.

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

The government opposes this Greens amendment. People across Australia currently receive information on their superannuation contributions on their pay slips and that will continue to be the case. This bill will not affect in any way, shape or form the information employees currently receive on superannuation contributions on their pay slips. Labor made regulations for additional duplicative provisions imposing additional red tape but never made regulations giving the opportunity for additional information to be included on employee pay slips on superannuation contributions. Labor never made those regulations. That was in relation to information about the date on which the employer expects to pay the contribution and various other bits of information. It is a redundant provision and the government thinks it ought to be removed.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The amendment will not rectify the situation because it does not introduce the regulations required to enforce the pay slip reporting. Without these regulations being introduced, this amendment is a stunt that will not make any practical difference to workers. Schedule 1 provides certainty to businesses, particularly small businesses who would have faced large implementation costs to introduce pay slip reporting. So we will be opposing the amendment.

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

The question is that schedule 1 stand as printed.

Question agreed to.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendments; report adopted.