Senate debates
Thursday, 19 September 2024
Committees
Selection of Bills Committee; Report
11:16 am
Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I present the 11th report of 2024 of the Selection of Bills Committee, and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The report read as follows—
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 11 OF 2024
19 September 2024
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Senator Anne Urquhart (Government Whip, Chair)
Senator Wendy Askew (Opposition Whip)
Senator Ross Cadell (The Nationals Whip)
Senator Pauline Hanson (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip)
Senator Jacqui Lambie (Jacqui Lambie Network Whip)
Senator Nick McKim (Australian Greens Whip)
Senator Ralph Babet
Senator the Hon. Anthony Chisholm
Senator the Hon. Katy Gallagher
Senator Maria Kovacic
Senator Matt O'Sullivan
Senator Fatima Payman
Senator David Pocock
Senator Gerard Rennick
Senator Lidia Thorpe
Senator Tammy Tyrrell
Senator David Van
Secretary: Tim Bryant 02 6277 3020
REPORT NO. 11 OF 2024
1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 18 September 2024 at 7.15 pm.
2. The committee recommends that—
(a) the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(b) the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 2 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(c) the provisions of the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 12 December 2024 (see appendix 3 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(d) the provisions of the Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 14 November 2024 (see appendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(e) the provisions of the Treasury Laws Amendment (2024 Tax and Other Measures No. 1) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 24 October 2024 (see appendix 5 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(f) the provisions of the Universities Accord (National Student Ombudsman) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 10 October 2024 (see appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral); and
(g) the provisions of the Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 30 October 2024 (see appendix 7 for a statement of reasons for referral).
3. The committee recommends that the following bill not be referred to committees:
4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:
•Building and Construction Industry (Restoring Integrity and Reducing Building Costs) Bill 2024 (No. 2)
5. The committee considered the following bills but was unable to reach agreement:
(Anne Urquhart)
Chair
19 September 2024
Appendix 1
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
This bill brings new industries into the AML/CTF regime for the first time and an inquiry allows these entities to have their say. A November report date is important to allow for early passage of the bill—to stop money launderers and terrorists from continuing to do their work, and to allow businesses time to get ready for the new rules the bill will introduce.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
AUSTRAC; AGD; real estate, accountancy and law peak bodies
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Possible hearing date(s):
To be determined by the committee
Possible reporting date:
13 November.
Signed
Senator Anne Urquhart
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of Bill:
Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referra1/principal issues for consideration:
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Attorney General Department
Australian Lawyers Alliance
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
Friday 25 October, Thursday 31 October
Possible reporting date:
November 2024
Signed
Nick McKim
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to thoroughly scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Businesses, interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024 to January 2025
Possible reporting date:
3 February 2025
Signed
Wendy Askew
Appendix 2
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
Appropriate scrutiny of legislation with a high degree of public interest.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Australian Communications and Media Authority Civil Society
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Environment and Communications
Possible hearing date(s):
11 October 2024
Possible reporting date:
11 November 2024
Signed
Anne Urquhart
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation)
Reasons for referra1/principal issues for consideration:
Consider details
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Experts, stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Environment & Communications
Possible hearing date(s):
October
Possible reporting date:
25 November 2024
Signed
Nick McKim
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to thoroughly scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Businesses, interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024 to January 2025
Possible reporting date:
3 February 2025
Signed
Wendy Askew
Appendix 3
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Crimes Legislation Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
This bill has many interested stakeholders who have expressed an interest in an inquiry, and the government is in favour of open debate.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
AGD, Law Council, faith groups, Equality Australia
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Possible hearing date(s):
To be determined by the committee
Possible reporting date:
12 December
Signed
Senator Anne Urquhart
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Crimes Legislation Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to receive evidence and scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Businesses, interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024
Possible reporting date:
12 December 2024
Signed
Wendy Askew
Appendix 4
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referra1/principal issues for consideration:
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Attorney General Department
OAIC
Digital Rights Watch
Law Council of Australia
Australian Lawyers Alliance
Electronic Frontiers Australia
Human Rights Law Centre
Communications Alliance
Reset Australia
Tech Council of Australia
Australian Communications Consumer Action Network
Centre for Responsible Technology (Aus. Institute branch)
Tech Policy Design Centre
Digital Industry Group Inc. (DIGI)
Adobe
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
Friday 25 October, Thursday 31 October
Possible reporting date:
14 November 2024
Signed
Nick McKim
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to receive evidence and scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024
Possible reporting date:
14 November 2024
Signed
Wendy Askew
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
There is extensive interest in the government's response to the Privacy Act review, and an inquiry allows for examination of some of the new offences contained in the bill.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
AGD, Law Council, privacy advocates, tech companies, peak bodies such as ACIC and COSBOA
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Possible hearing date(s):
To be determined by the committee
Possible reporting date:
l4 November
Signed
Anne Urquhart
Appendix 5
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Treasury Laws Amendment (2024 Tax and Other Measures No. 1) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to receive evidence and scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Economics Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024
Possible reporting date:
24 October 2024
Signed
Wendy Askew
Appendix 6
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Universities Accord (National Student Ombudsman) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to receive evidence and scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Education and Employment Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024
Possible reporting date:
10 October 2024
Signed
Wendy Askew
Appendix 7
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024
Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:
To allow the Committee time to receive evidence and scrutinize this legislation.
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Interested parties and other stakeholders
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Education and Employment Legislation Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
October 2024
Possible reporting date:
30 October 2024
Signed
Wendy Askew
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
Proposal to refer a bill to a committee
Name of bill:
Wage Justice for Early Childhood Education and Care Workers (Special Account) Bill 2024
Reasons for referra l /prin ci pal issues for consideration:
- [1]
Possible submissions or evidence from:
Committee to which bill is to be referred:
Education and Employment Committee
Possible hearing date(s):
Any day during the week of the 14th and/ or 21st of October
Possible reporting date:
Monday 11th of November
I move:
That the report be adopted.
Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I move:
At the end of the motion, add: "and:
(a) in respect of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report by 13 November 2024;
(b) in respect of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024, the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee report by 25 November 2024; and
(c) the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Acknowledging Biological Reality) Bill 2024 not be referred to a committee.".
I will just speak briefly on this amendment. In relation to A, we certainly believe that having a report by 13 November is more reasonable, as well as by 25 November in relation to item B, and that the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Acknowledging Biological Reality) Bill 2024 should not be referred to a committee. That relates to, I think, two votes that we've had in this place over the past fortnight, and the arguments that I've used in that are relevant here.
We do not believe, once the Senate has voted to not support the bill at the first reading, that referring it to a committee to have a committee inquiry that seeks to do exactly the same thing that I raised objections to earlier this week—an inquiry into what are essentially attacks on the trans community and the gender-diverse community—is worthy of the Senate's time. Where there are issues that affect and personally cause harm to individuals, again, like I said earlier in the week, we draw the line. This is seeking essentially to get around a number of votes in this place where a majority of the Senate has voted not to allow this bill to come into this place and be debated. It is now just seeking another pathway to have exactly the same divisive and hurtful debate in the committee room, as opposed to the chamber floor. For those reasons, we don't support it, and I would hope that the rest of the Senate—a majority of this Senate—would share that view. I don't understand why this Senate should take time to inflict personal harm on vulnerable individuals, and that's what this does. I don't care whatever way people try to dress it up and say it's something else. It is not. It is about causing division and publicly raising concerns about individuals' personal choices. That causes them harm, President, and we won't be part of it. And every time they try, every which way, to get it reborn in this chamber by dressing it differently—through different motions or legislation or referrals to committee—we will have the same principled position on it. We won't be part of anything that seeks to cause harm. We won't be part of anything that seeks to drive division and inflict that kind of division on a vulnerable community who've already endured a lot in terms of public debate about individual choices in this country.
The Senate should just get over it and stop bringing matters like this into the chamber. We are leaders in our communities. We should support our communities, and part of our communities is the trans and gender-diverse community. We should be thinking of them and not seeking to cause them harm. That's what this referral seeks to do, and we won't have any part of it.
11:20 am
David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I seek that parts (a), (b) and (c) be put separately.
11:21 am
Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I move an amendment, as circulated in my name, to the government's amendment:
At the end of the motion, add:
"and, in respect of the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Acknowledging Biological Reality) Bill 2024, the bill be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 11 February 2025".
The purpose of this bill is to amend the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 to re-establish the definitions of 'man' and 'woman' based on biological sex, removing the concept of gender identity from the act. The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 was amended in 2013 to include gender identity as a protected attribute, which created ambiguity around the legal definitions of men and women and undermined the act's original focus on biological sex. This bill seeks to restore clarity by reaffirming the biological distinctions between men and women and ensuring that legal protections are based on immutable biological characteristics.
The activists who pretend that biology and gender are somehow contrived or constructed, and those who believe them and enable them, ignore reality in the most calculated, malevolent ways. I use those terms because their ideology is directly harming women and children and permanently destroying countless lives in Australian families. These are the casualties of the ideological war on the reality that is human biology. Men and women, boys and girls—these are not identities to be swapped or changed by laws, regulations or declarations. They are determined by biology: chromosomes, DNA and the physical features we are born with.
We've seen a massive industry quickly emerge to mask or change the physical features that denote the gender we are born to, but the fundamental thing that determines who and what we are, that unique combination of molecules we call DNA, cannot be changed. It's inherited from our parents—the man and woman who conceived us. This is the unchangeable reality that gender activists and their enablers cannot change either. It's a reality they pretend does exist, yet it's the basis of procreation for almost every form of life on earth that's not microscopic. That includes every mammal, every primate and every human being. It is what we are. It is how we come to be. It's the basis of our very existence. The evidence, the facts that support this fundamental truth, cannot credibly be denied. Those who would have us deny it are directly attacking the rights of biological women.
For women in Australia it's a new battle for their rights and freedoms all over again. Biological men who claim to be women are intruding on the spaces and rights that real women have fought for over many decades. Men are invading women's bathrooms and change rooms, places where women have every right to expect privacy. This has been allowed to happen even in schools. Men are invading women's sports, putting women's safety at risk and making a complete joke of fair competition with their unfair physical advantages. Men are invading women's spaces online, spaces developed specifically as havens from the unaccountable abuse they often receive online.
As we saw in the case of Sall Grover's Giggle app, the law and courts provide them with no protection against these invasions. The courts are enabling these invasions.
Generations of Australian women have sacrificed and fought for these exclusive spaces. Their hard-won rights are now under direct attack. That's why I'm moving this amendment to the Sex Discrimination Act. Men may identify as women, undergo drug treatments and cosmetic surgery and wear dresses and make-up to superficially change their appearance, but that doesn't mean they belong with real women who were born as women. With this amendment, One Nation seeks to define these women for who and what they are and to protect their hard-won rights. We don't accept the ridiculous idea that this constitutes an attack on the rights of trans people. It is quite simply a defence against their attacks on the rights of Australian women and girls everywhere. I will keep fighting for this, and the majority of Australians with common sense will actually stand by what I'm trying to do here.
You want to shut this down. You're not even prepared to take it to an inquiry and let the people come before you—no debate; no nothing. That's what this government is about: shutting down everything that you don't want to debate about. You're not interested in the women out there that are fighting for their rights. That's what disgusts me about you. What are you frightened of? What are you frightened of in here from the women out there—
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Hanson, direct your comments to the chair.
Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
that you will not actually have an inquiry into this? That tells me how gutless you lot are.
11:26 am
Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
We see you, Senator Hanson. We know exactly what you're up to.
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator McKim, direct your comments to the chair.
Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The Australian Greens see Senator Hanson for what she is. We know exactly what she is up to here, because we have seen her build her grifting political career on demonising sections of our community.
Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I withdraw. But we have seen her build her political career on demonising sections of our community. She started with Asian people, decades ago, demonising Asian people for her own base political purposes. Then she moved on to Muslim people, and she has demonised Muslim people for their religion and their culture for her own base political purposes. Now she's moving on to trans folk. The Australian Greens see Senator Hanson for what she is, and we see her business model for what it is: built on bigotry, built on racism—that is what history shows us about Senator Hanson, and here we find ourselves again today.
The Australian Greens are not going to have a bar of Senator Hanson setting up an inquiry to allow trans people in this country to be demonised under parliamentary privilege. We're not going to have a bar of setting up a court for Senator Hanson to hold court in, so she can run her radical anti-trans agenda.
Trans rights are human rights. Trans folk in this country have every right to be celebrated, to be supported, to be loved, to be valued and to be nurtured.
I want to say to trans people in Australia that the Australian Greens are with you. We have your backs against this kind of demonisation and bigotry that Senator Hanson is trying to peddle in this chamber today—cheap gutter politics from Senator Hanson. The Australian Greens will always have the back of trans and gender-diverse and queer folks in this country. We are the only party that has a track record of every MP, every time, on every vote, whether it be in state or territory or Commonwealth parliaments, voting for marriage equality. We spearheaded that campaign, and we will use that foundation to spearhead the resistance against the kind of bigotry and hatred that trans people are now facing from Senator Hanson and her cohort.
Trans rights are human rights. Trans folk are beautiful.
My handsome, funny stepson Jasper is a young trans man, and I am so proud of him. He's making his way in life, like so many other young people are, with all of the difficulties young people are facing right now, through the environmental and climate calamity that we are living through, through being unfairly priced out of the housing market—through all of the challenges that young people are facing. I'm so proud of Jasper. He's moved to Melbourne. He's got himself a good job in politics—not with the Greens, I might add; I just want to rule out the nepotism angle there! I am so proud of him. He's a smart, funny, awesome young human. Honestly, Senator Hanson, I'd be happy, and I'm sure Jasper would be happy, to sit down with you and have a conversation about his journey through life and the challenges he's had to face.
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator McKim, direct your comments to the chair.
Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I'm very sure Jasper would be happy to sit down with Senator Hanson and have a conversation about some of the challenges he's faced. He has bravely faced those challenges. It's been an awesome journey and I'm so proud to have been part of Jasper's journey through life, and I hope it continues for many, many decades. Trans rights are human rights, and the Australian Greens have got the back of trans folk and will have the back of trans folk every single time people like Senator Hanson, Senator Roberts or anybody else seek to create a platform for their demonisation and seek to create a platform that is deliberately designed to be harmful and hurtful for trans folk.
11:31 am
Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
This bill, the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Acknowledging Biological Reality) Bill 2024, needs to be sent to committee to ensure that sensible and reasonable discussion can address the inherent error that exists in the Sex Discrimination Act 1984. It's been said that sometimes the law is an ass—or an arse, some say! What this means is that sometimes a law is made, validly through parliament, that contains a blatant, obvious, overt, logically impossible, glaring factual error. There are many examples. The error in this case is that a mistaken concept from simply saying something, perhaps based on a mistaken belief, becomes a fact, but it'll never become a fact because it is not the truth.
The mistake made in the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 is that if a person identifies as a particular gender such as female, despite biological evidence to the contrary, they should at law be considered female. This law is insane and delusional, and only normalises those persons with the illness called gender dysphoria when they should be receiving psychiatric care, support and loving compassion. I'm not talking about people who have a preference to partner with a person of the same gender, or those who prefer to dress in the style of a person of the opposite gender to which they were born. I'm not talking about those persons who are born with both male and female genitalia—true hermaphrodites, who are very few in number but nonetheless exist. For me to identify as being two metres tall does not make me that tall; that's the way it is. Thinking it or saying it does not make it true. The Australian basketball team, the Boomers, is not going to select me to join the team. Passing a law that says I am two metres tall does not make it true. That's the stupidity and falsehood of the effect of the current Sex Discrimination Act 1984—a true example of what George Orwell predicted could happen in a future chaotic world.
The women's rights movement took a massive leap backwards when Julia Gillard's changes to discrimination law started. It made possible the extreme examples where definitions of what constitutes male and female became blurred. We're now confronted with issues where a female enters a female-only space such as a public toilet and confronts a person claiming to be female who is visibly and biologically male. He is invading her space. She may well be fearful of her personal safety and privacy. That's very important to consider.
Women have fought hard for equal rights only to have pseudo-women, not biological women, attack women's rights, wanting to access the privileges of women-only spaces and opportunities. The encroachment of pseudo-women into women's sports events became a debacle at the recent Olympic Games, when a biological male claiming to be female battered women into submission to win a boxing gold medal. Battering women into submission is now a recognised sport because the International Olympic Committee is afraid to confront the truth. At the hands of the Greens and Labor, this insanity that defies and contradicts biology and defies science is overriding women's rights.
The biologically male boxer used his strength and physical male advantage to defeat all the true women opponents in the lead-up events. This has led to the world condemnation of the Olympic committee, and I note the International Boxing Federation bans biological males from competing against biological females, as do an increasing number of international sporting bodies. These are all real issues that this bill would address and would do so simply by reasserting biological definitions of what constitutes a male and a female.
I support the amendment to move this bill to the committee for inquiry. The people of Australia need to have a say. Julia Gillard's bill did not give the people a say. This Senate can rectify this. Let's listen to the people. Let's engage in honest inquiry, and I must point out Senator Hanson is a woman.
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Thank you, Senator Roberts. I do remind you, when referring to former prime ministers, to use the correct title. The question is that Senator Hanson's amendment to Senator Gallagher's amendment to the Selection of Bills Committee report be agreed to.
11:42 am
Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
At the request of Senator Cash, I move:
At the end of the motion, add:
"and, in respect of the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report by 3 February 2025".
This is a really simple motion asking for the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee to report back on this important bill before the parliament comes back next year. Let's be clear about what we're talking about here, money laundering and terrorism financing are serious, serious issues and we agree with the government that they are serious issues. In fact, that's why the coalition passed the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act in 2006.
The Attorney-General has now introduced 165 pages of dense and highly technical legislation that businesses saw for the first time just eight days ago. So let's look at what the government's own impact analysis says. It says that implementing this bill is estimated to result in an additional regulatory burden of $13.9 billion. These costs will apply to more than 100,000 businesses. This includes 90,000 new businesses who have never had to deal with a complex financial regulatory scheme and it appears that, overwhelmingly, they are small businesses.
What sorts of businesses are we talking about? We're talking about businesses in country towns. We're talking about country town lawyers who run small practices in rural and regional areas. We're talking about accountants who do the tax for cafes and bookshops and mums and dads who engage someone to help with their financial affairs. We're talking about the real estate agents who manage your sales and your rentals.
One of the main transaction types we're talking about is dealing with property. If you impose $1.85 billion in new upfront costs on businesses that help you buy a property, what does that do to the cost of your home? This is a new home-buying tax by stealth. We are driving the small law firms closer to the wall with increasing regulatory burdens. What impact does that have on our communities, especially in our small country towns? We've already had stakeholders raising concerns that we're going to make it even harder to get a lawyer in the regions. These are questions worth answering.
Money laundering is serious, but so is helping people buy a home. We want to make it easier, not harder, to buy a home. We want to make it cheaper, not more expensive, with less paperwork, not more. So it is reasonable to say: 'Let's take the time to look at this properly. Let's make sure we get it right, and let's be clear about the timeframes.' There was no exposure draft for the $13.9 billion bill. The most we've had is a few high-level papers circulated by the Attorney-General's Department. The bit that matters—the actual legislation—wasn't released to the public until just eight days ago. Most of the 100,000-plus businesses who will be covered don't even know it's coming. They need time to look at it. They need time to get advice and draft submissions explaining the bits that work and the places where tweaks are needed.
That is how you run a proper committee process, that is how you ensure your legislation is actually fit for purpose, and that is all we're asking the government to do today.
11:45 am
Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Just on the amendment, we won't be supporting it, obviously. We want this report to be done by 13 November. That is ample time. I would just say to the opposition: just work hard; work hard and get it done.
Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Well, that's your job. That's your job. Your job is to do this work. We're giving you essentially six or seven weeks to do this work. Get it done. There is nothing more urgent. They're overdue reforms. We need to get them done. I think the Senate has shown this week how slow those opposite sometimes are to do any work. They don't want to do any work. We want to get some work done. We suggest that 13 November is more than enough time to get that work done.
11:46 am
Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
While you want to try and rush these bills, we've got a problem here. Remember, you took a couple of staff off us. When you're talking about our national security—
Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Yes, I should work seven days a week, right? This is the problem. You are backing us up. You are throwing it in our faces. We don't have enough time because we don't have the resources. You give us stuff about national security, but you don't want us to look at this stuff. This is where we're at. I can't physically get through this at this point in time, so I doubt if the other crossbenchers can either.
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The question is that the amendment as moved by Senator Ruston to Senator Gallagher's amendment to the selection of bills committee report be agreed to.
11:53 am
Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I move:
At the end of the motion, add:
"and, in respect of the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024, the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee report by 3 February 2025".
11:54 am
Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
We support this extension of the reporting of the inquiry into the misinformation and disinformation—
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Roberts, I'm advised that time has expired, so I'm going to put the amendment. The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Duniam to Senator Gallagher's amendment to the Selection of Bills Committee report be agreed to.
11:58 am
David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Could you put (a) and (b) together and then (c) separately?
Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Okay. The question is that paragraphs (a) and (b) of the amendment moved by Senator Gallagher to the Selection of Bills Committee report be agreed to.
Question agreed to.
The question now is that paragraph (c) of the amendment moved by Senator Gallagher to the Selection of Bills Committee report be agreed to.
Question agreed to.
Original question, as amended, agreed to.