THE HON BILL SHORTEN MP LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION MEMBER FOR MARIBYRNONG

SPEECH *** CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY *** DEREGULATION WEDNESDAY, 19 MARCH 2014 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA Labor have always believed in making it easier for business to do business. We have always believed in competitive, productive and profitable enterprises. We believe in successful enterprises that provide Australians with good jobs. We have always believed in competitive, productive and profitable enterprisessuccessful enterprises that provide good jobs, secure jobs, fair pay and decent conditions. We understand the importance of small business. We need no lecture from those opposite. We appreciate the massive contribution that nearly five million Australians who own and work in small businesses make to our economy. That is why when Labor was in power we established a inister for !eregulation. That is why, previously, despite this sense of "golly, gee, discovery" from the #rime inister, that somehow he is the first #rime inister to ever talk about repealing legislation, we repealed more than $%,&&& pieces of redundant legislation, including '( thousand in %&$). That is why Labor initiated the most comprehensive *+A, deregulation process to remove much of the unnecessary constraints on our economy across different levels. Labor understand the importance of increasing productivity, increasing efficiency and helping put downward pressures on prices for small business. We are committed, in a bipartisan spirit, to the organised and ongoing effort to minimise, simplify and create cost-effective regulation. .ut, indeed, / must sayand / do not believe the #rime inister necessarily spoke to this point as much as / e0pected him tothat we balance against our desire for the goals which / have just outlined to ensure that through our regulatory system we improve competition in this country1 that we have 2uality standards, that we have consumer protections, in particular against fraud1 that

information is sufficient for people in Australia to be able to operate and make informed decisions in our markets1 that we have a clean environment where we tackle pollution1 and that we have wide access to services across the whole of Australia not just our cities. We understand that we should have a regulatory system which encourages the startups of business, that when people are seeking construction development approvals they are not tied up in unnecessary green tape. We understand the importance of making sure that our utilities in very strategic parts of our economy provide services and opportunities for the businesses that have to deal with them, and the consumers. We are most committed to ensure that, in markets where there is some form of regulation, be it telecommunications, financial services or insurance, there are in fact proper information sets available for businessin particular, small businessso they can make the comparisons which allow them to benefit from the benefits of competition. We are very conscious of state regulations as well property registration and the likewhich can be an obstacle towards businesses succeeding. That can include a range of issues, from registration at state titles offices right through to retail tenancies. We understand the importance of credit being able to flow through our economy and making sure that that is not impeded by unnecessary regulation. We are most committed to reforms which will see people spending less time filling out their ta0 re2uirements, which will make sure that people can spend more time making a profit and less time filling in forms. This matter should not be about partisan point scoring or ideology. We believe repeal should be diligent, not ideological. That is why this talk of bonfires and war is so remarkably overheated. We do not want important protections to be lost under the guise of deregulation. We should have regulations to make sure that our consumers are safe. We should make sure that we have regulations that protect mum and dad investorsa point / will return to. We should have regulations that preserve our pristine natural environment. These are vital. +n the substance of the bills before us as opposed to the high-blown rhetoric of the #rime inister, the statement of motherhood principles, let me talk first of all about the government"s proposition to abolish the Australian *harities and 3ot-for#rofits *ommission. / am concerned that the government is proposing to repeal a body that not only has the support of the sector that it regulates but also reduces red tape. To repeal the Australian charities commission, you would think the charities sector would be calling for its removal and shouting about the red tape burden, but the reverse is true. Today the Abbott ,overnment has managed to unite 45 leaders from the charities sector. This government loves their charities1 they will turn up at the opening of a charity. There is no doubt that when it comes to the photo opportunity, those opposite are charities" best friends. .ut when it comes to red tape and protection of charities6 missing in action, no appearance. We have 45 leaders from the sector taking the unprecedented action of issuing an open letter to retain the current framework. Let me say that this is courageous by these charities. We know what a vindictive, critical,

punishing mob those opposite are. Those 45 charities have dared to disagree with this mob opposite. We will be watching you to see if you punish them, because that is your form guide. /ndeed, some opposite seem to think that the charities sector is in love with their propositions. The inister for 7ocial 7ervices says it is only 45 out of all of them. inister for 7ocial 7ervices, say nothing. Let me go through what some of these 45 have said. The inister for 7ocial 7ervices, who deals with them, so disrespects their right to have a separate opinion to his own. Tim *ostello says6 The Commission is actually working for us and it gives the public confidence, it underpins the consumer benefit to charities. Watch out for World 8ision"s funding, / would say now, in light of that comment. #rofessor yles c,regor-Lowndes, !irector of the Australian *entre for #hilanthropy and 3onprofit 7tudies at 9:T, states6 During its short history, the ACNC has played a positive role in the overall regulatory environment of charities, and it is well-placed to continue that role. n the short term, it provides the infrastructure for a !one stop shop" for Commonwealth regulatory re#uirements, and a dedicated force to work with other Commonwealth agencies to streamline their present arrangements. ts stellar improvement in terms of timeliness, consistency of decision making and responsiveness to emerging issues of previous AT$ functions, surpasses the sector"s original high e%pectations. Then we have all sorts of other groups. !avid *rosbie, *hief ;0ecutive +fficer of the *ommunity *ouncil for Australia, has said6 The ACNC is more efficient than the government regulators it replaced, is doing good work and deserves a chance to achieve its three goals of reducing red tape A goal which the #rime inister rhetorically dedicated himself to this morning

- ncreasing public trust and strengthening the charities sector. / know the #rime inister is a strong rhetorical supporter of our charity sector1 / congratulate him on his #ollie #edal. / should just say that !avid *rosbie did not congratulate him1 that was me. !avid *rosbie continued6 A%ing the ACNC would be a very clear sign that government is not interested in the considered views of the charities sector. There we go. Louise Walsh, the *;+ of #hilanthropy Australiano doubt another nest of ar0ists, according to the ideologues over theresays6

&ince the ACNC"s establishment as an independent charities regulator, 'hilanthropy Australia has consistently supported the ACNC"s important role in our community. The ACNC has only e%isted for (ust over a year ) so far the progress is promising and we want it to be given the opportunity to realise its full potential. There you have it. That is what the 45 people that the inister for 7ocial 7ervices just dismisses. What did these people ever do to be dismissed by you, e0cept dedicate their lives to looking after other people< What an arrogant chap you are= This charities commission goes on to show that, when it comes to this government evaluating the beauty parade between ideology and pragmatic, moderate common sense, pragmatic, moderate common sense never wins. /n August %&$), a pro bono surveythere are more than just 45 here= This might change the random remark that the inister for 7ocial 7ervices made beforeof over $,4&& members of the not-for-profit sector found that >$ per cent supported the A*3*. That would be more than $,%&&, ?evin. +nly si0 per cent of the survey respondents in the charitable sector supported a return to the AT+ as a default regulator. The not-forprofit sector employs over $ million Australians, turns over about @$&& billion, involves almost 4,&&&,&&& volunteers and is the heart of all our communities. The #roductivity *ommission and the Aenry ta0 review recommended a national charities commission. The #roductivity *ommission, so beloved of the government, declared the previous regulatory framework to be comple0, lacking coherence and transparency and costly to charities. Abolishing the charities commission is an insult to ta0payers who want to see whether donations go. /t is an insult to charities, who will lose their visibility and governance support. /t is bad for the public, who will be vulnerable to more frauds and scams. 7o on the charities commission we have on one hand the government with highblown rhetoric talking about how much it wants to cut red tape, but when it has a chance to turn its words into deeds theythe Abbott ,overnment and the #rime inisterdo not live up to their own rhetoric. .ut there is a second e0ample of where the ,overnment is inconsistent with the rhetoric of the #rime inister"s opening speech and yet when it comes to turning good words into good actions they go missing. / talk of course about the future of financial advice legislation. What a disturbing proposition from the ,overnment. The Assistant Treasurer, with the support of the #rime inister, is determined to reduce the protections of mum and dad investors. The Assistant Treasurer was up-front during 7enate estimates about his game plan to prescribe new regulations to dismantle the current consumer protection laws as soon as the parliament rises ne0t week with immediate effect so there will be no parliamentary scrutiny of these changesnone. #utting aside Labor"s concerns about the substance of the Assistant Treasurer"s changes, we are most aggrieved with the process. This is all about pulling the wool over the eyes of Australian investors. Bust as bad, the financial services sector faces a very real prospect of having to deal in a short period of time with competing different regulatory regimes. The regulations that take effect from %' th and %>th of arch1 the current laws, if the regulations are disallowed in the 7enate1 and whatever legislative landscape we end up with after $st of Buly when the #arliament has dealt with the

,overnment"s legislation. This is a red-tape nightmare dreamt up by the fevered imagination of the #rime inister of Australia. The Assistant Treasurer appears to be proceeding in a ham-fisted manner, without any regard to the outcomes. Labor went through numerous rounds of consultation refining our policy. Cor the benefit of some of the new members of the *oalition, who might not have been in #arliament with the events that triggered this current round of consumer protection law which Labor put in place, it followed the collapse of the 7torm Cinancial, .ernie Dipoll"s #B* in2uiry into that and we put legislation into parliament that it debated and in2uired into, passed. 7o having seen the lessons of 7torm Cinancial, those people opposite turn their back on the e0perience of history and / cannot say when the ne0t financial disaster will happen and / cannot say who the victims will be, but / know one thing6 because of what you are doing, you are guaranteeing another 7torm Cinancial and upon your heads it will rest. And we will hold you responsible for your abandonment of basic common sense when it comes to consumer protection. This is dodgy law done in a dodgy way which will lead to dodgy outcomes. /f you want to make the changes, make the case via legislation. Cront up and have a parliamentary in2uiry. We saw what happened in 7torm Cinancial1 we saw what happened in Westpointhigh-profile collapses where in certain instances, investors were lured into these investment products because financial planners were receiving hidden commissions to promote these products. +ur financial laws, which you are seeking to dismantle, would protect consumers with a best-interest duty. There would be opt-in measures, re2uiring advisers to get their clients to opt in to receive ongoing service every two years, and annual disclosuresomehow annual disclosure is a bad idea. And then there is conflicted remuneration. We put the government on notice, that on one hand they want to reduce red tape, and / have outlined why we think as a principle that is sound. We put this Abbott ,overnment on notice that we do not want to effectively decriminalise and deregulate financial fraud in this country. We are a constructive opposition. We will give the package they put forward careful consideration. We support the repeal of redundant $E&$ legislation. We will not allow important protections to be recklessly cut. Labor stands for the protection of consumers, for the protection of workers and the protection of investors. arkets are fundamental, but one economic lesson which we all know in this place is that markets periodically need the help of government. Degulations protect against abuses. WeFve a proud record of removing the unnecessary regulations, but we will be guided by the interests of all Australians, not just blind ideology. ENDS MEDIA CONTACT: LEADERS OFFICE MEDIA UNIT 6277 40 !