HOST:
I thought we'd have a quick talk to the Assistant Treasurer, who's a very busy man but he's given us some time, David Bradbury, and David's on the line. Good morning David.
BRADBURY:
Good morning John, good to be with you.
HOST:
Good to be with you and thank you very much. Last night Labor passed a bill to create a national regulator for charities. Isn't that just going to encourage more regulation?
BRADBURY:
Look, the challenge that we've had in the charitable and not-for-profit sector is that there are different regulations in place in all the various states and territories. Now where we want to get to is ultimately to try and harmonise those arrangements right across the country, but you can't do that unless you have a national regulator in place. That's been recognised over some decades now where representatives from within the charitable sector themselves have been out there campaigning for this important change. There have been many reviews and we are now acting upon those reviews. If we can get this through the Senate then we will bring into effect a new national regulator.
HOST:
I think a lot of people are concerned. We had figures recently and I'd broadcast them relating to the percentage that actually ends up going to the charity. The administration and all those sorts of things, seem to take up a huge amount of the money that is donated by people who believe they're donating to charity.
BRADBURY:
That's right and that's why we do believe that at the heart of this reform is the need to increase transparency and accountability of the sector. That's what's important – public trust and confidence in the sector. We need to make sure that those doing the right thing, that people understand who they are and the very small proportion of those charities that may not be doing the right thing, at least there is greater transparency and there is a robust regulatory system in place.
HOST:
Okay, so if I decide, and I believe we do anyway, but if I decide to give to a charity, let's say Legacy, will I be able to find out what proportion of the money I have donated to Legacy actually goes to help people who are seeking help from that charity?
BRADBURY:
Well not on day one, but that is certainly the direction we are heading in and what we'll be doing is there will be financial reporting requirements under this regime, and that will require the charities that are covered by the ACNC, that's the new regulator, the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, but they will be required to meet obligations under the reporting requirements. That material will be available on the internet, for people to have a look and to make their own judgements about where it is that they may wish to send their financial contributions or indeed make decisions about where they would like to volunteer.
HOST:
Okay, but ultimately if somebody gives $100 to a charity, will that person be able to discover how much of the $100, because it could be $10 goes to the charity and the rest goes to administration, that should be made very clear, shouldn't it?
BRADBURY:
Well we're certainly not at this stage proposing to mandate that they provide that percentage figure.
HOST:
Why not?
BRADBURY:
We're setting up the national regulator and what will flow from that is we'll be putting out for consultation and working through the financial reporting requirements.
HOST:
Okay, will that be one of the things you'll do, however, David?
BRADBURY:
That's certainly something we'll be looking at –
HOST:
No, no, no, would you do it?
BRADBURY:
We haven't made a commitment to do that at this stage but we're happy to have a discussion about that. One of the things that many in the sector are concerned about, and we need to make sure that we're doing this in a reasonable way, because there are concerns about the establishment of league tables that don't necessarily accurately reflect what's occurring, so we need to make sure the information that is provided is not going to mislead people, that it's going to give people a genuine sense of which charities are doing the right things and which ones are not.
HOST:
Okay. Why did the Opposition try and block the passage of the bill, do you think?
BRADBURY:
Look I'm very surprised by this, because this does have very widespread support, both I think in the general public but also amongst those within the sector. If you take someone like Tim Costello, for example, from World Vision, he's written a number of significant opinion pieces on this where he makes the point that to ensure that we have trust and confidence in this sector. People have to have some faith that there are proper systems in place.
HOST:
Yes they do.
BRADBURY:
And that's at the heart of why we are doing what we are doing. In terms of why the Opposition is opposed to this, they really did not offer any reasons. One suggestion that they've made is by introducing a national regulator you are not going to reduce regulation because the states and territories continue to regulate, but the obvious point to make here is that until you have a national regulator, there is no single national regulator for the states to hand over their powers to. This is actually the first step, but a vital step, in us moving towards a more harmonised set of arrangements across the country and frankly, I think most people would be surprised to hear that in this day and age, 2012, we don't have a national regulator that is supervising and providing oversight of the charitable sector.
HOST:
Yeah, well I think it's something we certainly need and when you look at the list of charities and the cost of fundraising in relation to those charities, the Surf Lifesaving Foundation, they raise something like $23 million of $24 million but about $14 million of it, 62 per cent, goes in costs to raise that money. It's a hell of a lot.
BRADBURY:
And of course the other dimension to this is that charitable organisations that will be registered under the new national regulator are bodies that receive tax concessions. This is actually at the heart of why it is important that there be this regulation, because for every dollar raised, if they're an income tax-exempt charity they don't pay income tax on the money they raise, but equally, many of them are what we call deductible gift recipients. That means if you donate money to them you get a tax deduction on your donation so the government, the taxpayer at large, is providing a very generous subsidy and we think that's appropriate to the charitable sector, but obviously where there are subsidies of this sort being provided, we need to make sure we have got a strong system in place to make sure that there's no money being sent in directions that it shouldn't be.
HOST:
For the people who are animal lovers, and I am and the people who listen to this program mostly are, they'll be delighted to know that the RSPCA only spent about 11 per cent of the money raised in their business, WIRES is about the same, about 11 per cent, and Guide Dogs NSW/ACT only about nine per cent, so really when you compare that to 62 per cent, or 51 per cent for the Make a Wish Foundation, the costs are very high.
BRADBURY:
And we think it's important that there be more information available to people so that they can make those judgements and the RSPCA have been very big supporters of this initiative, but I must say though that they're not alone because there's been very widespread support among the charitable and not-for-profit sector for these reforms.
HOST:
Yeah, I'm not seeing – I've got a list here but I'm not seeing the Flying Doctor. I would like to think that he gets well-looked after. Does he?
BRADBURY:
I'm not sure whether they've expressed a view on this particular legislation; I've not had any direct meetings with the Flying Doctor Service.
HOST:
No, fine. They only use three per cent. God, they're good. Okay, just quickly to another subject, we've had a lot of callers this morning upset over the sale of Cubbie station. Is it true that at least a dozen parties have come forward with rival offers, many of them Australian?
BRADBURY:
Look that's not something that the Government is necessarily aware of, I'm not aware of those details, but I should underline this point and as we discussed when we spoke about this matter the other, the foreign investment review process is a process of application, where a potential bidder comes to the government to seek that authorisation before they enter into and conclude the commercial transaction. Now in this case the Cubbie Group is being effectively run by the administrator. Now the administrator has obligations under the law to make its decisions according to a range of various requirements, but keeping in mind the interests of the creditors to Cubbie station. So it is a matter for the administrator but the fact that approval is given does not of itself mean that transaction will automatically go ahead and there are plenty of cases where there might be approvals given but because there's a competitive process out there that the government doesn't necessarily have complete visibility over who may also be in the race for entering into that type of transaction so we don't have that information but certainly we are aware that the administrators and Cubbie have been working for a number of years to try and resolve their circumstances and that has what has led us to this situation.
HOST:
Just on a completely different subject, Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi's in a bit of trouble after he compared gay marriage to bestiality. What do you think of the comments he made?
BRADBURY:
Well look John I'm on the record in saying that I will vote against the proposal to change the definition of marriage.
HOST:
No, that's fine.
BRADBURY:
But having said that, I find these comments to be just extraordinary. I think that they are disrespectful in the extreme. Repugnant is probably a word that would be fitting and frankly I think that he should pull his head in, and if he doesn't Mr Abbott should pull it in for him.
HOST:
He should be stood down, he really should, just ridiculous comments. Anyway you and I stand in exactly the same spot when it comes to the use of the word marriage, so we're in unison on that and I think that a lot of Australians feel the same way. If two people want to live with each other for the rest of their life, great, wouldn't worry me a single bit, but don't call it marriage.
BRADBURY:
That's been the position that I've put publicly, people in the community that have asked me about this, I've been very straight forward about it and I understand that people will disagree but that's the great thing about democracy, I guess.
HOST:
That's what it's all about. Thank you very much for your time, David, good to talk to you.
BRADBURY:
Thanks John, good to talk to you too.