19 October 1999

Question Time, Parliament House, Canberra

Note

SUBJECT: Corporations Law Reform, Australia as a Centre for Global Financial Services

MEMBER FOR STURT: My question is for the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation. Can the Minister inform the House of the benefits that will flow to business and through them to the community, from the successful passage of the Government's corporate law economic reform program? Minister, what opposition did the reform meet during its progress through the Parliament and does that opposition deter the Government from continuing with its reforms?

MINISTER HOCKEY: Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I would like to thank the Member for Sturt for his question. Mr Speaker, when the Government was originally elected in 1996 we promised less red tape for business that would lead to more jobs and more investment. The Treasurer announced in 1996 the beginning a significant corporate law reform program and I am pleased the House that last night the Senate passed the first part of that program. Mr Speaker, it is a significant win for 1.1 million Australian companies and particularly the 950,000 small businesses. It has put in place an incentive for business to take calculated and well-informed risks. It delivers better director accountability through the safe harbour provision, which we have put in place. It has improved shareholders' rights. And importantly Mr Speaker, it has given small businesses the opportunity to access capital in a far more efficient manner. It is far cheaper now with this corporate law reform program for small business to raise capital to develop their ideas and to deliver on their ambitions.

Mr Speaker, two key areas of reform which passed through last night include that we've got business and not just the accountants having a say about Australian accounting standards and that we've got business and not just the lawyers having a say in Australian takeovers.

Mr Speaker, the editorial of the Australian Financial Review says, "CLERP is reason for applause". "The GST and business tax changes have grabbed the headlines but an equally important plank of the Government's reform agenda is corporate law reform". They go on to say that "it is crucial" and this is the Financial Review "it is crucial that is the Government is serious about making Australia a global financial markets player. Unnecessary regulation is as big an impediment for offshore companies that wan to invest in Australia as tax rates. Similarly, transparency and accountability is crucial for a fair and efficient investment market. "

Mr Speaker what this delivers is jobs and investment in Australians and Australian ideas. And I would like to particularly thank the Australian Democrats for their support in this Bill. The Australian Democrats were prepared to talk and negotiate on this Bill and it defies logic Mr Speaker why the Labor Party would choose to oppose this Bill and the principles behind it at every point. And if you use every political bone in your body, you have to wonder why the Labor Party would oppose it. How many votes would they have picked up in the seat of Menzies or Herbert or Petrie, because they oppose CLERP? The professional opposition that opposes IR (industrial relations) that has delivered more than half a million jobs. That opposes tax reform that has delivered more than half a million jobs, that delivers the privatisation of Telstra, that delivers Budget reform which delivers more than half a million jobs for Australia. The Labor Party has also opposed us on corporate law reform, which delivers for small Australian businesses.

But the good news for the Labor Party Mr Speaker is this. They have entered the second chance draw. They have entered the second chance draw. Because on IR, on Telstra, on Budgetary reform, on taxation and corporate law reform, there are second tranches coming along and you have the chance to oppose it again. Mr Speaker, our initiatives are delivering jobs for Australians, particularly for young Australians. This is another step forward. Why would Labor continue to oppose it?