

- Title
INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 1996
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
17-03-1997
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
38
- Electorate
VIC
- Interjector
- Page
1545
- Party
LP
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Senator KEMP
- Stage
- Type
- Context
Bill
- System Id
chamber/hansards/1997-03-17/0058
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- REPRESENTATION OF NEW SOUTH WALES
-
TAXATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL (No. 1) 1997
BOUNTY LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 1997 - ORDER OF BUSINESS
-
INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996
INCOME TAX (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 1996-
In Committee
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator KEMP
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator SHERRY
- Senator MARGETTS
- Senator KEMP
- Senator KERNOT
- Senator MARGETTS
- Third Reading
-
In Committee
-
FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT BILL 1996
- Second Reading
-
In Committee
- Senator CARR
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator COONEY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator COONEY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator O'BRIEN
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator HARRADINE
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator MURRAY
- Senator ELLISON
- Senator CARR
- Senator MURRAY
- Third Reading
-
TELECOMMUNICATIONS BILL 1996
TRADE PRACTICES AMENDMENT (TELECOMMUNICATIONS) BILL 1996
AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (UNIVERSAL SERVICE LEVY) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER LICENCE CHARGES) TERMINATION BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (NUMBERING CHARGES) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS) BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (CARRIER LICENCE FEES) BILL 1996 -
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS (TRANSMITTER LICENCE TAX) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS (RECEIVER LICENCE TAX) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
RADIOCOMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS (NUMBERING FEES) AMENDMENT BILL 1996
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL 1996 - MIGRATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (No. 3) 1996
- ORDER OF BUSINESS
- EUTHANASIA LEGISLATION
- EUTHANASIA LAWS BILL 1996
- Adjournment
- QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Page: 1545
Senator KEMP (Assistant Treasurer)(2.15 p.m.)
—It squares with the legislation currently before us because the legislation repeats the old law without change. I recognise your interest in preference share issues, Senator Harradine. You are quite right when you say that this issue was well canvassed before the Senate. However, I am advised that the law we are debating before this chamber simply restates section 80B part 8 of the old law without change.
If you have another bit of paper, which I understand you do, which relates to future policy directions, I would have thought that was a debate for another day. I do not deny your interest in this matter. In fact, I think you created a lot of interest in this matter. The point I am putting to you is that what we have before us is no change in the existing law. You are interested—and, as I have said, I do not deny your right to be interested—in a discussion paper, but that is not the substance of debate before this chamber.