Senator ROBERT RAY (4:44 PM) —I would like to foreshadow an amendment but I have not yet had a chance to put it in writing. It was suggested to me only 10 seconds ago.

Senator Faulkner —Who by?

Senator ROBERT RAY —I could not possibly reveal the source. Rather than adopting Senator Minchin's course—which I understand is to report by 23 June—I think our attitude would be to report back on the first day of the next sitting. Maybe those opposite could assist me with when that is going to be.

Senator Minchin —10 August.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Perhaps 10 August or 10 November. That is not really in your hands, is it? I was going to put that in writing as a foreshadowed motion, but if this amendment is carried then you will not even require it in writing. Senator Faulkner has given some indication as to why this particular bill should have a little longer hearing, and Senator Brown has reinforced that.

I found it interesting in the budget papers to see a figure over three years of $45 million. That is one of the reasons I want to reconsider some aspects of this bill. It is not true to portray this as a necessarily bad bill. It is a bill with some controversial aspects that people may say is good electoral practice or partisanship, but the part that interests me most is the provision in terms of tax deductibility.

Senator Minchin —It is not in this bill.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Are you indicating that it is not in this part of the bill?

Senator Minchin —It is in a separate tax bill.

Senator ROBERT RAY —It is going to be in a separate tax bill. I hope that you are not going to try to get that through a cut-off motion this session, because it is quite a remarkable figure. It is in some ways linked, because you always look for all the electoral reform that is being brought in. I found that figure of $45 million fascinating, because it is basically saying that political parties over those three years will receive donations of beyond $100 million. If you take what the company tax rate is and you take what the personal tax rate is and try to average it out, bearing in mind that some donors already giving money will benefit from it, over three years something like an extra $80 million will float into the political process. I hope that is not a start to say that we will do that rather than public funding, because that would lead to a very inequitable position.

Senator Minchin —Your members on the committee agreed to this.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Yes, they did. I regret that they did not have my guidance, but they shortly will have my guidance on this particular issue. One thing that the committee did not have, Senator Minchin—and I will finish this part of the contribution on that point—is any estimates. You have put the estimates in the forward estimates, and I have no idea how you calculated them.

Senator Minchin —Treasury did not have our guidance.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I am sure they did not. Maybe we will have to see Treasury to find out how they came up with that figure. I suppose what I am really saying is that this bill does have a chance of succeeding through the Senate with some amendments given mature consideration. If you put a very short reporting time on this, and if you defeat us on the cut-off motion, then it will be Wik II in the committee stage. You do not want that; we do not want that.

We would rather some time to try to work out a reasonable proposition. We know Senator Minchin is a reasonable person on these things. He does listen, he does engage in discussion. Sometimes he concedes; sometimes he digs his heels in. We know him in that particular way. We can also say that, if he ever gave his word on something, we know he would keep it. But I do think it would be better on this occasion to have a more extensive reporting date and actually get the job done than to get a quick reporting date. I can pretty much guarantee you—it is not a threat; it is just an indication—that you will not get it done in the committee stage of this session.