Senator COOK (1:52 PM) —I do not want to set up unreasonable hurdles, I want to get to the nub of the debate. You say that the government's position is well known and has been known since October. The bills that we are now considering came forward in December, so we only saw what your legislative changes were in December, and we now have some amendments. All I want to do here, and it is nothing more complicated than this, is find out whether this is the extent of your amendments, whether this is the extent of what you are asking the Senate to consider or whether you have further amendments elsewhere. You are unable to confirm or deny whether there will be further amendments. I then come to those questions that I have asked. I still do not have an answer for the last one, relating to section 165-55 of the legislation. It says:

For the purposes of making a declaration under this Subdivision, the Commissioner may:

(a) treat a particular event that actually happened as not having happened;

The Taxation Institute says that the draftsman must have been reading Alice in Wonderland when he or she wrote those words. You are not in a position to say whether there are any further amendments, but is the government examining that matter? Does it have it under consideration? Is it the position that it has not decided whether it should tighten those provisions in any way? Are we therefore to expect that when it does make a decision on that, we will hear further? Or is this the proposition that you will be putting to this chamber for us to vote on, when we come to it, and you do not have under review any provisions to amend the section?