Senator BROWN (5:02 PM) —Before the debate was adjourned earlier in the day, I was saying that these are good amendments and ought to be adopted. The Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Robert Hill, has indicated that there are difficulties because of the complexity of costing the amendments, which would, for example, extend tax deductibility to any value lost on a property or reasons of covenanting to protect native vegetation and so on. There is also some assessment to be done with the proposal in amendments coming next that the tax deductibility be allowed to be spread over five years. If a donor of a block of land for environmental purposes values that land at $1 million and the land is of high environmental value, it is logical that they get the same benefits as somebody who donates a painting which is worth $1 million. Under legislation, the person who denotes the painting will be able to spread tax deductibility over five years, obviously gaining benefits from that, but the person who donates the block of land—part of the national heritage—will not get that advantage.

Let me reiterate how important this legislation is and my earlier commendation of Senator Hill for bringing it into this place. It is breakthrough legislation, because for the first time it means that a citizen who donates a block of land—which has rare and endangered species or which is of great heritage amenity to the nation—to an entity like the Australian Bush Heritage Fund or the several trusts in various states set up specifically to look after land in perpetuity, with the purpose of protecting an ecosystem or some feature or living entity—wildlife or plant life—will know that it is going to be protected forever. The idea here, to shorthand it, is to ensure that people who make donations towards private national parks where there is a guarantee that they are going to be protected in perpetuity will get a tax advantage from that. Two days ago we were discussing in here and I was opposing a change in the diesel fuel grant system—

Senator Kemp —Well done! He is a fast learner.

Senator BROWN —The minister will be pleased. I was opposing a change in that system that gives a tax break if you want to put diesel in your bulldozer and go ripping into the forests. How much more important it is from my point of view that we give a tax break to somebody who wants to protect forests and donates land to an entity like the Australian Bush Heritage Fund. I support the amendments, but I am concerned that this process may lead to us seeing, tomorrow, a rejection of these amendments in the Reps—not because they are not meritorious but because the Treasury has not yet worked out how to do the assessments of what this will cost.

Senator Hill has flagged that he has amendments that next year will cover much of this field. Maybe we could hear a little more about what is intended there so that it is on the record and we have some more concrete reassurance that the excellent measures involved in these Democrat and Green amendments are not simply going to be consigned to oblivion. There it is. On the one hand, I do not want to see the legislation fail. On the other hand, I do not want to see the amendments, which obviously have the majority support in this committee, dismissed and put on the sideboard. I think that in the next 24 hours we have to come to a pretty honest arrangement about that so that all interests are best served and, in particular, this breakthrough legislation is not consigned to oblivion. It is too important for that. Once again—it is rare that I am in the position of being able to do this—I congratulate the minister for bringing the legislation forward.