Senator BROWN (9:40 AM) —The Greens oppose the sudden reinstitution of these measures onto the Notice Paper for the purpose of debating them tomorrow. I hear Senator Sherry say the government has made a commitment that the debate will take place next week. We share the same concern that the information base is not available to the Senate; therefore, the interaction with the community that is required for important legislation like this is not able to proceed as it should. There has been a deal made with the Democrats to allow for the two pieces of legislation. On the one hand, there is ostensibly an advantage in superannuation through copayments being made by the government to match payments up to $1,000 by low-income earners—people earning up to $27,000 a year—but the real drive in these twin pieces of legislation is the reduction for high-income earners from a 15 per cent surcharge to a 12½ per cent surcharge. That is going to be a $100 million break for the already rich, including every member of this chamber. Under the standing orders we will all be required to declare an interest—and I do so now—in the forthcoming debate on these matters.

Obviously, we are not going to be able to prevent the sudden reinstitution of these measures onto the Notice Paper. They have to be debated, of course, and we will be taking part in a vigorous debate on the legislation next week. I can tell the house that the Greens will be moving very strongly to amend this legislation so that the $100 million that will help increase the gap between rich and poor in this country is, rather, committed to decreasing the gap between rich and poor in a country that the Prime Minister espouses has the motto of `A Fair Go'.

Very early on I also flagged the concern of community interest groups on this, who point out that even the low-income earners are not going to be able to put out the $1,000 a year. People on under $27,000 are not going to be able to afford $1,000 a year to put into a superannuation scheme to get the matching grant from the government, unless they are spouses of high-income earners. So it is really a double bonus for the rich that is being put forward here, and I really do not know how the Democrats fell into that trap. But we will have a debate on it next week.

I can also flag that it again raises the opportunity to remove the discriminatory Commonwealth legislation against same sex and other partnerships in superannuation. The states have done so. The Labor government in Tasmania, supported by the Greens, brought in sterling legislation on that just a week or two ago.

Senator Sherry —I did have the same thought.

Senator BROWN —I will be facilitating the opportunity for Labor to support that as well; and I hear the Democrats are looking forward to it as well. It is a very important opportunity and I will be circulating an amendment to that effect later in the day. I flag to the government some substantial debate next week when this legislation comes on, and some important amendments to improve social justice in this country rather than to make things worse, which is what this legislation does.