Senator CONROY (11:43 AM) —I note Senator Ian Campbell's comment that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the US was rushed. I can only say, having met Senator Sarbanes last week in Washington, that he does not think that at all and he had already had a bill on the table for some months.

Senator McGauran —Did you meet George? He likes you!

Senator CONROY —Unfortunately, the White House was closed on the day we were to go there, due to President Reagan's funeral, Senator McGauran.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Watson)—Address your comments through the chair please.

Senator CONROY —Thank you. I accept your admonishment, Mr Temporary Chairman. I note Senator Ian Campbell's comments about how it was a far more `thorough process' and less rushed here in Australia. Some would even suggest that the government was dragged to this kicking and screaming, in fact, and that the only reason this bill has emerged at all is that there is an election looming. The government is doing the minimum amount that it can to remain credible, in its eyes, on corporate governance issues.

This bill represents a watering down of the government's own commitments. The Treasurer, Peter Costello, appeared on national television on the 7.30 Report and in relation to the HIH Royal Commission recommendations said, `We will implement them all.' This bill falls well short of that. Even though Senator Campbell has moved on to higher things now, he was a key participant at the time of the drafting of this bill. This represents Senator Campbell undermining the Treasurer. When the Treasurer goes on national television and says, `We will implement every single one of these recommendations,' and Senator Campbell turns up a year later with a bill that undermines the Treasurer in such a public way, you have to say this government is determined to do as little as it can to try and address these issues.

I would not want Senator Murray to feel that his offer would not be taken up by Labor. Many of the amendments that we drafted actually cover the recommendations that were agreed to in the second report. While I accept that the government, based on its track record, needs about three years to move on to the next stage, in actual fact many of the amendments are available right now to be acted upon. They were unanimously agreed to, and we can deal with those here. I take note of Senator Murray's offer and his indication that he wants to work closely with government and Labor and that we need a tripartite agreement on these issues. I welcome that offer; I wish it had been around yesterday when the Democrats cravenly caved in to IFSA and the government on fee disclosure issues. I wish that tripartite spirit had been available yesterday. Perhaps we would have got a better outcome for consumers in this country if Senator Murray's goodwill and good spirit had been available yesterday. However, as I want to move on to the amendments, I will allow the government to move the first of its amendments.