Senator JOYCE (6:09 PM) —Both schedules of the Tax Laws Amendment (2008 Measures No. 3) Bill 2008 have been dealt with by the Senate. This is just a brief statement to say that what we are seeing here with the McNeil case, which is schedule 1 of TLAB 3, is basically the returning of the legislation to its original intent. A brief synopsis of the McNeil case is that it changed the nature of rights issues potentially from one of capital to one of income and, as such, could have created immense uncertainty in how people would participate in such things as rights and options.

The McNeil case was agreed by the coalition last year. The consequence of that case meant that legislation should go before the parliament to return the legislation to its original intent. There are some concerns with regard to drafting and whether, as a consequence of the drafting, there still may be some inadequacies. We wait to see how that will work its way through, but certainly through the Senate inquiry there was a consensus between all involved that there should be a change back to the original intent.

The McNeil case is schedule 1. Schedule 2 relates to another case, being the KAP Motors case. KAP Motors dealt with the consequences of the refund of GST and other overpayments of certain taxes. The consequence of the KAP Motors case, which is noted in schedule 2, implied that overpayment of GST does not need to be reimbursed to the customer before it can be claimed back from the Commissioner of Taxation. Obviously getting something back from the Australian Taxation Office before you have paid it back to the person with whom you were involved goes against the intention of the legislation. Schedule 2 once more returns this legislation to its original intent.

I think that both schedules still have some drafting issues. I think there is a consensus about what we are trying to do here. TLAB 3 is one piece of legislation that should be supported throughout this chamber. However, it will be different, I suspect, from what the Senate may consider with regard to TLAB 4; there are some serious concerns about the structure of that piece of legislation. I will close on that.

I will also briefly say that I commend those involved in the defence forces. I also thank them for allowing us to intrude on their schedule, as we have through the Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program. Having done a bit of military service myself, I was thrilled to go back and do weapons drill and to start marching again.