Download Fragment

Thursday, 13 October 2011
Page: 7326

Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (12:04): The concern expressed by the opposition is that this amendment means there will be the threat of an audit of businesses and as a result of this small businesses may be put off tendering for government contracts.

Senator Ryan: One of them.

Senator XENOPHON: Yes, that is one of the concerns raised. I want to fairly summarise Senator Ryan's position in relation to that. My question to Senator Bishop is: what safeguards are in place for there not to be an unnecessary onus on businesses? I can understand the argument about there being a threat of an audit, but if an audit actually takes place I would imagine that there would be protocols and procedures in place for the Auditor-General's office to deal fairly with those small businesses to ensure that the process is a fair one and not unduly onerous. Has any analysis been done on the compliance costs, particularly for those small businesses? I think there are many larger businesses that are big and ugly enough to look after themselves, particularly public companies, that will not be daunted by the prospect of an audit. Even if a small business is subjected to an audit, and again we are looking at an efficient and effective use of taxpayers' funds for these government contracts and making sure that the money has been appropriately spent, I would have thought that the audit process would not necessarily have to be a traumatic one. It could be a pretty straightforward one that is reasonable. To what extent will the Auditor-General's office adapt its processes in order to deal with small businesses?

I do not think they have this wrong now, but this would be quite a different role for the agency in terms of their interaction with small business contractors. Essentially that is my concern. I can see the motivation for Senator Ryan's amendment but I wonder, in a practical sense, what the impact will be. Can we get Senator Bishop's perspective on this?