Mr TRUSS (Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) (12:59 PM) —in reply—I thank the honourable members for Mitchell and Lilley for their contributions, particularly the member for Mitchell, whose experience in this field and the work that he has done in this area in the past is recognised, I am sure, on both sides of the House. I acknowledge freely the importance of protecting privacy in these matters. He rightly recognises that there are permanent procedures in place, and they need to be there not just from the point of view of data matching but in relation to the whole management of personal information by governments.

The honourable member for Lilley involved himself in quite a bit of historical revision to try to make out that this measure was somehow all to the credit of the Labor Party. I acknowledge that they certainly introduced the legislation initially and that they at least paid lip service to the idea of stamping out fraud in the social security system. But it has really been only under this government that rhetoric has become action, and we have in fact been successful in saving currently around $46 million a week as a result of stamping out social security fraud and improved compliance.

There have been 4½ thousand prosecutions under this government, so we are really serious about getting rid of the cheats. Social security fraud is not only cheating on the taxpayers; it is also cheating on genuine beneficiaries. Most people receiving social security benefits do so because they are entitled to them and because they are in need. Those who cheat on the system are in fact placing suspicion on all recipients, and doing so unjustly. So there is strong community support for stamping out welfare cheating, and I think that is an important social objective as well as one that is important from the point of view of maintaining the integrity of the system.

This bill will help in that regard. If the sunset clause were to take effect, there would be lost savings of up to $560 million over the next three years; no-one wants that to happen. I commend the bill to the House and thank the opposition for giving it speedy passage.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl) —If no member wishes to consider the bill in detail, I will put the report question forthwith. The question is that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Main Committee adjourned at 1.02 p.m.