Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 26 March 2014
Page: 3265

Mr FRYDENBERG (KooyongParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) (17:49): Many millions of dollars. What the opposition does not like to hear is that we are still very much committed to our FOFA legislation. It was introduced last week. Our overall deregulatory effort is $720 million. From the document we have put forward you know that there is a $13 million saving attached to the omnibus bill. You also know that in the bills that we are discussing today we are getting rid of more than 1,000 redundant acts. The opposition also know that our $720 million figure has been verified in a public document based on costings by the Office of Best Practice Regulation, as well as by individual departments. This is across a whole range of measures which have significantly reduced the amount of duplication that exists in the regulatory framework that is currently in place. As well as dealing with the duplication of NOPSEMA and the duplication in terms of one-stop shops, I remind the House that we have introduced another piece of legislation that is extremely important in our deregulation framework. That is to open up the Comcare scheme to ensure that companies—

Opposition members interjecting

Mr FRYDENBERG: The opposition asked me about our $720 million target. The Comcare scheme will provide a saving of more than $30 million. The Labor Party and their friends in the union movement ensured that when they first came to office at the end of 2007 there was a moratorium put on the Comcare scheme so that companies had to enter into expensive different systems in every state. Those opposite shake their heads.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

The SPEAKER: There is no point of order. The member will resume his seat.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker—

The SPEAKER: Do not argue with the chair. Take your seat!

Mr FRYDENBERG: No, there is no point of order. The member for Watson should check the video tape because his colleague at the table was shaking his head. The opposition is not interested in the substance of repeal day. The opposition wants to have a bet each way. On the one hand, the opposition is saying that 'repeal day' is just a stunt: 'You are getting rid of regulations that are decades old and which have no impact out there in real life.' But on the other hand, those opposite get up at the dispatch box and say. 'We disagree with what you are doing on the ACNC.' Right? They are saying, 'You are having a disagreement with what the government is doing on FoFA. We have a disagreement with what the government is doing on Comcare. We have a disagreement with what the government is doing in terms of cleaning services.'

I want the opposition to understand that the more than 30-page document that we released publicly detailed more than 80 initiatives in the deregulation space—

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During the debate on the second reading, a second reading amendment had been moved which significantly broadened the scope of the debate.

The SPEAKER: We have moved on since then.

Mr BURKE: Now that we are in consideration in detail, that full breadth of relevance is no longer relevant to the debate, and while this would have been completely in order from the parliamentary secretary during the second reading debate, it is not relevant during the consideration in detail.

The SPEAKER: The parliamentary secretary will relate his comments to the bills before the House. But there is still, in consideration in detail when you are answering propositions put by the opposition, scope for you to answer in the terms you see are relevant.

Mr FRYDENBERG: Thank you, Madam Speaker. In terms of the bills before the House, they have got rid of more than 1,000 redundant acts. In terms of the legislative changes that are contained in the omnibus bill, they will get rid of some of the duplication in the aged-care space so that building certification, for example— (Time expired)