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
Tuesday, 10 February 2015
Page: 262

Senator KIM CARR (Victoria) (13:55): On the basis of what you have just said, you should accept the opposition's amendment. Also, the problem with what you have just said is that you propose that the fact you gave notice on a previous measure ignores the fact that the government has accepted a different measure. We are not actually debating that matter any longer because the government has proposed a fundamentally different proposition.

Senator Cormann: That's just not true.

Senator KIM CARR: You have—a $100 million cap instead of the $20 billion arrangement. It is a new measure of which no notice has been given, none whatsoever. Minister, is it not a fact that companies get prior approval before they lodge their claims and often before they actually undertake the investment? Is it not a fact, Minister, that the proposition you have just put to this chamber is completely erroneous because some companies such as CSL—an Australian manufacturer that makes vaccines and biopharmaceutical products—undertake strategic investment decisions on the basis of that advice, and that your proposal will in fact change the ground rules retrospectively on the basis of the investment they make? Whether or not they lodge their claim at any point in the future for activity undertaken in the period covered by this new amendment—this new proposition—the $100 million cap will, in fact, come into play irrespective of any other statements you have made. That is the nature of the retrospectivity. Is that the case?