Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Hansard source

I thank senators for their contributions, especially Senators Seselja and Canavan. We did hear some rhetoric from those opposite, but regulation of itself does not mean protection; it is the quality of the regulation that counts. Also, duplication does not mean extra protection; it means waste and destruction, and it brings institutions into disrepute. In relation to Senator Rhiannon's contribution about governance, forcing things through the parliament, I remind her of the very sullied record of the Australian Greens and being in lock-step with the Australian Labor Party, and on one occasion forcing over 40 pieces of legislation through this place without a single word of debate allowed to be spoken on them. I will not be lectured or hectored by Senator Rhiannon when she personally voted to achieve that outcome with the previous government. So, please, let us have none of this hysterical nonsense that we get from the Greens now that they find that they are no longer in control of the chamber.

We are debating the coalition government's commitment to getting rid of red tape. On 26 March this year, the government held its first ever red tape repeal day, removing—and this is a very interesting statistic—over 10,000 pieces and 50,000 pages of legislation and regulation, which it is estimated will save over $700 million in compliance costs. The repeal day is an important part of the government's deregulation agenda and will cut $1,000 million in red and green tape each year. The government will designate two parliamentary sitting days as repeal days each year. This will result in more efficient government and more productive business and not-for-profit sectors. Ultimately, this will boost Australia's competitiveness, helping to create more jobs. As Minister for Employment, I am very excited by that prospect, especially given that we as a nation face an unemployment rate with a six in front of it. Not only will cutting red tape boost our competitiveness and help create more jobs; it will also reduce the cost of living.

Bad regulation and too much regulation hurt productivity, deter investment and innovation and in turn cost jobs. That is the bottom line and that is the motivation for this government to get rid of red and green tape. We want to ensure that we are more competitive, which in turn will increase our nation's wealth. That will then allow us to have the money to pay for the welfare, hospitals, roads and infrastructure that people want and, of course, that in turn will create jobs.

In the five years from mid-2007, Australia's multifactor productivity declined by nearly three per cent. In 2012, the Economist Intelligence Unit ranked the productivity growth of 51 countries. Australia came in second last behind Botswana. That is the reality, yet those opposite have the view that everything is okay and nothing needs to change. When you come in second last just above Botswana in the productivity growth of 51 countries, you realise the difficulties that we as a nation face and that is why there is this importance on enhancing our productivity. It is not only the Economist Intelligence Unit that has reported; in 2013, Australia ranked 21st in the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index, slipping six places in four years. We were ranked 128 out of 148 countries for burden of government regulation, sandwiched between Romania and Angola. We believe as a government that Australia can do better, she needs to do better and will do better, despite the obstruction from those opposite.

The Productivity Commission has estimated that regulation compliance costs could amount to as much as four per cent of Australia's gross domestic product. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry 2012 National Red Tape Survey found that 44 per cent of businesses spend between one and five hours a week complying with government regulatory requirements—that is, federal, state or local—filling out forms, applying for permits and reporting business activity; 72 per cent of businesses said the time they are spending on red tape has increased in the last two years; and 54 per cent said that complying with government regulations has prevented them making changes to grow or expand their business. If it is preventing businesses from growing and expanding, it is preventing them from putting on more workers and creating jobs. The Australian Institute of Company Directors' most recent 2013 Director Sentiment Index found that 60 per cent of those surveyed believe that the amount of red tape and the time spent complying with regulations has increased over the last 12 months.

It is interesting to hear those opposite not wanting to come on board with us in cutting red and green tape. They actually know that it needs to be done; they just do not have the will or the capacity to do so. Let us not forget what was the Labor manifesto in 2007. In 2007, the then Leader of the Opposition, Mr Rudd, promised one regulation in, one regulation out. In 2008, the then Minister for Small Business, Craig Emerson, said that Labor would:

…take a giant pair of scissors to the red tape that is strangling small business.

They had all the rhetoric right and they had all the arguments right, but let us have a look at what they actually did.

In little more than 5½ years, Labor introduced more than 975 new or amending pieces of legislation and over 21,000 additional regulations. Their promise was great, but their delivery was completely in the opposite direction. Under Labor, there were more than 80 examples of non-compliant and prime ministerial exemptions from the regulatory impact assessment process. Once again, then, what does Labor do? They sign up to the regulatory impact statement process but then exempt themselves from implementing it. What sort of legislation did they exempt themselves from assessing the impact of? There was the carbon tax that they promised we would never have. There was the mining tax which has been so destructive of our resources sector, the debacle of the National Broadband Network, FoFA and changes to the Fair Work Act. These measures all escaped detailed regulatory impact scrutiny following exemptions provided by Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard. The Borthwick-Milliner review, which was, as it happens, commissioned by Labor, reported last year and found 'a widespread lack of acceptance of and commitment by ministers and agencies' to the regulatory impact assessment process.

What is the coalition's approach? The coalition is committed to a new approach where questions must be asked first before new regulations are passed. We simply ask the questions, 'What is the purpose of the regulation, what is the cost of the regulation and what is the impact on productivity?' Only after these questions are answered and only when it is absolutely necessary, with no sensible alternatives available, should government proceed to regulate. The simple fact is that removing these huge amounts of legislation—10,000 pieces and 50,000 pages—and saving $700 million in compliance costs will go a long way towards ensuring that we move up a little bit from coming second to Botswana at the very bottom of the league tables. It might actually allow us to get out from between Romania and Angola when it comes to burden of government regulation.

This is all about freeing up our economy so that jobs can be created for the 6.1 per cent who are currently unemployed. These are people who do not have the satisfaction of being able to go to work, of being able to look back on a day's work and of being self-reliant, and who do not obtain all the benefits of being in work: the physical and mental health benefits, the self-esteem and the social interaction—all the positives that come from employment. So often we talk about the dignity of work. That is right. But what those opposite fail to talk about is the indignity of nonwork. We as a government are absolutely committed to getting rid of obstacles that stand in the way of job creation. That is why we have got rid of the carbon tax, that is why we have got rid of the mining tax and that is why we want to get rid of all the red and green tape encompassed in this bill, which I commend to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.