|
senate vote 2020-09-03#11
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2020-09-18 12:42:06
|
Title
Bills — Payment Times Reporting Bill 2020, Payment Times Reporting (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2020; in Committee- Payment Times Reporting Bill 2020 and another - in Committee - Small business fail-safe mechanism
Description
<p class="speaker">James McGrath</p><p>The committee is considering the Payment Times Reporting Bill 2020 and a related bill. We are dealing with government amendments (1) to (17) on sheet RS116.</p> <p class="speaker">Michaelia Cash</p>- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-09-03.89.1) moved by South Australia Senator [Don Farrell](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/don_farrell) (Labor), which means they failed.
- Senator Farrell [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-09-03.89.1):
- > *Labor believes that complementary back-up measures are necessary to ensure the Payment Times Reporting Scheme improves general payment times to small business. Our amendments would introduce a fail-safe mechanism. That fail-safe mechanism means that over the next few years, if the government's scheme does not broadly improve payment times to small businesses to 30 days or less, the mechanism is triggered.*
- Read more about the proposed Payment Times Reporting Scheme in the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1920a/20bd101).
<p>Very briefly, in speaking to the government amendments which I moved prior to this debate recommencing, the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Employment Committee considered these bills in detail and recommended that they be passed. I thank the chamber for the support of this bill. The committee also recommended that a review of the Payment Times Reporting Scheme occur two years after its commencement. I agree with the committee's recommendation. In addition to agreeing to this measure, further government amendments to the bill have been made in response to feedback provided by various parties. The key amendments to the bill include reducing the transition period for the introduction of compliance and enforcement measures from 18 months to 12 months; moving the definition of 'small business' to the bill and inserting a new legislative note to the definition; requiring a payment time report to include additional information on payments made beyond 60 days, including payments made more than 120 days after a small business's invoice is issued; and moving more content requirements of a payment time report from the draft subordinate legislation into the main bill, including details such as the reporting entity's name, ABN and main business activity. Other technical amendments to the bill include ensuring that most reporting entities start their first reporting cycle on the scheme's commencement and requiring businesses to report in a form and manner approved by the Payment Times Reporting Regulator. I therefore commend the amendments to the Senate.</p> <p class="speaker">Don Farrell</p><p>Labor will support the government's amendments. In particular, we welcome the government listening to Labor and stakeholders about amending the reporting requirements so that large businesses with egregiously long payment times such as 180 days can't hide this data in the 60-days-or-greater threshold that exists in the original legislation.</p><p>Question agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Pauline Hanson</p><p>[by video link] I move Pauline Hanson's One Nation's amendment on sheet 1026:</p><p class="italic">(1) Page 46 (before line 10), before clause 58, insert:</p><p class="italic">57B Requirements for review</p><p class="italic">(1) Without limiting section 57A, the review must consider the following:</p><p class="italic">(a) whether the operation of this Act is meeting the objects set out in section 3;</p><p class="italic">(b) whether related government policies, including policies relating to electronic invoicing, have improved the payment terms and practices of reporting entities in relation to their small business suppliers;</p><p class="italic">(c) whether other measures such as mandating one or more maximum periods (the <i>mandated maximum payment periods</i> ) for the payment of small business invoices by reporting entities would be more effective in improving those payment terms and practices.</p><p class="italic">(2) In considering mandated maximum payment periods, the review must consider the following:</p><p class="italic">(a) how mandated maximum payment periods could best be implemented, taking into account:</p><p class="italic">(i) potential regulatory burdens on reporting entities; and</p><p class="italic">(ii) the need to avoid unintended consequences for small businesses;</p><p class="italic">(b) the mandated maximum payment periods that would be appropriate to improve payment terms and practices, including:</p><p class="italic">(i) whether mandated maximum payment periods of 30 days, 20 days, or 10 days or less would be appropriate; and</p><p class="italic">(ii) whether mandated maximum payment periods of 5 days would be appropriate if electronic invoicing were used;</p><p class="italic">(c) the impact of sector or industry-specific differences, including how mandated maximum payment periods could be imposed on sectors and industries with differing payment terms and practices;</p><p class="italic">(d) the compliance or enforcement arrangements that would be appropriate to support mandated maximum payment periods, including whether a penalty regime should be established for the following purposes:</p><p class="italic">(i) to require a reporting entity to pay small business invoices issued to the entity within a specified period, if the entity has a median payment period for small business invoices issued to the entity that is longer than the mandated maximum payment period;</p><p class="italic">(ii) to require a reporting entity that has failed to pay a small business invoice issued to the entity within the period specified in the terms of the relevant contract to pay interest on that payment.</p> <p class="speaker">Michaelia Cash</p><p>The government will be supporting the amendment moved by Senator Hanson. I thank Senator Hanson, on behalf of One Nation, for her constructive discussions in relation to this bill. As I said, the government will be supporting the amendment moved by Senator Hanson on behalf of One Nation.</p> <p class="speaker">Don Farrell</p><p>We supported the government's review into this amendment, and we support Senator Hanson's amendment to ensure that certain matters are considered by the review. While we believe the fail-safe mechanism is the only feasible way to reduce payment terms, in this parliament we don't object to these stronger terms of reference being imposed on a statutory review. I want to take this opportunity to note that such a review with these terms would help fine-tune the fail-safe mechanism before it is set to begin in our amendment. As such, I would hope Senator Hanson and Senator Roberts will consider voting in favour of the fail-safe mechanism soon. We should pass that amendment this parliament and ensure that technical clarifications can be made to it at a later date to assuage concerns Senator Hanson may have.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|