Bill
Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024
passed, as at 2024-12-10. Treasury portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Treasury
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2024-11-27
- second reading — 2024-11-27
- second reading — 2024-11-28
- second reading — 2024-11-28
- third reading — 2024-11-28
- introduced — 2024-11-28
- second reading — 2024-11-28
- second reading — 2024-11-28
- third reading — 2024-11-28
- passed — 2024-11-28
- royal assent — 2024-12-10
Divisions
- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansardr/28045/&sid=0000) introduced by Bradfield MP [Paul Fletcher](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bradfield/paul_fletcher) (Liberal), which means it failed. The motion was to suspend the usual procedural rules of parliament - known as standing orders - in order to let another vote take place. ### Motion text > *That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business moving the following motion immediately:* > > *That this House expresses its strong disapproval of this Government's contempt for good parliamentary process in bringing on debate on the [Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7296) within one day of the bill being introduced and without adequate notice to parliamentarians.* — 2024-11-28, House of Representatives: negative, ayes 62, noes 75
- Treasury Laws Amendment (Fairer for Families and Farmers and Other Measures) Bill 2024 - Second Reading - Put the question — 2024-11-28, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 74, noes 55
- The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time in the House of Representatives. In other words, they voted to agree with the main idea of the bill. This means they can now discuss it in more detail. ### What does this bill do? In his second reading speech, Fenner MP [Andrew Leigh](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fenner/andrew_leigh) (Labor) [explained that](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansardr/28044/&sid=0000): > *When Labor came to office, we asked former competition minister Dr Craig Emerson, one of Australia's best policy brains, to review the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct. Dr Emerson consulted broadly, and concluded that the code was not doing its job. As he noted, there were no penalties, and no formal complaints had been raised after the 2021-22 financial year. His report made 11 recommendations, and the government accepted all of them. The most important recommendation was that the Food and Grocery Code be made mandatory, with substantial penalties for more harmful breaches.* > > *As Dr Emerson noted, what it really means is that the supermarkets will need to treat their suppliers in good faith. They must not abuse their superior bargaining power, the muscle that they have over smaller suppliers.* > > *The government's intention is that penalties will apply principally to corporations—that is, to supermarkets themselves. Consistent with other industry codes, the bill provides for non-body corporate penalties. Breaches by non-bodies corporate are lower to provide a proportionate approach.* > > *The bill will ensure penalties for treating suppliers poorly in breach of the code are not merely a cost of doing business. These are serious penalties. They are the highest corporate penalties under any industry code.* > > *The bill provides that the maximum penalty that can be prescribed in the code will be the greater of $10 million, three times the value of the — 2024-11-28, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 78, noes 57
- The majority voted in favour of a motion: > *That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the motion for the third reading being moved without delay.* Standing orders are the usual procedural rules of parliament. This means the House will now vote right away on [whether to read the bill for a third time](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/divisions/representatives/2024-11-28/12) (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). — 2024-11-28, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 77, noes 59
- The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a third time in the House of Representatives. In other words, they voted to pass the bill and it will now be sent to the Senate for their consideration. ### What does this bill do? In his second reading speech, Fenner MP [Andrew Leigh](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fenner/andrew_leigh) (Labor) [explained that](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Hansard/Hansard_Display?bid=chamber/hansardr/28044/&sid=0000): > *When Labor came to office, we asked former competition minister Dr Craig Emerson, one of Australia's best policy brains, to review the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct. Dr Emerson consulted broadly, and concluded that the code was not doing its job. As he noted, there were no penalties, and no formal complaints had been raised after the 2021-22 financial year. His report made 11 recommendations, and the government accepted all of them. The most important recommendation was that the Food and Grocery Code be made mandatory, with substantial penalties for more harmful breaches.* > > *As Dr Emerson noted, what it really means is that the supermarkets will need to treat their suppliers in good faith. They must not abuse their superior bargaining power, the muscle that they have over smaller suppliers.* > > *The government's intention is that penalties will apply principally to corporations—that is, to supermarkets themselves. Consistent with other industry codes, the bill provides for non-body corporate penalties. Breaches by non-bodies corporate are lower to provide a proportionate approach.* > > *The bill will ensure penalties for treating suppliers poorly in breach of the code are not merely a cost of doing business. These are serious penalties. They are the highest corporate penalties under any industry code.* > > *The bill provides that the maximum penalty that can be prescribed in the code will be the greater of $10 million, three times the value of the benefit gain — 2024-11-28, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 77, noes 54
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2024-11-27.
This bill would move the job of running Commonwealth business registers from the tax office to the corporate regulator and close a modernisation program.
Staff who move to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission as part of this or future government reorganisations would be covered by the same rules and protections as its existing employees.
The main part of the bill starts the day after Royal Assent, while one division begins on 31 December 2024.
- Transfers administration of business registers from the Australian Taxation Office to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
- Winds up the Modernising Business Registers Program.
- Gives transferred Public Service Act employees the same legal framework, functions and protections as existing ASIC staff.
- Adjusts rules for registry records of corporate collective investment vehicles.
The Australian Taxation Office, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, and Public Service Act employees transferred to ASIC.
Sources
em
billhome
frl act