Second Reading
Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (15:20): I rise to speak on the Regulatory Legislation Amendment (Reform) Bill 2023, and I pay tribute to my predecessor who somehow managed to make this quite interesting and entertaining. Very passionate about this particular piece of legislation is the member for Monbulk. I dips my lid to you, because I am not sure if I am going to be able to do that. With the greatest respect to our advisers in the box – I am sure they and many other public servants have put a lot of work into it – this is what I would call the boring but important legislation. And it is important, but some of it does boggle the mind when you read certain things that absolutely make no sense whatsoever unless you understand the particular area of interest – something for example like our part 2 provisions, which amend the Monetary Units Act 2004 to provide greater flexibility in fee setting by allowing regulations in Victoria to prescribe small fees in the form of fee units by removing an unnecessary prohibition that means a fee less than the equivalent of one fee unit, currently $15.03, cannot be fixed in fractions of a fee unit. This means that fee units can be set to small fees and indexed annually to keep up with inflation.
Mathew Hilakari: Finally.
Danny O’BRIEN: Finally, says the member for Point Cook. We have all been waiting for this for years. Yes, I am taking the mickey a bit, but I do understand that we have this type of omnibus legislation quite regularly, and the people of Victoria have no idea what we do sometimes. This stuff actually is important because there will be people – organisations, businesses and others – that will find some of the small little things in legislation absolutely perplexing, frustrating, flabbergasting, whatever it may be, and it is important that they are reviewed and updated from time to time.
I understand the process for this legislation was effectively an invitation to all departments to come forward with their minor amendments to things that can reduce red tape, that can clarify aspects of legislation and that can make the world a little simpler and more efficient for everyone here in Victoria. At least that is the intention. As I said, I am not going to deliver the world’s greatest speech here, but as I understand it that is the intention of this. I literally have not read the entire bill. I will acknowledge that from the very beginning but say that I do hope the intention of streamlining legislation is actually being addressed here, because this legislation before us amends 14 acts across 10 different portfolios, at least one of which is actually mine in the liquor and gaming space – so I might say a few words about that in a moment.
As I said, it is important to be tidying up pieces of legislation to make changes that better reflect the modern world, which is often the case with legislation like this. What was passed in 1986 is no longer as relevant today or may not have the nuance that is required to operate efficiently and effectively within today’s environment. So it is that this goes to those 14 acts and across 10 different portfolios to address these issues.
The government claims that these regulatory reforms will provide $2.6 million in annual savings to businesses in Victoria. There is not much detail on how in fact that will occur, but even if we take it on face value as my previous colleagues have spoken, if you apply that just to small businesses – of which there are 710,000 in Victoria – that would equate to a saving of $3.66 per year. If you are a bit tight and like a coffee from the Shell servo, you can maybe get two coffees for that. But if you are a usual at your local cafe and go in to get a latte or a flat white, you are not even going to get a coffee for that.
I do not know that there will be dancing and singing in the streets from our small business community that these savings are being achieved, let alone from the wider business community – the larger businesses that have copped a whack in tax from this government over the last few years in particular. Indeed I want to go to that and highlight the concerns. We have heard some of the government members speaking in glowing terms about how this continues their regulatory reduction journey. But in fact, as the member for Gippsland East pointed out, the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry undertook a report two years ago titled the Cost and Ease of Doing Business in Victoria. It highlighted that effectively with a technical investigation, with a ranking of the ease of doing business across the state and with a survey of more than 700 of its members capturing the experience of doing business, and it came up to the conclusion that Victoria was the worst state for doing business.
One of those issues was that Victoria ranked seventh out of the eight states and territories on the average number of permits needed to start a business. What was concerning too were some of the statistics from the survey of 700-odd business members of the Victorian chamber. Less than half of businesses feel they get fair value for money from the taxes they pay. Only 7 per cent of businesses think the government is doing a good job of reducing the cost of doing business in Victoria. Forty-four per cent of businesses think government service waiting times are getting worse. We will have some debate tomorrow on the Service Victoria Amendment Bill 2023, which may allow some members to highlight the issues with direct government service in this state. Eighty-five per cent of these businesses said regulatory culture was a barrier to doing business. Some of those statistics are pretty alarming, or they should be alarming for any government that values the job creators of our state and gets on and makes sure that it is supporting business and removing regulation and red tape to ensure that they can create the jobs that Victorians depend upon.
I mentioned that there are some minor changes to gambling regulations through the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the Casino Control Act. Part 3 amends the Casino Control Act 1991 to remove a requirement for casino special employee licence applicants to provide evidence of certain former employment that is not relevant to the licensing criteria. I am sure that is neither here nor there for the vast majority of us, but for those people applying for those jobs – and indeed the people reviewing their applications and their suitability for casino special employee licences – hopefully that will remove somewhat of a burden. But it reminds me of the government’s attitude when it comes to the casino. We saw the government be dragged kicking and screaming into the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence here in Melbourne. While we have been seen a number of pieces of legislation come forward, I think three, to implement the findings of that royal commission, some of those issues have now been extended to others in the private sector.
I know the minister at the table, the Minister for Police, and possibly a few others in the room – no, pretty much only ministers I think – attended the Australian Hotels Association drinks last night, where I am sure ministers were regaled with the concerns of the hotels industry about the gaming reforms that have been proposed by this government. In particular mandatory carded play and mandatory precommitment for gaming the government has announced and is apparently now consulting with the industry on. But there is great frustration that after the appalling and, as was described by the commissioner, disgraceful behaviour of the casino and the amendments that came about as a result of that those amendments are now being extended to the hotels and clubs sector when it comes to gaming venues. I do not think that is fair. I think it is certainly the wrong decision by this government.
As I said, this legislation contains a multitude of minor changes. They are boring but they are important, and I wish the bill a safe passage through both chambers