Fiona O'Malley (Independent)

I thank the Minister of State for his response, but I do not accept what he has said. We are seeking to offer protection for people. A limited amount of protection is being offered. Rather than not having materials included, as Senator Quinn mentioned, they are expressly excluded.

That is why I am seeking the removal of the express exclusion. It is a very simple amendment and just requires the removal of the reference to materials. As anybody in the construction industry knows, once one has poured concrete one cannot reverse the process. While I understand the Minister of State's point that labour cannot be recalled once delivered, I contend the same applies to materials. The legislation is deeply flawed in this regard. This can be addressed simply by removing the exclusion of materials, as in the proposed subsection (3)(b). I do not accept that removing the exclusion is impossible.

We all agree on the intention of the Bill. Nobody wants to see anybody who has delivered a service not getting paid. Suppliers of materials are equally entitled to the protection afforded to service providers. By removing the reference to materials from the list, we can offer materials suppliers comfort in this regard. We should do so.

I accept what the Minister of State said about a regulatory impact study but the purpose of this Bill is to offer protection. Therefore, I do not believe the regulatory impact assessment is justifiable in respect of materials alone.