There are three cognate bills before us: the Statute Laws Provisions Bill, the Omnibus Repeal Day (Autumn 2014) Bill and the Amending Acts 1901 to 1969 Bill. It is a pleasure to follow the previous speaker, the member for Greenway. In the opening parts of her comments, the member alluded to members of the House on this side who had spoken on previous debates on statute bills and appropriation bills, when they were putting them up. Luckily, I have with me my copy of the Statute Stocktake (Appropriations) Bill 2013—
An opposition member interjecting—
Mr BUCHHOLZ: Your humbling dell tones do soothe me. I think it is farcical to have those on the other side make those soft allegations that we were missing in action, or unable to contribute to the debate. I remind the House that this debate is on a non-controversial bill. You, for all intent, will be supporting this part of the bill.
I also want to help the House understand that this is the first step of many in our government's plan to reduce over $700 million worth of legislation. This is step one. This is roughly around $17 million worth of savings in this legislation. You are not going to find the whole $700 million in here—that would be like getting the draw at the beginning of the football season and wanting to find out who has won the grand final. You need to understand the procedures of this House. This is step one. We advocate for small business, because most of us on this side of the House belong to small business—we have either come from small business or we own small businesses—and we understand what a BAS looks like. The other side of the House come from unions, they belong with the unions and they are intrinsically linked at the hip to the union movement.
Put your money where your mouth is with reference to this bill. It is generally a housekeeping bill, as most statute revision bills are. I acknowledge the commentary from the other side of the House, but step-one revision bills are predominantly housekeeping bills. There will be bills that come before this House which we will also be looking for the opposition's support on. If the opposition truly believes in getting rid of red tape and assisting small business, as the member for Greenway alluded to, then when we introduce bills such as the Corporations Amendment (Streamlining of the Future of Financial Advice) Bill into the House, you should give your support. If you truly wanted to help small business we would expect your support on that. We will also expect support on the agricultural and veterinary chemicals bills, when they come. We will ask for your support on the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Repeal Bill. All these bills will come to the House in the near future and that is where the money will be saved. We will also ask for support on the Paid Parental Leave Amendment Bill 2014 and the Personal Property Securities Amendment (Deregulatory Measures) Bill when they come to the House. At that point, feel free to stand at the dispatch box and squawk—but not today, as this is a non-controversial bill.
Who is best served to implement over $700 million worth of savings? Look at the record of those on the other side of the House and then look at ours. Looking at the history of Labor saying one thing before an election and doing another after, the words 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead' will haunt them for many decades to come—it will be the Achilles heel of credibility for the opposition.
There are more bills to come before the House and I encourage those in the House to support them all, but I now remind them that this one is a non-controversial bill. I encourage those on the other side of the House to support the measures that will have many millions of dollars of savings linked to them so the coalition government can reduce the shackles and burdens that currently impinge on our small businesses and Australia can return to some level of prosperity.