DARN! Got a response from the Econimics Legislation Committee

[SaguaroRose]

Received this email in response to my submission:


ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE


Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

We write to thank you for your recent correspondence to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010 which proposes the introduction of a 'public benefit test' for religious and charitable organisations seeking tax exempt status.

This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia. Submissions that are accepted by the Committee attract Parliamentary Privilege. However privilege does not extend to jurisdictions outside of Australia. Given this, your correspondence will not be included in the Committee's inquiry as a formal submission but it will be made available to the Committee members.



Kind regards,



John Hawkins

Secretary

Ah well, I'm glad I submitted it anyway. At least it's being made available to committe members, and I gave them my real name and address if they want anything more. Ya never know.........

 

[Zinjifar]

That's actually fine, and, it's the best you can get. This is actually for your protection. The 'accepted' articles will be read into the record and will be protected from libel charges by parliamentary privilege. No such protection can be guaranteed for non-australians, so, your submission will be retained for use by the committee, but, will not be made public.

That's all this means; not that your submission was rejected.

Zinj

 

[SaguaroRose]

That's actually fine, and, it's the best you can get. This is actually for your protection. The 'accepted' articles will be read into the record and will be protected from libel charges by parliamentary privilege. No such protection can be guaranteed for non-australians, so, your submission will be retained for use by the committee, but, will not be made public.

That's all this means; not that your submission was rejected.

Zinj

Cool, THANKS Zinj!!! Good to know!

 

[FinallyFree]

Received this email in response to my submission:


ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE


Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

We write to thank you for your recent correspondence to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010 which proposes the introduction of a 'public benefit test' for religious and charitable organisations seeking tax exempt status.

This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia. Submissions that are accepted by the Committee attract Parliamentary Privilege. However privilege does not extend to jurisdictions outside of Australia. Given this, your correspondence will not be included in the Committee's inquiry as a formal submission but it will be made available to the Committee members.



Kind regards,



John Hawkins

Secretary

Ah well, I'm glad I submitted it anyway. At least it's being made available to committe members, and I gave them my real name and address if they want anything more. Ya never know.........

Bahhh.... there go my plans for tomorrow.

 

[Carmel]

That's actually fine, and, it's the best you can get. This is actually for your protection. The 'accepted' articles will be read into the record and will be protected from libel charges by parliamentary privilege. No such protection can be guaranteed for non-australians, so, your submission will be retained for use by the committee, but, will not be made public.

That's all this means; not that your submission was rejected.

Zinj

True Zinj, that's as good as an acceptance as those outside of Oz will get, and in effect *is* an acceptance!

So far I've only seen one response from the secretary declining a submission (as off topic), but it gave the person the option to alter their submission with regard to the provisions of the amendment. If submissions from outside of Oz weren't being considered or used, then that option/suggestion wouldn't have been made. (NOTE: This was to someone in the USA)

 

[freethinker]

Will it be available to the CO$ ?

That's actually fine, and, it's the best you can get. This is actually for your protection. The 'accepted' articles will be read into the record and will be protected from libel charges by parliamentary privilege. No such protection can be guaranteed for non-australians, so, your submission will be retained for use by the committee, but, will not be made public.

That's all this means; not that your submission was rejected.

Zinj

 

[RogerB]

Will it be available to the CO$ ?

The way I read it . . . NO.

In fact the only parties that know such submissions were submitted are the submitter and the Senators of the committee. These "not part of the formally accepted submissions" traffic will be viewed "in camera" . . . that is a standard British legal scenario where evidence is presented and NOT made public.

Part of my evidence in the original Melbourne Inquiry was made "in camera."

I am an Ozzie citizen, resident overseas, and my submission to this Senate Committee received the same response as cited above . . . . it is not because we are foreigners . . . but because parliamentary privilege does not extend, presumably, beyond the shores of Oz.

Though it would be an interesting legal test

Rog

 

[freethinker]

So if I send evidence it will not be presented to the CO$ to eplain it?

The way I read it . . . NO.

In fact the only parties that know such submissions were submitted are the submitter and the Senators of the committee. These "not part of the formally accepted submissions" traffic will be viewed "in camera" . . . that is a standard British legal scenario where evidence is presented and NOT made public.

Part of my evidence in the original Melbourne Inquiry was made "in camera."

I am an Ozzie citizen, resident overseas, and my submission to this Senate Committee received the same response as cited above . . . . it is not because we are foreigners . . . but because parliamentary privilege does not extend, presumably, beyond the shores of Oz.

Though it would be an interesting legal test

Rog

 

[Carmel]

Will it be available to the CO$ ?

The submission itself? No, definitely not.

Could the CofS be questioned about some of the info in it? Possibly, yes.

If you have concerns about info*alone* pointing directly to you, then state that you want the info kept confidential. If you do so though, realise that the info will be far less valuable as it can't be acted on or taken much further. Still, it would have value as far as corroborating info in other submissions.

 

[Carmel]

So if I send evidence it will not be presented to the CO$ to eplain it?

Just saw this.....have I answered your question in my previous post?

 

[freethinker]

OK

The submission itself? No, definitely not.

Could the CofS be questioned about some of the info in it? Possibly, yes.

If you have concerns about info*alone* pointing directly to you, then state that you want the info kept confidential. If you do so though, realise that the info will be far less valuable as it can't be acted on or taken much further. Still, it would have value as far as corroborating info in other submissions.

 

[Once bitten]

Received this email in response to my submission:


ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE


Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

We write to thank you for your recent correspondence to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010 which proposes the introduction of a 'public benefit test' for religious and charitable organisations seeking tax exempt status.

This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia. Submissions that are accepted by the Committee attract Parliamentary Privilege. However privilege does not extend to jurisdictions outside of Australia. Given this, your correspondence will not be included in the Committee's inquiry as a formal submission but it will be made available to the Committee members.



Kind regards,



John Hawkins

Secretary

Ah well, I'm glad I submitted it anyway. At least it's being made available to committe members, and I gave them my real name and address if they want anything more. Ya never know.........

I have submitted a submission from outside of Australia and mine has been accepted and I have told that I am protected under parliamentary privilege, so I don't quite get that the OP's hasn't been included. Mine's up there as one of the confidential ones and I have been given a number. Here's what I received:



Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your submission to the above inquiry and to advise that it has been accepted by the Committee as a confidential submission. We will not be providing your submission to anyone on request and it will be listed as ‘confidential’ on the Committee's webpage.

Your submission is protected by parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege refers to the special rights and immunities attached to the Parliament or its members and others necessary for the discharge of the parliamentary functions without obstruction and fear of prosecution. This means that you cannot be prosecuted or disadvantaged because of anything you have provided in evidence, or because you gave such evidence. If you believe that anyone has disadvantaged you in any way as a result of the submission you have made, please advise the Secretariat.

Should you require any further information concerning the Committee's inquiry, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee Secretariat on 02 6277 3540.


Yours sincerely

Bahhh.... there go my plans for tomorrow.

Hey, it's still worth doing one

 

[Kookaburra]

Genny, perhaps you are protected by parliamentary privilege because you were on staff in Australia, so all your info is directly dealing with CoS here. Only other thing I can think of is that there is some reciprocal deal with NZ.

 

[Lovinglife625]

That's actually fine, and, it's the best you can get. This is actually for your protection. The 'accepted' articles will be read into the record and will be protected from libel charges by parliamentary privilege. No such protection can be guaranteed for non-australians, so, your submission will be retained for use by the committee, but, will not be made public.

That's all this means; not that your submission was rejected.

Zinj

Thanks Zinj. I do believe you are right.

I got the exact same reply as did the OP.

Larry

 

[RogerB]

Well, One bitten, that is interesting.

Did you ask for your submission to remain confidential? Did you ask for your name to be withheld/not published? These things might have influenced how your submission was accepted.

I did not ask for any confidentiality, but my submission did contain information "defamatory" to other US organizations along with CofS history that I used as examples of deceit and fraud by "charities" as the reason for my recommendation for the Tax Amendment.

So it seems the folk dealing with the submissions really are using some good sense.

R

I have submitted a submission from outside of Australia and mine has been accepted and I have told that I am protected under parliamentary privilege, so I don't quite get that the OP's hasn't been included. Mine's up there as one of the confidential ones and I have been given a number. Here's what I received:



Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your submission to the above inquiry and to advise that it has been accepted by the Committee as a confidential submission. We will not be providing your submission to anyone on request and it will be listed as ‘confidential’ on the Committee's webpage as Submission Number 17.

Your submission is protected by parliamentary privilege. Parliamentary privilege refers to the special rights and immunities attached to the Parliament or its members and others necessary for the discharge of the parliamentary functions without obstruction and fear of prosecution. This means that you cannot be prosecuted or disadvantaged because of anything you have provided in evidence, or because you gave such evidence. If you believe that anyone has disadvantaged you in any way as a result of the submission you have made, please advise the Secretariat.

Should you require any further information concerning the Committee's inquiry, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee Secretariat on 02 6277 3540.


Yours sincerely



Hey, it's still worth doing one

 

[Once bitten]

Well, One bitten, that is interesting.

Did you ask for your submission to remain confidential? Did you ask for your name to be withheld/not published? These things might have influenced how your submission was accepted.

I did not ask for any confidentiality, but my submission did contain information "defamatory" to other US organizations along with CofS history that I used as examples of deceit and fraud by "charities" as the reason for my recommendation for the Tax Amendment.

So it seems the folk dealing with the submissions really are using some good sense.

R

I said in my covering e-mail that as my submission being sent from outside Australia, I was under the impression that I was not entitled to parliamentary privilege and thus was leaving my name off my submission.

I actually didn't mind if it had been published, because I thought I had put forward quite a good argument. I might contact them again and see what the story is.

 

[RogerB]

I said in my covering e-mail that as my submission being sent from outside Australia, I was under the impression that I was not entitled to parliamentary privilege and thus was leaving my name off my submission.

I actually didn't mind if it had been published, because I thought I had put forward quite a good argument. I might contact them again and see what the story is.

Yep, the boyz and gurls downnunda really are using their noggins.

One thing you've got to luv about them Ozzies, they can think and know how to handle things sensibly!



Rog