“The Senate scrutiny of bills committee is starting to raise the attention of the parliament to the fact that lots of laws are coming through where all the detail is sorted in the regulation – it’s convenient for government because they get to decide what the laws are, whereas actually the parliament should decide what the laws are,” Senator Patrick said.

“On the day the bill was being debated, I moved a second reading amendment that said the bill will be referred back to committee until such time as the regulations have been tabled, after which time the committee shall report a month later. When a bill goes back to committee under orders of the Senate, the government can’t deal with the bill as part of ordinary business.”

Senator Patrick said the amendment had secured the support of Labor, the Greens and One Nation. As a result, the bill has moved to 11th place on the most recent Senate notice paper and the government has released a position paper for consultation outlining its regulatory approach to the bill, with industry submissions having closed earlier in August.

The news follows similar concerns from industry that the government has yet to clarify the scope of matters that could be referred to the disciplinary panel within ASIC, and appear on an adviser’s record in the financial adviser register.

In its report on the bill, the Senate economics legislation committee noted that the lack of accompanying regulations had “made assessing the bill more difficult both for interested stakeholders and the committee itself”.

“Due to the lack of regulations, even the regulators are currently unable to assess the full impact the legislation will have,” the report noted.