The SPEAKER ( Hon. Andrew Wallace ) took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION
Valedictory
Mr DRUM (Nicholls—Chief Nationals Whip) (09:31): on indulgence—Firstly, I'd like to thank the House for its indulgence to allow me to make a valedictory speech. To the Deputy Prime Minister and to the ministers and shadow ministers, thank you for this opportunity. It only seems like yesterday that the 2016 election was held and we were summoned to Canberra for an induction for a couple of days. It was very interesting and it was an opportunity to meet all the new members from all over Australia from all the respective parties. While it has been six years, it certainly feels like it was only a few days ago.
I see today as an opportunity to thank the many people that help you as a member of parliament when you come to this place, and I want to thank the people that have enabled me to be the member for Murray and then the member for Nicholls. Firstly, there are my staff. My first office manager was Alison Foscholo. Then I had Claire Ewart-Kennedy and Lyndal Humphris. They have all been wonderful at managing the office and they've enabled me to concentrate on the job at hand of being the MP. My media adviser in the office is the wonderful and talented Luke Griffiths. I also have two incredible staffers who have been with me for the full six years: Mark Skilbeck, as my lead adviser, and Tessa Harris, who has managed the diary and been at the front of the office since day one. A big thank you to all of those staff. I also want to say a huge thank you to Di Andrews who is in the position of whip's clerk. It's a huge job, and Di has been wonderful in that role. I also need to thank Tory Mencshelyi, who has been a huge help, not just to myself but to the entire National Party team. As MPs we are all only as good as our staff, and I think all of us should, every now and again, take time to reflect on how good our staff are and how much work they actually do for us each and every day.
When I talk about the Nationals team, I really want to thank all of my team here today for all of your support and friendship. Sometimes this team has the capacity to turn an otherwise quiet and uneventful day into something a little bit more frenetic, complicated, and, may I say, a little bit amusing as a workplace. So my team can never be classified as being boring.
I love the Nationals and I genuinely believe in the movement that the Nationals stand for. For over 100 years, we've been putting regional issues at the front of the political debate—in politics, where the numbers rule in a ruthless fashion. We live in a country that has 43 per cent of its people living in two cities. I have, simply, a natural belief that if we go forward without a strong National Party we will also lose out on the contested issues to the parties that are centred around the capital cities. I know the Nats are far from perfect, but we know our people, we work hard for our people and we work hard to make sure that each of us gets better and better.
To that aim, I would like to thank Barnaby Joyce and Michael McCormack for their leadership, and I acknowledge the entire team for your leadership and your support. However, there are three individuals I would like to make a special mention of, and they are Darren Chester, Kevin Hogan and Pat Conaghan. These guys have that extra level of friendship, again. All the members in this House, from all parties, will understand exactly how important true friends are—people you can share anything with, people who are always there to support you and people who are always there to give you some hard truths every now and again. Therefore, I want to thank those people.
I would also like to thank the many members of the Liberal and Labor parties who have put party politics aside and have enabled friendship between us to grow. That's another thing people outside this House don't understand—that there are strong friendships that grow within the various parties and even across two opposition parties. I would also like to thank that little group that sits just over there to the right and normally gets the banter going whenever there is a division, because that's a very funny little group that sits over there!
I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank the parliamentary staff. We have the drivers who look after us, we have the clerks and we have the House staff; they're always more than happy to help every time we want any bit of assistance. We have this wonderful catering staff here in the House, and I'll just take this opportunity again to thank those people and to acknowledge how lucky we are to be treated so well.
Apart from this being a wonderful opportunity to thank people, it's also an opportunity to reflect on what my team has been able to achieve for the electorate of Murray and now Nicholls. It's very humbling to be able to stand up and announce big infrastructure projects like the Echuca Moama bridge, funding for the upgrade of the Shepparton rail line and funding for a new cancer centre at Goulburn Valley Health. To have millions of dollars spent in Yarrawonga, Echuca, Kyabram, Nagambie, Seymour and Shepparton gives you a sense of justification that the faith your constituents have placed in you has in some way been repaid. And if you want my summary of this job, it is: well, you go to Canberra and you get the money to come back and give us the things that we need in our electorate. That's effectively how I see this role.
But of all the projects that I've been able to deliver, the Murray-Darling school of medicine is possibly the one I am most proud of. In an area that is short of doctors, we are four years into a seven-year program that will see 30 doctors graduate each and every year from the University of Melbourne's Shepparton campus. This will have a lasting health benefit for the people of the Goulburn Valley well into the future.
Thinking about some of the more memorable moments, I can't go past this opportunity: leading into the last election, when the water debate was heating up, we called a public meeting, and I invited the then water minister, David Littleproud, and also Barnaby Joyce down to front a group of angry water advocates. They came from everywhere to meet us. And to say that these farmers were somewhat angry—we knew they would be combative, but it was taken to another level again. Most people thought I was mad to stage that opportunity—and maybe they were right. I put myself and my party leaders in front of an angry group of farmers. They knew we were trying to help them, but they were bitterly disappointed that we weren't able to get the security and the legislated changes to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan that they desperately craved. We escaped with our physical wellbeing barely in check. I will never forget that public meeting at Goulburn Valley coolstores.
Communities up and down the Murray-Darling rivers have paid a huge price to comply with the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. I urge all political parties from all states to show some genuine compassion about the damage inflicted by the plan. I urge these political parties to take an empathetic view forward as we try and find the right balance between water for agriculture and livelihoods versus water for rivers, wetlands and lakes.
It's amazing how many other industries hang off the back of agriculture. In my electorate there would be more than 5,000 people who are employed directly in food processing. Then on top of that there are also the transport industries. Then on top of that there are also the packaging industries. Then there are the steel engineering industries. Then there are also the large parts of the professional sector. All of these industries are relying heavily on the outcomes of agriculture. When ag is struggling all those other associated businesses are also struggling.
The Goulburn Valley really is a food bowl that produces so much for our great country and, therefore, I think we all need to be aware of that. For those members who have been to my parliamentary office, you will see that it looks a little bit like a supermarket. I have a collection of produce from the Goulburn Valley that really does highlight the productivity of that region.
On reflection, I've also really enjoyed my time as a National Party whip. People often ask me: what's the story about the whip? What is that? My response is that it's just like being a team manager. You're working with other members, having them take you into their confidence, helping the leadership get things organised. It's a role that I have really enjoyed—hosting whips drinks also! I have also enjoyed working with the other party whips, with Chris and Jo; with Anne from the Labor Party; with Bert, Nicolle and Rowan from the Libs. It is a fantastic group—Kenny O'Dowd. It's a great group of people that are effectively just trying to make sure that the House operates as smoothly as it can.
I also think it's worth acknowledging the various councils that I work with across the Goulburn Valley: the Mitchell and Strathbogie shires in the south, the Moira and Campaspe shires in the north, the Greater Shepparton City Council. They've all been tremendous to work with. I start nearly every project with joint local and federal government buy-in—always start from a position of support. Very, very rarely would I ever oppose a local government and their projects.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank all the volunteers within a National Party, especially in Nicholls. There are too many to mention, but I would just like to thank Lindsay Dann, Don and Cheryl Kilgour and Peter Ryan. There are so many others and I will always be indebted to you for the support and the friendship that you have offered. I would also like to acknowledge the state team led by Tim Bull, assisted by Steph Ryan and Peter Walsh. They're a great bunch and I wish them well into the future.
I also want to acknowledge one of the great leaders of the Nats in Tim Fischer. He had a mantra that used to say: 'You've got to keep firmly in touch with at least 10 friends from outside of politics and you've got to work hard on those friendships.' Well, I am relatively lucky because I've got that number covered with my punters club group. These guys know a lot about horses, cricket, golf, footy and life in general. Unsurprisingly, they have some very strong opinions, but they too are great friends. I love catching up with those guys and I hope to catch up with them more into the future.
I would also like to acknowledge my siblings. I was very, very lucky to be born into the family that I was born into. We were very, very poor, but as you get older in life you realise how lucky you were. A big thank you to my five brothers and my one sister, and to all my nieces and nephews.
I would also like to thank my five children. They are just wonderful human beings. Wanting to spend more time with them has played a major role in this decision to step down and not contest at the next election. To Luke, Alyce, Gabby, Corey, Josh, Sally, Willow, Olive and Sonny, I am really looking forward to spending more time with you all and not feeling guilty about it, which happens to be the problem I have at the moment. Every time I'm with family I probably should be at some community event, and I get a case of the guilts.
As I said, I'm very proud of my kids. I am very proud of their work ethic. I am very proud of the adults that they've become. They're very resilient individuals, but they have great care for their friends. I also acknowledge that I have been very busy for most of my life, whether it was building sheds, coaching footy, state politics or this job here, and it's the kids who have often missed out. I've missed many barbecues and many birthdays. I have missed doing what normal families would take for granted. I'm sure most of you in this House know exactly what I'm talking about. The amount of sacrifice we in this House have so that we can do our job just needs to be pointed out, because this job certainly does become all-consuming.
I say thank you to my wonderful partner, Ros, and her family and extended family. Ros is in the gallery today with her great friends Bruce and Kerry Winzar, her son Sam and his girlfriend, Emma, which is fantastic. Putting your hand up for this job means making significant sacrifices—sacrificing your time and sacrificing your family. It's your partner, wife or husband who bears the brunt of that sacrifice. For me it's now time to put family first. Ros, thank you for enabling me to do this job. I thank you again for helping me better understand a few different points of view on a few different issues every now and again. You have simply been a wonderful partner over the last 15 years. I really am looking forward to having more time to do the things that we enjoy more so than the things we have to do. You're very understanding and compassionate. Ros has her own business helping people with disabilities. It's a big business that keeps her very busy. She is just the most wonderful partner.
It is great to look back and see what has been achieved. It has been an amazing ride. I've just loved the ride. I'm also keen to look ahead to the new chapter, even though I have no idea what the new chapter will look like. I will finish how I started. I thank you all for your indulgence to make a valedictory speech to thank those who have done so much to help me perform this role. Cheers.
Mr JOYCE (New England—Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development and Leader of the Nationals) (09:47): on indulgence—Drummy, as he is so well known, has been a great servant to his football club, the beloved Geelong; to his party, the Nationals; to the state of Victoria; and to the nation of Australia. He has been a great honour to his family. We wish him all the very best.
Mr CHESTER (Gippsland) (09:48): on indulgence—It is the mark of the man that the member for Nicholls, Damian Drum, would not be able to name an enemy in this place. A place where there are often false enemies and even falser friends, Drummy has only friends and mates across the divide and in our party room. As the National Party Whip he was actually the glue of the party room. He held people together, even at times when the bonds were enormously strained. His mix of humility, grace and dignity is something we'll miss in our party room, but most of all we will miss his irreverence, his incredible sense of humour and his capacity to turn the worst situation into something quite funny—often inappropriately and often with quite gallows-like humour.
Damian has served with great distinction at both the state and federal levels. He was a reliable friend in this place—I feel like I'm almost eulogising my mate. He has had one bit of advice to us all—never take yourself too seriously. You can rely on Drummy because, even when Barnaby sacked me the second time, Drummy told Barnaby what a stupid idea it was while at the same time he told me, 'Suck it up, Princess.' Damian, I will miss your incredibly frank and fearless advice. As someone who experienced setbacks of your own as a footy coach you taught us all that it doesn't define you and you bounce back stronger than ever. You made an incredible contribution. I wish you, Ros and your families great health and safety travels.
The SPEAKER (09:49): Before I call the member for Bennelong, I would like to join with my parliamentary colleagues and congratulate the member for Nicholls. I came in with the member for Nicholls in 2016. I think the member for Nicholls is a dying breed in Australia now: a mix of larrikinism, irreverence and just a downright good, old-fashioned bloke. But behind every good, old-fashioned bloke there's a fantastic woman. Ros, thank you for what you've done not just for Damian but also for the partners of the male members in this place.
Mr ALEXANDER (Bennelong) (09:50): And he is not a bad tennis player either! He tells me his golf is something special!
I rise here today to speak as a result of a strange series of events and a great number of people who have initiated, cajoled, encouraged, mentored and worked with me to win back Bennelong, hold it through five campaigns and engage in work to address challenges where answers must be found. I've often been asked what the difference is between my first career as a tennis player and this. My quick response is that the game of tennis starts at love all. Ponder that. In my time on the tour, tennis went open, allowing the professionals entry into the grand slams, and the tour events became prize money tournaments rewarding performance regardless of reputation or standing. The equitable breakdown was initiated unselfishly by Ken Rosewall, who was then the king of the pros. The best events welcomed the best players, and tennis became a performance based profession with an equitable distribution of funds—a meritocracy in its purest form. Tennis since that time has grown and prospered beyond the wildest expectations. If our arena in this chamber had the same basis for meritocracy and fairness and a true contest of vision and ideas, imagine what could be achieved.
I was attracted to enter the political world after conversations with Brendan Nelson and John Howard, who were both keen to attract people with real life experience who could contribute to the development of policy. My summation of their advice was that a party should only win office on the basis of the policies, plans and vision they present and that governments should only hold on to office on delivering on those undertakings. The year 2010 was good for the coalition, and I was one of many to win a seat in parliament. I was delighted to find I had some 80-plus new friends with a common thread uniting us. We formed friendships quickly, and these bonds have endured. I became besties with the Wyatts—Ken Wyatt and Wyatt Roy—even though my shoes were older than Wyatt Roy, and they still are! However, Ken tested our friendship with his maiden speech. It was magnificent, moving, insightful and hopeful—and totally inconsiderate of those who had to follow! In truth, the real reason why I am retiring now is so that I don't have to follow him again.
When elected in 2010, I likened it to being selected to represent your country in sport. Initially, there is a euphoric moment of elation, but then very quickly it dawns on you that the responsibility of representation is now yours. The electorate of Bennelong is named after a man who symbolises first contact between the English settlers and the First Nations people—the commencement of multiculturalism in this country—so it is appropriate that it is now one of the most multicultural communities in Australia. Our schools are diverse, with distinctly unique characteristics, and our communities are multicultural and vibrant. Our strength and character are built on this diversity. Macquarie Park, Macquarie University and the CSIRO are at the cutting edge of innovation, and it's amazing how many life-changing and life-saving developments have come from this quarter. Our suburbs hold families both old and young, established and, now, many moving into new apartments in Epping, North Ryde and Meadowbank.
Since 2010, I've survived five elections, against a high-profile journalist, an international businessman, a former premier, Australia's best neurosurgeon and—perhaps best of all—a local mum. We kept winning, I believe, because we listened and understood local problems and set out to address them. In visiting schools I was made aware of concerns that a lack of participation in traditional Australian sports was leaving some students out of games but also, more importantly, the friendships that would be made by participating in sport. Thanks to the generosity of Hyundai we put table tennis tables in all 40 schools, providing a sport that every student could play. With the help of Hugh Lee of the AAAB and Andrew Hill, the Bennelong Cup was up and running—and still is. Thousands of children have made friends through this initiative, and I'm grateful to every school that has taken part. A collateral benefit is that we've also produced quite a number of ranked players.
In 2010, small businesses were really struggling with the effects of the global financial crisis and unfair competition from the major players with their $2 milk. We set out to encourage people to support their local businesses through the Bennelong Village Businesses campaign. In this, we were aided with marketing assistance provided by Boehringer Ingelheim and their CEO, Wes Cook; and the support of our local paper, the Weekly Times, and its legendary editor John Booth. We're about to celebrate John's 90th birthday. Unfortunately, he finds himself in hospital after a late-night fall after working—he works seven days a week. Get well soon, John, and go the Tigers! They're his favourite football team.
We've brought our local schools closer to our innovative businesses in Macquarie Park by setting up the Bennelong STEM Challenge with the generous support of Medtronic. I was inspired to run this as a kind of tournament for the brain, and I've been genuinely surprised and impressed by the collegiate nature of the students participating and the way they discuss and engage with each other to expand and improve their projects.
I've walked nearly every street of the electorate through doorknocking and three 100-kilometre walks across Bennelong to raise money for life-saving charities Motor Neurone Disease NSW, the Leukemia Foundation and Rare Voices. We've had some big wins, on 18C, saving Tennis World and making Eastwood safer for residents, and some important invisible ones like securing funding for the life-changing work of RASAID and helping Youthsafe keep our youth, well, safe. These little victories, the ones that don't make headlines but make a real, tangible difference to a small group of people, are as precious as anything.
Armed with the advice that government should only be won by better policies, the first step was to really understand the issues in Bennelong. So our three rules of engagement were to listen, listen and then listen again. People were concerned about house prices as Bennelong recorded the strongest growth of any electorate in the mid-decade housing boom, locking first homebuyers out of the suburbs they grew up in and excluding essential workers like teachers, nurses and police from living in the communities that they served. They were also concerned about overdevelopment and traffic congestion, as Bennelong is bisected by five of the 10 most congested roads in the state. Like in much of Sydney, high rises are coming to dominate our suburbs, putting pressure on roads, schools and living standards.
This struck a chord with my experience. In my maiden speech I talked about my time living in Atlanta, Georgia and the extraordinary growth of the US's Sun Belt cities from Florida to California. This growth had been implemented by visionary local authorities, who set out to sell Atlanta to the world on the basis of building infrastructure which provided quick connectivity to all of the east coast. 'Where is our Atlanta?' I asked in my maiden speech. I wanted this chamber to be an arena for a contest of ideas and vision like I had seen in America. I wanted our members and leaders to be armed with the courage to achieve bold visions not mired in petty, non-productive denigration of each other, as had been the trend. The extreme growth of the American Sun Belt was in stark contrast to the imbalance of settlement that was stifling our growth. Strategic decentralisation was what America did so well and what would be an answer to our local housing and congestion challenges. As a result, I have devoted much of my time to finding ways to plan settlement and, importantly, fund the infrastructure that will realise the creation of new cities. In the absence of a plan, Sydney and Melbourne have grown exponentially and created a great imbalance of settlement.
Our major cities are amongst the most expensive in the world, are congested, and the cost of refitting infrastructure is prohibitive. We must create a plan of settlement and design infrastructure which will facilitate a strategic decentralisation that creates smart, environmentally friendly cities, leveraging off our economic powerhouse CBDs within commutable times, which would be possible when connected by fast mass transport. Initially, growth would be driven by connectivity but eventually these cities would reach a critical mass to be sustainable in their own right, forming mega regions that will drive our economic growth while providing affordable housing and better quality of life for future generations. When funded by a reasonably equitable share of the uplifted value of the land, this infrastructure can be fairly, sustainably and fully funded. Every day we do not act on this raises the cost involved and sets Australia back further.
I am pleased to see that we have made some small steps on these fronts. I have chaired inquiries that have called for the creation of a minister for housing, an agency to examine better ways to fund infrastructure and an agency that looks into faster and high-speed rail, which became the Infrastructure and Project Financing Agency and the National Faster Rail Agency respectively. I now look forward to these groups actually doing something. The work has led to numerous in-depth, fruitful discussions with outside groups that support these policies, not just experts and academics but business leaders, engineers, bankers and ambassadors. The community will is there. We just need political leadership and a vision.
Unfortunately, vision that plans for decades into the future is at odds with a political system that resets every three years and is obsessed with the narrative of the day. In this House, where the main game is all too often to denigrate and name call, the contest of ideas is the first casualty. If I could change one thing about our system, it would be the way it segregates ministers from the parliament; opportunities are lost through this.
Our democracy is not only representative because it incorporates every citizen, but, because of our diversity, the members of this parliament are more representative of Australia than ever before. This legislature is a valuable resource for government because we all represent our communities and our own personal histories but too often parliament and its work are dismissed by government, and committees are seen as ways to occupy backbenchers. I am immensely proud of the work that my colleagues and I have done on backbench committees. Our backbench committees utilise the knowledge and expertise of their members and engage with world-leading experts from across the country. We find the facts that then build the solid foundation of reasoned recommendations to form evidence based policies for our leaders to absorb and use yet, once tabled, the reports sit in at ministerial drawers to gather dust and eventually receive a token response that does not engage with the scholarship within.
It is often said that these committees are where we do our best work in this place, and that has certainly been my experience. This good work is only possible through the parliamentary staff who manage us, educate us and draft our reports. I have been incredibly lucky to have the great support of a number of committee staff, particularly Killian Perrem, Lynley Ducker, Bill Pender, Samantha Mannette and Lachlan Wilson. Thank you all for your hard work and your scholarship. Great friendships have been made with co-chairs of these committee—Jim Chalmers, Sharon Bird, Luke Gosling and all the members. I am proud of the camaraderie we have maintained and the bipartisan nature we have always upheld. I am also pleased to have never had a dissenting report on any inquiry report that I have tabled. It is frustrating that, although we have many friends across this aisle, all the public sees is question time, showing us to be aggressive and divided. The low standard of public discourse is high on the list of reasons why Australians are losing trust in politics. A true contest of ideas is not one that relies on the destruction of the opposing view to then win by default. In thousands of conversations in Bennelong, the overwhelming interest of people is on plans and ideas, not political denigration.
The Menzies-Calwell Club was formed in 2013, following a magnificent valedictory speech by widely respected Martin Ferguson and the generous response of the then Prime Minister Tony Abbott. I have vivid memories of my dad telling me that Bob Menzies and Arthur Calwell had lunch each Friday after sitting weeks to find agreement on the best courses of action. In their image our club meets each Tuesday for lunch and leaves politics at the door. Arthur Calwell never made it to Prime Minister, but through these lunches he had an inordinate amount of sway from the opposition benches. It's a surprise that, at a time when we look back on this gilded age, for many it was also a high mark for bipartisanship.
Bipartisanship starts with all of us. Each Thursday morning we play tennis on the parliamentary courts—it's open to everyone: Peter Khalil, Anthony Albanese, Kevin Hogan—what a great partner! They're regulars. Of course now, with Anthony the Leader of the Opposition, he can't always make it. Kevin and I are not overly competitive, but we do take every no-show as a default. Bipartisanship has its limits.
At this point, I'd hoped to turn to a packed gallery and thank my friends who were watching up there—people like the candidate chosen to be my successor, except one hasn't been chosen yet. So, COVID has ruined yet another thing, and the galleries are much barer than I'd hoped. However, I suppose this isn't a bad thing as all of the people I have to thank and friends made over the past 11 years wouldn't fit into these galleries and so, sadly, won't all fit into this speech, but I'll try.
Thanks to all my supporters. Back in 2010, we gathered 600 people to help us out in the election, and I'm amazed that so many of those people are still campaigning for us today. To every person who passed out a how-to-vote card, stood before the sun came up at a freezing train station, hammered in a lawn sign or helped in any one of an infinite number of ways: thank you; I am only here because of your generosity.
Thanks, also, to my close friends, the late Bill Gough, Craig Brown and Josh Bihary who formed my initial support team; Caroline Currie who insisted I meet with the Brendan Nelson which started this political ball rolling, and Mitch Geddes who led me to doorknock over 9,000 homes in the first campaign.
Josh had called me after an incorrect report that I was running for preselection for Bradfield, divulging that his first love was politics and offering to be my campaign manager for this preselection. I looked forward to finding out what a preselection was as I knew not. Josh became my senior adviser, and we remain great friends. He's sitting up there today with Jonathon, my current senior adviser and friend. I always muse: isn't it funny that my senior advisers look so much younger than I? I'm tall for my age.
I've been fortunate to have incredible mentors who guided me in my good friend Victor Dominello and the then Father of the House, Philip Ruddock. They, and many others, have provided me with guidance, especially through the first few cautious years of learning—thank you all so much.
My good fortune extends to the local conference led over the years by Artin Etmekdjian, the late Peter Graham and currently James Wallace with passionate and helpful executive teams that are too large to mention here. Thank you all for your support and guidance, and good luck leading our team in the foreseeable future.
To the people I work with: everybody in this room knows how much we rely on our officers, and I am no different. Our office has been like a home, a family. In the five years between 2016 and when I announced my retirement, we had only one member of staff leave us—for a very large amount of money—which I think speaks more to the camaraderie of the office than anything else.
Some time ago, I looked up the definition of team. Essentially, a team is a group of individuals who join to achieve a common purpose, bringing together complementary skills to form a force greater than the sum total of its parts. I've been privileged to be part of this team, united in the quest for fairness, opportunity and equity, and genuinely seeking what is best for our community and our country with an uncompromised integrity.
Thank you to everyone who has worked in the office—those who were there at the beginning: Josh, Jen, Peter, Jacquie, Suzanne and Belinda; those who came in between: Sarah, Marie, Edwina, Molly, Jacob, Ursula, Simone and Tim; and those who are here now: Frances; Brendan; Daniel; Kendal and Madison, the twins; Wally and Jonathon. They all work really hard, except for Wally. He's useless, he's a dog—but very good for morale. As with my own family, I love each of you, and this will remain so. Working with you has been a joy, and I am proud of what our team has achieved together.
My partner, Gill, daughter Emily and son, Charlie, were able to come to my maiden speech—Charlie still in his school uniform. However, Georgia was in England doing a gap year. All three of my children and Gill are here today, as well as my sister Annette. Thank you for taking time out of your very busy schedules. And it is interesting to note that, last night, or earlier today, when I was going to bed, you were waking up. Funny how times have changed and tables have turned!
My other sisters, Pam and Susan, are unfortunately unable to be here today. My first racquet was inherited from Pam; Annette threw me the first balls to try to hit; and my first taste of real competition was trying to beat my sister Susan, which took years.
The demands of this job are such that, too often, I've allowed my pursuits to distract from what is really important, and for these lapses I am sorry. My father, a romantic, often said, 'The pursuit of anything but love, laughter and happiness is futile.' Now, without this job, I will be a better partner and dad. To my children: while I am proud of your success, I am more proud of how hard you have worked and persevered to earn your success. The real value of our family, as with all families, is: when we suffer failure, we are comforted by each other, and when there are victories, we're all there to celebrate with you—the more so because you deserve it.
And finally, thank you to the people of Bennelong for your trust and support in having me represent you. I hope I'm followed by a candidate who is able to represent you with all of their focus, as I have tried to.
To close, in keeping with the advice I received from John Howard, I want this place to be an arena where ideas, plans and visions will be contested, with the best winning and all Australians benefiting. Those involved in achieving such outcomes, whether in government or opposition, will be proud of their contribution, and Australians will be proud of their elected representatives. If this place could agree on common goals and we combine to bring all that we have to achieve these goals on behalf of the Australian people, maybe we could earn their trust and respect. So my wish, on the eve of an election being called, is: make this a contest of ideas, plans and vision that will uplift our people and give them hope for the future and opportunities for all. I thank the House for your indulgence.
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (10:13): Can I, unusually, just offer my congratulations and best wishes to the member for Bennelong on behalf of the Opposition and the Australian Labor Party. John Alexander was a great Australian tennis player, a great representative, and he's a man who has a great deal of dignity about him. I thank him also for teaching me how to do a kick second serve. I wish him well in the future. I'm glad that he's retiring, in one perspective, because, when the by-election occurred in Bennelong, I did tell the New South Wales branch secretary at the time: 'We will not beat John Alexander while he is there.' He was also a very good and diligent local member. And I wish him and his family all the best for the future.
Valedictory
Mr O'DOWD (Flynn—Deputy Nationals Whip) (10:15): on indulgence—In the autumn of 2010, I'd never thought of being a politician. Yet, by the spring of 2010, I was one. The preselected candidate for Flynn had withdrawn his nomination. I was in the party room of the local branch and was told to get a candidate—quick time. When the music stopped, I was left holding the ball.
Flynn is a fairly large electorate. It's 133,000 square kilometres, twice the size of Tasmania. From my business experience, I knew about 50 per cent of the electorate, which just happened to change boundaries between 2007 and 2010. The other 50 per cent, in North and South Burnett, I wasn't too familiar with, so I had to get to know that area pretty quickly in the three months leading into the election.
The election came and went in a blur, and suddenly I was the new member for Flynn. Where to now? Fortunately, Senator Barnaby Joyce, Ron Boswell and Connie Fierravanti-Wells came and gave me some very good advice. Barnaby was in the Senate in those days. I thank Graham McVean. He was my early chief of staff and helped me on the way too.
After three days on the road with Senator Fierravanti-Wells, she told me I had her baffled; she didn't know what faction I belonged to. I responded by saying I didn't know what a 'faction' was; I thought they were only in the Labor Party. How wrong was I! I also found out something else about Connie. I took her down an underground sapphire mine at the Gemfields. She was very allergic to bats. She quickly left me, and I found her later on in the shop buying sapphires.
So I went into parliament treating my constituents like I did my customers. I was in business for 30 years prior to becoming a parliamentarian. The 'customer is always right' philosophy is what I've based my, probably, four terms on. In the first term, 2010 to 2014, we were in opposition, and the class of 2010 were already making their presence felt in opposition. John Alexander was a case in point. Harry Jenkins was the Speaker, and, unlike some of my colleagues—like Michael McCormack, George Christensen and Ewen Jones—I was never evicted prematurely from the House. Michael McCormack chalked up seven evictions. I think George Christensen probably would have beat him, but nevertheless. Ewen Jones had the loudest voice in the parliament, and he quite often got kicked out. There were other guys in the House then. The late Paul Neville and Bruce Scott were much more refined, and they were never asked to leave the chamber. Even our Nationals leader, Warren Truss, a true statesman, was sent out, much to our surprise. Harry wasn't in the chair on that day.
Christmas 2010 it had began to rain but forgot to stop. A lot of damage was done on all the river flats throughout Flynn: the Nogoa, the Comet, the Dawson, the Fitzroy, the Kolan, the Burnett and Barambah Creek all flooded. 'One-in-100-year flood,' they said. Emerald, Theodore, Bundaberg, Gayndah, Rockhampton—all were flooded. Roads and property damage was extensive. A similar event happened in 2013, with the same result. Julia Gillard was the Prime Minister and Anna Bligh was the Premier, and they both came to Flynn. We were grateful for the financial assistance they offered in yet another one-in-100-year flood. John Cobb, the former member for Calare and the then shadow minister for agriculture, quipped that he'd spent more time in Flynn during 2010 to 2013 than he had in his own electorate. These flood events were a sharp learning curve for me. It was great to see the three levels of government working together to restore the damage.
Through my four terms I've worked with committees: trade and investment, petitions, defence, treaties and agriculture. This gave me a much better understanding of how these portfolios work and what work has to be done, and that it takes committee members from both sides of the House to achieve what we achieved. My current deputy chair, Justine Elliott, is a pleasure to work with, as is the secretariat.
I did plenty of overseas delegations, and every country I visited had their own issues and their own way of handling their chosen style of government. After two trips to Palestine and Israel, I'm hoping a solution can be found very soon. Peace between these two nations is paramount to the whole region. I leave it to my friends Mark Coulton, Marie Vamvakinou, Anne Aly and others to continue the fight for justice to bring human rights and peace to this troubled land. His Excellency Izzat Salah Abdulhadi, the Head of the General Delegation of Palestine to Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific, is a very sincere person and a true gentleman. You'll always have my support. Senator Patrick Dodson, the late Alex Gallacher, former member for Macarthur Russell Matheson and member for Fowler Chris Hayes have proved to be great team members on these delegations, and we remain good friends.
Along the way there have been many people who helped me, and I'd like to take a moment to mention some of their names: John and Sue Engwicht, Mike Burns, Ross Drayton, Cameron and Joan Millar, Sonia Burton, Graeme and Lyn Johnston, Neil and Margaret Dunbar, Don Williams, Ian and Norma Rolfe, Eddie and Mary Vella, Colin and Catherine Dunne, Peter Craig, Darryl Kelly, Ron Norman, Frank Fraser, Graham and Lyn McVean, Craig Butler, Don Holt, Tony Goodwin, Hec Kilah, Oz Blacker, good mate the late Greg McCann, Kathy Duff, Margi Morris, Barbara Hocking, Gil and Michelle Smith, the late Percy Iszlaub from Wondai, Wally Knight, Mark Postle, Bob McCosker, Bob Pailthorpe, Graham Hartley, Glen Bryce, Don and Carmel Waugh, Ken and Val McInness, Ivan and Gleniss Shepherdson, Jeff and Bronwyn Schultz and John Gibbs.
I turn to the class of 2010—now the cream comes to the top, outstanding!—and the ministers who came out of that class: Josh Frydenberg, Karen Andrews, Ken Wyatt, Dan Tehan and Alan Tudge. They will continue to serve this country well. I've got my federal colleagues on my electorate boundaries in the federal scene. I share about 200 or 300 kilometres of boundaries with David Littleproud and then I have Llew O'Brien from Wide Bay, Keith Pitt from Hinkler and Michelle Landry from Capricornia. I have state colleagues—Lachlan Millar in Gregory, Colin Boyce in Callide and Stephen Bennett from Burnett near Bundaberg. I've eight mayors and, of course, the councillors. I thank them for the work they do. They do a great job, and they will continue to do a great job.
There's about 10 of us on this side of the House departing: Greg Hunt, John Alexander, Kevin Andrews, Nicolle Flint, Andrew Laming, Steve Irons, George Christensen, Christian Porter and Damian Drum. I wish those 10 people all the best in their new lives. There are others from the other side leaving, and I'll just mention a couple. I don't know the whole list, but there is Joel Fitzgibbon—Joel and I have got something in common: we spread a bit of coal dust on our porridge every morning—Warren Snowdon and, of course, Chris Hayes. I wish Chris would get off that motorbike and stop having accidents. I want to thank the Canberra parliamentary staff for the work they do: the clerks, secretaries, Comcar drivers, transport officers, the Serjeant-at-Arms, the mail and delivery teams, the Hansard reporters, the caters and the attendants. You all do a fantastic job looking after us while we're in Canberra.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, former prime ministers Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard and deputy prime ministers Warren Truss and Michael McCormack: you've all done an outstanding job and made outstanding contributions to make Australia a better place. Well done in what you have done! I wouldn't like to do your job for all the coal in Queensland.
So my parliamentary journey has come to an end and I look back over what I've achieved for Flynn. To name a few projects, there is the Rookwood Weir, water projects in the North and South Burnett, the Gracemere to Yeppen four-lane highway, the Philip Street bypass, lights at Dawson Road, funding for the Springsure to Tambo road—David Littleproud probably wants to take some credit for that too. There is the John Peterson Bridge at Mundubbera. There are the men's sheds. What a great bunch of men's sheds we have in Flynn and across Australia! They do a fantastic job. There is the wooden bridge replacements, over 30 mobile phone towers, the upgrade of the Bruce Highway from Gin Gin to Rockhampton, six passing lanes on the Capricorn Highway, flood damage recovery, the swimming pool at Blackwater, the rebuild of the Mount Morgan range after the flood, the betterment projects in the Gayndah-Mundubbera area, the new disaster centre at Gayndah Airport, skills training centres in the Gladstone High School and at the CQUniversity, Southern Oil—and I thank Michael McCormack for introducing me to Tim Rose and those guys from Southern Oil who decided to make Gladstone their northern depot. There is headspace in Gladstone and Emerald, the Emerald Hospital upgrades and health precinct at Emerald, and multiple projects under the regional jobs programs.
My future project, which I hope to be alive to see, is the Gladstone to Toowoomba rail link. It is a very important piece of infrastructure and we're currently doing the business case study on that right now.
I turn to my staff at Gladstone and Emerald. Sue Carige and Lane Buffington have been with me from the start. Lane is here with us today. Of course, we then have Rachel Hardy, Natasha Nixon and Jenny, who have also been in the Gladstone office for a long, long time. I'd like to thank Mitch for stepping in at short notice. He does the media for me at the moment. Thank you all. You all do a wonderful job.
I turn to my family. We were raised on a dairy farm at Bracewell near Mount Larcom. Mum and Dad had to work very hard in those days to support my three sisters and my one brother. The three sisters and one brother were allergic to milking cows, and that left me doing the job on most occasions. I don't mind saying that because it's true. But where would you be without your family and their unwavering support?
On a sad note, while I've been in parliament my mother, my brother, Bob, my sister Maureen and my brother-in-law George have passed away. I've got to thank my children, Ben and Amber, and the grandkids for their support. To my partner, Shirley, thank you for being with me on this very special journey and for keeping the home fires burning whilst I was on the road and at other places. Fast horses and stud Brahman cattle may be the answer in our retirement. To my sisters Bernice and Lorraine and my sister-in-law, Joyce, and brother-in-law John: thank you for your support over the years. Thanks for your encouragement and good feedback over the four terms.
To my Flynn constituents, thank you for making Flynn the economic powerhouse that it is for Queensland and for Australia's economic future. They include coalminers, heavy-industry workers, gas workers, cattle producers, farmers and transport workers. They are innovators such as the Ian Burnett family and the Carl Morawitz family in cotton; SwarmFarm Robotics' Andrew and Josie Bate in robotic farming. In the citrus industry there is Craig Pressler; Craig Meyer is also in citrus. In the sugar industry, Dale Hollis and Alan Dingle; Craig Myer from Mundubbera is also in citrus. They are health and emergency workers. They are small business, SMEs and large businesses; mum and dad businesses. To my constituents of Flynn: keep up the hard work, forward thinking and determination. You all have a right to be well-represented in parliament, and I sincerely thank you for your votes of confidence in me. It has been an honour and a pleasure to serve you. I will close on this note. God bless you all. I thank the House. Thank you.
Mr JOYCE (New England—Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development and Leader of the Nationals) (10:32): on indulgence—Just while the member for Flynn is receiving his rightful congratulations, I would like to make a brief comment. Kenny, as he's known, is a reflection of Central Queensland, he's a reflection of people in small business and he is underestimated. So often people didn't understand that Kenny O'Dowd was—and is—a very successful business person, running pubs, fuel businesses, properties and racehorses—although I don't know whether they're as successful as everything else. He is also a great reflection of Australia. People feel a sense of comfort that there is a bloke like Kenny O'Dowd in the parliament. So to Kenny O'Dowd, and especially to Shirley, Ben and Amber, I would like to put on the record that Australia has been incredibly well served by looking across the chamber and seeing a person like Kenny O'Dowd.
Mr PITT (Hinkler—Minister for Resources and Water) (10:33): on indulgence—Ken is my neighbour. We know him as Kenny, and in the parliament, they know him as the bulldog. Ken is someone where the party would always ring and say, 'We're worried about Flynn; we're worried about Ken.' I'd say: 'I don't know what you're worried about. This is a guy who sponsors a race at every country race club.'
As the Deputy Prime Minister outlined, he's delivered fuel, he's worked in Bougainville, he's had pubs, and he's got this interest in horseracing. I did say to Ken one day: 'You don't mind a punt. How much have you been involved?' He said, 'I've had a couple of horses.' I said, 'What's a couple?' He said, 'I had over 25 in work at one stage.' In fact the tax office used to ring him every fortnight and ask him to declare himself as a professional, to which I'm told he declined. I'm sure it's a great relief for Shirley to know that is still something that he looks at every single day.
But as my neighbour, my friend and my colleague, I thank Kenny for his contribution to our local communities. He's a good man. It's that simple. So thank you to the member for Flynn for his service. He has been a great friend. I hope he enjoys his retirement with Shirley. We certainly look forward to his continued contribution in a different role. Ken, once again, we'll see you in Bundy, in Gladstone, in the regions, because that's your home.
Mr McCORMACK (Riverina) (10:34): on indulgence—To both the member for Nicholls and the member for Flynn, and to their respective spouses, Ros and Shirley, I wish you all the very best. May Damian and Ken's horses run well and may the sun shine warmly on their faces. All the best for the future.
Mr CLARE (Blaxland) (10:35): on indulgence—This morning we have been fortunate to hear three very personal, important and inspiring speeches. There has been a common thread that has run through all of those speeches, in Drummy's, in JA's and in the Bulldog's. For all three of these men who have served this parliament, all three would struggle to find an enemy on either that side or on this side of the House. You all have friends right across the aisle, and it is a mark of the gentlemen that you are.
After such a long night, where we sat here until around about 5 am in the morning, and many of us are living on a little amount of sleep, the way we've started the parliament this morning is inspiring for us all. It reminds those of us who are contesting the next election why we're here and how to do our job better. On behalf of the Labor Party: thank you very, very much for your service to this place and to our country. To your loved ones and to your staff: thank you for your service to you as individuals and to our country. We wish you all the very, very best in the next chapter of your lives.
BILLS
Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill 2022
First Reading
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Fletcher.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr FLETCHER (Bradfield—Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts) (10:37): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Social media services have provided Australians significant social, educational and economic benefits for many years. However, these benefits have also come with greater exposure to online harms—including exposure to emotional, mental health and financial harms that can result where malicious online trolls post defamatory material to attack a person's reputation.
The Australian government is committed to keeping Australians safe from online harm, including the harmful impacts of defamatory material posted anonymously on social media.
Today we introduce the Social Media (Anti-Trolling) Bill, to ensure defamation law is fit-for-purpose in the digital age and to empower Australians to respond appropriately to defamatory attacks by anonymous social media trolls.
Outline of the Bill
The challenges of responding to defamatory material online crystallised after the High Court's decision in Fairfax Media Publications v Voller.
In that case, a majority of the court determined that the appellant media companies were 'publishers' of defamatory comments that had been made by third parties on their Facebook pages.
The decision highlights the challenges faced by individuals and businesses when it comes to defamation on social media.
Following Voller, it is clear that Australians who maintain an ordinary social media page could be liable for defamatory material posted by someone else—even if they do not know about the material.
The government considers it is not appropriate for Australians to face potential defamation liability for material posted by others.
Many individuals and organisations simply do not have the resources to continuously monitor and moderate their social media pages, merely to manage their defamation liability risk. This bill urgently responds to the risks created by the Voller decision, to protect all Australians who maintain a normal social media page from inappropriate defamation liability.
The government is also deeply concerned about the harmful impact of defamatory material posted on social media. It is in the nature of social media that harmful posts may go 'viral' and rapidly be disseminated to a wide audience, amplifying the harm. Furthermore, where defamatory material is posted anonymously, it can be very difficult for Australians to respond.
Some will take no action.
Some will report the attacks to the platform.
Some will contact the eSafety Commissioner, or another regulator.
But those who have suffered the most extreme attacks on reputation, or who are bearing the significant emotional, mental health and financial costs, may wish to consider all options to vindicate their reputation, including legal proceedings.
This bill provides powerful tools to help Australians who have been subjected to defamatory attacks by anonymous social media trolls, and who may be considering legal proceedings to protect themselves.
The government has developed a number of mechanisms to protect Australians from a wide range of online harms. This bill is another important tool to support Australians combat trolls online.
Introductory provisions
'Trolling' encompasses a range of harmful online behaviours that vary in severity from the merely annoying to the criminal. Too often, this behaviour can result in harms to the victim's mental and emotional health, and can damage the victim's reputation in the eyes of their peers.
The title of the bill explicitly recognises that posting defamatory material on social media is a form of 'trolling'. The title sends a clear message, calling out defamatory attacks on reputation as a form of behaviour that is not acceptable online—particularly where those reputational attacks are made behind a cloak of anonymity. The bill focuses on defamatory trolling on social media, and in this way complements other measures on the Commonwealth statute book—like the Online Safety Act or the Criminal Code—which address other forms of trolling and other online harms.
Protecting page owners
Part 2 of the bill deals with liability for defamatory material posted on a social media service.
Specifically, the bill expressly addresses one of the outcomes of the Voller decision, in relation to an end user who operates or maintains a page on a social media service—called a 'page owner' in the bill.
One of the implications of the Voller decision is that a page owner—such as a small business owner or community football club—may face defamation liability for defamatory material posted on that page owner's page.
This can occur where the defamatory material was posted by someone else, in circumstances where the page owner might not even be aware of the post.
Following the reasoning in the Vollerdecision, a page owner may be a publisher for the purposes of defamation law if they 'facilitate' or 'encourage' the relevant communication—for example, by allowing comments—and are therefore said to 'participate' in the communication of the defamatory matter.
The government does not agree that café owners or car mechanics, or people in many other classes of work, should have to risk defamation liability to engage with their client base through social media. It is not reasonable to expect millions of Australian small-business owners to spend precious time and resources actively moderating their social media pages for potentially defamatory material.
The government is also concerned that the liability risks made clear by Vollermay have a chilling effect on free speech—as page owners may censor comments or disable functionalities due to a fear of being held liable for content that they did not post. In some cases, the Voller decision may have contributed to decisions to limit the ability for the general public to interact with news and current events. We saw this, for example, when the US news network CNN blocked access to its Facebook pages in Australia after the Voller decision was handed down.
Section 14 of the bill addresses these aspects of the Voller decision. It makes clear that page owners are not 'publishers' of defamatory material posted on their pages by third parties. In practice, this means a person who maintains or administers a page on a social media service will be protected from defamation liability.
These protections would apply for all Australian page owners, regardless of where in the world the material may have been posted.
Clarifying the liability of social media service providers
Part 2 of the bill also clarifies the status of social media service providers as 'publishers' of defamatory material.
Section 15 of the bill deems that social media service providers are the publishers of defamatory material posted on their platforms. The deeming provision applies to all material posted in Australia on the provider's platform.
This means social media providers are accountable for defamatory material posted on their service. It reflects the significant role that providers play in promoting and disseminating content, and community expectations around the responsibilities that come with providing a service that comes with the potential for significant harm.
While under current jurisprudence many social media service providers would already be publishers regardless—and in this sense the bill simply confirms the current state of the law—the provision clarifies expectations and removes the burden of proving in court that the provider was a 'publisher' of the material, particularly as that burden would otherwise fall on the victim.
Stronger mechanisms to assist victims
Part 2 of the bill also recognises that Australians can suffer harm because of defamatory material that is posted on social media. Social media platforms can provide an avenue for users to post information that is false and to do so in language that can be abusive and damaging.
Where defamatory posts are made anonymously, it can be difficult for victims to seek legal recourse against the originator.
The government acknowledges that there are many legitimate reasons that Australians may wish to be anonymous online, and the bill respects that principle and recognises that anonymity has a legitimate place in the digital ecosystem.
But this does not mean that social media users should be able to abuse anonymity to defame or harm others.
Accordingly, part 2 of the bill introduces pioneering reforms to 'unmask' anonymous trolls who post defamatory material on social media.
There are two mechanisms in the bill which will allow a victim to obtain the poster's relevant contact details, to assist in potential defamation proceedings. A victim may choose to pursue either or both, in any order.
Complaints scheme
The first mechanism to unmask anonymous online trolls is the complaints scheme described in section 17 of the bill.
The complaints scheme provides a quick and low-cost way for victims to raise concerns about defamatory material and obtain the poster's contact details. To meet the requirements of the bill, a social media service provider must establish a complaints scheme that satisfies the criteria in section 17 of the bill.
Relevantly, to meet those requirements, the complaints process must allow a victim to make a complaint about defamatory material posted on the social media service. Within 72 hours, the social media service provider must disclose the 'country location data' of the poster. This involves a statement to the effect that, according to the geolocation technology deployed by the provider, at the time the post was made, the poster either appeared to have been located in Australia or appeared not to have been located in Australia.
If the material was posted in Australia, the provider must, within 72 hours of the complaint being made:
notify the poster that the material is the subject of a complaint, and
report back to the complainant that the poster has been informed.
The provider must also report back to the complainant about any response or outcome from notifying the poster. This may involve the poster agreeing to remove the material, asserting that the material is not defamatory, or refusing to engage with the complainant.
If the complainant is dissatisfied with the handling or outcome of the complaint, the complainant can request the poster's relevant contact details. With the poster's consent, the provider can disclose those details to the complainant.
'Relevant contact details', for the purposes of the bill, are a person's name or the name by which they are known, email address, telephone number and such other information as is specified in legislative rules.
Where these details are disclosed with consent, the complainant may be in a position to effect service of legal proceedings, or to seek an order for substituted service, if they wish to do so. The complaint scheme's consent requirement is an important limitation to protect the privacy of the poster and manage potential safety risks.
The complaints mechanism serves a number of important purposes, even where the poster does not give consent.
First, by providing country location data, it provides useful information to the complainant about whether it may be worthwhile to commence a defamation action. Victims may decide that, on balance, the difficulties involved in litigating against a foreign defendant, and potential international enforcement issues, mean that the cost and risk outweigh the benefit.
Second, for material posted in Australia, the complaints mechanism will notify the poster that the complainant considers it to be defamatory, which may be enough to prompt the poster to remove the material. It may also allow the complainant to understand the poster's view on the complaint—early in the process and without needing to commence legal proceedings. This can inform the complainant's decision about their next steps.
Third, for material posted in Australia, the mechanism will bring the material to the attention of the social media service provider, flagging that the complainant considers it to be defamatory. Bringing inappropriate behaviour to a provider's notice can play an important role in enforcing community standards.
The complaints scheme expressly contemplates that material may be removed by consent—without either incentivising take-down or encouraging continued publication. Neither the complaints scheme nor any other part of the bill affects existing mechanisms that exist to allow take-down of defamatory and harmful content.
End-user information disclosure orders
The second mechanism in the bill by which a victim may 'unmask' an anonymous social media troll is a new form of court order set out in Part 3 of the bill—called an 'end-user information disclosure order'.
These disclosure orders can be granted against a social media service provider by an Australian court with jurisdiction to hear a defamation dispute, or Division 2 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.
An Australian person may apply for a disclosure order where:
material has been posted on a social media service
the prospective applicant reasonably believes there may be a right to obtain relief in a defamation proceeding relating to the material
an Australian court would have jurisdiction in that defamation proceeding, and
one of the following three conditions is satisfied:
the prospective applicant is unable to ascertain the poster's relevant contact details
the prospective applicant is unable to ascertain whether the material was posted in Australia, or
the prospective applicant reasonably believes the material was posted in Australia.
Where the court is appropriately satisfied, they may grant a disclosure order. Relevantly, this includes being satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that there may be a right for the prospective applicant to obtain relief against the poster in a defamation proceeding that relates to the material.
Should the court grant the order, the social media service provider will be required to provide the victim with the poster's country location data and, if the material was posted in Australia, the poster's relevant contact details.
Empowering the courts to issue these orders, based on an assessment of whether there is a right to obtain relief in defamation, will provide an expedient and enforceable approach to unmasking anonymous trolls, while protecting the privacy of users where the claim is baseless.
The bill also ensures that the court retains the discretion to refuse to make an order, and explicitly makes clear that the court may do so where it is satisfied the disclosure of the relevant contact details or country location data is likely to present a risk to the poster's safety.
These mechanisms ensure that the disclosure order regime will allow a victim to obtain the poster's relevant contact details in appropriate circumstances, with strong safeguards against abuse.
Conditional defence
To incentivise social media service providers to adopt and comply with the two unmasking mechanisms, the bill gives social media service providers access to a conditional defence from defamation liability. This defence is available in relation to material posted in Australia, provided the social media service provider meets certain criteria. These criteria, and the circumstances in which the defence is available, are set out in section 16 of the bill.
Broadly speaking, to make out the defence the provider must have a complaints scheme that meets the prescribed requirements.
If a complaint is made under that scheme, the provider must comply with the scheme in relation to the handling of the complaint.
If the victim requests the poster's relevant contact details—either in response to a complaint or through a court order—the provider must disclose those details to access the defence.
If a social media service provider is unable or unwilling to disclose the contact details to the victim, they will not be able to access the defence—and will therefore face potential defamation liability. This ensures that, even if victims are not able to obtain the poster's contact details, they are not left without an appropriate defendant against whom they can commence defamation action.
Nominated entity requirements
Part 4 of the bill sets out requirements in relation to nominated entities.
The bill recognises that many providers of social media services are entities incorporated in a foreign country. Pursuing legal action against those entities can cause difficulties in relation to access and enforcement of civil judgments. Even seeking to make a complaint to a company located in another country can raise challenges.
To address these challenges, the bill requires foreign providers of social media services that meet specified thresholds to establish an Australian 'nominated entity'.
This obligation will apply to a social media service provider that is a body corporate incorporated in a foreign country, where:
at least 250,000 Australians hold an account, or
the provider is prescribed in legislative rules.
The nominated entity must be the provider's agent, must be incorporated in Australia, and must have an office in Australia.
Among other things, the nominated entity must also have access to country location data and relevant contact details of users, in respect of material posted in Australia, and be authorised to receive complaints and requests for contact details under the complaints scheme.
The net effect of these provisions is that, where complainants seek to make complaints or serve a disclosure order, there will be an Australian entity, with an Australian office, capable of receiving the complaint or being served with a court order. That entity will be in a position to comply with those mechanisms to provide contact details where required to do so by the bill.
This will make it significantly easier for Australians to obtain information about a poster (where permitted by the bill) and then to commence proceedings if that is what they decide to do.
The obligation is a civil penalty provision, enforceable by a fine of up to 500 penalty units. Furthermore, a provider that is subject to the obligation must have established a nominated entity by the time material was posted on its service if it wishes to access the conditional defence in defamation proceedings about that material.
These mechanisms will incentivise a social media service provider to establish an appropriate nominated entity to act as its Australian agent.
Attorney-General intervention and legal assistance
Part 5 of the bill sets out miscellaneous provisions, including powers with respect to intervention in defamation proceedings.
Specifically, section 25 of the bill sets out two alternative bases on which the Attorney-General may intervene in a proceeding.
Subsection 25(1) provides that the Attorney-General may intervene in a proceeding on behalf of the Commonwealth where, amongst other things, the provider of the social media service is a party to the defamation proceeding, and the Attorney-General believes it is in the public interest to do so.
The provision makes clear the Attorney-General may intervene in defamation proceedings where the provider of the social media is a party—even if the proceeding does not arise under this bill—provided the matter is in federal jurisdiction.
Defamation cases can be complex and can sometimes involve a significant power imbalance between a large provider and an individual whose reputation has been harmed. In part, the power to intervene under subsection 25(1) would allow the Attorney-General to address this imbalance, where it is in the public interest to do so.
Subsection 25(2) provides an alternative and additional basis of intervention. The provision makes clear that the Attorney-General may intervene in a matter arising under the bill. This includes proceedings that are not defamation proceedings, such as applications for a disclosure order (where substantive defamation proceedings have not commenced).
This power of intervention will allow the government to put its views to the court about how this novel piece of legislation is intended to apply.
The bill also recognises that intervention may be associated with increased legal costs. Accordingly, where the Attorney-General has intervened in proceedings instituted by an Australian person, section 25 of the bill allows the Attorney-General to authorise the payment of legal costs to that person. Such a payment may be authorised where, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, the proceeding will:
settle an area of uncertainty under Commonwealth law, or
resolve an important question under Commonwealth law that affects the rights of a section of the public that is, or a group of individuals who are, socially or economically disadvantaged.
This ensures that, in appropriate circumstances, Australians are not financially disadvantaged in proceedings in which the Attorney-General has intervened.
Conclusion
The Australian government is committed to supporting the safety of Australians online and is unwavering in its commitment to respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by new technologies.
This bill is a strong addition to the government's world-leading measures to address online harms and provide appropriate safeguards to all Australians. I commend the bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure Protection) Bill 2022
First Reading
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Ms Andrews.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mrs ANDREWS (McPherson—Minister for Home Affairs) (10:59): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Australian government is committed to protecting the essential services that all Australians rely on by uplifting the security and resilience of our critical infrastructure. As the threats and risks to Australia's critical infrastructure evolve, so too must our approach to ensuring the ongoing security and resilience of these assets and the essential services they deliver.
Critical infrastructure is increasingly interconnected and interdependent. These interconnections deliver efficiencies and economic benefits to all Australians. However, connectivity without proper safeguards creates vulnerabilities that can deliberately or even inadvertently cause disruption and result in cascading consequences across our economy, our security and our sovereignty.
Threats ranging from natural hazards, such as extreme weather events, through to human induced threats like foreign interference, cyberattacks and trusted insiders all have the potential to significantly disrupt critical infrastructure. Recent incidents such as the December 2021 Log4j vulnerability, compromising systems in Australia and across the globe, as well as the impacts of COVID-19, illustrate that threats to the operation of Australia's critical infrastructure continue to be significant and far-reaching.
It is a regrettable fact that malicious threat actors continue to target the infrastructure that underpins the provision of essential services that all Australians rely on. The consequences of a prolonged and widespread failure in the energy sector, for example, could be catastrophic not just to our economy, security and sovereignty but the Australian way of life.
Following the tabling of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security's advisory report on the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2020 and the statutory review of the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 in September 2021, the government moved swiftly to respond and introduce government amendments to these critical recommendations.
In the passage of the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Act 2021, known as the SLACI Act, the government addressed recommendations 1 through 5, 10 and 14 of the advisory report in order to legislate the measures of highest criticality to protecting the security of Australian critical infrastructure in the shortest possible time. The SLACI Act has implemented key elements of the framework by introducing mandatory cyberincident reporting and government assistance to relevant entities in response to significant cyberattacks that impact Australia's critical infrastructure assets.
Today, the government is now seeking to legislate the preventative measures to ensure the continued protection of Australian critical infrastructure through the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure Protection) Bill 2022, known as the SLACIP Bill. The bill is the culmination of over two years of concerted effort of government and industry working in partnership to develop an approach that will safeguard our critical infrastructure from those threats.
The bill sets out two key obligations. Firstly, the requirement to have, comply with, review and update a risk management program. The risk management program asks critical infrastructure entities to identify material risks that could have an impact on the critical infrastructure asset and, as far as reasonably practicable, minimise, eliminate or mitigate the risk from occurring.
The bill proposes that the risk management program is reported to a critical infrastructure assets board, council or governing body. This ensures that the material risks in the functioning of the asset art reported and raised with the most senior levels of critical infrastructure assets.
The risk management program requirement is designed to be incorporated into the existing risk management arrangements. If a critical infrastructure asset looks at and indeed, I hope, exceeds the requirements in the risk management program rules, then this is suitable for fulfilling the obligation. This obligation is meant to be additive to, as well as the least and lightest regulatory impact. Ensuring that there is appropriate risk management in place, such as for cyber and information security, physical and natural hazards, and personnel risks, is increasingly important given the interconnected nature of Australia's critical infrastructure exposes vulnerabilities which, if targeted, could result in significant consequences for our economy, security and sovereignty.
In line with recommendations 8 and 9 of the PJCIS's advisory report, a comprehensive program of consultation has been undertaken with industry to design the rules and definitions that underpin these reforms. From ministerial round tables that I personally conducted, to official-level town halls and working groups, the government has spent over 12 months working in partnership with thousands of entities across industry to ensure that these reforms effectively balance security with compliance costs.
Importantly, none of the risk management program requirements will come into force without additional consultation with industry and careful consideration of any issues they raise, including the timing on when the requirements will come into force. Indeed, if passed by the parliament, my intention is to delay the obligation for critical assets impacted by recent supply chain issues—including the freight services and infrastructure, as well as food assets—until 1 January 2023 at the earliest. Additionally, there are a number of assets that already have existing obligations in place, and I don't intend to apply the risk management program to every critical infrastructure asset. Detail about the coverage of assets is outlined in the explanatory memorandum.
The government understands that the introduction of reforms that impact many businesses across our economy will cause apprehension. The government is committed to ensuring that the requirements remain fit for purpose in a dynamic and evolving space.
Pursuant to the committee's advisory report recommendation 6, I have written to the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs to outline my expectations that the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Centre within the Department of Home Affairs provide technical support and advice to industry regarding the functions of the SOCI Act.
Additional guidance on how to meet the requirements of the risk management program will be jointly developed with industry and government partners over the coming weeks and months. Stakeholders have expressed their appreciation of the government's commitment to working with industry to develop that guidance material.
The Cyber and Infrastructure Security Centre will take a pragmatic, active and engaged regulatory and partnership approach, working in collaboration with industry, as we build the security and resilience of Australia's critical infrastructure.
Second, there are some critical infrastructure systems and networks that are so vital, interconnected and of such national significance to the functioning of Australian society, defence or security that, if they were subject to a cyber attack, it would cause disproportionate consequences. The bill sets out criteria for the declaration of a system of national significance. The focus is on identifying critical infrastructure assets that are of national significance, noting interdependencies across key sectors in the economy and consequences should the asset be impacted.
These reforms will mean that not only will we be able to respond in times of crisis, we will also have legislation in place that assists in mitigation of the chances of a crisis emerging in the first place. In line with this objective, the SLACIP bill implements recommendations 7, 8 and 9 of the committee's advisory report.
I note the exclusion of the portion of recommendation 7 relating to merits review. This recommendation requested that a merits review system of appeal to the Security Division of the AAT be implemented.
The Administrative Review Council's publication What decisions should be subject to merit review? identified that national security considerations could justify the exclusion of merits review, particularly those decisions that involve consideration of issues of the highest consequence to the government and where that decision-making power is vested in a minister.
Decisions about systems of national significance involve highly sensitive information that, if released to the public record, would have the potential to highlight assets for targeting by malicious actors. The government notes that judicial review remains available for all decisions made under the SOCI Act.
The SLACIP bill also enables the government to work with industry to strengthen the cyberpreparedness and resilience of entities that operate assets of the highest criticality to Australia's national interests. These assets of highest criticality are defined as systems of national significance due to the role they serve in the economy and the consequences to the national interest should they be unavailable or inoperable.
The enhanced cybersecurity obligations will support a bespoke outcomes-focused partnership between government and Australia's most critical infrastructure asset operators, and will build an aggregated threat picture and understanding of cybersecurity risks to critical infrastructure in a way that is mutually beneficial to government and industry.
The report also notes the following recommendations of the PJCIS report, that:
Under recommendation 11, subsection 13A(2) of the Intelligence Services Act 2001 be amended to restrict cooperation or assistance provided by an agency under that act to agencies or other bodies by regulation outlined in subsection 13A(1), only to the functions and extent authorised by other Commonwealth legislation. To deliver on this intent, the Minister for Defence has issued a direction to the Australian Signals Directorate to limit the scope of ASD's assistance to the government assistance measures in the SOCI Act;
Under recommendation 12, the government review the risks to democratic institutions, particularly from foreign originated cyberthreats, with a view to developing the most appropriate mechanism to protect them at federal, state and local levels. The government agrees that it is vital to maintain the availability, reliability and integrity of Australia's democratic institutions. The government will review the risks to these institutions and assess appropriate mitigation mechanisms with reference to existing initiatives across government, including the work of the Electoral Integrity Assurance Taskforce, which brings together government agencies with capabilities to identify, assess and remediate threats to the electoral process, including the Australian Cyber Security Centre. Consideration of these risks will also factor in existing efforts to uplift cyber- and data security policy settings across government—federal, state and local; and
Under recommendation 13, the government review the processes and protocols for classified briefings for the opposition during caretaker periods in response to serious cyberincidents, and considers the best-practice principles for any public announcement about those incidents. The government will consider the issue.
This bill today demonstrates the government's commitment to uplifting the security and resilience of Australia's critical infrastructure. The measures that are outlined in this bill will enable Australia to maintain the availability, integrity and confidentiality of assets and networks critical to our national interest, and secure those assets from further severe shocks—shocks such as those we have seen from the COVID-19 pandemic and natural disasters, malicious actors and other hazards.
The bill underpins the continued growth of the resilience of Australian industry and the ability for businesses to compete in overseas markets. The bill provides a necessary uplift to the security of critical infrastructure so that Australia continues to be a safe and prosperous nation. I commend the bill.
Debate adjourned.
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2021-2022
First Reading
Message from the Governor-General transmitting particulars of proposed expenditure and recommending appropriation announced.
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Sukkar.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr SUKKAR (Deakin—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness, Social and Community Housing) (11:15): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Today the government introduces the additional estimates appropriation bills. These bills are the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2021-22 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2021-2022. These bills underpin the government's expenditure decisions.
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2021-22 seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of just over $11.9 billion. These bills ensure there is a sufficient appropriation to cover estimates variations related to existing programs—for instance, changes in costs for demand-driven programs.
These bills also pay for the first-year costs for measures announced in the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook and subsequently announced measures.
Importantly these bills also provide additional funding to support the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic through purchases of additional personal protective equipment for the National Medical Stockpile and the national COVID-19 vaccine rollout, reflecting the latest health advice about dosage intervals. Through this bill the Department of Health will receive nearly $2.9 billion, the majority of which is for COVID-19 response programs, and a further $741 million of additional funding support for senior Australians.
The bill also provides $2.8 billion in additional funding to the Department of Social Services for payments to the National Disability Insurance Agency to continue to deliver the National Disability Insurance Scheme. This increased NDIS funding ensures that those individuals with permanent and significant disability receive reasonable and necessary support to build capacity, increase independence and establish stronger connections with their community.
The Department of Education, Skills and Employment will receive an additional $1.4 billion across a range of programs, including an additional $73.9 million to support the childcare sector, $102.4 million to support jobs in the post-pandemic economic recovery and a further $1.096 billion to support vocational education and training.
The Department of Defence, meanwhile, will receive nearly $1.3 billion. This additional funding is primarily to support the implementation of recent government decisions on defence capability and to continue the Australian Defence Force's support for the government response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill and the portfolio additional estimates statements tabled in the parliament. I therefore commend the bill.
Debate adjourned.
Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2021-2022
First Reading
Message from the Governor-General transmitting particulars of proposed expenditure and recommending appropriation announced.
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Sukkar.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr SUKKAR (Deakin—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness, Social and Community Housing) (11:19): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2021-2022, along with Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2021-2022, which I just introduced, are the additional estimates appropriation bills for this financial year. Together, these bills ensure there is a sufficient appropriation to cover estimates variations related to existing programs and measures. This bill specifically seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of approximately $4.033 billion.
The most significant items of the bill are as follows.
The bill proposes $2.493 billion to the Department of Health primarily for the purchase of additional personal protective equipment (PPE) for the National Medical Stockpile as part of the government's ongoing response to COVID-19. We note that pressure for additional PPE in February and March 2022 is met on an expedited basis using the appropriation coronavirus response bills Nos 1 and 2 2021-22. Accordingly bill No. 4 addresses pressure for additional PPE from the months of April to June this year.
The bill provides additional $424 million to the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources to support the construction of the Hunter Power Project by Snowy Hydro Ltd.
Additional funds are also provided to the Department of Finance to support the final stages of construction of centres for national resilience in Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. This augments initial funding provided through advances to the finance minister that occurred in 2021.
Again full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill and the portfolio additional estimates statements tabled in the parliament.
Debate adjourned.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Concession for Australian Medical Innovations) Bill 2022
First Reading
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Sukkar.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr SUKKAR (Deakin—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness, Social and Community Housing) (11:21): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
This bill fulfills the government's 2021-22 budget announcement to introduce a patent box tax concession for medical and biotechnology innovations.
Australia already has a research and development tax incentive to support industries to undertake R&D in Australia. The patent box adds a tax incentive for businesses with successful R&D to commercialise Australian developed R&D here in Australia, supporting jobs, investment and a stronger economy.
Where the taxpayer meets the eligibility criteria for the patent box regime, income directly attributable to the eligible patent will benefit from being subject to an effective income tax rate of 17 per cent, to the extent that the taxpayer undertakes the R&D for that patent in Australia. The patent box will apply from 1 July 2022.
This is just another example of the Morrison government cutting taxes on investment in Australia. By taxing income from patented innovations at an internationally competitive rate, the patent box will reduce IP offshoring and make Australia a more attractive location for R&D.
Australia will join over 20 jurisdictions who currently have patent boxes, including the UK and France. The Australian patent box will be limited to the medical and biotech sector. This sector has significant Australian based R&D and we're confident will be particularly responsive to this incentive.
Australia's patent box regime has been designed consistent with the OECD's requirements for concessional tax regimes for intellectual property regimes to ensure that the patent box meets internationally accepted standards.
The government has consulted widely in developing this patent box. Since the 2021-22 budget announcement, the government has incorporated changes to the bill recognising the long lead times between application and granting of patents as well as commercial decisions around which jurisdictions to patent in. However, even where patents are filed in other jurisdictions, they must be owned in Australia and the underlying R&D must have occurred in Australia to benefit from the patent box.
Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum.
Debate adjourned.
Social Security Amendment (Improved Child to Adult Transfer for Carer Payment and Carer Allowance) Bill 2022
First Reading
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Evans, for Mr Robert.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (11:25): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Australian government is committed to achieving fair and equitable access to payments supporting carers, allocating around $9 billion per year to over 620,000 Australians who receive carer payment and /or carer allowance to care for a family member or friend with disability, a medical condition, mental illness, or who is frail due to age.
The Social Security Amendment (Improvements to the Child to Adult Transfer Qualification) Bill 2022 ensures all carers have a smoother transition when moving from the child to the adult stream of carer payment and carer allowance.
This bill will ensure, from 1 April 2023, all carers retain equal access to carer payment and carer allowance until their care receiver turns 16 years and three months. At this time, they can transfer to the adult stream of payment if they are assessed as eligible.
This removes a current anomaly where carers who choose not to submit an adult claim, continue to receive payments until the care receiver turns 16 years and three months of age. Yet, in contrast, carers who complete and lodge the adult transfer forms on time, but who are assessed as ineligible, will have their payment cancelled somewhere between the child turning 16 years and 16 years and three months of age, depending on when the assessment is completed.
This bill also ensures that carers who submit their claim documentation for the adult stream before their care receiver turns 16 years, but have not been assessed by the time the care receiver turns 16 years and three months, will remain eligible for payment until their claim is assessed.
The standalone carer allowance healthcare card currently cancels when the care receiver turns 16 years of age. Under this measure, qualification for the standalone healthcare card would align with carer allowance, meaning all standalone carer allowance healthcare cards will continue until the care receiver turns 16 years and three months of age.
A part of enhanced communication to carers, this bill includes writing to this cohort nine months before their care receiver turns 16 years and three months, rather than the current six months.
I commend this Bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
Social Services Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022
First Reading
Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by Mr Evans, for Mr Robert.
Bill read a first time.
Second Reading
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (11:28): I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Many industries across Australia are currently experiencing labour shortages due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Regional areas, as well, are suffering from staff shortages as a result of depressed labour mobility between regions and reduced migration.
The Social Services Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 will help to incentivise recipients of age pension, disability support pension and certain veterans' entitlements to undertake or increase paid employment.
Pensioners who choose to engage in some paid employment during their retirement typically have higher incomes and are able to support a higher standard of living than those who don't. They also gain significant non-financial benefits, including stronger social connection, staying mentally active and keeping physically fit.
Pensioners who choose to work during their retirement make a valuable contribution to Australia's economy and community. At present, around 80,000 age pensioners are supplementing their pension income with paid employment.
This bill encourages retired pensioners who would like to re-enter the workforce to do so, and provides further incentives for those who are already working to increase their hours.
Under current policy settings, age pensioners with employment income have their age pension cancelled if their total income exceeds the pension income test limit for more than 12 weeks. They also lose access to their Pensioner Concession Card (PCC) after 12 weeks.
These policy settings can act as a disincentive for age pensioners to work. Many age pensioners want to work but do not want to lose their pension status and have their PCC cancelled for earning too much. They also do not want to complete a full application to have their age pension and PCC reinstated.
This measure increases the flexibility of the pension for those people over age pension age who want to work by allowing age pensioners to move more easily between the age pension and periods of work.
From 1 April 2022, pensioners with employment income, whose total income exceeds the income limit, will have their age pension suspended for a period of up to two years, rather than cancelled after 12 weeks. If at any time during the two-year period their income is at a level that they can return to the age pension, they will benefit from an abridged reapplication process that only requires them to update their circumstances, including their income and asset information with Services Australia.
Pensioners will also be able to retain their PCC for longer. Currently, age pensioners who earn above the income limit keep their PCC for 12 weeks. Working disability support pensioners retain their card for 52 weeks. This measure increases and aligns the amount of time age pensioners and disability support pensioners are able to retain their concession card to two years. The PCC provides access to a range of Commonwealth health concessions, including cheaper prescriptions under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Allowing working pensioners to keep their PCC for two years reflects the value pensioners place on their concession cards and recognises older Australians often have additional medical needs, even if they are able to work.
Importantly, when recipients of age pension, disability support pension and certain veterans' entitlements take up work and their partner is also a pensioner, they will both keep their PCC and both will be able to easily resume their pension payments within the two-year period.
This measure complements existing work incentives. For example, the income-free area lets a single age pension recipient have up to $180 per fortnight in employment or other income before their payment is affected. In addition, the work bonus allows age pension recipients to have an extra $300 per fortnight in employment income before their payment is affected. This means in total, a single age pensioner with no other income can earn up to $480 per fortnight from work before their payment begins to reduce.
The government values the contributions of all senior Australians and is committed to supporting pensioners to have a higher standard of living in retirement. It is also committed to addressing the current workforce shortages affecting many Australian businesses. This measure assists with both those goals. It provides greater flexibility in the age pension for those who wish to work and will help to provide additional labour supply for those industries who require it.
I commend this bill to the House.
Debate adjourned.
PARLIAMENTARY ZONE
Proposed Works
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (11:34): At the request of the Assistant Minister for Regional Development and Territories, I move:
That in accordance with section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974, the House approves the following proposal for works in the Parliamentary Zone which were presented to the House on 9 February 2022, namely: National Gallery of Australia 40th anniversary sculpture commission and associated works.
Question agreed to.
COMMITTEES
Trade and Investment Growth Joint Committee
Report
Ms KEARNEY (Cooper) (11:35): On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth I present the committee's report incorporating dissenting reports. It's entitled The prudential regulation of investment in Australia's export industries.
Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).
Ms KEARNEY: I move:
That the House take note of the report.
Debate adjourned.
Reference to Federation Chamber
Ms KEARNEY (Cooper) (11:35): I move:
That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.
Question agreed to.
(Quorum formed)
Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade
Report
Mr TED O'BRIEN (Fairfax) (11:39): I'd like to thank my colleagues for coming in today to see this very important report being tabled on behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade. The report is entitled Expanding the membership of the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).
Mr TED O'BRIEN: by leave— The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the CPTPP, is an agreement between 11 economies, including Australia. The subject of the committee's inquiry was the agreement's expansion—that is, the case for new members to accede to the agreement. Sixty-eight submissions and eight public hearings later, the committee deliberated. And today I am delighted to be tabling a report that received bipartisan support in the joint standing committee.
The starting point is to recognise that the CPTPP is one of the world's most comprehensive free trade agreements. It follows, therefore, that the CPTPP's quality must be maintained. Indeed, it should be open for new members, but that welcome should not be unconditional. Put differently, the only aspiring economies that should be considered are those that (1) support an open, transparent and stable trading environment; (2) demonstrate an ability and willingness to meet the agreement's high standards; and (3) offer export potential through enhanced market access.
Tackling the question of future CPTPP members isn't an academic exercise. Indeed, the United Kingdom is well into the accession process as the first aspiring economy to formally request to join the agreement. As the committee has recognised, that process that the UK is undergoing should be leveraged as a template for other future aspiring economies. There are also lessons to be learnt from the UK experience. These are, firstly, the benefits that accrue from negotiating a bilateral free trade agreement with a trading partner while concurrently helping facilitate that same partner's accession to the CPTPP; secondly, the importance of government-to-government engagement during the accession process, including at the ministerial level; and, thirdly, the value of clear guidance on the accession process, including the various gates—the various stages—of the deal.
When it came to the question of the UK's accession, the committee recommended that the Australian government work with its other CPTPP members to encourage and facilitate the UK's accession to the agreement. We made a similar recommendation on encouraging and facilitating the accession of South Korea, noting that South Korea is at a far earlier stage in the process than the UK, as it's only now in the midst of formalising its request to join the CPTPP.
Taiwan, on the other hand, formalised its request to join the CPTPP some time ago. The committee's recommendation on Taiwan was that the Australian government work with other CPTPP members to encourage and facilitate its accession to the agreement. We also went one step further with respect to Taiwan. Australia does not have a bilateral free trade agreement with Taiwan. Noting the benefits that accrued from negotiating a bilateral free trade agreement with the United Kingdom, while also supporting its accession to the CPTPP, the committee has recommended to the Australian government that it also consider adopting a similar approach with Taiwan—that is, negotiating a bilateral Taiwan-Australia free trade agreement while, concurrently, encouraging and facilitating its accession to the CPTPP.
Then there's China. Much of the evidence we received on the China question was binary in nature. Most people typically argued that China should be either in or out. But where we landed was somewhere else. The committee recommended that the Australian government work with other CPTPP members to encourage China to re-establish full trading relations, ending its coercive trade measures and re-engaging in ministerial dialogue, and demonstrate an ability and willingness to commit to the CPTPP's high standards prior to supporting the commencement of an accession process.
On other economies which have expressed an interest in the CPTPP without formalising a request to join, including Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines, the committee recommended that the Australian government work with other CPTPP members to encourage ongoing informal discussions with these economies.
Lastly, the committee also made a recommendation with respect to the United States, which was central to negotiations on the agreement before it withdrew under President Donald Trump. The committee recommended that the Australian government work with other CPTPP members to encourage the United States to renew its interest in the agreement.
In closing, I thank the diplomatic representatives of the United Kingdom, China and Taiwan for their submissions. I also thank all submitters and those who appeared before the committee in public hearings. I thank the committee secretariat; my deputy chair, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy; and the chair of the full committee, Senator David Fawcett.
Finally, I thank all members of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade from both the House of Representatives and the Senate, from both this side of the aisle and the other side, for their cooperation which led to the report I tabled today receiving bipartisan support. I commend the report to the House.
Animal Health Australia and Plant Health Australia Funding Legislation Amendment Bill 2021
Second Reading
Consideration resumed of the motion:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Ms COLLINS (Franklin) (11:47): The explanatory memorandum for the Animal Health and Plant Health Australia Funding Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 says the purpose of the proposed amendments to the Australian Animal Health Council (Live-stock Industries) Funding Act 1996, the AHA Act, and the Plant Health Australia (Plant Industries) Funding Act 2002, the PHA Act, would be to streamline administrative processes by removing redundant provisions, to add provisions that create efficiencies and facilitate future levy arrangements, and to increase consistency between the acts regarding the spending of emergency response levies.
The AHA Act is the disbursement act under which the Commonwealth pays levies and charges that are collected from certain animal industries to the Australian Animal Health Council, otherwise known as Animal Health Australia. Animal Health Australia is a not-for-profit company created to coordinate the government-industry partnership for animal biosecurity in Australia. The AHA sets out priorities that must be applied to the spending of the Emergency Animal Disease Response levies. These priorities ensure that the Commonwealth's primary purposes for Emergency Animal Disease Response levies are met. These purposes include cost recovery for collection of these levies and funding industry contributions to relevant emergency responses under the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement—that is, when there is an incursion or when something comes through Australia's biosecurity system, there is a levy imposed on those industries that are impacted to try and deal with it.
The proposed amendments in the bill relating to the AHA Act include: amending the AHA Act to facilitate the funding of emergency responses under emergency biosecurity response deeds other than the Emergency Animal Disease Response Agreement, such as the proposed Emergency Response Deed for Aquatic Animal Diseases; adding a power in the AHA Act for the Governor-General to make regulations, which is consistent with the regulation making power in the PHA Act; and repealing redundant provisions in the AHA Act that relate to honey, as honey-related levies are no longer paid to the AHA.
The PHA Act is the disbursement act under which the Commonwealth pays levies and charges that are collected from certain plant industries to Plant Health Australia. Plant Health Australia is a not-for-profit company created to coordinate government-industry partnership for plant biosecurity in Australia. The PHA Act sets priorities that must be applied to the spending of the Emergency Plant Pest Response levies. These priorities ensure that the Commonwealth's primary purposes for the spending of the Emergency Plant Pest Response Levies are met. These purposes include the cost recovery for collection of these levies and funding industry contributions to relevant emergency responses under the Emergency Plant Pest Response deed.
The proposed amendments in the bill relating to the PHA Act include broadening the scope of permissible uses for the Emergency Plant Pest Response levies in the PHA Act to include the promotion or maintenance of the health of an EPPR plant, which will provide more flexibility to PHA industry members in meeting industry biosecurity needs. This is also consistent with the permissible uses for the equivalent emergency animal disease response levies in the AHA Act, adding a power in the PHA Act for the secretary of the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment or a delegate of the secretary to determine that a body is a relevant plant industry member by notifiable instrument. It also seeks to repeal redundant provisions in the PHA Act that provide for the redirection of excess levies to research and development purposes.
The explanatory memorandum also outlines that the bill would make minor consequential amendments to the Horticulture Marketing and Research and Development Services Act 2000 and the Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989. It is understood that the proposed amendments would commence on 1 July 2022. The explanatory memorandum further states that consultation has been undertaken with PHA, all the industry members, and AHA. It also notes that the proposed changes would not impact AHA's existing industry members. I note that this bill has no financial impact on the Australian government budget, but I have sought assurances from the government that it will not be increasing massive levies across industry and the sector, and that has been part of the consultation.
As already stated, Labor has indicated that we will support the bill. We do take very seriously legislation of this nature around biosecurity to ensure that there are measures in place to keep out pests, weeds and disease, and we've been very supportive of these types of bills and legislation in the past. We have not wanted to hold these up in any way, shape or form. However, we do need to highlight the concerns that we have with the government's slow approach to strengthening Australia's biosecurity system. Firstly, the government doesn't have a good track record when it comes to delivering on biosecurity. We know the government did an almighty backflip on the biosecurity levy, and it failed to adopt the levy that was recommended in an industry review back in 2017. It did a lot of work on this levy. It even made provision for one in the budget a number of years back. The government even expended the money. But, like so many other announcements on that side, the levy didn't eventuate. I've spoken to many farmers and other stakeholders across the agriculture sector, and they continue to raise concerns about Australia's biosecurity system and the lack of a sustainable funding arrangement and how we are going to pay for it into the future.
It is clear that this has been a huge policy void over the past few years when it comes to the government doing anything of note around strengthening Australia's biosecurity system. Indeed, it's like many parts of that government, where they are responding slowly and on an ad hoc basis. It has been extremely disappointing given the significant risks that pests and disease could have on Australian produce and the impact across the agriculture sector. Indeed, in terms of agriculture it is estimated that Australia's biosecurity system underpins around $78 billion in production, with around $60 billion of that in exports. Around $42 billion is attributed to the country's inbound tourism industry and 1.6 million Australian jobs across the supply chain. The National Farmers Federation estimates that the cost of a single outbreak of disease or pests in Australia would exceed $50 billion. This is a very significant issue to the future of our sector.
With so much at risk, where has the government's urgency been to do something about the biosecurity system? They've had nine years in government to fix this—nine years! How long is it going to take? Indeed, prior to the 2021-22 budget, where they did put in a bit of money for biosecurity, it was actually going backwards over the forwards. That was the state of biosecurity funding in this country. The government really has done very little to assure farmers and primary producers or to give them any confidence that it is a good manager of Australia's biosecurity system.
I've spent a lot of time in this place talking about biosecurity and the government's failures. I've also spent a lot of time in this place quoting about the government's failure, including the Inspector-General of Biosecurity and the Auditor-General. As the Inspector-General of Biosecurity and the Auditor-General point out, there's a lot to be concerned about. I just want to spend a bit of time going through these concerns. As I've mentioned, we all know there is a lot at risk so we need to understand what these reports are saying about where the biosecurity system is.
Last year alone there were four damning reports and reviews outlining serious inadequacies that exist across Australia's biosecurity. Three reports were from the inspector-general and one from the Auditor-General. The first report was in February last year by the Inspector-General of Biosecurity. The report looked at the adequacy of the department's operational model to effectively mitigate biosecurity risks in evolving risk and business environments. The Inspector-General of Biosecurity's broad assessment was that the biosecurity system is not in a strong position to address the diverse and evolving biosecurity risks and business environment expected to prevail from 2021 through to 2025. The inspector-general made 19 recommendations to the department.
The second report was in April last year—again, the Inspector-General of Biosecurity—and this report of course centred on the Ruby Princess cruise ship incident and human biosecurity, and we all know what a debacle that was. The review found weaknesses in the department's management of human biosecurity functions and recommended a strengthening of arrangements for intercepting listed human diseases and biosecurity risk material to ensure that the efforts be directed across to areas of highest risk. Who would have thought, Deputy Speaker, in a global pandemic there might be a risk? The review also found that information systems that underpin human health activities need to be transformed. The inspector-general in that report made 42 recommendations that went to improvements around the management of human biosecurity and the vessel's pathway.
The third damming report was in June last year. This one was the Australian National Audit Office responding to noncompliance with biosecurity requirements. The Auditor-General made eight recommendations to the department, and the performance report concluded the department's arrangements to respond to noncompliance with biosecurity requirements are 'largely inappropriate'. The department's compliance framework is 'largely inappropriate.' Indeed, it says there is:
… no framework to assess risk across the entire biosecurity system and target regulatory actions accordingly.
Mr Perrett: How long have they been in power?
Ms COLLINS: Nine years—thank you, Member for Moreton—and this is the type of report they get.
The report goes on to say:
Arrangements to detect non-compliance are partially appropriate—
and the department estimates include:
… undetected non-compliance is increasing.
The use of regulatory tools and response to non-compliance is only partially effective.
The department does not use the full suite of available regulatory tools.
Then there was the fourth review, again from the Inspector-General of Biosecurity, titled Accountable implementation of Inspectors-General of Biosecurity review recommendations(2015-2021). This is the fifth review of the department's track record in implementing the interim inspector-general and inspector-general's recommendations since 2015. The statement that, I suppose, captured my attention is from the executive summary—and I'm going to quote this into Hansard, because I think it's important.
None of these reviews would have been necessary if the department had a well-established commitment to and a sound process for continuous improvement; and appropriate accountability mechanisms within biosecurity divisions and the department more broadly.
The department has struggled to come to an appropriate understanding of the independent Inspector-General role. It has therefore not capitalised on the benefits of the independent assessments that the Inspector-General provides. It appears that the department has approached Inspector-General recommendations as an administrative, rather than transformative, process and not treated them with the level of importance that seemed to be envisaged by the Australian Parliament when it established the statutory role in the Biosecurity Act2015.
Rather damning, I would've thought. This report makes a further 10 recommendations for improvements to be made by the department in relation to biosecurity.
So, after nine years, the question is: What has gone wrong? Why is it in this state? Why do we have the Inspector-General of Biosecurity having to publish reports and reviews and make further recommendations to the department to take action? Where is the government? Why are they not taking these recommendations more seriously? This is a very serious issue. They cannot continue to be complacent and slow-acting and, indeed, I would say, ignoring some of the recommendations that they feel it doesn't suit them to do.
The findings from the four reports and reviews are a shocking reflection of the government's ineptness. It is really clear, in terms of the human biosecurity system, of course, that they didn't do anything until COVID-19 and the Ruby Princess, and the Inspector-General of Biosecurity and the Auditor-General really have called it out. After all this, and all the reports and the reviews, why hasn't the government prioritised strengthening Australia's biosecurity system? Now, we know they're all distracted and divided over there at the moment, but they have had nine years to get this right, to protect Australia from biosecurity risks.
To be frank, I'm amazed that more hasn't been done to protect Australians and our valuable agriculture sector and our producers from these biosecurity risks. When I talk to farmers, when I go out and talk to primary producers and those who work in the sector, biosecurity risks are always raised with me as of concern. They know the serious risks associated with a weak biosecurity system. When you look at Australia's biosecurity system, you can see the under-resourcing that has happened under this government.
As I mentioned before, the government abandoned the work it was doing to introduce a biosecurity levy. The department has stated that sustainable funding arrangements for biosecurity are still being considered. Well, what are they? What is it? What sort of sustainable funding model is the government planning? Why the secrecy? Why hasn't the government done more work? Why isn't it still consulting? What is going on? We don't have any answers from government in relation to where this is going. Indeed, what we saw in the last budget was some capital funding to fix some of the IT systems and other things with biosecurity, which, although welcome, clearly doesn't deal with the long-term sustainability of the biosecurity system.
It is clear they've been far too relaxed about the serious consequences of a biosecurity incursion and the harm it could cause to Australia's agriculture industry but also to Australians' human health. If you're a farmer or primary producer, you wouldn't trust this government to fix it or to deliver for you. On that side of the chamber they talk a lot about being on the side of the farmers, but that really isn't what I hear on the ground. What I hear on the ground is that people really are jack of it. They—
Honourable members interjecting—
Ms COLLINS: Seriously! The short answer is: people are trying very hard. Staff currently working in biosecurity and Australian Border Force officers are working incredibly hard, doing the best they possibly can with the resources they have available to them, to try and keep Australia and the Australian agriculture sector safe, but this government has not had their back. There has been a failure when it comes to this biosecurity system.
But there has also been a failure more broadly when it comes to what the government is doing to support Australian farmers. There has been no real action on climate change. We of course have a crippling workforce shortage, and we've heard many, many promises about how this would be resolved. We all remember the promised agriculture visa that was supposed to be up and running before Christmas, which, of course, has not happened. We have the minister still talking about the ag visa. No multilaterals have been signed. As far as I'm aware, there are not very many workers actually on Australian farms under this visa. We had multiple states experiencing a mouse plague and the government saying: 'Nothing to do with us.' But, of course, that happens so many times. We have a timber shortage in Australia at the moment. We talk about agriculture and forestry products. This government—really! We hear it all the time: 'We're the government of farmers.' That's not what I hear out there. They really have let farmers and regional communities down when it comes to doing the serious work of actually thinking long-term and supporting this sector.
Australian farmers need to have confidence and certainty that the government of the day will manage the biosecurity system so that we can protect and mitigate any risk to our agricultural industry—and also, as I said, to our human health—from pests and disease. It's clear from all of the experts that the government has a lot more work to do to make sure that our biosecurity system is well resourced and not at risk of failing. Labor will continue to keep a close eye on this and make sure that we hold the government to account when it comes to managing our biosecurity system. Whilst we do want to support this bill, I move:
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes the Coalition Government's ongoing failure to adequately strengthen Australia's biosecurity system".
I thank the House.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Andrews ): Is the amendment seconded?
Mr Thistlethwaite: I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the member for Franklin has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form that the amendment be disagreed to.
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (12:06): I thank the honourable member for Franklin specifically in relation to the opposition 's ultimate support for this bill, but, of course, the government doesn't agree with much of her commentary and the pious amendment that Labor is moving.
As mentioned, the Animal Health Australia and Plant Health Australia Funding Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 amends funding legislation for Animal Health Australia and Plant Health Australia, our partners managing the animal and plant emergency response deeds. The government confirms that this bill will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the legislation dealing with funding and levies relating to those partner organisations.
The bill will facilitate the ability of industry parties signing up to future emergency biosecurity response deeds to use the same levy arrangements available in relation to the existing plant and animal deeds. It'll offer increased flexibility to plant industry members in the spending of their emergency response levies. The bill will reduce administrative burden and red tape and improve clarity by removing redundant provisions. It'll simplify and give an appropriate level of oversight to the process of identifying relevant plant industry members for a particular leviable plant product.
These sensible and necessary changes will contribute to the ability of industries to further their biosecurity aims and ensure that Australia's biosecurity regime continues to protect our great nation's unique agriculture and environment and our way of life. I commend the bill to the House.
Question agreed to.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.
Third Reading
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (12:08): by leave—I move:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Question agreed to.
Bill read a third time.
Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2021
Second Reading
Consideration resumed of the motion:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Mr PERRETT (Moreton) (12:09): I say upfront that Labor will be supporting this bill in the parliament. Nevertheless, I move:
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes that the Government's mismanagement and politicisation of Australian Research Council grants and failure to adequately support Australia’s universities during the pandemic are causing serious harm to our world-class researchers".
I thank the member for Kingsford Smith for seconding that.
The Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2021 amends the Australian Research Council Act, applying indexation to our research programs while also inserting funding for the 2024-25 financial year. It's routine legislation and it needs to pass at this House to guarantee funding under rolling forward estimates. The Australian Research Council is an independent Commonwealth body and is the centrepiece of higher education research in this country. It funds primary research. It funds applied research. This legislation is essential to supporting its ongoing operations.
The Labor Party supports the council's important work, which is why we support this bill; but, while we're happy to support this particular measure, we're not happy with how the Morrison government has treated the ARC now and in the Abbott-Turnbull escapades before this current manifestation of incompetence and venom. It's a national scandal and it's getting worse and worse. In recent years, we have seen consistent to delays to grant decisions—delays which seem to be getting longer every year. We have seen political interference from ministers, culture war manoeuvres where they are trumping the ARC's independence. We've seen disrespect from the highest levels of government, and it's unfair to all the brilliant, hardworking nation-building professionals in our university system. It's a terrible, short-sighted attack on this country's economic future.
Smart countries know the value of research. They know that it drives economic growth, that it encourages innovation, that it expands our sense of history, human capacity and who we are. But that's clearly not how the Morrison government views research. Last year, the Morrison government delayed the announcement of research grants until Christmas Eve—literally the night before Christmas, like Ebenezer Scrooge in the Dickens novel. You can imagine the uncertainty this because our poor researchers, who didn't know if they still had their jobs in the next year or if their projects would be able to continue. How can you plan your career or commit to long-term research projects when you don't know things until the last minute? You can't. What about rent, food, mortgages and families? All were put in limbo due to coalition incompetence. Our shadow education minister, the member for Sydney, Tanya Plibersek, wrote to the National Audit Office, requesting an audit into the Morrison government's administration of ARC grants. She believed that letter because of her belief that this was a failure of public administration. Unfortunately, the Audit Office denied the request. That was disappointing, but our concerns with the ARC are still there.
On Christmas Eve, the acting minister vetoed six of the recommended projects because they didn't suit the Morrison government agenda or their taste. This was particularly cruel. An enormous amount of work goes into these applications—months and months of planning, editing and writing—and they were denied at the flick of a panda by an acting minister. As Professor Brian Schmidt, Vice-Chancellor of the Australian International University, said at the time:
In a liberal democracy, You make the grant rules, The independent research agency uses peer review to determine funding. It is completely inappropriate for grants to be removed by politicians, unless the grant rules were not followed.
Professor Schmidt is a Nobel Prize winner in astrophysics, so Brian knows a thing or two about research. Professor Schmidt knows just how damaging these arbitrary decisions can be.
And this wasn't a first for this government. In 2018, the Minister for Education and Training, Senator Birmingham, personally vetoed $4.2 million worth of grants from the Australian Research Council. Researchers described the minister 's behaviour as, 'reprehensible,' saying that it undermined the impartiality of the entire grants process.
This kind of political interference does serious harm to Australia's world-class university research sector. It damages our international reputation and makes it harder for universities to retain and recruit topnotch staff, putting thousands of jobs at risk. The role of the minister for education should be to ensure that the ARC's grant processes are rigorous, fair and transparent—and then, hands off! Obviously, they need to make sure that the council is competent and well run, then they should leave the independent agency to function without unnecessary and cumbersome political interference.
We hear a lot about free speech from the Morrison government, particularly from some of the members patrolling out the front of the parliament in fact. But when it really came down to it and they had a chance to woof the woof, hypocritically, they did the complete opposite. They clamped down on speech that they disagreed with. That's not Labor's approach; we support freedom of speech. That's not as a slogan or in a culture war, but as a fundamental principle of a free society. If Labor wins the next election, we're committed to approving grant applications that are recommended by a rigourous ARC peer-reviewed process. And they'll be delivered on time on a pre-established date—not Christmas Eve, I can guarantee that!—and well in advance of the grant's commencement. That's the Labor guarantee.
But of course we have to do much, much more to support our universities, particularly after the past horrific two years. They have been two of the hardest years in the history of higher education. We know that the Prime Minister abandoned higher education during the pandemic. In its hour of need, he deliberately and systematically deserted it. As thousands of university staff members were losing their jobs, what did the Prime Minister do? He excluded universities from JobKeeper. Businesses with booming profits got JobKeeper—$39 billion in fact—$39 billion went to profitable companies. But universities were coldly left out—a cruel and calculated decision by the Prime Minister.
I don't know what happened to the member for Cook when he was at university, but slaking his revenge has turned out to be a disaster for the sector. Across the pandemic, 40,000 jobs were cut across tertiary education. That's an unbelievable figure: 40,000 jobs. It's a hard number to get your head around. What do 40,000 jobs mean? That's 40,000 homes hit and 40,000 families rattled. Thousands of these jobs were in regional Australia; that's why we've heard so many National Party MPs speaking up about this. I'm just kidding—that did not happen! It was thousands of jobs in those bush areas, in places like Rockhampton, Bathurst, Armidale, Geelong, Warrnambool, Toowoomba and Townsville, and I could go on. Universities are Australia's fourth-biggest export industry and they've been hung out to dry by the Morrison government. Higher education is not a burden, it's an investment that delivers returns.
And so is research. Unfortunately, because of the Morrison government's abandonment during the pandemic, an estimated 7,000 research jobs were lost in the past two years. Departments have been shut down and research institutes, like the National Centre for Flood Research in Lismore, have closed. Under the Liberal Party, Australia has been a difficult place for researchers: a 2016 survey of medical researchers found that 83 per cent of them had contemplated leaving the profession. That is a fair dinkum brain drain flowing from the pen of the education minister and the Prime Minister's office.
The Australian Postdoctoral Reference Survey found that over half of our early-career researchers had thought about moving overseas, and plenty of them have already made this choice. It's an exodus of talent from our shores, where other countries will receive the benefits of that investment. These are the kinds of people who help supercharge our vaccine development, the people who liberated us from the worst of COVID and the pandemic, and we're watching them walk out the door. The truth is that we can't have a strong modern economy without a healthy research system. It's something we desperately need in this country. According to research by Harvard University, Australia has the economic complexity of a developing nation. Australia was between Uganda and Burkina Faso as the 87th most complex economy in the world—87th!
This isn't just an economic risk; it's holding our economy back. As a country, we spend well below the OECD average on research and development. New technology and breakthroughs don't emerge out of thin air; we need researchers to discover them and we need a system that encourages their work. The Liberal Party has never given researchers the support they need. We need a Labor government to do that. We need a Labor government that will invest in our universities again and that will deliver up to 20,000 new university places that will help fill skill shortages and future skill needs by training Australians in jobs, including engineering, nursing, tech and teaching, to name but a few. Those places will prioritise universities offering more opportunities for underrepresented groups, such as people in regional parts. I hope the National Party hears that. People from regional parts of Australia will receive that helping hand so the best and brightest kids from the bush get to go to our universities, as well as kids from remote and outer suburban areas, those who are amongst the first in their families to study at university and, obviously, First Nations Australians. A Labor government will use its $15 billion national reconstruction fund to help translate brilliant discoveries and inventions into new Australian businesses and new Australian jobs. It will put real resources into research and development.
Labor governments have always invested in higher education. Obviously, Gough Whitlam made my university study possible, but we've got a long history of investing in higher education. We've always opened it up to more students from less-privileged backgrounds so that our best and brightest can solve the problems of a modern Australia. We've always supported research. That's our legacy and that's our ambition. Our universities won't be rebuilt under the Liberals, who spent their term in office trashing them. What a legacy! We need a Labor government to rebuild our universities.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Andrews ): Is the amendment seconded?
Mr Thistlethwaite: I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.
Mr STEVENS (Sturt) (12:21): I rise to support the second reading of the bill and not the amendment. Of course, this is a routine matter for us to deal with on an annual basis. We are, primarily, in this bill, adjusting the expenditure caps on research that are set out in the act. Of course, each financial year we add a new fourth year of the funding cap. We're also happily here increasing the existing ones in line with inflation. So this bill will see a little over $840 million added to what we're investing in research.
I'm very proud to be here, speaking in support of this, because research and the taxpayer funds and support that we provide to research are ever more important, now more than ever, in light of the lessons that we've learnt in responding economically to the challenges of the coronavirus and the very important needs of sovereign capability here in Australia: to be less reliant on offshore supply chains and to be more able and competent to produce more things here, particularly things that we rely on in a crisis. We saw during the coronavirus pandemic how important it was to have supply chains that were onshore here. If a situation like that ever befalls us again, we want to be even more robust than we were this time.
Research is so important in that because, of course, modern manufacturing and advanced modern industries require research for us to have a competitive advantage. This government has already announced, through the Modern Manufacturing Initiative in a previous budget, that we want to be investing in industry capacity in this country, particularly in the six areas that we identified through the Modern Manufacturing Initiative. I want to talk about one of those specific to my home state of South Australia in a moment. All six of them are about building resilience, and they need investment in research to be able to be industries and industry sectors that we can build on and grow into the future. By investing through things like the Research Council, we're going to see those excellent outcomes. It's research not just for research's sake but also for the added economic and industry benefit outcomes from that.
One of the six areas we've talked about is defence and, naturally, as a South Australian, I want to take the opportunity to reinforce how important it is for us to have a sovereign defence industry. The decisions of this Morrison government and previous coalition governments since 2013 have been vitally important for us to build our sovereign defence industry capability in this nation. Clearly, the naval shipbuilding decisions that have been made are the two biggest examples of that, but a whole range of capability acquisitions decisions that have been made in the last eight to nine years have been vital to give the defence industry in this country the confidence that it has a government that is going to invest in it and its capability.
But just as vitally important is research. When we talk about this bill and about investing in research as a government, it reminds us of recent examples like the one the Prime Minister announced at the Press Club last week and, of course, the Trailblazer program. They are examples of us as a government investing in research that partners us with tertiary institutions like universities, such as in the Trailblazers example. The announcement last week by the Prime Minister links universities and agencies like the CSIRO into the commercial sphere to find those great partnerships. Because although we do it in this country, I do believe we can do even better at ensuring that we get a commercialisation outcome from our spend in research and development. Whether that's taxpayer funds, whether it's private sector funds or whether it's the universities, we want to make sure that as we are spending money on research and development we are not just doing the R and the D but are getting the C part as well—commercialisation—and seeing an economic dividend from research when we are undertaking research that has an industry outcome.
So, in fairness, this is going to be more and more exciting for us, for our economy and particularly for my home state of South Australia because, as we are making decisions as a government to invest in defence industry, research and development, I'm very confident that that is going to lead to commercialisation outcomes for businesses that either exist or will be created because of the IP from research and, of course, jobs and economic benefits are going to flow from that.
I have a great business in my electorate called Supashock and it is an example of a business that is growing rapidly because it is undertaking research and development. They are bringing young graduates into the firm every year. They are enhancing their existing products. They are creating new products. They're servicing their existing customers and finding new customers. Just before Christmas, I was at a milestone announcement with the German company Rheinmetall, which partners with Supashock. In fact, they are a minority shareholder in that business. Rheinmetall are engaging with Supashock in contracts right across the world. In my electorate, through Rheinmetall, there will be components and parts made for major defence vehicle contracts across the globe. That is really exciting and it is because Supashock is investing in R&D. They always have a new or enhanced product, which means not only are they an excellent business that are making very good high-quality consistent products but there is always something new coming from them, something exciting that gives them an edge when they are seeking and bidding for various contracts. That all comes from research and understanding—in their case as a business—how vital it is to be investing in R&D and to be always looking for the next opportunity to enhance your product and to get an edge on your competitors. It's even more vital that we as a government are partnering with Australian businesses when they are competing internationally in export markets.
The more that the investment through the Research Council and the other investments that we make in research and development can lead to economic outcomes, the better. I mentioned the Trailblazer program that we announced last year as a government. This is very exciting. Just last week the acting education minister released the shortlist of the universities that are being considered to be one of four selected in the Trailblazer program to receive government funding partnered with the universities. Certainly I'm very supportive of Adelaide university's proposal under that process. It has been shortlisted and is in the final eight. As I say, four will be selected, so I hope it will be successful. It has a defence proposition to put forward which sees us investing as a government, but a far larger amount of money is being unlocked through the university and the industry partnerships brought together for that proposal, that bid into the Trailblazer program, which unlocks way more than the amount of money that we, as a government, will be spending. And it's not just about the dollars and cents when it comes to research; it's also about the capability and the quality of the research that's going to occur. In that case, again, some very eminent, significant defence companies are a part of that bid. I'm very excited for what they've put forward and very hopeful that they'll be successful.
As the member for Sturt, I've been involved in other propositions to government for research funding. Again, I was thrilled last year that the Heavy Industry Low-carbon Transition CRC, which was another Adelaide university led program, was successful. That has received Commonwealth funding. It's an example of partnering with tertiary institutions and, most importantly, the private sector. In that case, they are looking at some of the heavy industries, which of course are significant carbon emitters—industries like steel, aluminium et cetera—and how they can transition as we move towards a net zero carbon emissions future. In some cases there are technological breakthroughs that have not yet occurred and that must occur. With cement production, for example, if we're going to do large-scale production of cement in a zero-carbon way, then there are some industrial processes that are yet to be developed. I believe that these kinds of partnerships, which we as a government invest in with the private sector and with the tertiary education sector, are going to lead to outcomes in the sorts of breakthroughs that we need.
Again, I reiterate that these are examples of government being a co-investor in things that involve research to solve problems and that lead to economic outcomes. Most important is when we know that, although we're putting money in ourselves, we're actually leveraging an enormous amount of other money, from the private sector and from the universities. The United States is quite renowned for its tertiary education sector being excellent at converting research and development into commercialisation—into something that can become a business. I do think that we can do better than we already do in that regard. I'd love to see, in this country, that we are enhancing the link between the things that happen at our universities and how they lead to commercial outcomes. The Prime Minister's announcement last week, on the day that he addressed the National Press Club, was about exactly that—creating these linkages between research that's done at universities and commercial outcomes through businesses, whether it's an existing business or a business that is created off the back of IP that is developed through research at our institutions, so that the money we're investing gives us a return as well.
When research funding is focused on industries and breakthroughs for manufacturing, for example—and I've spoken about the Manufacturing Modernisation Fund initiative that we have put forward—we want to see those dollars lead to breakthroughs and lead to an economic return on that. Hopefully, ideally, whatever we're spending on research has a significant multiplier effect when it comes to the economic outcome when that research is successful.
Not all research is going to be successful and not all research is undertaken for economic benefit, obviously. As a government we're an enormous investor in health and medical research. The primary purpose of that, obviously, is to solve the problems and challenges in the health sector and the medical sector. Whether it's developing vaccines or developing new treatments for cancer and other things, that research investment is equally vital. But I'm certainly pleased to see that, as a government, we have an added focus, in the research funding that we invest, on seeing these economic manufacturing outcomes.
We have been a great manufacturing nation, particularly in the post-Second-World-War era. South Australia, and my home city of Adelaide, is one of the best examples of that. We had the GM-Holden factory, and we had very many other significant manufacturing businesses that were very successful for a long, long time. They were impacted by things like opening the economy up and reducing tariffs and by cheaper imports coming from other countries. Whilst I'm very passionately supportive of free trade, it is obviously regrettable that we have lost manufacturing jobs in this country in the more recent decades. But the opportunity for us now is to bring those manufacturing jobs back into our economy. We're going to do that by being competitive, by being more advanced and by having IP and technological breakthroughs by focusing on research and development and leading that through to commercialisation.
In closing: in my support of this bill, I reiterate the point that the way in which we're investing in research, through things like the Australian Research Council, means that, of the research dollars that we're investing, we're seeing—as a government—more and more being focused on the outcomes of that research. We can see an economic dividend coming from it. We want to see, as we're investing in manufacturing R&D, the commercialisation of that. We want to see a new era of manufacturing and a transformation of the industrial capability of our economy through the research dollars that we're investing. I commend the bill to the House.
Mr DICK (Oxley) (12:35): I rise to speak on the bill before the parliament, the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2021. Labor supports this bill. As we have heard, the purpose of the bill is to amend the Australian Research Council Act to apply indexation to approved research programs, as well as to insert funding for the 2024-25 financial year. The Australian Research Council is an independent Commonwealth body. It funds both primary and applied research through the Discovery program and the Linkage program.
The legislation is essential to support the ongoing operations of the ARC. Obviously Labor supports this work; that's why we are supporting the bill. But, whilst I make those introductory remarks, I also want to speak strongly in favour of the second reading amendment. I wish to raise my very real concerns about how the government is treating the Australian Research Council. It has been subject to unjustifiable delays to grant announcements and to political interference from government ministers, and the important work that its researchers do has been completely devalued.
I also want to place on record my growing concerns regarding the lack of support—the fact that this government seems incapable of adequately supporting Australia's universities during the pandemic and the serious harm that has on our world-class researchers. I thank the member for Sydney for the work that she's done in advocating on behalf of the sector. I think all members on this side of the chamber are at one in that we've either heard concerns from or had contact with numerous people in the sector who are basically at the 'break glass' point.
Last year, the government delayed the announcement of important university research grants until—are you ready for it?—Christmas Eve. Talk about taking the trash out on a quiet day! This, of course, caused enormous uncertainty for the 5,000 researchers whose jobs and projects relied on the funding. Then the acting minister—we need to point out that we still have an education minister that has been stood down. We've forgotten about the fact that the minister is not around or not doing their job because of serious allegations. And, even when the minister is here, the education minister seems completely obsessed about only one thing: curriculum—about what's being taught or culture wars at university.
You don't actually hear the government, the Prime Minister or the education minister talking about the value of higher education. It's nonsensical during question time sometimes. It's like listening to a weird Liberal Party branch meeting in which motion after motion is moved or to a Young Liberals or ALSF conference about who can be more right wing in attacking the university sector. Somehow, some members of the government believe that the university sector is a hotbed of communism—that it's trying to indoctrinate young people and trying to take over the world. If it's not that; it's the weird view they have about curriculum being taught in schools. I've said this before: if the government is so concerned about curriculum at schools and the correct right-wing ideology is not being followed—they have been in government nine years. What are they doing? It is just ridiculous. We never talk about education outcomes in this place. We never talk about the impact of cuts to higher education. We just continually see the government on these weird culture wars, trying to whip up hysteria without tackling what not funding our higher education sector means for our nation.
Let's get back to Christmas Eve, when the then acting minister made the decision to veto six of the recommended projects, seemingly because they were not in line with the government's agenda. These applications take a huge amount of time and work from researchers over the course of months, and this government basically has slammed the door in their face. This is a government unafraid of repeating its own mistakes. As I often say, the government is never afraid to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. In this government, back in 2019, Senator Birmingham personally vetoed $4.2 million worth of grants from the Australian Research Council, simply because they did not suit the government's political agenda, or maybe they just weren't to his current views at the time. This behaviour was described by universities and researchers—let's take the politics out of this; let's hear what the sector said—as 'reprehensible' and that it undermined the impartiality of the grants process. This kind of political interference does very real harm to Australia's world-class university research sector. It damages our international reputation and makes it harder for universities to retain and recruit staff, putting thousands of jobs at risk.
The Minister for Education and Youth has a responsibility to make sure that the ARC's grant processes are rigorous, fair and transparent and to make sure the council is competent and well run. I firmly believe that the minister should be approving grant applications that are recommended by a rigorous Australian Research Council peer review process. I will be strongly supportive of Labor's commitment if we are privileged to be elected. Academic freedom is key to a functioning and free society, and I am horrified that the government has seemingly chosen to disregard it in favour of their own personal political ends. Their attitude towards research and their reluctance to invest in it has made Australia an unwelcoming place for researchers and the important work that they do.
I want to focus at some of my remarks now on the practical side of demonstrating to the House and to the Australian community what this government has done to the sector, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. If there were ever a sector that needed government to support them, it's the university and higher education sector. Seven thousand jobs were lost, as we heard from the member for Moreton. Departments were shut down. Research institutes have closed. Sadly, this is another chapter in the government's neglect of research. A 2016 survey of medical researchers found that 83 per cent of them had thought about leaving the profession altogether, while another found that over half of our early career researchers had thought about moving overseas. It publicly said that we were looking at a brain drain in this country. Since then, we have seen this played out, with talented researchers leaving our shores in droves.
A healthy university system is the key to our economy—I fundamentally believe that—our democracy and our society. For conservatives who believe in institutions and the value of institutions, they've got a really funny way of showing it. They've got a really warped view of the way to support institutions in this country. We need to invest in research to invest in our future. New technology and breakthroughs just don't come out of thin air; we need researchers to discover them. Australia's investment in research and development falls well short of the OECD average. Universities are where some of our best minds go to learn the skills they need to help the future of this nation. Universities are one of our most important economic and social institutions. They drive innovation, they generate export income, they encourage new industries and new businesses, and they help educate and train the next generation of skilled workers. But, despite this, universities have been systematically trashed by this government. During the pandemic, the Prime Minister simply left higher education out in the cold.
I am privileged to represent one of the largest growth corridors in the nation: the greater Springfield area in the south-west suburbs of Brisbane and the Ipswich area. Within that lies the beating heart of the University of Southern Queensland's Springfield campus. I pay tribute to the leadership of Professor Geraldine Mackenzie, both to her outstanding leadership and to her leadership team at that campus. I have talked to parents and to students. There's not enough time today for me to talk about international students and the neglect that the government has shown there. Queensland's third-largest income generator is the dollars that come in from overseas students.
If there is one example that I want to leave the parliament with tonight of how the government really disrespected the sector, it is the fact that universities were deliberately excluded from JobKeeper. Casinos got JobKeeper, $39 billion was wasted on profitable companies, but universities were left out. We all know businesses with increasing profits got JobKeeper. We've all seen those stories. Australian higher education has suffered hugely as a result of that one decision to exclude universities from JobKeeper, with around 40,000 jobs being cut across the pandemic. Think about what that means, Mr Deputy Speaker. I listened to the member for Morton's contribution where he spoke about regional centres and regional Australia. When you take jobs out of regional centres, that has a multiplier effect. The government members in this chamber know that. You take out those jobs and it has supply chain issues, and it has huge impacts when it comes to the local economy.
The sheer scale of the livelihoods destroyed by this government is nothing less than shameful. Academics, tutors, admin staff, library staff, catering staff, ground staff, cleaners, security officers and so many others—all out of work. They all had bills to pay, and many had families to support. During the pandemic I've met with a number of families who—through no fault of their own, but due to the woeful neglect by this government—were simply cut out of the JobKeeper program. Thousands of these jobs were in regional Australia. This is Australia's fourth-biggest export industry and Australia's most successful service export. Surely this huge export income alone should have been enough to justify the government's support? But not once did we see one member of the government speak out on this. It is shameful the way universities have been treated.
The money was ripped out not only from universities but also, as I said, from the local economies—the cafes, restaurants, hairdressers and shopping centres that all of these international students would have been shopping in—and all the local students—particularly in regional centres, and would have supported. At the same time, the government also introduced legislation that more than doubled the course fees for thousands of Australians. So it was a double whammy. There was no support for the people who worked in the sector—no support for people who needed that support—and then the double whammy of the increased fees for thousands of Australian students. That legislation originally contained an overall cut to university funding, and it was also targeted at the disciplines the government dislikes.
The government have spent a decade trying to undermine, cut funding to and discredit our universities. When was the last time we heard a question in this place about the outstanding work of universities? It's never discussed by the government. The fact that today we've only seen one token effort by the government—they're not interested in this sector. Their attitude towards higher education is indicative of their attitude across the whole of government: do only what is in their immediate political self-interest and ignore the long-term—or even, in this case, the short-term—consequences of their failures and their neglect of the real issues facing our nation.
We on this side of the chamber have a concrete plan to rebuild the university sector. But, more importantly, we will show the sector the respect that it deserves, including the 20,000 new places under Labor's Future Made in Australia Skills Plan. This work will address the critical issue of skill shortages and future skill needs, by training Australians in jobs in critical areas like engineering and nursing—I know the member for Cooper will be a strong supporter of that—and by making sure that we have quality educators in our country. We also have plans to prioritise universities offering more opportunities for underrepresented groups, which will directly benefit so many of my local communities, those people who are first in family to study, people from First Nations backgrounds. We also want to work with universities, in partnership, on how our $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund can help translate brilliant discoveries and innovations into Australian businesses and, more importantly, provide Australian jobs. There's a core difference when it comes to universities, but our university and research sector know they can rely on this side of the chamber, because we want to work with universities to build our nation and to see more people employed. But we will clearly need a change of government for that to occur.
Ms STEGGALL (Warringah) (12:50): Today I rise to speak on the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2021. This bill will amend the Australian Research Council Act to index appropriations and provide a new funding cap, commencing in 2024. These are administrative changes that I support. The Australian Research Council is a statutory Commonwealth agency under the ARC Act. For 20 years the ARC's fundamental purpose has been to grow knowledge and innovation in the national interest and for the Australian community. This kind of innovation aims to underpin positive environmental, social and economic outcomes. The ARC does this by advising the government on research matters as well as administering the National Competitive Grants Program, Excellence in Research for Australia, and the engagement and impact evaluation assessment frameworks. The ARC runs various funding schemes under the banner of linkage programs, which encourage research collaborations between researchers and a range of different styles of organisations, including private enterprise, community organisations and other research agencies.
In 2021 the ARC had its 20-year anniversary, and it has achieved a lot. Since being established, the ARC has awarded over $13 billion in over 29,000 research grants. There are 1,100 research projects funded each year. The Commonwealth invests in research and development in many ways, but the ARC forms a large part of it. The ARC administers roughly 6.8 per cent of the Commonwealth's total investment in research and development. This is a substantial amount. The ARC has partially funded 74 centres of excellence with industry and universities, and centres of excellence foster collaboration between research organisations, businesses and universities. Centres of excellence usually undertake innovative transformation research, and recent centres have focused on issues like recycling and even dark matter.
The ARC supports industrial transformation research hubs, which engage researchers to investigate new technologies and economic, commercial and social transformations. Usually, these are to benefit industry partners. Alongside this are ARC industrial transformation training centres, which help facilitate innovation and postdoctoral training for research industries. The ARC also brokers crucial partnerships between government, business and academia, international institutions and community organisations, with over 9,000 domestic and international partnerships over the last 20 years.
There is a lot to be celebrated. While several reviews into the ARC have highlighted areas for improvement, the importance of the ARC just cannot be understated. Through its fostering of world-leading research, the ARC is central to Australia's innovation performance. Innovation crucially underpins our economic prosperity and wellbeing. It is directly tied to productivity. Just look at how innovation has brought us through this pandemic. From the mRNA vaccines to telehealth, the benefits are clear. Innovation is crucial for both our economic recovery and our long-term resilience as we emerge from this pandemic. The ARC is a fundamental pillar of what I call the new economy. The new economy is forward focused, sustainable, decarbonised and, importantly, built on innovation. It's an economy where our research delivers revolutions in consumer goods and services. It's where our research takes on the big issues of our times: climate change, artificial intelligence, automation and biodiversity loss—and beats those challenges, comes up with the solutions. Breakthroughs like the cochlear implant and wi-fi are many in this economy, and new jobs and prosperity are delivered.
In Warringah we're lucky to have various innovation and research hubs that support this vision of a new economy, from the Lakeba Future Hub to the SEVENmile Venture Lab. They're incubating the next iteration of products, services and businesses. And Warringah's workforce is supporting the new economy, with 23.9 per cent of people in Warringah engaged in professional, scientific and technical services—the leading employer in the electorate.
But more can be done. To fully enact the vision of the new economy requires the Commonwealth government to invest in research and development through agencies like the ARC. Whilst this bill will provide an extra $10 billion to $12 billion per annum in appropriations, it still falls well short of what we need to get Australia ahead of the curve, really leading the way and opening up that door to the new economy. Australia is falling further and further behind the rest of the world on innovation. We were once ranked 17th in the world, according to the global innovation index, and we've slipped to 25th this year. It's no surprise, because Australia's total private and public research and development spend is falling behind that of our global peers.
Currently we invest 1.8 per cent of GDP in research and development, and that's down from a high of 2.2 per cent in 2008. It leaves us at the back of the pack of OECD countries. We are half the average of OECD countries. Israel and South Korea, for example, both have spends of up to four per cent of GDP on their R&D. The impact of this extra investment is noticeable. Many of the world's best tech startups originate in these two pioneering countries.
The economic benefits of investing more in research and development are manyfold. A recent CSIRO report found that, for each dollar invested in R&D, an average of $3.50 in economic benefits came out of it. That is good investment. If we want to have better living standards and protect our environment, our communities and our way of life, we had best innovate—and innovate fast. We can improve our performance by increasing the appropriations for the ARC. Bold investment through the ARC will have immediate effect. An additional barrier is a lack of commercialisation of our world-class research, despite linkage programs supported by the ARC. Collaboration between industry and research institutions underpins innovation, and it will be critical in order to support jobs growth in our recovery and in dealing with our current and future challenges.
So, I support the government's announcement of a $2 billion fund that will take research and facilitate the development of marketable products and services with financial incentives. But let's get real: it's the very least we could do after the pandemic devastated our universities. Additionally, if we're really serious we will engage with national moonshot programs, which are national high-ambition, high-payoff ventures. We can look at doing these in areas of comparative advantage. Some of the sectors we should look at are space, space quantum, quantum, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, clean technology and digitisation.
Future jobs in innovation require advanced science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills. Seventy-five per cent of the fastest growing occupations require significant STEM skills and knowledge, and STEM based employment is projected to grow at almost twice the pace of other occupations. Unfortunately, the STEM performance in our schools is lacking. It's leaving a brains gap for business and affecting our innovation, and I suggest it would be a better focus for the government than worrying about ideology and culture wars and how one should be reinterpreting history to suit ideology. STEM is the most important area of our future.
We can't ignore, either, the unfortunately vast gender disparity in STEM studies. According to the Chief Scientist, STEM is still 79 per cent male dominated, and we know that gender and cultural diversity and research drives better innovation outcomes and has been linked to organisation performance. It is a win-win when you fix the gender divide. We therefore need a comprehensive plan to address both the achievement gap in STEM and the gender disparity in participation in STEM. All this should be tied together with a comprehensive strategy to coordinate, plan and outline core objectives for national industry innovation in Australia.
Unfortunately, we can't talk about this bill and this funding for the ARC without discussing the government's poor performance on research grants. Last month, a group of the country's most eminent scientists and researchers spoke out against the minister's decision to block grants for six projects. These projects had been evaluated and elevated for funding by an independent panel. The arms-length process is designed to place funding for the most meritorious projects away from political interference. The announcement of successful grants was also delayed. The researchers should have known in November if they made the cut, and instead they had to wait until Christmas Eve. This is extraordinary. People may not understand why, but it's because delay impacts outcomes. For 30 years, they've been awarded on time, in the fourth quarter. That is what the scientists and people in the sector could rely on. The delayed announcement caused substantial uncertainty for many researchers, who were pinning future research on these grants. So researchers who aimed to collaborate with industry risked losing those very important relationships due to the time delay and through no fault of their own.
If an independent process, designed to be impartial, recommends certain grants, then the government should follow its guidance and award them in a timely manner. Too many times we have seen the Morrison government overrule departments and other bodies just to rort the process with their own cherrypicked selections. We need more accountability to be built into this process. If the minister chooses to reject a grant, he or she should table a statement of reasons setting out a clear rationale for such a move, because the funds we are allocating are public funds and they should be allocated with transparency and in accordance with the process that has been approved.
In conclusion, the ARC plays a crucial role in supporting innovation in Australia. It's part of our new economy. I want to see it be a bigger part of the new economy we are capable of building, but it does require vision and it requires commitment to letting go of the past and actually moving forward towards new technologies. We are limping to the back of the pack with our performance on innovation. This is acting as a drag on our productivity and our economic growth, and so many young people know this and fear this, because they are ambitious; they are hungry for success. I know this because I meet so many of them in Warringah.
We can become leaders once again and ensure decades of prosperity, but only if we embrace just some of the limited policies that I have set out as being part of a new economy. We must consider the challenges we have ahead. We have big challenges ahead, in the next decade in particular, in relation to global warming and climate change, but we also have the skills, the willpower and the smarts. We have the smart workforce to do this. We have the innovation and the R&D. We actually need to let go of the past, be brave and ambitious and look towards building a more prosperous and a clean and sustainable future, and we will do that with innovation.
Mr KHALIL (Wills) (13:05): Federal Labor is supportive of the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2021 which indexes approved research grants and provides funding for the 2024-25 financial year. Whilst these amendments are standard and uncontroversial, the government's continued treatment of the Australian Research Council is anything but.
My electorate of Wills is home to a high number of researchers and academics. They continue to share their frustrations with me about the government's interference with their sector. Delays to grant announcements are of particular concern. Last year the government deliberately delayed announcements about university research grants until Christmas Eve. This was less than a month before grants were scheduled to commence. Up to 5,000 researchers had no certainty when it came to their jobs and research projects.
Furthermore, political interference by successive ministers demonstrates the government's concerted effort to politicise research in this country. In this round of grants the then acting education minister vetoed six humanities grants because they clearly didn't suit the government's agenda. You might ask: who was this acting education minister? It was none other than the member for Fadden, who is known for his fantastic oversight of other government programs such as robodebt! I'm sure if the member from Maribyrnong were here he would be nodding his head at the great job that the member for Fadden has done and the track record he has! He is just one of several Liberal government ministers who have vetoed Australian Research Council grants. Then Minister for Education Tehan intervened in 2020. Senator Birmingham personally vetoed $4.2 million of grants back in 2018. Of course, they are all following in the footsteps of Howard government ministers who did the same thing.
Unlike the Liberals, federal Labor has never vetoed Australian Research Council grants because we respect impartiality in the grants process. We know that proposals can take months and months of planning, and then, in the way that this government is doing it, can be denied with a flick of a pen. This is reprehensible interference. It's not only harming our research sector but damaging our international reputation. How can we attract the best researchers, scientists, educators, students and other professionals when the system is anything but fair or transparent? How can we retain all of those people? It's another example of a government that says they are committed to jobs—they talk about jobs a lot—but everything they do within their power actually jeopardises thousands of jobs. Don't get me wrong, the grant processes should be rigorous, and that is why if elected a federal Labor government would be guided by a rigorous Australian Research Council peer review process in approving applications. We support academic freedom and believe that Australia should be a world leader in research.
Unfortunately, under this government 7,000 research jobs have been cut in the past two years. That's 7,000 people without work as a direct causal effect of this government's policies. How can this exodus of talent be of any surprise when surveys show more than half of our researchers consider moving overseas upon completing study? We need to be investing, not interfering, in academic institutions like universities. They are not just important social hubs but economic ones—driving innovation, fostering new businesses and industries, helping to educate and train people for their jobs. So many people in my electorate of Wills understand that the Morrison government has left our universities behind. When they did finally come to the table with JobKeeper, after a lot of advocacy by the federal Labor opposition, they deliberately left universities out. This has meant 40,000 jobs have been cut, 40,000 jobs that were not important enough for this government to save—academics, tutors, admin staff, library staff, catering staff, ground staff, cleaners, security and many more. These are all real people—so many faces and names I know in my own community who worked in the sector, who have families and responsibilities. They are all now out of work.
And yet, even as education is our biggest service export, this government is only trying to make it harder for Australians seeking an education. Thousands of Australian students are now paying double for courses because of changes made by this government, who originally planned to cut university funding overall. Surprise, surprise, just like in their grant interference, these changes hit humanities and other disciplines that this government ideologically takes issue with. But, unlike this government, we will support universities. We will deliver up to 20,000 new university places under our Future Made in Australia Skills Plan. Sectors such as engineering, nursing, technology and education generally will all benefit as we help fix areas of skills shortages. Of these places, we will prioritise opportunities for marginalised and underrepresented groups.
I know how important this is. Education made such a difference to my sister and me. My parents worked hard and sacrificed when they came to Australia. They did overtime in their jobs. Mum and dad were educated. Dad was a lawyer in Egypt. When he came to Australia, he couldn't continue in that field. He ended up working at Australia Post. He gave up much of his career to put food on the table for us. He and my mum always insisted that we get a good education. We didn't have a lot, growing up as children of migrant parents in public housing, but that lesson was always drummed into us: get a good education, because it opens up the door to opportunity for you, and this country will give you that opportunity. So I worked hard, doing the night shift at the local service station, working as a cleaner, doing all sorts of jobs, to get through university. But access to education meant that, with that hard work, I could have a successful career and give back, in public service, to the country that has given us so much—like so many other Australians who have been given opportunities through education.
As a federal MP, I want to make that a reality for every Australian, including those from regional, remote and outer suburban areas, First Nations Australians and people who are first in their family to attend university, often from a migrant or culturally diverse background. Federal Labor will work with universities to determine how our $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund can support meaningful projects that create jobs and opportunities. Unlike the Liberal government, we will support researchers, academics, students, support staff and everyone else who is passionate about making Australia a world leader in higher education. We will continue Labor's legacy of supporting a world-class education system, one that attracts the best and the brightest, with access for all Australians, to give them that door of opportunity that they can open and fulfil their potential.
Dr LEIGH (Fenner) (13:13): On Christmas Eve last year we saw a familiar pantomime playing out, of the Liberals again vetoing Australian Research Council grants. This sad and tired pantomime played out first under the Howard government, when Brendan Nelson knocked off nearly a dozen ARC grants. It then happened in 2018-19, when Senator Birmingham and the member for Wannon, Dan Tehan, as education ministers, knocked off another handful of Australian Research Council grants. And now we've seen the coalition do it a third time, with the decision of the member for Fadden, Stuart Robert, as acting education minister, to block six humanities research projects from receiving funding.
Let's be clear about what it means to win an Australian Research Council grant. This is a process that involves several rounds of rigorous peer review from internationally determined experts. Those researchers who put their time into preparing for Australian Research Council grants do so often during summer, giving up their holidays in order to prepare documents, knowing that there is probably only a one in five chance that they will make it through that highly competitive process. I'm aware of this; as a former professor at the Australian National University, I was fortunate to win three Australian Research Council grants and to serve as a reviewer for Australian Research Council grants.
Now, these are referred to as grants, but make no mistake. This isn't like the minister stepping in through some dodgy colour-coded spreadsheet process. This isn't like the minister stepping in after a public servant has spent a few hours or even a few days looking at which grants might be supported. This is a highly rigorous academic selection process in which it is utterly bizarre to have the minister stepping up and knocking off grants.
I pay tribute to the anonymous ARC Tracker account on Twitter, which has very carefully documented the problems we've seen under the Coalition. It has documented the significant delays in the announcement of Australian Research Council grants and documented the way in which those applying for grants have been left at the political whims of the government. The Australian Research Council, at least in this instance, did not connive with the minister's decision. One of the worst things about the 2018-19 decision was that grant applicants were led to believe that their grants had been knocked off on the basis of merit, that they had failed through the competitive selection process. The Australian Research Council did not at the time come clear with those unsuccessful grant applicants and say, 'Look, your peers put you top of the pile, but the minister knocked you off.' At least this time it was very clear what had happened when the minister stepped in.
The knocking off of ARC grants is akin to the Minister for Sport funding a sporting competition with prizes at the end and in which the rules are very clearly set out, then coming along as people are walking up to the medal ceremony and saying: 'No, I don't like this silver-medallist. I'm knocking off the silver-medallist and I'm allowing the bronze medallist to step up.' That is what it is like to override it. That is why we have seen an open letter signed by 139 current and former members of the Australian Research Council's College of Experts, protesting against the decision, pointing out that the six projects that were knocked off satisfied 'a rigorous multistage selection process' and that the ministerial decision to override the recommendations for funding 'undermines this process'. We've already seen at least two members of the College of Experts resign in protest. As the statement notes, the government has failed to uphold standards in line with the Haldane principle which holds that, while governments need to establish funding guidelines, decisions on individual research proposals are best made through independent peer review and government ministers should not decide which individual projects should be funded.
Australia is, as far as we know, unique among advanced countries in allowing the minister to knock off research grants. This doesn't happen in other countries, and that's because other countries don't see this as being like handing out money to local sporting clubs. They see this as having a rigour and an independence that means that ministers should not step in and override the process. The Morrison government claims it wants to protect academic freedoms. In fact, it commissioned a 2019 review of freedom of expression and intellectual inquiry into higher education. Minister Roberts's decision to veto ARC grants is a clear breach of a core principle of academic freedom. The veto of those grants is extraordinary. What did they knock off? They knocked off research projects exploring modern-day China. They knocked off a project on Shakespeare, one of whose key investigators was head of the peak Australian Shakespeare research society. So those who say that they're interested in the classics are knocking off grants for researching Shakespeare. Those opposite who talk about the importance of understanding China are knocking off grants for research into China.
At a time in which we have massive discontent with democracy among young Australians, we have the minister knocking off a grant for research into the School Strike 4 Climate. Whether you agree or disagree with the School Strike 4 Climate—and I was one of those who joined those marches—surely it is worth understanding the discontent of young people, understanding the frustration that they face about this government's complete failure of leadership on the issue of climate change. Tony Abbott may be gone from this place, but this government still has Tony Abbott's climate targets, still has the climate targets of the man who called climate change 'absolute crap'. We had a grant for research to explore the School Strike 4 Climate that would have shed light on young people's attitudes and potentially had proposals for greater community engagement in the climate debate and strengthening our democracy. If there's anything that all of us in this place should be united behind it's strengthening our democracy. When there are young people up in the gallery, members on all sides wave to them. We're pleased to see school groups in the chamber, and I can't wait for them to come back as the restrictions lift. Yet when it comes to understanding the views of young people about climate change, the Morrison government wants to stick its head in the sand.
We've had a range of senior figures within the academic establishment speaking out. Barney Glover, the Vice-Chancellor of Western Sydney University, said that it was facile to suggest that any of the vetoed grants weren't in the national interest. Nobel laureate Brian Schmidt, the Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University, said that it was inappropriate to intervene to remove grants 'unless the grant rules were not followed'. There's no suggestion in this case that there was a failure by the applicants to follow the grant rules, so the government is again simply knocking off grants in its own political interests.
One of the grants was to do with religion, and we were in here until after five o'clock this morning debating the issue of freedom of religion. You'd think the government would want to better understand issues surrounding religion. But, no, it's knocked off a grant for research into religion and done so at a time when these issues are of significant importance. We've had Christine Parolin, the executive director of the Australian Academy of the Humanities, saying:
Having researchers second guess whether their work will be rejected by the minister of the day after passing a rigorous assessment process of their peers, is no way to support a research system in a liberal democracy.
The anonymous ARC Tracker account said:
It undermines, insults and wastes the precious time and thorough considerations of 200-strong College of Experts assembled by an independent ARC.
Professor Barney Glover, in talking about climate activism, said:
Surely we want our best social and political scientists to explore the phenomenon. And what could the Minister possibly find objectionable in a liberal democracy supporting freedom of speech and extolling the virtues of academic freedom.
We've seen from this government a decision which has been described by the former Labor frontbencher Senator Carr as 'McCarthyism', pointing out that it subverts research that was recommended by the Australian Research Council. There are some $800 million of grants that are allocated through the Australian Research Council, and the meddling is utterly outrageous. Labor has said very clearly that, were an Albanese Labor government to be elected, our education minister would never exercise that veto. It never happened when Senator Carr was the minister for education and it wouldn't happen under minister Plibersek. The member for Sydney, were she to become education minister in Australia—and that would be a great day, indeed—would never veto an Australian Research Council grant.
The member for Sydney, Tanya Plibersek, recognises that the Australian Research Council is an independent Commonwealth body. She recognises that political interference undermines the support of the academic community for the Australia Research Council process. And she recognises that the attacks on the independence of the Australian Research Council are just part of the government's attacks on universities. We've seen cuts to university funding and we've seen jobs lost. Universities, such as Curtin University and the Australian National University, have literally been decimated, losing more than one in 10 of their staff.
During the pandemic, the government changed the rules three times to prevent public universities getting JobKeeper assistance. That's one of the reasons why so many of them lost jobs. But, at the same time, casinos got JobKeeper, and $20 billion of JobKeeper went to firms with rising revenue. Private universities, such as Bond University and New York University's Sydney campus, got JobKeeper. But public universities were left out, and the Commonwealth assistance that was extended to universities was far less than the hit to their revenue from the government closing the borders and shutting off access to overseas students.
International education is our fourth-biggest export industry, and yet it's being undermined by this government. Their Orwellian-named 'Job Ready' graduate program does nothing to improve the opportunities for young people. It drives up the cost of an arts degree so that it's now comparable to the cost that US students pay to study at a typical university in the United States. An Australian student can pay $58,000. And we know, because debts are paid through the HECS system, that students simply don't change their course choices when fees go up or down for particular courses. Instead, what happens is that this merely adds to the debt burden of young Australians.
The government's attacks on universities and attacks on research are nothing short of outrageous and should be condemned by this House.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Llew O'Brien ): It being approximately 1:30 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
Raper, Mr John William (Johnny), MBE
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (13:28): I rise to pay tribute to rugby league legend Johnny Raper, who died yesterday aged 82.
Johnny and his family were from Kingston Road, Camperdown, in my electorate. I'm also a Camperdown boy. Like him, I played a few games for the Camperdown Dragons, but with just one per cent—maybe!—of his talent. Johnny was famous because, when he was 16, he actually played three games in one day. He played the under-16s, then the under-18s and then A grade—and he played A grade because you got paid a case of beer! So he had a case of beer to take home to dad. He made his debut for Newtown as an 18-year-old before heading to St George, where he won eight premierships. He went on to captain the Kangaroos. He was named one of the original four rugby league immortals. Later on, he returned to coach Newtown for a year.
He used to attend my fundraisers, and he was always the life of any event, was Johnny Raper. I pass on my sympathy to his beloved wife, Carol, and to Stuart and the rest of the family and also to his friends—notably Singo, who was there with him in his dying moments. He was much loved. He was a character, a great Australian, and he will be sadly missed.
Wentworth Electorate: Safer Communities Fund
Mr SHARMA (Wentworth) (13:30): I rise today to welcome the federal government's support for important local security infrastructure upgrades in my community of Wentworth, made possible by the federal government's Safer Communities Fund. Round 6 of this program offered a total of approximately $10 million aimed at preventative initiatives to help reduce crime, violence and other security risks that are driven by racial or religious intolerance. The funding is significant to my community because it will enable schools, places of religious worship and community organisations in my own electorate of Wentworth to enhance their security with the installation of such devices as fencing, gates, video surveillance and CCTV cameras and alarm systems.
Unfortunately, Wentworth's Jewish community has been the target of a number of reprehensible attacks in recent years. These demonstrate the need to strengthen security measures to ensure the community can practice their faith in freedom without fear. I am pleased to have helped secure such funding from the government, and I thank the government for the support. Unfortunately examples of anti-Semitism and attacks on the Jewish community and other minority communities are still far too prevalent in Australia. It is important that we do all we can to protect vulnerable communities from this and other forms of bigotry and intolerance. I shall continue to speak up for and help to protect the Australian Jewish community.
Standen, Ms Janice (Jan)
Dr ALY (Cowan) (13:31): [by video link] I rise today to talk about Jan Standen, who is an incredibly deserving recipient of the WA Senior Australian of the Year award. It has been an absolute honour to get to know Jan and the team at Grandparents Rearing Grandchildren WA since I became the member for Cowan. GRGWA, Grandparents Rearing Grandchildren WA, provide emotional and physical support for grandparents who are full-time caregivers to their grandchildren.
Jan joined the group in 2013 when her three grandchildren came to live with her. She knows the day-to-day battles that grandparents experience as primary carers because she has lived them herself. She has driven rapid expansion in membership and outreach and even secured a new premises for the organisation. She connects grandparents to services in the community, and GRGWA now offers free legal and counselling support, food bank pickups, donation distributions and an op shop providing free clothing and toys for those grandparents who are faced with the situation of having to care for their grandchildren through circumstances and often through tragedy. As a fierce advocate, Jan has made a huge difference to their lives. I commend her for her very well-deserved accolade. Good on you, Jan! You deserve to be our WA Senior Australian of the Year.
Robertson Electorate: Entertainment Industry
Mrs WICKS (Robertson) (13:33): I recently met with a number of local entertainment business owners about their experience during the COVID-19 pandemic and how the Morrison government can best continue to support their recovery. I met with business owners like Liz, who works tirelessly to organise the Central Coast Christmas Fair, which I attend every year and is absolutely incredible. Steve and Isaac oversee a number of successful entertainment venues across the coast, including Drifter's Wharf at Gosford. Lou is a passionate artist manager. I also met Chris from Six String Brewing, Ruth and Pat from RUN Sound, and Brad Cardis from Fixx Events.
These business owners told me the many ways they have been hit hard by the recent bushfires, floods and the impact of the pandemic, creating uncertainty and meaning events across our region have had to be cancelled or postponed repeatedly. To make things worse, many of these businesses have been unable to access funding and grant programs that could otherwise help them because of the varying classifications of the Central Coast across many government departments and agencies at a state and federal level. Layers of government bureaucracy, red tape and the lack of consistent classification across the Central Coast have prevented these businesses from being able to access all of the support they need. A quick survey of four different grant programs across both state and federal governments showed the Central Coast was classified as regional metro and a non-urban centre at the same time. I am fighting to fix this and give the Central Coast a single consistent definition.
Assange, Mr Julian Paul
Mr ZAPPIA (Makin) (13:35): Julian Assange has now spent over a thousand days in England's maximum-security Belmarsh prison whilst the US attempts to extradite him to face 18 charges which carry a possible 175-year prison sentence. He has not been a free man for over a decade and his health is fragile. His alleged crime is that he published classified US military documents which exposed US war atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan. In December the UK high court ruled that Assange could be extradited. Assange is now appealing to Britain's Supreme Court.
Assange is an Australian citizen. His alleged offences did not take place in the US, nor were they illegal in Britain or Australia. Support for his release continues to grow with national identity Dick Smith, medical professionals, right- and left-leaning media commentators, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce and former Integrity Commissioner Michael Griffin, who was himself a past military man and Director of Military Prosecutions, all adding their voices. However, we hear nothing from the Prime Minister.
Assange is being persecuted because he humiliated the US, and the US now wants retribution. Even people who were critical of Assange's actions say he has suffered enough. I urge the Prime Minister to follow the lead of Prime Minister John Howard in the David Hicks case and negotiate Assange's release.
Casey Electorate: Tourism
Mr Tony SMITH (Casey) (13:36): The electorate of Casey that I have the honour of representing encompasses the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges. As members would be aware, tourism is very important. It's driver of so many small businesses and so many jobs throughout the region.
The federal government is investing a little over $15 million in tourism infrastructure that will boost tourism and create even more jobs. This includes Warburton Water World and stage 1A of the Yarra Valley Trail. Last Friday I was pleased to visit the Dandenong Ranges to Kalorama for the launch of the RidgeWalk project that will see many kilometres of walks across the top of the Dandenong as a magnet for even more tourists in the years ahead.
I want to pay tribute to the council and their team for pioneering this project; the Morrison government for funding it; the state government for also contributing; the local council who are also contributing money; the leadership of the mayor, Councillor Jim Child, and the administration of the Yarra Ranges Council.
When complete, this will be a fantastic asset for everyone that visits the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges, both domestically and internationally.
Bendigo Airport
Ms CHESTERS (Bendigo) (13:38): After five years of asking, and sometimes begging, the City of Greater Bendigo has finally been told by this government that their key project, the upgrade of the Bendigo Airport terminal, may receive funding. It took Labor standing up to announce funding for this project for the government to finally come to the table and say, 'Yes, we'll fund it.' The clock is ticking on this government, having deprioritised and not considered the project for over five years, they've probably got five weeks to deliver the money to the City of Greater Bendigo before they go into caretaker mode
So I am here to say to the government: hurry up. The people of the Bendigo region have been waiting too long. The upgrade of this terminal is critical if we want to receive more flights and have more airlines flying in and out of Bendigo. In a post-pandemic COVID recovery, our local tourism operators, hotels and businesses want this upgrade to happen and happen quickly so that we can encourage more airlines to fly to Bendigo.
The Sydney-Bendigo route by Qantas is incredibly popular, and I believe that other destinations will be just as popular. People want to come to our region, and air travel is one way they can do it. So, hurry up, government: before you go into caretaker mode, deliver the money as you've promised to the City of Greater Bendigo for this project.
Reid Electorate: Gallipoli Turkish Cultural Foundation
Dr MA RTIN (Reid) (13:39): The Gallipoli Turkish Cultural Foundation is responsible for the care and maintenance of the Auburn Gallipoli Mosque, an important place of worship for people in my electorate of Reid. Last week I visited the mosque to announce over $227,000 in government funding for the foundation to purchase new security facilities for the site. I also visited the Gallipoli Home, an aged-care centre for all faiths operated by the foundation and built with assistance from the federal government. I'd like to acknowledge the ongoing important work of the Gallipoli Turkish Cultural Foundation. Auburn Gallipoli Mosque is not only a local landmark but a place of national significance. The name of this mosque, Gallipoli, recalls a time and place that is very significant to both Australia and Turkey. It represents the shared legacy of Australian society and the Australian Turkish Muslim community, who have been integral in creating and maintaining this sacred building.
Around half a million Australians practice Islam, and there are over 5,000 Muslim residents living in Reid. Today, Auburn Gallipoli Mosque represents the enduring success of our multicultural nation. Thank you to the foundation president, Dr Abdurrahman Asaroglu, and his team at the Gallipoli Turkish Cultural Foundation for the work that they do in maintaining this important place of worship and this important cultural centre for our entire community.
Mayo Electorate: Lintons Reserve
Reinsurance Pool for Cyclone and Related Flood Events
Mr THOMPSON (Herbert) (13:42): We have now reached a major milestone in the fight to reduce the crippling cost of insurance premiums in North Queensland. This sitting fortnight, the Assistant Treasurer will introduce legislation in the House to enable the implementation of the reinsurance pool for cyclone and related flood events. It was great to be joined by the minister in Townsville for the announcement and to receive some feedback on the ground from the hard-fighting locals who push us across the line. It is being extremely well received because the reinsurance pool will be delivering savings that are more than double what was initially expected. We'll see savings on premiums of up to 46 per cent for homeowners, 58 per cent for strata properties, and 34 per cent for small and medium businesses.
The cost of insurance is one of the No. 1 issues that have been raised with me since being elected, and this policy will leave insurance companies with no excuse for the eye-watering premiums that locals have been enduring for many years. Importantly, this legislation includes eligibility for strata properties where at least 50 per cent of the floor space of units are used wholly and mainly for residential purposes. We'll also be expanding the pool to provide coverage for small-business marine property insurance. The Treasurer has already directed the ACCC to undertake price monitoring of supply of insurance products covered by the pool to ensure savings are passed on.
Macquarie Electorate: Domestic, Family and Sexual Abuse
Ms TEMPLEMAN (Macquarie) (13:44): This week two women have again been unafraid to call out the failures of this government to keep women safe. As Grace Tame said, it needs to be more than empty announcements, and Brittany Higgins called for a more specific action plan for ending violence against women.
The staff at the Women's Cottage in Richmond have been at the front line of these issues for nearly 40 years, supporting women fleeing domestic violence and those living with the trauma of child sexual abuse. The cottage has kept services going during the pandemic, but they've now lost funding for their DV caseworker, even though the severity and intensity of the violence has increased. It's the consequence of a tricky, piecemeal approach to funding by this government. That isn't good enough, and Hawkesbury women should not have to travel hours to get help.
The other major challenge is housing. There is no women's refuge; nor is there much emergency housing. Last election, I saw the need and committed more than a million dollars to address the problem if we won. It's my win that the government has mirrored my promise with an investment in short-term accommodation for women, children and their pets escaping violence. Our wonderful, collaborative Hawkesbury DV support community has put in time, energy and ideas to make this space as practical and safe as possible, and I thank them for all the work they do. I am so looking forward to seeing this facility opened later this year.
Powering Communities Program
Centre for Women & Co.
Mr VAN MANEN (Forde—Chief Government Whip) (13:45): Last Friday, the Assistant Minister to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction, the member for Goldstein, and I had the pleasure of visiting the Centre for Women & Co. in my electorate of Forde. It was an absolute delight to award a Powering Communities grant to the Centre for Women & Co. to install solar panels on their roof. Stacey and the passionate team at the Centre for Women & Co. provide a critical service to our community, supporting female domestic violence victims and supplying women's wellbeing services to the community, not only in my electorate of Forde but across Logan and to the Bayside as well.
The centre offers women's touchpoints for knowledge-sharing and development, to enable informed choices around health, finances, holistic wellbeing and relationships, delivered with integrity, compassion and respect, through the expert team of qualified professional counsellors in specialist fields. As with any of these grants, they go a long way to assisting community organisations that do so much good work, to reduce the costs of operations, so that more of the money that they have can go to providing the actual services that are needed for the women in our community. And, at the Beenleigh office, this will be exactly the case.
I want to thank the Centre for Women and Co. for their tireless work and their continued efforts in our community. I wish them every success for the future.
Menopause
Ms KEARNEY (Cooper) (13:47): I rise to address the House about a topic we seldom speak about—a topic that many people avoid and people speak about quietly, hoping no-one will overhear. I want to talk about menopause. A hundred per cent of women experience menopause; 75 per cent have symptoms; 28 per cent have severe symptoms that impact wellbeing and their work ability. For many women, it's a confronting experience. It can feel like it draws a line under your life as a young woman, and it can brutally dash any plans or hopes to have children. It can make women feel invisible—like this major health experience, which means that you can't sleep well, which creates significant pain and which impacts many other parts of the body and its functions, doesn't really matter.
By not talking about menopause, we contribute to its stigma and the loneliness many women feel as they navigate these silent waters alone. Like so many women's health issues, many women have to go from doctor to doctor, looking for someone who takes the time, asks the right questions and simply gets it. This is true across endometriosis, polycystic ovarian syndrome, vaginismus, and a whole host of other women's health issues. Women deserve a health system that understands their needs, their bodies and their experiences—period.
Giving a speech on menopause after a night spent fighting for the rights of trans kids and protecting people from religious vilification reminds us all of the importance of speaking up. This issue and the issues we give airtime to are important.
Powering Communities Program
Bonner Electorate: Sport
Mr VASTA (Bonner) (13:48): I'm a proud supporter of the local sporting clubs in my electorate of Bonner. I rise today to share how the Morrison government's Powering Communities initiative has successfully delivered for the Mt Gravatt Vultures Australian Football Club, who are now enjoying the benefits of the $12,000 in funding they were awarded. Over the years, I've had the privilege of supporting the club with funding for several projects to upgrade their facilities at Dittmer Park, including night lighting, field irrigation systems and construction of coaching boxes and spectator facilities. With energy bills often being one of the biggest overheads for not-for-profit organisations, this funding was put towards the installation of solar panels to support the club's endeavours to become more sustainable.
President of the Mt Gravatt Vultures, Daryl Guilford, recently let me know of the completed installation, and expressed the club's sincere appreciation for the funding. Daryl mentioned the panels are already providing major benefits by reducing the power bills. This relieves financial pressure so the club can further invest in its growing football program, with over 600 male and female players. In even more great news, these savings can go towards purchasing equipment like balls and training bibs, as well as facilities improvements that not only benefit players but spectators as well. This forms part of the club's goal for 2022 and beyond, providing a great community club that welcomes all players, volunteers and spectators to an environment that they feel part of.
Proxy Firms
Dr LEIGH (Fenner) (13:50): Proxy firms advise on issues such as executive pay, director appointments and corporate social responsibility. They've done important work holding firms to account on excessive CEO pay, the use of JobKeeper to pay executive bonuses and Rio Tinto's destruction of ancient Aboriginal artworks in the Juukan Gorge. Yet on the Friday before Christmas the Treasurer rushed out draconian measures that were designed to attack proxy advisers. That included a fine of $11 million for forgetting to send an email. It was an attack on investors and appropriately criticised by the Australian Financial Review and the Australian Shareholders Association. This morning, those draconian regulations were defeated in the Senate by a resounding vote of 29 to 25. That is a defeat for Treasurer Frydenberg and his underhanded attempt to undermine proxy advisers. It's a defeat for Arnold Bloch Leibler, the firm that pays the Treasurer's pro bono legal bills and has campaigned against the transparency that proxy advisers bring. It is a victory for shareholder capitalism, for transparency and for small business in Australia.
Mallee Electorate: Australia Day Awards
Dr WEBSTER (Mallee) (13:51): Australia Day is a time for communities across this vast continent to pay tribute to some of their outstanding people: citizens of good character who have selflessly served their local community in many and varied ways to improve the lives of others. I want to extend my congratulations and appreciation to some outstanding citizens in my electorate of Mallee who are worthy of public recognition. In the Yarriambiack shire there are two young achievers of the year, both from Rupanyup: Lachlan Weidemann and Chandan Thandi. Lachlan is a role model in his community, where he has served as school captain. He has excelled in academic achievements and sport and is recognised in his community for his business achievements. Chandan Thandi has also been awarded for his excellence in sport and academia and for significant contributions to the local Rupanyup show. Chandon is known as a humble, confident young man and generally a great bloke. Yarriambiack Citizen of the Year was awarded to Marg 'Chappy' Lingham, a lifelong contributor to many sporting clubs in the area, including the local football and netball club, golf club, tennis club and bowls club. She is known as someone who is hardworking, never complains and just gets on with it. Congratulations to these wonderful citizens.
Koalas
Ms SWANSON (Paterson) (13:53): Koalas face the real possibility of extinction in New South Wales by 2050. Under those opposite, this uniquely Australian icon has never been more vulnerable. This government and their state mates have stood by, clearing up to 1,300 per cent more koala habitat. And they've got the gall to come to my electorate of Paterson and visit organisations like Oakvale farm and the Port Stephens Koala Sanctuary, whose dedicated, down-to-earth teams do an extraordinary job of protecting, healing and promoting our koalas right now. But this government tells them to try their luck in the Liberal lottery of grants. Well, good luck with that, quite frankly, and it better not be rorted—dangling the chance to share in the sliver of money that's going to be shared right up and down the east coast of Australia. The minister and others paraded around this week getting their pats and pics and making empty promises. Well, it just won't cut it in Paterson. If those opposite were serious about protecting koalas in Paterson, they'd be stumping up the money and stopping the clearing right now.
Ryan Electorate: Infrastructure
Mr SIMMONDS (Ryan) (13:54): At the last election I made a commitment to fix our local roads and I'm happy to report on important milestones for these key projects in the electorate of Ryan. This week I visited Sir Fred Schonell Drive and Coldridge Street in St Lucia where work is underway to fix this notorious black spot. With the funds I secured from the government's Black Spot Program, this dangerous intersection will now be made much safer. The works underway will see improved safety by upgrading the existing right turn from a Sir Fred Schonell Drive into Coldridge Street from a filtered arrangement to one with a dedicate the turning lane. The northbound turning lanes on Coldridge Street will also change to improve bus movements and create a better traffic flow.
I move now to The Gap, where next week we will see the decking laid on the new Gresham Street bridge. Late last year we saw the temporary bridge put in place as part of the works to rebuild the existing 90-year-old original bridge. I committed $700,000 to this jointly funded project with Brisbane City Council to improve flood immunity, upgrade the vehicle load limit and improve safety for all road users at the Gresham Street and Waterworks Road intersection.
Finally, at the Indooroopilly roundabout site, residents driving Moggill Road every day will see work well underway on this vital corridor. The car dealership is removed and work is occurring to prep the site. These projects are game changers for our local community, for too long put in the too-hard basket but, with my and the federal government's support, we're getting on with the job of fixing up these roads and getting you home sooner and safer.
Commonwealth Integrity Commission
Mr DREYFUS (Isaacs) (13:56): The national anticorruption commission the Prime Minister promised Australians over three years ago has not been established. With the long list of government rorts, corruption scandals and recent revelations about this Prime Minister's lack of integrity by those who know him best, Australians are not surprised. But a huge number of Australians, including many who contact my office about this issue, are appalled. They are appalled by corruption scandals like sports rorts, car park rorts, paying a Liberal donor $30 million for land worth a tenth of that and the minister's for energy's involvement in grass-gate the forged documents scandal. The truth is that this Prime Minister and his colleagues are terrified of what an independent national anticorruption commission would reveal about what this government has been up to for years. This is a government that lives in terror of accountability as it staggers from scandal to scandal. This is a government that survives only by misusing its power to ensure secrecy and more cover-up.
Unlike the Morrison government, Labor won't ignore corruption in government. We know that strong action must be taken against corruption, and that's why, if we are elected, Labor will establish a powerful, transparent and independent national anticorruption commission.
Western Australia: Bushfires
Mr RICK WILSON (O'Connor) (13:58): In my time as the member for O'Connor, I've seen serious bushfires on many occasions, but last weekend my constituents faced an unprecedented challenge, with four major fires spread across the south coast, the South West and the south-central Wheatbelt. On Friday and Saturday we saw out-of-control blazes threaten the southern towns of Denmark and Bridgetown, leading to communities evacuated and homes and property destroyed. A cool change on Sunday morning relieved the pressure and gave firefighters desperately needed relief. However, the cool change was so welcome in the south-western towns was still 12 hours away in the central Wheatbelt, where temperatures rocketed to the low 40s accompanied by strong northerly winds. Fires in the Wickepin, Narrogin, Corrigin and Bruce Rock shires got away on Sunday morning and raged over many kilometres, destroying sheds, houses and, most devastatingly for farmers, their precious livestock. While the cool change alleviated conditions on Sunday evening, hot conditions today and tomorrow will be challenging. With many areas of smouldering bush, there's the possibility fires will escape containment lines.
At times of crisis we see the very best of our communities, and last weekend was no exception. From the firefighters at the fire front, to the shire presidents, councillors and staff who organised the evacuations, to the neighbours who helped begin the clean-ups and the often very grisly task of destroying livestock, to the Western Power crews who are working frantically to restore many kilometres of powerlines and restore power, and, indeed, to everybody who played a part in the enormous effort over the weekend: I thank you for your amazing service and wish you all the best over the next few days.
The SPEAKER: In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.
CONDOLENCES
Garland, Hon. Sir Ransley Victor (Vic), KBE
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:00): I move:
That the House record its deep regret at the death on New Year's Day of the Honourable Sir Ransley (Victor) Garland KBE, former member for Curtin, minister in the McMahon and Fraser governments and High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, and place on record its appreciation for his service to Australia and offer its heartfelt sympathy to his family in their bereavement.
Vic Garland was first elected to this parliament over half a century ago. He was a child of the Great Depression and the Second World War, an only child raised by parents of modest means, and it created in him the fuel for life: to work hard, not waste a minute, be useful and then, when your work is done, to be grateful—strong Liberal values.
At the University of Western Australia, Vic majored in economics and went on to qualify as a chartered accountant. He quickly got involved in the Liberal Party and local community groups. By his early thirties, Vic was vice-president of the party in Western Australia, heavily involved in Apex and was deputy mayor of Claremont.
In 1969, after Sir Paul Hasluck's appointment as Governor-General, Vic Garland was elected member for Curtin at a by-election. He was re-elected six times. Vic Garland called himself a realist. 'I look at the world as it is and work from there.' And he saw politics as an act of leadership—'Leadership towards national purpose,' he said—and described it.
In his first speech to the parliament in August 1969, Vic Garland spoke of a changing world and the importance of growing a strong economy to fund Australia's place in the world. The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Victor Garland believed in the centrality of defence and involvement in our region. As he put it, 'defence in its true meaning is not just guns but also butter.'
Friends say Vic was a man who was a simultaneously thoughtful and considered yet had a sense of urgency. Remarkably, he was sworn in as a minister two years after entering parliament—Minister for Supply and Minister assisting the Treasurer in the McMahon government.
At a time of consequence, he was opposition whip during the 1975 supply crisis, and in the Fraser government he held a range of portfolios—Supply, Post and Telecommunications, Veterans' Affairs, Special Trade Representations, and Business and Consumer Affairs.
In the economic portfolios, he advanced the shift to national legislation for companies and securities, and led Australia's trade negotiations during a time when tariffs at home and abroad determined the fate of industries and jobs.
In 1981, at the age of 47, Vic Garland was appointed Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom. Vic's wife Lyn joked at the time that, unlike during his long stints in Canberra, at least in London they'd crossed paths at the breakfast table!
Vic had always felt he understood the British. He visited London, often as a minister for special trade negotiations, and, unlike with the continental Europeans or the Americans, he had a fallback when negotiations got difficult: there was always the rugby or the cricket to talk about.
But soft diplomacy is much more than rugby or cricket, and, in London, Australia also had a shining light in Vic's wife Lyn, who was a seasoned concert pianist, so much so that Lyn gave a recital at Australia House for some 400 people, including half of the UK cabinet. Soft diplomacy doesn't get much better than that.
Before the last election, the now member for Curtin, with former leader, Bill Hassell, went to visit Vic and his wife, Lyn, in their aged-care residence. It was for morning tea, a moment to honour the past. At that morning tea, Vic expressed one thing: his gratitude to Australia for the opportunities to serve—to serve.
Today I offer my heartfelt sympathy to his wife, Lyn, Lady Garland, and their surviving children, David and Sally, as well as their grandchildren, Anthony, Oscar, Lucy, Ben, Barnaby and Gus. May this dedicated servant of Australia and our great party rest in peace.
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (14:04): If there was someone who was destined to have a firm grasp of numbers, it was Victor Garland. The son of an accountant, who grew up to be an accountant, he had an unfettered clarity which he carried into politics. As he once put in an interview: 'I'm a realistic person. I wouldn't deny that. I think I try to look at the world the way it is and work from there. There's nothing starry-eyed about my approach.' Armed with a Bachelor of Arts and a major in economics, he practised as a chartered accountant. Along the way, he married Lynette Jamieson, an accomplished classical pianist. The Prime Minister spoke about Lyn performing in the UK later on.
He eventually crossed paths with Western Australian powerhouse Sir Charles Court, who became his mentor and acted as the catalyst that propelled Victor towards a political career. So when Sir Paul Hasluck vacated the seat of Curtin to become Governor-General, preselection beckoned. That was successful, as was his election to this place, of course resulting in a punishing commute that is the burden of every Western Australian who bravely puts their hand up to serve here.
Promisingly, he began his first speech to parliament as the member for Curtin by honouring John Curtin as a great Australian who trod the highest path of duty. As supply minister in the McMahon government, he managed to replace Australia's fleet of antisubmarine helicopters. In the Fraser government, he was given the new portfolio of post and telecommunications. The Adelaide Advertiser hailed him as entering the job 'with an accountant's tidiness and a rising politician's pragmatism.' The Advertiser story goes on:
He admits he had taken only a marginal interest in the whole area of his new portfolio but claims that he has never complained about his treatment by the ABC. Almost a rare claim among politicians these days.
That was in 1976.
Like his predecessor, he called time as the member for Curtin to take up another challenge—in his case, as high commissioner to London. It was an appointment that ruffled some feathers, but Victor went and served Australia and got a knighthood along the way. Turn the clock forward to December 1983, at the end of his stint as Australia's man in London, and you find the very picture of a man surrounded by challenges but still determined to absolutely represent Australia's interests. Sir Victor knew that even a relationship as special as the one that exists between Australia and Britain was one that needed careful tending. He stayed on in the UK, sitting on a host of boards and doing work spread over a wide area before at long last coming home to Perth.
As he was the second-last surviving Liberal member of the McMahon ministry, Sir Victor's death, after 87 well-lived years, marks the twilight of an era. Our thoughts on this side of the House are with his wife, Lady Lyn Garland; his children, Sally, Michael and David; his grandchildren, Anthony, Oscar, Lucy, Ben, Barnaby and Gus; and his family in the Liberal Party. May he rest in peace.
Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Commonwealth Integrity Commission
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (14:08): My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister claimed he began work on an anticorruption commission four years ago. The Prime Minister pledged to legislate one three years ago. Why has the Prime Minister betrayed the Australian people and his own colleagues by breaking his anticorruption pledge?
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:08): I'm not going to take lectures from the Labor Party about anticorruption. They'd be very well aware of the matters in Victoria at the moment and the matters in Queensland at the moment. I would've thought that the Labor Party would not be coming in here today when integrity issues, and the lack of integrity being displayed by their colleagues in seeking to sweep things under the carpet in those places, are well on display in Victoria and Queensland.
But the gold standard when it comes to corruption was the Labor Party in New South Wales. They have so many ex-Labor ministers in prison that they could start a branch of the Labor Party in Silverwater prison. When they go to meet them, they're at the Silverwater prison.
Honourable members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I think I heard only about half of that answer of the Prime Minister because of the wall of noise on both sides of the House. I ask honourable members to limit their interjections. The Prime Minister has the call.
Mr MORRISON: The Treasurer just reminded me that perhaps what I was saying then was a bit too close to home for the Labor Party. It's certainly a bit too close to home for the Leader of the Labor Party. His good mate is Ian Macdonald. He saved his preselection and he went off to prison.
The SPE AKER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition?
Mr Marles: I have a point of order, Mr Speaker, on relevance. The question isn't an invitation for the Prime Minister to engage in the kind of spray he is now.
Mr Tim Wilson interjecting—
Dr Chalmers inter jecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Goldstein and the member for Rankin! It's very hard to rule on relevance when I can't hear what's being said.
Government members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I don't need advice from members on my right, thank you very much. I simply can't rule on the issue of relevance when I can't hear the answer that is being given.
Opposition members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: That comment from my left—more an expression than a comment—is disorderly if it was directed to the chair. I'll give the member the benefit of the doubt. It seems like someone has a guilty conscience. I didn't even point them out. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition?
Mr Marles: The question goes to the government's lack of action in terms of putting in place an anticorruption commission at the federal level, despite undertakings that they had made. Not a single word that the Prime Minister has spoken in his answer to this question, which has been going for a minute and 18 seconds, goes to that—not one word.
The S PEAKER: I'm listening very carefully to the Prime Minister. I ask the Prime Minister to be directly relevant, as he is required to be under the standing orders. The Prime Minister has the call.
Mr MORRISON: I'm responding to allegations from those opposite. They're suggesting something very untoward about members on this side of the House. I'm simply reminding those members that, if they want to come to the dispatch box and start talking about these matters, I'll talk about the times when the member for Watson was at Eddie Obeid's ski lodge. I don't know whether he has been off to see him in prison lately. Here he comes. Are you writing to them in prison? Are you sending them letters?
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order?
Honourable members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: There's so much noise you can't hear me. The Leader of the Opposition has the call.
Mr Albanese: I realise that this is a Prime Minister under pressure.
The SPEAKER: Is there a point of order?
Mr Albanese: Yes, there is, Mr Speaker. He cannot use question time to just spray those opposite. This was a very specific question about his responsibility and his commitments.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I say to all members in the House that references to corrupt conduct, corruption or the commission of an offence like fraud, which I picked someone up on yesterday, are unparliamentary if directed towards a member of this House, a group of members of this House or a party that belongs in this House—and this goes on both sides. I will pull members up on them. I don't care what side they're from. They are unparliamentary remarks and they should not be used in the House. The Prime Minister has the call.
Mr MORRISON: The Leader of the Labor Party is happy to come in here every day this week and cast slurs against me and members of the government. What I know about the Leader of the Labor Party is he can dish it out but he can't take it. And if he hasn't got the strength of character to cop it, he should stop dishing it out.
Honourable members interjecting—
Mr Albanese: Mr Speaker—
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition has already used his point of order on relevance. Is there another point of order?
Mr Albanese: Yes, Mr Speaker. I say to the Prime Minister: I'm happy to give the leave to have a discussion about anti-corruption and about our records, right now in this chamber.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat.
Mr Dutton interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I don't need to hear from the Leader of the House.
Mr Dutton interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House will resume his seat. There is conduct that is creeping into practice in this place where the use of points of order is being abused. I will be pulling members up for points of order which are not valid, and if it keeps happening then don't be surprised if you don't get the call. I'm trying my best to err on the side of caution and always give members that do rise, at the dispatch box or otherwise, the point of order, because I think that's a reasonable thing to do. But, if that process is being abused, then there may be opportunities where you just simply don't get the call. I'm happy to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.
Mr Burke: Thank you, Mr Speaker, just briefly, because the context here does matter. Ministers—and it's within your rights as Speaker—are now being allowed to travel much more widely than they have travelled for some years in their answers. If that happens, there will be a response. People will respond spontaneously. It will happen, and points of order will then be raised, because they will go to the order of the House when the House falls into disorder—points which don't have to be on relevance. But the change in behaviour has happened directly at the same time that ministers have been given a much wider berth than has happened here for some years.
The SPEAKER: I thank the Manager of Opposition Business for that. One of the benefits of the Christmas break is an opportunity to read Hansard, and I don't think there has been a significant change in my—
An honourable member: That's sad!
The SPEAKER: It is terribly sad! But I don't think there's been a significant change in the way I'm approaching it compared with previous Speakers. The Prime Minister has the call.
Mr MORRISON: To the best of my recollection, last year—
The SPEAKER: The member for Griffith.
Mr MORRISON: I tabled a 350-page bill for the government's Commonwealth Integrity Commission. I tabled the bill. I'm still waiting for the Labor Party's proposal. All I've seen is a two-page document. So what I have to rely on for the Labor Party policy is what I'm seeing in the circus that we're seeing unfold in Queensland and in Victoria, and what we've seen in New South Wales from the Labor Party over a long period of time. Our bill's out there—350 pages, $150 million committed to it. There are many qualities you need to lead this country as Prime Minister, but being a sook and a snarler— (Time expired)
The SPEAKER: The Prime Minister will resume his seat and I give the call to the member for Ryan.
Economy
National Security
Mr SIMMONDS (Ryan) (14:19): Will the Prime Minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is securing our recovery and building a stronger Australia by delivering on our plans to grow the economy, securing jobs and strengthening our ability to counter threats to our national security?
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:19): I thank the member for his question, and I thank him for his contribution to the Brisbane City Council. He would know, as a former treasurer of that council, how important it is to manage the nation's finances well. Through this pandemic Australia has retained our AAA credit rating, having one of the strongest economies to emerge through this pandemic and set Australia up for the future. That is demonstrated by the fact that unemployment has fallen to 4.2 per cent. Our goal is to achieve unemployment below four per cent, with a 3 in front of it, this year—something that has not been achieved in this country for some 50 years. People getting into jobs changes lives. That's why it's such an important part and the focus of our national economic plan—1. 7 million jobs have been created under this government. The unemployment rate for young people has fallen to less than 10 per cent, the lowest rate since 2008. And one million more women are in jobs as a result of the economic policies that have been pursued and the strong financial management by this government.
That national economic plan is about lowering taxes, cutting red tape and, secondly, investing in the skills and the infrastructure that Australia needs to grow—skills which now see 220,000 trade apprentices in training, the highest level in Australia's recorded economic history since 1963. There is affordable, reliable energy, where we hit our targets for emissions reduction through technology, not the taxation approach favoured by those opposite—adopting emissions reduction targets that will cost jobs and put up electricity prices. Under our record, electricity prices have fallen by eight per cent over the last two years. Under the Labor Party they went up by more than 100 per cent.
Australia will be a top-10 digital economy by the year 2030 and we will have a sovereign manufacturing capability in this country. We remember that under the Labor Party one in eight manufacturing jobs were lost. But a strong economy allows you to stand up for Australia and for our values in a world where we face foreign interference and coercion. You will not find our government looking to appease those who would seek to coerce Australia. The leader of the Labor Party said he's happy to trade away and ask China—to accept some and stand by some of their coercion.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order?
Mr Albanese: These are serious issues regarding national security. The Prime Minister should not make—
Govern ment members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Members on my right! I cannot hear the point of order that is being attempted to be made. Leader of the Opposition, I can't hear what your point of order is.
Mr Albanese: It goes to the Prime Minister making a serious allegation across the chamber, and he shouldn't be permitted to use question time to just make things up.
The SPEAKER: Well, there's no valid point of order—because I couldn't hear it, to start with. The Prime Minister has the call.
Mr MORRISON: Those who are seeking to coerce Australia and our region do not want to see this government re-elected.
Mr Brian Mitchell inte rjecting—
The SPEAKER: Member for Lyons!
Mr MORRISON: They don't want to see us re-elected. They know who their candidate is in this election: it's the leader of the Labor Party.
Mr Brian Mitchell interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Lyons is warned.
Energy
Mr BOWEN (McMahon) (14:23): My question is to the Prime Minister. The Assistant Minister to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction claimed this week, in relation to the climate policies of the government and the opposition:
We're more close than we've ever been before and all broadly swimming in the same direction.
If that's right, why won't the government match Labor's Powering Australia plan to create more than 600,000 jobs, cut power bills and reduce emissions by 43 per cent by 2030?
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:24): Because Labor policies put up electricity prices. Because Labor policies on emission reduction close down manufacturing, close down the resources industry, take away people's livelihoods. They adopt targets that they can't achieve by simply pursuing technology targets, and they have to pursue it by putting up the cost of electricity on households and businesses and drive people out of jobs. That's why we don't adopt the Labor Party's policies. Under our policies, electricity prices have fallen by eight per cent over the last two years. The policies of the Labor Party that they would like us to adopt—last time they had those in place, electricity prices more than doubled by over 100 per cent.
So, no, the Libs and the Nats are not going to be adopting the Labor Party's policies on emissions reduction, because the Labor Party's policy on emission reduction is the same as the policies of the Greens. How do I know that? We know it from the Leader of the Greens himself. The Leader of the Greens knows that if the Leader of the Labor Party were to become Prime Minister of this country, he would be answering to the Leader of the Greens when it comes to climate policy. So, if you're living up there in the Hunter, if you're living in La Trobe, if you're up there in the Northern Territory or in the resources industry in Western Australia, if the Labor Party seeks to form a government after this election, they'll be doing it with the Greens, and they'll be putting up your electricity prices, and they'll be selling out the blue-collar jobs of this country.
Honourable members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Just before I call the member for Wide Bay, once again I'm going to have to make a general warning. I'm looking at some of the members that are principally responsible. But I'm issuing a general warning. Don't be surprised if you get ejected under 94(a), if you keep going.
Regional Australia
Mr LLEW O ' BRIEN (Wide Bay—Deputy Speaker) (14:26): My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the Deputy Prime Minister please outline to the House how the Morrison-Joyce government is delivering infrastructure projects and creating jobs in the regions through programs like the Building Better Regions Fund? Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware of any alternative approaches?
Mr JOYCE (New England—Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development and Leader of the Nationals) (14:27): I thank the honourable member for his question. I note that I was with the honourable member in his electorate recently. One of the great things about the Community Development Grants Program is the Katie Rose Cottage Hospice at Wide Bay. It's an incredible job they do there with people at the last part of their life, having their family around them. It's an incredible thing. I want to commend them.
The Building Better Regions Fund allows those in smaller areas to get some form of benefit that would otherwise go to a major capital city. By its very nature, a major capital city can have the Western Sydney airport, which so many people are beneficiaries of. But if you live in a place such as Murgon, in the seat of Wide Bay, you need something vastly more targeted, and the Building Better Regions Fund allows that form of targeting to these people so that they can get projects that are so important to them. That allows us to do such things as the expansion of the 1,600 square metres of exhibition space we have done with the Newcastle Art Gallery. I was up in the Hunter at the Newcastle Art Gallery the other day. This allows them to at least have what they believe is a premier facility in their area, with the capacity to expand. In the city areas, in one instance, the member for Sydney—close to half a billion dollars was recently spent on the art gallery in her electorate. Regional areas also deserve to have their time for investment by our nation because they are the people that we stand behind, they are the projects that we stand behind and the resources in their industry we stand behind.
Ms Catherine King interjecting—
Mr JOYCE: I hear the interjections from the member for Ballarat, who obviously wants to lead the charge to get rid of these projects. She believes they're a rort. She quoted them as 'dodgy grants programs'. I've never heard her come and defend the programs; I've heard her come to talk about getting rid of the programs. The Labor Party just want the votes--but they're going to leave the people behind. They always do. They never actually present themselves. And, although we may see the member for Grayndler, the Leader of the Opposition, in regional areas at times, we'll never see the member for Sydney coming up to Central Queensland to stand behind the coalminers, or look forward to Minister Penny Wong going to Central Queensland and the Hunter Valley to stand behind the coalminers, or maybe the member for Port Adelaide going to the Hunter Valley to stand behind the coalminers, because they don't believe in these industries. They don't believe in these people.
The SPEAKER: The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order?
Mr Burke: I'm not sure how this stream of consciousness can be directly relevant to anything. He's referring to seats that don't exist. He's meandering around.
The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Deputy Prime Minister will return to the question. The Deputy Prime Minister has the call.
Mr JOYCE: We did hear the interjections of the member for Ballarat. We know that the Labor Party—whether it's the member for Hindmarsh—will never come to these regional areas because they don't believe in the people. They don't believe in the projects. They don't believe in the coal industry. They are leading them astray and are leading our nation astray. They're letting the people of regional Australia down.
Tame, Ms Grace
Ms COLLINS (Franklin) (14:30): My question is to the Prime Minister. Ms Grace Tame told the Press Club she received a threatening phone call from a government funded agency. Can the Prime Minister guarantee the results of his so-called investigation into this threatening call will be released or will he sweep it under the carpet, hide from the truth—as he has done before—and fail to take any real action?
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House on a point of order.
Mr Dutton: The imputation in the back end of that question is against the standing orders. It's a reflection on the Prime Minister. It was an unsubstantiated flourish, which might've sounded okay in the tactics meeting this morning but it's against the standing orders and it should be ruled out of order.
The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business.
Mr Burke: Thanks, Mr Speaker. On the point of order: the question asks will the Prime Minister release or will he, in the alternative, follow a different path. It's for the Prime Minister in his answer to make clear which he will do. If the Leader of the House is wanting to argue, as I think he just did, that there's no occasion where the Prime Minister has ever swept something under the carpet then I think we are pretty much in the land of irony.
The SPEAKER: Standing order 90 prevents members from reflecting on other members. I am going to allow the question. Whilst it's sailing close to the wind, I think it is in order. I will give the call to the Prime Minister.
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:32): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am happy to affirm, once again, as I did in issuing a statement this week, that I have not and would not authorise any such actions, and at all times have sought to treat Ms Tame with dignity and respect. The first I became aware of that allegation was during the Press Club address when it was delivered. Ms Tame should always be free to speak her mind in my view and conduct herself as she chooses. I have made no criticisms of Ms Tame, her statements or her actions.
While Ms Tame has declined to name the individual, I would advise her to at least advise the government which government funded agency she is referring to. The Australia Day Council has issued a statement saying they had no knowledge of any such interaction and would be pleased to pursue the matter if we had some knowledge of even the agency that is being referred to. Those comments were not made. I can't establish them. They were not made on my behalf, nor would they ever be. They were not made with my knowledge in any way, shape or form, or by my office. I and my government consider the actions and statements of the individual, as it was explained, as absolutely unacceptable. Inquiries can only be made where we can be directed. Those inquiries should be seeking to get answers to the matters that have been raised and if anyone has any information on that then I would encourage them to bring it forward so the matter can be properly addressed.
Water Infrastructure
Mr KATTER (Kennedy) (14:34): Prime Minister, are you aware 93 per cent of Australia's land mass contains 74 per cent of our water but only one million people? Are you aware that North Queensland's north-western gulf has three of Australia's biggest rivers and has 11 irrigation occupation cultivation production ballot projects? Prime Minister, you are aware of Carl von Clausewitz—a people without land will look for a land without people. If Queensland's auction system is allowed, big corporations—foreign—will get everything, all of the water, and locals nothing. Prime Minister, will these 11 projects, based on the Griffith-Emerald-Mareeba experience, take 300,000 people from big city slum land into a prosperous golden future? (Time expired)
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (14:35): I thank the member for Kennedy for his question and for his strong commitment, in particular, to the Hughenden irrigation scheme that he and I share a great passion for, not just that scheme and its impact for the north-west of Queensland but for the CopperString Project, which is absolutely vital to unleashing the considerable economic potential of that region. The Hughenden irrigation scheme—the dam—would hold in the order of 200,000 megalitres that will unlock up to 10,000 hectares of diversified crops on the southern side of the Flinders River, and we are looking forward to receiving that business case next month. We only discussed this week, as we do on many occasions, how we need the Queensland government to support this project. It is an incredibly important project for North Queensland and for north-west Queensland, and we urge the Queensland government to work with us to deliver this project and to get the dozers on the ground—utes and boots—to get this project moving. The member for Kennedy and I, and the minister for infrastructure and his predecessor, have been working to get this project moving, but the Queensland government are yet to come on board and actually ensure that we can get this approved so we can get the jobs, so we can get the wealth and so we can access the resources that are so important for Australia's economic future.
The member for Kennedy understands that if you don't access the resources of our nation and manage them properly for our wealth then we can't defend our country. We can't go and have over two per cent of our national economy invested in our defence forces and see that increasing into the future and embrace the massive defence projects that are going to keep Australia safe unless we are also making the same decisions to support our resources industries, to support our agricultural industries and, in particular, to support the projects that underpin their success.
The Hughenden irrigation scheme is one such important project of many. We have more than 3½ billion dollars for dams, weirs and pipelines through the National Water Grid Fund. More than $1.7 billion has been committed for the construction of 72 water infrastructure projects across the country. Fourteen infrastructure projects have been delivered, including the Charleston Dam in Queensland. That was completed in December 2020 and is expected to deliver 100 megalitres of water per annum to Forsayth and 500 megalitres of water to Georgetown. There is the Scottsdale Irrigation Scheme, which the member for Riverina, I know, was a great champion of, in Tasmania. The Sunraysia Modernisation Project in Victoria was completed in October 2019 and is expected to deliver some 25,000 megalitres of water. The Liberals and the Nationals—and I happily concede and agree the member for Kennedy also—know how important these projects are. (Time expired)
Taxation
Mr PEARCE (Braddon) (14:38): My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer remind the House of the Morrison government's strong record in delivering tax cuts to Australian families and businesses, including in my electorate of Braddon? Treasurer, are you aware of any alternative approaches?
Mr FRYDENBERG (Kooyong—Treasurer) (14:38): I thank the member for Braddon and acknowledge his experience as a farmer, as a soldier, and also acknowledge his commitment to lower taxes, including for 40,000 of his constituents, who are getting tax as a relief as a result of policies pursued by this side of the House. At every turn, we have sought to cut taxes. It has been a real priority for this government—cutting taxes for families. So if you are earning $60,000 a year, you paid $2,160 less tax this year than you would have under the Labor Party. We have been cutting taxes for small business to the lowest level in 50 years, putting record incentives through our tax system for investment, which is helping to drive investment even through the COVID recession. The patent box has been encouraging innovation in the biotech and medical sectors.
But we have been opposed by this Leader of the Labor Party every step of the way when it comes to cutting taxes. Indeed, this Leader of the Labor Party said, when it came to cutting taxes for families, that we were cutting taxes for the top end of town. He described small business and families as the top end of town. And this Leader of the Labor Party has supported a carbon tax, a mining tax, a congestion tax, a retirees tax, a housing tax, higher taxes for income earners, higher taxes for superannuation, higher taxes on family businesses and, most damning of all, a death duty. Higher taxes—
The SPEAKER: The Treasurer will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?
Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, you made rulings on this yesterday. We've now got to the comic example of the Treasurer wanting to refer to something that apparently happened in 1991. That's before he'd even been sacked for the first time!
The SPEAKER: There's no valid point of order. I have pulled the Treasurer up in the past on 'alternative approaches', but he is entitled, on the basis of the question that's been asked, to explore alternative approaches, and that's what he's doing. He's not engaging at this point—and I hope he doesn't—in any character assessments.
Mr Albanese interjecting—
Mr FRYDENBERG: I take this interjection from the Leader of the Opposition. He says we're making it up.
Mr Burke interjecting—
Mr FRYDENBERG: The Manager of Opposition Business said we've invented things. This is what the Leader of the Opposition has said at a Labor conference: 'Comrade Chair, I am pleased to move the resolution calling upon the government to consider the imposition of an inheritance tax.' I'm not making it up. That's the Leader of the Opposition's own words.
Mr Marles: Point of order, Mr Speaker: he's defying your ruling.
The SPE AKER: No, he's not.
Mr Marles: He is. How can it possibly be an alternative approach when he's talking about something which happened in—
The SPEAKER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Treasurer has the call.
Mr FRYDENB ERG: I refer the Leader of the Opposition to a very good article on the front page of the Australian today titled 'Anthony Albanese's historic battle cry in war on family wealth', where it says:
He insisted people earning incomes of more than $100,000 … did not "actually earn them."
And:
Accumulated income in the form of capital is for all socialists at least part of the source of many social injustices.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order?
Mr Albanese: Yes, Mr Speaker.
Honourable members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Just before you make your point of order: there is so much interjection in the House, on both sides.
Mr Albanese: The point of order is that the Treasurer was just quoting former Senator Robert Ray, not me. We don't look like each other.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Leader of the House?
Mr Dutton: Mr Speaker, I just refer to the earlier ruling that you made about the abuse, by the opposition, of this process, of points of order, when there is no point of order. It's an opportunity to either reprosecute or to put some new fantasy into the debate. By defying your ruling, Mr Speaker, they make it very difficult for us. We're happy to hear a point of order on relevance, which is within the standing orders. There is the ability to ask one point of order on relevance, and that's it. So far we've had three contributions, none of which have been within the standing orders. I seek your advice as to how on earth we can stop this blatant abuse and the glass jaw that's constantly on display.
Mr Albanese: Mr Speaker, I also seek your advice. When the Treasurer is actually using a quote from someone else and purporting it to be from me, if it's allowed to stand—
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. If the Leader of the Opposition considers that he's been misrepresented then he has an appropriate way of dealing with that. As I've previously said—
Opposition members interjecting—
T he SPEAKER: No, a member can't say anything he or she wants, but I'm not an arbiter of fact. The Treasurer has the call.
Mr FRYDENBERG: This Leader of the Opposition stands for higher taxes. He stands for death duties and that's why the member the Fenner, who's hiding in the back, has said, 'The Albanese supporters were known as the Bolsheviks.'
Aged Care
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (14:45): I won't ask about my year 6 history essays! My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Today I met with Christine from Penrith who has spent 16 years caring for aged-care residents. Christine says things have got much worse under this government and that residents are no longer getting the care they deserve. She's made the difficult decision to leave the industry. Why hasn't the Prime Minister addressed the chronic workforce shortage and the conditions affecting aged-care workers and the people in their care?
Mr HUNT (Flinders—Minister for Health and Aged Care) (14:46): I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question and in particular to thank all of those aged-care workers: the nurses, the personal care workers, those that have assisted through the course of the pandemic.
Ms O'Neil interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Member for Hotham!
Mr HUNT: Shortly after coming to office, one of the things that the Prime Minister did was to call a royal commission because we were faced with the shocking findings of the inquiries into the Oakden scandal, the South Australian aged-care home that was run by the public sector under the previous Labor government there. The Prime Minister called that royal commission precisely because, on our watch, we wanted to make a fundamental difference. What we have seen is a $17.7 billion investment in aged care over and above what was in place previously. We have gone from $13.3 billion of annual expenditure, when Labor was in government, to now $27 billion, $30 billion, $32 billion and $33 billion—
Ms O'Neil interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Hotham will leave under 94(a).
The member for Hotham then left the chamber.
Mr HUNT: so a $20 billion increase in aged care investment and expenditure. In response to the royal commission, we have put in place 80,000 additional home-care packages, 40,000 in 2021-22 and 40,000 in 2022-23, so $6½ billion over four years. We have put in place $798 million to support informal carers and $272 million to connect senior Australians to aged-care services. In particular, in residential accommodation facilities, we have put in place $7.3 billion over five years from the current year, which is currently being held up in the Senate by the ALP.
In addition to that, we have the aged-care new funding mechanism, AN-ACC, and $189 million to help our residential aged-care facilities. We are also improving access to primary care, $365 million; empowering consumers of aged care, $200 million; and, very importantly, growing the workforce helping our seniors with $216 million. Now we have also put in place $600 million of retention bonuses. We've announced $800, the fourth such bonus, for those workers that have been serving through the pandemic, those workers that have helped lead to an outcome which has saved countless lives by comparison with countries around the world. We've had one of the lowest rates of loss of life in aged care. Each life lost has been an immense sadness for the families affected, but because of the work of our aged-care workers we have saved thousands of lives. We thank them and we honour them.
Covid-19: Economy
Mr TED O'BRIEN (Fairfax) (14:49): My question goes to the Treasurer. How is the Morrison government's strong and decisive economic management throughout the COVID-19 pandemic ensuring the Australian economy will respond strongly and recover strongly by international standards, and is the Treasurer aware of any alternative approaches that may jeopardise this recovery?
Mr FRYDENBERG (Kooyong—Treasurer) (14:49): I thank the member for Fairfax for his question. I acknowledge his more than 20 years of business experience that he has brought to this place and his strong advocacy for a stronger economy and lower taxes. He has seen firsthand, at the Ginger Factory in Yandina, how 85 jobs were saved by JobKeeper.
If we take our minds back to 2020, at the start of this pandemic, we saw 1.3 million Australians either lose their jobs or see their working hours go down to zero. Treasury feared that the unemployment rate could be as high as 15 per cent, with more than two million Australians unemployed. We put in place programs like JobKeeper, which saved more than 700,000 jobs, the cash flow boost, and $750 payments to pensioners, carers, veterans and others on income support. The net result is that we now have one of the strongest economic recoveries in the world. In fact, Australia has outperformed all major advanced economies in our recovery. Our unemployment rate today is at 4.2 per cent. We have 250,000 more people employed today than at the start of the pandemic. In the United States they have 2.6 million fewer people employed today than at the start of the pandemic. Our lower taxes are rolling out across the economy, providing more money in people's pockets.
Now, there is a significant threat to that economic recovery that is not yet locked in, and that's this inexperienced and weak Leader of the Labor Party, a leader of the Labor Party who has never had a Treasury portfolio, a leader of the Labor Party who attacks our tax cuts for families as being for the top end of town, and a leader of the Labor government who is too weak to take on the unions and the Greens. He does have an economic recovery plan. It consists of a national drivers licence. It consists of taking fuel excise off electric vehicles. The only problem is there is no fuel excise on electric vehicles. And of course there's a $6 billion cash splash to give money to people who have already had the jab.
But the reality is that they talk a big game in opposition; they deliver very little in government. They talk about secure work, but unemployment was 5.7 per cent under Labor. It's 4.2 per cent under us. They talk about higher wages, yet real wages were falling under the Labor Party. They talk about a lower cost of living, yet electricity prices double. They talk about lower debt, yet they have promised more than $80 billion of extra spending, and that's so far. And they talk about lower taxes, and they took to the last election $387 billion of higher taxes. So this weak, inexperienced—
The SPEAKER: Order! Order!
Mr FRYDENBERG: leader of the Labor Party—
The SPEAKER: The Treasurer—
Mr FRYDENBERG: is a major threat to the Australian economy.
The SPEAKER: The Treasurer will resume his seat. I've spoken to the Treasurer about that once—in fact, more than once before. I don't want it repeated again, please.
Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on disorderly conduct. You have raised that before. The Treasurer knew that that was contrary to your ruling and said it anyway. At the very least, he should be asked to withdraw.
The SPEAKER: Yes. It's a character assessment that I have picked the Treasurer up on in the past. I will continue to do it, because the question is very simple. He is asked to comment on alternative approaches. It doesn't give him free rein to make a gratuitous character assessment, as I said yesterday. The Treasurer will return to the dispatch box and withdraw that.
Mr FRYDENBERG: Which—
The SPEAKER: I don't want you to repeat it, as has often been done by another member in this House—
Mr FRYDENBERG: I withdraw, Mr Speaker.
The S PEAKER: and has been done by other members. I just want to say something on that. When a member of this House is asked to withdraw a comment, I'm going to take a very dim view if the member takes that opportunity, in some smart way, or half-smart way, to repeat the offence. I will take a very dim view if that's done again, and I think the member knows exactly who I'm talking about.
Aged Care
Ms KEARNEY (Cooper) (14:54): My question is to the Prime Minister. Today the shadow minister met with Christine from Penrith, who has spent 16 years caring for aged-care residents. Christine says things have got much worse under this government and residents are no longer getting the care they deserve. She's made the difficult decision to leave. Why hasn't the Prime Minister addressed the chronic workforce shortage affecting aged-care workers and the people in their care?
The SPEAKER: The standing orders prevent the same question from being asked again—well, it certainly seemed identical.
Government membe rs interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I'm very appreciative of the gratuitous advice from members on my right but, as members on my right know, I am able to give a member an opportunity to rephrase a question. But, on this occasion, it's not a matter of rephrasing the question. That question was out of order because it was, to the extent that I'm able to tell—and I don't have the wording in front of me—identical. I think the House accepts your mea culpa, Member for Cooper. I will give the member for Cooper the call on this occasion.
Mr Dutton interjecting—
The SPEAKER: That's out of order, Leader of the House. The member for Cooper has the call.
Ms KEARNEY: My question is to the Prime Minister. Would Australia's aged-care system have been better equipped to cope with the deadly COVID outbreaks if the Prime Minister had not made a $1.7 billion cut when he was Treasurer?
Mr HUNT (Flinders—Minister for Health and Aged Care) (14:56): The proposition of the question is false. Aged-care funding has gone up each year, every year, under this government. Each year has been a record. Last year we had a $17.7 billion additional investment. In one budget alone, additional investment—
Opposition members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I just ask the minister to resume his seat for a moment. I would've thought, given the leniency that I just showed on that question, that members on my left would've been keen to hear the answer to the question. But the level of interjections is too high. I've given you a general warning. I don't know what more I can do to put you on notice that you'll be enjoying the rest of the afternoon outside the chamber if you keep interjecting. I don't enjoy throwing people out. You work so hard—everybody works so hard—to get in here. I don't know why people are so keen to get thrown out. The minister for health has the call.
Mr HUNT: Each year, every year, under this government, funding has gone up to record levels in aged care. No person in Australian history has invested more money in aged care and overseen greater reform in aged care than this Prime Minister. He was the one who went where Labor was afraid to go and brought in a royal commission into aged care, following the scandal of Oakden in a public aged-care facility in South Australia under the previous Labor government—
Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Whitlam will leave under 94(a).
The member for Whitlam then left the chamber.
Mr HUNT: a scandal which should lead to absolute shame on the opposition benches but about which they seem to have airbrushed from their memory. But, as a consequence, the royal commission called out historic neglect, called out an intergenerational challenge that this country has faced. The response has been an investment going from $13 billion, increasing now as we see it, to $27 billion, to $30 billion, to $32 billion, to $33 billion—a $20 billion increase from when Labor was last in government to the end of the current forward estimates, again to be increased in this year's budget.
And, as part of that, what we have done in particular is put in place absolutely vital aspects of higher care. And that includes actions, which have passed this House, to put in place greater screening for workers. And these are being blocked. These measures to protect aged-care residents are being blocked in the Senate right now by Labor. They are standing in the way of protection for older Australians.
So they come to the dispatch box. They come to this House. They talked about assisting older Australians in residential aged care and they blocked the very means of delivering that protection for older Australians. They have learned nothing from Oakden, they have learned nothing from their failure to invest when they were in government and they have learned nothing from what has occurred in other countries around the world—a world in which we see that Australia has one of the lowest rates of a loss of life in aged care. Each one of those lives lost is an agony for the families involved, but each one of those lives saved is something for which we should be thankful, and, above all else, I thank the workers who contribute to that. (Time expired)
Honourable members interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Order! I know we're all tired. Everybody's tired. It has been a very long 48 hours. Let's just try to get through it.
Defence
Mrs WICKS (Robertson) (15:01): My question is to be Minister for Defence. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government's actions to create and maintain strong defence regional security relationships keeps Australians safe and secure, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?
Mr DUTTON (Dickson—Minister for Defence and Leader of the House) (15:01): I want to say thank you very much to the honourable member for her question and for the support that she provides to veterans in her local community.
We know that our nation is facing the most complex and potentially catastrophic regional security environment since the Second World War. The threat now posed by the Chinese government's aggression is a very real, and it's growing. We've seen an unholy alliance between the Chinese government and the Russian government, with President Putin. Both countries have been a very open about that relationship, and that should , I think, cause great concern right across the world, particularly in our own region. We have worked very closely, together, with partners. We have an incredible alliance through our Five Eyes and with our AUKUS partners. Minister Payne is in Melbourne this afternoon to meet with her counterparts in the foreign ministers' Quad. That is a coming together of like-mindeds.
And there are many countries in Europe and elsewhere across North America and around the world who are worried about what is happening in the Indo-Pacific, so this government has invested more into our defences and into keeping our country safe into the future. We did that off an incredibly low base because Labor, when they were last in power, cut funding for defence to the bone. That's the reality. They want to pretend now that somehow there's no difference between the two parties when it comes to defending our nation in the next decade and the decade beyond.
Mr Brendan O'Connor interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Member for Gorton!
Mr DUTTON: Nothing could be further from the truth. If anyone has been less prepared to put themselves forward as a potential prime minister of this country when it comes to the issue of national security, I'm not aware of anyone less prepared, maybe apart from Mark Latham, than this man.
Ms Swanson interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Paterson will leave under 94(a).
The member for Pat erson then left the chamber.
Mr DUTTON: We now see evidence that the Chinese Communist Party—the Chinese government—has also made a decision about who they're going to back in the next federal election. That's open. That is obvious. And they have picked this bloke, the Leader of the Opposition, as their candidate.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.
Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to pages 516 and 517 of Practice. This House has various precedents with respect to unparliamentary language, but anything that goes to whether or not people are, in fact, guilty of treason, sedition or anything against the national security of this nation has been dealt with by speakers in the strictest terms. The Leader of the House, given that he is the Leader of the House, is meant to know this better than anyone on that side. Eyes wide open is going right there. He has made that clear. When you asked him to sit down, he kept going.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House. I just want you to address the point of order.
Mr DUTTON: On the point of order, and with reference to Practice as referred to by the honourable member opposite, there was no such allegation made against the Leader of the Opposition. Mine was a reflection on what has been publicly reported and commented on by the Director-General of ASIO. There are media reports today in relation to these serious matters. I have not made any allegations against the Leader of the Opposition, which is the way in which it was framed by the Manager of Opposition Business. Mine is a reflection of the Chinese government, the actions of the Chinese government, and that is the context in which I made the comment, and it is perfectly in order. It might be uncomfortable for those opposite, but it is perfectly in order.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House will resume his seat. I am very familiar with the provision that the Manager of Opposition Business refers to on a page 517. In fact, I spoke about it in question time today, about references to corruption, deliberate dishonesty et cetera. Previous Speakers have ruled on things such as sedition and treason. If the Leader of the House had referred specifically to a member of the Labor Party or members of the party—
An honourable member interjecting—
The SPEAKER: Look, I am just not going to take interjections while I am a ruling on a point of order, so whoever is interjecting will cease immediately. Part of the problem in this role is when the level of interjections is so high I can't hear exactly what is being said. I did not hear the Leader of the House say anything that would have offended this provision, or the way that the House has dealt with these issues of inappropriate or alleged inappropriate conduct. So I am going to give the call to the Leader of the House—
An honourable member interjecting—
The SPEAKER: I am going to give the call to the Leader of the House. The Leader of the Opposition can resume his seat. I am going to listen very carefully. If you want me to rule on these things, you have got to allow me the opportunity to actually hear what is being said. That shouldn't be rocket science. The Leader of the House.
Mr DUTTON: As I was saying, we live in incredibly uncertain times. I will tell you what the Australian people want at the moment: they want strength in relation to the way in which we are going to deal with that uncertainty, with that aggression and with that threat to our sovereignty and to our democracy. This Prime Minister has made decisions in relation to laws, to strengthen laws to protect our country—
Mr Brendan O'Connor interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Gorton will leave under 94(a).
The member for Gorton then left the chamber.
Mr DUTTON: If I can reflect on the time when those opposite were in government, they passed no national security legislation to support— (Time expired)
COVID-19: Aged Care
Dr CHALMERS (Rankin) (15:09): My question is to the Prime Minister. Jeta Gardens, to the south of Brisbane, is the site of the worst aged-care COVID outbreak in the state, with 100 residents and 82 staff infected. According to reports, a resident was taken to hospital after falling from a second-floor balcony on 2 February when she did not receive her pain medication. An incident report lists neglect as a factor in her fall. Will the Prime Minister take responsibility for the shocking crisis in his aged-care system?
Mr HUNT (Flinders—Minister for Health and Aged Care) (15:09): In relation to this case: this has been referred to the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission. I won't pre-empt the findings, but that is already being undertaken.
In relation to Jeta Gardens: we recognise that there has been—
Dr Chalmers interjecting—
The SPEAKER: The member for Rankin!
Mr HUNT: We recognise that there has been a significant outbreak, and the actions taken by the department of health and government include a department of health case manager put in place; a Metro South Health unit nurse navigator allocated and an Aspen clinical first responder; the Older Persons Advocacy Network engaged; the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission engaged; a surge workforce from Aspen, with one lead and four resident nurses, two personal care workers plus one Healthcare Australia worker; Community Business Australia has been engaged; and we've had additional security put in place. In particular, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission has mandated a nurse adviser support for training, and Sonic Pathology Australia has been in place periodically since 7 January. As early as 7 January a notice to agree was put in place by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commissioner. In addition to that we have 15,120 P2 or N95 respirators which have been provided; 7,600 gowns; 36,000 gloves; 3,000 protective goggles; and 5,580 rapid antigen tests. All of these have been put in place as part of the process to ensure that there is a rapid response.
In terms of the individual: I would be very happy to provide the details to the House once the quality and safety commissioner has completed her investigation. I know, in particular, that the commissioner has taken this and other cases around the country very seriously. There have been over 19,000 site visits or reviews by the commissioner over the course of the last two years. This has been one of the important actions which has been put in place. Indeed, the commission was established by this government, in addition to the royal commission, as a permanent, standing aged-care quality and safety commission. It's funded and has expanded under this government, under the leadership of the Prime Minister. This is something which we regard as a critical and fundamental role.
Again, I want to thank all of the nurses and the personal care workers, and all those who have helped Australia to have one of the lowest rates of loss of life in aged care. I think that is a very important thing to understand, that, as we face real challenges, what our nurses and our personal care workers—those who are involved in aged care—have achieved is to save lives on a scale which compares— (Time expired)
National Security
Mrs McINTOSH (Lindsay) (15:12): My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is keeping Australians safe in an increasingly complex threat environment—especially the steps we are taking to counter violent extremism in all its forms?
Mrs ANDREWS (McPherson—Minister for Home Affairs) (15:13): I thank the member for her question, and I thank her for the dedication that she has shown to make sure that her community remains safe and secure.
Last night, the Director-General of Security presented his Annual Threat Assessment. His assessment is that our terrorist threat level remains at probable, which is where it has been for a number of years now. That means that there is credible intelligence that there are people out there who have the intent and the capability to do us harm. Our security outlook has been complex for some time, challenging and changing, and, as the director-general said last night, the pandemic has added another level of complexity to our security outlook.
We've seen that people have had increased time to be online, and that has created a number of security challenges for us. Again, as the director-general said last night:
Online radicalisation is nothing new, but COVID-19 sent it into overdrive.
That's why the Morrison government have taken steps to make sure that our agencies are well resourced, and, just earlier this month, I announced an extra $61.7 million for measures to counter violent extremism. Our investment in some very practical programs within local communities includes early intervention and rehabilitation programs with a focus on regional and rural Australia.
Australians know that a coalition government can be trusted with national security matters. We've made sure that we have well-resourced agencies, and that includes making sure that there is an extra $1.3 billion for ASIO. We've legislated to keep Australians safe from terrorists at the end of their jail term, and we've listed The Base, Sonnenkrieg Division and the entirety of Hezbollah as terrorist organisations. These groups are stains on Australia's very rich cultural fabric, and the coalition government will never, ever, ever take a step backwards when it comes to looking after our national security. The people of Australia absolutely understand that, when it comes to national security, when it comes to keeping Australians safe, the coalition have demonstrated time and time and time again that we will do what it takes to keep Australians safe and secure. We have always taken a responsible approach to national security, and we will not stop. We will keep doing everything to look after Australia. (Time expired)
Mr Morrison: Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.
STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE
Parliamentary Staff
Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister) (15:16): I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition would join me in thanking all of the attendants and all of those parliamentary staff who supported us in what was a very late sitting into the early hours of this morning. Thank you very much for your attendance to us. We were here, obviously, for a very long time. I thank all members of this House for their endurance over the course of last night and the early hours of this morning. Thank you to them and to the staff who were supporting them over a very late night sitting.
DOCUMENTS
Presentation
Mr MORRISON ( Cook — Prime Minister ) ( 15:16 ): I table, for members' information in relation to matters that were dealt with over the course of the morning, the letter from the Attorney-General to the member for Mayo—copying in the Labor Party—on the matters that were raised. I table it for members' information.
STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE
Parliamentary Staff
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (15:17): I do want to take the opportunity to join with the Prime Minister in thanking staff for what was a very late night sitting. There were a range of staff here and outside the chamber. The security that the Prime Minister and others have as well were here until the early hours of the morning. The COMCAR drivers were sitting out there waiting to take people home. There are, of course, increased security around Parliament House due to some of the events that have happened in the ACT over the past couple of weeks, and I do want to pass on my thanks to them.
QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER
Questions Without Notice
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (15:18): Mr Speaker, I have a question for you. I would ask that you examine—I don't have access to the Hansard, but I particularly refer to the answer given by the Minister for Defence in his last dorothy dixer, and it goes to two issues. One is the issue that was raised by the Manager of Opposition Business with regard to the reflections on members of a very serious nature that were made during that debate. I take that very seriously, and the idea that that should be the subject of partisanship and partisan domestic debate at a time of international uncertainty is just not acceptable and is not in Australia's national interests.
The second point I make is just as serious or perhaps more so. In the Minister for Defence's answer, he referred to a purported view, purportedly expressed by the Director-General of ASIO. I have regular briefings. I had a briefing with the head of ONI yesterday. I had a briefing with the Director-General of ASIO two weeks ago. I take national security in today's world very seriously, and that's why I do that. The idea that—
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition, if he's wanting me to examine something—
Mr ALBANESE: Yes, Mr Speaker.
The SPEAKER: I don't want to give you the opportunity to relitigate something—
Mr ALBANESE: I understand, Mr Speaker.
The SPEAKER: so if you want to point something out to me, that's fine.
Mr ALB ANESE: My point is that the Minister for Defence—and I think it is probably up to you to talk directly to the Director-General of ASIO, because there are some matters, due to the nature of those organisations, that we don't discuss here. It would be up to you, but certainly you would have the capacity to do that. But to bring in someone from outside who is well-respected, who has a job in our national security infrastructure, and attempt to use them in a partisan way is a very serious matter indeed. I ask you to reflect on the comments of the Minister for Defence and report back to the House next week.
The SPEAKER: I thank the Leader of the Opposition.
STATEMENTS
Personal Explanation
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the Opposition) (15:21): I've got another one! Mr Speaker, in compliance with the standing orders of the House, I wish to give a personal explanation. It goes to a point of order that I made earlier.
The SPEAKER: Does the Leader of the Opposition claim to have been misrepresented?
Mr ALBANESE: I do, Mr Speaker, by the Treasurer—repeatedly. As bizarre as it is that he quotes something that is more than 30 years old and occurred more than nine Prime Ministers ago, he could at least do it accurately. In some of the quotes that he has used, he has used comments, allegedly made by me at some conference more than three decades ago, where the quotes themselves say that I was quoting someone else at the time. At least the Treasurer could get it right, as absurd as this whole kindy exercise is.
QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER
Parliamentary Hours
Ms STEGGALL (Warringah) (15:22): Mr Speaker, in relation to the thanks about the length of the sitting hours that we have just gone through, I wanted to raise my concern that, only one day after the delivery of the statement acknowledging the Jenkins review recommendations, such a lengthy sitting was in direct contradiction to the recommendation that a review of the hours of operation to ensure a safe work place of parliament should occur. I would ask that that be noted, because I strongly believe it was disrespectful to all staff in Parliament House to insist upon sitting to 4.40 in the morning.
The SPEAKER (15:22): The member for Warringah's concerns are noted. I'm not sure what I can do about that, other than to say your concerns are noted and you might want to take that up with others other than me.
STATEMENTS
Personal Explanations
Mr BANDT (Melbourne—Leader of the Australian Greens) (15:23): Mr Speaker, I seek to make a personal explanation.
The SPEAKER: Does the member for Melbourne claim to have been misrepresented?
Mr BANDT: Yes, I do. During question time, the Prime Minister said: 'The Labor Party's policies on emissions reduction are the same as the policies of the Greens. How do I know that? We know that from the leader of the Greens himself.' Not only did I never say such a thing, I never could have. Labor, like the Liberals, have said their targets aren't science based, whereas ours are. Labor, like the Liberals, have said they support 114 new coal and gas mines being opened, whereas we don't. Labor have said that under their policies there will be the same amount of coal in the system as under the Liberals, whereas we want a phase-out. Labor have said that coal will continue to be exported and mined in the 2050s, whereas we want a moratorium. Labor in this place has voted with the Liberals to open up the Beetaloo gas basin, including using public moneys for it, whereas we oppose it. If the Prime Minister were to be at all truthful, instead of misrepresenting me, he would have said that Labor's embrace of coal and gas puts them far closer to the Liberals than it ever does to us.
QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER
Parliamentary Hours
Mr HUSIC (Chifley) (15:24): I just want to follow on from the member for Warringah's recommendation to consider sitting hours in light of the Jenkins report. Those opposite talk about family values and family work hours. I would urge you, Mr Speaker, if you could, to consider, as the joint head of the Department of Parliamentary Services, that we had a lot of people who were kept here for long hours, working behind the scenes, affecting their ability to keep contact with their families,. There is a responsibility—if I may say not disrespectfully—on you and the President of the Senate to keep tabs on those working hours, given what has been recommended. We're now in a situation where, after all those hours and all that effort, that legislation we were here for until nearly 5 am is not even going to be considered by the parliament. It was all for nothing.
The SPEAKER (15:25): I'll take the matter under consideration, but I still come back to thinking that it's a matter for the task force more than for the Speaker of the House. But I don't think anyone—or very few of us—wanted to work until five o'clock this morning.
DOCUMENTS
Commonwealth Ombudsman
Presentation
The SPEAKER (15:25): I present the reports on the Commonwealth Ombudsman's activities under section 65(6) of the Building and Construction Industry (Improving Productivity) Act 2016, for the periods 1 January to 31 March 2021, and 1 April to 30 June 2021.
MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Morrison Government
The SPEAKER (15:26): I have received a letter from the honourable member for Bruce proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:
The Government's failure to focus and deliver on the needs of Australians.
I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.
More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—
Mr HILL (Bruce) (15:26): We came to this week—the dying days of this parliament—after a summer of utter chaos engulfing the government and the nation. Christmases were ruined, holidays disrupted, families separated and isolated. There was the testing crisis, where sick Australians queued for hours or days and trudged from chemist to chemist, desperate to get a test to protect themselves, their family and their incomes. The crisis in aged care accelerated. There were outbreaks across the nation. The testing infrastructure and the workforce collapsed. The supermarket shelves were empty—you couldn't get chicken in Coles. Businesses were closed, supply chains collapsed, and the shadow lockdown took hold across most of the country, though not in Western Australia, which I think the Deputy Prime Minister described as North Korea. Summer was okay over there.
It didn't have to be like that. It shouldn't have been like that. If only the Prime Minister had done his job, if he'd focused on Australians, planned, prepared and delivered. But instead, while chaos raged, the government has been consumed, day by day, with fighting, focusing on themselves, not the nation. The karma bus, or truth, has finally caught up with the Prime Minister in the last few weeks: the astounding revelations of secret texts that reveal what those closest to the Prime Minister really think of him. His good friend Gladys Berejiklian described him as 'a horrible, horrible person', more concerned with politics than people. With friends like that, who needs enemies? If he has friends like that, I'd hate to meet his enemies. A cabinet minister, who still hasn't outed themselves over there, wanted the world to know they consider the Prime Minister, the leader of their government, a 'complete psycho'. The next one I admit is tricky. I have to choose my words carefully under the standing orders, as the Speaker just reminded us in question time. You can't call the Prime Minister, or any other member in here, a liar or a fraud. 'Fake' is okay. It's funny, isn't it—on the front of every newspaper, on every radio station, on every television channel, it's blaring, but I can't quote precisely what the Deputy Prime Minister actually thinks about the Prime Minister. A little hint: it sounds like 'friar', 'the old town crier', 'Dunlop tyre'. Malcolm Turnbull said the Prime Minister had a reputation for 'crying'. The French President—'I don't think; I know' what he meant. I'm not even going to try and go near what Michael Keenan said about the Prime Minister in Niki Savva's book. Look that up for yourself. I do recommend it. The truth is that any Australian could have written these texts. Every Australian knows well that the Prime Minister goes missing when it counts and that you can't believe a word he says.
Now, it might sound strange, but this is where the government's at. The fact that they hate each other—that they fight amongst themselves, that every day is like a montage from Mean Girls—is not the real problem. That the Prime Minister's character is a pattern of mendacity is not the real problem. And 'terminological inexactitude', as Winston Churchill called it, is not the real problem. The real problem now is the impact on Australians and on our nation, because the Prime Minister's not doing his job. The government is focused on itself, not on governing. It's as simple and as sad as that.
But the Prime Minister's pattern is well established: for every problem, it's someone else's fault. Every crisis is someone else's responsibility. And eventually every response is too little too late, driven by politics, not people. It's the same formula; we now see it. It's gone on for long enough; you can see it. He denies and disregards. He disappears. He distracts, he deflects, he divides, and then when he acts it's deficient, and he's derelict in his duty. That's it. His denial and his disregarding is dangerous now. We saw it in the bushfires, the vaccine rollout and the rapid antigen testing crisis over summer. He didn't meet with the fire chiefs—didn't order the aerial bombers that they said they needed. He didn't order the vaccines. He told Australians we were at the front of the queue; we will never forget that. That wasn't true, though, was it? Now, I'm not going to say which queue it was. It wasn't the close one; it was the far one. He wouldn't meet with the CEO of Pfizer. And he didn't order the rapid antigen tests. Every developed nation in the world had their government secure the supplies in a competitive market. He was warned.
That's the common theme with all this: the Prime Minister was warned on the bushfires, he was warned on the vaccines and he was warned on the tests, and he did not learn from his mistakes. And with distribution, when he finally acted, too little too late, he chose to put private profit over public health. Rapid antigen tests should be freely available on Medicare. That's how we do health in this country. He ignores the problem until it becomes a crisis. Then, after that doesn't work, he tries disappearing, hiding under the doona—derelict. He goes missing for days and sometimes weeks, as we've seen. We saw it in the bushfires: he went to Hawaii, and then his office lied about it. And the quarantine, the vaccines, the rolling lockdowns across most of the country, every state and territory last year, because of the Prime Minister—he was always nowhere to be seen, at the peak of the crisis, when we needed him most. And the testing: just hoping things would go away.
Then we get the distractions and the diversions, the photo-ops, the marketing, the stunts. I've learnt, Deputy Speaker—and you might have educated me on this—that you can't read those hashtags into Hansard. But Australians know what they are. It was the Prime Minister's job to equip the fire chiefs, but it wasn't his job to force people to shake his hand in the fire zones. As Sean Kelly said, it was like a 'malfunctioning electronic device'—wandering around. It was a photo-op; it wasn't a comfort visit. And it's not his job during the aged-care crisis to go and wash women's hair in a hair salon—it's downright creepy, as well. It's not his job, when kids can't get vaccinated, to pretend he's a pilot or a racing car driver to distract people. It's not his job, when businesses are closing from lack of tests and staff, to play cricket commentator over summer and see whether that distraction works for a day.
Then there was Novak Djokovic. The Prime Minister manufactured that crisis. The government gave this guy a visa and then spent a week—deliberately, incompetently—trying to cancel it and kick him out of the country, when they'd brought him here in the first place, to break the media cycle around the testing crisis. But, oh Lord, can you imagine what we're going to see this weekend, after the week he's had? Well, you actually don't have to imagine it. They've already pressed the panic button. We saw that in question time. And 60 Minutes is up on Sunday. The Prime Minister's going to be serving margaritas to Karl Stefanovic in the Lodge—it's the best thing since Christopher Pyne had to make his own G&T in his little log cabin! But the secret weapon, Jenny, is going to save him. Now, that's nice of her. I think it's lovely of her to do this for him—absolutely terrific—and that she could find the time, because it was only a few weeks ago that we learnt she was busy scouring every chemist in Canberra for RATs, or trying to find out the price of milk or bread for him.
But when that doesn't work we go to deflection—that's DEFCON 4: deflection. He blames everyone else—anyone else—for his own mistakes. It's the states, it's the premiers, it's Labor, it's the man on the moon. He's the master blame shifter. But the final one: eventually, when he's forced to act, it's deficient—too little too late. We saw it on JobKeeper: bad design, and too slow; 100,000 people ended up on the unemployment queue instead of attached to their job, because he didn't act when Labor told him to, and then he designed the scheme badly, adding tens of billions of dollars to the national debt for the next generation to repay, giving payment to businesses to increase their profits when they did not need it.
And then there's aged care. We heard about that, powerfully, from the member for Hotham yesterday. There have been 622 deaths this year alone. Eleven hundred homes have outbreaks. The Prime Minister saw this coming. He was warned. He did nothing. The minister went to the cricket for three days, yet the Prime Minister has done nothing. He won't sack the minister. He says it's not a crisis, but then, to break the media cycle before parliament resumes, he sends in the Army. But it's not a crisis!
Make no mistake—beware—if this bloke is re-elected, if he scrapes back into power, he'll do it all over again, because that's who he is. That's what he is. The worst weapon in his dark arsenal is not the dissembling or the deceiving; it's the division. If MPs, including me, look a little worse for wear today, it's not because of Boris Johnson-style parties. We were here until 5 am sorting out his latest mess on religious discrimination. Instead of uniting the country, he uses faith communities and gay and trans children for base political purposes—as wedges, as human shields, to divide the country. He's had four years to fix this, and yet we had 24 hours to consider his half-baked divisive idea. Shame on him!
Yet, this morning, after the House fixed part of his mess, he was out there briefing out from his office that the effort to stop discrimination and bullying against all kids must be stopped, even though that's 100 per cent what he promised. He forgets that, when he writes a letter, you can read it months later—he promised he would do that. When he says stuff on TV, you can go back and watch it—he promised he'd do that. He's so committed now, we find, to religious protections that he's just dropped them.
But they always focus on themselves. We were here till 5 am. There's one big thing that he said he would do that he has not done, and that is a national anticorruption commission. The government says, 'Well, there's no time.' There are eight sitting days left. I say to the government: if you're serious about a national anticorruption commission, bring on the debate. I know that if you bring on that debate my colleagues and I will be here until 5 am tomorrow. We'll be here all weekend; we'll be here next week. There are five weeks till the budget. We will get it done. If only the government had the guts to bring on the debate!
Mr TIM WILSON (Goldstein—Assistant Minister to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction) (15:37): It's always a great pleasure to be able to follow on from the member for Bruce. I actually have an affection for him. He's theatrical in his performance. In fact, he performs substantially better than most of the other members, particularly on the frontbench, of the opposition. Of course, the actual matter of public importance has been about a focus on Australians. That's an entirely legitimate thing to raise as an issue. We care deeply on this side of the chamber about Australians and their future. Yet the member for Bruce focused only on one Australian. Despite his claim that the criticism of the government was about its failure to focus on every Australian, he was obsessed with only one. It's part of a constant attempt by the opposition to assassinate the character of the Prime Minister—with one objective only. We all know that, within a few months, the people of Australia will go to the polls and they will make a decision about who is going to run this country for the next three years.
Of course, the opposition know they can't win the hearts and minds and confidence of Australians. They don't actually have any solutions to the challenges that our country faces. They know, as was remarked many times throughout the last question time, that Australia is entering a very challenging period. The director-general of ASIO outlined that in his threat assessment recently. The opposition have no actual answer for that. This government is actually focusing on not only governing but also making sure that every Australian is safe, secure and has those economic opportunities.
The only objective of the Labor Party is to win the election by assassinating the character of the Prime Minister, because they have no other way of doing it. It's based on a sneaking-in strategy with, of course, the help of the Greens. We know that. The Greens now talk about how they have shadow ministers waiting to be sworn in to a Labor-Greens coalition government. But, increasingly, as the member for Warringah and others have highlighted, the opportunity for them to leverage their position should they be re-elected with others will mean that they will be able to hold the government of the nation hostage too. Because they don't actually want stable government or government that is focused on the full spectrum of the Australian people; they're just looking for a pathway to sneak into power.
They know what Australians know, which is that, past the colour and light of parliament—and let's not pretend otherwise: sometimes there is. We were all here until 5 am this morning. We are all tired. Some of us are even a little bit cranky. But, past the colour, movement and light of parliament and Canberra and the things that obsess the media, the purpose of this parliament is to design laws and deliver programs to make sure not just that we advance the national interest, economic opportunity and national security but that Australians are able to live out the fullness and the opportunity of their lives every day.
Think of the challenges we have faced over the past few years. When we were all elected into this chamber at the start of this term, not a single one of us would have said: 'You know what we're going to spend most of this term doing? Fighting a global pandemic and securing Australia against one of its biggest external threats, on a health basis, in over 100 years.' None of us thought that. I certainly didn't. I had different plans, focused on what we were going to do to reform the superannuation system and making sure Australians have an economic opportunity through home ownership. But we all know that the focus has shifted because of a much more immediate and urgent concern. Despite this challenge, despite everything we have faced as a nation—and full credit goes to the Australian people for the sacrifices they have made to support themselves, their families and their communities, because that is their victory and their success—the numbers tell the story about where we are.
I remember when weren't sitting here until 5 am. I remember getting on flights to Canberra when only a small number of us could come into this chamber, at the start of this pandemic, and we sat for very short periods of time to pass urgent legislation. We were looking over the precipice and thought the economic costs of a pandemic could very well lead to mass unemployment, Australians losing their homes, collapses in property prices and Australians finding themselves in an economically perilous situation. Now, nearly two years later, look at the numbers. There have been 1.1 million jobs created since the pandemic hit—the lowest unemployment in over 30 years. That is Australians living out their lives and their full opportunity, against that backdrop. There are 11.5 million Australians benefiting from tax relief—people keeping more of their own money in their own pocket to support their own families. Recently, there was data out showing that Australians have up to four years of repayments in their mortgage offset accounts because they're unsure, quite reasonably, what's going to come next. If there's anything Australians don't need right now it's uncertainty and the indulgence of a Labor government that is the more focused on the character assassination of the Prime Minister than on what it is that they can do to back Australians to live out the success of their lives.
Of course, the story continues. Where have the majority of those jobs and opportunities for business operators gone? To women. We often talk in this place about gender equity and how important it is, and I'm very much a strong believer in that. We want empowered women to be able to live out the success of their lives. There were 815,600 female business operators in August 2021. We want Australians from all backgrounds to be able to have a go and to be able to get on with their lives. And we have 220,000 trade apprentices—a record high. We have an incredible story to tell, as a nation, of our success.
While jobs have been going up and the economy has been going up, our emissions have been going down, and this is something I'm particularly passionate about in my portfolio area. So many countries promise big, high-theory numbers about what it is they're going to achieve, but Australia is on the pathway to carbon neutrality by 2050. We have cut our emissions by 20 per cent on 2005 levels, and we're already projected to cut them by 35 per cent by the end of the decade, smashing our targets. This is because we have the policies in place to make sure that Australians are empowered, and it's built on a partnership. We're not going down the reckless and irresponsible path that the Labor Party has chosen so many times in the past by seeking to impose taxes as a single blunt instrument. For the Labor Party, everything is a nail and the hammer is always a tax, and it's directly on Australians and their households.
The other thing we have seen is electricity prices going down. Bills have been going down. Taxes are down. Electricity bills are down. The empowerment of Australians is up. We've seen one in four Australian homes with rooftop solar—the highest in the world. We are a No. 1, and we are very proud of that.
But it's also all of the other things we're doing to make sure Australians have their success and can live out the best of their lives. Ninety-nine per cent of homes and businesses, more than 12 million, have access to the National Broadband Network, in comparison to the legacy of the Labor Party, who basically couldn't even find an electrician to turn on any household in the country. Over 1,200 mobile black spot base stations have now been funded, with over 900 already built—a huge improvement to the welfare of rural and regional communities in particular, where black spots can have a direct impact on whether people get access to phone reception at life-or-death moments. There are 135,000 new home projects, backed, of course, by the HomeBuilder program.
Over 93 per cent of Australians are protected with vaccines. Whatever the Labor Party likes to say or has constantly harped on about in the past, we have seen Australians take up vaccinations at internationally epic levels, and we should be proud of that. We thank all our healthcare first responders and those healthcare workers who have been part of that solution with the Australians who've been prepared to roll up their sleeves so that they can get a vaccine directly into their arms to protect themselves and their fellow Australians, particularly the most vulnerable. We're ranked second in the world for pandemic preparedness, according to the Johns Hopkins index—something that we should all be proud of.
Of course, we are focused on making sure that Australia is prepared, no matter what may yet come. We've made compelling and challenging decisions on defence which have led to some of the highest spending. There are 100,000 new defence industry jobs and 15,000 small and medium businesses that are being supported across the supply chain. Seventy defence vessels and 1,700 vehicles are being built here in our great country, to defend our country no matter what may come. And of course there are significant agreements with alliance partners, particularly the United Kingdom and the United States—something we should be proud of.
We are caring for our vulnerable, with 163,105 new aged-care home packages. There are 502,413 people on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, funded—unlike the Labor Party—so that those who are disabled aren't just sold a promise; they're also sold a delivery. There are 857 new medicines listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. At every point, the focus of this government is on the Australian people, not on the Canberra bubble.
Mr CONROY (Shortland) (15:47): This MPI is about focus and delivery—delivering for the Australian people. The member for Bruce has already outlined how this government has comprehensively failed to deliver for the Australian people during the pandemic. They failed to deliver a national quarantine system. They failed to deliver vaccines on time when the Australian population needed them. They failed to deliver RATs. And they're failing right now in aged care—the member for Bruce covered all this—and this is an inexcusable failure by this government.
But I want to concentrate on something else that's been canvassed a lot in question time today, which is this government's failure on the most important duty of a federal government—that is, ensuring the defence and national security of this nation. They love to drape the flag around themselves. They love to hide behind khaki when it comes close to an election. And you saw the disgraceful effort from the defence minister today—disgraceful; utterly unprecedented. It's a brave choice by the Liberal Party, given their great hero is Robert Gordon Menzies, a man known to be a Nazi appeaser—a man known to have advocated for doing a deal with Hitler 10 days after Poland was invaded. Ten days after Poland was invaded—
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Llew O'Brien ): The member will pause. The member for Riverina?
Mr McCormack: I'm afraid the member at the dispatch box should withdraw that slur against the former Prime Minister.
Mr Conroy interjecting—
Mr McCormack: No way! That is unacceptable—to accuse Robert Menzies of being a Nazi appeaser! You should withdraw, and you should withdraw now.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Riverina will resume his seat and the member for Shortland will pause. I'm just referring it to the Clerk.
Honourable members interjecting—
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Whilst the comment wasn't made against a sitting member, it was unparliamentary and I'll get the member to withdraw.
Mr CONROY: Do I get the time back, Mr Deputy Speaker?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You'll withdraw.
Mr CONROY: I withdraw to assist the House, but the fact remains that 10 days after Poland was invaded Robert Gordon Menzies wrote a letter to the high commissioner, advocating for a peace deal with Hitler. That is the truth.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will pause for a moment. The member for Riverina?
Mr McCormack: He should just withdraw, Mr Deputy Speaker. You've asked him and he's defying your directions.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: He has withdrawn. The member will continue.
Mr CONROY: They're ashamed of their own history. They're ashamed of their own history on defence, which included sending troops to Vietnam on a lie—a war in which 500 Australians died. They're ashamed of their history of lying to get us into the Second Gulf War because the truth is they've always politicised national security.
Mr Tim Wilson: A point of order. An unparliamentary remark was made against a collective group of people. In the past, I understand, under Practice, if it is not withdrawn, it would lead to individual members getting up individually and claiming—
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The unparliamentary remark that I was referring to was one made against a former Prime Minister who is no longer serving.
Mr Tim Wils on: And a remark was just made regarding 'our history' or the government's history and deception.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The assistant minister will take his seat. The member for Shortland will resume.
Mr CONROY: Thank you. This is how sensitive they are about their actual record on national security. This is why it's laughable for them to attack Labor when they have presided over the Hunter class frigate program that has blown out by two years. The budget has blown out from $30 billion to $45 billion. The project is 2,000 tonnes overweight, the ships will be slower than the rest of the fleet, the ships will have a shorter range and the ships will be very noisy, which is a problem for a submarine hunter. Most remarkably, the frigate captains will have to choose between using the radar or sailing at full speed, a problem when you're trying to avoid a missile attack.
This is the truth about this government on national defence. They will drape themselves in the flag, but when it comes to delivering for the ADF and delivering for taxpayers, they go hiding, they go missing. They use the ADF as a political prop time and again, but when it comes to delivering for the ADF, they go missing. Look at the $3.7 billion of MRH-90 helicopters cancelled because they can't deliver a project. The Attack class submarines were cancelled, wasting $4 billion. The truth is that this government cannot deliver for this nation and cannot deliver for national security. They are simply incompetent.
Mr McCORMACK (Riverina) (15:52): If the member for Shortland wants a history lesson, he should stay in the chamber; I might give him a couple of facts and figures. When in government last time, that side dropped defence spending as a percentage of GDP to the lowest level in this nation since 1938—and we all know what happened in 1939. That is a fact.
I'm the member for a garrison town, Wagga Wagga, where all three arms of the Defence Force proudly serve with bases. We've got Kapooka, home of the soldier, where every young and not-so-young recruit goes to do their basic training. We've got the Air Force, and if you spend any given time in the RAAF, you end up at Forest Hill. We've even got a Navy base, even though we're many hundreds of kilometres from the nearest drop of sea water.
We are investing in defence like no government before. We are investing in defence as a government right across this nation, with 70 defence vessels and 1,700 vehicles being built in Australia, with Australian hands, with Australian products; and with 100,000 defence industry jobs created and 15,000 small and medium businesses supported. We as a government are putting money back into defence, not like that lot. They deserted our ADF in their hour of need, but we are putting the investment back where it's properly needed so that our defence people, those proud people who wear the khaki and the blue and the white uniforms when they are on patrol and when they are on peacekeeping missions, can have the very best equipment. They know that they have a government which has their back.
We all know that actions speak louder than words. We are generally judged not by what we say but by what we do. I'm going to read a couple of quotes from somebody about this very topic at hand. The most important test of a government is how it backs and supports jobs. We are backed and supported by the words from this person, who said, 'You judge a budget by jobs and opportunities and what it says about the future'. He also added:
That is absolutely the key test. The government, the opposition, any decision-maker in the economy, should be judged on what happens to unemployment …
This was said in 2020:
The test for this budget is what it means for unemployment. If unemployment is too high for too long, then this budget and this Government would have failed its central task.
There's a theme here:
The test of the Morrison Government's management of the recession and its aftermath is what happens to jobs and the businesses which create them.
I couldn't agree more! He also added that a test was 'whether or not unemployment stays too high for too long'. Finally, he said, 'I expect that that will be the main issue at this election: what happens to jobs.' The member for McEwen is onto who I'm referring to: it's the shadow Treasurer, the member for Rankin.
I absolutely agree with him. It is all about jobs. That is why, when we came to government with the unemployment rate at 5.7 per cent and rising, we knew had to do something. We knew that we had to help businesses. It's not government that creates jobs. It's businesspeople, farmers and those small businesses that open the doors, take the risks and take out the big debts to help employ Australians. And what's the rate now? 4.2 per cent. What is it in regional Australia? It's 3.8 per cent. There are 70,000 jobs in regional Australia going right now. There are vacancies that need filling and we're doing something about it with all the measures that we're putting in place.
Most importantly, those people who have jobs are paying less tax. Under that mob, if they get the Treasury benches after the next election, goodness knows how much tax they'll be paying. At the moment the tax rate for small business is the lowest it's been in decades. Indeed, for personal income tax payers we are lowering taxes all the time. They stand for higher taxes. They stand for fewer jobs. We are the ones who support the economy. We are the ones who support Australian Defence Force people. Indeed, at the last election what did they stand for? $387 billion of higher taxes: a retiree's tax, a superannuation tax and a housing tax. That's what they stand for. If Australians want to risk the future of this nation, vote 1 Labor, because that's what will happen. But, if they want to back a government that's going to support lower taxes, it's the Liberals and Nationals they should put a 1 beside.
Ms PAYNE (Canberra) (10:57): The MPI today is about the failures of this government to deliver for the Australian people. There is no more pressing example than the current crisis that our aged-care system is in. Aged care was in crisis before COVID. We have seen report after report. We have seen a royal commission showing absolutely unacceptable neglect in aged care, with neglectful, disgraceful treatment of our older Australians, our parents, our grandparents, our husbands and wives and loved ones, who are suffering. The workers who front up every day have fronted up every day of this pandemic, at risk to their own health and their family's health, to care for these people because they care so deeply about the residents that they care for. But the government is not there supporting them at all.
On Tuesday we met with a group of workers from the aged-care sector from the Australian Nursing & Midwifery Federation. It was an honour to meet with those people, predominantly women, and hear about what they are going through at the moment. Some of them had fronted up after working through night shifts because it was so important for them to be here to give this message. The Prime Minister didn't come out and meet with them. The Prime Minister doesn't care about what's going on in aged care. In fact, he denied time and time again that it was a crisis until realising that people knew it was a crisis. It's always someone else's fault.
The very minister who is responsible has failed time and time again to prevent and manage this foreseeable crisis of preventable deaths of vulnerable Australians in the aged-care system that is clearly a federal government responsibility. On their watch these people have died and these people are suffering, isolated and neglected. A quarter of the shifts for the workers who care for them are not being filled at the moment, because of the COVID crisis. It could have been prevented if boosters and RATs, rapid antigen tests, had been delivered to the residents and the staff in aged care.
We knew this was coming. We knew this. We are three years into this pandemic, and even before it hit here in Australia we knew that one of the most vulnerable parts of our community was the aged-care sector. We knew that that's where we had to get the vaccines rolled out immediately. This government failed in 2020, and they have failed again with this omicron variant, which we should have seen coming. We saw this coming, and they weren't there for those vulnerable Australians. Now we've got the Defence Force going into aged care. It should never have come to this.
What a situation we have here, with the stories you hear from the people working in aged care, working so hard to deliver these people some dignity. These people are in agony. People are falling out of bed, lying on the floor. Which person do you go to first—the person who has fallen or the person who needs to be taken to the toilet or needs to be changed or needs to be showered or needs to be fed? It's not happening. People are isolated, away from their families, and ill. Families are desperately worried about these people in aged care. It is not good enough.
If there is any question about whether this Prime Minister even cares about Australians, it has been this awful summer that Australians have endured and the way that he smirked his way through it at the cricket, saying, 'We're taking wickets in the pandemic.' People were ill. People were dying. His answer has always been to see it as a political problem. When the testing started to fail, rather than getting RATs out to people for free, he said, 'Get out of the line. Go to the beach. Jenny can pick up a RATs when she goes down to the chemist'—when we all know it was just about impossible to get them.
This is a government that does not care. We are in the dying days of this parliament and we are debating bills to divide Australians rather than legislation to address this urgent crisis. It is unforgivable from this government.
Mr CONAGHAN (Cowper) (16:02): I'd like to commend the member for Riverina on his very impassioned speech in defence of the former prime ministers of Australia, who should receive the respect of this parliament—
An honourable member interjecting—
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Llew O'Brien ): The member will take his seat.
An honourable member interjecting—
Mr CONAGHAN: How quickly we forget. It's just under three short years ago that we were looking at a drought across the nation—and I'm happy to speak for the next four minutes on this government and how we have focused and how we have delivered over the past three years, whether it be on drought, floods, fires, floods or pandemics. But when I first came into this role, when we had that devastating drought, this government had the recovery allowance scheme for those who were struggling through the drought, the community support initiative, the isolated children scheme, the access to telehealth services. It was shortly after that that we had the fires. The former Deputy Prime Minister, the member for Riverina, came up to my electorate and spoke with David and Carolyn Duff, who were absolutely ravaged. They had lost almost everything. We stood there with them and tried to understand what they were going through, and it was absolutely torturous for them. But the federal government was there, walking with them, providing the $75,000 federal grant and then the low-interest loans of up to $2 million, which they described as 'a game changer'. We were there for them then, and, when floods ravaged Telegraph Point, Rollands Plains and Port Macquarie, the Prime Minister was there, front and centre, wading through the water, moving debris. He wasn't there for a photo opportunity; he was there because he cared. There were $50,000 grants for businesses and $75,000 grants for primary producers. We had thousands of dead cattle floating down the river onto the beaches in Port Macquarie. This can't be politicised. We have to walk a day in these people's shoes. The Whalebone Wharf had just completed a half-million-dollar renovation, which was washed away overnight. These are people's emotions, these are people's livelihoods, and the federal government has walked with them.
Then we faced coronavirus. The member for Goldstein referred to looking over that precipice. I remember the first two weeks of the coronavirus pandemic. I remember the panic and the fear in people about what was going to happen. And then the federal government stepped up with JobKeeper, which saved 700,000 jobs, kept employees and employers together and helped with the mental health of employees and employers. And we continued to work with them with JobSeeker and HomeBuilder, ensuring that the economy was strong. The result speaks for itself. We have worked together.
The biggest problem in my area when I was elected was that in Coffs Harbour youth unemployment was 20.3 per cent. It is now less than four per cent, which is below the national average. Unemployment in Coffs Harbour is less than the national average, and businesses are thriving. People are working their way out of the pandemic, and what they don't want to see is this rubbish, this garbage, in this place. All they want to know is: how am I going to make the next dollar? How am I going to look after my family? Where am I going in the future? And the future is this government because we will work out of this pandemic. We will work out of this debt that was incurred because of a one-in-100-year pandemic.
QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER
Parliamentary Behaviour
Mr BURKE (Watson—Manager of Opposition Business) (16:07): I'm aware of the dispute that's gone back and forth, and I don't want to enter too much into the argument now. But the concept of offensive words applies to the words themselves, regardless of whether they apply to a current member or a former member of parliament. But obviously there is a higher level of protection for members of parliament and judges under the standing orders in the way they're described. Given that, for example, a year earlier than the time that was being referred to the United Kingdom had a formal policy of appeasement, we're potentially going down a path where history can't be discussed in different terms because of views that were quite rightly formed by all of us further down the track. I'd simply ask, if it is possible, for you to have an opportunity to reflect on the ruling that you've made, rather than us immediately establishing a precedent. You may choose to refer it to the Speaker himself, and I would invite you, having reflected on it, to provide further advice either to the House itself or, if you deem it more appropriate, directly to the Leader of the House and to me because, potentially, we've gone a significant way further than we've gone before in the rulings that have been made today. But I don't want to litigate it further at this point.
Mr LLEW O'BRIEN (Wide Bay—Deputy Speaker) (16:09): I thank the Manager of Opposition Business. I will take it under consideration. I stand by the ruling at this point in time. I will speak to the Speaker and, if it suits the Manager of Opposition Business, either I or the Speaker will address you and the Leader of the House in response. In addressing this issue, it is a very serious statement to make that you are appeasing or sympathising with a group who murdered many millions of people. That is a fact. These are things that we will consider. I appreciate that there is a bit of uncertainty, and we will look into that. It is a very, very serious remark to be made in this parliament and that's why I've ruled as I have, but I will absolutely take it under consideration and refer to the Speaker.
Mr ROB MITCHELL (McEwen—Second Deputy Speaker) (16:10): The one consistency we can talk about with the government is that truth is never at the forefront of their thinking. Each and every day we come in here and we hear mendacious claims by ministers and backbenchers about things that are just factually not correct. Today, we have heard it again, about defence. We supposedly cut defence spending to its lowest level in history. It is just not true. The Howard government did that. What we do know is that, when the government talk about spending money, all they do is spend money. They don't deliver anything. We know that from French Prime Minister Macron, who knows that he was lied to about the submarines. It has cost us $4 billion and there is not one submarine. Every day in here we have had to listen to those opposite saying, 'We're building ships.' You've built nothing on that side. It's all nothing. It's empty promises. That's why this government has been in the second-highest taxing government in history. So, if you want to talk about history, I say to the former Deputy Prime Minister, 'You were Deputy Prime Minister in the second-highest taxing government in history.' There was only one higher, and that was old mate Johnny, Johnny Howard. Remember him—the one that sent us to a war on a lie? Why? Because it's consistent with what we hear from the other side.
We see millions and millions of dollars being channelled into their mates at the expense of Australian families. We can't get a RAT. We've got a company here in Australia that makes them every single day of the week, and the hapless little minister over there quaintly just doesn't do a thing, doesn't go and say, 'Let's get Australian made product.' We hear all this garbage, 'We've got to have sovereign building,' and all this. They wrap themselves in a flag, put on this faux patriotism, but, at the end of the day, they deliver nothing. When RATs are being made in this country and exported overseas and people in aged-care facilities can't get them, something is wrong. That something is a government that puts itself before the Australian people.
We now have a trillion dollars worth of debt. That is a figure that was never, ever going to be thought of. But they sit there proudly and say, 'Look what we've done.' We hear a misinformation campaign each and every day. Whatever happened to 'back in black'? Remember, they promised, 'We're back in black next year'? They promised here, in this place, they would deliver a budget surplus each and every year in government. Well, you have been in government eight years, and what have you delivered? Highest debt, highest deficit and money going over to your mates at the expense of Australian families. Why do people in aged care have to suffer? Why is it that every promise that the government make they break? We know why they don't want a national integrity commission. Let's face it, there would probably be no-one on the front bench. They would all be tucked away because of what's been happening. We see money going out each and every day and no accountability.
At the last election, the government promised all this money for busting congestion. Where did that get to? Nowhere. Every single promise they have made, they have broken. Australians know that, when the Prime Minister puts his hand out and forces them to shake his hand, they should count their fingers. You never know what's going to happen with the government, except for one thing—they consistently don't be honest with the Australian people. They break their promises. They have spent money. They have put our kids and grandkids into debt, higher than ever before. The highest taxing governments have both been on the conservative side. The second-highest one has members serving in this government. Yet they come in here and make these false claims: 'Oh, Labor is going to spend all this money.' The truth is in the pudding. Have a look at what they say and what they do. What we find out is that this government couldn't deliver a pizza, let alone a budget surplus or look at after aged care. We sit here every day and hear about how people are suffering in aged care. Not one of them over there has said, 'Gee whiz, we're sorry we made that mistake, we're sorry we misled people, we're sorry we didn't get RATs, we're sorry didn't do the work, and we're sorry we didn't give people in aged care PPE.' The minister would rather spend more time at the cricket than go and see people in aged-care facilities, and that is a national disgrace.
Ms BELL (Moncrieff) (16:15): Again, we hear the colourful language and the huff and puff from the member for Bruce and other members on the other side. We hear giggling and laughter from the Labor Party on this important topic here today. We hear slurs of former prime ministers of this great country. We hear spin and we hear insults. That's we hear from them. We don't hear about a plan. There's no alternative plan on the other side of the House to tell Australians how you run our great nation. Why is that? Australians have the right to ask you that question. It's because you don't have one. You don't have the experience that it takes to run this country in a once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Moncrieff will pause for the moment. Is the member for Shortland making a point of order?
Mr Conroy: Yes. The member's reflecting on 'you'. I ask that she direct her comments through the chair. She's saying 'you' don't have a plan.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thanks to the member for Shortland. Continue on.
Ms BELL: Thank you. I appreciate that input. So I say to the Australian people: the Labor Party doesn't have a plan. Thank you for clarifying that. I think it's very, very important, because I want to highlight to Australians and compare in contrast what the Morrison government has done to support Australians during a once-in-a-hundred-year pandemic. As a nation, we haven't been under this much pressure since World War II. Australians know that. Being elected by the Australian people to steward our way through this pandemic is an absolute privilege. It's a privilege. It's a bastion of trust, and it's posed many difficult positions and decisions to keep Australians safe and to keep Australians in jobs. They're called key performance indicators. That's what the Australian people should judge this government on, not spin and slur and unparliamentary language and stage-managed appearances to demean the Prime Minister's character. I would urge Australians not to listen to those opposite, not to listen to their hate speech and not to listen to their hypocrisy. If you vote Labor once—
Mr Conroy: I rise on a point of order. The speaker has reflected on members of the opposition by arguing that we engage in hate speech. That is most unparliamentary.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. The member for Moncrieff will continue on.
Ms BELL: I tell the Australian people that, if they vote once for Labor, they will pay for it for the next 10 years. That is fact. At the federal election that we're facing in May, they'll pay for it for longer. I want to ask Australians not to be fooled by those opposite. Don't be fooled by their bluff, their huff and puff, their flip-flop from one side to the other. They don't have the experience required to make the incredibly difficult decisions that our Prime Minister and cabinet make every single day for the good of our nation.
I'm going to outline some of those thousands of decisions that I'm talking about that our cabinet and our Prime Minister are making for both sides of the political divide, for all Australians, not to appease one group over another—thousands of decisions every day. We've delivered a AAA credit rating for Australia, for our nation. Can a member from the other side tell me another nation that's done that? We've had $30 billion in tax cuts and unemployment at record lows of 4.2 per cent, heading towards something with a three in front of it. When did the Labor Party last see that number? When was it? It was so long ago I can't remember it, and I'm heading towards 53.
There are 1.7 million more jobs. Youth unemployment is at less than 10 per cent—the lowest since 2008. One million more women are in jobs. These are the key performance indicators that I'm asking Australians to judge our government and our Prime Minister on. I'm asking Australians not to get distracted by the personal attacks on our Prime Minister's character that we've seen this week. There are 220,000 trade apprentices in training. We have affordable, reliable electricity. We have lower emissions. Those opposite, let's remember, rely on the Greens to form government. (Time expired)
Ms McBAIN (Eden-Monaro) (16:20): I'm glad to be able to rise and talk on this MPI today. I do so not out of partisanship but out of a deep sense that people in my electorate have been left behind by this government. I ask you to consider whether, over the last three years of the Morrison government or the last near-decade of the coalition government, your life has become better.
I put a Facebook post up yesterday asking people in my community what the biggest issues were for them. Maybe I should've expected it, but I was shocked by the number of my constituents that engaged with me, begging me to raise their issues. Literally hundreds and hundreds of comments came flooding in. Most of the concerns were not a surprise to me. In the 18 months since I was elected I've travelled over 80,000 kilometres in my car visiting towns and villages across Eden-Monaro. Everywhere I go—every town, every village, every cafe and even the supermarket when I'm in there—people stop and ask what we can do to get this government to act. There is a feeling among people that they are being abandoned at worst or ignored at best. People look to government for leadership, for assistance, to know that they have the backs of average Australians. Instead of deferring and deflecting, it's time to get on with it because there are big issues facing our communities and our nation.
We spent almost all of yesterday, last night and the early hours of this morning debating the Morrison government's flawed Religious Discrimination Bill. My colleagues and I fought tooth and nail to make sure that vulnerable children were adequately protected. But the questions my constituents ask are: Why was the government more focused on this obviously flawed bill than on a federal integrity commission? Why is Scott Morrison prioritising this bill over dealing with the housing crisis, when people across the country are being forced out of rentals, facing homelessness and can't afford a roof over their heads? Why isn't this government fixing the mess that is aged care? A royal commission report titled Neglect took two years and cost $104 million, and not a single recommendation has been implemented. The most vulnerable people in our community, our parents and grandparents, are suffering pain and indignity for one reason: this government led by this Prime Minister won't do its job. It would rather create a distraction than address the issues.
In April last year, the government announced a $280 million funding round under the Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants program. Community groups, organisations and councils were encouraged to apply. The initial timeline indicated they'd have an answer to that application in November or December. Lo and behold, we're in February with no outcomes. Communities are left in the dark about whether those projects will even proceed, and this looks like it's timed to coincide with an election campaign. Whilst this government continues to delay this funding, bushfire survivors and affected communities are the ones that miss out.
You won't hear of that. You'll be told that there's plenty of money that has gone to bushfire affected communities. But the lived experience on the ground is very, very different. The Prime Minister should've done more than show up for a photo-op. He should've listened to those people directly impacted on the ground in bushfire areas, and he shouldn't have walked away from an opportunity to hear from the people affected about what they needed most from this government.
So let me tell you what those in Eden-Monaro are asking for. They want better support for bushfire survivors. They want money spent on mitigation and resilience measures so we are better prepared for our next natural disaster. They want affordable housing and more public housing across the region. They want a federal integrity commission. They want better staff ratios in aged care and better conditions for older Australians. They want the government to deal with issues like staffing and skills shortages that are ravaging our businesses. They want a future made in Australia, where manufacturing is brought back onshore and we become a more self-reliant nation. More than anything, they want a Prime Minister and a government that will just do its job. I think it's time that people got what they asked for.
Mr GOODENOUGH (Moore) (16:26): By whichever metrics we use, it is evident that the Morrison government has a track record of delivery for Australians in key areas over the past three years. For instance, on the important measure of employment, the Australian economy has created 1.1 million jobs since the pandemic hit, with 700,000 jobs saved through JobKeeper. The unemployment rate is currently the lowest recorded in 40 years, at 4.2 per cent. The Morrison government has introduced a series of legislated tax cuts, with 11.5 million Australians benefiting from tax relief. Soon 90 per cent of taxpayers will be paying a marginal tax rate of more than 30 per cent. In terms of pandemic preparedness, more than 93 per cent of Australians have been protected with vaccines under our National Immunisation Program.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Llew O'Brien ): The time for the discussion has concluded.
BILLS
Corporate Collective Investment Vehicle Framework and Other Measures Bill 2021
Returned from Senate
Message received from the Senate returning the bill without amendment.
Parliamentary Workplace Reform (Set the Standard Measures No. 1) Bill 2022
Bill received from the Senate and read a first time.
Ordered that the second reading be made an order of the day for the next sitting.
ADJOURNMENT
Asylum Seekers
Ms PAYNE (Canberra) (16:28): Mehdi Ali is a 24-year-old asylum seeker. He was 15 when he arrived in Australia from Iran seeking sanctuary. He has been held in immigration detention for nine years. He spent time on Nauru and is currently being held in Carlton's Park Hotel. He is unable to leave. He is unable to even open a window to get some fresh air. He has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. He's been approved for resettlement in the United States under Australia's 2016 swap deal with the US, but he is still waiting. There are 30 others like him in the Park Hotel alone. They're being used as an example. They're being tortured by this government as revenge for the medevac legislation. The Australian government is refusing to accept New Zealand's offer to resettle these refugees.
The Prime Minister's Novak Djokovic stunt shone an international spotlight on our nation's shame when he was put in the Park Hotel. The Prime Minister last month claimed that no refugees were being held in detention in the hotel, and then he claimed that he never said that. Mehdi Ali is in there, and 30 other refugees are in there. The Refugee Council of Australia estimates that offshore processing costs more than $1 billion a year. That is a lot of money that could go elsewhere. It is money that would be better spent if those in administrative immigration detention were allowed to live in the community, and there's no reason that that can't happen. There are no safety or national security concerns for these people, and this has even been admitted by Peter Dutton.
I'm proud that our shadow minister, Kristina Keneally, has said that these men should be allowed in the community. I am proud that, in our platform, Labor has pledged to end the outrageous temporary protection visas and safe haven enterprise visas. I'm proud that our party platform is committed to ending the practice of indefinite detention, a practice which is illegal under international law. And I'm proud that Labor has called on the Morrison government to increase the number of refugees taken from Afghanistan and called on him to say what number of people he would bring in.
The Morrison government has abandoned thousands of Afghan interpreters and others who risked their lives to help Australian soldiers. They're now facing Taliban reprisal after coalition forces pulled out of Afghanistan. At the last minute, 4,168 people were evacuated from Kabul, and Labor thanks the brave men and women of the ADF for their heroic efforts. But they and the people of Afghanistan have been let down by this government. The Department of Home Affairs received more than 32,500 applications for the humanitarian program from Afghan nationals on behalf of more than 145,000 individuals. The government then waited months before committing to an actual number of humanitarian places. A Senate report last month found the government's behaviour to be dishonourable. It said:
We asked these people to stand in harm's way with Australian personnel. We have left them standing in harm's way.
Minister Hawke only acted after seeing this scathing report. Reverend Tim Costello has said that their response was 'mean and tricky' and a fig leaf to disguise the government's total failure.
Even those that make it to Australia face new, arbitrary challenges. Protesters outside Parliament House this week drew attention to the approximately 5,000 people from Afghanistan, living in Australia—living in limbo—on cruel temporary protection visas. Some have been living here for over a decade but have no adequate pathway of permanently resettling in Australia. The visas mean they are unable to sponsor their family members stuck in Afghanistan. There is nothing temporary about the situation in Afghanistan, and I call on the government to let these people stay here. Let them have some permanency in their lives. Let us welcome these people to Australia.
The Biloela family is another example of this government's cruelty towards refugees. I'm proud that Labor has stood up for this family from day one and that, under a Labor government, this family would be enjoying their lives in Biloela, where the community wants them, and that so many of my colleagues have called for this.
COVID-19
Mr LAMING (Bowman) (16:33): All of us return to our states tonight, and I return to Queensland, a state that still has emergency powers that were introduced in mid December and extended to April. I make an appeal to leaders around the country that, with omicron having peaked and now declining in daily cases, we review the need for these emergency powers. Emergency powers are easy to introduce. They don't take long. The laws are drafted. You simply insert a date and get parliamentary agreement. I've argued that the state LNP was quite right in being cautious and using emergency powers as a last resort. What we've learned from COVID, of course, is that it's highly disruptive, and for some of us more than others. This has been a two-year journey—the word 'unprecedented' completely overused—but both sides of this chamber have dealt with these shocks. I remember the management of the GFC also set us challenges we'd never seen previously. And Australia is recognised as having handled these shocks remarkably well. But, as I go around the states, that element of freedom that we bestowed on jurisdictions in the guise of national cabinet, while it worked for us in the first 12 months, obviously became frayed after that. There were significant areas of overlap but also a gap.
If we look at the individual policies and compare states, one wonders, if there's only one body of science, how there can be so many varying responses. I'll put mandates into that category. Mandates need to have a scientific basis, because, fundamentally, vaccination itself lies at the heart of scientific evidence. But seeing states dreaming up and fabricating mandates for potentially political purposes is, I think, deeply concerning. If mandates differ between jurisdictions, it can only be for political reasons, because there's only one a science.
The Lancet said very clearly in an opinion piece: this is not an epidemic of the unvaccinated. And I differ from most of my medical colleagues because I don't believe in ostracising, humiliating, shaming or attacking people that don't have faith in a vaccine. I know the only way forward is to educate, politely and patiently. Australia now leads the world at the top of a handful of fully vaccinated populations. We don't need to go to these extra measures to corner, compel, threaten and sack people for those extra few people to get the jab.
When you talk to those that are running the vaccine hubs now, they'll often say to people coming in for their boosters, 'Thank you so much for coming in willingly, because all I've seen during this period of mandate are people doing it resentfully and regrettably, and often just to keep their employment.' We don't have to be that way. We can get through COVID by positively encouraging a public health message and respecting that some people just aren't going to accept it, either because of level of education, awareness or understanding, or from listening to YouTube videos and following Facebook pages. This is the modern challenge of media.
To those that were in the rallies, to those that have come down and protested against the mandates: while I don't necessarily share your point of view, each of you are citizens, worthy of an opinion. What we shouldn't be doing is humiliating, cornering and leading ourselves into a situation where good people have been sacked from their employment by virtue-signalling companies—travel agency companies that, for no good reason, sack someone who works at home on a computer taking bookings. We have a very robust AHPPC system, advised by the best in the country at ATAGI.
As the chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training I was deeply concerned, as was my deputy chair, about the impact of COVID on the work of Fair Work, and we dug more deeply into the situation to look at what the implications were. Too many Australians have lost loved ones to COVID, but too many more, for no good reason, have lost their jobs in Queensland.
The emergency powers have to come to an end. Whatever the mandate set out to achieve, it got the extra blip of vaccination in December. I urge the Queensland Premier: We will get through COVID. We can do it without mandates and without sacking people. We can do it without turning baristas and waiters into policemen at the doors of restaurants. No, this is not the most important thing in beating COVID. It's working in unison and making sure that mandates, if ever used, are a last resort.
Veterans
Mr NEUMANN (Blair) (16:38): Our veterans are waiting too long for assistance and are being let down by this Morrison-Joyce government. Claims processing by the Department of Veterans' Affairs is far too slow, and the department needs more staff to process a growing backlog of claims—and I'm glad the minister is sitting opposite. The so-called funding boost to help DVA speed up claims that was announced in the budget was a temporary two-year funding increase. It was a political fix to help the government get through to the next election. It has gotten so bad that the government's own MPs can't ignore the crisis any longer. The LNP member for Herbert called out his own government for failing veterans and their families, as reported in the Australian on 11 January this year. He considered that DVA has too many poorly trained casual staff and needs more well-paid, highly trained permanent workers to process claims faster.
The reality is that the member for Herbert and the government of which he is a part of have failed to fix the problems, whether they're in Townsville or in my home city of Ipswich. It's gotten worse under this government's watch. I've heard stories from veterans and their families waiting up to 18 months to get assistance. In some cases, it's taken four years if a veteran challenges the decision from DVA through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, a body stacked with Liberal Party mates.
Veterans and their families will remember that the Prime Minister had to be dragged kicking and screaming to support the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. It's no wonder that, given the evidence from the hearings of the royal commission late last year in Brisbane confirmed what many veterans already knew, they were suffering terrible psychological harm and have had to wait too long to get much-needed benefits. The commission heard that DVA set itself a 100-day target to deliver benefits, but more than double that in recent years, to 200 days, and, in some cases, up to 14 months. The next round of hearings at the royal commission starts in Sydney next week. I encourage all veterans and families to tell their stories, make a submission and appear as witnesses.
The government knows that there's a serious political problem on its hands, and veterans are fed up. The Minister for Veterans' Affairs ordered a so-called overhaul of the veterans’ welfare system in October last year. When the minister announced a $1.3 million review of DVA claims processing systems to be undertaken by one of the preferred consultants, McKinsey, he said it would report in December last year. It's now February and there’s still no word of the audit findings or recommendations. Once again, all announcements and no delivery from this government. We know this is a government addicted to secrecy, but, if they were fair dinkum about fixing this problem and putting veterans first, they would release the report immediately. Veterans have a right to know where this supposed reform of the system is up to and what it will deliver. I say to the minister: show us the report; release it and consult with the Labor opposition so that we can work together on this issue.
In response to Labor's questions in the last Senate estimates about waiting times, it was revealed that backlogs have increased from the period 30 June 2021 to 30 September 2021. The data shows that the average time to process veterans’ disability pensions had jumped from 226 days to 271 days. In addition, average processing times for initial liability claims under the DRCA legislation had blown out from 245 days to 305 days and under the MRCA legislation from 233 days to 255 days. The number of claims on hand under both acts has increased as well. Labor was sceptical of the McKinsey review as it failed to look at the key drivers of long-claim processing times and backlog, which is the impact of chronic staff shortages in DVA.
A recent Labor initiated Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee inquiry into the Public Service found the long delays with veterans claims are the direct result of the government's ideological cap on permanent public servants, which has forced DVA to rely on high levels of poorly trained labour hire contractors. Most Australians would be shocked to know that the Prime Minister is allowing the public service jobs in DVA and other agencies to be outsourced like this, all because he stubbornly refuses to dump this ridiculous staffing cap policy. While it’s supposed to save money, outsourcing labour hire arrangements actually costs more money than employing permanent staff, thanks to exorbitant fees and premiums paid to labour hire firms. But we didn't need an expensive consultant's review to tell us this. This is just another example of this terrible government wasting taxpayers' money and not being on the side of veterans. After nine long years, they've got no plan to fit these dangerous, long waiting times for assistance in DVA. It's not good enough, and our veterans deserve better.
Telecommunications
Mr LEESER (Berowra) (16:43): Since I commenced my telco campaign last year, I've heard from hundreds of people across my electorate and around Australia who face the same problems caused by inadequate service by big telco. Today I'd like to share some of their stories with the House.
Prue from Torrens Park in South Australia said: 'I run an online counselling business in the pandemic of anxiety. I shudder to think what this has cost in the last six months. It's a total nightmare in which I have to climb a mountain, literally with laptop in hand, to speak to anyone. When the internet is off, 50 per cent of the time I have no television, no phone service, nothing. I have a battery-operated radio that occasionally picks up the ABC. I'm 68-years-of-age and live alone, and my children are really worried that, if I had a fall, there's no way I could let anyone know until I died. I live literally 10 kilometres from the CBD. This is an appalling Fourth World system.'
Cheryl, from Glenorie, in my electorate, wrote in her submission:
Since we've lived in Glenorie (16 years) we have been 'plagued' by many, many people driving to the front of our house and stopping there.
We couldn't figure out at first why.
Then it dawned, they had no reception where they lived or worked, and our place was the first available place to take or receive calls.
My poor next-door neighbour used to think they were up to no good and it took a while to convince him they were only on their phones.
This is beyond a joke.
Deirdre from Talbingo, in New South Wales, wrote: 'Mobile service is so intermittent that sometimes it takes three to four phone calls to complete a conversation, as the phone service drops out so regularly. During holiday periods, visitors to the town and campers on Blowering Dam swell the numbers of people using the system, and the system can't cope—to the point that a signal is almost non-existent. This is a dangerous situation, as in an emergency situation we're unable to call emergency services. Landline for those have it is also unreliable, and we've had times when that also goes out for up to three days. This is a topic of many conversations in our community. We feel let down by many parts of the system.'
Irmgard, from Lake Cathie, said:
My husband has several serious health problems.
When he suffered a very severe heart attack a few years back, the paramedics were unable to get in touch with the hospital for approval of an urgent procedure.
He only survived due to the extraordinary effort by one of the paramedics performing CPR all the way to the hospital.
There are frequent interruptions to our electricity supply, which means we and our neighbours are left without a landline as well and therefore have no access to emergency help during that time.
Our internet connection is the old-fashioned copper kind, although the myriad of new estates being built all around us have access to both proper mobile reception and fibre technology internet to their houses.
I find it hard to understand why Telstra is allowed to extract money from us for a service which it does not deliver.
Irmgard, I have to say: I'm with you 100 per cent.
Bernadette, from Bellbrook in New South Wales, wrote:
In 2019 we had an Emergency Warning for the Carrai Fire.
We lost all power at approximately 2pm on Friday 8 November which meant that our landline & satellite NBN also went down.
We then had patchy mobile reception until 11pm when the nearest Telstra tower was damaged by fire.
From that point on we had no access to any telecommunications.
This meant our only connection from the outside world was via the battery-operated transistor radio so we tuned into ABC Mid North Coast which was frustrating as the updates being announced were different to what we could see on the ground an we had no way of letting anyone know.
After 24 hours, what soon became infuriating was the constant announcement on the radio to refer to the RFS "Fires Near Me App" or the "RFS website" which was impossible without either mobile reception or NBN internet.
Simply referring us to a website, hotline or app is not going to work.
Mark, from Moggill, near Brisbane, wrote:
Since moving into my new home I have had no service with Telstra.
I've contacted them on numerous occasions which has resulted in a $50 credit and quote for over $2,000 to install a 4G repeater antenna as there are no plans for Telstra to invest in additional infrastructure in our suburb.
The quoted price is the equivalent of over 3 years of my plan costs.
I work from home full time and am unable to be contacted much of the time.
I end up receiving missed calls often hours later and need to stand outside to return calls meaning I can't work on my computer at the same time which is completely impractical.
These stories, and so many more, indicate why we need urgent telco reform in this country. In the peri-urban areas of Australia, in the regions and in remote Australia telecommunications should be a service Australians can rely on. But big telco seems to be alone among the service providers that provide services to Australians in taking money from Australians and failing to deliver a service again and again and again. This is why I've been working hard with colleagues on seeking to reform telecommunications, and it's a campaign I'm not going to give up on.
Moore, Mr Fred
Mr STEPHEN JONES (Whitlam) (16:49): It's my great honour to deliver a short eulogy to my friend and mentor and local legend Fred Moore. Fred was born in September 1922 just outside of Cobar. His dad was an underground miner, and the family worked in the mines throughout New South Wales for many generations. Fred, abhorred racism in all its forms, and this was probably borne of his experience playing with the local Aboriginal kids in his neighbourhood. They were amongst his best friends.
During the Depression, as the mines closed, Fred's family moved to Lithgow, where his dad worked as a miner in the coalmines in that town. He was nine years old when he witnessed the clashes between the fascist new guard and the trade unionists on May Day in 1932. It was a formative experience. The poor health and safety in the mines in those years meant that at an early age Fred's dad was a dusted miner, and they had to move to the inner city so he could be close to the specialist medical treatment that was available to help his silicosis.
He was the very opposite of a one-dimensional man. He was a talented boxer and a gifted musician. He mastered the harmonica like a virtuoso, and even into his 90s he could be called upon to play 'The Internationale' on the harmonica. He even had the honour of performing live on national television on Andrew Denton's Enough Rope program.
Fred met his wife, May, 70 years ago, and they were a family in every sense of the word. They were a partnership both in the home and outside. They moved to their new home in Dapto on the very edge of the world-famous Dapto greyhound track. They lived in that same home, a modest fibro home, until Fred passed away a few weeks ago. They had five wonderful daughters, Josephine, Colleen, Gail, Debbie and Susie. For the last 10 years of Fred's life, Susie was his all-time companion and all-time carer.
When he moved to Wollongong, he worked at the Nebo Colliery, which was owned by Australian Iron and Steel. It fed the steelworks at Port Kembla. He was a hard worker and well respected by his colleagues, and he quickly rose to the rank of what I would call the local union delegate; the miners have all sorts of names for these things. He became a legend within his workplace, within the local lodges and within the miners federation nationally. He became a life member of that union. He was the only person I know who was awarded life membership of two unions—one of which he never worked in, which was the Maritime Union of Australia. He was a communist, a socialist and a proud communitarian. He would often remark on the struggles between the Left and the Right within the Labor movement that the Left went to jail and the Right went to parliament. Well, here I am!
He was a loved and committed Aboriginal activist from the earliest age. Through the union movement, he organised for industrial action against businesses that discriminated against local Aboriginal people, that wouldn't serve them or let them try on dresses or clothes within the local stores. He was the driving force with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander campaign on the South Coast for recognition and the right to vote. One of his greatest honours as a white man was to be initiated as an honorary elder in the Jerrinja tribe.
He was a feminist, at home and beyond the home. He was one of only two people who were awarded honorary life membership of the Miners Women's Auxiliary, and he used to wear the badge with honour and call himself an honorary woman. He was an internationalist. He organised collections in his workplace for the African National Congress so that those workers could be funded in that country.
Fred's spirit lives on, and we'll remember him every afternoon as that cool southerly blows across the thin plains of the Illawarra. He's gone, but he's not forgotten. He was my friend and my mentor, and he was a friend and mentor to so many. Vale, Fred. We love you.
National Archives of Australia
Mr Tony SMITH (Casey) (16:54): Knowing our history and handing it on from generation to generation is vital for our Australian democracy. In that endeavour, it's hard to say anything is more vital than preserving the critical historical material in our National Archives so that it's accessible for Australians today and tomorrow and into the years beyond.
This afternoon I want to praise an opinion piece written by former Prime Minister John Howard in Nine newspapers in mid-January. He welcomed the fact that there'd been a recent injection of nearly $68 million of funding, to allow the Archives to do, really, the emergency work and avoid a catastrophe, with some of our key historical documents at risk of not being able to be preserved in a digital form into the future. He pointed out in that opinion piece:
The National Archives of Australia truly fits the definition of a national treasure. The material contained in the archives is integral to an accurate understanding of our history as a nation.
And that is so true. If we want to teach history, then it's very important that we have the facts of our history, so that Australians can understand where we've come from and where we're going, that they can access this material and that it is never lost.
This afternoon I want to argue for more funding for the National Archives, because the amount that has been provided, whilst welcome, will, as I said, get the Archives through the immediate emergency, but, as the Tune review has found, far more money will be required into the future. This is no ordinary spending program. It's a bipartisan issue. The Archives don't express a political opinion. As former Prime Minister Howard pointed out, they merely preserve the primary sources of what actually happened in our history, and preserving them is vital for us as a nation.
So I am arguing for more funding for the Archives, but I'm arguing for a bit more than that this afternoon, because additional funding can be seen as a cost but it should be seen as an investment in our nation. So, as well as having the additional funding, I'm very keen that, in the future, whether it's in this parliament or the next, we end the days of the National Archives coming to government at a time of crisis, every one or two years, seeking money so that we don't face the situation where vital records are not preserved. There is an advisory council, which I know does a very good job and gives advice. The Archives themselves appear before a Senate estimates committee, as you'd expect. What I'd like to see, in terms of getting certainty and clarity around their funding for the future, is for a joint parliamentary committee to be able to have the Archives in regularly, to understand what the needs are, put a bit of sunlight on the task at hand, create a bit more understanding of how important it is, and be able to recommend that to government, on a long-term basis of the sort of funding that's required.
As you'd know, Mr Speaker, I'm not an advocate of creating new committees unnecessarily. If there were an existing committee that could do this—perhaps the joint public accounts committee—where the parliament itself took some ownership of this bipartisan issue for the benefit of Australians today and tomorrow, then I think that would be a very, very good thing. I put that out there as an idea, in the last word in the adjournment debate on this Thursday.
House adjourned at 16:59
Federation Chamber
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Zimmerman ) took the chair at 10:00.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Zimmerman ) took the chair at 10:00.
CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS
National Disability Insurance Scheme
Mr CONROY (Shortland) (10:00): Today I will be advising the House of one of the most offensive cuts to a constituent's NDIS plan I have even seen by the Morrison-Joyce government. The NDIS is being undermined by the Liberals and Nationals. They are cutting the support packages and plans of vulnerable Australians. In a country as prosperous as ours and one that prides itself on being the land of the fair go this is just not on. I am so angry. Labor will not cop the ongoing attacks on the NDIS by the Liberals.
Ian from Belmont South is vision impaired and has had a guide dog for 40 years. The provision of this guide dog has been part of his NDIS plan until a recent review by a bureaucrat who conducted it in December and determined it was not reasonable and necessary for this vision impaired man to have funding for a guide dog. Let me repeat this. The Morrison-Joyce government has cut funding for a guide dog to a man who is blind. How can this happen in Australia in the year 2022? The reason provided by the National Disability Insurance Agency for this cut is that Ian has been provided funding for an extra two hours of a carer a week and so there is no need for a guide dog. What a load of utter garbage. How can they equate an extra two hours of carer funding with the loss of a guide dog? This is what this government is resorting to now.
Unfortunately, the internal review by the National Disability Insurance Agency confirmed the savage cut so Ian is forced to go through the appalling, time consuming and expensive process of appealing to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. He shouldn't have to do this. I call on the minister to personally intervene to restore the funding, to ensure that this funding is provided to Ian for his guide dog. A vision impaired participant in the NDIS who has had a guide dog for 40 years, and recently funded by the NDIS, should not be a victim of this budget cut mentality. We are talking about the quality of life of someone living with a disability here. Ian deserves dignity and respect from the NDIS. I call on minister to act urgently to remedy this situation.
Unfortunately, Ian's case is not isolated. This government has broken the sacred bond it committed to when it supported the Gillard government's establishment of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. This scheme is all about empowering Australians living with a disability to live their best possible lives. This government is cutting plans left, right and centre. They are destroying the lives of Australians with a disability, all with a callous disregard for the impact on those people and communities like mine. I stand with Ian. He deserve to have his guide dog reinstated. We won't stop until we achieve victory on this very important issue.
South Australia: Floods
Mr RAMSEY (Grey—Government Whip) (10:03): Earlier this week I gave a bit of quick run down on the flooding situation on the Stuart Highway in South Australia. A number of outback highways were cut. I gave a bit of an update. I also spoke about the unincorporated areas in councils. I spoke about the damage that was done in my own council—and on my own farm—particularly to the roads of the Kimba district council. This is a council of about 1,040 people with probably in excess of $5 million worth of road damage alone so it has been a pretty challenging event.
The disaster recovery funding arrangements are now in place. I thank both the state government for getting that claim organised and Minister McKenzie for turning it around so quickly—I think in about 48 hours. For the benefit of those local councils and communities, I thought I might run through just what that entails. It's fifty-fifty state and federal funding. In this case it covers 14 local government areas and that includes the unincorporated areas of the pastoral land which is covered by the outback areas authority. It includes the Cleve, Coober Pedy, Elliston, Flinders Ranges, Franklin Harbour, Grant, Kimba, Lower Eyre Peninsula, Port Augusta, Roxby Downs, Streaky Bay, Tumby Bay and Whyalla councils. It is important to note that, for these councils, this funding will cover assistance to help state agencies and councils cover the costs associated with delivering to impacted communities exceptional relief and recovery measures that go beyond the capacity of state and local government and may include activities to protect the general public, prevent damage to residential areas and so on. It is also for the restoration of essential public assets. The measure provides financial assistance to help them with the cost of restoring and repairing to their predisaster standard eligible essential public assets with infrastructure damage as a direct result of disaster. It also covers emergency works such as removing debris and making temporary repairs undertaken immediately after the disaster to enable an eligible asset to be operational.
The important part about this is that these areas that have been affected can now budget, plan and get on with the job of the restoration process. It's tough enough being a councillor or a CEO in a small council and wondering how on earth you're going to deal with these issues, but know that the governments at all levels, as I said in a radio interview, have got your back. This is the insurance operation that means you can confidently go about your work in future. So I look forward to all those assets, particularly the ones that I drive on, being restored.
Franklin Electorate: Infrastructure
Ms COLLINS (Franklin) (10:06): In Tasmania yesterday, public schools went back to school. I want to wish the students and parents well as they deal with the challenging times of living with COVID-19 during the school year. I also share the frustration of many parents on Hobart's eastern shore about what this means for traffic delays, particularly around the Mornington roundabout. This roundabout has been identified as a problem for a very long time. There are accidents on it on a regular basis. Importantly, the congestion is incredible, and it backs up every afternoon and causes huge inconvenience. It was first identified by the current state Liberal government in 2020 as a high-priority problem spot to fix. Then, of course, we had the May election last year, a year early, and there has been nothing from the state Liberal government in terms of a commitment to fix this major congestion point on the eastern shore. It is the intersection of several major highways and it causes massive problems every afternoon. All the government committed to was to do a study.
They were obviously successful at the election, and they have done a study. They got the results in October, and here we are with the school year going back. We're in February and still there has been nothing from the government about what the solutions for the Mornington roundabout are. What is the state Liberal government going to do with this major piece of infrastructure that everybody knows has been a problem for years? It was designed under the former state Labor government many years ago, and we knew at that time that it had a life span of 10 to 15 years in terms of the solutions around it. Since then, of course, Hobart's eastern shore has continued to grow, with many housing developments, and that congestion has continued to grow. We know that this is a very significant problem. It's effecting productivity and economic activity, but, importantly, it's impacting on people's lives every single day. The state Liberal government needs to do better, and the current federal government needs to get involved with what is a major intersection of a major Tasmanian highway, the Tasman Highway, on the way down to the airport. This is a priority corridor for both governments, and we have heard nothing about how the Mornington roundabout is going to be fixed.
My residents on the eastern shore have, frankly, had enough of government promises, of delays on projects, of not enough happening, particularly in southern Tasmania, from the current federal Liberal government. They seem focused on the northern seats, and I get that. They want to win an election and they've got marginal seats. But that does not mean that the people in southern Tasmania who need critical infrastructure should miss out. It means that the state and federal Liberal governments need to invest and show some serious solutions for what is going to be happening to the Mornington roundabout on Hobart's eastern shore.
Wentworth Electorate: Australia Day Awards
Mr SHARMA (Wentworth) (10:09): I rise to put on record my congratulations and appreciation for the many residents of Wentworth who were honoured in the recent Australia Day honours awards. If you'll forgive me, I would like to read their names into Hansard and say what they've been honoured for.
Dr Helen Nugent was made a Companion of the Order of Australia for eminent service to people with disability through leadership of social and economic policy reform and implementation as well as to business, the arts and the community. Mr John Hartigan AO was made an Officer of the Order of Australia—many people would know Mr Hartigan—for distinguished service to the media industry, to Indigenous welfare and sport. Mr Rodney Graham Sims was made an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to public administration in economic and regulatory roles, a service he continues to perform. Professor Lesley Burnett was made a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to pathology and medical research. Emeritus Professor Andrea Durbach was also made a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to the law, human rights and tertiary education. Professor Mark Hertzberg was made an AM for significant service to haematology, tertiary education and research. Rick Holliday-Smith, who I know personally, was made a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to business through a range of roles and organisations. Mr Nicolas Parkhill was made an AM for service to community health, particularly people living with HIV-AIDS and healthcare delivery. Emeritus Professor Mr Arie Rotem was made an AM for significant service to tertiary education and public health. Mr Laurie Sutton was made an AM for significant service to the not-for-profit sector and business. Dr Geoffrey Symonds was made an AM for service to medical research, particularly through gene therapy. Mr Adrian Boss was awarded a Medal in the Order of Australia, OAM, for significant service to the community, particularly through cycling programs—something close to my own heart. Mr Mark Cotter was made an AM for service to surf lifesaving and was President of North Bondi Surf Life Saving Club for a number of years and someone who I still work with very closely and who I was able to celebrate with on Australia Day. Mr Jakob Enoch was awarded an OAM as well for service to the community through education. Mr Alan Joffe was awarded an OAM for service to the Jewish community. Ms Jane Jose was awarded an OAM for service to the community through cultural and charitable organisations. Mr Donald Magarey was awarded an OAM for service to the law and to music. Kevin O'Rourke was awarded an OAM for service to the law. Mr Stewart Bailey was awarded an Emergency Services Medal for distinguished service as a member of an Australian emergency service, particularly during his time in surf lifesaving and surf rescue. Finally, Major General Christopher Field AM CSC was awarded a Distinguished Service Decoration for service in the Middle East region and at USCENTCOM in the period of March 2020 to October 2021. All these Australians deserve our thanks.
Employment
Ms COKER (Corangamite) (10:12): The Morrison government crows about the unemployment figures but turns a blind eye to the human damage inflicted by the rapid growth of insecure work across our nation. Over the eight long years of the coalition, we have seen flatlining wages and rampant casualisation of our workforce. This government doesn't want it known that around 3.4 million Australians are in insecure work—casual gig workers, freelancers, short-term contract workers—or that when the pandemic began, casuals lost their jobs eight times faster than those in more secure forms of employment. They're working in hospitality, aged care, cleaning, manufacturing, retail and virtually every other sector.
In my electorate, I have seen firsthand the human impact job insecurity is having on workers and their families. Uber and rideshare drivers who work across my electorate are contacting me in despair. They play a vital transport role, but they have none of the fundamental rights of the rest of the Australian workforce. They have no minimum wage, no long service leave, no annual leave, no family leave and, above all, they have no job security. This is wrong. The denial of natural justice undermines the great Australian tradition of dignity for all workers and a fair go.
There's a rich history of maritime employment in the Geelong region in my region. However, our maritime workers' pay and conditions are under immediate threat. The Maritime Union of Australia is battling Svitzer, a subsidiary of the Maersk group, to retain maritime workers hard-fought rights. Svitzer has applied to terminate its collective agreement with its entire Australian workforce and push workers back onto the bare legal minimum wage and conditions. It's a deliberate attempt to cut the pay and conditions of workers and push them into insecure work and instead use labour hire. Workers are being ripped off by Svitzer who want to cut their pay.
I stand here in support of the MUA in condemning this shameful behaviour by Svitzer. I reject and condemn any attempt to exploit the Fair Work Act to undermine wages and conditions. Labor's Secure Australian Jobs Plan will fix this. In government we will tackle the worst employment practices that leave hundreds of millions of Australians in insecure work, we will introduce criminal penalties for employers who rip off their workers and, importantly, we will introduce same job same pay. We will cap the number of times a person can be employed on fixed-term contracts.
Insecure work has been allowed to flourish under the Morrison government. Unlike Morrison, Labor won't walk away from the millions of workers impacted by insecure employment.
Powering Communities Program
Mr SIMMONDS (Ryan) (10:15): An important part of my plan for Ryan is protecting our local lifestyle, protecting our community so my kids and their kids grow up enjoying everything I did and more. The local environment is one of the most important aspects of this incredible lifestyle that we enjoy in Brisbane's western suburbs. Over the last few years I have worked to keep our local environment clean and green as well as contribute to our national targets to transition to renewable energy.
Investing in clean energy sources is an important part of Australia's long-term emissions reduction plan to deliver net zero emissions by 2050. Australians are already playing their part in that. We have the highest rooftop solar uptake in the world. One in four Australians have solar on their home, and I am pleased to be one of them. We're also putting practical solutions into the hands of local community groups and businesses as well as households—solutions that not only reduce our carbon footprint but also lower electricity costs so that Australians can get back to the things that matter most and not worry about their power bills.
Local not-for-profit organisations are the heart of our community in the Ryan electorate. I am proud to have secured $67,000 for these organisations to improve their energy-efficiency practices and technologies. The Morrison government's Powering Communities Program provides funding to not-for-profit organisations to reduce their energy use, improve energy productivity and reduce carbon dioxide emissions. These organisations can use these funds to upgrade equipment to reduce energy consumption, to invest in energy monitoring and management systems and to invest in on-site renewable energy and solar connected batteries.
These are some of the upgrades that I have fought hard to see funded in our local area. The West Toowong Bowls Club has purchased energy-efficient equipment. The Bellbowrie Moggill Men's Shed, the Pullenvale Progress Association, the Riverside family church, the Toowong Uniting Church, the Kenmore District Kindergarten and C&K Indooroopilly—a very diverse group of community organisations—have all installed brand-new solar panel systems thanks to the support of the Morrison government. It was particularly fantastic to hear that the Kenmore District Kindergarten was not only getting benefit from its solar panels on emissions and reducing its energy costs but using them to help educate our next generation on the important steps you can take to protect the local environment. I myself have these conversations with my son, Theo, who at four is already a bit of an expert.
Last week I was pleased to show the Assistant Minister to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction, the member for Goldstein, the McIntyre Centre's new solar panels and to speak about the impact these new solar panels will have for the centre. It takes money out of power bills and invests it in those community groups that need it the most.
Women in Sport
Mr JOSH WILSON (Fremantle) (10:18): [by video link] There are deep cultural and institutional shortcomings in Australia that continue to put women at risk and continue to mean women face inequality and experience harm. This week we considered the Jenkins report and heard from Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins. It seems to me that the message we need to get as decision-makers, particularly as men, is that it's past time for action and change. Inequality, mistreatment and disrespect are all matters that require cultural change and changes to our systems and laws, but there are structural forms of inequality too. Today I want to speak about what might be regarded as a relatively minor form of that built form of inequality—namely, that throughout our neighbourhoods you will find community sports facilities that reflect the lack of fairness and respect for women and girls. That has been the case for a long time.
In the last few years the AFLW phenomenon has shown us what we've been missing in not being able to support and cheer for women athletes playing our distinctive national sport. But it has also shown that football clubs around Australia simply don't provide adequate facilities for women and girls. Even in sports with a long history of female participation, it is often the case that the toilets and change rooms have been designed and provided for men and boys. The reality is that community sports facilities for women and girls are generally abysmal, if they are not absent altogether, and that is not right or fair. To the extent that it means women have to change in their cars or outdoors, it is ludicrous and it is unsafe.
Next year Australia and New Zealand will host the Women's World Cup, the premier international football tournament for the world game—a different but no less beautiful kind of football. Again, at a time when Australia should be showcasing not just the Matildas—and my constituent Sam Kerr, in particular—but all the incredible young footballers coming through who will be inspired by the event, we know that the facilities to complement that interest are not good enough. Unfortunately, the Morrison government's approach in this area took the form of the thoroughly rotten sports rorts program that included at least one case where a project received money on the basis of upgrading female facilities, even though the club in question had no women's teams.
I know there are facilities in my community that need to be upgraded, and that includes both high-level facilities for teams like the Fremantle Dockers AFLW side and their training HQ at the ARC in Cockburn and where they play at Fremantle Oval in addition to the facilities at numerous local sports clubs.
The Spearwood Dalmatinac club has put its hand up to be part of the Women's World Cup, but the Morrison government is yet to make clear how it will support facility upgrades that will be necessary as part of legacy commitments we have made as the host nation. We cannot continue to have a government that perverts community sports funding for its own political interest while neglecting to address the deeply substandard— (Time expired)
Casey Electorate: Volunteers
Mr Tony SMITH (Casey) (10:21): All of us know here in the House of Representatives that to do our job to the best of our ability we work in partnership with our local community. In that vein, I want to thank in this speech so many members of the local community who have worked so hard in partnership with me in a range of areas. I have spoken previously of my local apprentice and trainee of the year awards and the members who judged those awards over a long period of time. I wanted today to thank those members of the local community who volunteered their time to judge my annual Anzac schools essay writing prize: Anthony McAleer, Roger Boness, Ray Yates, Otis Heffernan-Wooden, Caroline Evans, the late Don Parson—a dear friend of mine—and his daughter, Talia Parsons, as well.
As we know, we also have a number of local grants programs, where we consult with community members on assessing those applications and receive their advice. I want to thank those people who have given their time in assessing those over a long period of time. In the Local Sporting Champions program, I want to thank Lee Nolan, Julia McDonald, Randall Bourchier and Beck Mitchell. For the Anzac Centenary Grants and Armistice Centenary program—obviously a few years back—I thank Ray Yates, Brigadier Michael Phillips (retired), Councillor Jim Charles, Anthony McAleer, Margi Sank, Bob Gannaway and Sue Thompson. I thank those who have assessed the Stronger Communities grants, volunteer grants and Powering Communities program: Brett Whelan, Caroline Evans, Toni Madden, Chris Dowling, and Debbie Sadlier. For the community environment grants program I want to thank Malcolm Calder, Morris Maxwell, the late Maureen Bond and Melissa Carmody, who represented the Yarra Ranges Council. Finally, for the Local Schools Community Fund, I thank the former principals and current principals—Ray Yates, Peter Leonard, Sally Broadly, Stewart Miller and John Faulkner—and other people who were prepared to volunteer their time. They have done a magnificent job in volunteering their time to ensure that our community can be the best it can be.
As their federal member of parliament, I just wanted to take the time to thank them individually here today for everything that they have done. They have gone about their business, often meeting in my office late in the afternoon or early evening, to really make their contribution to the Yarra Valley and the Dandenong Ranges. So here in the Federation Chamber of the House, I want to thank them so much for all they have done, over so many years in many cases.
Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces
Dr ALY (Cowan) (10:24): [by video link] The Jenkins report revealed some pretty ugly truths about this place. I just want to take the time to pay heed to all the women who came forward and shared their stories. In particular, though, I want to recognise the women of colour who came forward with their stories, to reveal how gendered violence and harassment are also racialised for them.
In particular, I want to recognise Danya Manning. Danya launched a campaign to end sexual violence, and has advocated to make workplaces safer for women since 2018. She is a former LNP staffer and is one of the first women of colour to speak out about her own experiences. Despite reaching out to the Prime Minister, she has not been acknowledged and she was not invited to the apology.
Since then, many staffers who are women of colour have contacted me. The other side to this ugly truth is that, historically, the voices of women of colour have been sidelined and silenced in important gender dialogues in this nation. The women who have contacted me are fearful that history is going to repeat itself. Too often, women of colour have been told to wait our turn. But our turn never comes. We've been told that we, too, will reap the benefits that other women have gained, but that never happens—at least, not without us having to take up our own fight.
Right now, women of colour who have shared their experiences of sexual violence in the workplace and in public are fearful. They are just as fearful as other women, because they experience that same sexualised violence, but it has an intersectionality to it, an intersectionality based on their race and their colour. I urge everyone here not to ignore that; don't ignore those racialised experiences of the women of colour who, bravely, have come forward and told their stories as part of the Jenkins review. We should consider those in the implementation of the Jenkins review, because it is only when we all stand together and it's only when we all raise our voices together that our voices gain a momentum and grow stronger. We cannot move forward for women as a nation if we do not consider the experiences and the different experiences of all women, and we need to acknowledge those differences.
To all the women of colour and the staffers who came forward, I want to tell you that I'm here for you and that if you need me, call me.
Brisbane Electorate: Australia Day Honours
Mr EVANS (Brisbane—Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) (10:27): The Australia Day Honours List recognises great Australians for the extraordinary contributions they make to our nation. Some remarkable Brisbane residents have been recognised this year, including—fittingly, in these times—some extraordinary healthcare professionals.
I congratulate Professor Barbara Leggett, now a Member of the Order of Australia, for her work in gastroenterology, hepatology and medical research. I also congratulate Professor Margaret Turner, now a Member of the Order of Australia, for her efforts in the fields of medical research, psychiatry and psycho-oncology. There is also Dr Gino Pecoraro—congratulations to him for receiving the Medal of the Order of Australia for his contributions to medicine as a gynaecologist.
Also receiving the Medal of the Order of Australia was Janice Blackford, for her service to the arts and the Brisbane community, and Margot McKinney, the renowned Brisbane jeweller, for her charitable pursuits and service to the arts. Both Janice and Margot are a source of inspiration for everyone contributing to Brisbane's already-vibrant arts scene, making it even better.
I also commend Dylys Bertelsen and Mark Sheridan, both awarded an OAM, for their services to community health and charitable organisations. Their hard work, in a way, symbolises the contribution of community and charitable organisations, which make an immeasurable contribution to the welfare of others—especially through challenging times, like through the global pandemic.
Congratulations also to Irma Howell OAM for her services to the youth of Brisbane through the Scouts movement, and congratulations to James McClelland OAM for his efforts and dedication to the Royal Life Saving Society. Big congratulations to Otway Benson, to Charles Clark, to Jon Just and to Dr Edmund Spork for their outstanding contributions through a range of community roles and organisations. All have been awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia.
A Brisbane resident has been awarded the Australian Police Medal, as well; congratulations to Assistant Commissioner Katherine Innes. And thank you to all the police around greater Brisbane for everything that you do for our community.
Representing Australia's defence forces, a Brisbane local has received the Distinguished Service Medal. Brigadier Edward Smeaton, thank you for your distinguished leadership. Chief Petty Officer Janelle Scrase has received the Medal of the Order of Australia in the military division for her meritorious service in the Royal Australian Navy. Thank you both for your service.
On behalf of the entire Brisbane community, I would like to congratulate all the worthy recipients in the Australia Day 2022 Honours List for helping to make our great nation the very best it can be.
Gilmore Electorate: Mental Health
Mrs PHILLIPS (Gilmore) (10:31): Mental health is a huge issue in the electorate Gilmore. However, sadly, it is all too commonly a hidden issue. Local GPs tell me that a large proportion of their work is supporting and helping patients with mental health concerns. One local practice alone employs six credentialed mental health nurses, as the demand for mental health services is so high, and does about 80 telehealth consultations a week with patients who have complex and enduring mental health problems. So you can imagine the uproar from mental health patients, GPs and psychiatrists when the Morrison government quietly and quickly announced just before Christmas last year that it would axe the Medicare rebate for item 288, which gives psychiatrists the incentive to provide specialist mental health support in regional and remote areas.
This is one of the cruellest blows for people in areas like mine. A region that has gone through the worst drought, 80 per cent of Gilmore was hit by the Black Summer bushfires, leaving mental health scars we can only imagine, interspersed with seven disaster declared floods and then the pandemic. And the Morrison government elects to make it harder for locals to seek the mental health support they need.
I have had many representations on this issue, but I want to talk about a handwritten letter I received from constituent Julie. She says: 'Hello, my name is Julie. I am 51 years of age. I am writing to you in regard to the changes with Medicare and my mental health situation. I was diagnosed with bipolar and PTSD four years ago and have been seeing a psychiatrist regularly for three years and I was bulk billed. Today I called for my next appointment and I was told that, due to the government changes to Medicare, it would be at a cost of $635 to see a psychiatrist. I am on a disability support pension due to having a mental health problem, so I am unable to pay $635 per session. But, without seeing a psychiatrist, I cannot get my medicine approved. I am doing okay now, but, if I cannot get my meds approved, my mental health will decline quickly without medication, which I don't want to have happen. I need to see a psychiatrist ASAP to renew my script and have it approved, but at $635 I can't.'
Why does the government not care about Julie and the many other people in my electorate and around the country in regional areas who need to access a psychiatrist? I urge the federal government to ensure there are Medicare incentives in place for psychiatrists to provide services in regional areas.
Herbert Electorate: Mental Health
Mr THOMPSON (Herbert) (10:34): As members of parliament, many of us get to go to different launches and openings, but one recently in the electorate of Herbert really stood out for me, and I think it's particularly important that we highlight it today. A few weeks ago I was joined by the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention to officially launch Townsville's Head to Health centre. Head to Health is an incredible model for mental health treatment and prevention. Most people are quite familiar with headspace, which is for 12- to 25-year-olds. Head to Health is similar, but it's designed for adults. As someone who's suffered with mental illness and poor mental health in the past, I know this will be, absolutely, a life-changing place—for people who are not travelling well to be able to go to get the support that they need. It's a one-stop shop for people in the community who are experiencing mental ill-health to get linked into the support that they need.
The centre is staffed by mental health professionals with different skill sets to address the different needs of people who walk through the door. Whether it's a mental health nurse, a counsellor, a psychologist or a psychiatrist, staff at the Head to Health centre can pretty much help anyone with any mental health concerns. It's an incredible model, one where you're greeted at the front door by someone who immediately comes along beside you, where you are, and helps determine what your next steps are. It's about putting the person first and working with them by walking beside them. It is a 'no wrong door' approach, which means no-one gets turned away. Their individual situation is assessed and the right treatment options are worked out. The best thing about Head to Health is it costs the individual nothing. It's absolutely free. Having it free breaks down one of the biggest barriers for people when dealing with poor mental health, something which is, unfortunately, becoming more and more common.
This is a part of our government's $2.3 billion investment in the National Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan. The plan is about delivering significant reform of the mental health system and ensuring all Australians have access to high-quality, person-centred care. Not only is Townsville's Head to Health centre doing that, but it's making it extremely accessible. Locals are able to drop in when it suits them, between 10 am and 8 pm from Monday to Friday, or between midday and 8 pm on weekends and public holidays. We are reducing the cost to zero, making it accessible for everyone, because there's nothing more important than your health, and that includes your mental health. That's something that I know firsthand.
In closing, I wanted to say that it's a good reminder, for us here and for people around the country, that it's okay not to be okay, but it's not okay to suffer in silence. Head to Health in Townsville will be somewhere where people can get the help that they need.
COVID-19: Morrison Government
Mr PERRETT (Moreton) (10:37): Summer: seeing family and friends, watching some cricket, reintroducing myself to my children and maybe catching up on a bit of extra reading—that's what I would normally do over the Christmas holidays. But I don't think anybody experienced this summer like that. Now in the third year of the pandemic, we expect the Morrison government to make decisions based on the expert advice that they receive. But Australians are asking if they can trust this Prime Minister to lead this nation through the remaining years of the pandemic. Can the conservatives get any better? Surely they can't get any worse.
This is my report card for the Morrison government on their management of the pandemic so far. Vaccine roll-out: way too slow. Building quarantine: didn't happen. Creating a tracing app: didn't work, money wasted. Rapid antigen tests: they didn't buy enough. Reopening borders: they didn't plan adequately. Preparing our hospitals: they didn't prepare.
The Moreton team has been hearing from local residents who want the Morrison government to know how its poor decisions have impacted on their lives. Here is some of what they said:
Carla said food and rent prices have skyrocketed overnight. In her neighbourhood, the dogs are getting skinnier because people can't afford to feed them. Carla asks, 'How can people who are on a $250-a-week Centrelink payment pay $500 a week in rent?' The rise in living costs has stopped her from travelling to see her daughter, who has been diagnosed with cancer. Her daughter needs a procedure but can't be admitted to a hospital because her doctor is worried she might contract COVID.
Dolly's daughter works in aged care. Last month her daughter contracted COVID and carried the virus home to Dolly and her grandchildren. They couldn't get tested and they couldn't get any rapid antigen tests, so they stayed home for three weeks with no income until they thought were clear of the virus. Dolly said: what else could they do?
Senna said that when her husband caught COVID they had no wages coming in for three weeks. They have five children to feed. She couldn't find any rapid antigen tests so her husband could be cleared to go back to work. 'The government is supposed to look after people', she said. But they haven't looked after her family.
Lin, a local pharmacist, says he 'can't believe how the government has mismanaged the pandemic'. He says: 'You don't even have to plan. You can see what has happened in other countries and just cut and paste.' Older residents talk of staying home because they don't want to get sick. They are there, lonely and afraid of ending up a statistic, because that is what living with COVID means to them.
Not getting the health outcomes right leads to poor economic outcomes. Just ask Carla, Dolly, Senna, Lin and so many others. Prime Minister Morrison, I know, will blame everyone else, but Australians won't forget the summer they lost to COVID because of his government's mismanagement and poor planning.
On a separate note, Deputy Speaker Zimmerman, I thank you particularly for your fine words and fine deeds yesterday or this morning—whenever it was!
Petrie Electorate: Infrastructure
Mr HOWARTH (Petrie—Assistant Minister for Youth and Employment Services) (10:40): I would like to start with an email I received yesterday from Terzi, a constituent living in my electorate of Petrie. The subject line is 'Enough is enough'. Terzi says: 'The north side has been neglected for too long. How does the south side have at least three major highways heading into the city and the north side does not have one in the third-largest city in Australia? The Gateway bypasses the city. For the last two days, I have not been able to leave my home, as the traffic has been banked up for hours. It takes me 30 minutes to travel three kilometres to get to the train station. The journey from Carseldine to the city only takes about 25 minutes. The north side of Brisbane has had some of the biggest population growth in the country. Where do you think all these people are going to drive? It's absolute chaos every day.'
Terzi and 100 others who have contacted me since Saturday are concerned about the Linkfield Road overpass in the suburbs of Carseldine and Bald Hills in my electorate of Petrie. The overpass sits at the heart of a heavily congested feeder road. Along with the member for Dickson, we secured funding from the Australian government to fix it in 2018, at least four years ago. The coalition government committed $100 million to upgrade and improve the capacity of Linkfield Road and the overpass of the Gympie arterial interchange. This was 80 per cent of the funding. As people know, all roads are built by state governments, and in this case it's built by the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. Last Friday a forklift on the back of a truck punched through the bridge over the Gympie arterial road, and now there is a huge gaping hole in the Linkfield Road overpass impacting traffic in every direction. Right now people will be stuck in traffic on their way to work.
This wouldn't be a problem if the Queensland Labor government had acted in good faith for the people of Brisbane's north to use the $100 million. Instead, they have delayed and put it off. They're not spending money on infrastructure. In 2021, last year, I wrote to the Queensland minister, Mark Bailey, on 6 August, 21 September and then again in late November, asking him to bring forward the construction, from a 2023 start for an October 2024 finish to this year. He wrote back to me on 3 December and said, 'No, I won't do it and I won't put in sound barriers.' Last night Colin and Jenny Stafford wrote to me as well and said, 'Luke, why are we putting money into fixing that up? Why not just invest in the new bridge straight away?'
This is a real issue. I've secured $100 million for Linkfield Road overpass at Carseldine, $800 million for the Gateway Motorway upgrade and $120 million for on- and off-ramps at Griffin and Murrumba Downs, and the Queensland Labor government can't start one of those projects. It's not good enough for a fast-growing city in north Brisbane.
Adelaide Electorate: Lunar New Year
Mr GEORGANAS (Adelaide) (10:43): As we speak, Lunar New Year celebrations are continuing around the nation and, indeed, around the world. My wonderful electorate of Adelaide is no exception. I am very blessed to have huge Chinese and Vietnamese communities in the electorate. Adelaide has always been the stage for the biggest most colourful Lunar New Year celebrations and, after two years of restrictions and many of the events being cancelled this year, it was wonderful to attend some of them that ran a COVID-safe event. Traditionally, Lunar New Year celebrations start on the first new moon of the lunar calendar and end during the first full moon 15 days later. In Adelaide this important cultural event is recognised annually with celebrations showcasing time-honoured rituals, music, art, food, lion dances, lanterns and street parties. These were common sights in the city and around the electorate. It was wonderful to see so many getting into the spirit.
I was very fortunate to be invited to join the Vietnamese community in the festivities at the Vietnam Restaurant in my electorate. This amazing establishment is one of Australia's oldest and most awarded Vietnamese restaurants. It is run by Mr and Mrs Phan, who opened the restaurant in the very early eighties. Those of us who know the restaurant well know that consistency is key. That's why Mrs Phan still cooks in the kitchen and the restaurant has maintained its original charm. Why mess with perfection? And it is perfection. Today Mr and Mrs Phan's children Linda and Ben run the restaurant and continue this wonderful tradition. I've known the family for many years. In fact, I coached Ben football when he was a young lad, when he played with my boys.
The Vietnam Restaurant celebrated with music, dragon dances and firecrackers, to the joy of the many, many patrons who were there. I particularly enjoyed feeding the dragons the lucky envelopes; that's always a great event. My thanks and congratulations go to all the amazing talented performers—and of course the food, as always, was amazing.
The electorate of Adelaide is truly spoilt for choice when it comes to culture, diversity and amazing places to eat. A lot of these restaurants have done it tough this year and last year, with COVID. This year is the Year of the Tiger. The tiger is known as the king of all beasts, symbolising strength and courage—and we can certainly use some of that spirit as we enter our third year of this pandemic. I wish all the families who are celebrating Lunar New Year the best of luck—and kung hei fat choi!
Moore Electorate: Centenary of Anzac Memorial Arch
Mr GOODENOUGH (Moore) (10:46): Eight years ago I successfully secured an $86,000 federal Anzac Centenary Grant to build an iconic memorial arch for our local community as a permanent reminder of the 100th anniversary of the Anzac landings at Gallipoli for future generations of Australians to remember. Overlooking the Ocean Reef Marina, the commanding stainless steel-and-glass structure is 12 metres wide and six metres high. The design is based on the passage of light being drawn through a portal entrance along the ceremonial east-west pathway into a circle composed of 100 elements, commemorating the 100 years of Anzac tradition and service, towards the setting sun. Each year the memorial attracts thousands of local families, who gather in the grounds of the Ocean Reef Sea Sports Club at sunrise for the annual dawn service as well as commemorations for Remembrance Day and Vietnam Veterans' Day.
Today, impending civil construction works associated with the redevelopment of the Ocean Reef Marina make it necessary to relocate our treasured Anzac memorial arch. I'm working in cooperation with the Joondalup City RSL and Development WA to secure the necessary funding to relocate our iconic Centenary of Anzac memorial arch to a prominent, suitably landscaped and more-permanent site overlooking the redeveloped Ocean Reef Marina. The new location will provide families with a special place at the heart of the newly developed marina precinct—to gather, reflect and pay their respects for many generations to come. I strongly make the case, based on merit, for federal support towards the relocation of the memorial arch to a new permanent site, and I call upon the Minister for Veterans' Affairs to favourably consider the application.
We look forward to being able to gather in person for public ceremonies once again this Anzac Day. After two years of pandemic restrictions, the Anzac spirit and tradition of courage, service and mateship remains stronger than ever, after more than a century—never more so than during the past two years, when pandemic lockdowns cancelled suburban Anzac services across Australia. Millions of Australians gathered on their driveways at dawn to remember and observe the Anzac tradition. Looking to the future, our iconic Centenary of Anzac memorial arch, located on a prominent, suitably landscaped site overlooking the redeveloped Ocean Reef Marina, will provide families with a special place in the heart of the newly developed marina precinct to gather, remember and pay their respects to our veteran community for many generations to come.
World Cup
Freedom and Heritage Flag of Vietnam
Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong) (10:49): I rise today to speak about a matter which has been raised with me by the Victorian chapter of the Vietnamese Community in Australia. I attended Lunar New Year celebrations recently and they raised an incident with me which occurred on 27 January 2022 at AAMI Park during the World Cup qualifying match between the Socceroos and the Vietnamese national team. In supporting the Socceroos members of the Australian Vietnamese community decided to wear garments such as T-shirts, scarves or hats that carried the symbol of the Vietnamese heritage flag. The flag is of yellow background with three horizontal red stripes in the middle. It is well recognised by federal and state governments. It has even been recognised by councils in Australia and overseas.
There were demands made by AAMI Park security to members of the Vietnamese community that if they wanted to attend the soccer match in support of the Socceroos they had to take their belongings to their cars—bin those scarves, hats and hand-held flags which reflect the old flag of the Republic of South Vietnam, known as the heritage flag. The scarves and hats had the symbol that I have just outlined and they were asked to remove them. During the soccer match authorities in uniform approached and blocked the view of the game of at least one member of the Vietnamese community. The police made requests and eventually took possession of a yellow scarf that a man was wearing around his neck which resembled the colours of the Vietnamese heritage flag.
We know that the Vietnamese community in Australia is proud of their heritage and embracing Australia and our values of freedom and democracy. I'll also mention that Vietnamese soldiers and Australian diggers paid the ultimate sacrifice under the two flags, Australia and the heritage flag, during the Vietnam War. Over the past 47 years under both flags the Vietnamese community has made significant contributions to the Australian community. The Vietnamese community has always been resilient, harmonious and embraces Australian values.
I am puzzled. I don't understand why the Vietnamese community was specifically targeted by authorities not to wear scarves and hats. I think the community is owed answers. I am interested to know what questions were raised, if any, by the Vietnamese government to the Australian government. I also believe fundamentally that there should be a formal investigation and a briefing provided to both the Australian community and those of Vietnamese heritage in Australia. If you can't wear a scarf and reflect a political view then I think we've got a very low bar of respecting our history.
Health Care
Mr McCORMACK (Riverina) (10:52): Ensuring people in regional Australia have the very best access to the very best quality health care continues to be a priority for this government. A great example of this is the funding announcement made last Thursday in my Riverina electorate. A total of $1.87 million has been invested to enable Charles Sturt University to provide intensive, high-quality rural education experiences in Forbes and Parkes in the central west of New South Wales through its Three Rivers Department of Rural Health, a multidisciplinary academic and research unit. Through the additional local training and placement opportunities students across a range of allied health disciplines, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, social work, exercise physiology, speech pathology and podiatry, will have exposure to the delivery of rural health care for those people in those areas.
Executive Dean of the Faculty of Science at Charles Sturt, Megan Smith, said at the announcement at Parkes: 'It's great to have our doctors. People to go to them to find out what's wrong with them. But if you've broken your leg or you've had a serious accident it's the allied health professional who will get your back on your feet. It's the allied health professional who supports the child with a disability so the family can continue to function. We need the whole health workforce, and our doctors need an allied health workforce as well, because what's the use of a community having a doctor if they don't have a pharmacist?' Good point.
Three Rivers Department of Rural Health Director, Christine Howard, said student presence across these local communities would increase significantly. She said:
This will be a boost to health service provision but will also support the local economy as students spend money in these communities whilst on placement. Additionally, the investment in housing for students also supports local business through property management, security, cleaning, and linen services.
Charles Sturt, in collaboration with the Western NSW Local Health District, the primary health network and local health providers, identified these opportunities to increase student placements. The program of work will also increase the opportunities for local clinicians to become involved in teaching, supervising and mentoring students through rich rural-health experiences. The funding will also be used to purchase a four-bedroom house in Forbes for student accommodation to ensure students have a place to live when they arrive for their placements.
Charles Sturt's vice chancellor, Renee Leon, said:
Students in Charles Sturt University's Three Rivers Department of Rural Health live and study in regional Australia, affording them a unique and clear understanding of the health needs of these communities.
That, coupled with the Murray-Darling Medical Schools Network, which the member for Nicholls—retiring—just mentioned in his speech, is going to make such a difference to my electorate and, indeed, right throughout New South Wales and Victoria. I thank and commend the two regional health ministers—the member for Parkes and now the member for Lyne—for their help in that regard.
Holt Electorate: Australia Day Awards
Mr BYRNE (Holt) (10:56): I want to talk about an exceptional group of people and organisations that I honoured on Australia Day as part of the 18th annual Holt Australia Day awards. Thirty-eight individuals and six local organisations were recognised for their contribution to the community at the Cranbourne Community Theatre on a rather sultry Australia Day. This wouldn't have been possible without the incredible Holt Australia Day Awards Committee, which comprises Leanne Petridis, Jodie Hollis, Chris Drysdale and Rohimi Barielli, who I want to thank for assisting us with picking these worthy award recipients.
This year we recognised individuals like Suzanna Klaster, for her 31 years of service to Casey Radio, and Harley Meddings, for his tremendous volunteer work at the Cranbourne information support centre—or Community Information & Support Cranbourne, as it's known now. We recognised organisations like the Bakhtar Community Organisation, for supporting Afghan Australians in the city of Casey during the pandemic and assisting the settlement of newly arrived Afghan refugees fleeing the Taliban.
The exceptional people and organisations that were awarded the Holt Australia Day Award this year were: Mr Ali Rahimi, Amorelle Blom, Andrew Pinxt, Barry Freeman, Beven Elankumaran, Carolyn Carr, Charitha Dissanayake, Damien Ablett, Graeme Phipps, Harley Meddings, Jesse Anderson, Jim Wright, Jo Ann Fitzgerald, John Broughton, Dr Kim Son Vu, Kimbarlie O'Reilly, Kimben Lim, Les Rand, Lisa Tuthill, Lloma Shaw, Margaret Lenders, Maureen Fowler, Nia McMartin, Nicole Treffers, Niroshi Rodrigo, Paul Garrett, Peter Hanson, Polly Freeman, Rev. Ric Holland, Robert Adams, Robert Ward, Sara Jafari, Shinnee Kapea, Suzanna Klaster, Dr Tarekegn Chimdi, Tim Burgess, Wayne Smith and Yaneth Orellana. The organisations were Aged Care Reform Now, Bakhtar Community Organisation, Hampton Park Tennis Club, Multicultural Youth Support Service, Monash Health, for the COVID-19 pandemic response, and Sikh Sewaks Australia (SSA).
I have read these names into the parliamentary record. They're the names of people and organisations that have done exceptional work in their time. In their own quiet Australian way—by their actions and their deeds, their sense of community, their sense of hope and the inspiration and direction they provide to others—they improve Australia, they improve their community and they improve the environment in which they live. And they do it in an Australian way. They do it not to seek the limelight, not wanting to go out there for the awards and honours, but because they want to make their community a better place. In my view, what better day to celebrate that than on Australia Day? I was honoured to award these people the Holt Australia Day awards.
Page Electorate: Australia Day Awards
Mr HOGAN (Page—Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister and Assistant Minister for Local Government) (10:59): I'd like to acknowledge this year's winners of the Australia Day awards in the Richmond Valley. Congratulations to Sonya Marks, who was awarded the Emergency Services Medal. Citizen of the Year was given to two deserving recipients: Michael Pontefract and Patrick Power. Michael was recognised for his significant contribution to the Richmond Valley community through his work of 40 years as a lifesaver, a Rescue Jet Ski workplace trainer and assessor and the coordinator and treasurer of the Charcoal Inn Charity Club. Patrick received Citizen of the Year for serving as a medical officer for Casino rugby for 43 years, acting as a mentor for young players, supporting the Casino women's rugby team and being a fundraiser for the Heart Foundation, St Vincent de Paul and the Red Shield Appeal.
Isabella Ennever was awarded the Young Citizen of the Year award for her representation of youth in rural New South Wales. Jacob Urell was awarded the young volunteer of the year award for his time spent with the Evans Head Surf Life Saving Club, patrol member, nippers and carnivals and helps with fundraising. Dorothy Sullivan was recognised for her volunteer work in the community spanning more than 50 years, including volunteering for the Casino Historical Society, P&C committees, school canteens, Casino Show, Westpac Rescue Helicopter, Casino Beef Week and Friends of Windara.
The young sportsperson of the year award went to Abbey Urell—the second one for her proud parents—for her dedication to the support of open-water swimming. Abbey is a member of the Evans Head Surf Life Saving Club and has been the Evans Head Casino nipper of the year for the past three years.
Noah King was awarded sportsperson of the year for being a good role model for the juniors teams and is respected by teammates and opposition.
Congratulations and thank you to all the very worthy award winners.
I would like to acknowledge and congratulate members of my community who received OAMs and Australia Day awards at the Coffs Harbour city council awards. Leonard Leete of Sapphire Beach was awarded an OAM for his service to the community through emergency response organisations. Citizen of the year went to David Law for his expert student tutoring in sonography, nursing and chemistry as well as junior sports coaching. Kath was awarded the senior citizen of the year for being a passionate advocate for the growth and development of her community. The Young Citizen of the year went to Gurpreet Singh, who volunteers his time to coach and mentor young talented soccer, AFL and rugby league players. Riley Saban was awarded the Young Citizen of the Year for being a role model for people with disabilities. He is certainly that. Thank you and congratulations to all the worthy award winners.
I would like to acknowledge and congratulate members of my community who received Australia Day awards in the Kyogle. Kevin Donaghy was awarded Citizen of the Year. He's dedicated his time for 15 community organisations over the last 43 years. Senior Citizen went to Anne Riordan, who for 40 years has volunteered tirelessly for many organisations as well. Noel Bodycote was awarded Senior Sportsperson of the Year for his dedication to Kyogle lawn bowls. Oscar Kenna was awarded Junior Sportsperson for his outstanding achievements as well. Congratulations to all the award winners.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Goodenough ): In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.
BUSINESS
Rearrangement
Mrs McINTOSH (Lindsay) (11:02): by leave—I move:
That order of the day No. 1, committee and delegation business, be postponed until a later hour this day.
Question agreed to.
Rearrangement
Mrs McINTOSH (Lindsay) (11:03): by leave—I move:
That order of the day No. 2, committee and delegation business, be postponed until a later hour this day.
Question agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms McIntosh: I move:
That the Federation Chamber do now adjourn.
Lyons Electorate: Infrastructure
Mr BRIAN MITCHELL (Lyons) (11:04): It's been clear to me since my election in 2016 that regional communities have been getting hollowed out for far too long under the Liberals. The Liberals talk a big game on the regions, but they just don't do the work that matters. Access to medical services is woeful. Internet is under par. We're losing banks and services left, right and centre. And don't get me started on the state of our regional roads and highways under the Liberals. That's why every chance I get I talk about the importance of rebuilding our regions. We need people, businesses and government services back in our regions. Under Labor, that will happen. Labor leader Anthony Albanese understands the regions and he knows they are a major driver of the nation's economic growth. When we back in our regions, we are investing in a better future.
A few weeks ago, the member for Grayndler visited Lyons, along with Labor's candidate for Bass, Ross Hart, and me, to announce that an Albanese Labor government will commit $15 million to build a new headquarters for the Royal Flying Doctor Service at Launceston Airport. It's a terrific commitment from Labor for a terrific service. More than 2,300 flights are undertaken by the RFDS in Tasmania every year. It provides crucial aeromedical and patient transfer for regional communities. However, it's clear that to maintain this crucial service new facilities are needed. Labor's redevelopment will include facilities for world-class clinical care and give the space needed to cater for additional medical and fire services personnel in times of crisis or high bushfire danger.
By securing the future of the RFDS, Labor will ensure that this essential service retains its central location and accessibility to Tasmanians for all corners of our state. This is essential funding. I'd just like to give a shout-out to John Kirwan, the departing CFO of the RFDS, who joined the RFDS in Tasmania some years ago when it was a three-person operation. There are now more than 40 staff providing critical primary medical services across Tasmania, including a very well-used mobile dental van that goes to aged-care centres in my electorate.
Unlike those opposite, who rort and pillage the public purse, Labor is identifying key areas of need and working with communities to deliver the best outcome just like our $8 million commitment to upgrade Main Road in Perth and High Street in Campbell Town. We'll be working with the Northern Midlands Council to improve pedestrian safety, install new street furniture, reinvigorating the centres of both these growing towns.
Of course there's Labor's $100,000 commitment to fund a feasibility study into bringing world-class dementia care to Campbell Town. Now, some people say why a feasibility study? We know a unit is needed, but a feasibility study is the first step to getting that dementia unit for Campbell Town. Labor is working with residents from across the northern Midlands to identify critical dementia care shortages.
These commitments from Labor and the Labor leader Anthony Albanese will help to rebuild our regions and make these towns much better places to live. I come back to my central point: Labor knows that the regions are a critical part of the nation's economy going forward. They've been left to languish for too long under those opposite. They talk a big game. They wear the big hats. They wear the checked shirts. They put on the blunnies and the moleskins and walk around the paddocks but don't do the work. Our medical services in the regions are woeful. Our internet is below par. The digital divide in regional communities is getting wider and wider under the Liberals. Labor has a plan to improve the NBN in the regions and the outer suburbs, and bring fibre back into those areas which the Liberals, of course, with their second-rate NBN, have allowed to languish.
Labor understands the regions. Labor gets the regions. Labor loves the regions and Labor will invest in the regions. Thank you.
ADJOURNMENT
Mental Health
Mr VASTA (Bonner) (11:08): I rise to talk on an issue that is close to my heart and one that touches the lives of all Australians, and that is mental health. Mental health affects one in four Australians each year with 75 per cent of mental health issues occurring before the age of 25. What's even more alarming is that suicide continues to be the cause of the largest loss of life for young Australians. That is why it's so important that we continue to invest in our mental health services and ensure each Australian has access to the support that they need.
I'm pleased to say the Morrison government continues to deliver on funding for mental health. I have been a very strong advocate for mental health and I'm very pleased to update the House that we're keeping up the momentum with my plan to deliver more mental health services on the Bayside.
The last time I spoke on this project was in November of last year after reconvening the Bayside Mental Health Working Group. With over 20 local mental health experts and community providers in attendance, the key focus of this meeting was delivering for youth mental health. During our previous meetings, the working group had identified youth mental health as a gap in desperate need of being filled on the Bayside. I invited Brisbane South PHN, in partnership with Pharos Care to present a local-subscribing and internationally recognised approach to youth mental health. Loneliness and isolation are known risk factors in multiple youth issues and the team presented a prototype for 14- to 25-year-olds. The presentation was very well received, with some excellent suggestions put forward from the working group which have now been incorporated into the model.
Co-producing the service is vital for its success and so the meeting was invaluable. I am very pleased to confirm that consultation with local youth has since commenced on the Bayside. This will inform the final model, which the team looks forward to sharing with us soon. I'm incredibly encouraged by this news, as it is evidence of seeing our local community groups come together with the common goal of filling mental health services gaps on the Bayside.
From these community roundtable discussions, I was introduced to Roses in the Ocean, which I have since partnered with to deliver a pop-up safe space pilot program on the Bayside. This program offers a drop-in, non-clinical alternative to emergency departments for people experiencing emotional distress or suicidal crisis. This model has been developed in recognition of the fact that acute clinical services, such as emergency departments, are not always the best fit for people in emotional pain and distress. These pop-up safe spaces offer an alternative—a welcoming environment that can fill the gaps that are currently in our system. As the safe spaces are community led and locally designed, this enables them versatility to look, feel and operate in different ways, depending on the community's demographic and geographical needs. They are also staffed by trained prevention peer workers, who themselves have experienced crisis and therefore can connect and relate to others through mutual understanding. There are currently five of these pilot programs across Australia, and I'm proud to say that through my advocacy I have been able to deliver one of these pilot programs in Bonner.
I would also like to take this time to highlight the Men's Walk & Talk initiative, which is providing an incredibly important network for men within Bonner. In January of this year, I joined with the Men's Walk & Talk to celebrate their first birthday. This group was started by Jeff Kruger and Mitch Rowing. It focuses on supporting men by encouraging them to walk, talk and connect with other men in the area. What began as a weekly Sunday morning walk in Carina's Minnippi Parklands was quickly embraced by the community. It was so popular, that in December of last year Jeff and Mitch added an additional walking route along the Bayside. Now there are over 50 men at both of these Men's Walk & Talks each week. On last year's RUOK? Day I was also able to sponsor a sausage sizzle for the men after their walk in Carina. This provided a time for them to catch up and get to know some of the new faces.
Aged Care
Mr ROB MITCHELL (McEwen—Second Deputy Speaker) (11:13): I rise today in this House, once again, to condemn the Morrison government's attitude towards Australia's aged-care system. Right now aged-care industry bodies, staffed residents and their families are calling out to the government for assistance. By and large, these calls have been ignored. Every day my office is contacted by people in our community expressing their concerns and fears for the current state of aged care. Staff are calling the office, exhausted. As COVID ripped through aged-care communities, getting staff to replace those off sick or isolating has become increasingly difficult and it has led to many homes being understaffed.
Some staff have had trouble taking their shifts because the local childcare centres have had to close because of positive cases and staff did not have access to alternative child care. This is yet another problem that the Morrison government has failed to address. Some staff have children who either have had to isolate or have tested positive. The local secondary schools have already had a number of positive cases reported. It is a bleak time for these staff, who care deeply about their jobs and want to provide the best care possible. They have not been provided with the basic support that they need and deserve in order to fulfil their roles.
It has been an extremely difficult time for aged-care residents as well. Aged-care residents have suffered more than any other group throughout this pandemic. Not only does this situation make them one of the most at-risk groups for serious illness due to COVID but also so many have spent much of this pandemic isolated from family, friends and the support networks that they need and deserve. As aged-care homes are forced to lock down in response to COVID infections many residents lose the capacity to communicate and interact with their family and their support networks, making the staffing crisis experienced in their homes and the anxiety associated with COVID even more difficult to cope with.
More than two years into this pandemic this situation in aged care is just as dire as it has ever been. Across the country we hear reports of understaffed aged-care homes, residents' buzzes being left unattended and residents being scared and alone. The use of the military to provide additional support in the aged-care sector is a sign of how desperate this situation is, yet the minister for aged care refuses to acknowledge that a crisis exists. It's almost like Fonzie when he couldn't say 'wrong'. You can't get the Prime Minister or the aged-care minister to admit that we have a crisis in aged care. The first step to fixing any problem is acknowledging that there is one, yet the Morrison government is too concerned with saving face to acknowledge the work that needs to be done to address the appalling state of aged care in this country.
Lack of care for older Australians and Australian aged-care residents is endemic to the Morrison government. We have seen time and time again throughout this pandemic the sheer disregard for the lives and wellbeing of aged-care residents, the botched vaccine rollout for aged-care residents and staff, and the ongoing lack of support for those in the aged-care sector. It is a clear message that the Morrison government doesn't give a damn.
Older Australians built this country. They worked hard, paid their taxes and raised their families. They are the people who we owe for a lot of things that make our country what it is today with freedom and opportunity. These people and their families who have worked to contribute to this country throughout their lives deserve so much better than this chaotic, unsafe system that is the result of eight years of Liberal-National government neglect. The government have ignored their needs. Let there be no mistake: the aged-care system is broken.
Aged care is an issue that impacts all of us. Australians and their families deserve compassion, safety and adequate care as they move through their final stages of life. We know from the beginning of this pandemic that aged-care homes are vulnerable. The Morrison government had two years to plan for this situation we find ourselves in now, but, like so many things with this Prime Minister, it's too little too late.
Older Australians deserve respect, compassion and care. Once again this government is failing to provide for them. It has never been more clear that an Albanese Labor government is what this country needs and what Australians need, especially older Australians who helped build this country and the staff who can't even get the basics of PPE and RATs to work in this situation. Every single day they have to face the issues in aged care. I have seen this firsthand. I stood in a room with 20 different bags that contained the leftover possessions of people who died. Do you know what? The lazy minister couldn't even bother ringing them back. This government is a disgrace with the way it treats older Australians. It is a disgrace the way they have treated aged-care workers as just a tool to play with. They should hang their heads in shame. Colbeck, if you have any morals, you'd resign now.
Moore Electorate: Roads
Mr GOODENOUGH (Moore) (11:19): The connection of Whitfords Avenue with a realigned Gnangara Road at the Wanneroo Road intersection represents a priority infrastructure project worthy of federal support. It will yield significantly more economic benefit than the initial investment. Since the land acquisition process was completed several years ago little progress has been made in proceeding to the design and construction phase and securing funding. This is a project which I have been actively campaigning in support of over many years, requiring the joint cooperation of the City of Wanneroo and the WA state government through Main Roads Western Australia. This priority initiative will unlock several hectares of undeveloped commercial and industrial zoned land for development, creating a vibrant, bulky goods transport and logistics hub. It will also improve access to employment and services in the Wangara industrial area for my constituents who commute on a daily basis.
I have been working closely with local landowners, who have engaged consultants to prepare advanced plans for the construction of new commercial buildings along the realigned Gnangara Road frontage. They have secured leases with national tenants ready to establish showrooms, factories and warehouses, creating hundreds of local jobs. Facilitating this development will attract significant investment in construction totalling millions of dollars for the local economy. In the lead-up to the last state election, the WA Liberal opposition committed $10 million towards the roadworks. Unfortunately, the McGowan Labor government is yet to make a funding commitment to this vital economic development project, which is expected to cost $20 million.
Upgrading the connection between the residential suburbs of Moore and the vast industrial powerhouse of Wangara will be the catalyst for further economic development within the City of Joondalup, as local people will be able to commute more easily to work and businesses based in Joondalup will be able to supply goods and services to customers in the Wangara commercial and industrial area. This critical east-west route through the heartland of the Moore electorate complements the other recently constructed links between the Joondalup and Wanneroo communities, in the form of the grade separated traffic bridges at Joondalup Drive and Ocean Reef Road, which have facilitated more free-flowing traffic between our residential suburbs and commercial hubs. The project has wide support from the local community, as it will alleviate traffic congestion. I strongly make the case for federal funding to act as the catalyst for development. The economic benefit realised will far exceed the infrastructure investment.
The creation of a community hub in the established suburb of Kallaroo is another priority project within my electorate which is worthy of federal support. At the heart of the suburb is a small community facility built around a clubhouse. It includes tennis courts, a playground and outdoor recreational area and caters for a thriving local community. The 40-year-old facility has long since outgrown its capacity. The local residents association has advanced a proposal to extend and redevelop the ageing facilities to create a new not-for-profit community hub. The committee has completed due diligence by commissioning extensive research to ascertain community needs, culminating in a strategic business plan for the next five years, including indicative building plans for the redevelopment of the existing facility. The North Shore Community Hub is intended to cater for the existing community base of more than 600 local residents through a program of community activities and events, including health and wellbeing programs, tennis, pickleball, fitness, tai chi and yoga. The local community recently enjoyed a Christmas carols event and a musical performance staged by the local orchestra in the grounds. In partnership with local and state government, a funding contribution from the federal government is necessary to make this landmark project a reality. The North Shore Community Hub redevelopment has significant merit and I wish to formally place on record my strong support for a federal funding contribution.
In the current highly competitive environment for government funding, these priority projects have both considerable merit and community support. I am pleased to advocate for them in the upcoming budget process.
Dobell Electorate: Health Care
Ms McBRIDE (Dobell) (11:24): My community on the Central Coast of New South Wales is in the middle of a health crisis, but it's not a crisis that's COVID related. What people are facing on the north end of the coast is a severe shortage of general practitioners. This is a crisis largely of the government's own making, and it's one they've presided over for too long. It's never been harder or more expensive to see a GP on the Central Coast than it is now, and I say that having first worked as a pharmacist in my community in the late 1990s. That's because of the government's refusal to recognise our community as a priority. This has made it harder for local practices to recruit and retain GPs, or replace GPs who retire or move. As a result, we've seen a severe shortage of GPs in our community, and the impacts on locals and our healthcare system have been devastating, with people waiting weeks for routine appointments, practices closing their books, retiring GPs who can't be replaced and people ending up in emergency departments in hospitals which are already stretched and at times buckling under the strain. We're three years into a global pandemic, so you would think health care would be a top priority for this government, but clearly that's not the case in the community that I represent.
People in the north end of the coast have been calling for the government to fix the GP crisis for years, but all the government has done is sit on its hands. Then, at the end of last week, the government made a surprise announcement. After years of inaction and on the eve of an election, they decided to make Wyong-Gorokan and Toukley-Budgewoi priority areas for GPs. While this is welcome news—and I thank every local person, GP and community advocate who has stood up and fought for this change—and it's a great relief to many people in my community, it is long overdue and doesn't go far enough. The Morrison government has still failed to recognise the severe shortage of GPs across the rest of the Central Coast. There are practices in The Entrance, Bateau Bay and other pockets of the coast that desperately need more GPs. They should be a priority, too, but they're still being overlooked. It's only because of, as I mentioned, the incredible efforts of our community advocates and doctors that the government has even taken this step to start to address the GP crisis. But it's not enough.
GPs in my community on the Central Coast are stretched—GPs like Dr Con, who runs Oceanside Private Practice at The Entrance. Dr Con has served our community for 12 years. He has seven empty consulting rooms in his practice because there are no GPs to fill them, while each day he's turning away people who are looking for a GP. He said to me recently, 'We've been trying to recruit GPs, but, because of the rules that the government put in place, we could not obtain any GPs at all. The current number of GPs that have been trained in Australia is insufficient to meet the needs of our communities. We need to have more options on the table to be able to recruit GPs.' This sentiment is echoed by GPs and practice managers across our community.
This government may not be prepared to act, but Labor will. We have a plan to end the GP crisis on the coast and in other communities like mine across Australia. Unlike the government, we will make the entire Central Coast a priority area so local practices can recruit from a larger pool of doctors, including overseas trained doctors, so locals can get the care they need, close to home, when they need it. We'll also make it easier to see a GP for thousands of other Australians in the outer suburbs and the regions by recognising them as priority areas, too.
In the middle of a pandemic, access to health care is vital. We understand that. We know that, the further you live outside a big city, the less access you're likely to have and the worse your health outcomes will be. We understand that GPs are essential and underpin health care in communities across Australia, working hand in hand with allied health professionals, with nurses and midwives. That's why we initiated the Senate inquiry into GP services in outer metropolitan, regional and rural Australia. Although this inquiry is ongoing, the evidence presented so far is stark. It's made it very clear that there is a chronic shortage of general practitioners across the Central Coast. We have listened to doctors and patients in my community and we'll make sure that practices can recruit the GPs that they desperately need and that people need to see.
When we made this commitment last week at Oceanside Private Practice, alongside Dr Con, he said to me, 'This will enable us to have an option to hire new GPs to serve the community, so that, when people are sick, they have access to care. With a growing population on the Central Coast, we need more GPs. This announcement is the greatest news for the Central Coast, for GPs and for the community.'
This government has failed the people on the Central Coast. Clearly, it doesn't consider the health care of people living in the outer suburbs of the region a priority, but Labor do and we'll act. We believe every Australian deserves quality care close to home, no matter where they live.
Higgins Electorate: Australia Day Awards
Dr ALLEN (Higgins) (11:29): I'm delighted again to see so many constituents in the Higgins community recognised in the Australia Day 2022 Honours List. This year, there were 18 award recipients from Higgins—men and women who have served our community with distinction and dedication; men and women who have given back to the community in a variety of ways. The honours list provides a great opportunity for all Australians to recognise the value of those people who go above and beyond to make a difference to all of our lives.
One of the many honour day awardees I would like to thank is my good friend Dr Alan Finkel AC, who has been elevated to the Companion of the Order of Australia, a merit of the highest degree of service in Australia. Dr Finkel was honoured for eminent service to science through energy innovation and research infrastructure initiatives, to climate change policy, for his contribution to Australia's COVID-19 response, and to science and engineering education. It is no surprise I am standing here today to speak of Dr Alan Finkel AC's service to Australia. Alan commenced as Australia's Chief Scientist in 2016, bringing to the role extensive experience as an entrepreneur, engineer, neuroscientist and educator. Prior to becoming Chief Scientist he was Chancellor of Monash University and President of the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering. He also holds a PhD in electrical engineering from Monash.
Alan led the amalgamation that formed the Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health—coincidentally, my father-in-law, Charles Allen, also a Higgins constituent, was the chair of the board at the time. He has been chair of the Australian Centre of Excellence for All-sky Astrophysics and was director of the ASX-listed diagnostics company Cogstate Limited. Some people do not know that Alan is passionate about science education. He cofounded Cosmos Magazine, which, in addition to magazine publishing, operates a secondary school science education program. He also established the Australian course in advanced neuroscience to train early career neuroscientists and is patron of the Australian Science Media Centre. Quite simply, Dr Finkel is an extraordinary Australian.
I was also pleased to see a number of incredible medical professionals honoured for their important work, including Dr Andrew Cattermole AM for his significant service to dentistry, and Ms Helen Crowe AM for her significant service to neurology and oncology. She is a local nurse practitioner whose research and work with prostate cancer patients is remarkable. Dr Sharan Johnson AM was honoured for her significant service to community health for her work in occupational hygiene and with the Australian Safety and Health Professionals Association. I also want to thank and congratulate Professor Prudence Francis AM for her significant service to medical research in the field of oncology, and Associate Professor Leeanne Grigg AM for her significant service to cardiology. Professor Robert Power AM was honoured for his significant service to medicine in the field of international development and research. His leadership at the Burnet Institute, right on the edge of Higgins, has led to better health outcomes right across the world.
I am delighted their outstanding contributions are improving the lives of those who suffer and for this to be celebrated in this way. This year's honours list also includes recognition for two sporting champions: cyclist Paige Greco OAM and rower Rosemary Popa OAM for service to sport for a gold medal at the Tokyo Olympics. Higgins sure does produce some amazing and strong women.
Higgins is also represented in the Australia Day Honours list for significant service for intellectual property law granted to Mr John Downing AM and for the significant service to business and to the community awarded to Dr Alan Wein AM.
Finally, Australian Police Medals were awarded to senior Sergeant Bradley Mason and Superintendent Sharon McKinnon as well as an Ambulance Service Medal to Ms Glennis Winter. I thank them for their service, in particular for keeping our community safe. I commend all of the Higgins residents and, indeed, all Australians represented in the Australia Day Honours List this year and express my deep appreciation for their important contributions.
Service to the community is one of the things that is so central to the love and support that our community provides for us and the recognition that community is central to a good society. I am very proud of the fact that Higgins is recognising these wonderful individuals and the important contribution they have made. There are so many others in the community and I am very proud of the fact that we have a community Higgins award that is a warded for volunteers.
Federation Chamber adjourned at 11:34