The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 10:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
DOCUMENTS
Tabling
The Clerk: I table documents pursuant to statute as listed on the Dynamic Red.
Full details of the documents are recorded in the Journals of the Senate.
COMMITTEES
Meeting
The Clerk: Proposals to meet have been lodged as follows:
Environment and Communications References Committee—private meeting otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) today, from 11.30 am, for the committee's inquiry into Oil and gas exploration and production in the Beetaloo Basin.
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—public meeting on Tuesday, 24 August 2021, from midday, to take evidence for the committee's inquiry into advancing Australia's strategic interests in the region.
Intelligence and Security—Joint Statutory Committee—private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1), followed by public meetings—
today, from 11.30 am.
Tuesday, 24 August 2021, from 12.30 pm
Wednesday, 25 August and 1 September 2021, from midday.
Thursday, 26 August and 2 September 2021, from 3.30 pm.
Tuesday, 31 August 2021, from 4 pm.
Road Safety—Joint Select Committee—private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1), from 3.30 pm, on Thursday, 26 August and 2 September 2021.
The PRESIDENT (10:01): I remind senators the question may be put on any proposal at the request of any senator.
BUSINESS
Rearrangement
Senator CASH (Western Australia—Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (10:01): by leave—I move:
That—
(1) The hours of meeting for Monday, 23 August 2021 be 10 am to 8 pm.
(a) divisions may take place between 6.30 pm and 7.20 pm; and
(b) the question for the adjournment be proposed at 7:20 pm;
(2) The hours of meeting for Tuesday, 24 August 2021 be midday to 8 pm and the question for the adjournment be proposed at 7:20 pm.
Question agreed to.
Rearrangement
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (10:02): I move:
That the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021 be considered today at the time for private senators' bills.
Question agreed to.
BILLS
Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021
Second Reading
Consideration resumed of the motion:
That this bill be now read a second time.
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (10:02): I rise to speak on this very important bill, the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021. The purpose of this bill is to ban absolutely the importation of goods that are produced in whole or in part by forced labour—that is, slavery.
Estimates of the number of slaves across the world range from some 38 million to 46 million people. The use of forced labour within global production chains has emerged as a major humanitarian concern. The issue of modern slavery has also been highlighted by the well-documented human rights abuses perpetrated by the Chinese government against hundreds of thousands of Uighur people in Xinjiang in western China. The massive and systematic oppression of the Uighur people by the Chinese communist regime is undeniable, including the exploitation of detained Uighurs as a captive labour force. Uighur forced labour plays a key role in Xinjiang's massive cotton production and extends across an array of Chinese industries, including the supply chains of global brands.
In 2020 the Australian Strategic Policy Institute estimated at least 80,000 Uighur detainees had been shipped out of Xinjiang and assigned to factories in a range of supply chains—including electronics, textiles and automotive—under a central government policy known as 'Xinjiang aid'. ASPI identified 27 factories in nine Chinese provinces that are using Uighur labour transferred from Xinjiang since 2017. Some 83 foreign and Chinese companies, allegedly, were directly or indirectly benefiting from the exploitation of Uighur workers outside Xinjiang through abusive labour programs. Some of the international brands allegedly involved are very well known, including Apple, Esprit, Fila, Abercrombie & Fitch, Adidas, Amazon, BMW, The Gap, H&M, Marks & Spencer, Nike, North Face, Puma and Samsung.
International action against modern slavery is building. Not only have a growing number of countries enacted laws against modern slavery; there's also increased action to deal with the products of forced labour in China. In January this year, the US government implemented an executive order banning the importation of cotton and other products from Xinjiang. In July, the US Senate passed a bill to ban the import of all products from Xinjiang.
The need for Australia to address this pressing problem caused me to introduce the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Uyghur Forced Labour) Bill 2020 on 8 December last year. The purpose of the bill was to amend the Customs Act 1901 to ban the importation of goods produced or manufactured in Xinjiang or else manufactured in China through the use of forced labour. That bill was referred to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, chaired by Senator Abetz, with Senator Kitching as deputy chair. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Senator Abetz, Senator Kitching and other members of the committee for their work on that important inquiry. I also wish to thank the many people and organisations that made submissions and gave evidence, especially members of the Australian Uighur community, who faced harassment from Chinese government officials here in Australia and grave threats to family members, relatives and friends in Xinjiang.
The committee reported to the Senate on 17 June this year. The committee endorsed, without reservation, the objectives of my bill and went on to observe:
The state-sponsored forced labour to which the Uyghur people are being subjected by the Chinese dictatorship is a grave human rights violation. It is incumbent on the government to take steps to ensure that Australian businesses and consumers are not in any way complicit in these egregious abuses.
The committee took the view that it would be preferable to introduce a global ban on the import to Australia of goods produced by forced labour. However, within the context of a global ban, the committee further highlighted the need for specific action to be taken in relation to Xinjiang's cotton trade.
I have expressed my support for the committee's primary recommendation of a local ban and for other recommendations relating to government-to-government policy, administrative and enforcement matters. My concern has always been that action be taken quickly to ensure that Australia's condemnation of the Chinese government's shameful persecution and exploitation of Uighur people is made absolutely clear. The committee's report is an important step forward, and legislative implementation must not be delayed. There must be an immediate response from the Australian parliament, not the usual protracted process of government review that may lead to legislative and administrative action in two or three years. That is not acceptable.
Accordingly, rather than amend the original bill, this new bill seeks to implement the committee's primary recommendation without delay. The ban that this bill would implement is global in nature and does not specify any geographical origin for its application. The importation into Australia of any goods found to have been produced by forced labour, as already defined by the Criminal Code, will be subject to the penalties that apply to the importation of other imports prohibited by regulation under the Customs Act—for example, asbestos.
The bill is, I acknowledge, something of a blunt instrument, but that's what's needed to thwart modern slavery, especially China's resorting to the massive use of forced labour. If Australia is to be true to the democratic values we hold, we need to leave the Chinese government in no doubt that its conduct is unconscionable and unacceptable. And this action cannot be further delayed. It must happen within the life of this parliament—indeed, within this calendar year. We need to send a very clear political signal to Beijing and to the numerous international brands that have been happy to turn a blind eye to China's massive exploitation of forced labour. We need to send that signal right now, before the Beijing Winter Olympics next February, just six months away, when the Chinese Communist Party intend to bask in a massive international propaganda event.
Passage by this bill will be a step forward in the international campaign against modern slavery and the brutal oppression of the Uighur people in particular. It will send a very clear signal that the CCP's human rights abuses will be called out. I understand that the Labor opposition, the Greens and members of the crossbench are prepared to support this bill. I strongly urge government senators who have been vocal about this issue to do likewise, otherwise their many strong words will be shown to be quite hollow. Passage of this bill through the Senate will hopefully force the hand of the government, which so far has been sluggish and, indeed, most reluctant to move on the issue. It would be a grave failure on the part of the Australian parliament as a whole if we did not call out and take action to limit the massive abuses of human rights by the Chinese communist regime. This bill is part of a growing international campaign against modern slavery and those who profit from such human rights abuses. It seeks to send a very strong message. It seeks to contribute to the worldwide effort to stop this abhorrent trade.
Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (10:11): [by video link] Slave labour is a scourge which needs to be booted out. It is a cruelty inflicted by humans against humans in denial of human value and fundamental human rights. So I congratulate Senator Patrick on this initiative and fully understand that which motivates him in putting this bill before the Senate today. I also want to acknowledge the work of the secretariat and other committee members of the Senate's Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee that looked at Senator Patrick's bill, crafted a report and made a list of some 14 recommendations.
For slavery to exist, there must be a procurer of the slaves and a market for them and their work. The genesis of this bill clearly is the disgust held at the behaviour of the Chinese Communist Party dictatorship's treatment of the Uighurs in Xinjiang province. One million of their own people are in concentration camps, slave labour camps. So this brutal dictatorship is the procurer of the slaves, and the market for their labour is both the dictatorship and many businesses which are able to supply on the world market at prices cheaper than competitors because of the slave labour savings. Senator Patrick has outlined a number of those businesses, so I won't go through that list again.
This is a real and present issue. It is difficult to believe that large businesses aren't aware of this scandalous supply chain. So often we hear from big business moralising on all manner of things, but they don't seem to have the capacity to do so when it hits their bottom line, their profit. Decency and a moral compass should dictate our corporate citizens in this country would not source product from such human-rights-denying hellholes, but seemingly some do.
To their credit, Wesfarmers have taken a positive, principled, proactive stance. I for one salute them for their position, which stands in contrast to the attitude of the Australia China Business Council, which during a hearing into another matter referred to, I believe quite dismissively, 'the colour and movement' in Xinjiang province. Indeed, in a hearing on 10 June this year, I put to the representative of the Australia China Business Council my concern at his use of the words 'colour and movement' in Xinjiang province. I asked:
Would you agree with me that the events occurring there are a little more serious than just colour and movement, when you've got one million people in concentration camps; and parliaments, like the Canadian parliament, determining that genocide, forced organ harvesting and slave labour are occurring? Would you agree with me that that terminology of 'colour and movement' doesn't really create the full picture of the atrocities that are going on?
Regrettably, we got this very weak answer:
I would agree that it was a poor choice of words, but neither would I necessarily choose the words that you've chosen to use; so I'll meet you somewhere in the middle.
Consider that for a moment: one million citizens in slave labour concentration camps, forced organ harvesting and the abuses go on, and the Australia China Business Council is unable to acknowledge that the word 'atrocity' should or could be used. Later on he sought to dismiss all these human rights abuses as simply reports, and he said that he wasn't going to use the words, because he didn't think it was constructive. Then, when talking about it, he said, 'We could have a very long and torturous discussion about this.' It really is a matter of regret that the former CEO of that same organisation described our great country as 'little Australia' and 'a shag on a rock' and diminished our country.
That said, this is a bill that is important. The government supports the intent of the legislation and acknowledges the importance of the issues. Just in case people are under any misapprehension, in Australia there is already the Modern Slavery Act 2018, of relative recent origin. This act drives business due diligence around supply chains. The government recently also committed $10.6 million to implement Australia's National Action Plan to Combat Modern Slavery 2020-25, which delivers initiatives to prevent, disrupt, investigate and prosecute modern slavery crimes. As Senator Patrick indicated, originally his bill was only in relation to the Uighurs. On the strength of our report, he accepts that it should have broad application, and that is what the government has sought. I commend Senator Patrick for that amendment to his bill.
The government has sought on numerous occasions to assist in the disruption of these supply chains, but it is considerably difficult for government and sometimes businesses, especially small businesses, to fully understand the degree of their supply chain and from where product is originally sourced. But can I say to the state governments in Australia that are seeking to source trains from Xinjiang province: you can be in no doubt as to what is occurring in Xinjiang province. The fact that you are pursuing and continuing to pursue contracts for the supply of trains and carriages from Xinjiang province, when you know what is going on, is a matter of, I believe, national scandal and national disgrace which brings a lot of disrepute on you and your state governments. You should be desisting from assisting the supply chains and assisting the Chinese Communist Party dictatorship in circumstances where the depravity of the treatment of these poor individuals who are making these trains is now so well known.
In the committee's report to the Senate, 14 recommendations were made. Time does not permit me to go through all of them. I will simply say that any legislation of this nature should have broad application, such as the Magnitsky legislation—another committee on which I sit has brought before the parliament a report suggesting that we should have Magnitsky type legislation—whose origin was in fact the Russian oligarchs and their corruption. But it doesn't only apply to Russia and its oligarchs; it should apply across the board, across the world. Similarly, slave labour legislation should apply across the board to any potential supply chain of this nature. That the government takes this seriously cannot be in any doubt.
This is a bill worthy of consideration and support, in principle. Until such time as a detailed examination of its various clauses has been undertaken and we have the whole-of-government response to the Senate committee's report, I believe it is premature to deal with this bill on a vote. Senator Patrick himself acknowledged that this was a 'blunt instrument'. I don't seek to misquote him on that. I understand the reason and rationale for his use of those words. But when dealing with a blunt instrument to deal with a horrendous issue—and with that I'm on all fours with Senator Patrick—there needs to be a deep analysis of every single clause to ensure that there are not any unforeseen consequences or circumstances.
I say to Senator Patrick and to the Senate that, if this bill were to go to a vote, my heart would say yes but my head would be saying 'not yet'. Good intentions are always to be applauded, and Senator Patrick should be fully applauded for what he is seeking to do with this bill. But life has also taught me that, too often, on examination, good intentions are exposed as sometimes naive and sometimes counterproductive. I believe that, in this case, there is no naivety in that which is being sought and pursued but there is the possibility of unforeseen consequences or counterproductive outcomes which would not suit the purposes of the originator of this bill.
Senator Patrick, congratulations on bringing this issue forward, but I would suggest to the Senate that we wait until we get the full government response and the analysis of the bill in some detail from the department so that we can move forward in a coherent manner to ensure that the human rights abuses that are occurring 24/7 in Xinjiang province are not simply discussed as colour and movement, as was so appallingly done by the Australia China Business Council, but that the matter is taken seriously, that we deal with the issues and that we ensure that we can wipe out this horrid trade in human misery.
As I said, my heart says yes to this bill but my head says 'not yet'. I trust that the Senate will defer a vote on this bill, and consideration will be deferred until all the evidence is together so we have the best possible product to protect the peoples of the world who are subjected to slave labour. I thank the Senate.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Abetz. Before I call Senator Watt, I want to note that Australia is experiencing very difficult times, but it is very pleasing to see women leading our Senate chamber this week. Senator Watt.
Senator WATT (Queensland) (10:24): I could not agree more, Madam Deputy President—including yourself. I rise to contribute to the debate on the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021. I will say, from the outset, that Labor will be supporting Senator Patrick's bill, and I foreshadow that I will move a second reading amendment in the name of Senator Keneally at the end of my contribution.
In 2018, the Global Slavery Index estimated that over 40 million individuals across the world were trapped in some form of modern slavery. For nearly 25 million people, that was forced labour, most prominently in Eritrea, Burundi and North Korea but occurring in nearly every corner of the globe in some way or another. For context, 25 million people is roughly the population of our nation, yet I'm sure that there are many here in Australia who are not aware of this horror. We often speak of slavery in the past tense, as if it were a crime against humanity that we've thoroughly consigned to the history books—a scourge that climaxed with the Emancipation Proclamation and something that, today, can only be found in books and film—yet it is the reality for many millions of people around the world who live their lives in bondage. For every one of us, there is one of them, living a life of cruelty and despair.
It is not that our abhorrence towards slavery has weakened but, rather, that the problem has evolved in a rapidly developing modern world. The current iteration of forced labour and servitude is now hidden and obscured by the complex supply chains of our global trading system. So, noting the enormity and complexity of this issue, it is vital that countries like Australia show leadership, particularly in our region, in combatting modern slavery and forced labour. Modern slavery is not foreign to us here. It happens in the Asia-Pacific, and it even occurs here in Australia. In 2018, it was estimated that roughly two-thirds of the people trapped in forced labour and slavery lived in the Asia-Pacific region. The same report says that there are roughly 4,300 people in Australia today living in these horrific circumstances. This is an issue that isn't relegated to history or far-flung lands. It happens in our own backyard and in our own community. It is something that the Australian Labor Party has always taken a strong stand against. Labor led the push for an Australian modern slavery act and later moved amendments to the Modern Slavery Bill in 2018 to improve its effectiveness, introduce penalties for noncompliance and establish an independent anti-slavery commission. These amendments were not supported by the Liberal-National government at the time.
In the intervening period, the world has witnessed a growing number of horrifying reports of forced labour and human rights violations. Evidently, we, as a global community, need to do more, and that starts at home. Labor has also taken a strong stance against the exploitation of our airports to smuggle people into the country. Over 130,000 people have been brought to Australia through these loopholes, and many have ended up working in slavery-like conditions in our horticulture sector. These people are being trafficked by organised crime and illegitimate labour hire companies, and many have been subjected to wage theft, abuse and sexual assault, while the go-slow Department of Home Affairs processes their applications. This is a significant problem that has been ignored and denied by those opposite. We welcome this private senator's bill today because we recognise that more must be done to combat modern slavery and we fully appreciate how pervasive the problem has become.
We also thank Senator Patrick for engaging with the committee process and adopting recommendations of the Senate inquiry into this bill. Whilst we support the proposed legislation, we recognise that this bill will only go so far in addressing the problems at hand. The Senate inquiry and key stakeholders have highlighted a number of ways that the bill could be improved to ensure that it is more effective in addressing modern slavery. Firstly, the bill does not address what information or what standard of proof is required to ban a product produced by forced labour. Does the bill require a proven crime beyond reasonable doubt before the government can take action?
It is not clear whether this is the standard of proof required or whether some lesser measure would be used. It was the view of the committee as well as key stakeholders that the standard should be where the evidence reasonably but not conclusively indicates that imports were produced in whole or in part by forced labour. This is also the approach taken by the United States government with the Tariff Act. With this standard, the burden would then be shifted back to importers and the producers of the good to demonstrate the absence of forced labour in their supply chain. Without such a standard, the bill may introduce a ban that is unworkable in the real world.
Secondly, the bill does not outline an open referral mechanism, another feature employed by Washington in their fight against forced labour. An open referral mechanism would allow anyone to petition the Australian Border Force to investigate allegations of forced labour. Further, this open referral mechanism should then necessitate a transparent process by which the reasons for the acceptance or rejection of a petition would be published. This would increase the practicality of the ban and allow for greater transparency and accountability over its implementation.
Thirdly, the bill doesn't provide the Australian Border Force with enough power to investigate in instances where it believes goods produced by forced labour are being imported. Without the ability to issue detention orders for specific goods, companies or regions with a high risk of forced labour, the ABF is significantly hamstrung in the way it can enforce the ban. Without explicitly outlining these powers in the bill, the ABF's ability to investigate and enforce the ban will be hampered.
Fourthly, we must ensure fairness in this system. There should be a process by which importers can challenge a finding or order made by the ABF in the investigation of goods produced by forced labour. It is important that importers who can demonstrate that they have taken every reasonable effort to verify the source and the type of labour used and have provided sufficient evidence that the shipped goods were not produced with forced labour are not unfairly disadvantaged. If they cannot satisfy these requirements, the goods should be seized and detained. This, in turn, would create a commercial imperative for importers to have done their own homework before importing a good. If they can provide their proof, they will be able to secure the swift release of their product.
Finally, the bill would be improved by specifically articulating transparency measures, which should be specifically laid out in the bill, ideally in the way of a publicly available register which outlines the number of investigations, the number of petitions, the number of detention orders and the details of any findings of forced labour. This is what best practice would look like in a bill of this kind. We acknowledge the work of the Senate committee and a number of stakeholders who have engaged with this process to attempt to achieve the most effective and practical ban possible.
Despite what we've outlined above, Labor support any efforts to combat modern slavery. In moving our second reading amendment, we seek to acknowledge the important work of Senator Patrick and we call on the Morrison government to do more than match the effort and resolve from Labor and the crossbench to combat this horrible crime. It's evident what must be done. The Morrison government needs to work with Labor and the crossbench to amend the Modern Slavery Act to introduce penalties for noncompliance and to require mandatory reporting on exposure to specified issues of pressing concern, including Uighur forced labour. Australia is way behind many of our like-minded partners in addressing forced labour and modern slavery. It is vital that we pursue an effective, country-agnostic approach to address these global problems. Without leadership, our region will continue to be exploited by those who profit from the misery of forced labour.
To effectively address the myriad issues presented by modern slavery, the Morrison government needs to do more than amend laws. The government needs to work with consumers and producers alike to boost the transparency of global supply chains. This should include work across the Australian Border Force, the Australian Sanctions Office and AUSTRAC with international partners to increase outreach and information sharing. An independent antislavery commissioner, which Labor has called for, could and should lead this important work.
The Morrison government should also engage in regular dialogues with unions, industry groups and human rights organisations in order to more quickly identify potential issues and address them properly. Additionally, properly funded research into forced labour is vital if we are to identify and combat the issue. Australia should ratify the International Labour Organization's 2014 forced labour protocol. If Australia wants to speak with global credibility on ending forced labour, it must join the 45 other countries, including the UK, New Zealand, Canada, France and Germany, that have ratified the protocol and fully abide by the ILO's forced labour convention.
The Morrison government should consider publishing an annual list of countries, regions, industries and products with a high risk of modern slavery, including forced labour. Companies importing from these places would have the onus placed on them to prove goods are not made with forced labour. It could also consider targeted sanctions on foreign companies, officials and other entities known to be directly profiting from Uighur forced labour and other human rights abuses. The Morrison government should lead by example and conduct a comprehensive review of its procurement procedures and supply chains and disclose this publicly as part of its existing modern slavery report. This should act as a blueprint for state and territory governments to also review their supply chains and ensure they are not importing goods made from forced labour, including in Xinjiang.
None of my comments here should be a shock to anyone. This is the solution that Labor has long called for to properly address this complex issue. Without these changes, we fear that the millions of people who live their lives in forced labour and slavery will never leave it. It is a stain on our humanity that it exists, and we should do everything that we can to stop it, so we move our second reading amendment to this effect and we again reiterate our support for Senator Patrick's bill. We support this legislation and strongly support its intent. Slavery has not been consigned to the history books, but it should be. For the 40 million people around the world living their lives in bondage, including the millions in our region and the thousands in Australia, we owe them all our efforts to outlaw and combat this scourge. Real leadership and resolve is required to make modern slavery a thing of the past, so I commend this bill to the Senate and, at the request of Senator Keneally, I move:
At the end of the motion, add ", and whilst supporting the bill, the Senate:
(a) notes that:
(i) Australia has an important role to play in combatting forced labour and modern slavery, particularly in our region,
(ii) the provisions within this bill are a blunt instrument to address this issue, and will be difficult to enforce without additional reforms, and
(iii) the Government has previously opposed efforts in this place to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act 2018; and
(b) calls on the Government to do more to address forced labour and modern slavery, including supporting Labor's amendments to the Modern Slavery Bill 2018 which sought to improve its effectiveness, introduce penalties for non-compliance, increase transparency of global supply chains, and establish an Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, which the Government has previously opposed in this place.
Senator RICE (Victoria—Deputy Australian Greens Whip) (10:37): [by video link] I am very pleased to be here today supporting this bill of Senator Patrick's, the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021. It's a very important bill. It's an incredibly important issue—the fact that we have forced labour, that we have slavery continuing today, that slavery is not a thing of the past, that there are 40 million people around the world who are still subject to the appalling conditions of living as bonded labourers, as slaves in forced labour.
I thank Senator Patrick for bringing this bill to us, and I thank him for modifying the bill from the first version that we saw, which was focused on the atrocities and the appalling conditions suffered by the Uighurs in China, because it is important to acknowledge what's going on in China—acknowledge the huge, massive attacks on Uighur people's human rights in China—but it's also important to acknowledge that this is not an issue that is just restricted to China and this is not an issue just restricted to the Uighur population. There are issues of modern slavery, of forced labour, all around the world, so I really do thank Senator Patrick for having broadened the extent of the bill, which was one of the recommendations by many of the people who put in submissions to his previous bill.
As Senator Patrick himself acknowledged in his contribution, this bill isn't perfect, and, as Senator Watt just told us, there are many ways that this bill could be improved. The Greens support most of those critiques of the bill. We'd like to see our legislative framework improve to pick up on many of those issues that Senator Watt just raised. But that does not take away from the importance of this bill and the importance of putting the issue of forced labour around the world and what the Australian government's response should be fairly and squarely on the agenda, on the table for us today.
Yes, this bill should be improved, but so should the rest of our framework for addressing human rights. We need a legislative framework that puts human rights—the rights of people to live decent, unoppressed lives, to have freedom of speech, freedom of movement and freedom of association—at the core of our foreign policy. It needs to be at the core of our foreign policy. Not only that, it needs to be at the core of our trade policy and at the core of our aid policy. This bill is an important contribution towards changing our legislative framework for that to occur. As such, the Greens are very happy to be supporting it as a step forward.
As I said, this bill, as we know, began with the appalling conditions being suffered by a million or more Uighur people in China. We have heard so much in this parliament—and quite rightly—about what the conditions are. It's horrific. Basically, cultural genocide is being undertaken against the Uighur people, with detention of up to a million people, the forced labour this bill is addressing, reports of systematic rape and the widespread destruction or damaging of thousands of mosques. So whatever we can do as Australians to address this is important, and we need to keep the focus on. We cannot just let it be put to the side and say that, because China is a very large country and a very powerful force in the world, there's nothing that we can do. There are things that we can do, and we must do them.
But, as I have said, it's also important that we acknowledge that this isn't just an issue focused on China. We need to broaden it out. One reason why we need to broaden it out is that we need to make sure that, when we are talking about the appalling human rights abuses being meted out by the Chinese government—by that totalitarian regime—we don't get ourselves into a frame of thinking that it's only China that's doing that, because it's not. There are other appalling human rights abuses all around the world, as we know.
I have just spent the weekend focused on the tragic circumstances that are currently unfolding in Afghanistan, as I'm sure many of us have. We're going to be hearing a lot more this week about the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan—the massacres, the deaths that they are imposing and are likely to be imposing upon people. We have seen the coup in Myanmar. We have seen regimes such as Saudi Arabia's. There are issues all around the world, and we need to make sure that they are being addressed.
So it's not a focus just on China. We have to be very careful that we take whatever action we can to make sure that, by having a focus on the actions of the Chinese government, we don't flame anti-Chinese racism here in Australia. We've got to put all of the work that we are doing in a framework of respect for human rights everywhere, including in Australia, and respect for the human rights of people of Chinese heritage here in Australia. We know that, with the focus on China over the last year or so, there has been a huge increase in racism directed at people of Chinese heritage in Australia. It is very important that this bill has been modified so it's not focused just on China; it is focused on slavery and on forced labour wherever it occurs in the world.
There are other places in the world where it does occur. As I said, 40 million people around the world are subject to slavery or conditions of forced labour. For example, state sanctioned forced labour is particularly common in the cotton sector in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. Each year, during the harvest season, citizens are forced out of regular jobs to spend weeks picking cotton at work. In Saudi Arabia, millions of migrant workers fill mostly manual, clerical and service jobs in Saudi Arabia, constituting more than 80 per cent of the private sector workforce, governed by an abusive kafala system that gives their employers excessive power over their mobility and legal status in the country. Human Rights Watch tells us that the system underpins migrant workers' vulnerability to a wide range of abuses, from passport confiscation to delayed wages and forced labour. There is little that's being done to dismantle the kafala system, which is leaving migrant workers in Saudi Arabia at high risk of abuse. Then, in fact, there are other elements of forced labour, such as prison labour and the situation in prisons. Exporting prison produced goods is illegal under domestic and international trade law, but in the United States prison labour is a billion-dollar industry, and 37 states allow the use of prison labour by private companies. In eight states, prisoners are not paid for their work in state-run facilities. The country-wide average for inmates receiving the least for their work is US14c per hour, and the average for those earning the most is US63c per hour, so it's important that Australia focuses on where forced labour and modern slavery are occurring, no matter where it is around the world.
As I said, we need to be putting human rights at the forefront, at the core, of our foreign policy and of our trade policy. There is lots more that we can be doing, as well as supporting the bill before us today, and I'm hoping the Senate is indeed going to be supporting this bill today. We need to be increasing the powers in our Modern Slavery Act. Our Modern Slavery Act is up for review, and I am hoping that it will be strengthened so it can really address broader issues of modern slavery wherever they're occurring around the world, and particularly requiring it to have mandatory reporting so that that bill actually has some teeth. We must ratify the International Labour Organization forced labour protocol. I don't understand why Australia has not ratified that protocol yet. More broadly, we need to be changing our framework so that we can have a powerful focus on human rights abuses wherever they occur in the world as that would clearly enable us to have targeted sanctions on human rights abusers wherever they are in the world. Across parties and across the Senate we have had a focus on the need for Magnitsky legislation. As we know we have had a government response to this legislation which is frankly lukewarm. I am not convinced that we are going to be toughening our sanctions regime, as we need to, to give us the powers to be taking powerful action against human rights abusers wherever they are in the world. As Greens, we will be continuing our pressure to be getting really strong Magnitsky legislation to enable us to be effectively imposing targeted sanctions on human rights abusers no matter where they are from: whether they are Chinese officials, who are responsible for the appalling conditions that the Uighur are living under; whether they are the generals, who are responsible for the coup in Myanmar; whether they are people in Russia, in Saudi Arabia or in other parts of the world who are responsible for appalling attacks on human rights abuses.
I want to conclude by saying that this is a very important bill. But what is more important is to see it in the context of needing to have a legislative framework, which the Greens have been proposing and will continue to advocate for, that puts human rights at the core of our interactions with other countries, whether that's through our foreign policy, through our trade arrangements or through our aid arrangements, so that we can feel that we are doing our utmost to be supporting the rights of people around the world. This is important because while human rights are being abused, while people are suffering and not being able to live their best lives, anywhere in the world, we suffer too as part of that common humanity. We need to be taking action and we need to be taking whatever action we can. In that context, the Greens are very happy to be supporting Senator Patrick's bill this morning.
Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New South Wales) (10:49): [by video link] As a member of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021. The purpose of the original bill was to ban the importation of goods from Xinjiang, in the People's Republic of China, as well as goods from other parts of the PRC that are produced in whole or part by forced labour. I, like other speakers, am pleased that Senator Patrick has expanded the scope of the bill with the insertion of section 50A, 'Prohibition of the importation of goods—goods produced by forced labour', within the meaning of the Criminal Code.
I associate myself with the comments that have been made by Senator Abetz but I focus my comments this morning on the work of the report and the work that the committee did on this report, particularly in relation to the massive and systemic oppression of the Uighur people by the Chinese government. The explanatory memorandum to the bill states that the use of forced labour is defined in the bill by reference to the Criminal Code. The explanatory memorandum states:
The importation into Australia of any goods found to have been produced by forced labour, will be subject to the penalties that apply to the importation of other goods designated as prohibited imports by regulations made under the Customs Act.
The Bill supports Australia's longstanding commitment to internationally recognised human rights to freedom from slavery and forced labour such as in Article 8 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and related international conventions against slavery and forced labour.
I acknowledge and thank Senator Patrick for the work that he has done and thank him for bringing forward this bill.
This is a critical time in the world's dealings with the communist regime in Beijing and, accordingly, this bill is very timely. Apart from the evidence given by the usual apologists for Beijing, the remainder of the evidence to the committee was very compelling. This is an issue of concern to many Australians, especially given the evidence provided by the president of the Australian Uyghur Tangritagh Women's Association that every single Uighur in Australia has family members and/or friends in the concentration and/or labour camps.
Many respondents pointed to the research of Dr Adrian Zenz, including his work indicating that there are as many as 1.8 million Uighurs and other ethnic groups currently subjected to forced labour in the PRC. Dr Darren Byler, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Colorado, told the committee about his research based on interviews with former Xinjiang workers and immediate family members of workers. He states:
… what I've learned from them through those interviews and through comparison to open-and-closed access Chinese government documents, such as internal police documents, is that a system of unfree labour is now widespread in Xinjiang and, to a certain extent, across China. In factories and other institutions, the workers are taught to speak Mandarin and embrace state political ideology, all while learning to work on an assembly line or as maintenance workers, cleaners, nannies and cooks in state-directed labour programs. Though some of these new workers referred to as 'surplus' labourers were simply farmers from nearby villages, many of them are also relatives of detainees or former detainees themselves. All of them know that overt refusal of these job assignments could result in their internment in camps or imprisonment.
The World Uyghur Congress noted that forced labour tended to take place in or around internment camps, prisons and workplaces inside East Turkestan as well as across China. Various submitters to our committee referred to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute report of March 2020 Uyghurs for sale: Re-education, forced labour and surveillance beyond Xinjiang by Vicky Xiuzhong Xu, Danielle Cave, Dr James Leibold, Kelsey Munro and Nathan Ruser. Other speakers have referred to some of the contents of that report, which identified 27 factories in nine Chinese provinces using Uighur forced labour, transferred from Xinjiang, since 2017.
These factories are part of the supply chain for 82 well-known global brands in the technology, clothing and automotive sector. Of note, the report estimated the transfer of more than 80,000 Uighurs and other ethnic minorities from Xinjiang to factories across the country, between 2017 and 2019, through labour transfer programs under a central government policy known as Xinjiang Aid. ASPI also maintains the Xinjiang Data Project website, which brings together research on the human rights situation of Uighurs and other minorities in Xinjiang. Furthermore—and I note that this has also been referred to—one of those companies, Chinese rail manufacturer KTK, works with a number of governments in Australia, including the New South Wales government and the Victorian government, and is being investigated for its links to forced labour.
Witnesses provided troubling evidence of PRC government intimidation in response to the publication of research in this area. Professor Leibold and Ms Munro said that the report had been repeatedly criticised by the Chinese government, seeking to besmirch ASPI as an organisation and its researchers, who have been repeatedly doxxed and threatened, and ignoring the substance of the report and the specifics of the evidence. Doxxing, I understand, is the practice of releasing a person's private information on the internet. Ms Xu informed the committee that the PRC had threatened to sue ASPI for libel, following the publication of the report. We also know that there have been incentives offered to companies to incorporate Uighur workers into their business. They reported that the government subsidies include free land, lower electricity costs, low-cost loans, transportation subsidies and even subsidised labour.
Evidence by Professor James Leibold should sound a salutatory warning. The two-way trade between Xinjiang and Australia is increasingly significant and should be of serious concern to our parliament. The customs bureau of the Xinjiang regional government releases monthly statistics on the import and export of products between Xinjiang and other countries. According to Professor Leibold's evidence, Australia is—much to my surprise—one of the regime's top trading partners. Over the four years of the brutal crackdown in Xinjiang, Australia's two-way trade with Xinjiang increased by 150 per cent. The vast majority of that trade, about 73 per cent, is the import of goods from Xinjiang into Australia, with imports increasing by 150 per cent in 2009 and amounting to $37 million. By comparison, in 2019, neither Canada nor the UK was among Xinjiang's top 30 trading partners. Germany and Japan imported far less. In fact, in 2019 Australia's imports from Xinjiang actually exceeded that of the United States and comprised about two per cent of Xinjiang's total exports.
Our report canvassed legislative responses by other governments, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada. On the private-sector front, Be Slavery Free noted that the Better Cotton Initiative, a global not-for-profit organisation and the largest cotton sustainability program in the world, has suspended its activities in Xinjiang on the back of concerns over the prevalence of labour abuses in the area. BSF also noted actions taken by Woolworths, Kathmandu and PDH brands, as outlined in their modern slavery statements. Indeed, Woolworths commenced tracing its garment supply chain, and Kathmandu noted that the risk of exposure to forced labour was potentially present at all levels of the supply chain.
In relation to the issue with Beijing, the report indicated that there is widespread support for this bill. I think that is not surprising given the change in sentiment that is fast becoming the norm—that it can no longer the business as usual with the communist regime in China. The ongoing threats by Beijing are symptomatic of the predicament that we find ourselves in, noting that years of questionable and, if I may say so, defective foreign and trade policy have made us vulnerable to economic coercion. Those who have responsibility for our 'fellow traveller' foreign policy were prepared to ignore communist China's skulduggery so long as the rivers of gold continued to flow. Businesses also engaged in extensive trade because the rivers of gold were flowing. This has proved to be a flawed business model, and if we profess to have a values based foreign policy then that includes standing up on issues such as abuse of human rights.
Whilst China's bully tactics on different fronts were clear, there was a reluctance to offend China on the part of those leading our foreign and trade policy, and my criticisms in January 2018, though valid, were not welcome. We were never clear what strategy we were adopting with China. Therefore, when you are dealing with a bully, it is important that you have the political fortitude to stand up to them. As I've said, I think that the Australian public will now expect that. Australians will no longer tolerate business as usual with the communist regime. China is not a democracy. It is a totalitarian regime, and we need to treat it as such. I won't go into the statistics in relation to our mounting trade. Suffice it to say that having put a third of our trade eggs in the China basket has opened us up to criticism on a range of fronts, especially now that we are seeing the emerging evidence about some of those goods potentially being linked to forced labour in Xinjiang, and potentially in other places.
I am pleased the committee endorses without reservation the objectives of the bill, as I've indicated, in relation to state-sponsored forced labour in relation to Uighurs and, of course, in other parts the world. I agree that it is incumbent upon the government to take steps to ensure that Australian businesses and consumers are not in any way complicit in these egregious abuses. Our report made it clear that it is important that we prohibit the import of any goods made wholly or in part with forced labour, regardless of geographic origin. It is important, as part of any process in relation to forced labour, that we audit supply chains and ensure that the exposure of Australian businesses to these practices is fully audited and also that Australian businesses and importers are given clarity in relation to the procedures.
In conclusion, I note that the government supports the intent of this bill and acknowledges the importance of this issue, including the need for transparency and appropriate action in response to the instances of modern slavery and human rights abuses. Senator Patrick indicated that this bill is a blunt instrument, but I would urge the government to accept all the recommendations of the report. I note that there are deficiencies in the Modern Slavery Act, and some of those have been discussed this morning. In its efforts to combat modern slavery, the government has taken a country-agnostic, victim centred approach that focuses on supporting the best outcomes for victims in addressing modern slavery in supply chains, and I think that those changes do need to be made. The evidence of widespread use of forced labour for particular classes of product from different parts of the world, and most especially from Xinjiang, necessitates action on this complex issue as a matter of priority.
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (11:04): [by video link] I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021. I thank Senator Patrick for introducing this private member's bill. It is a bill that Labor supports.
It should not be controversial to stamp out the use of slavery and forced labour in Australia and around the world. Slavery has not been relegated to the history books. It is a blight that countries around the world too often see to this very day. As we speak, there are more than 40 million people around the world who have been coerced and forced into slavery-like conditions.
Some have promoted the lie that slavery is not part of our own history in Australia: 'There was no slavery in Australia.' The person I'm quoting, of course, is the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, on ABC Radio just one year ago. When Morrison said slavery had not existed in Australia, he was covering up the exploitation of more than 62,000 South Sea islanders—people from Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Tuvalu, Kiribati and Fiji. More than 62,000 South Sea islanders were forcibly brought to Australia. More than 62,000 South Sea islanders were kidnapped, tricked, coerced or threatened into coming to Australia, where they were forced to work as slaves on cane fields in Northern Queensland. That shameful practice is known as blackbirding. While it started in the 1840s, it continued until it became illegal in the early 1900s. That's almost 40 years after the Thirteenth Amendment made slavery illegal in the United States. When it was finally made illegal, there were no repatriations. In fact, thousands were deported, often to the wrong islands, where they had no family and no connections and may not have spoken the local language. The fact that the Prime Minister of Australia was unaware of this practice is a national embarrassment.
There is also the well-documented practice of Indigenous workers being bought and sold as chattels, particularly in the northern Australian pastoral industry. The purchase and sale of Indigenous workers and forced labour without pay reportedly continued as recently as the 1950s. Again, the fact the Prime Minister of Australia was unaware of this practice is incomprehensible.
While the open and flagrant use of slavery and forced labour has, thankfully, been stamped out, it is something that continues in Australia in the shadows. Make no mistake: there is slavery and forced labour in Australia today. The 2018 Global Slavery Index estimates there are at least 15,000 slaves in Australia. The use of slavery in Australia today is particularly high in the agricultural sector, and it's also present in construction, domestic work, meat processing, cleaning, hospitality and food services. These are all essential industries, and they are being driven in part by slavery. Many of those 15,000 slaves in Australia today are migrants on temporary visas who were forced into slavery by the threat of deportation by their employer.
In 2013, the Fair Work Ombudsman launched its Harvest Trail investigation. Of the 638 horticulture businesses and labour hire companies it investigated, more than half were breaking labour laws, including workers being placed into piecework arrangements which resulted in them being paid substantially below the Australian minimum wage. A few years later, the Ombudsman went back and re-investigated 245 of those businesses. Of the 245, 162 had disappeared and may now be phoenixing. Of those that were still operating, almost half were still breaking labour laws. So, even after getting caught the first time, they were reoffending. At budget estimates, we asked the Fair Work Ombudsman if they were going to check on those repeat offenders a third time; they said no. This isn't a criticism of the Fair Work Ombudsman; they just do not have the resources to enforce labour laws around this country. They do not have the resources to stamp out modern slavery in Australia.
The only organisations that do have the scale and expertise required are trade unions. But the Morrison government is so ideologically opposed to the trade union movement that it will never in a million years give a qualified union representative the power to check that people are being paid what they are legally entitled to.
Instead, we had another inquiry in 2019, the Migrant Workers Taskforce, which also found slavery-like conditions in Australia, particularly at shonky labour-hire companies. One of the key recommendations was to establish a national labour-hire registration scheme. It would focus on four high-risk sectors: horticulture, meat processing, cleaning and security—sectors where the 15,000 slaves in Australia today are most likely to be working. That report was over two years ago, and the Morrison government has still not introduced this scheme. We can be sure Mr Morrison has no intention of introducing that scheme before the end of this parliament's term.
Then there is the gig economy, which the Morrison government has still done nothing to regulate, when Uber workers are dying on the roads for as little as $6.67 an hour, with no paid leave, no workers compensation and no alternative options in Mr Morrison's economy—and, if you die at work, Uber will not even contact your family. Uber is now the second-largest employer in Australia. This is the future of work that Mr Morrison envisages for all Australians—a return to slave-like conditions.
Just today, Uber announced a new partnership with the largest employer in Australia, Woolworths, to begin same-hour grocery deliveries. We now have the two largest employers in Australia teaming up to exploit workers. My question for Woolworths is this: What steps are you taking to ensure the Uber workers you're using aren't being paid $6.67 an hour? What steps are you taking, Woolworths, to ensure that Uber riders delivering your goods have a safe working environment? Just last week, it was revealed that Uber failed to report 500 incidents, including sexual assault and serious accidents. And this is the company that you, Woolworths, are now working with. As the economic employer of those Uber drivers now delivering your products, Woolworths—the people at the top of the supply chain—you owe those riders in the supply chain a duty of care.
The Senate Select Committee on Job Security has heard about forced labour taking place on mine sites in Western Australia. Electricians have provided evidence that they are lured to a remote mine site at one rate of pay and, once they arrive, they are told they can either take the work for a lower rate of pay or they can wait for a week, without pay, until the next flight. That fits the very definition of forced labour. So slavery and forced labour continue on farms, at Uber, at mine sites and in other workplaces around Australia because Mr Morrison doesn't think that slavery ever existed in Australia, let alone that it exists today under his own prime ministership.
I want to commend the Australian Workers Union and Unions NSW for leading the charge in exposing modern slavery on Australian farms. Unions NSW recently released a report with the Migrant Workers Centre entitled Working for $9 a day. It found workers on farms earning less than $1 an hour on piece rates, with some working 20 hours per day. Earlier this year, I met one of those workers, a Taiwanese woman called Kate. Kate was receiving $4 an hour to pick oranges on a farm in southern Australia and was eating out of a bin to survive. At one farm, Kate was sexually harassed and told she would have to put up with it if she wanted to keep her job.
The Australian Workers Union is seeking to introduce through the Fair Work Commission a minimum wage for fruit pickers to bring an end to slavery on Australian farms. If Mr Morrison had any interest in addressing slavery on his watch, he would support the Australian Workers Union in that case. In fact, if Mr Morrison was interested in fighting slavery, there is a long list of things he could do. The only progress that has been made on modern slavery in the last eight years of this government has been the result of massive pressure by the Labor Party, the trade union movement and civil rights groups.
In 2017, Labor announced it would introduce modern slavery legislation if it won the next election. Twelve months later, the Morrison government introduced the Modern Slavery Bill 2018. It was a pale imitation of the legislation proposed by Labor. As we've seen so often with Mr Morrison, he takes a Labor idea and waters it down just enough to prevent it from being good policy, just as we saw with JobKeeper, with rorts by the likes of Gerry Harvey—no action. Labor moved amendments to the Modern Slavery Bill to improve its effectiveness, introduce penalties for noncompliance and establish an Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner. Unfortunately the Liberal government rejected those amendments.
Labor again calls on the Morrison government to work with Labor and the crossbench to amend the Modern Slavery Act to introduce penalties for noncompliance and to require mandatory reporting on exposure to specific issues of pressing concern such as Uighur forced labour. Until then, Australia remains well behind many of the global partners in addressing slavery and forced labour. Australia still has not ratified the International Labour Organization's 2014 forced labour protocol. If the Morrison government wants to speak with any global credibility on ending forced labour, it should join the other 45 countries, including New Zealand, the UK, Canada and Germany, and fully ratify the ILO Forced Labour Convention. Instead, we have a modern slavery reporting system that has been treated as a joke by big businesses in Australia.
Research from the Australian Council of Superannuation Investors in June found that a majority of the ASX 200 companies were treating it as a tick-the-box exercise and were only disclosing the absolute bare minimum about slavery in their supply chain. A third of ASX 200 companies were potentially noncompliant. In fact, not a single company in the first year of the scheme has reported a single modern slavery incident, even when they have identified red flags such as passports being seized, wage theft, forced overtime or recruitment fees being charged to workers. The fact is that Mr Morrison's watered-down slavery laws have turned this into a box-ticking exercise.
In the meantime, the world is witnessing a growing number of horrifying reports of forced slavery and human rights violations in China. According to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute 2020 report titled Uyghurs for sale, more than 80,000 Uighurs were transferred out of Xinjiang to work in factories across China between 2017 and 2019. Those workers typically live in segregated dormitories, undergo organised Mandarin ideological training, are subject to constant surveillance and of course are forbidden from participating in religious observances. The Uyghurs for sale report identified 27 factories across nine Chinese provinces that are using Uighur labour transferred from Xinjiang. These factories claim to be part of the supply chain of 82 high-profile brands.
If your company is profiting from forced labour or slavery, it is your responsibility to stamp it out, so I call on the following companies identified by the Strategic Policy Institute to implement the appropriate slavery policies so that they are transparently avoiding human exploitation and misery at their advantage. They are companies like Amazon, Google, Huawei, Calvin Klein, Skechers, Zara, H&M, BMW, Jaguar, Land Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, Levi's, Walmart, Costco, Adidas and Nike. Martin Luther King once said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' If those companies continue to profit from gross injustice, and the Morrison government continues to allow them to do so, it is not just the Uighurs who suffer; it brings down rights and conditions for workers around the world, including here in Australia.
So Labor supports this bill. We call on the Morrison government to ratify the ILO Forced Labour Convention. We call on the Morrison government to publish an annual list of countries, regions, industries and products with a high risk of modern slavery and forced labour. We call for an Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner. We call for penalties for companies who are noncompliant. We call for targeted sanctions on foreign companies, officials and other entities known to be directly profiteering from forced labour. And we call on the Morrison government to lead by example and conduct a comprehensive review of its own procurement and supply chains.
Senator VAN (Victoria) (11:19): No-one in this place would be surprised to know that we on the government benches believe that slavery in any form is an abhorrent practice that must be eliminated. No-one, no matter their race, age, sex, gender, nationality or ethnicity should be subject to having their basic freedoms being taken away from them. The Morrison government believes in freedom of the individual and the importance of this in a good society. The government does support the intent and acknowledges the importance of this issue in this bill, including the need for transparency and appropriate action in response to instances of modern slavery and human rights abuses.
However, the government does not support all aspects of the proposed Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021 and, instead, recommends that the departments continue working with domestic stakeholders and international counterparts to address modern slavery wherever it is identified and to collectively respond to reduce and eliminate its practice, including through a review of the Modern Slavery Act 2018. This act creates a robust transparency framework to drive business action and to identify and address modern slavery in global supply chains.
There is no doubt that business has a large job ahead of it. With 3,000 companies in Australia due to report, it is absolutely amazing the work that our companies are doing. There are an estimated 40 million men, women and children in modern slavery today and it can be found in almost every country in the world, according to the International Labour Organization and the Walk Free foundation, who I will come back to later. With increasing globalised trade, it affects almost every business through those interconnected supply chains. This is not just limited to one region; this is a whole-of-world problem, and the interconnectedness of those supply chains is an incredibly difficult thing to unwind and to get transparency of, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be doing it.
I thank the resources industry for the work they are doing in this space. Given the global nature of supply chains for minerals and resources companies, they are leading some of the best transparency work on this. I call out and thank Mr Andrew Forrest for the work he is doing, not only through his mining company but also through the Walk Free Foundation that he founded and funds, and the important work that they are doing in bringing transparency to supply chains, not just in the mining industry but right across the globe with their anti-slavery index.
The government, however, goes further. We take a country-agnostic, victim-centric approach that focuses on supporting the best outcomes for victims in addressing modern slavery in supply chains. This reflects the reality that modern slavery can take many forms and exist in any sector, supply chain or country. However, Senator Patrick's explanatory memorandum highlights a concern over which the government has held deep concerns—that is, the widely reported state-mandated enforced labour occurring in Xinjiang. The government made a submission to the parliamentary inquiry into this bill on 15 March this year, which outlines our response to combatting modern slavery. In addition to administering the act which drives business due diligence around supply chains, the government has recently also committed $10.6 million to implement Australia's national action plan, which delivers initiatives to prevent, disrupt, investigate and prosecute modern slavery crimes.
The Department of Home Affairs and, with them, one of its agencies, Australian Border Force, as well as the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade were all participants in the whole-of-government submission to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee's inquiry into this bill. The Australian government, through that submission, notes that the intention of the bill, as expressed in its explanatory memorandum, is to take a strong stand against the well-documented human rights abuses of hundreds of thousands of Uighur people in the Xinjiang province. The Australian government acknowledges the intent and importance of the issue, including the need for transparency and appropriate actions in response to all instances of modern slavery and human rights abuse. However, the government does not support all aspects of the bill. The government is working with domestic stakeholders and international counterparts to bring to light modern slavery, wherever it is identified, and respond collectively to reduce and eliminate its practice. The government consistently raises concerns about the treatment of Uighurs and other minorities in China and other countries, including at ministerial level directly with China and in multilateral forums. Reports of forced labour are a key element of Australia's international advocacy, and the government, jointly with other countries, continues to urge China to allow meaningful and unfettered access to Xinjiang by independent international observers. The government is committed to tackling modern slavery, including forced labour.
The landmark Modern Slavery Act 2018 established a robust transparency framework to drive business action to identify and address modern slavery risks in supply chains. Supply chains are incredibly complex. They are interconnected and criss-cross the world, and, until everyone is being transparent, it's hard for everyone to be completely transparent, but those actions must continue.
The government notes the recent report by the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade of its inquiry into the use of sanctions to address human rights abuse, and is considering its response to the report and its recommendations. The government is committed to monitoring, evaluating and reviewing its actions to combat modern slavery to ensure it is delivering a targeted, effective response. In particular, the government will continue to monitor reports of forced labour globally, including in Xinjiang, to assess Australia's policy settings and to engage with stakeholders and partners with a view to supporting international efforts to reduce the risk of modern slavery, including forced labour in Australia's supply chains.
The Modern Slavery Act, which entered into force on 1 January 2019, aims to combat modern slavery in global supply chains of Australian goods and services by increasing supply chain transparency and holding large businesses publicly accountable for their actions to combat modern slavery. It does this by providing public visibility to businesses, civil society, NGOs and consumers about modern slavery risks that have been identified and the actions taken by reporting entities to address those risks. The act requires large entities operating in Australia—that is, companies with a turnover of over $100 million annually—to prepare an annual modern slavery statement. Those statements set out their actions to identify and address modern slavery risks in their global operations and supply chains. The government estimates that approximately 3,000 entities will be required to report under the act, including globally recognised brands and the Commonwealth. Many of these entities are likely to have supply-chain links with China, including entities in the textiles, electronics and vehicle manufacturing sectors. Under the act, the government has established an online register of modern slavery statements. The register is a government-run central depository of all statements submitted under the act. The government published the first tranche of those statements on 27 November 2020 and continues to regularly publish tranches of statements as they are received. To date, approximately 400 statements have been published on the register.
In implementing the act, the government has engaged proactively with business and civil society to provide detailed, comprehensive and practical guidance to support entities to understand the modern slavery risks in supply chains and operations and to take actions to address these risks and report on their actions in compliance with the act. To support an understanding of the modern slavery risk in compliance with the act, the government actively undertakes outreach to Australian entities on risks related to modern slavery in supply chains. Agencies, including the Border Force and DFAT, engage closely with peak bodies and individual businesses, both in Australia and overseas, as well as with officials from state and territory governments, to raise awareness of relevant supply chain risks.
The government encourages Australian companies and institutions to conduct appropriate due diligence specific to their industries to satisfy themselves at board level that their commercial and other arrangements are consistent with legislation and international standards. Australia's approach to combating modern slavery is grounded in the United Nations' guiding principles on business and human rights—the UNGPs, as they're called. In line with those principles, the government encourages entities to work collaboratively with suppliers to address modern slavery risks and ensure responses prioritise the best interests of victims, no matter where they are.
The government takes a country-agnostic approach in its efforts to address modern slavery. In this way, the government recognises that all instances of modern slavery—whether forced labour, servitude or forced marriage—in any country or region are egregious and necessary to address.
The government is committed to ensuring the act provides a strong and effective mechanism for addressing modern slavery risks, and the government reports annually to the parliament on the implementation of and compliance with the act. The government is required to review the act in 2022, next year, including whether it is necessary to amend the act to improve its operation. This will include consideration of compliance, penalties and other complementary measures. The government will consider bringing forward, if required, further legislation.
Modern slavery can affect any country. The United Nations estimates that there are more than 40 million victims of modern slavery worldwide. Over half of these are exploited in the Asia-Pacific region, where the supply chains of a significant number of large businesses operating in Australia are based. Modern slavery in supply chains also distorts global markets, undercuts responsible businesses and imposes significant legal and reputational risks for companies.
Like Senator Patrick, the government is concerned that there may be parts of Australian businesses relying on supply chains that have links to slavery. This government is committed to ensuring that, no matter where the practice of slavery or forced labour occurs, Australian businesses are not linked to it in any manner. While this government believes in and appreciates the intent of this bill put forward by Senator Patrick, the bill as it currently stands cannot be supported.
Eliminating slavery and human rights abuses is a global necessity as a society, and we must ensure that we are not inadvertently supporting it. This is why we're conducting a review of the Modern Slavery Act next year. As I've said, the Modern Slavery Act creates a framework for businesses to drive them to act in ways that eliminate slavery from their supply chains and their operations. When this was introduced, it was a world-first step which demonstrated the government's commitment to taking real and serious action to combat modern slavery. As it currently stands, large businesses are already required under the Modern Slavery Act to identify how their operations and supply chains may contribute to modern slavery and explain what they are doing to address those risks, no matter where that risk occurs. This increased transparency creates a level playing field for large businesses to disclose their modern slavery risks. I believe that, if we're going to do something, especially on an issue as important as this, it must be done right.
I note the intention of the bill is to take a strong stand against the documented human rights abuses of hundreds of thousands of Uighur people in Xinjiang province in China. As the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women, Senator Marise Payne, has said, Australia is deeply concerned by the reports of human rights violations and abuses in Xinjiang. However, modern slavery risks are not limited to any single region or country, and business action to assess and address these risks should not be limited to any geographical region. I don't think there would be anyone here in the chamber today or in this parliament who would not support the intention of this bill, that being ensuring we are not supporting slavery anywhere in the world. However, as I said earlier, I believe if we're going to act against this issue it must be done right to ensure that it properly addresses the issue globally.
Senator CICCONE (Victoria—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (11:34): [by video link] I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Forced Labour) Bill 2021, and in doing so I wish to thank Senator Patrick for the consideration he has given to the feedback provided by Labor senators and others through the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee in its inquiry into the previous iteration of this bill. Certainly, the narrow focus of the Customs Amendment (Banning Goods Produced By Uyghur Forced Labour) Bill 2020 responded to a very real and concerning matter—namely, the servitude forced on the Uighur people and others by the Communist Party of China. Nonetheless, as abhorrent as that example is, sadly, the Uighur are not the only people throughout the world subject to such practices by oppressive governments, and it is right that any legislation which comes from this parliament should address this as well.
This new bill implements the committee's recommendation by amending the Customs Act to impose an absolute ban on the importation of goods produced in whole or in part by forced labour. It is general in nature and does not specify any geographic origin for its application. Should this bill become law—as I hope it will, along with the amendments that will be proposed by Senator Keneally—it will ensure that goods which are produced by those who are subject to servitude will be subject to penalties akin to those applied to the importation of other goods designated as prohibited imports under the Customs Act.
As a regional power, Australia has an important role to play in combating the scourge of modern slavery globally but also, most particularly, in our region, the Asia-Pacific. Labor has always been committed to showing leadership on this issue, which is why we on this side campaigned for an Australian modern slavery act; moved amendments to the Modern Slavery Bill in 2018 to improve its effectiveness and introduce penalties for noncompliance; and sought to establish an independent antislavery commissioner. Unfortunately, those on the treasury bench have shirked our nation's responsibility on this very important issue. The government have not supported our amendments and, as the facts on the conditions facing the Uighur people and others throughout the world have become known, they have failed to act.
As mentioned by Senator Watt, it was estimated by the Global Slavery Index in 2018 that there were approximately 40 million people living in modern slavery conditions, with over half of these being in forced labour specifically. We would never accept workers in our country being subject to such conditions in the manufacturing of Australian goods, and thankfully, with the presence of strong unions, we can safeguard against such conditions developing. It is why I support the need for a free and democratic trade union movement not just here in Australia but right around the world.
However, whilst we may set this standard for ourselves, it is important that we apply the same standard to those goods which, whilst produced abroad, nonetheless make their way into many Australian homes and businesses. No Australian home should have whitegoods that have been made by forced labour. No Australian businesses should be supplied by manufacturers who engage in forced labour practices. For that matter, no state government of this country should continue, simply because it would cost too much to find another contractor, with the purchase of train parts from Chinese suppliers that are linked to the exploited Uighur workers.
There is no denying that it can sometimes be difficult to call out the behaviour of others. To do so often requires great courage and, for some who lack this courage, the task may appear too great. When former Prime Minister Bob Hawke called out the massacre of democracy protesters by the Communist Party of China in Tiananmen Square and offered sanctuary to Chinese visa holders in Australia, this took courage. Australia should never be a country that lacks courage. We have a very proud history of leadership. We should be true to this legacy in how we govern our actions today.
The conditions of Uighur people in Xinjiang province, in the People's Republic of China, are unacceptable. Under the leadership of the Communist Party, Uighurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz and other Muslim groups are subjected to extensive state-sponsored repression and human rights abuses, including mass arbitrary detention, rape, sterilisation, political indoctrination, cultural destruction and mass surveillance. This is not a contention. This is not an assertion. This is a simple fact.
A 2020 report released by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute found that there were 27 factories in nine Chinese provinces that had Uighur labour forcibly transferred from Xinjiang since 2017. And, according to the ASPI, these factories form part of the supply chains of 82 well-known global brands in the technology, clothing and automotive sectors. As Dr Michael Clarke, an associate professor at the Australian National University focused on the history and politics of Xinjiang, told a committee inquiry into an earlier iteration of this bill, Xinjiang is the site of the largest mass-repressing of an ethnic and/or religious minority in the world today.
I'm pleased to see that international condemnation of this behaviour has been growing. In July 2020 the United Kingdom delivered a cross-regional statement on Hong Kong and Xinjiang on behalf of 27 countries that, among others, mattered. It called for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to be allowed meaningful access to Xinjiang to assess the circumstances of the Uighur people. In October 2020, at the United Nations committee on social, humanitarian and cultural issues, Germany delivered a statement on behalf of 39 countries criticising the treatment of Muslim ethnic groups in Xinjiang. Later, in March 2021, the European Union, Britain, Canada and the United States of America launched coordinated sanctions against Chinese officials involved in human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
We must also do our bit. This is an issue that cannot be ignored and, again, I reiterate: the case of Xinjiang's particularly egregious forced labour is not just limited to this part of the world; it is found in many others—Eritrea, North Korea, Burundi. It is in parts of the world, near and far, and, wherever it is, it must not be tolerated. Wherever it is, we must stand up. That is why I support this bill. Whilst it is not, in itself, a total solution, as Senator Watt has articulated, and whilst Labor will seek to make amendments to improve its operation, it is a positive first step, which is why I commend this bill to the Senate.
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (11:42): I move:
That the question be now put.
Question agreed to.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator O'Neill ): The question now is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Watt be agreed to. Is a division required? Senator Smith?
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (11:43): I draw to the attention of the Senate that, because of the pandemic context in which we're operating, there has been discussion between whips about how to manage divisions in the chamber. It's the President's desire to manage them as best we can, avoiding the physical participation of senators as far as possible. If I might share with you, it's the government's position to oppose the second reading amendment. I understand, and have it in written form, that it's Senator Hanson's and Senator Roberts' position to oppose the second reading amendment as well. It may well be, at this point, an opportune time to identify what other senators may be opposing the amendment and what senators might be supporting the second reading amendment.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It's news to me. Could you hold for a moment? I'll take some advice from the Clerk.
I'll ask the Opposition Whip to indicate if you are willing to proceed in the way that has been outlined by Senator Smith or if, in the first instance, we proceed with a division and give the whip sufficient time to clarify the position.
Senator KIM CARR (Victoria) (11:45): by leave—On the basis of what's just been indicated to the chamber, it was clear that this division would be lost by the opposition. So long as our position in terms of the motion is recorded, I think it would be acceptable to proceed without a formal division on this particular question.
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (11:45): by leave—I indicate that the Greens support this second reading amendment.
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (11:45): by leave—I indicate I'm supporting Labor's second reading amendment.
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (11:46): With those positions now known to the chamber, consistent with the pairing arrangements, the second reading amendment will have been negatived.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you for that assertion. In this instance, I might actually take confirmation from the whip for the Labor Party that that is your view at this point in time.
Senator KIM CARR (Victoria) (11:46): That would be correct, on the basis of what has been indicated on the floor of the chamber.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: In that case, in this extraordinary situation, I declare the amendment lost.
Question negatived.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question is that the bill be now read a second time.
Question agreed to.
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (11:47): by leave—I just want it recorded that the government opposes the second reading.
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (11:47): by leave—Just to be clear, I am supporting my own bill.
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (11:47): by leave—Although I did shout 'aye', I want to make sure that the Greens are recorded as supporting this bill.
Bill read a second time.
Third Reading
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator O'Neill ) (11:47): No amendments have been circulated.
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (11:48): If there are no amendments and there is no committee stage, I move:
That this bill be now read a third time.
Question agreed to.
Bill read a third time.
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (11:49): It may well be that Senator Roberts would like the position of One Nation recorded on Senator Patrick's private senator's bill. Madam Acting Deputy President O'Neill, I think you'll find that Senator Hanson supported Senator Patrick's private senator's bill, and it's probably prudent to have that position recorded in the Hansard. But that's for Senator Roberts to disclose.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Smith. Senator Roberts, are you seeking the call?
Senator ROBERTS (Queensland) (11:50): by leave—I ask that Hansard record that Senator Hanson and I supported Senator Patrick's bill.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That matter is noted. Thank you, Senator Roberts.
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2021
Second Reading
Consideration resumed of the motion:
That these bills be now read a second time.
to which the following amendment was moved:
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes that:
(a) the Government has known about the impending decommissioning of a range of offshore assets in Australian waters since it was first elected eight years ago;
(b) while this legislation compels the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority to regulate the financial assurance capabilities of offshore oil and gas producers, the Government has not provided any additional funding to the agency to undertake this critical task;
(c) the current legislation fails to include a comprehensive definition of what the permitted alternatives to complete removal requirements will be, making it possible for pipelines and concrete structures to be left in place without certainty over environmental, safety and well integrity outcomes; and
(d) the Government's lackadaisical approach to decommissioning reform has resulted in Australian taxpayers footing the bill for the Northern Endeavour fiasco, which has to date wasted $210 million of public money".
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (11:51): I rise to speak on the proposed legislation, which amends the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act. I note that this amending legislation, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2021, basically deals with a number of different problems that have been created by the conduct of a number of oil and gas companies.
I want to start by saying that we have a really big problem in this country, and that is that we are having our resources produced, extracted and, in the case of LNG, turned into liquefied form and shipped off overseas and we are getting almost no return. We know that, in 2018-19, $62 billion of oil and gas was exported from this country, and the Australian taxpayer, the owner of the resources, got $1 billion in petroleum resource rent tax in return. Of the $62 billion of taxpayers' resource that was shifted off overseas, the taxpayer got $1 billion—that's it. Now, if people don't recognise that that is a problem, then we are beyond help.
That is the situation with all of our oil and gas wealth. If we were to look at how others, particularly places like Norway and Qatar, have done in relation to the oil and gas that they extract from their economic exclusion zones or their territories, they have done substantially better than us. Norway have over a trillion dollars in their sovereign wealth fund, and most of that has come from the return that they get from the extraction from underneath the North Sea of the resources of the citizens of Norway.
We have done a really poor job. In fact, a committee that's looking into oil and gas and whether or not we're maximising the benefit for Australians found that it's likely that, on the numbers, the return to the taxpayer on our oil and gas is minus 36 per cent. We actually lose money by extracting oil and gas, because we end up subsidising the oil and gas industry through tax write offs and other such support. The oil and gas industry, who are mostly multinationals, then take the resource and send it off overseas. Exxon Mobil, according to its tax transparency data, had $42 billion of revenue over the last five or so years, and they've paid not a cent in corporate tax. If anyone doesn't see that there's a problem with this—and I'm sure the Greens will stand up, quite rightly, and say that as well as not getting any money for it, as well as having to subsidise the industry, of course all of that oil and gas then goes off overseas to be consumed and used and producing carbon emissions. There might be some argument if the Australian population were getting huge benefits from this and had been getting huge benefits from this, but there is basically no reason whatsoever for us to want to, in any way, produce oil and gas in this country because nothing comes back to the taxpayer. It's a fundamental problem.
My understanding of the nature of this bill is it seeks to close off a loophole in relation to stranded assets. A good example of where this has been a problem is in the case of the Northern Endeavour. The NorthernEndeavour was owned by a company related to Woodside, and a few years ago they sold the tenement—in fact, legally correctly, they sold the company that owned the tenement. Had they sought to sell the tenement, that would have invoked a whole range of analysis by NOPTA to make sure that the company that was taking it over was financially sound, but, instead, it was just a change of shareholding at the company level. Low and behold, we ended up with a company called NOGA, Northern Oil & Gas Australia, owning the asset NorthernEndeavour and, indeed, the tenement, and the allegation is that they didn't have the capital to actually operate the field. What we saw happen was, in 2019, NOPSEMA issued a prohibition notice against the company after a component fell onto the deck, so it was a safety issue—and I genuinely understand it was a safety issue—but the company basically then was put in a position where it didn't have any cash flow because it wasn't producing oil and it didn't really have a pathway out of the prohibition notice. For three or four months the company operated, trying to remedy the situation. What happened was the company ended up having to go into administration. The story thus far: Woodside sells an ageing asset to a company at a peppercorn price, that company operates to a point where they get a prohibition notice and that drives them into liquidation. The interesting thing here is I had a conversation with NOPSEMA at estimates back in, I think it was, October of 2019, saying, 'If you don't help this company come out of the prohibition that it's in, if you don't lay out on the table what they need to fix with the platform, then what will happen is the company will go into administration and the taxpayer will end up carrying the can, having to deal with an asset and all of the different structures on the sea bed, and that would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.' And the head of NOPSEMA, Mr Smith, said to me, 'No, that won't happen, Senator.' You know what? A month later it did! It did happen, and the company went into administration, and, of course, we ended up with a situation where the taxpayer has had to take over the operation of the NorthernEndeavour. So, right now, in the Timor Sea, we have a vessel, an FPSO, that is being operated by the Australian taxpayer in lighthouse mode, costing something in the order of $10 million a month—it might be somewhere between $5 million and $10 million. That's an astounding fact. I think, at the last count, it was $80 million of taxpayers' money that had been spent operating a vessel in lighthouse mode, and that does not include the cost to remedy the vessel, to remove the vessel and to return the sea floor back to its original state. That's likely to run into a billion dollars. Of course, the government has announced that it's going to try and claw that back from the industry. But I can tell you that the events that took place with the Northern Endeavour, which are the driving factor behind this bill, were known before the Northern Endeavour situation occurred. So it's quite unexplainable how we got into this mess and how the taxpayer has borne the cost of all this.
Whilst I will be supporting this bill, I can't not mention the total failure of government in terms of dealing with this whole circumstance. I say that this vessel, with a bit of help—far less than the money that had been spent—could have been kept in production, could have kept employing Australians and could have kept contributing to our fuel security situation because of the storage that was on the Northern Endeavour as a vessel. Unfortunately, this has just been a big sink for the Australian taxpayer. It's not a good situation. So, in the end, I'll be supporting this bill, but I foreshadow that, in the committee stage, I will be moving an amendment that looks at transparency. I'll talk to that amendment when the time comes, but, to give you a bit of a tip, it simply deals with things like production data, with requiring a company to basically say: 'This is how much I am producing. This is how much is left in the tenement'—useful information to shareholders and useful information to Australian taxpayers, who actually are the owners of the resource. I know that some on the other side may say, 'Whoa—that's company information.' But you know what? When you come along and you talk to the Australian government and you say, 'I'd like to extract some resource from your EEZ,' there's a cost to that in terms of your transparency with the Australian public. When we get to that point in the committee stage, I'll certainly be drawing out the findings of ACIL Allen in relation to whether or not this information should be held secret.
Anyway, I won't delay the chamber any further. I will be supporting the bill, but I will also be moving amendments to it.
Senator SMALL (Western Australia) (12:02): I acknowledge at the outset that I am a former Woodside employee. That's a matter of public record, but it is important to be transparent with the chamber. I also acknowledge the decency and integrity of Senator Whish-Wilson, who, in a wide-ranging assessment of the bill—an assessment that I mostly disagree with—did have the honesty to acknowledge that Woodside, a company that features very relevantly in this conversation, has been a very significant Australian taxpayer—indeed, contributing $4.9 billion in income tax and royalties in the five years from 2013 to 2018 and then, more recently, $493 million in 2018, $583 million in 2019 and $707 million in 2020. I think that is important context as we consider the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021, which makes the necessary legislative changes to the act to implement some aspects of the department's enhanced decommissioning framework and the relevant recommendations from the independent Review of the Circumstances That Led to the Administration of the Northern Oil & Gas Australia (NOGA) Group of Companies, otherwise known as the Walker review.
As part of the Morrison government, I do support these very important steps in the right direction, but, as a Western Australian, as someone who was part of the industry and as a taxpayer, I am concerned that the conversation can't stop here. Decommissioning is a very significant issue for the nation, and, indeed, we must take steps to ensure that Australian taxpayers and Australians derive the maximum benefit from the exploitation of these resources. On that, I totally agree with Senator Patrick. I suspect we might disagree on the mechanisms.
What have we got so far? We've got a bill that provides a trailing liability by expanding the remedial directions and provisions in the act. That requires any former titleholder or related person, which is a broadening of the definition, to carry out decommissioning if the current or immediate former titleholder is unable to do so. Whilst that is a measure of last resort where all other regulatory options have been exhausted, it does aim to ensure that the risks and liabilities of petroleum exploitation remain the responsibility of those who have been involved in the project. The bill increases regulatory oversight and scrutiny by providing for specific decision-making criteria to ensure that the entities are and, importantly, remain suitable to undertake petroleum project activities. So, in all, this bill is very sensible in taking those steps towards ensuring that the situation we've seen with NOGA and the Northern Endeavour is not repeated. However, in light of my comments that this is just the beginning, let me outline some of the important facts.
The decommissioning liability in Australia has been modelled at more than $60 billion of expenditure over the next 30 years. Assets in the North West Shelf and Bass Strait comprise the vast majority, some 73 per cent, of that estimated $60 billion liability. There is an opportunity to materially reduce this cost with smart regulation, industry cooperation and the adoption of best practice here in Australia. Australian legislation, in my view, does not provide adequate guidance on the decommissioning options that are most in tune with international best practice, and I fear that the impact is to Australian taxpayers if we don't amend the current statute position on the mandatory removal of all infrastructure, which I do acknowledge is worked around by NOPSEMA, which uses regulatory processes to appropriately approve alternative arrangements.
In her last contribution on this bill, Senator Brown, on behalf of the Labor Party, did clearly articulate how little they understand of the resources industry and how their concern is partisan politics on this issue and not being wedged by the Greens. Their interests are not acting on behalf of Australian taxpayers, who potentially fundamentally forgo 58c in the dollar where decommissioning spend is deductible against both company income tax and PRRT, meaning that a significant proportion of decommissioning costs—as much as $17.8 billion in the next 10 years alone—is borne by Australian taxpayers through taxation relief, perfectly lawfully and perfectly legitimately. That's a massive number: $17.8 billion in the next 10 years. The economic benefit, when you consider that liability, is premised on the regulatory default of full removal of all infrastructure, particularly as it relates to the removal of long-distance export pipelines and interfield pipelines—we're talking about steel and concrete here—where clear alternatives exist internationally. Limiting decommissioning activities to the preparation, disconnection, cleaning and site remediation to leave all export and interfield pipelines in place would save some $9 billion on the overall liability alone. These are pipelines that have existed on the sea floor for some 40 years, in some cases, and they have formed natural habitats. They not only attract industry through enhanced fish stocks but are important to local communities in regional Australia in supporting the community recreation that's associated with those areas.
That is the magnitude of what we're talking about here: billions of dollars of forgone tax revenue, an impact to the environment that makes no sense whatsoever and an impact to our regional Australian communities. Implementing alternative arrangements for pipelines alone would save the taxpayer some $5.2 billion. We must also talk in terms of the environmental impact because, at the end of the day, everyone that comes to this place enjoys Australia's pristine ocean environment. As a Western Australian who's visited Exmouth and Coral Bay on the site of the world-famous Ningaloo reef, I associate with that deeply. But the oil and gas infrastructure we're talking about is often under water for decades and is covered in marine life. Requiring operators to fully remove that infrastructure doesn't always make environmental sense.
Few studies of the environmental impact of leaving the infrastructure offshore in situ in Australia have been completed and that's a problem. However, studies from comparable international environments are already available. Under controlled guidelines, there is reasonable evidence already available which shows that, in some circumstances, leaving offshore infrastructure in situ or partially removing it is not only sufficient but, in fact, better for the ocean environment as compared to complete removal. There are multiple factors which need to be weighed, and that makes decommissioning a complex matter. It shouldn't be a partisan political football because of the impact to Australians.
Some examples of those environmental benefits include: attracting fish at all stages, whether adult, larval or juvenile fish, including commercially significant species; providing a spawning habitat for marine life; and introducing hard surfaces, which allow for greater marine biodiversity. Marine life that thrives at varying depths often settles along vertical infrastructure in locations that would not normally be available due to the prevailing water depth. Infrastructure can provide shelter, protection from fisheries and a natural protection, thereby enhancing production levels of commercially significant fish species within a region. Creating those artificial reefs also provides fishing, tourism and community amenity in regional Australia.
The concern that any proposed change to the act permitting in-situ decommissioning is inconsistent with our obligations as a signatory to the London convention is, frankly, rubbish. Indeed, the United Kingdom has world best practice legislation to deal with decommissioning liabilities and they are, of course, where the London protocol was signed. In fact, the UK's decommissioning legislation, which requires that a consideration and advice on alternatives to abandoning or decommissioning where it comes to the installation or pipelines, such as reusing or preserving it, is enshrined in the United Kingdom's legislation. That's what we are talking about here—other jurisdictions who have already taken steps to recognise not only the environmental but the economic, community and social factors that this issue raises.
Considering that the United Kingdom is not alone in this, with the United States, Norway and Japan already employing these best practices, the Australian oil and gas industry is in need of further legislative reform. Those other nations are slightly ahead of Australia's industry because their oil and gas assets are slightly older; therefore, they are further advanced in the decommissioning phase of their infrastructure life cycle, but they are tangible examples that show that these improved methods can be sustainably implemented. It's noteworthy that not only the United Kingdom but also Norway, the United States and Japan are fellow signatories to the London protocol.
So whilst I understand that this bill is an important and positive step to developing a solution to preventing recurrence of the Northern Endeavour situation, it's important in my view that the research and advice to the department be pulled together, along with consultation with industry experts and stakeholders, and should be considered, invested in. It warrants further consideration. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but it is not the destination in which Australian taxpayers need us to go. When you consider the looming task of a maturing offshore oil and gas industry, assets and the related financial liabilities associated, these growing demands do require our attention quite urgently. That number of $17.8 billion of taxation revenue foregone in the next 10 years sticks very clearly in my mind when it comes to paying for the sorts of services and investments that Australia needs as we move beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
I welcome this legislation and I am here to advocate that we further consider in a more holistic way the needs of decommissioning so that it is balancing environmental, economic, social and community factors in what is a complex and nuanced area of Australian legislation. I commend this bill to the Senate.
Senator O'NEILL (New South Wales) (12:14): I have no declaration of having worked for any of the big oil or mining companies across this country. I'm just a humble teacher and a lecturer in education from the Central Coast, with a small-business family background. But, nonetheless, I understand what it means when you come into government to have a really good look at what's going on, get in the race early, not wait until the last minute, see what's going on and prevent the situation that we are coming in here to correct today. And make no mistake: this is a correction of a failure of government to see what was going on and to bring in a timely bill a long, long time before this day to prevent the matter that it's seeking to use as a historical moment for a change going forward.
There are lots of concerns about retrospective legislation. You can understand why there's pressure against that. But the only reason there would be pressure for this to be retrospective is that the government weren't on the job. Anything that really matters they don't do until it's too late, and then they do it in the most untidy way. So let's just have a look at this bill which does seek to do something good finally but is once again too little too late by a government who are obsessed with announcements over actually doing the day job of showing up properly, planning and delivering legislation in a timely way to benefit the people of Australia. The cost to the Australian people of this delay is $200 million. So it costs when you don't show up. It costs when you don't get to the starting line. It costs when you don't do your day job and you're the government.
So I rise today to speak on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021. It is, as I said, a reform in dealing with offshore equipment and infrastructure that helps prevent companies from dodging their corporate responsibility and to do what every kid learns even at preschool, to clean up after yourself, after they have extracted the nation's resource wealth. Even Senator Small in his contribution spoke about Australia being behind not just because our assets are a little younger than the assets of the UK, Norway, the US and Japan but because this government doesn't think it needs to do stuff to protect Australia. It thinks it just needs to show up, be in power, give itself a few little pockets of money that it can rort and send out and that will do. It thinks that's good enough. Well, it is not good enough.
This piece of legislation is particularly relevant when we consider the recent debacle surrounding the Northern Endeavour. This was an oil vessel that was anchored in the Timor Sea, a beautiful part of the country. But it's going to cost the taxpayers $200 million to clean up after its inexperienced owner purchased the platform from Woodside. That owner, Northern Oil & Gas Australia Pty Ltd, was then forced to close after the national offshore environment authority, known as NOPSEMA, found that there were a lot of significant environmental and safety concerns that were associated with the Northern Endeavour. What were those concerns? One was corrosion. Another was the ability to respond to an oil spill. Another was a faulty fire suppression system and a significant risk of a major incident occurring. Remember where this is. It's in the Timor Sea. You don't have to be a mining executive to have some sense of value not just of what's under the seabed but of the sea itself and its amazing environmental asset base.
The decision, unfortunately, forces the taxpayer to fund the cost of decommissioning and the environmental clean-up and it leads to calls for a change to the regime by which titles are transferred. So, essentially, the company, Woodside, that owned it and could have paid for a clean-up got rid of it just in the nick of time, according to its calculations, before it went to a smaller company that was unable to do the maintenance and the clean-up. What's the impact? Unfortunately, it forces the taxpayer to fund the cost of decommissioning and the environmental clean-up and it leads to calls to change the regime by which a title can be transferred from a big, smart company with a whole lot of lawyers and an awful lot of money to a smaller company with fewer assets and perhaps a lot of innovation, desire and enterprise but less capacity to do the job of cleaning up. And it's clear, retrospectively, that NOGA didn't have the experience or the capital necessary to effectively manage the title.
Clearly, the current legislative framework is totally insufficient, and sensible reform is needed. The bill establishes four key reforms to the current regime. It provides for oversight of changes that occur in control of titles, and now includes offshore projects being transferred by the sale of shares—so somebody is going to be watching. The bill also includes electronic lodgement of applications and provides for expanded information-gathering powers to assess the suitability of entities wishing to enter the title regime—so somebody is going to be watching; previously they weren't. Finally, and most importantly, it expands existing powers to recall previous titleholders and decommission infrastructure and remediate the marine environment if the current titleholder is unable to do so. So if you were responsible for it and somebody else gets it and it starts to fall apart you don't just hand over your responsibility; that's really what's going on with one of the core parts of this bill.
I'm hopeful that the last reform I mentioned there will change the industry attitude by increasing the due diligence that is required of companies when they decide that they are going to offload the title; they can't just dump the problem on the next person and run away with the profits. There is nothing wrong with profit-making from investment in oil and gas; there is innovation there, and there are resource needs in our communities. But people who are in those responsible roles as the leaders of these big companies, which too frequently are multinational companies not Australian owned companies, cannot 'cut and run' and leave the Australian people with a tax bill. We can't afford to be spending money to clean up for these big companies; they should be doing it themselves.
I also note that the federal government has proposed a levy on the industry to fund the decommissioning of the Northern Endeavour. This policy debacle that we are discussing here has led to a new tax on the industry due to the gap in the previous legislation and the fact that the government didn't show up to do its day job around this issue of protecting our environment from leaky assets that are past their use-by date.
The new legislation means that those industry players who are doing the right thing, who play by the rules, are not unnecessarily penalised by the short-sighted actions of the few—at least, that's the plan. According to the explanatory memorandum, the new regime will ensure trailing liability across the entire life of the lease and expands the remedial directions provision in the OPGGS Act to require any former titleholder or related person of a current or former titleholder to carry out decommissioning if the current or immediate former titleholder is unable to do so. Trailing liability will be a measure of last resort where all other regulatory options have been exhausted. It aims to ensure that the risks and liabilities of petroleum activities remain the responsibility of those who held title, or have the ability to influence operations under the title, and to change industry behaviour by increasing the due diligence undertaking by companies in regard to who they sell the assets to. I think it's altogether fair and reasonable for companies that have profited from the extraction of our petroleum wealth to make their contribution to remediating the site. In the case of Northern Endeavour, it extracted 200 million barrels of oil, nearly $15 billion of oil in today's prices. It's obscene that, after that lucrative cargo is collected, ordinary Australian families should have to fork out $200 million in taxes to remediate that site.
APPEA, the industry's peak body, believes that rehabilitating all former oil rigs in Australia would cost, as Senator Small indicated, about $60 billion by 2040. So we've got to get this right and it's got to be fixed quickly. This is in fact a ticking time bomb for Australian taxpayers. And this legislation goes only some way—not all the way—to ensuring that this burden doesn't fall on everyday Australians but, rather, on the entity responsible for the infrastructure and the associated works required for rehabilitation. Without effective action, we could potentially see the phenomenon I've just been discussing of the Northern Endeavour proliferating right across the sector—as many mining companies have done—where oil giants dump soon-to-be-decommissioned assets onto dollar companies and then abdicate all responsibility for remediation of sites, leaving taxpayers footing multimillion dollar invoices. In my home state of New South Wales alone, the Audit Office of New South Wales found in 2017 that security deposits of the state's 450 mines 'do not include sufficient contingency, given the substantial risks and uncertainties associated with mine rehabilitation and closure' to fill in their voids or maintain vegetation when operations cease. Current practices support endeavour, entrepreneurship and jobs, but when you've made your money and the clean-up needs to be done, it is entirely unreasonable to ask someone else to do the job unless you pay them to do so.
Labor will be supporting this bill, as tardily as it has arrived. We support it because we believe in corporate responsibility and we absolutely believe in the health of the marine environment. I want to shout out to people back home on the Central Coast, where I haven't been now for six weeks. I'm missing my community and I'm missing seeing that beautiful ocean, the great Pacific Ocean, every single day. One of the most wonderful things about Australia is our abundant flora and fauna both on the land and in the sea. An oil spill off the coast would absolutely jeopardise our beloved, pristine maritime and marine environment, as well as thousands of tourist jobs.
Fear of an oil spill is why my local community on the Central Coast is so afraid of the development of the PEP 11 exploration permit, which they fear will blot the landscape as well as put us at risk of an environmental disaster on the Central Coast, not far from Newcastle and Sydney. After years of delay, the local member for Robertson, Ms Wicks, and Mr Morrison finally got the message from the community and put a message out via the media that they personally oppose PEP 11. But the gap between what this government says and what it then actually does widens by the day. It's more of a chasm, really, than a gap. I do note, however, that neither Mr Morrison nor Ms Wicks have responsibility for making an announcement about PEP 11. That goes to Minister Pitt.
Minister Pitt's deafening silence on the matter of PEP 11 licence extensions is very troubling to the people of the Central Coast. As a true Central Coast resident, I call on Minister Pitt to come clean, issue a public statement and, once and for all, rule out PEP 11. The Central Coast needs to have this sword of Damocles removed from over our heads. Keep our breaches pristine and unpolluted. Tell the truth, Minister Pitt; put it on the record. Put it in writing so that the community can actually be confident that there's no gap between the weasel words of the Prime Minister and Ms Wicks and the action of the government that Mr Morrison leads.
Despite the PM's impressionistic effort to look like he's with the Central Coast community, this failure to direct Minister Pitt to end the PEP 11 oil threat is real. Minister Pitt has the power to cut PEP 11 out of our lives, out of our environment, out of our pristine coastal waters and out of our community. Like a cancer, PEP 11 needs to be cut out right now, no mucking about, no ifs, no buts, no hints, no maybes—just gone.
Once again, with the Morrison government it's a minute late and a dollar short. As always with this government, their lack of leadership, their poor management, always has a cost.
The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 should not have been triggered by a potential catastrophe in the Timor Sea. But we do have this legislation. We do have it before us at last. Thankfully, the government—perhaps having listened to wise public servants, who they so often seem to ignore—have come to the table in an effort to prevent future disasters. It's still going to cost the Australian people $200 million to fix up the Northern Endeavour problem that happened on the watch of this government. Well, it was supposed to be on the watch of this government; they actually weren't watching.
I commend the bill to the floor of the house, but in doing so, I note that there was an announcement of an industry-wide levy of 48c a barrel, which I referred to in my previous remarks. To the best of my knowledge, there is no bill, which would be a Treasury bill, that has been brought to the parliament to actually do the next vital step of the parliament— (Time expired)
Senator WATERS (Queensland—Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate) (12:29): [by video link] I rise to speak on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2021. These bills strengthen Australia's offshore oil and gas regulatory regime by ensuring that the decommissioning of oil rigs is managed effectively and the cost—the immense cost—of that decommissioning doesn't fall to the taxpayer. It also clarifies the application of levies in relation to cross-boundary greenhouse gas titles.
These bills came about after the owner of the Northern Endeavour, Northern Oil & Gas, went into liquidation in February last year after being shut down the previous year by the offshore oil and gas regulator, after it had found corrosion issues that could have led to a major accident causing multiple fatalities and environmental damage. The facility was previously owned by Woodside, which had sold the Northern Endeavour to Northern Oil & Gas as a late-in-life asset just three years prior to the shutdown. This bill is really only part of the fix, with APPEA's position being that the cost liability in our offshore waters runs to some $60 billion over the next 30 years, so Woodside is once again getting off lightly. It has spread its liabilities right across the entire gas industry. The Greens will support this legislation because extracting any tax from the gas industry is like getting blood from a stone, particularly when the Australian Taxation Office has called the gas industry systemic non-payers of tax. There are billions in subsidies to the gas industry and freebies to avoid paying the petroleum resource rent tax. What a dud deal the gas industry is for the Australian taxpayer, not to mention the climate.
Whilst we'll be supporting this bill, we're not going to gloss over what Woodside is getting away with here. It donates at least $110,000 each year to each major party year in and year out. Over the last decade $2.1 million has been handed over by Woodside to the Liberal, National and Labor parties. That's quite a lot of influence.
Remember when the Howard government planted a bug in the cabinet room of East Timor's cabinet? It was for the commercial advantage of Woodside. The foreign minister at the time, Alexander Downer, went to work for Woodside after leaving parliament. Australia spied on a vulnerable foreign government to advance the interests of this gas company, and the only ones that are now paying for the price for that are, of course, witness K and Bernard Collaery, who exposed it. This government then scrapped the carbon price, which Woodside, as Australia's ninth-biggest polluter, had to pay, saving the company millions a year. Now this bill will save Woodside a bucketload yet again. We're in this mess because Woodside offloaded an old rig, the Northern Endeavour, to a fly-by-nighter—who went bankrupt within a very short time of acquiring the assets—so Woodside could conveniently avoid the decommissioning costs. Woodside has privatised the profits and socialised the losses, as so often happens in the mining industry. Any sense of justice says that they should pay the full costs, but a long-term levy on the industry for decommissioning is the next best solution.
There are so many gaps in the government's knowledge. We need a forensic audit of orphan wells and temporary plugs because the government doesn't know where they all are. Who's responsible for those? How many more of these assets are there going to be for future generations to decommission? There are hundreds of production platforms around this country, including in Bass Strait off the coast of Tasmania, and even Victoria's iconic Twelve Apostles are now under assault. The Victoria Labor government is on the brink of allowing new gas drilling on Keerray Woorroong country in the Port Campbell National Park, right near the Twelve Apostles, which comes just weeks after the federal Liberal government opened up vast areas for drilling just six kilometres from the Twelve Apostles. The Victorian state government should immediately withdraw support for new gas drilling in our pristine oceans and on land, including at the Twelve Apostles National Park. The Victorian government should reject the application by Beach Energy to begin gas production in Victorian waters on the doorstep of the Twelve Apostles. It should retract its support for the Liberal government's plans to drill for gas in the Commonwealth waters surrounding the Twelve Apostles Marine National Park, and, frankly, it should reinstate the moratorium on onshore gas drilling, to protect farms and bushland and the climate from new gas.
On that mention of climate, I foreshadow that I will be moving the second reading amendment standing in my name to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 which adds to the end of the motion:
", but having regard to the role emissions from offshore petroleum projects play in atmospheric warming, the Senate:
(a) notes the recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the planet is warming at the fastest rate in at least 2000 years, rapidly approaching 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels;
(b) notes the recent statement by the International Energy Agency (IEA) that new coal, oil and gas projects, including offshore petroleum projects, must cease by 2021 if we hope to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees; and
(c) calls on the Government to act urgently on the IPCC's and IEA's warnings".
I will be moving that second reading moment once we get to that stage. I understand there is already a second reading amendment before the chair.
The IEA don't issue those sorts of warnings lightly. They are a fairly conservative agency, and that is a clear call by them to get out of coal, oil and gas and to not have any new coal, oil and gas by the end of this year. And the IPCC report which was released a fortnight or so ago is, again, a clear, stark warning—after a long series of warnings—and it is just absolutely terrifying. It shows that the world is heating faster than scientists previously thought, sea level rise is increasing faster in Australia than in the rest of the world and the world is hotter now than it has been in the last 125,000 years. The IPCC report shows that we're on track for more frequent and more intense heatwaves, floods, fires and droughts. Australia has the most to lose, but our government is doing the least to stop it.
The Paris Agreement says that we should aim to limit global warming to 1½ degrees, but the IPCC report warns that we might hit that 1½ degrees within a decade, much sooner than previously projected. At 1½ degrees, those extreme drought events become twice as likely to occur. The most extreme heatwaves, the ones that we only used to see once or twice a century, would happen almost every five years. And at 1½ degrees we will lose most of what's left of the Great Barrier Reef, after having already lost 50 per cent of its coral cover with three successive bleaching events over the last six years.
The IPCC report makes it clear that, if we don't have huge cuts to pollution soon—and that means by 2030, not by a fictitious 2050—1½ degrees or even two degrees could be out of reach. We're risking a world where climate change could become unstoppable and the world could become uninhabitable. The tipping points are fast approaching—the collapse of the ice sheets at our poles, the dieback of the Amazon and arboreal forests, the shutdown of ocean currents, the melting of the Arctic permafrost. The warning is perfectly clear, and, after that IPCC report, coming on the heels of the IEA's strong call for no new oil and gas, the failure to have 2030 targets, on the opposition side, and the failure to lift our pathetic existing 2030 targets, on the government side, is criminal negligence.
Mr Morrison is failing to protect Australians from the climate crisis and he is putting lives at risk. Mr Morrison's 2030 targets are a death sentence, and the so-called opposition is letting him off the hook by continuing to not have 2030 targets at all. Twenty thirty is the deadline for the climate, and, if we haven't done enough by then, then I fear it will be too late. Australia has already warmed by 1.4 degrees, and we are more vulnerable than other countries to extreme weather. Mr Morrison should be out leading the charge for global action, but instead he is fibbing and spinning about his own failure to act, and the world knows it. It's 'I don't hold a hose' writ large.
Last month, in the middle of the G7 meeting, which was mostly focused on tackling climate action, the Prime Minister nipped out of that global meeting and video linked into the Perth conference of APPEA, the Petroleum Production and Exploration Association—the gas lobby—and announced 80,000 square kilometres of new ocean permits for the fossil fuel industry to be burnt, to produce carbon dioxide and to add to global warming in a climate emergency, when the rest of the world was in a meeting focused on taking action on the climate. That was our Prime Minister; this is our government. So there is a long way to go before we see determined and realistic action from the Morrison government when it comes to climate change. I suspect it will take a fresh government and the Greens in the balance of power for any semblance of science based climate policy to be delivered.
The Greens are pleased that the introduction of these bills is finally taking a step in the right direction, albeit a tiny and belated one, and we stand ready to work with both parties to address the climate crisis, as always. This isn't going away, and what we see is a legacy of bad behaviour by the fossil fuel industry, who don't pay their fair share of tax and who get a whole lot of handouts from taxpayers by this government after making very generous donations to both sides of politics. It is a quintessential example of regulatory capture and, in fact, it is a plutocracy. The mining companies have been effectively running the parliament for decades, and it is about time we ended those donations from that dirty sector, transitioned out of fossil fuels, embraced the fantastic economic opportunity of a fast and deep transition to renewable energy—with all the jobs and economic stimulus that that could provide—and finally heed the science on the climate crisis to save what's left of this precious and beautiful planet that we all share, not only for future generations but for the other species that we share it with but also for the people who are already experiencing the effects of climate change now. The food-producing land of our northern neighbours is becoming too saline to produce food. This is not some future problem. This is not 2030's problem; this is now's problem. It is certainly not 2050's problem, as this government would have us believe.
The Greens welcome that we have a skerrick of action taken on the offshore oil and gas industry cleaning up their own mess. Frankly, it is laughable that we even need legislation. They should have been cleaning up their own mess for decades without the need for this legislature to tell them to do so, but here we are. We will welcome and support these bills. As I foreshadowed, we will be moving a second reading amendment which calls for meaningful action on the climate crisis if we are to have any hope of a liveable future. I hope and implore the parties in the chamber to support that.
Senator VAN (Victoria) (12:43): I rise to speak on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2021. The Australian offshore oil and gas industry is subject to some of the world's most stringent and rigorous environmental regulation. The industry is committed to adhering to these regulations and to operating in an environmentally safe manner. As I have worked with many energy companies across my career, both upstream and downstream, I have seen firsthand how hard those companies work to ensure that the environment is protected throughout their operations. The industry currently applies some of the most extensive environmental management strategies to ensure its operations are conducted safely and responsibly. It is clear that the industry works to the highest standards and has a long history of world-class responsible environmental management.
It is important to recognise that Australia's offshore oil and gas industry has supported Australia's energy security and economic activity for over 50 years. Our economy has benefited from the export earnings, investment and employment opportunities that it has delivered for Australians. In my home state of Victoria, there are 23 offshore platforms and installations in the Bass Strait. This includes the new Marlon B platform and the Kipper subsea wells, which feed a network of around 600 kilometres of underwater pipelines.
These projects will provide Australians and Victorians with good jobs and economic support for Australia for decades to come, just as the creation of natural gas production and distribution in Victoria in the late 1960s along with cheap electricity from coal in those basins made the state a manufacturing powerhouse. With the moratoriums that have been in place in Victoria over recent years, the state is being brought to its knees on energy supply, and we need to correct that. But we need to do it with proper environmental regulation. If we are to properly support our resources sector, we must have the right regulatory framework in place. This will allow the sector to operate efficiently and to the safest standards possible. Having the right regulatory framework in place also ensures that best practice is followed through the entire life cycle of a project. As Australia's offshore petroleum industry continues to mature, there will be an increased focus on management of mid- to late-life assets. This includes managing declining production while preparing to decommission offshore facilities, wells and pipelines. This is sensible foresight by the government to deal with normal and expected changes occurring in the industry. There are particular points of the life cycle of any industry when regulatory frameworks and practices need to adapt to the changing circumstances. As the times change, the conditions in which we operate change, and we must change with those changing conditions. For the offshore oil and gas industry, that time is now and, as a government, we are responding accordingly. We must be prepared to deal with the future challenges that we will face as this industry begins to mature to ensure that the taxpayer, the shareholders, the workers and the natural environment are protected. These are all important considerations which these bills will address.
It is important that we strike the right balance between investment and managing an industry that is steadily maturing. This government wants to see that an industry that has benefited the nation so greatly is not left out in the cold with outdated regulations, and we don't want to see the taxpayer or the environment left holding the bag either. These bills will strengthen Australia's offshore oil and gas regulatory regime to ensure that emerging decommissioning works facing the industry are able to be managed effectively and the costs of decommissioning and offshore project remain with those who are responsible for carrying out the project. This regime will importantly ensure that the cost does not fall to the Australian taxpayer at the end of a project's life cycle. In the coming decades there will be a number of offshore projects which have exhausted their reserves and require decommissioning. This is a normal part of the resource development life cycle and, if properly managed, the decommissioning of these projects will not provide the government, or most importantly the taxpayer, with any unforeseen burdens. Fundamentally, that is what these bills intend to do to manage our resources and related infrastructure effectively. Thankfully, we will see the development of new projects, such as the Scarborough, Browse and Barossa gas projects, which will continue to support our economy and energy security in the coming decades. However, those projects that are in the latter part of their life cycle need the correct regulatory framework in place to ensure that their decommissioning is handled correctly. As the industry continues to mature, large companies may move to divest their mature assets to focus on new areas of production potential. Australia can expect to see as new entrants to the industry smaller companies with joint ventures that bring a fresh perspective and a different risk profile.
This bill implements aspects of the government's enhanced offshore oil and gas decommissioning framework and the relevant recommendations from the independent review into the circumstances leading to the administration and liquidation of Northern Oil & Gas Australia. By amending the act to enhance regulatory oversight of activities the companies may undertake during the mid- to late-life of a project, including decommissioning, this bill reduces the risk of another Northern Oil & Gas Australia-like incident occurring again.
For those of you who are unaware of the Northern Oil & Gas Australia incident, in February 2020 this group went into liquidation, leaving the Northern Endeavour floating production storage and offtake facility without an operator. This was an unfortunate incident that left the government responsible for ensuring the safety of the facility and conducting critical maintenance work. How the government responded to this incident, and the implementation of these bills, sends a strong signal to the world that Australia will maintain its global reputation as a safe, reliable and responsible country for offshore oil and gas development.
These bills ensure that companies operating in Australia's offshore oil and gas regulatory regime are capable, competent and responsible in managing their offshore projects by ensuring that when projects are decommissioned they are managed effectively and that the associated costs of decommissioning, importantly, remain with the entity involved. We want to ensure that we have the best oversight framework and that the offshore oil and gas industry manages the current and future decommissioning challenges to ensure that our world-class offshore oil and gas industry remains exactly that: world-class.
The first bill, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021, provides government oversight of transactions involving a change in the control of a petroleum or greenhouse gas titleholder. The sale of an offshore gas project is intended to be captured as a transfer of the title under the act. However, offshore projects can also be transferred by the sale of the shares in a company that owns and operates the project. These transactions are not currently captured by the act, because there is no transfer of interests in the petroleum title or titles. This is essential to ensure that mature assets are transferred in line with government regulation while maintaining an environment that encourages investment. If regulatory approval is not obtained for this type of corporate transaction, significant civil penalties may be imposed. In addition, the title can also be cancelled. This approach is consistent with similar regimes across the Commonwealth.
It is also important that regulations provide for trailing liability, and this is what this bill encompasses. Through the expansion of the remedial directions provisions in the act, any former titleholder can be called upon to carry out decommissioning if the current or immediate former titleholder is unable to do so. This, of course, is intended to be a measure of last resort where all other options have been exhausted. However, the Northern Oil & Gas Australia incident reinforced the fact that we as a government must be prepared for all scenarios. As the act stands now, only an immediate former titleholder can be directed to decommission and remediate an area. This reduces the environmental, health and safety risks associated with the potential abandonment of assets and infrastructure and ensures that risks and liabilities of petroleum activities remain the responsibility of those who have been involved in the development of the project and not the government or taxpayers. This will set the expectation that sellers will undertake appropriate due diligence before selling assets, titles and infrastructure.
In this bill, amendments are provided to improve the administration of petroleum and greenhouse gas titles. We want to ensure that, while best practice is being followed, assets can be transferred in the most effective manner possible. As I mentioned earlier, as the industry begins to mature, we expect to see new entrants to the industry who bring a different risk profile. By improving the administration of petroleum and greenhouse gas titles, we can ensure that the transfer of these assets is done without fault and in line with government regulation.
The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2021 amends the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Act 2003 to enable NOPSEMA, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority, to expand existing cost recovery mechanisms to former titleholders or related persons when issued a direction. Again, this will ensure that what occurred in the Northern Oil & Gas Australia incident will not occur again.
The government has been actively working with key stakeholders in the offshore oil and gas industry to seek advice on reforms to make sure the circumstances surrounding the Northern Endeavour do not happen again. We have a world-class offshore oil and gas industry, and we intend to keep it that way. Our oceans represent some of the most diverse and pristine ecosystems in the world, and this government is committed to ensuring that they are protected. These bills are one layer to the many components we're putting in place to achieve this. Recently, the National Plastic Plan was announced with the aim of reducing the amount of plastics that can impact our environment. In April this year, the Prime Minister announced an additional $100 million investment to ensure that we remain a world leader in marine park management.
Our oceans are the lifeblood of the Australian economy. They not only supply thousands of jobs around Australia but play a vital role in maintaining a healthy planet. It is our duty to ensure that those who rely on the ocean and interact with it, whether for enjoyment or for commercial reasons, do so in a responsible manner.
Our resources sector is absolutely vital to our economy and our energy security. Importantly, this government is committed to ensuring that this critical industry has proper regulations around it so it can continue to operate in an environmentally safe manner.
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (12:55): [by video link] I rise to speak on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021. The purpose of this bill is to stop offshore petroleum companies entering transactions where their dominant purpose is the avoidance of the decommissioning and remediation costs of end-of-life assets. The proposed legislation is a regulatory response to Woodside's plan to avoid liabilities in the Timor Sea, which ends with the Australian taxpayer being on the hook for $1.6 billion.
The story behind this legislation needs to be put on the record, because it's more than a story of incompetence by the regulators and incompetence by a parade of government ministers drawn from the National Party. It is also the story of a government which prefers the interests of its foreign-owned petroleum companies over the interests of Australian citizens. So, let us begin the story.
In September 2015 Woodside Petroleum entered into an agreement to dispose of its majority interest in the Laminaria and Coralina joint venture, which included the Northern Endeavour, a floating oil production storage and offloading facility. The Laminaria and Coralina oil leases are located 550 kilometres off Darwin under 340 metres of water in the Timor Sea. By 2014, these oil fields had produced 100 per cent of their expected production, and Woodside decided these petroleum assets had reached the end of their life. Woodside's Timor Sea petroleum assets were unsellable because the liabilities far outweighed any asset value. Woodside considered decommissioning these oil assets but instead came up with a less costly plan—they decided to transfer the assets and liabilities to a small company which would eventually go bust, leaving the Australian taxpayer with the clean-up costs. Entering a transaction where the dominant purpose was the avoidance of a billion-dollar clean-up cost made sense; there were no anti-avoidance provisions in the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006, so what they planned to do was legal. In 2015, Woodside paid a small group of companies $24 million to take over their Timor Sea assets and liabilities—the first act of this tragedy had been written. A handful of foreign-owned transnational companies, which operate in Australia's offshore waters, knew Woodside was offloading its liabilities, initially to a small company but later to the Australian taxpayers. It seems only the regulators and the minister did not understand what was happening. In any case, the industry watched to see if Woodside would get away with their plan. If they did, it meant it would be okay for them to do the same. The industry did not have to wait long to see if Woodside's sting would work.
The second act of this tragedy began when, in July 2019, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority, NOPSEMA, issued a prohibition notice on the Northern Endeavour. The owners of the Northern Endeavour pleaded for the prohibition notice to be replaced by an improvement notice, which would have given them time to generate funds and undertake repairs. The owners of the Northern Endeavour showed good faith by spending millions of dollars on repairs, but, without any road map back to production, the business went into administration, then liquidation. Two hundred and fifty Australians lost their jobs.
In February 2020, the Australian government became liable for up to $1 billion or more of maintenance and clean-up costs. This event is without precedent. The Northern Endeavour Taskforce was established to manage the Northern Endeavour. To date, $200 million has been spent on weekly maintenance costs of this oil ship—$200 million. I understand a further $382 million will be spent between now and mid-2023, when the Northern Endeavour is expected to be towed away. This additional cost is based on the current weekly maintenance cost of $4 million, for a further 96 weeks. So far, we can see the taxpayer on the hook for $582 million, enough to build a 300-bed hospital in regional Queensland.
In March 2020, Steve Walker was asked to review the circumstances leading up to the government taking over Timor Sea assets previously owned by Woodside Petroleum. In June 2020, the Walker review was published. It was made public in September 2020, after a freedom-of-information request. The report, largely written by NOPSEMA, exonerates NOPSEMA and is a whitewash. NOPSEMA initially said health and environmental concerns were the reasons for the July 2019 prohibition notice on the Northern Endeavour, but on 18 May 2021 they told me health and safety were their concerns. What happened to their environmental concerns? Those environmental concerns disappeared after the government commissioned Woodside to report on the environmental problems arising from the decommissioning of the Northern Endeavour. We will never know what is in that $8.8 million report, because it is marked 'cabinet-in-confidence'. What are they hiding? If NOPSEMA had commissioned the Woodside report before they issued a prohibition notice to stop production on the Northern Endeavour, then it is reasonable to assume 250 Australians might not have lost their jobs and taxpayers would not have lost $600 million that cannot be recovered.
The bill we are debating today makes no provision for Woodside to pay for cleaning up the Northern Endeavour. That is the reason why I have proposed an amendment to make the legislation retrospective to 1 January 2015. If the legislation operates from 1 January 2015, then Woodside would pay for the costs it has avoided. If my Woodside amendment were supported, there would be no need for the proposed industry-wide levy announced in the May 2021 budget. The levy of 48c per barrel means the whole industry, not Woodside, will pay to clean up the Northern Endeavour and its associated oilfields. I think it's entirely understandable that the industry is resisting this levy. The government is still trying to persuade the offshore petroleum industry to pay for Woodside's liabilities, and that is the reason why, after 12 months, there is no legislation before the Senate. There is no reason to believe an industry-wide levy will be introduced. Woodside Petroleum's gift of its liabilities to a small Australian company was like the bottom-of-the-harbour tax schemes, which sent companies into liquidation, leaving the tax commissioner as the only creditor. The government closed these schemes by making it a criminal offence to enter into them, but this time there are no consequences for Woodside.
To understand why the government is willing to let the Australian taxpayer fork out up to a billion dollars in place of Woodside, we need to look at the relationship between Woodside Petroleum and National Party ministers. Woodside is a corporate member of the National Party. This means Woodside Petroleum pays $55,000 a year for special access to National Party ministers, who, in a coalition government, traditionally hold the portfolio for offshore petroleum. Woodside Petroleum is not the only petroleum company to be a corporate member of the National Party. The conflict of interest, apparent or real, is obvious. Why does the Prime Minister allow this conflict of interest to continue? The government knows much more than it's telling. But its decision not to make this legislation retrospective to catch the Woodside avoidance transaction makes no sense if you genuinely represent the interests of Australians. The Woodside sting means they were able to recently enter into an agreement with BHP with a billion dollars more in assets than they would otherwise have had. It's a lot of money and enough to grease a few palms.
Labor intend to support the government to pass this legislation without making it retrospective, and they are doing that because something is better than nothing with an estimated industry liability of $60 billion in cleaning up end-of-life petroleum assets. The government and Labor could get together to make the legislation retrospective and save the taxpayer a couple of billion dollars but they fear the power of petroleum companies with deep pockets so close to the next federal election.
These stories will never be told by the two big parties because too often they put their future over the interests of Australians. But we all know One Nation never puts its interests before the people of Australia. I am constantly calling for accountability. At Senate estimates a few years ago I questioned the then minister for resources, Senator Matt Canavan, with regard to the Northern Endeavour. He was evasive and didn't particularly want to answer my direct questions. Something stinks to high heaven with regard to the Northern Endeavour, and you will never convince me otherwise.
I will not support the legislation unless my amendment calling for Woodside and not the taxpayers to pay for the costs is supported. If the Labor Party oppose my amendment, they will also have to tell the Australian taxpayers why. I have questioned for years our oil and gas resources—about the profits and about the taxes that multinationals should be paying but don't. That's only because the government is not pursuing it. There have been a lot of cover-ups that have happened, and this is the biggest cover-up that I've ever seen. Woodside is responsible and should pay for these costs, not the Australian taxpayer to the tune of billions of dollars.
As I've said, where is the legislation that is going to impose this levy? We haven't seen it. It's not before us. So it's all smoke and mirrors. It's all talk. Who is going to end up paying this bill? It is going to be you, the taxpayer, and me, out of our taxes. We have to stand up to this. I'm calling on the Labor Party, I'm calling on the crossbenchers and I'm calling on the Greens party: let common sense prevail here. A company has done the wrong thing. They got rid of their assets to get out of the clean-up costs. That is the guts of this whole issue that I'm talking about now. We have to make sure that they pay for it. The Australian government expects any other Australian to pay for what they are responsible for, and that's all I'm asking for. So I hope that the Labor Party does come on board with me on this and I hope that the coalition government sees the common sense in this—that Woodside should be paying for it—because otherwise I will continue to ask: why is Woodside in cooperation with the National Party? Why are they paying $55,000 a year to have access to National Party ministers who deal with petroleum, oil and gas? Is it a conflict of interest? It certainly is. Anyway, the public will judge them, as I'm judging them. Like I said, I think it stinks to high heaven.
Senator ROBERTS (Queensland) (13:09): [by video link] As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I note that, while the government's bill, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill, has some merit, it raises far more questions than it answers.
Before explaining that, I would like to note that I'm in quarantine. I appreciate very much my staff and the staff at 2020 in Canberra for their patience in setting up the remote parliament for me, despite my lag in technology. Nonetheless, I dislike this set-up. It is a mockery. I would much prefer travelling to Canberra, where I can see eyeballs and read faces. What we are going through in our country is a nonsense. It is a complete nonsense. There is a risk, but it is not being managed.
We see the same mismanagement in oil and gas as well. On 20 September 2019, a group of companies called the Northern Oil & Gas Australia Pty Ltd—NOGA as it was called—went into voluntary administration and subsequently, on 7 February 2020, into liquidation. As a consequence of the Northern Oil & Gas Australia liquidation, the Commonwealth government set up the Northern Endeavour Temporary Operations Program, taking control of the Northern Endeavour—and, I take it, Australian taxpayers took on the costs—until a longer term solution could be agreed to. As usual, this parliament is looking after big corporate mates at the cost of taxpayers. Australian taxpayers should not be made to pay to the clean-up bills of multinational companies who make huge profits, pay no Australian company taxes and leave us to fix the mess they leave behind.
We support a bill that provides for changes to enable the oversight and scrutiny of transactions involving a change of ownership or control of a petroleum or gas titleholder through a merger or takeover. The amendment expands existing powers to call back previous titleholders to decommission infrastructure, and to remediate the marine environment in the title area where the current or immediate former titleholder is unable to do so. We support the intention of ensuring that an entity should not transfer its assets to avoid the cost of cleaning up at the end of a profitable project and leaving the cost behind to be paid by taxpayers.
The lessons learnt from the Northern Endeavour have shown that the current regulatory framework is vulnerable. None of the regulatory controls anticipated the circumstances of a titleholder liquidation. This is a serious concern. As such, events could be repeated as Australia's offshore industry matures and late-life assets are likely to be passed from established major oil companies to smaller less substantial titleholders. The concept of trailing liability, whereby a titleholder would be continually liable for the decommissioning and removal of its offshore assets, even after selling its assets and its interest in a title, ensures that someone other than the taxpayer is responsible for the liability—and that's exactly as it should be. With an estimated $60 billion in anticipated decommissioning liabilities falling due over the next 30 years, this government and this parliament must ensure it can call upon former titleholders to decommission and to remediate the title area in the unlikely event that the current titleholder is unable to do so.
We are the world's largest exporter of energy, the largest exporter of liquefied natural gas and the second-largest exporter of coal, yet we have the world's highest domestic gas prices, and our electricity prices are three times that of countries who use our coal to generate electricity. Now, why is that? Why can't we use more of our own gas domestically? Who made the deals that cut Australians out? This parliament made those deals over many decades. Why can't we build a transnational pipeline to bring North West Shelf gas to the east and convert it to produce liquid fuels like petrol and diesel? This gas is suitable for that. Why can't we use the gas itself to power cars now?
Liberal-Labor-Nationals are clearly in election mode, promoting policies and changes that they think will win them votes. The reality is none of them have real plans and real solutions to get us out of COVID over the next year, or to make the economy safe. This amendment—increasing the responsibility of petroleum gas producers—is an easy vote winner. But where are the hard questions being answered? Liberal-Labor-Nationals lack the will to listen and the courage to do something novel and appropriate for the people of Australia in our national interest. We Australians need alternative leadership that we can trust, and One Nation stand ready to address the big issues and to take a position that puts everyday Australians first. We can be sure that China and our Asian neighbours will continue using hydrocarbon fuels like gas, coal and oil for decades to come—our natural gas and our coal for decades to come. What's more, China exploits labour, sacrifices the environment and sacrifices worker safety, and yet we still buy their products. And Liberal-Labor-Nationals ignore calls for local manufacturing and industry development, as well as calls to support small business.
There are other facts that need consideration. The government—indeed, the parliament—repeatedly bets on technology that is unproven, does not provide jobs to replace those lost in coal powered generators, and is very expensive. At the moment hydrogen, the latest energy fad, costs $6 a kilo to produce. The government's dream, this parliament's dream, is to bring it down to $2 per kilo. Even at that price, far-fetched though it is, it would produce electricity at $200 per megawatt hour—four times the current cost of coal fired electricity. With solar, we have a dependence on China for the installation, the components and the generators. The cost is high, and the reliability of solar electricity is atrocious; the stability is just not there. And we lose jobs. For every job created by solar and wind, we lose 2.2 jobs in the real economy. As for wind, again, like solar, there's a dependence on China, with exorbitantly high costs, low reliability and poor stability. It's unstable and, again, results in the loss of jobs. We have an abundance of clean gas and coal. We should be an energy power, as we were when international investors flocked to the Hunter Valley, Central Queensland and Victoria to build aluminium refineries. These jobs are now gone, and, under current Liberal-Labor-Nationals policies, manufacturing industry jobs are doomed.
Turning to this amendment again, it's a soft policy for the voters. Why is the government not legislating to protect us from the huge cost of cleaning up site pollution caused by renewable energy generators? These sites are not forever. They last 10 to 15 years. That's it. Then they're redundant; they're gone. Actually, the assets are not gone, the eyesores are not gone and the pollution is not gone, but their productive capacity is finished. Eventually, like any machine, these generators will need to be repaired and replaced, and their components are expensive and highly toxic—for example, boron, gallium arsenide and cadmium telluride, which could cause serious or permanent injury such as nausea, skin problems, hypertension, weakness, kidney and liver disorders, heart palpitations, anxiety, depression and cancers.
Australians deserve far better. We all deserve to know the facts and the real risks and costs of these fad energies, these parasitic malinvestments. Australians need to be shown the agreements and protections that renewable energy providers have signed up for, and the generators need to be committed to complementary legislation protections to this amendment. The current legislation must be replicated to capture these energy generators, such as solar and wind power. Remember: we're paying huge government subsidies to them, and yet they're not committed to the long-term protection of our environment. They're a parasitic threat to our precious natural environment.
These changes require complementary legislation in the legislation governing renewables to ensure that they do not pollute our land, waterways, children's playgrounds, agricultural crops and the water we drink. The taxpayer should not be left with the clean-up bill. Fair is fair. None of us would want to see a farmer given back land after it had been used for a solar or wind generation only to find that the toxic waste on it is a safety risk to us all, a desert memorial to renewables.
This legislation is a bandaid. If Liberal-Labor-Nationals were serious, then we would have a level playing field for all energy sources, with all being judged equally on their quality, reliability and cost. This bill does not go far enough. The National Party's mates intended to leave the clean-up of the Northern Endeavour to the taxpayer, and the Nationals and Liberals were very quick to agree. That seems to be a pattern. One Nation aims to close this loophole. Senator Hanson has circulated a retrospective amendment to ensure that the company that made the vast profits from this project pays for the clean-up. Any party who does not support this amendment will be supporting an increase in pollution—and that's real pollution—and an increase in the bill for taxpayers. This government, and Labor, must show us it is serious about Northern Endeavour. The government must also go further and present similar legislation to protect us from toxic pollution from renewables.
Australia needs alternative leadership that Australians can trust, and we stand ready to address the big issues and to take a position that puts everyday Australians first. One Nation supports the government's amendment, provided our retrospective amendment is adopted. We support cutting all subsidies to renewables and letting them compete in a free-market economy against hydrocarbon fuels to generate cheap, clean, affordable, reliable electricity for Australian businesses and homes.
I want to address some comments made by Senator Waters in her address earlier this morning. All of her comments with regard to climate were based on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and its lies and propaganda that the Greens wallow in and parade and push, with no consequences and no thought for Australians. No UN catastrophic climate forecast has ever come true—not one. There is no basis for any of these UNIPCC claims that the Greens peddle. Never has the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change provided the empirical scientific evidence—within a framework, proving cause and effect—that carbon dioxide from human activity will affect the climate and needs to be cut. We will be dealing with this on a date fairly soon. Until then we will continue to expose the government.
We note that today is day 714 since I challenged the Greens—Senator Di Natale, who was the leader at the time, and Senator Waters—to a debate on the empirical scientific evidence that shows carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut and a debate on the corruption of climate science by the United Nations and other organisations. It's been 11 years since I first challenged Senator Waters in a public forum where we were both speaking. Every time, she has run from me. That's because there is no evidence. Now we have a toxic legacy that we will need to clean up in the future from this mess. But, in the meantime, coming back to this legislation, we support the bill, provided that it includes our amendment to make it retrospective so that the perpetrators of the Northern Oil & Gas Australia disaster are held accountable.
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (13:22): The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021 amends the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 to strengthen Australia's offshore oil and gas regulatory regime. The bill strikes an appropriate balance between implementing regulatory safeguards for Australian taxpayers, managing the impost on industry and encouraging continued investment in oil and gas development. I thank senators for the contribution they have made to this bill, and I commend the bill to the chamber.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Chandler ): The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Brown be agreed to.
Question negatived.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: An Australian Greens amendment was foreshadowed by Senator Waters in her contribution. Senator Hanson-Young, would you be able to move that second reading amendment on Senator Waters's behalf?
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (13:23): At the request of Senator Waters, I move:
At the end of the motion, add ", but having regard to the role emissions from offshore petroleum projects play in atmospheric warming, the Senate:
(a) notes the recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the planet is warming at the fastest rate in at least 2000 years, rapidly approaching 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels;
(b) notes the recent statement by the International Energy Agency (IEA) that new coal, oil and gas projects, including offshore petroleum projects, must cease by 2021 if we hope to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees; and
(c) calls on the Government to act urgently on the IPCC's and IEA's warnings".
Question negatived.
Senator HANSON-YOUNG: We will not call a division, given the numbers and the difficulties today, but I would like the Australian Greens to be recorded as supporting the amendment. If other parties could put their positions, that would be helpful. Otherwise, I will call a division.
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (13:24): The government opposes the amendment as put forward on sheet 1386. I also note, in the absence of Senator Patrick from the chamber, that my understanding is that he supports your amendment.
Senator WATT (Queensland) (13:24): Labor also opposes the Greens amendment on sheet 1386.
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (13:24): by leave—In addition to that, my understanding is that Senator Hanson and Senator Roberts, who obviously can speak for themselves, and Senator Griff have indicated that they oppose this amendment.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question now is that the bills be read a second time.
Question agreed to.
Bills read a second time.
In Committee
Bills—by leave—taken together and as a whole.
The TEMPORARY CHAIR ( Senator Chandler ) (13:25): The question is that the bills be agreed to without amendments or requests.
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (13:26): [by video link] by leave—I move the amendments to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Titles Administration and Other Measures) Bill 2021, circulated in the name of One Nation, together:
(1) Schedule 2, item 46, page 68 (line 4), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(2) Schedule 2, item 46, page 68 (line 12), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(3) Schedule 2, item 46, page 68 (line 21), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(4) Schedule 2, item 46, page 69 (line 2), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(5) Schedule 2, item 46, page 69 (lines 11 and 12), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(6) Schedule 2, item 46, page 69 (line 17), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(7) Schedule 2, item 46, page 69 (lines 21 and 22), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
(8) Schedule 2, item 46, page 69 (line 31), omit "1 January 2021", substitute "1 January 2015".
The government has put forward to charge a levy of 48c a barrel on oil clean-up costs. In light of it, yes, there are oil companies that have not done the right thing and we do need to protect the environment. As I've stated, in the last budget by the federal government there was talk about introducing a levy that would bring money into the coffers to clean up future environmental damage. The trouble is that we haven't seen that legislation. It hasn't been presented to the parliament. We're looking at a bill now that is going to charge the levy, but we haven't the bill that will put that levy in place. We're putting the cart before the horse.
What I'm saying is: Woodside purposely unloaded their assets in the Northern Endeavour so they wouldn't be up for the billions of dollars in costs. I investigated the Northern Endeavour for quite a time, going back three years. At Senate estimates I asked questions of Senator Matt Canavan, who was the minister for resources, with regard to the Northern Endeavour. I was told it was due to environmental issues that it was shut down. There was no clear proof of anything. They said there was an object on the deck of the ship. Then they said it was for health and safety reasons that it was shut down, not environmental issues. But the ship was getting to the end of its life. That's why Woodside unloaded it. An Australian company took it on and was shut down and—I believe—badly dealt with by NOPSEMA. When I queried that, the minister couldn't answer the questions. There needs to be a full investigation into what happened there, with Australians losing their jobs.
What I'm saying about this legislation—and I know we don't like to do things retrospectively—is that you can't deny that Woodside unloaded this for $24 million to avoid paying hundreds of millions, possibly up to a billion dollars, to clean it up. Why should it be at the cost of the taxpayer? Why should they have to fork out this money? It is so wrong. Why do we keep protecting these multimillion dollar companies—
The TEMPORARY CHAIR ( Senator Chandler ): Senator Hanson, it being 1.30 pm, the committee will report progress. I shall now proceed to two-minute statements.
STATEMENTS
Afghanistan
Senator GREEN (Queensland) (13:30): [by video link] I join the Senate to speak on the critical situation in Afghanistan, where the Taliban have taken control of Kabul, and Australian citizens, visa holders and others seeking refuge wait to be rescued and taken to safety. I want to acknowledge the members of the Australian Defence Force who are currently undertaking this mission, in particular the ADF personnel from Townsville's first and third battalions who are contributing to the deployment. We thank them all for their service and their bravery. We also understand that this is a particularly difficult time for veterans across our country. Please know that there is support there if you need it. I join in calling on the government to increase support to these organisations offering support to our veterans during this very difficult time.
Finally, to the Afghan families in Australia who are waiting to hear from loved ones, to the people who have waited for many years to be joined by their family, to those who served alongside our soldiers and to the soldiers themselves who have been advocating on their behalf for so many years, we want you to know that you are not forgotten. Like many other MPs and senators, my office is assisting a number of families in this situation, and it is incredibly heartbreaking. We should be doing everything in our power to play our part in accepting visa holders and refugees. We have a moral obligation to do this. We can't simply say that we wish things were different. It is too late for that. As Jason Scanes, a veteran from Maryborough in Queensland who has been trying to get his own Afghan interpreter to safety since 2013, said last week, 'We don't leave our mates behind and we don't give up on them either.' Let's hope that that is true.
Agricultural Shows
Senator BROCKMAN (Western Australia—Deputy Government Whip in the Senate) (13:32): I rise to talk about the agricultural field days that are currently going on in Western Australia. Agricultural field days, particularly as someone who grew up in the bush and has been in and around agriculture for a long time, were always a highlight of the calendar. As a young child, particularly being able to go to the field days to look at machinery, to interact with other members of farming communities, to see the livestock and the sheep dog trials, they really were a highlight in every calendar year. Obviously, agricultural field days in some parts of Australia, continue to do it very, very tough indeed. Luckily, in Western Australia, we have been able to have an agricultural field day season this year. We've already had a number occur in Western Australia with a large number still to come.
One of the key aspects of preserving those field days and enabling them to go forward has been the Morrison government's program supporting agricultural shows and field days. Help has flowed to agricultural field days across Western Australia for things like installing watering points for sheep and cattle and horse yards as the Brunswick Agricultural Society. We've upgraded the Nanson showgrounds dining hall kitchen in the Chapman Valley. We've helped to fit out the ram shed with the purchase and installation of portable sheep pens for the Esperance and districts agricultural show. We have supported the Katanning agricultural show, the Kellerberrin and districts agricultural show, Kununurra, Mount Marshall and the list goes on and on.
COVID-19: Pensions and Benefits
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (13:34): I rise today to speak about income support during lockdown. If we are going to beat this virus then we have to pay people to stay at home. Lockdowns are hurting people, particularly those on low incomes. It is completely ridiculous, on one hand, to tell people that they have to stay at home and then, on the other hand, to not offer some additional support to do so.
Last year, we had the coronavirus supplement and JobKeeper, which changed many people's lives and enabled them to survive through the lockdowns. But the government took those supports away far too early and cruelly, impacting many people right now. Punishment and punitive measures do not boost morale. They don't create goodwill in the community and they harm people on low incomes the most. By not providing people on the JobSeeker payment with extra support, they are punishing them. People are not coping with the impact of extended lockdowns. There's no proper financial support. Lifeline saw its three busiest days in history this month. We cannot ignore the financial stress of going into lockdown on individuals and families, particularly those on low incomes—those on JobSeeker who are trying to survive with no extra support.
The Prime Minister must take action to ensure that everybody is properly supported, and the best way to do that would be to reinstate the coronavirus supplement. People cannot survive on $44 a day. If you are told to isolate and you have to go and get a coronavirus test, how do you afford to take a taxi or an Uber? If you are immune compromised, how do you get your groceries delivered? If you're on a low income, of course you are going to try to go out and find additional income, because the government is not adequately supporting those on low incomes in lockdown. It's time to make sure everybody can stay safe at home.
Tasmania: COVID-19
Senator POLLEY (Tasmania) (13:36): There are over 38,000 small businesses, employing over 91,000 Tasmanians, in my home state of Tasmania. That's over a third of the Tasmanian workforce. But this government, the Morrison government, has left them in abeyance without any real support. With the lockdowns in New South Wales and Victoria, Tasmanians are feeling the pinch. We have small businesses right across tourism, agriculture, manufacturing, arts, construction, transport and healthcare services.
Last week, with the shadow minister for small business, Matt Keogh, and our candidate, Ross Hart, the future member for Bass, I was able to visit a number of small businesses in my home city. They were talking about how it has been only their experience in business that has kept them afloat. They talked about the issues that they see within the community and the concerns that they have with these shutdowns and the impact that they are having on small businesses in my home state. I want to thank Jane Freeman at Balls n Bumpers, Malcolm Leedham and Marisa Ranson from Lead'em Footwear, and Paul Mischis from Route 66 for being so welcoming, and for being prepared to talk about the struggles they're facing. They are determined to see this pandemic off. They are working together, and we are seeing Tasmanians supporting each other.
But it's this government. Why so many people are in lockdown across this country rests firmly with Scott Morrison. He has failed to provide vaccines in a timely manner. He has failed to deliver quarantine. He had two jobs. Two jobs is all he had at this time, and he has failed every single Tasmanian, every single Queenslander and every single Victorian. Every single Australian who is locked down now is locked down because of Scott Morrison.
Education
Senator ROBERTS (Queensland) (13:38): With the steady downward trend of education standards over the last 20 years for reading, maths and science among Australian children, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, ACARA, needed to deliver a curriculum review that reflected proven teaching methods. Rather than provide a robust review that would turn the tide, though, ideology got the better of ACARA. Fortunately, ACARA's attempts have been binned as deserved. Back when formal motions were allowed, One Nation put forward two successful motions that highlighted significant fundamental flaws in ACARA's reviewed curriculum. Instead of focusing on proven methods for teaching maths and reading, ACARA thought it more important to demolish Judeo-Christian heritage and the role of Western civilisation in Australian society, laws and customs. Australia is proudly a liberal democratic society, and these values should be at the very basis of our national curriculum.
I acknowledge that Minister Tudge has ditched the reviewed curriculum. He has recognised that ACARA has tried to turn our curriculum into a tool for left-wing ideologies that denounce Western civilisation as something to be ashamed of and is, instead, promoting notions of imperialism and is negatively repackaging significant and defining Australian historical events. There is a need to lift the educational outcomes for our children. One Nation will continue to monitor the effects of the efforts of ACARA to ensure our cherished Western liberal democracy is enshrined in the national curriculum. It is not an accident that Australia is one of the most sought-after places to live. Safeguarding our way of life comes from the teachings we give our children, whether at home or through the curriculum. They remind them of what Australian men and women have defended in past decades—our right to a free society, with laws and customs of Judeo-Christian origins—and only when our children know that can they defend and uphold those wonderful values.
Afghanistan
Senator HENDERSON (Victoria) (13:40): [by video link] I rise to join with so many Australians to express my deep distress and heartbreak over the situation in Afghanistan. Over the last 20 years, Australia has been a steadfast contributor to the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan. Australia joined with the United States, NATO and the international community in Afghanistan in 2001 to help find Osama Bin Laden and those responsible for the attacks on 11 September and that was achieved. I acknowledge the more than 40,000 Australian Defence Force personnel and civilians who served in Afghanistan. We honour the 41 soldiers who died and the many Australians wounded in attacks and, of course, we also share with all Afghanistan veterans in what they are enduring at the moment.
The Taliban must cease all violence against civilians and adhere to international humanitarian law. The government's top priority is the safe and orderly departure of Australian citizens and visa holders. Since 18 August we have facilitated the evacuation of approximately 554 people from Kabul and, I'm pleased to say, two of those people were Maria and her 11-year-old daughter, Heria. They are Australian citizens from Melbourne. I became involved in their case when Maria's husband contacted me late one evening last week. They travelled to Kabul to visit their sick mother and grandmother. They became embroiled in the turmoil very quickly, and their commercial flights were cancelled. Soon after contacting me, they received a message from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. They headed to airport but couldn't get to the tarmac because of the chaos and gunshots. I am pleased to say that, on their second attempt, with the help of wonderful Australian soldiers, they made it to the plane and they are now in Perth quarantining. I want to thank our ADF personnel most sincerely for everything they are doing.
Afghanistan
Senator GRIFF (South Australia) (13:42): [by video link] I, like many others, urge the federal government to massively increase the number of humanitarian visas offered to Afghan refugees. Last week, Minister Hawke announced an initial 3,000 places but these will be within the humanitarian program of 13,750 places already allocated for this year; it will not be extra places. You have to ask the question: What happens to those poor souls who were in that original 13,750 and who will now potentially miss out?
When the world is witnessing a humanitarian crisis, we have a responsibility to act, if on no other basis than compassion for our fellow humans. Our hasty departure from what is widely considered a failed state has allowed the Taliban to return at a speed which has stunned the world. It is not only interpreters and other locally engaged employees who are now terrified for their lives and very much terrified for their future; women and girls who remain are facing the prospect of returning to the days of old—a terrifying fate of sexual slavery, oppression and subjugation, a future where they will be denied an education, denied the ability to move freely in society or to have their voices heard.
Those who flee must be able to find safe refuge. Canada, for example, has stepped forward and offered to take 20,000 Afghan refugees on top of their humanitarian program—on top of the program. We should very much be doing the same. After 20 years we cannot simply walk away. In 2015, Australia responded to the civil war in Syria with 12,000 additional humanitarian places for fleeing refugees. That was the right decision and the humane decision, and it is time now for Australia to do the same and contribute more places of safe haven to those in need.
Prime Minister
Senator WALSH (Victoria) (13:44): [by video link] Today Australia is experiencing the third wave of the COVID pandemic. Prime Minister Morrison is saying that he couldn't possibly have seen it coming, that hindsight is a wonderful thing. 'There's many wise in hindsight', he says to anyone who's trying to hold him to account. The problem is that when it comes to the COVID crisis the Prime Minister already had the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, because in 2020 we already knew that vaccines were the way out, in 2020 we already knew to lock down hard and fast and in 2020 we knew that we needed to find financial support for people and get it to them so they could stay home and stay safe. But even though we knew all of this all of last year, even though Victorians had to learn these lessons the hard way and even though the lessons were there for all to see, today we have a prime minister who says that he couldn't see them and says to his critics that hindsight is a wonderful thing.
But the Prime Minister didn't need a crystal ball. He just needed to pay attention. He needed to pay attention and get the vaccines that we needed, pay attention and support the states to go hard and go early, and pay attention and provide the critical ongoing financial support that people need. Instead, today we are in the middle of this third wave. Today businesses are shutting their doors. Today people are out of work. Today children are missing school again.
Australians need a prime minister who will actually act, a prime minister who doesn't shy away from the hard decisions but takes responsibility. They need a prime minister who will work as hard at his job as every single Australian is working at theirs right now. (Time expired)
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Chandler ): Order, Senator Walsh. Senator O'Sullivan.
COVID-19: Vaccination
Senator O'SULLIVAN (Western Australia) (13:46): Over 200 Australians are being vaccinated every minute. The agreement that the national cabinet reached, based on the modelling by the Doherty institute, has set out a clear path back from this pandemic. It's been a game changer. It's a compact that we now have with the Australian people. It can be summed up by the Prime Minister's comments that Australians will be able to spend Christmas with their families should our vaccination thresholds be reached. And as a nation, we are on track to reach them. We have the doses, we have the infrastructure to administer them and we have Australians coming forward.
Our agreement with the Australian people spells out a clear plan, a time line for when we will be able to reopen life after lockdowns—certainly for businesses and those they employ. But as Proverbs says, 'Hope deferred makes the heart sick.' We can't have parts of the nation go rogue. Lockdowns into next year in pursuit of eradication were not part of the plan, but some of our premiers are letting down the side. I'm sure my Queensland colleagues will have something to say about their own state, but in Western Australia we have a premier who is addicted to having his finger over the big red button, waiting to press it at any moment and keep pressing it into next year. Lockdowns and border closures are necessary right now, but they are not sustainable. Australians know that, and they are getting tired of them. This is why they are stepping up at world-record rates to get us to 80 and 70 per cent fully vaccinated. We have one of the highest weekly uptake rates in the world.
It's clear that the McGowan government lacks confidence in our ability to deal with the next stages of reopening. The reality is that it's not a case of if but when the delta strain breaches the Western Australian border. As our east coast states are showing, it's almost impossible to shut it down. A vaccination rate of 80 per cent means that we can live with the virus like we do with the flu.
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Chandler ): Order, Senator O'Sullivan. Senator Patrick.
Morrison Government
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (13:48): It's unbelievable. Today I asked the Senate to support my private senator's bill to ban the import of goods produced with slave labour. How could anyone not support a measure to disrupt this abhorrent trade? How could anyone not support a measure to stop Australian companies having to compete with cheap imported goods?
The bill came out of a bipartisan recommendation from a government controlled committee. Thankfully, the Senate supported my bill, but the government didn't, and that is unbelievable. The government want to talk some more. They want to think about things. They want to ponder. This attempt to deal with modern slavery is going into the same basket as ICAC and the same basket as whistleblower protection—all too hard for this government.
The government shies away from any measure that involves integrity or decency. We saw it this week with Afghan security guards. The government makes a call. Their instinct is wrong. They make the wrong call. They did the same thing in relation to making it a criminal offence for Australians to come back to their own country. Of course, they let that pass, and hopefully we'll never see that again. Again, there was the refusal to deal with all of the disrespectful things that happened, particularly to women, in this place. The government were forced to change their mind. The Prime Minister basically is lacking a moral compass. This was not a good day for the government.
Prime Minister
Senator AYRES (New South Wales) (13:50): [by video link] Senator Patrick's right. Words matter, but deeds matter a lot more. Today, coalition members—Senator Abetz, Senator Fierravanti-Wells and others—spoke up about the antislavery bill, but neither they nor their coalition colleagues voted for it.
Similarly, crises reveal character, and that's true of this Prime Minister. In the full public gaze of the COVID pandemic crisis, we see a Prime Minister whose real character is revealed. Not since Billy McMahon, the former member for Lowe, has a Prime Minister so visibly, so consistently shrunk from national challenges. Not since then has a Prime Minister been so diminished by his failure to grasp the responsibilities of his job that he and the former member for Lowe are contenders for the worst prime ministers in Australian history. Whether it's on Afghanistan and the failure over years and years, and latterly months and months, all through this year, when it was clear that we had a special responsibility to Afghans who had worked with Australian troops; on vaccines and the absolute failure to secure supply for Australians; on national quarantine and the bungling and incapacity to grasp the responsibility that the Prime Minister has under the Constitution to keep Australians safe; on bushfires, where, having been humiliated for not telling the truth about his overseas holiday, he proceeded to bully Australians, including journalists; or on not implementing the Respect@Work recommendations—at every juncture, on every crisis, this Prime Minister just keeps getting smaller.
Afghanistan
Senator WATERS (Queensland—Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate) (13:53): [by video link] It is a terrifying time to be a woman in Afghanistan. The Taliban's history of oppression, violence and threats against women makes it hard to believe the new government's reassurances that it will respect women's rights to study, work and participate in government. There are clear and immediate risks for the freedom, education, employment, safety, political engagement and bodily autonomy of Afghan women and gender-diverse people. The situation is chaotic, and I commend all those in government, electorate offices, community groups and civil society groups who have been working tirelessly since Kabul fell to help those on the ground and their families here. Afghan women who can are standing up, and Australia has a moral obligation to support them.
The Australian government must offer permanent protection to at least 20,000 Afghans in addition to Australia's current humanitarian intake, and we must give immediate protection to Afghan citizens currently on temporary protection visas here in Australia. The Australian government must allow women to apply for women-at-risk protection visas from within Afghanistan rather than requiring them to risk their lives crossing the border just to apply. We must also facilitate their evacuation. More must be done to protect the millions of people, including women, in Afghanistan. Australia must provide immediate and increased aid to support women, girls and gender-diverse people, delivered through partnerships with civil society and aid organisations working on the ground. This is essential to ensure that aid is targeted to those most in need. Consistent with Australia's National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security, Australia must call on the international community to ensure that Afghanistan's women leaders are included in these peace talks and represented in the Afghanistan National Assembly and public office. This is a crisis, decades in the making, that Australia has contributed to. We now have an obligation to do everything we can to secure the safety and freedoms of people in Afghanistan.
Afghanistan
Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (13:55): [by video link] Twenty years ago the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation, being harboured in Afghanistan, was putting the finishing touches on its 9/11 hijacking massacre operations. On that fateful day, 2,977 people, from nearly 100 different countries, of whom 10 were Australians, died. More than 6,000 were injured, with many scarred for life. This barbaric shedding of innocent civilian blood was as brutal as it was brazen. Any self-respecting nation could not allow such a travesty to pass without a strong, definite response.
To root out this network of terrorists, military action was, regrettably, required. With the removal of the Taliban regime came the dismantling of the al-Qaeda network. The removal of al-Qaeda's safe haven within Afghanistan and the destruction and dismemberment of this horrific terrorist organisation were much needed. A question to which we will never know the answer is: how many other attacks and resultant thousands of deaths and injuries would have occurred but for the blocking out of this truly horrid organisation by military action?
As we reflect on the 10 Australians cruelly killed on 11 September, we can be thankful that we had Australians willing to serve and sacrifice—41 of whom gave the ultimate sacrifice to protect us and other freedom-loving peoples from similar attacks. Those who served in Afghanistan should be the beneficiaries of our universal admiration for blocking out al-Qaeda; we are all the beneficiaries. For those who gave so much in the cause for freedom and are battling to come to grips with the events in Afghanistan: remember that Open Arms veterans and families counselling is available 24 hours a day on 1800011046. (Time expired)
Morrison Government
Senator LINES (Western Australia—Deputy President and Chair of Committees) (13:57): I rise to talk about the Morrison government's complete failure on managing the COVID vaccine. The speaking points this week must be 'deflect from New South Wales at all costs' or 'defend the Premier of New South Wales whatever it takes'. We had Prime Minister Morrison out in the media this morning invoking that Churchill quote 'It's always darkest before the dawn'. And then we had a government frontbencher out this morning attacking the states that don't have COVID rampaging through them at the moment, threatening those states. So we are already awake to what is going to happen this week.
You'd think the Morrison government might've learnt that attacking states like Western Australia, who've been absolutely clear about the way we have confronted this virus, with hard lockdowns and so on—you'd think they might've learnt when Mr Morrison and the member for Pearce, Mr Porter, backed in Clive Palmer. Against all Western Australian voters, they backed in Clive Palmer. When they realised how unpopular that was, Mr Morrison suddenly changed his mind.
Attacking Western Australia, threatening the income we get from the Commonwealth government, is again going to backfire on you. Mr Morrison had two jobs here. One was hotel quarantine and one was vaccine. He has failed at both. He has absolutely backed in a premier who has also failed. I wish the people of New South Wales all the best, but, with Mr Morrison backing you, I don't like your chances. So lay off WA; we're doing just fine. Our mining sector is working, keeping the country going. So don't come after Western Australia. You've got enough problems at the moment.
Nguyen, Dr Anh
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (13:59): This afternoon I'd like to celebrate an outstanding Australian, Dr Anh Nguyen, a medical practitioner and also president of the Western Australian Vietnamese community. Last week, Dr Anh, as he is affectionately known, celebrated 40 years in Australia. He arrived in Adelaide in 1981, having fled the chaos that was falling across Vietnam with the arrival of the communists in South Vietnam. I want to extend my deepest appreciation for the outstanding leadership that Dr Anh has shown the Vietnamese community over decades in Western Australia. We applaud him, and of course we applaud the Vietnamese community in WA for the wonderful contribution they make.
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Smith.
PARTY OFFICE HOLDERS
Australian Labor Party
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:00): by leave—I would like to advise the chamber that Senator Gallagher will be absent from the Senate for the duration of this fortnight for personal reasons and, during this time, Senator Watt will be the Acting Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate.
The PRESIDENT: Before I go to questions without notice, Senator Whish-Wilson: can I ask you to remove the banner behind you, pursuant to the orders we've adopted before that there be nothing readable or slogans on banners behind people participating remotely, please. Thank you.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Prime Minister
Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:00): [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham. On 15 July the Morrison-Joyce government declared that it would not join a United States evacuation mission to rescue Afghan civilians who helped Australia and that it had no plan to mount a similar operation. Why?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:01): [by video link] I thank Senator Wong for her question. Can I, at the outset, acknowledge that the situation in Afghanistan is one that is evolving quite rapidly, remains highly volatile and is a dangerous situation. Our highest priority as a government is, indeed, to secure the safe and orderly departure of those Australian citizens still in Afghanistan, their families, Afghan former locally engaged employees, other visa holders and permanent residents and, indeed, the assistance that we are providing as a government to the United States, to New Zealand, to the UK, to Fiji and other nations in relation to helping with their foreign nationals, as we acknowledge and thank many other nations assisting us.
Since 18 August, Australia has supported the evacuation of around 1,000 people from Afghanistan over some 12 flights through our work with the UK and with other nations. We do urge the Taliban to ensure the ability for the safe and orderly departure of people seeking to leave the country.
We join international calls for the Taliban to cease all violence against civilians, to adhere to international humanitarian law and to respect all Afghan's human rights, especially those of women and girls. Our work in relation to helping people to depart Afghanistan has been ongoing for some time. Since 15 April 2021, the Australian government has brought out more than 430 Afghan locally engaged staff and their families to be resettled in Australia under our humanitarian visa policy, an arrangement that's been in place since 2013 and has supported more than 1,900 people to do so during that time.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, a supplementary question?
Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:03): [by video link] On 1 June, the United Kingdom announced an acceleration of its relocation policy offering priority relocation to the UK for Afghans at risk that were or had worked with them. On 18 June, Germany expanded its eligibility criteria. However, the Morrison-Joyce government did neither. Why?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:03): [by video link] I don't accept the insinuation there around a lack of action in relation to the actions and support our government's provided. Australia, unlike many other countries, has had in place special visa arrangements for some time to support those who've worked alongside our forces and others who have been serving in Afghanistan. That's what has enabled us to see some 1,900 visas specifically provided to Afghan locally engaged staff and their families at risk of harm all the way back to 2013. Recognising what was happening in Afghanistan, we worked hard to make sure that we expedited processing around such applications during the course of this year. That's what enabled more than 430 Afghan locally engaged staff to access those visas and be resettled in Australia in the period since 15 April. Clearly, the deteriorating security situation has meant more urgent steps are necessary, and they're what we're taking.
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Birmingham. Senator Wong, a final supplementary question?
Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:04): [by video link] Nasir, an interpreter for the ADF, has been resettled in Australia and has family in Afghanistan who fear reprisals. Australian authorities told them to send visa applications by post—impossible in the chaos of Kabul. They turned to US soldiers who were willing to put them on an evacuation flight, even with limited documents. Why was it left to the US to help those caught up by Australia's bureaucratic gridlock?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:05): [by video link] Senator Wong, without some forewarning, it's impossible for me to be able to specifically address the individual case you mentioned. But I can assure you, the Senate and all Australians that the Australian officials working on the ground in Afghanistan—officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Department of Home Affairs—and, of course, our Defence Force personnel there are working quickly to ensure rapid processing of visas that enable the evacuation of people who may be in circumstances where they are immediate family, for example, of Australian citizens, immediate family of permanent residents or immediate family of those locally engaged staff who've supported Australia. That work is being supported by Home Affairs and other officials here in Australia, as well as around the world, in enabling us to provide rapid responses. In relation to the individual circumstances— (Time expired)
Afghanistan
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (14:06): My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Payne. Will the minister update the Senate on the situation in Afghanistan?
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:06): I thank Senator Smith for his question. The situation in Afghanistan remains dangerous and volatile a week after the Taliban entered the capital, Kabul. We have all been devastated by the return of the Taliban, but we are focused squarely on the challenges ahead of us: ensuring the safe evacuation of Australians and holders of Australian visas, and working with the international community to continue supporting the people of Afghanistan.
The instability certainly makes our work all the more difficult. Nevertheless, we are working closely and very well with our US, UK, German and other partners at the Hamid Karzai International Airport in one of the most challenging people movements we have undertaken for decades. We're absolutely focused on bringing out every Australian and Australian visa holder that we possibly can. Cooperation does continue to be the key, and we'll continue working closely with our partners for as long as we are able to, to get people out.
There is discussion, as we have seen, about the prospect of the US extending its withdrawal deadline. We are part of those discussions, and we are absolutely ready to continue to support a continuing operation at Hamid Karzai International Airport.
The international community is watching the Taliban for its acts of injustice. It must observe all of its obligations to uphold international law and human rights. We call on the Taliban, and continue to call on the Taliban, to cease all violence against civilians and to adhere to international humanitarian law and the human rights to which all Afghans are entitled—in particular, women and girls.
This is an immensely difficult situation. It is terrifying and distressing for every person and every family trying to get to the airport, and for everyone worried about family members, friends, colleagues and contacts. It's a huge task being undertaken by Australian personnel.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Smith, a supplementary question?
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (14:08): Will the minister advise the Senate on the progress of our airlift to evacuate Australians, holders of Australian visas and their families from Afghanistan?
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:08): Again, I thank Senator Smith. Since 18 August we have evacuated over 1,000 people on 12 flights, including Australian and New Zealand nationals, Australian visa holders and foreign nationals. In the last 24 hours we have evacuated over 450 people from Kabul on four ADF flights.
We have a significant presence on the ground at Hamid Karzai International Airport, including Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade officers, Australian Defence Force personnel, Department of Home Affairs officials and Australian Border Force members.
I thank every single one of those women and men for the extraordinary job they are doing. We have evacuated not just our own people but people on behalf of the United Kingdom, the United States and New Zealand as well as Fiji. Many of you know from talking to my office, the Minister for Defence's office, the Minister for Home Affairs's office, the minister for immigration's office and our consular team what a task is being undertaken. I thank all colleagues, members and senators, for their engagement on behalf of so many Australians and Afghanis— (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator Smith, a final supplementary question?
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (14:10): Will the minister update the Senate on Australia's continuing support for the people of Afghanistan.
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:10): The Morrison government will maintain our support for the people of Afghanistan through this crisis and beyond in the coming years, working closely with other donors to identify and respond to the most pressing needs. Our $50 million bilateral program will focus on the immediate crisis and increasingly on humanitarian outcomes, including in response to the current drought, and on internal displacement, COVID-19 and economic stability, all factors exacerbating the situation in Afghanistan right now.
We are working closely with our longstanding partners, including the World Food Programme, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the United Nations Population Fund. We have committed $5 million to the UNHCR supplementary appeal to assist internally displaced Afghanis and support those neighbouring countries hosting Afghani refugees. We will continue to work with the international community to hold the Taliban to account and to support the people of Afghanistan.
COVID-19
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:11): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, Senator Payne. I refer to reports that the New South Wales minister for health, Brad Hazzard, wrote to Minister Hunt on 11 August requesting the Australian Defence Force open vaccinations centre in Sydney and in the state's west. Now 12 of New South Wales's hardest hit local government areas in Western Sydney are facing even tighter restrictions, including curfews, and the state is facing an ever-worsening outbreak. Why, almost two weeks later, has the Morrison-Joyce government failed to formally respond to the New South Wales government's request for help in Western Sydney?
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:11): I thank Senator Keneally for her question. I don't have a full brief on this matter, but let me provide the information that I do have to the Senate. As I understand it, the New South Wales minister for health wrote to the Commonwealth minister for health, Minister Hunt, on 11 August and was responded to by phone on the same day. That was followed up by phone on 12 August, with a formal reply sent by letter on 13 August. This fact has been acknowledged and confirmed by Mr Hazzard on several occasions. On 12 August, at a press conference, Minister Hazzard, I am advised, said: 'They responded very quickly and I think Minister Hunt responded within minutes to say they would see what they could do to try to get onto it. So we just have to hope everyone's got enough staff and enough vaccines to be able to get up there and do what we need to do.' On 13 August, Mr Hazzard said: 'They've stepped up. Minister Hunt responded quite quickly. I think it was within an hour or two he responded to me and indicated that they would have the appropriate committees put in place to get the ADF working with the public health network up there with the western New South Wales local health district.'
The Commonwealth responded within 24 hours by commissioning 50 ADF members for community support and compliance and also five ADF medical teams of up to 14 members each for western New South Wales. In addition—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally on a point of order?
Senator Keneally: I do appreciate the minister's information. However—and this is a point of order on relevance—the question specifically was about Western Sydney, not western New South Wales. They are two different places.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, with respect, there was a preamble to the question. The minister outlined at the beginning that they were providing the information they had available. I would be reluctant to rule what the minister is saying as not in order given the question.
Senator PAYNE: As I understand it, there are already 300 ADF members on the ground in Western Sydney as part of a joint operation with the New South Wales Police Force. As at 22 August, across the12 affected local government areas of concern in Greater Sydney, 777 primary care and Commonwealth sites are administering the AstraZeneca vaccine, including 500 general practices, 266 of which are also offering the Pfizer vaccine, seven general practice respiratory clinics, four Aboriginal controlled health services and 176 community pharmacies.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, a supplementary question?
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:14): Will the Morrison-Joyce government agree to the New South Wales government's request for ADF support to boost vaccination—not the police checks on homes but vaccination—in Western Sydney? Yes or no?
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:14): As I indicated, there are a number of Defence teams and personnel in New South Wales supporting New South Wales requirements. Defence has also deployed five vaccine delivery teams to support NSW Health in regional New South Wales. Defence is supporting NSW Health by providing 12 public health support teams to assist with COVID-19 case management. There are also five vaccine delivery teams to support NSW Health in regional New South Wales. There are eight teams operating at the New South Wales Public Health Emergency Operations Centre in St Leonards. Two teams are operating in facilities in Parramatta. One team is operating in Liverpool. One team is operating at Nepean Hospital. Defence has committed a further four teams to assist NSW Health with these activities. From tomorrow, 24 August, these personnel will be deployed to NSW Health districts as required. Defence has responded to all requests for assistance from Emergency Management Australia.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, a final supplementary question?
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:15): Why is the Morrison-Joyce government quick to use the ADF in political ads in the midst of the Black Summer bushfire season but not quick to assist the people of South-West and Western Sydney to get vaccinated against COVID-19?
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:16): There are two things about that. The first is that, at a point in time in which Australian Defence Force men and women are not only on the ground in Sydney and elsewhere in New South Wales and other parts of Australia responding to COVID-19 critical needs but also on the ground in Kabul in Afghanistan and at Al Minhad supporting the most extraordinary emergency evacuation we have undertaken in decades, all that Senator—
The PRESIDENT: Order! I take the point of order, Senator Payne. Senator Keneally.
Senator Keneally: The question was not about Kabul. The question was not about Afghanistan. It was about the Morrison-Joyce government use of the ADF in political advertising and in COVID vaccines.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, I'm going to remind senators, when they stand to raise a point of order: don't just go straight to restating the question. At least try and have a semblance of the standing orders by mentioning a standing order. Senator Keneally, I have ruled before that, when questions are politically loaded, a minister can respond in kind. Your earlier questions were specific, and I think a lot of specific information was provided. There's an opportunity to debate them after question time, but that had loaded language, and the minister is in order in responding.
Senator PAYNE: As I said in my previous response, as at 22 August, across the 12 affected local government areas of concern in Greater Sydney, 777 primary care and Commonwealth sites are administering the AstraZeneca vaccine, including those 590 general practices, seven general practice respiratory clinics, four Aboriginal community controlled health services and 176 community pharmacies. (Time expired)
COVID-19: Economy
Senator BRAGG (New South Wales) (14:18): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business, Senator Cash. Can the minister update the Senate on how the Liberal and National government's economic plan and the National Plan to Transition Australia's National COVID-19 Response, agreed by national cabinet, will help to chart our economic recovery from the pandemic?
Senator Watt interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, I have asked before for silence during questions, particularly as we have so many people participating remotely.
Senator CASH (Western Australia—Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:18): I thank Senator Bragg for the question. The Morrison government is committed to putting in place those policies that will help employers out there create jobs across our nation. In terms of the beginning of COVID-19, as my colleagues know, we entered COVID-19 with a strong labour market. In fact, around 1.6 million jobs had been created since we were first elected to govern. We also had the lowest welfare dependency in 30 years. By providing employers and businesses with the economic framework to lever off, we enabled them to prosper, to grow and to do what we needed them to do, and that was, of course, to create more job opportunities for Australians.
We also know, though, that COVID-19 has changed so much of this. We are still dealing with it, and we are still dealing with the lockdowns that are affecting millions of Australians, in both their jobs and their employers across our country. We also know that the road ahead will be a long road. It will be a hard road and it will be a bumpy road. However, what we have seen is that the Australian labour force has demonstrated and continues to demonstrate remarkable resilience. In particular, when we look at the latest figures, which show this, unemployment in Australia fell from 4.9 per cent to 4.6 per cent recently, with the creation of 2,200 jobs.
As a government, we've worked with the states and territories and together we've chartered a plan out of this pandemic. As a government, we continue to provide the support—in particular, the economic supports—that will help both businesses and Australians get to the other side. In terms of our economy, we continue to be in a stronger position to recover than we were a year ago, and we will continue to work with states and territories to plan our path out.
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Cash! Senator Bragg, a supplementary question?
Senator BRAGG (New South Wales) (14:20): Minister, how is the government supporting businesses and protecting jobs through the current lockdowns and restrictions that are in place to help suppress COVID-19?
Senator CASH (Western Australia—Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:21): The government have provided unprecedented support, as we should, to both Australians and Australian businesses since the commencement of the COVID-19 pandemic. We've now provided over $300 billion in direct health and economic support. Much of that support, as we know, was aimed at keeping Australian businesses operating and keeping Australians in jobs. But, as the outbreaks that we are currently seeing illustrate, Australia and Australians are not out of the woods yet. The Morrison government continues to work with the states and territories to assist their businesses and to support their staff who are impacted by COVID-19. We've expanded Queensland's COVID-19 business support grants to $600 million. We've provided $12.5 million for NT businesses. We've increased support for Victorian businesses to over $800 million. Again, we will continue to provide the support that Australians need.
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Cash! Senator Bragg, a final supplementary question?
Senator BRAGG (New South Wales) (14:22): How can each and every Australian do their bit to help us get out of this pandemic and to get Australian business back into business and Australians back to work?
Senator CASH (Western Australia—Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:22): As we know, the best way for each and every one of us to help small businesses in particular, and to ensure our businesses can stay open and to ensure that Australians can get back to work, is to get vaccinated. As more and more Australians get vaccinated, what we'll do is rob the virus of its potency and its power to disrupt our lives. It's really pleasing to see more and more Australians every single day putting their arms out and getting vaccinated. When we look at those vaccination rates, we went from 15 million doses to 16 million doses in five days, and we went from 16 million doses to 17 million doses in an even smaller period of time. That is what each and every one of us needs to do. Certainly, on those figures there are positive signs that Australians are taking up the opportunity and that they do see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Senator Watt interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Watt!
Senator CASH: Each and every one of us has a role to play, and encouraging Australians to get vaccinated is what we need to do.
Senator Watt interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, count to 10 after you're called to order.
Afghanistan
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:23): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. But before I ask my question I just want to acknowledge that the situation outside Kabul, of course, is extremely difficult and fluid, and I'd like to thank Ministers Payne and Hawke for working with Greens senators over the last week to try to get people evacuated. Given the humanitarian crisis facing the people of Afghanistan, the Canadian and the UK governments have announced that they will take an extra 20,000 refugees, whilst Australia has committed to only 3,000 within the existing capped program. The Prime Minister says 3,000 is just a floor, not a ceiling. Why won't Mr Morrison then do what Mr Abbott did in 2015: match what other countries are doing and give more places to refugees fleeing Afghanistan, making sure that Australia stands by those who stand by us?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:24): [by video link] I thank Senator Hanson-Young for her question and I thank her for the acknowledgement of those ministers who have been engaging with Greens senators in relation to assisting with the extraction of individuals from Afghanistan. Indeed, can I thank many members of the Senate and across the parliament for engagement with local constituencies on those matters and particularly, whilst I know ministers are working hard on it, I thank those many officials working around the clock to do so, especially the officials from various agencies who have been redeployed either to the United Arab Emirates or to Afghanistan to help in these dangerous and challenging circumstances.
Senator Hanson-Young, indeed the government does recognise the humanitarian challenges that exist in relation to what is occurring in Afghanistan. It is why we've made the swift announcement in relation to there being 3,000 places this financial year, in this current financial year's humanitarian intake, to be dedicated to ensuring that Afghani citizens are offered permanent protection in Australia. Since 1 July 2013 more than 8½ thousand visas have been granted to Afghani citizens under Australia's humanitarian visa program. We remain committed to working carefully to give priority to persecuted minorities, to women and children and to those who have links to Australia, such as family members. We'll work as always through the processes to ensure that applicants satisfy public interest criteria for character, security and health, making sure that we do keep the safety and security of Australians as being of paramount importance. Importantly, we'll work with Afghan community leaders in Australia through this process. We'll also work with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to help to identify those most in need.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hanson-Young, a supplementary question?
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:26): Currently, 4,400 Afghans reside in Australia on temporary visas. Why won't the Prime Minister give them permanent protection? They're here already. Many have been here for many, many years. They can't go back. Why not end their limbo now, allowing them to rebuild their lives without the fear of the Taliban? Where is the Prime Minister's compassion for those who are already here so that they can call Australia home?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:26): [by video link] This is indeed a sensitive issue and topic. It is sensitive because we wish to make clear that, obviously, in all of the current circumstances and for the foreseeable future, given the security situation in Afghanistan, nobody is going to be repatriated or expected to return to Afghanistan, given the threats that may exist. However, it's also important, in terms of the protection of life and the protection of our migration system in a way that enables us to make decisions to prioritise those most in need and most appropriate to be allowed to come to Australia, that we maintain confidence and order in the migration program. That requires us to make sure that the policy settings we've put in place that have stopped the tragic flow of boats to Australia—a tragic flow of boats that saw so many people lose their lives, that saw people smugglers gain an upper hand and take advantage of vulnerable people—doesn't have any opportunity to restart. That's why we're keeping in place policies that stopped that.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hanson-Young, a final supplementary question?
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (14:28): The double standard of this government never ceases to amaze. On the same day as trumpeting a new agricultural visa which provides a permanent pathway for agricultural workers, the Prime Minister is refusing to allow people who are already here on Australian soil to stay here permanently to rebuild their lives. How is this fair? How is it fair to leave these people living in limbo while opening up the door to others?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:28): [by video link] What's not fair is to have a circumstance where people smugglers across different parts of Asia take advantage of some of the most vulnerable people: take advantage by taking their money; take advantage by putting them on rickety boats, dangerous boats; take advantage by putting them in harm's way, where they may find themselves losing their lives on a perilous journey to Australia, as many others did before. What wouldn't be fair would be if community confidence in our humanitarian program, our migration program, were undermined to the extent that we were unable to continue to be one of the most generous countries in the world on a per capita basis when it comes to the resettlement of refugees. It wouldn't be fair if it were undermined to the extent that we were unable to make the types of decisions we have made to put a dedicated number of places in place to support Afghani citizens. That's why it's important that we maintain confident settings in those programs so that we can give priority where appropriate by maintaining that community confidence in an orderly system.
COVID-19
Senator McALLISTER (New South Wales) (14:29): My question is to the Minister representing the minister for health, Senator Colbeck. Today New South Wales recorded 818 new COVID-19 cases. There are now 100 people in the ICU and, tragically, there have been 74 deaths from the current outbreak. This is the third consecutive day of more than 800 cases in New South Wales, with the highest ever number of daily cases, 830, recorded yesterday. Can the minister confirm that Australia is now experiencing the highest number of daily cases since the beginning of the pandemic more than 18 months ago?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:30): I thank Senator McAllister for the question. It is true that, over the last few days, the number of cases per day in New South Wales has been the highest since the beginning of the pandemic. We are seeing the very, very difficult effects of the delta variant of the virus, which is clearly transmitted much more quickly in the community, and we've seen a number of states now struggle with that. We're seeing exactly the same concerns being expressed in Victoria, where there were 70-odd cases today. So, clearly, the delta variant, which the government has been quite open and upfront with the Australian people about, is a completely new ball game with respect to the management of COVID-19. We've seen here in the ACT how quickly the numbers increased once the variant arrived in the ACT. We're seeing concerns expressed by state leaders all around the country. The New South Wales government, working with the Australian government, is doing everything that it can to suppress the spread of the virus. That is our responsibility. That is what we're trying to do.
Alongside that growth in numbers, we are seeing every single day an increase in the number of Australians who are vaccinated. We've passed 17 million vaccinations administered in this country, and that rollout continues to develop at speed, as we said it would.
The PRESIDENT: Senator McAllister, a supplementary question?
Senator McALLISTER (New South Wales) (14:32): Based on current projections, when and at what level will daily cases peak?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:32): As I indicated in my answer to the primary question, the New South Wales government, along with the Commonwealth, are doing everything that they possibly can to suppress the transmission of the virus. I say to people in New South Wales, particularly in those LGAs of concern—
The PRESIDENT: Senator McAllister, on a point of order?
Senator McAllister: My point of order is on relevance. It was a very specific question about the projections about daily case numbers.
The PRESIDENT: The minister has been speaking for 19 seconds. I've allowed you to remind the minister of the question. I'll listen carefully during the 41 seconds remaining.
Senator COLBECK: I say to all people in New South Wales, particularly those in the LGAs where the virus is spreading more rapidly: please obey the instructions of and the conditions imposed by the New South Wales government. Please do that, because the virus moves with people and is transmitted to people, and it's only when—
The PRESIDENT: Senator McAllister, on a point of order?
Senator McAllister: My point of order is on relevance. The minister has 18 seconds left. He was asked a very specific question about the projections about the level of daily cases and when they would peak. If he doesn't know the answer, he should take it on notice.
The PRESIDENT: I do take the point that the minister has been speaking for over 40 seconds. It was a question specific in nature, and so I take the time to remind the minister of the question, because the time for a more general commentary has passed.
Senator COLBECK: It's only when people stop moving and interacting with each other that we will see a reduction in the transmission of the virus. It's all very well to come in here to ask impossible-to-answer questions. But the virus travels with people, and it is people's— (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator McAllister, a final supplementary question?
Senator McALLISTER (New South Wales) (14:34): Eighteen months into the pandemic, Australia is experiencing its highest daily case numbers, and millions of Australians are in lockdown in New South Wales, in Victoria and in the ACT. Does Mr Morrison regret failing to secure enough vaccines and repeatedly telling Australians that the vaccine rollout is not a race?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:35): I completely reject the assertion that the Australian government has not secured enough vaccines. We have procured over 100 million doses of vaccines. We have available—and they will be available—enough vaccines that will be developed for the possibility of booster shots down the track.
We will do what we said we would do, which is to continue to increase the supply, continue to increase the opportunity for Australians to take up the vaccine. There are more than 8,000 points in this country, right now, where people can get access to a vaccine.
An opposition senator interjecting—
Senator COLBECK: That's not true, Senator—I will take your interjection. The Victorian Premier even said today that there are open opportunities for vaccines in Victoria today. (Time expired)
Senator O'Neill interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill.
Senator O'Neill interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill! I am going to insist that when senators are called by name they pay some heed to that. We have half the Senate participating remotely.
COVID-19: Vaccination
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (14:36): [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham. Minister, the Prime Minister has provided his very clear support for organisations to introduce requirements for mandatory vaccination for their staff. What message does the government have for workers who object to mandatory vaccination?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:37): [by video link] I thank Senator Hanson for her question. Can I, at the outset, emphasise that the government has said all along that vaccination is a voluntary program, that we are not mandating it—aside from certain very high-risk health areas where, while it is still not Commonwealth legislation doing so, we have worked with states and territories in mandating vaccination, such as in relation to health- or aged-care workers.
It is correct that Australia's workplace relations laws do allow for businesses to put in place arrangements that are reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of people that they work alongside of or, indeed, customers that they may work with. It is for businesses to make an assessment in relation to that reasonableness test, and some have chosen to do so in relation to the COVID-19 vaccine—as is their right under existing workplace arrangements.
We do encourage all Australians to get vaccinated. In doing so, I want to thank and acknowledge the millions of Australians who have done so to date, driving total vaccinations administered in Australia to in excess of 17.1 million doses. That has ensured that we now have nearly 53 per cent of all eligible Australians over the age of 16 having had a first dose. Indeed, of the first age cohort to be eligible for the vaccine, the over 70s, we have now seen more than 85 per cent of them have a first dose and more than 57 per cent of them are fully vaccinated. Of those over 50, more than 75 per cent of them have had the first dose. These are very encouraging numbers, and I continue to urge Australians to make a booking, to get out there, to do the thing that can best save them, their loved ones, their families and their work mates, and that is to get vaccinated.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hanson, a supplementary question?
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (14:39): [by video link] Minister, should there be a limit on this policy? I reference SPC, which is a cannery in regional Victoria where the staff do not come in contact with the public in the normal course of their duties. Why would they need to be vaccinated?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:39): [by video link] It is a matter for SPC to speak for themselves, although I gather they have highlighted that within a food manufacturing workplace such as theirs, with a production line such as theirs—their staff work in close proximity to one another—there are issues they have worked through with their workforce. Engagement and consultation with their workforce is a matter for them, and the advice they seek and the analysis they undertake as to whether they meet the reasonableness test that applies to being able to put such a requirement in place is a matter for them. That's something that Australian businesses had available to them prior to COVID-19, with such reasonable health decisions being a part of workplace arrangements, and it's something that continues. Obviously there needs to be provisions to enable those who have genuine medical or other reasons not to be vaccinated, and I understand such businesses who are making these decisions are applying those arrangements.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hanson, a final supplementary question?
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (14:40): [by video link] In light of your response to that, Minister, and given the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister's strong support for organisations mandating compulsory vaccination in a wide variety of circumstances, will the Prime Minister require Liberal and National Party candidates in the next election to be vaccinated? And will the Prime Minister require disendorsement of members and senators who are not vaccinated?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:41): [by video link] As I said at the outset, vaccination is a voluntary program. As I have emphasised in both previous answers, there are provisions within Australia's laws that existed prior to the pandemic that enable businesses to put in place reasonable practices to ensure the health and safety of co-workers, customers and others that people engage with. I make it very clear: I urge every single member of the coalition and every single member of the parliament to get vaccinated, just as I do every single Australian. I have done so; my wife has done so; my parents, my family and others have done so; and I would encourage all to do so. I would expect any member of the government to do so and would encourage their constituents to do so in a way that helps to continue to build those numbers which we have seen grow so remarkably in recent times that we are now vaccinating, in the space of a week, a city the entire size of Adelaide. (Time expired)
Australian Agriculture Visa
Senator DAVEY (New South Wales—Nationals Whip in the Senate) (14:42): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture and Northern Australia, Senator McKenzie. Minister, following today's announcement about the Australian agriculture visa, can you, please, inform how our government is supporting our agricultural industry and regional communities through the establishment of this visa?
Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Minister for Emergency Management and National Recovery and Resilience, Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education and Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (14:42): Thank you, Senator Davey, for your question. As the regional specialists, the Nationals are extremely proud to be part of a government that unashamedly backs our primary industry. We know that agriculture needs workers. It needs workers now and will well into the future. Today our government has announced further details outlining the establishment of the Australian agriculture visa. It's a big win for farmers; it's a big win for rural communities who rely on agriculture; and it is a big win for the state of New South Wales and the rice industry. This is one of the biggest structural reforms in the history of our agricultural sector. Farmers have been calling for it and we, as a government, have delivered on it. The important new visa will support Australian farmers now and into the future by providing a wider pool of workers to help meet increasing seasonal workforce demands.
The visa will be available to skilled, semiskilled and unskilled workers right across the agriculture sector, including meat processing, the fishing industry, the forestry industry, the dairy industry and horticulture. The initial regulatory framework implementing this visa will be in place by the end of September, with full implementation of the demand-driven visa category within three years. The ag visa, over time, will respond to systemic workforce shortages and was developed as a result of the changes to the Working Holiday Maker Program, which was developed as part of the UK-Australia Free Trade Agreement. It will also include a pathway to permanent residency, potentially giving the workers who help get the crops off the opportunity to actually settle permanently in regional Australia with us. Importantly, workers under the visas will be covered by the same workplace laws, entitlements and protections as Australian citizens.
Opposition senators interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order on my left.
Senator McKENZIE: Absolutely, regional Australia will lead our nation's recovery from COVID-19, and this visa will help us have the skilled workforce we need.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Davey, a supplementary question?
Senator DAVEY (New South Wales—Nationals Whip in the Senate) (14:44): Thank you, Minister. This is not the only example of what we're doing to support our agricultural industries address the current workforce shortages. Can you outline the range of programs we've implemented to do this?
Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Minister for Emergency Management and National Recovery and Resilience, Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education and Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (14:45): The new agriculture visa builds on a number of other measures our government has delivered. In September last year we restarted Pacific labour mobility programs. Since the restart over 10,000 workers have arrived from the Pacific and Timor-Leste. These Pacific workers have been invaluable to our agriculture sector and will continue to be the mainstay of our overseas agricultural workforce well into the future.
We'll also be doubling the number of Pacific workers in Australia, with an extra 12½ thousand people to be recruited by March 2022. We have committed $29.8 million to fund initiatives to improve employment opportunities in the ag sector, including attracting domestic workforce, ensuring we've got incentives to help people—in particular, young people—move to the regions, and it's great to see that over 3,000 people have done that. We've also designed and delivered the Agricultural Workers Code so that workers can cross state borders and get the crops off in time during COVID.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Davey, a final supplementary question?
Senator DAVEY (New South Wales—Nationals Whip in the Senate) (14:46): Minister, can you please explain the barriers our farmers and regional communities face in addressing their workforce shortages?
Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Minister for Emergency Management and National Recovery and Resilience, Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education and Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (14:46): Yes, I can. The biggest barrier for farmers and regional communities is the Australian Labor Party. They have not met a farm, a farmer or a primary industry that they don't want to shut down tomorrow—in partnership with Senator Whish-Wilson and the Greens—whether it is our fantastic fishing industry or our magnificent, sustainable hardwood forestry industry. 'Lock it up and leave it. We don't want any jobs out in rural and regional Australia'—that's the Australian Labor Party. Talk to the live cattle or sheep trade—the Australian Labor Party say 'shut it down'. They just want to wrap up our primary industries in red and green tape; they have no understanding of the contribution they make to our local economies and also our national economy.
One thing we do need to raise in the context of the ag visa is the importance of quarantine systems from our state and territory governments.
Prime Minister
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (14:47): [by video link] My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Birmingham. On 24 June, as delta continued to spread through the Bondi cluster, Mr Morrison said:
… I commend Premier Berejiklian for resisting going into a full lockdown.
Does he stand by this statement?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:47): [by video link] I think I answered an almost identical question at some time in the previous sitting fortnight. Whether it was from Senator Sheldon or another senator, I'm not sure.
As the Prime Minister himself has made clear, and as I told the chamber at that time, our knowledge and understanding of the delta variant and how we need to respond to it has only grown—as indeed our knowledge throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has grown, given the evolving nature of it.
This is a once-in-a-century pandemic. The scientific analysis and the evidence and advice continues to evolve, and we have responded to it and adapted to it as we have gone along. We recognise the fact that, for so much of the pandemic, New South Wales, with one of the best contact-tracing systems in the world, was able to effectively respond to small outbreaks and clusters to effectively drive the testing, undertake the contact tracing and enforce the isolating that kept the people of New South Wales safe during those outbreaks.
Tragically, in relation to this latest outbreak, we do have a circumstance where it has been necessary for New South Wales to pursue lockdowns and, regrettably, those lockdowns have not been able to—
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Birmingham. Senator Watt, on a point of order?
Senator Watt: On relevance. It was a pretty straight question asking whether the Prime Minister, and Senator Birmingham, stood by his statement. We're getting a long dissertation from Senator Birmingham, but we're not getting an answer to that question.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, the material Senator Birmingham is outlining is directly relevant. That point of order goes to attempting to instruct the minister how to answer the question, which I cannot do. The minister is being directly relevant with this material.
Senator BIRMINGHAM: As I said earlier in the answer, these are points the Prime Minister himself has made publicly in response to questions like those that Senator Sheldon has just asked. Tragically, in New South Wales, we do have the circumstance now where, of course, the lockdown has been necessary, and it's been very necessary for New South Wales to tighten aspects of that lockdown, and we have made sure with the provision, as Senator Payne referenced earlier, of Australian Defence Force personnel to seek to help New South Wales in the enforcement of that lockdown, as we've made such ADF resources available to other states and territories before—whether it be in lockdown enforcement, border enforcement or, indeed, testing or other regimes—to support them.
The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Sheldon, a supplementary question?
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (14:50): [by video link] On 15 August, after the Bondi cluster had spread throughout the state, Mr Morrison claimed he told Premier Berejiklian to lock down the entire state. Why did Mr Morrison insist that south-west and Western Sydney go into a hard lockdown when he previously insisted Bondi, where the delta outbreak started, remain open?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:50): [by video link] We have sought through this pandemic to work as best we can with state and territory governments, who have the public health powers and abilities to put in place the restrictions that have so effectively kept Australia safe. Despite the very challenging, very difficult circumstances we know that Australians in lockdown face at present and the tragic circumstances for those who have lost loved ones to COVID-19, be it in the current New South Wales outbreak, last year's Victorian outbreak or other circumstances in Australia, as a nation we have still performed far, far better than almost any other developed country around the world in terms of suppressing COVID-19, in terms of saving lives and in terms of ensuring that our country is as strongly placed for the future as is possible. We're going to continue to build on that through the rapid escalation we've seen in the vaccine rollout, working with the states and territories, with health professionals, general practitioners and pharmacies, to keep that momentum in vaccination rates.
The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Birmingham. Senator Sheldon, a final supplementary question?
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (14:52): [by video link] Will Prime Minister Morrison accept responsibility and apologise to the people of south-west and Western Sydney who are in a harsh lockdown as a result of his failure to secure enough vaccine supply and his failure to build purpose-built quarantine facilities?
Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:52): [by video link] Like Senator Colbeck previously, I reject completely the assertion in relation to vaccine supply. Australia has contracted some 180 million doses of vaccine for primary supply and many tens of millions of doses now to support booster shots. Of course, as is well known, there have been some challenges in the vaccine supply—the challenges in terms of early failure to deliver, from Europe to Australia, some 3.4 million doses that would have enabled us to move faster earlier, had those doses turned up; and challenges in relation to the changes in ATAGI advice related to AstraZeneca that are all too well known. But what we have managed to do is ensure Australia had fallback options with each of those challenges, with the contracts we put in place with Pfizer and the contracts we put in place with Moderna. The fact that we're now seeing Australians turn out in such record numbers and that, indeed, we are administering vaccines at a faster rate than many other countries have managed to achieve is a testament to— (Time expired)
Tokyo Paralympic Games
Senator HUGHES (New South Wales) (14:53): My question is to the Minister for Sport, Senator Colbeck.
Senator Watt interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt!
Senator HUGHES: Can the minister outline to the Senate how Australia will take part in the Tokyo Paralympics—
Honourable senators interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order! Sorry, Senator Hughes. I have repeatedly asked for silence during questions. Senator Hughes, please start the question again.
Senator HUGHES: My question is to the Minister for Sport, Senator Colbeck. Can the minister please outline to the Senate how Australia will take part in the Tokyo Paralympics?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:54): I thank the senator for her question and acknowledge her interest. The Tokyo Paralympics begin tomorrow with the holding of the opening ceremony and run through to 5 September. I don't know about other senators, but I am certainly looking forward to watching these Paralympic Games, just as many Australians watched and enjoyed the Olympics that occurred just recently, and the pride of Australia from a Paralympics perspective will be on show for the world to see.
These Paralympics offer another important opportunity for Australians to unite and celebrate the individual efforts of athletes who've overcome some extraordinary odds. Paralympians, in particular, have done that. Athletes will be representing 163 nations and competing across 22 sports. Just like their Olympic counterparts, this Paralympic team are a source of inspiration to absolutely every one of us. Australia's team in Tokyo will be the largest ever at an overseas Paralympics and the biggest since Sydney in 2000, with 179 athletes. They will compete in 18 sports, including the debut disciplines of para-taekwondo and para-badminton. The team includes soon-to-be seven-time Paralympians Danni Di Toro and Christie Dawes, as well as 84 athletes making their Paralympic Games debut.
The success of our athletes depends very much on the team behind the team, and the Australian Institute of Sport must be commended for its leadership, assisting sports and athletes, particularly in managing the challenges of the pandemic. I say to Paralympics Australia—the president, Jock O'Callaghan; the chief executive officer, Lynne Anderson; and the chef de mission, Kate McLoughlin—thank you for your work in assisting— (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hughes, a supplementary question?
Senator HUGHES (New South Wales) (14:56): Minister, how is the Liberal and National government supporting Australia's Paralympic team to get to and perform to their best in Tokyo?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:56): The Australian government is proud to support our athletes in achieving their Paralympic dreams. In fact, more than 85 per cent of athletes competing in Tokyo have received direct grants through the Australian Institute of Sport. This is in addition to other support for Paralympics Australia and para-athletes, including $3.5 million in this year's budget to support Paralympics Australia to fund additional COVID-19 related costs such as charter flights and return quarantine arrangements for athletes and their support staff participating in the 2021 Tokyo Paralympic Games; $4.5 million in 2021-22 in increased funding direct to 13 Paralympic high-performance sports in national sporting organisations, to enhance preparations for Tokyo and beyond; and $8 million over three years, from 2018-19, to support the Australian Paralympic team to prepare for these games. (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator Hughes, a final supplementary question?
Senator HUGHES (New South Wales) (14:57): Why is the Paralympics important to the broader population of the Australian community?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:57): The Paralympics and our para-athletes, as I've said, are an inspiration to us all, as well as elite athletes in their respective sports. These athletes have some extraordinary tales of hardship that they've overcome to be competing in these games. They are an enormous demonstration of how sport and physical activity can play an important role in our lives and, in some circumstances, give an opportunity that would not exist otherwise. That's very much the case with the story of some of our para-athletes. They have opportunities that they would not have otherwise had. I say to all Australians: I hope you enjoy the 2020 Paralympics. I look forward to watching them and I look forward to cheering on our athletes to do their best, as I know that they're aspiring to do, over the next few weeks. (Time expired)
COVID-19
Senator WATT (Queensland) (14:58): My question is also to the Minister representing the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Senator Colbeck. Yesterday on Insiders, Mr Morrison said that high COVID case numbers shouldn't delay Australia's reopening: 'At some point, you need to make that gear change, and that is done at 70 per cent.' Is it the Morrison-Joyce government's position that New South Wales, which recorded its worst day on Sunday, with 830 new cases, should open up when it hits a rate of 70 per cent vaccination, irrespective of case numbers?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:59): What the Prime Minister was doing was reinforcing the work that has been prepared for national cabinet, which has been agreed to by national cabinet and supported by the modelling of the Doherty institute. To reinforce that, the national cabinet has requested that additional work to update that Doherty modelling be commissioned to support the program. And, as the Chief Medical Officer said yesterday, the fundamentals of that modelling don't change.
I think it's dishonest of Labor, as it has been throughout the pandemic, to be frank, to suggest that this question be considered in isolation from all of the other things that we're doing, including the increase in vaccination. We've seen over a million Australians in the last four days receive a vaccination. We've seen day after day—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, on a point of order?
Senator Watt: On relevance. We're getting lots of rhetoric from the minister, but we're not getting an answer to the question, which is simply whether it's the government's position that New South Wales should open up when it hits a rate of 70 per cent vaccination, irrespective of case numbers.
The PRESIDENT: Again, Senator Watt, I'm going to insist that, rather than just take the opportunity to say the answer is not appreciated and then read out the question again, particularly when it's only part of the question being read—it contained a number of quotations that refer to a rather comprehensive area of public policy. The minister is directly relevant to that by addressing the issue of vaccination. I can't instruct him on how to answer a question. But I don't think anyone would assert that that is not relevant to the modelling that you refer to.
Senator COLBECK: Of course, the modelling includes a whole range of different measures that support reopening the Australian economy, which is what we all want. We want Australians to be able to move more freely, and there are a number of actions that are being taken by state governments and the Commonwealth government to facilitate that. There are restrictions on movement that are being taken to limit the spread of the virus. That's what we're doing. We're increasing and continuing to increase the pace of the rollout, with records being posted nearly every day for the number of Australians who are turning out to get a vaccine. We thank every single one of them for doing so, and we encourage more to continue to do that. We want to see our economy open. We want to see Australians being able to move around. We'll continue to do everything we can to facilitate that.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, a supplementary question?
Senator WATT (Queensland) (15:02): One of the architects of the Doherty institute modelling, Professor James McCaw, said last Friday that if New South Wales case numbers weren't reduced we would need 'stronger social measures and stronger versions of lockdowns, rather than weaker'. Who is right: Mr Morrison or Professor McCaw?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (15:02): As I indicated a moment ago, the Prime Minister was reinforcing the agreement that he has made with state and territory leaders to start opening the economy at certain points of vaccination rate. To reinforce that, the national cabinet has asked the Doherty institute to do some further work on the modelling. But our aim is to work with the states and territories in a cooperative manner to reinforce the need to get vaccinated and to provide the opportunity for Australians to take up vaccination and reduce community transmission of the virus so that we can reopen both our communities and our economy, which we know is what all Australians want. That's what we will continue to do.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, a final supplementary question?
Senator WATT (Queensland) (15:03): University of Melbourne epidemiologist Professor Tony Blakely warned this morning, 'If you've got high numbers, your contact tracing will be overwhelmed and you won't have as much of an effect from your vaccination coverage to keep things under control.' Who is right: Mr Morrison or Professor Blakely?
Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (15:04): What the government will continue to do is to take the advice of the health professionals who have been guiding us through the process. When we received the Doherty modelling, we released it to the public so that they could see it. What I would urge the Australian public to do is to have a look at the Doherty modelling. We will continue to release the information that will allow Australians to be able to make their choices about whether they should call on their state governments to open up their economies. We will continue to work to fight against the virus instead of, as the Labor opposition are doing, fighting against us. There are no Cedric Dublers on that side. They're not barracking for the Australian people or trying to assist us to win this race against the virus.
Honourable senators interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order across the chamber!
Senator COLBECK: They're more likely to be at the back of the pack and trying to talk the athletes over. We'll continue to work in the interests of Australian people.
Senator McAllister interjecting—
Senator O'Neill interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator McAllister, Senator O'Neill, order! When I call people's names, I ask them to have some respect for the chair. I appreciate there was some volume in the chamber at that point because of the nature of the interjections during the contribution. But I did call people to order on numerous occasions.
Senator CASH: Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
COVID-19
Prime Minister
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (15:05): I move:
That the Senate take notice of answers given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Payne), the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services (Senator Colbeck) and the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to questions without notice asked by Senators Keneally, McAllister, Watt and Sheldon relating to COVID-19.
The Prime Minister was New South Wales Premier Berejiklian's biggest cheerleader when she refused to send Bondi into lockdown. As we stand here today, the people of Western Sydney, indeed of all of New South Wales, of Victoria, of Canberra and even of New Zealand are being drawn into Mr Morrison's COVID quagmire. Their frustration is palpable. We are 18 months into this pandemic. It shouldn't be this way, but the situation in Australia is worse than ever. In Sydney people have endured eight weeks of lockdown: eight long weeks of isolation from friends and family, eight long weeks of children trying to be schooled at home. For many it's been eight weeks of heartbreaking loneliness, for what? We get more bad news every day. It's no longer just the rising case numbers; there's a death toll now too, and it stands at 74. The Prime Minister in his urging to end the lockdowns openly admits that the death toll will rise. Despite all the sacrifices, despite all the hardship, the numbers keep ratcheting up and up. There doesn't appear to be an end in sight. It is a race to protect as many Australians as possible with the vaccine before this outbreak is totally out of control. But it's a chaotic race and it's too little, too late from Mr Morrison.
The statistics here will make you cry. One in 250 people in the Blacktown LGA is positive for COVID. One in 125 people in the Cumberland LGA is COVID positive. These are Western Sydney people who are COVID positive. We've only got 23 per cent of the Australian population fully vaccinated, and priority groups are still waiting. Eight per cent of the western New South Wales Indigenous community over the age of 16 is fully vaccinated—only eight per cent. There's no plan to vaccinate the 12- to 15-year-olds. The TGA has approved the Moderna vaccine, but Mr Morrison was only able to secure 10 million doses for 2021, with the majority not arriving for months. Whose responsibility is vaccine supply? It's the federal government's, the Morrison government's. It's Mr Morrison's failure to supply vaccines and his failure to deliver fit-for-purpose quarantine that have resulted in this mess. Mr Morrison promised that all Australians would be fully vaccinated by October: fail. He promised that four million Australians would be vaccinated by the end of March: fail. He promised that all quarantine workers, frontline healthcare workers, aged- and disability-care staff and residents would be vaccinated by Easter: fail. He promised six million Australians would be vaccinated by 10 May: fail. Now he's making promises about families gathering around the table for Christmas lunch. Maybe he ought to understand that Vinnies in Western Sydney are reporting that people are coming into their shops to sell their furniture, their dining room tables, for food. These are people who are going to be lucky to have furniture by Christmas. Addison Road, another frontline service, says that 50 per cent of their food-aid recipients are new to food aid, because of jobs lost, a loss of livelihood, mounting debts, reduced hours and having to escape violent households during this COVID lockdown. They say they were providing groceries to two people per week before the pandemic. Now they've reached 8,000.
Mr Morrison has failed to reach every vaccine target he's ever set. People, particularly in Western Sydney, are being told to get a vaccine. That would be great, except, over in the other place, the government has told the member for Greenway that vaccine hubs in Western Sydney are unnecessary. I've got news for the government: pharmacists in some parts of Western Sydney are tearing their hair out because they can't get access to enough vaccine. GPs in Western Sydney are hesitant to give AstraZeneca to young people. They're hesitant to receive the indemnity and hesitant to give that advice. Pharmacists are telling us that they're running through their two-week supply in two days. This is not a lightning response. This is not agile. This is failure, and it is the people of Western Sydney and the people of Australia who are being left behind by this 'too little, too late' Prime Minister. (Time expired)
Senator SCARR (Queensland) (15:11): There is no doubt that Australia is in difficult times at the moment. My heart goes out to the communities in Western Sydney, the broader Sydney community and, indeed, the areas across all of Australia where people are subject to lockdowns. We hope and pray that we emerge from this crisis as quickly as possible, as quickly as we can. I want to make a few points in relation to this debate. The first is: the Prime Minister has been absolutely crystal clear that he takes responsibility. He takes responsibility for the current situation and for the early setbacks. I want to quote the Prime Minister:
… I take responsibility for the early setbacks in our vaccination programme. I also take responsibility for getting them fixed and that we are now matching world’s best rates, with more than 1 million doses …
We're actually doing better than that now. As to the latest figures in terms of vaccination rates—and a lot of this has been contributed to by the GPs, the pharmacists and the clinics in New South Wales, many in those areas which Senator Keneally spoke about—in the last three days, one million doses of the vaccine have been given to Australians. That's an extraordinary figure. That means that more than 85 per cent of our over-70s have received one dose of the vaccine; more than 70 per cent of our over-50s have received one dose; and more than 50 per cent of over-16s have received one dose—extraordinary figures.
There has been an extraordinary acceleration in relation to the number of doses given. If we go back, historically, and have a look at the acceleration, we can see it drawn out in stark relief. One million doses took 45 days; going from 13 to 14 million doses only took six days; going from 14 to 15 million doses took three days; going from 15 to 16 million doses took five days; and going from 16 to 17 took three days. We're essentially providing a million doses every three days, which is an extraordinary effort. I really commend all of the health workers and other health professionals who are engaged in that process, and I congratulate all of those Australians who, with the benefit of their own health advice, have made their own determination to come forward and be vaccinated.
It's not only that. We have a national plan, which has four phases, and it is absolutely vital that we stick to that plan. It's absolutely vital that all of the premiers and all of the state governments stick together on the plan that was agreed at national cabinet—the plan that was informed by the best research available to the government, from the Doherty institute, and by economic modelling from Treasury. We need to stick with the plan. It would be extraordinarily disappointing if the rhetoric in this place generated an atmosphere which led or encouraged people to depart from that plan. I was very concerned about some of the rhetoric coming from those opposite in relation to continually looking at case numbers. As the Prime Minister has said, once we hit that 70 per cent vaccination rate, once we hit that 80 per cent vaccination rate, our focus has to shift to those hospitalisation rates and be not so much on those case numbers.
If you look at Israel, which was out there at the forefront and got its people vaccinated more quickly than any other country on the face of the earth, their current COVID case rate is extremely high. In Israel it's in the thousands every day, notwithstanding the fact that they were out there and got their people vaccinated early. But, as is the case in Israel, so will be the case in Australia. We have to be committed to the national plan that was agreed upon, and that means that, once we hit those 70 per cent and 80 per cent vaccination rates, we have to start opening up. We can't continue indefinitely with these lockdowns. It is just not possible. They are taking a toll on our young people and on older people. A mental health toll is being paid by so many people in our community. Small businesses are seeing their life's work destroyed. In the future, we can't continue with lockdowns that just go on indefinitely. Once we get those 70 per cent and 80 per cent vaccination rates—and we're achieving remarkable outcomes at the moment—we have to start to open up.
Senator McALLISTER (New South Wales) (15:16): Hemingway wrote that bankruptcy happens gradually and then suddenly. The consequences of the Prime Minister's decision that vaccination was not a race have revealed themselves in much the same way. The Prime Minister's plan with COVID, as with everything it seems, appears always to have been to do as little as possible, take as little responsibility as possible and then just hope that everything would work out in the end. Frequent small outbreaks were built into the government's plan. They were a natural consequence of Mr Morrison's refusal to take responsibility and fix the hotel quarantine system. His own budget documents from May this year assumed there would be one lockdown a month. But there was always a risk that these outbreaks could not be contained, especially with the government's failure to acquire enough vaccines to meet any of the numerous vaccination time lines it devised and then discarded over the last 12 months.
The Prime Minister was gambling with other people's lives and with other people's livelihoods, and it's individuals and families across New South Wales and the country who are paying the price. As the case numbers in New South Wales have climbed gradually and then suddenly—just as Hemingway told us might happen—the consequences have become stark. Back in June, the Prime Minister congratulated Premier Berejiklian for not going into a full lockdown, and here we are in August with the third day in a row of case numbers over 800 in New South Wales. These numbers are the highest that we have seen since the pandemic began, yet the government was unable to tell us in question time today when it expects they will peak. A good government would be honest with the Australian public about where we are and where we are heading. It would own up to its mistakes. It would lay out the sacrifices it is asking the Australian public to accept and it would explain what the plan out of here really is. Well, it seems that is too difficult a task for this Prime Minister, who always wanted the job but never wanted the work.
The reporting over the weekend that the Doherty modelling was based on low case loads and may not support opening up at 70 per cent was, sadly, not news. The Prime Minister's approach has always been to assume good luck and low case loads. The Prime Minister's plan has always been just to hope that everything goes right. We heard from the Doherty institute's Professor James McCaw that, if New South Wales case numbers weren't reduced, we'd need:
… stronger social measures and stronger versions of lockdowns rather than weaker.
We've heard from epidemiologist Professor Blakely: 'If you've got high numbers, your contact tracing will be overwhelmed and you won't have as much of an effect from your vaccination coverage to keep things under control.'
I read the Doherty advice—I wonder sometimes whether Senator Colbeck has. It's very clear that all of those thresholds are absolutely dependent on having an effective contact, trace and isolate strategy sitting behind them. Meanwhile, that's of no interest to the Prime Minister apparently. He was on Insiders, insisting that New South Wales should open up at 70 per cent as per the Doherty modelling. There was no nuance, no reflection on the gravity of the situation, no reflection on the risks he is asking Australians to take on, just stubborn pride and ego. It's characteristic of his entire approach to leadership.
This weekend more than 200 children aged nine and under were diagnosed with COVID-19 in New South Wales. That's chilling news for parents who look at their precious little people; they worry whether the months of home schooling may not, in fact, be the worst thing that their kids have to face. And what makes that particularly confronting is that the overwhelming majority of children are not eligible for vaccines. Will children be amongst the 70 per cent vaccinated? Well, we don't know. The Australian public actually deserves some answers from this gutless Prime Minister. (Time expired)
Senator VAN (Victoria) (15:21): I rise to respond to Senator McAllister and Senator Keneally because they've just got it plain wrong. They were so silent last year when Victoria was in lockdown; we did not hear a peep out of them. There was not one peep about how badly managed the pandemic was in Victoria.
Senator McAllister was quoting Professor Blakely just now. He was the one who was calling for better contact tracing in Victoria last year. Victoria has had over 200 days of lockdown. So when you're banging on about the people in south-western Sydney, think about the people in Victoria. Think about the people in Melbourne who have done it so much tougher than on your patch. I have full empathy and sympathy for the people in south-western Sydney. The government has been doing an exceptional job of getting the vaccine out to protect those people.
I was flicking through some materials over the weekend and I pulled out a media report from 5 November 2020. It was talking about how the government had just completed its fourth order for a total of 135 million vaccines for Australians and for our Pacific neighbours; that's more than five times the population of Australia. Now, if we look at the figures of what vaccine supply we have agreements for, there are 255 million doses ordered or under contract, plus over $25 million for the COVAX facility. There is going to be more than enough to go around. There is more than enough now.
I was listening to Premier Andrews yesterday in his daily little press conference—and it just chills Victorians to the bone every time they see him stand up and hear him speak about how we've got to go harder. He was saying that, even in the state-run facilities, there were over 70,000 vaccine appointments available that Victorians could go and get. There would be even more in the Commonwealth-run ones—probably two-thirds of that again. So there is ample work being done to protect Australians and protect Victorians.
When it comes to Premier Andrews, is he a man of his word or not? This is the question that all Australians, and particularly Victorians, have to ask. He went to national cabinet. He sat down with his colleagues, all the premiers, and they agreed on the national plan. That plan was phase A, the current phase, where we accelerate vaccination rates and where we have lockdowns. But now he's stepping back from what he agreed to with phase B. He's going: 'Maybe not, once we hit 70 per cent. Maybe not, when we get to 80 per cent.' Does this man not keep his word? Is that all his word is worth? It's the same with Premier McGowan. Are they just going to back away from their word? These are people who Australians voted in, putting their trust in them, and now they're backing away from their agreements with the national cabinet. This is not an election promise that you can back away from when you don't feel like sticking to it. This is an agreement with the national cabinet. How dare these people not accept that agreement and work towards its delivery? It's ludicrous. Premier Andrews can stand there every day and go, 'You've been bad little children'—
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Please resume your seat, Senator Van. Senator Urquhart.
Senator Urquhart: A point of order: I bring to the attention of the Senate standing order 193, which says that you cannot make an imputation or a personal reflection on people from other parliaments and other jurisdictions. I would encourage the senator to come to order on that point.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Urquhart. I must say I was listening but I didn't hear any breach of that order. Senator Van, I know you're a reasonable person.
Senator VAN: The people of Victoria are having their say about Mr Daniel Andrews, the Premier of Victoria, every single day. There are people who are just sick of lockdown, and by 'sick' I mean mentally unwell. You say the word 'lockdown' and Victorians recoil; their bodies jump at the mention of it. People are sick of being locked down. They need hope. Where is this hope going to come from? It's coming from the vaccine rollout—the amount of vaccine that is available for people right now, which people must go out and get. There's hope in the national plan: 70 per cent, then 80 per cent and then life gets back to some semblance of normal. That's what Victorians want to hear, and Daniel Andrews had better back up his agreement to national cabinet.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Van, you need to refer to people by their proper titles.
Senator VAN: Premier Andrews must stick to his promise to national cabinet. If he backs away from it, the people of Victoria should judge him incredibly harshly.
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (15:27): [by video link] I rise to take note of the answers given by Senators Birmingham, Payne and Colbeck. I want to make a really clear point. We've just heard from Senator Van that there are more than enough vaccines now, but that is simply not true. I would suggest that the government and the crossbenchers have a look at the evidence that vaccines are not going to the critical areas that need them.
I will give the example. An article in the Sydney Morning Herald from 23 August mentions a pregnant woman in Sydney, Ms Topp, who is struggling to access the COVID-19 vaccine, despite emerging evidence that pregnant women can experience severe disease if they contract the virus, with rising numbers of cases in the demographic. Ms Topp said:
I'm going through the public system—I don't have an obstetrician … It is like a secret handshake situation. It has become about who you know.
The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists have urged practitioners and governments to prioritise pregnant women. Frenchs Forest obstetrician Dr Talat Uppal said:
I don't know if the finite nature of pregnancy is being appreciated: these women are going to deliver and some may deliver early. They need to receive the vaccine in a timely way.
There have been 39 pregnant women that have contracted COVID-19. This is a particularly disturbing outcome of the government's lack of action.
Then we move to the aged-care facilities, none of which are getting the number of vaccinations they need. There's not enough there. Listen to them. They're saying that there is not enough.
Gerard Hayes, secretary of the Health Services Union, said many workers in the sector who wanted to get vaccinated hadn't been able to do so. He said people had made appointments and had to cancel them to go to work. He said he was receiving calls from those in the sector looking for assistance to get vaccinated, including workers from the Central Coast and in Dubbo, and he was concerned about the pressure on workers. He said:
We are seeing people leaving the industry and that worries me due to the workforce that's required now and into the future.
Quite clearly, the government's failing pregnant women, it's failed the aged-care sector and it's now failed with the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Just over a quarter of Australians in the NDIS are fully vaccinated, below the national average, yet this was a priority group—the highest priority for the government. They have failed time and time again. They have put people at risk because of their own incompetence. As Australia battles its most serious outbreak of COVID-19 to date, just 26.9 per cent of the 267,526 NDIS participants aged over 16, who are in phase 1a and 1b of the vaccine rollout, are fully vaccinated. These are just horrific statistics. Don't take it from me. Anne Kavanagh, professor of disability and health and an epidemiologist at the University of Melbourne, said the vaccine rollout for disabled Australians was 'negligent' and a 'failure', and the consequences could be dire amid a surging delta outbreak.
This is clearly the government's failure to turn around and take all the appropriate steps. Let's just look at the track record. Mr Morrison says he doesn't hold a hose. Mr Morrison says the vaccine rollout isn't a race. Mr Morrison says New South Wales didn't need to go into lockdown. Mr Morrison is a Prime Minister in name only, because he certainly hasn't filled the duties of Prime Minister throughout this pandemic, and his continuing failure is putting everyone at risk.
Question agreed to.
Afghanistan
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (15:32): I move:
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to a question without notice asked by Senator Hanson-Young today relating to Afghanistan.
I will throw to Senator McKim to make some comments.
Senator McKIM (Tasmania—Deputy Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate) (15:32): [by video link] As Senator Hanson-Young said at the start of her question, the Australian Greens absolutely recognise that the situation outside the Kabul airport is extremely difficult and fluid and at times extremely dangerous, and we would like to thank both Minister Payne and Minister Hawke for their engagement with Senator Rice and me over recent days. We also want to thank officers from DFAT, from Home Affairs and from the Australian Border Force and Australian Defence Force personnel for their ongoing efforts in providing advice, in processing visas and in evacuating people from Afghanistan under what are extremely trying conditions, to say the least.
The situation in Afghanistan, with the Taliban in control of much of the country and with local forces in other parts of the country preparing armed resistance to the Taliban, is heartbreaking and terrifying. It will undoubtedly result in countless more lives lost, along with the kind of brutality against women and girls and against ethnic and religious minorities that we witnessed so horrifyingly when the Taliban were last in power.
We in Australia and the government of Australia cannot absolve ourselves from culpability for what is happening. We helped bring about the current situation by being part of a colonialist invasion, and we have a moral obligation to respond accordingly, and that means responding strongly and decisively. We should immediately announce that Australia will accept 20,000 refugees from Afghanistan in addition to our existing annual humanitarian intake. This would allow us to provide protection to far more people, to people like women and girls, to people like LGBTIQ+ people, to people like human rights advocates, journalists and artists who've been critical of the Taliban in the past, to more people who supported Australian defence and Australian consular personnel and to people from ethnic, religious and cultural minorities who've previously been persecuted by the Taliban, such as Hazara people.
Prime Minister Morrison's current offer of 3,000 places, which I note is not in addition to our existing humanitarian intake, is grossly inadequate. He has since said that it is a floor, not a ceiling. Well, if we've got a higher target, he should announce it so more people know that they can apply for these humanitarian visas and ultimately freedom and safety in Australia. Both the United Kingdom and Canada have offered to take 20,000 refugees from Afghanistan, which shows the pittance that Australia is currently offering to take. There is absolutely no reason why Australia should not match those offers and take 20,000 refugees from Afghanistan.
The government should also announce that everyone from Afghanistan who is currently in Australia on a temporary visa will receive permanent protection and be put on a pathway to Australian citizenship, and we should immediately release people from Afghanistan who are currently in immigration detention in Australia because they arrived here by boat to claim asylum. While we're at it, we should also return to Australia those who are exiled offshore in Papua New Guinea or Nauru. Those people have been in detention for more than eight years, and most of them sought our protection after fleeing Taliban brutality the last time the Taliban was in power. While we're doing that, we should release that entire cohort of people.
We know what happened the last time the Taliban seized power. It was a calamity for human rights, for religious, ethnic and cultural minorities, and for women and girls. It was absolutely brutal and horrendous, and tragically, history looks set to repeat. We cannot stand by and do less than our share. Other countries are doing more, and so should we. The government needs to step up. We can do better and we must.
Question agreed to.
NOTICES
Presentation
Senator Patrick to move on 1 September 2021:
That the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Regulations 2021, made under the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission Act 2012, be disallowed [F2021L00863].
Senator Ruston to move on the next day of sitting:
That, on Wednesday, 25 August 2021, the notice of motion proposing the disallowance of the Industry Research and Development (Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program) Instrument 2021 be called on at 4 pm and, if consideration of the motion has not concluded by 4.30 pm, the question then be put.
Senator Faruqi to move on the next day of sitting:
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Youth, by no later than 9.30 am on Thursday 26 August 2021, de-identified information about applications for the Australian Research Council Future Fellowships 2021 and Discovery Early Career Researcher Award 2022 funding schemes, specifically:
(a) the number of applications deemed ineligible on the basis that they cited pre-print publications;
(b) the primary field of research code of each of those applications; and
(c) the total monetary value of those applications.
Senator Lambie to move on the next day of sitting:
That the following matters be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and interim report by 29 November 2021, and a final report by the first parliamentary sitting week in February 2022:
(a) Australia's twenty-year military, diplomatic and development engagement in Afghanistan, with reference to:
(i) our success in achieving the Australian Governments' stated objectives,
(ii) the collapse of the Afghan Government and Afghan National Army, and the Taliban's resurgence and takeover of Kabul, following the withdrawal of coalition troops from Afghanistan,
(iii) the costs of Australia's engagement in Afghanistan,
(iv) the Prime Minister's statement that Australian Government support will not reach 'all that it should' in Afghanistan following the withdrawal of coalition forces from the country; and
(b) how the Australian Government should respond to recent developments in Afghanistan in order to:
(i) protect Australia's national security,
(ii) prevent or mitigate damage to Australia's international reputation, if necessary,
(iii) extend immediate mental health support to Australian defence force personnel and veterans while the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide remains ongoing, and
(iv) protect Australian citizens, visa holders, and Afghan nationals who supported Australian forces, where they remain in Afghanistan; and
(v) any related matters.
Senator Waters to move on the next day of sitting:
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Water, by no later than 1 pm on Thursday, 26 August 2021, the following documents relating to the Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling program:
(a) any correspondence between the Minister for Resources and Water and Tamboran Resources Ltd, Santos Ltd or Sweetpea Petroleum Pty Ltd or any subsidiaries discussing the program;
(b) any correspondence between the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction and Tamboran Resources Ltd, Santos Ltd or Sweetpea Petroleum Pty Ltd or any subsidiaries discussing the program; and
(c) details of any meetings between the Minister for Resources and Water or the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction and representatives of Tamboran Resources Ltd, Santos Ltd or Sweetpea Petroleum Pty Ltd, including date, location, attendees, and notes of any matters discussed.
BUSINESS
Leave of Absence
Senator URQUHART (Tasmania—Opposition Whip in the Senate) (15:38): by leave—I move:
That leave of absence be granted to Senators Wong, Gallagher, Ciccone, Kitching, Bilyk, Gallacher, Sheldon, Ayres, Dodson, McCarthy, Marielle Smith, Chisholm, Sterle, Walsh, Farrell and Green from 23 to 26 August 2021, for personal reasons.
Question agreed to.
Leave of Absence
Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (15:39): by leave—I move:
That leave of absence be granted to the following senators from 23 to 26 August 2021:
(a) Senators Antic, Birmingham, Fawcett, Griff and McLachlan, for personal reasons;
(b) Senators Abetz, Duniam, Fierravanti-Wells, Hanson, Henderson, Lambie, McDonald, McGrath and Roberts, on account of state COVID-19 travel restrictions; and
(c) Senator Molan, for medical reasons.
Question agreed to.
Leave of Absence
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (15:39): by leave—I move:
That leave of absence be granted to Senators Waters, Rice, Thorpe, Whish-Wilson, McKim, Steele-John and Faruqi from 23 to 26 August 2021, for COVID-19 related reasons.
Question agreed to.
NOTICES
Postponement
The Clerk: Postponement notifications have been lodged in respect of the following:
Business of the Senate notice of motion no. 1 standing in the name of Senator Whish-Wilson for today, proposing a reference to the Environment and Communications References Committee, postponed till 30 August 2021.
General business notice of motion no. 1216 standing in the name of Senator Whish-Wilson for today, proposing an order for the production of documents by the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment, postponed till 30 August 2021.
General business notice of motion no. 1220 standing in the name of Senator Hanson-Young for today, proposing the introduction of the Live Performance Federal Insurance Guarantee Bill 2021, postponed till 25 August 2021.
COMMITTEES
Reporting Date
The Clerk: Notifications of extensions of time for committees to report have been lodged in respect of the following:
Economics References Committee—Foreign investment proposals—from 20 to 27 August 2021.
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee—Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 5) Bill 2021 [Provisions]—from 20 to 27 August 2021.
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee—Advancing Australia's strategic interests in the region—from 2 to 30 September 2021.
The PRESIDENT (15:40): I remind senators that the question may be put on any proposal at the request of any senator.
NOTICES
Withdrawal
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (15:40): I withdraw general business notice of motion No. 1218 standing in the name of Senator Waters for today, relating to an order for the production of documents.
DOCUMENTS
Urban Congestion Fund
Order for the Production of Documents
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (15:41): At the request of Senator Rice, I move:
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development, by no later than 10 am on Monday, 30 August 2021, the following documents discussed during a hearing of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee on 19 July 2021:
(a) any email or document setting out the list of 'top twenty marginal seats' to be 'canvassed' for projects as part of the Urban Congestion Fund (UCF), as referred to by Mr Brian Boyd of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) on page 5 of the Hansard of the committee's hearing on 19 July 2021;
(b) any spreadsheets created by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development for the purpose of setting out proposed UCF projects, as referenced in paragraphs 2.30 to 2.32 of the ANAO's report, Administration of commuter car park projects within the Urban Congestion Fund;
(c) any spreadsheets created by, originating in, or shared between the Prime Minister's office and the offices of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development or the Minister for Urban Infrastructure, setting out proposed UCF projects, as referenced in paragraphs 2.30 to 2.32 of the ANAO's report, Administration of commuter car park projects within the Urban Congestion Fund; and
(d) any maps and attached schedules referred to by Mr Boyd of the ANAO on page 8 of the Hansard of the committee's hearing on 19 July 2021, setting out where projected UCF expenditure would take place and the party affiliation of the seats in which that expenditure would occur.
Question agreed to.
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (15:41): Could I have it noted that the government opposed that motion.
JobKeeper Payment
Order for the Production of Documents
Senator PATRICK (South Australia) (15:41): I move:
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) the order of 4 August 2021 requiring the Commissioner of Taxation to provide, by 9.30 am on Thursday, 12 August 2021, the list of all employers with an annual turnover of greater than $10 million that were paid a JobKeeper payment and the number of employees paid, the total amount paid and any amount returned, has not been complied with,
(ii) the response by the Commissioner acknowledges the power of the Senate to require the publication of documents and information, but claims public interest immunity in relation to the documents, and
(iii) in support of the claim the Commissioner asserts that the release of the information will harm the public interest by undermining public confidence in the Commissioner's ability to keep taxation information confidential;
(b) rejects the claim of public interest immunity made by the Commissioner of Taxation, noting that:
(i) the information sought relates to public funding received by an employer, not an employer's business or taxation information, and
(ii) the harm purported cannot be sustained, noting identical data relating to New Zealand employers has been published on a searchable and real time New Zealand Government web page; and
(c) orders the Commissioner of Taxation to comply fully with the order by 4.30 pm on 26 August 2021.
Question agreed to.
Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services, Minister for Women's Safety and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (15:42): Could I have it noted that the government opposed that motion.
MOTIONS
Afghanistan
Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (15:42): by leave—I move:
That the Senate—
(a) notes with great concern the urgent and dangerous situation in Afghanistan and the uncertainty ahead for the Afghan people;
(b) acknowledges the role of Australia's service men and women during the last 20 years within the Coalition forces, working with our Allies and others, in the cause of fighting terrorism, promoting freedom and seeking to support the people of Afghanistan;
(c) honours the sacrifice of the 41 Australians who have died in Afghanistan in the service of their country, and acknowledges the terrible loss suffered by their families;
(d) recognises the service of the more than 39,000 Australian Defence Force men and women who served their country in this, our longest war, and the sacrifice of their families in supporting their service;
(e) acknowledges the work of thousands of diplomats, aid workers, members of the Australian Federal Police and other government officials who have contributed to our efforts;
(f) recognises the sacrifice of our Coalition partners and our allies, who have seen their service men and women give their lives for the work they undertook in Afghanistan;
(g) recognises the sacrifice of the people of Afghanistan, particularly those who have died in war or in conflict;
(h) acknowledges and expresses gratitude for the important ongoing role of ex-service organisations in supporting veterans and their families;
(i) commits to the continued work in providing support to all current and former service personnel and their families, and to those who work to serve Australia's interests at home or abroad;
(j) acknowledges and commends the ongoing work and dedication to duty of those Australian personnel and officials who are providing and have provided assistance and support to those in Afghanistan in an extremely dangerous situation;
(k) notes the Government is continuing to take urgent action to evacuate from Afghanistan Australians, Afghan visa holders and others, along with their families, in cooperation with other Coalition partners, in extreme conditions;
(l) notes more than 8,500 Afghans have been resettled in Australia since 2013, including more than 1,900 locally engaged staff and their families;
(m) notes the Government's work since April to bring out more than 430 locally-engaged employees and their families to be resettled Australia, and that this number is increasing as further evacuations are now undertaken;
(n) notes the Government is committed to providing at least 3,000 places for Afghan resettlement in 2021-22, with further commitments to increase the intake in following years; and
(o) calls on any future Government of Afghanistan to respect the human rights of all its citizens, especially women and girls, and for the international community to hold any future Afghan Government to account.
Next month, we will mark and commemorate the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Those attacks and their aftermath changed global security and politics. Through our collective efforts, as part of a coalition of nations, we helped to protect the world from repeats of those atrocities and blunted the attacks of al-Qaeda terrorists who had established bases in Afghanistan to train and to plot.
The disappointment and pain felt by so many at the return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan after these 20 difficult years is absolutely understandable, not least for the Afghani people and those who have sacrificed so much to try to improve the lives of Afghans. I acknowledge the more than 40,000 Australian defence personnel and civilians who served in Afghanistan and honour the 41 soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice and the many Australians wounded in attacks who continue to feel the effects of their service, both mentally and physically. Right now, there is no immediate answer or evaluation that will change this disappointment. There will be time for reflection and to incorporate all of the successes and the failures into our understanding of how the world should deal with states that harbour terrorists and regimes that brutalise their own people. For the moment, however, we are dealing with what has happened and looking beyond that disappointment because we have ongoing work ahead of us.
Our immediate mission is to rescue Australians, Australian visa holders and their families and vulnerable Afghans. They include Afghans who are at risk of harm due to their work for Australia. That is our focus. We are making progress, but it is difficult and complex, as all of the countries involved in the same operation are finding. Since 18 August, we have brought more than 1,000 people out of Kabul and we will continue this mission as long as we are able. We are working with all of our partners in country, here from Canberra and in relevant posts in close cooperation. That consultation and cooperation is vital to the ongoing evacuation efforts. Conditions near the airport in Kabul are very dangerous and changing rapidly.
The wellbeing of the Afghan people is also a priority. The Afghan people have suffered through 40 years of conflict. It is devastating to see and hear of the situation there now. I fear for Afghan women and girls and for their rights to education, work and freedom of movement. I fear for the many women I have met over the years of my visits to their country. As for all Afghan people, women and girls deserve to live in safety, security and dignity. Any form of discrimination and abuse should be prevented. Their voices must continue to be heard.
Australia will continue to support the Afghan people through our development program, working with trusted international partners. We are focusing our $50 million bilateral program on humanitarian priorities, those occurring as a result of these events but also including in response to drought, internal displacement, COVID-19 and economic instability, working through existing humanitarian partners, including UN agencies. We have committed to bringing an initial 3,000 Afghans under our humanitarian program to Australia. We will work closely with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and we will provide support to UNHCR's efforts to manage internal and external refugee movements.
Australia will support international efforts to maintain pressure on the Taliban and on any future Afghan administration to meet its responsibilities to its people, its region and the wider world. The United Nations Security Council's call for an immediate end to the violence against civilians; the restoration of security, civil and constitutional order; and urgent talks to resolve the crisis and to arrive at a peaceful settlement is endorsed by Australia.
I understand why a return of the Taliban, especially so quickly, suggests that the achievements of the last years, enabled by the hard work and sacrifice of so many Afghanis and the many Australians and international partners who have contributed so much, will be undone. As we look at this now, many Afghan people have received years of experience of improved education, of health care, of women's rights. School enrolments have increased tenfold since 2002, and access to health care rose from nine per cent to 57 per cent between 2002 and 2020. The maternal mortality rate has fallen from 1,100 deaths to 396 deaths per 100,000 live births between 2000 and 2015. Women's representation in politics increased from zero in 2001 to 27 per cent in 2020.
There is great anxiety that our commitment to Afghanistan has been in vain. I know that from many of my own friends who have served and worked in Afghanistan, both military and civilian, including colleagues here in this parliament. To ensure it is not in vain, we will look for every opportunity to sustain the benefits to the Afghan people that the international presence has brought. We must not lose sight of the fact that many Afghans have seen what a better alternative looks like. One thing of which I am certain is that our ADF personnel and veterans, our diplomats and other civilians who have also served must know that their efforts have not been in vain. Australians did the job that we as a nation asked of them and they served overwhelmingly with great distinction. Nothing will change that.
We must also consider how we combat terrorism from here. Our international networks of cooperation are now more synchronised and networked than ever before. Australia's major concerns today and for much of the past two decades have been with our immediate region, South-East Asia, where violent extremism has taken hold before in pockets of Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia. We've worked with those countries to fight and disempower those violent extremists. We thank those countries for their ongoing efforts on this and recommit ourselves to that task. There is a real risk of which we are acutely cognisant: that, if terrorist bases are once again established in Afghanistan, this will morally energise and materially support terrorists closer to our shores.
Finally, we are clear in relation to the Taliban. The extreme ideology they have long projected has blighted lives and produced conflict. The world is watching now to see how they will behave. They say they want the trust of the international community. With a request for trust comes an expectation that that trust will be earned. That should start with ending all violence against civilians; ensuring the participation of different political actors in Afghanistan; upholding human rights, particularly the rights of women and minorities; allowing journalists to report freely; and opposing violent extremists. We make no premature commitments to engage with an Afghan administration that is Taliban led. Any new Afghan administration will be judged on its conduct. The international community will continue these discussions. We are also very clear that the Taliban has seized power by force, not through the support of the Afghan people.
The links between our two peoples began in the 1860s. Afghan cameleers helped develop our remote inland regions. They have strengthened so much in the decades since, in recent years with further immigration, including under Australia's humanitarian program. Afghan Australians will continue to make a rich contribution to our society here. A stable Afghanistan that prevents violent extremism would contribute to security in central and South Asia and inhibit terrorism further afield, including in our region.
I'm told by my post in the UAE and by the ADF that the first person literally off the first Australian plane from Kabul a few days ago was a little Afghani boy and that he skipped down the ramp when it was lowered. It was a compelling and important sign for those seeking to help and those working on this evacuation.
I know the desperation and fear that is all pervasive right now. I know it is difficult beyond our imaginings for so many brave and proud people in Afghanistan right now and for many here who grieve for the country and the people they love, perhaps as their birthplace or perhaps for other connections. It is very difficult right now. Australia, our partners—government, non-government, humanitarian, academic—and countless others all have an enduring commitment to the people of Afghanistan. That will not change.
Honourable senators: Hear, hear!
Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (15:56): [by video link] Over the last two weeks Australians have watched in horror as the Taliban's offensive escalated into a rapid takeover of Afghanistan's regions and eventually its capital. Within days, provinces and cities fell, one after another. Afghanistan's civilian government, security forces and institutions crumpled.
It is with a heavy heart that we face the tragic reality that, despite 20 years of international military intervention and development assistance and despite thousands of lives lost, the international community has fallen far short of its goals and all Afghanistan's gains are imperilled. These events have been heartbreaking for the people of Afghanistan, for the Afghan Australian community, for our veterans, for our diplomats, for our development workers, for the loved ones of the 41 Australian soldiers who lost their lives in battle and the hundreds more who died after the war as a result of its traumas and for all those in Australia and around the world who hope for a better life for the people of Afghanistan.
I have spoken with Afghan Australians, and I have seen their pain and their fear. I've spoken with Afghan women in Australia, trailblazers, community leaders and patriots, all deeply proud of their heritage, often lost for words as they witness the return of a regime whose brutal repression of women we know too well.
In conflict and in peace, in our region and beyond, Australia has been prepared to step up to play our part. Australians understand the power of cooperation with allied and aligned nations, with partners on the ground, with local communities, organisations and activists. And Australia's security is best served wherever we are, for we are trusted as a nation that helps those who help us, and that trust is built on actions, not words.
Like many others, including so many veterans, I fear the Morrison government's failure to act has now tarnished that reputation. Not only has it fallen short ethically; it has harmed our national interest. On 13 April the United States announced that it would fully withdraw its troops by 11 September, and on 15 April Mr Morrison announced the withdrawal of Australian troops by September 2021. It was subsequently reported that the last Australian troops departed on 18 June. On 25 May the government announced the closure of the Australian embassy, citing security concerns. It is true that the speed of the Taliban advance was insufficiently anticipated, but it is also clear that this government had time to prepare and act. For months now, many, including veterans of the ADF, former prime ministers and the opposition, have been calling for urgent action to get those Afghans and their families to safety.
I, and so many colleagues, have been inundated with requests for assistance from veterans, Afghan Australians, development workers and diplomats. For so many, the fear that those who helped Australia and who worked to build a better Afghanistan would be left behind to face the wrath of a vengeful Taliban exacerbated the trauma they were already suffering. Government ministers gave assurances help was on the way, but, at the same time, Australians heard report after report of Afghans caught up in bureaucratic gridlock. Security guards at the Australian embassy were told they wouldn't be eligible for humanitarian visas before being told they could apply. In recent days, 100 such applications have been rejected, with the security guards being informed by a template letter, before the advice changed yet again. Afghans who implemented Australia's development projects were told they were ineligible to apply because they were employed as contractors. But, of course, to the Taliban, these are simply people who helped us.
The United Kingdom announced an acceleration of its relocation policy, offering priority relocation to the United Kingdom for Afghans at risk who were working or had worked for them. In June, Germany expanded its eligibility criteria. But our government did neither. In July, the previously announced US airlift evacuation of interpreters and their families began. This government told us Australia wouldn't join the airlift and that it had no plan to mount a similar operation, and that was on 15 July. So here we are, a month later, with our ADF and government personnel being called on to do precisely that in far more perilous circumstances.
To the members of the ADF and to all the public servants—and I particularly mention those from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade who are working to evacuate Australians and those who helped us—I say: thank you. Thank you for your courage, thank you for your commitment and thank you for your service. We hope and pray this operation will be successful. I also hope that, after it has concluded, this Prime Minister will take the time to ask himself whether he should have heeded warnings and calls. Mr Morrison now deflects to the wisdom of hindsight. Instead, he should understand the consequences of wilful blindness.
Our mission in Afghanistan commenced in the aftermath of the terrible events of 9/11, and it achieved its initial objectives, but we sought to do more. With many brave Afghan men and women, thousands of whom died in the fight, we sought to build a better life for the people of Afghanistan, and gains were made: the return of millions from refugee camps in neighbouring countries, girls in school and women participating in civil society, politics and the professions. That these gains have not been secured is tragic, but that does not mean they were not worth striving for, because they are always worth striving for. In the time to come, we will have to grapple with what we have learnt from this about the limits of military intervention and foreign backed statehood. This mission did not end the way we wanted or hoped, and we should face that reality squarely. These are issues which demand responsible and sober engagement, and all who served and all who will be called on in the future to serve are entitled to that honest appraisal.
We do not know yet what shape the next government of Afghanistan will take. We do know that the Taliban inherits a changed Afghanistan where two-thirds of the population are under 25, most of whom have no memory of its brutal rule; where democracy, women's rights and burgeoning media and civil society, however limited, were facts on the ground; and where citizens are already resisting the Taliban's return, fearful for their futures and unwilling to set the clock back. We know too that Australia and the international community now have to contend with the consequences of this crisis, including the flow-on effects for regional and global security, and we know that strategic advantage from the West's withdrawal will be sought by some. Our government will need to work with allies and partners to counter this, to ensure the security of Australians and to find ways to press the Taliban to deliver on their public commitments to inclusion, the rights of women and minorities, and the security of those who have supported our forces. So I endorse the foreign minister's support for the UN Security Council's call to which she referred in her contribution.
Having said that, we acknowledge that Australia's ability to influence Afghanistan's future is likely to be limited, but there are immediate priorities on which the Morrison-Joyce government must act. In addition to evacuating all Australians and Afghans who supported Australian operations, the government must fast-track visas and evacuations for the family members of Australian citizens and Australian permanent residents, and it should commit to many more humanitarian places for Afghans who are at risk of serious harm by the Taliban. Protecting the Afghan journalists, community leaders, activists and human rights defenders, especially women, should be central to Australia's response to the crisis in Afghanistan.
The Morrison-Joyce government's offer of 3,000 visas is insufficient. Australia did not use its full refugee quota last year, and we have over 13,000 places available each year. Sadly, the places on offer will only help if we are able to secure passage for those who need it, a task made much harder by the current crisis. Mr Morrison must ensure that Afghans in Australia on temporary visas are not deported and have pathways to remain here, because there is nothing temporary about the crisis in Afghanistan. Finally, the government must outline how it will work with international partners to provide humanitarian assistance to the people of Afghanistan and to Afghanistan's neighbours, who will bear the impact of those fleeing for their lives. These are all the ways Australia can still make a difference.
Many thousands of Australians served and worked in Afghanistan in the ADF, in our diplomatic service and through our aid programs and beyond. To all these courageous men and women I say, 'Thank you for your service, courage and commitment.' I end by again paying tribute to those who fell in our name in Australia's longest war. I honour their sacrifice and I extend my sympathy to their families and friends. Thank you.
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (16:06): I rise to contribute to this debate on the motion moved by Senator Payne today. In doing so I extend my sympathies and my heart to everybody who is being impacted by the horror that we've seen unfold over the last couple of weeks in Afghanistan—those who are there fleeing for their lives and those who are here, desperate to know whether their families are safe and what the future will hold.
For 20 years we have been engaged in Afghanistan—Australia's longest war. Of course, we went in following the United States. Australia, again not having an independent foreign policy, was led by John Howard into a war that, arguably, we could never win. Let's remember that the purpose of this military action, right at the beginning, was to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and to attack terrorism. It wasn't initially about freeing women or children or bringing democracy to Afghanistan. It wasn't about rebuilding civil society. And the biggest problem right there is that you can't beat terrorism purely with military response—it requires political, civil society, and humanitarian strategies. None of these were at the core of the approach of the United States and coalition forces at the beginning. Some would argue that, in fact, over the last decade things in Afghanistan have become more unsafe and less free for those who had such great hopes for a reborn nation.
To that point, I acknowledge that the Greens have serious reservations about some of the elements of this motion. We think that it takes a rose-coloured-glasses view of Australia's role in Afghanistan. We can't discount the failures that have occurred over the last 20 years, and the toll on Australia has been great. Forty-one lives have been lost in combat, 260 have been wounded and over 500 veterans have, tragically, taken their own lives. Thousands and thousands more still suffer the effects of PTSD. But the toll has been largest for and hardest felt on the people of Afghanistan. It has been enormous, long lasting and tragic—tens of thousands of innocent lives lost, hundreds of thousands of people displaced and families torn apart. And, of course, like always in war and combat, it is women, children and minorities that are the hardest hit. Australia's longest war has had a long, tragic and harrowing impact on the people of Afghanistan. Hundreds of thousands have fled across borders to escape oppression and violence, in search of freedom from military actions, death and torture. For 20 years, Australia has played a role in this bloody war.
I was remembering last week that, after the 2010 election, one of the things that the Greens negotiated with the Gillard government was a commitment to debate the Afghan war in the parliament every year—a commitment to not forgetting the real impact of this conflict, to debating the merits of our actions, to not forgetting the sacrifice of Australians and others involved in this action and to not forgetting the very people whose lives this war was impacting the most. That debate happened in October 2010, in November 2011 and again in October 2012. But then that was it. When the Abbott government came to power, this parliament stopped debating this important war. This parliament stopped debating the merits of why we were there. It wasn't at the forefront in our minds, as members of parliament, and that is a shame, because without debate we cannot consider the best ways forward.
Over the last two weeks we have seen the horror unfolding in Afghanistan and thousands and thousands of people fleeing for their lives, and we've asked the question: should Australia have done more? What was the exit strategy? How were we going to get people out? What was the evacuation plan? This parliament should have been debating those issues regularly, passionately, honestly, and we just haven't been, and that's not good enough. Our veterans, our diplomats and our Afghan friends in Afghanistan and here on Australian soil deserve better from this parliament. They deserve better from this government in relation to planning, talking and being honest about our involvement.
It's been 20 years of Australian involvement in Afghanistan. And this week marks 20 years since the Tampa, that famous Norwegian boat that was stopped by former prime minister John Howard and that was holding over 400 refugees and asylum seekers, mostly Afghan nationals. That, of course, was the beginning of a huge diplomatic and political row in this country over how we treated people when they were fleeing horrible regimes like the Taliban's, and it set a marker for how we respond to those in need. I put it to you, Madam Acting Deputy President Polley, that's it's been a pretty shameful history ever since.
And it is not lost on me, as we stand here and debate this issue and what should be done to help those who are left fearing for their lives in Afghanistan, that 20 years ago our government turned its back on the very same people fleeing the very same regime. We need to do better. And that is why the Prime Minister's commitment of 3,000 humanitarian places within our existing program is simply not enough. It is why this slow drip, drip, drip of getting people out of Afghanistan who have worked alongside us, and their families, is not good enough. And it is why the Prime Minister's refusal to grant permanent protection to the 4½ thousand Afghans who are here in Australia already, giving them an opportunity to get on with their lives, to be free of the constant threat of having to face the Taliban again, is an unnecessary cruelty—that limbo hanging over people's heads when there is absolutely no need to. It is unnecessary and it is mean-spirited. And if we have not learnt anything for the last 20 years—my gosh, what on earth have we been doing? I don't buy for one second—and I'm sure that not one person in this chamber buys it either—the spin from the Taliban this week that they have changed their approach, that they will treat women and girls properly, that Hazaras will be able to live free from oppression and persecution. I don't believe it and I'm sure you don't either, Madam Acting Deputy President Polley.
So what are we going to do about it? We at least have to take on board our moral obligation and commit to taking and helping those who stood alongside us and helped us, and their families. We have to allow those already in Australia to bring their families here. We have to play our role in the international community by acknowledging that this is a humanitarian crisis and we need to do more.
Minister Payne and Senator Wong both acknowledged that, as members of parliament, our offices have been inundated with heartbreaking stories of people who are living in fear right now, of people who are worried about the fact that they haven't had a phone call or a text message returned in the last 12 hours and they don't know if their family is still alive. As the situation outside the airport deteriorates even further, that fear is only growing.
There are moments like this that happen in a Prime Minister's leadership where a Prime Minister can decide to do the right thing. I plead with Mr Morrison: don't be stubborn about this. This is a humanitarian crisis. These are people's lives—people we owe an obligation to, people we should help because it's the right thing to do. Don't be pigheaded about this. Show some leadership and show the compassion that the Defence Force, our diplomats and our humanitarian workers have all been showing and committed to for the last 20 years. It doesn't take much to do the right thing. You just have to show a bit of compassion and have a little bit of heart, and I urge the Prime Minister to do that today.
Senator HANSON (Queensland—Leader of Pauline Hanson's One Nation) (16:20): [by video link] I rise to speak to the motion moved by Senator Payne. The decision to withdraw from Afghanistan has been drawn into sharp focus by the images of the chaotic scenes at the Kabul airport. We have watched history unfold before our eyes, just as we did 20 years ago when the World Trade Center buildings collapsed and the Pentagon burned from the September 11 terrorist attacks. It's our obligation to bear witness to these events because Australia has played an active role in Afghanistan from the beginning. It has been our longest war, and it has not been without enormous cost.
It's important that we acknowledge the 41 Australians who lost their lives in Afghanistan. It's important that we acknowledge, even if we can't really know, how their families must feel at the moment. I would say to them that it was not in vain. The mission to Afghanistan has not been a failure. The initial objective to hunt down al-Qaeda and destroy its base of operations was achieved. It was right for Australian forces to stay in Afghanistan as part of the effort to secure and rebuild the country. For me, there is no question about this. The questions which remain are whether the withdrawal of coalition forces was too hasty, whether the Taliban will again implement a regime as oppressive and terrible as the one which ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, whether Afghanistan will again become a safe haven and operations base for Islamic terrorists under the Taliban, and what coalition countries will do for Afghans desperate to flee a resurgent Taliban.
Many are saying the withdrawal of Western forces was premature. This position has been underlined by the rapid way the Taliban has taken over control of much of Afghanistan. I had the privilege of visiting Afghanistan three years ago to have a look at what our troops were doing to train the Afghan army. Our people held the younger local trainees in high regard and had strong hopes for the future of Afghanistan. The problem was the old guard: fighters still around from the days of the Taliban. It was clear to me we needed to stay a lot longer and support a younger, more enlightened generation to lead Afghanistan to its rightful place among the modern community of nations.
Now there are reports that intelligence estimates of the strength of the Afghanistan government and armed forces to resist the Taliban were ignored by the unhinged President of the United States, Joe Biden. President Biden has presided over a disaster that could have been avoided. The Taliban now have access to modern weapons and equipment given to the Afghan army, enough for up to 300,000 troops to enforce their rule and supply terrorists. The threat of Islamic terrorism has increased again. This disaster has diminished the standing of the United States and Australia. It's very telling that, while we close our embassies in Kabul, Russia and China are keeping their embassies open.
While the Taliban have made noises about being more benign rulers, particularly with respect to women, there are indications they have not changed since 2001. They have freed thousands of Islamic terrorists. There are reports of executions in the streets and lists being compiled of women to be married off as sex slaves to Taliban fighters. And we have all seen the terrible images of people desperate to escape the Taliban at the Kabul airport following the rapid collapse of the Afghan government. These images have shocked the world, even knocking the COVID-19 pandemic off front pages for a couple of days.
As was inevitable, the usual suspects are putting pressure on the Morrison government to increase Australia's humanitarian refugee intake and bring in a flood of refugees from Afghanistan. The Greens want 20,000 places made available over and above the 13,750 existing places available in our humanitarian program. Labor has called the Prime Minister's offer of 3,000 places within the current humanitarian intake 'piecemeal' and the figure 'plucked from nowhere'. Amnesty International says the offer is 'insufficient'. One Nation encourages the Morrison government to resist these very predictable and opportunistic calls to open the floodgates to a new wave of refugees. Because the government has already been bringing Afghans to Australia for resettlement for years, more than 8½ thousand have come to call Australian home since 2013, when the coalition government came to power. The government is working to bring in those Afghans and their families who worked with the Australian forces and are at risk as a result, and some have already arrived. One Nation strongly supports this effort. We owe it to the Afghans who worked with Australian forces to make their country a better place. But we do not support opening the floodgates to waves of undocumented arrivals again.
The current environment is simply too chaotic for individual applicants to be properly vetted to ensure they don't pose a threat. Afghans have been exposed to a fundamentalist ideology incompatible with living in Australia. There are more than 40 Islamic countries that are better suited to accommodate Afghans fleeing Taliban rule. Australia is hardly in a position to accommodate a flood of new arrivals in any case. They are possibly people who will hate our culture and way of life, people who may never hold a job, people who may want to destroy our democracy. We already have a domestic housing crisis, skyrocketing public debt, growing urban congestion and massive dependency on welfare, all of which are only exacerbated by lockdowns and the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite this, the Morrison government is already showing some signs of caving in to the pressure. It has called the initial figure of 3,000 places a floor, not a ceiling. The Morrison government is holding the door open and could significantly increase the number.
I will not apologise to anyone for not being a bleeding heart. I am a realist and I am not convinced large numbers of Afghan refugees being allowed in to this country is in Australia's best interests, especially with large numbers of terrorists being released from prisons by the Taliban. The PM's open door represents yet another failure to show leadership, which has been the defining feature of the major parties in government during this pandemic. The Prime Minister has surrendered control of the pandemic to premiers and chief ministers in the states and territories. The Prime Minister has surrendered leadership around the vexing question of vaccine mandates, and he is now leaving the door open to surrendering control of our international border and humanitarian visa program to the bleeding hearts of Labor, the Greens and the open-border brigade. They are looking for any and every way to open the floodgates and return to the time when people smugglers were effectively in control of Australia's immigration and refugee programs.
People smugglers are poised for just such an opportunity. They will be active in Afghanistan right now, preying on desperate people. We cannot return to that situation in Australia. Too many people died, and we are still dealing with the fallout years after the last boat arrived. The Prime Minister needs to make it absolutely clear exactly how many people his government plans to bring here from Afghanistan. He needs to show some leadership at last. This parliament and the Australian people deserve to know who will be coming here and the circumstances in which they will come. The Prime Minister cannot leave it open-ended, as that's exactly what the people smugglers have been waiting for.
I have to respond to Senator Hanson-Young's comments when she talked about the oppression and the persecution of women and children happening there. Might I remind her that exactly that is happening here in Australia. It's no different. Why aren't you speaking out about that? Why aren't we debating that on the floor of parliament? What about the child brides? What about female circumcision? What about women having to wear the burqa because their menfolk tell them to? This is happening right on our own doorstep, and you're worried about another country. It is oppression or persecution when we have multiple underage marriages happening on our own doorstep, and yet we do nothing about it.
I would also like to point out that I did go to Afghanistan and I saw what was happening on the ground there. I met interpreters and people who worked with our Defence personnel. They were highly regarded. Yes, I think our presence there did a lot for the country. Just after I left, they had an election. ISIS and those fighters over there were actually lining themselves up at the polling booths to stop people from going to vote. They wanted their freedom. I spent two hours in the Afghan military training college. I walked around with a brigadier, who showed me what was happening. We had women in classes. For the first time, they were actually allowed to join the defence force. For the first time, they were actually allowed to teach in schools. For the first time, they were allowed to join the police force. The country was moving forward.
Now this has happened, and I ask myself the question: Why? Why are Russia and China still over there? Why is Imran Khan, from Pakistan, a supporter of it? We had big problems coming. I saw President Joe Biden unhinged. He either actually had no idea what was going on over there or he wasn't advised, because I was there for three days and I could see exactly what was going on and what needed to be done. I blame the Prime Minister for not stepping up to the mark and having it out with Joe Biden, asking why the troops were not left there long enough to get our people and those that helped us out of that country. The Taliban is now armed with equipment they've never had before. They will become a force to be reckoned with, and, if they really do join up with ISIS, I believe that the Western nations around the world will feel the force of terrorism. It will reach our doorsteps again, because this will be seen by the fundamentalists as a win for them.
That's why I oppose these people freely coming into the country. You can't open up the floodgates. We have a lot of terrorists there that hate our democracy and hate our way of life. You cannot just open up the floodgates. We have to know who we're bringing into the country. This fight is very important. You talk about debating these issues on the floor of parliament. Our ministers and the Prime Minister should have their fingers on the pulse to know what is actually happening there. Sometimes we have too much talk on the floor of parliament, and nothing happens. We must put these decisions in the hands of those authorities who really know what is happening. Most politicians on the floor of parliament haven't been to Afghanistan. They have no idea what went on over there. I went over there, and I saw for myself. I do understand the importance of us being there—to liberate the country, to liberate those men, women and children—but, like I said to you, you ought to start looking in your own backyard instead of talking about the persecution and oppression of women and children over there, because it's happening in our own country. You're a representative, Senator Hanson-Young, for all the people here in Australia, so I suggest you start looking at that. I'll be quite happy to have that debate with you. Let's sort out what's happening to the women and children in Australia. Thank you.
Senator LAMBIE (Tasmania) (16:33): [by video link] To the people who have served in Afghanistan; to the people who lost mates in Afghanistan; to those of you who have missed birthdays, wedding anniversaries, Christmases and kids' first days of school; to the people who lost their health and livelihoods and who lost who they once were over in Afghanistan; and to the many, many people who left a piece of themselves in a war for a country on the other side of the world: we sincerely thank you. We thank you for your service, and we thank you for the sacrifices you have made for this country. We thank you for all that you gave to the people of Australia so we can live our lives in peace, far away from war and conflict. Your country is incredibly grateful and always will be.
Today is hard, and I know many of you are feeling a lot of pain and a lot of hurt about what's going on in Afghanistan. I know that you're confused. You gave everything you could have over there, and you've done everything you could have done—we know you did—just to see the country you tried to save crumble to pieces within minutes of our troops pulling out. And here we are, watching in horror, as Kabul falls to the resurgent Taliban. We're seeing videos of Afghans handing over their babies to American soldiers, trying so desperately to find a way to keep their children safe—even if it means never seeing them again. We're seeing people clinging to the evacuation planes as they take off from the runways out of Kabul. There are plenty of crowds gathering outside the airport gates in the middle of a pandemic, doing everything they can to run, to escape, to get themselves and their families far away from the Taliban, who have once again taken over their country.
It is heartbreaking. There is no other word for it, it's absolutely heartbreaking, but we shouldn't doubt what we fought for. We fought for our values and they're worth fighting for. They are always worth fighting for. No matter what the odds, no matter the result, you value what you fight for. We have always done that. You fought to give little girls a chance to go to school, and you fought to rid the world of the shadow of extremist terrorism. You fought to give people in one of the poorest nations in the world a say in the way their country was run. You fought to make the world better. You certainly fought to make their little bit of the world better, safer and fairer. And that's what Australians should always fight for, because they are part of our values. You did what you believed in and you did what you were asked to do. You should always hold your head up high, stand tall and be proud of what you've achieved, because you did exactly what the country asked you to do.
If anyone wants to judge the result of our longest war by what the country looks like once we leave it, they've missed the point. The only question to ask is what the world would look like if we hadn't gone there in the first place? We need to consider that. What would it look like if Australians hadn't stood up for what we stand for? I have no doubt that we would be living in a world that would be shivering in the shadow of terrorism. People all around the world would live in fear that the disgusting disregard for human life we saw on September 11 would be felt any day, any time, because the ones who think of human life like a bargaining chip, a perverted holy war, would still have a place to call home in Afghanistan.
To those who fought in our longest war: you made us safer, you made Afghanistan safer. You have got nothing to apologise for, you've got nothing to bow your heads down for. If there's failure to be found in what we've seen in the last few weeks, it's to be found in this building. Any failure sits on the shoulders of all the people who sit in this chamber today, and on the shoulders of people who sit in the other place, who made bad decisions about how to run this war. They're the people to blame. They're the people who need to go and have a look at their own conscience—and not just the ones sitting in there today, but the ones from the past. I hope you're taking time out, especially the ones from the past, to have a good think about your actions, because, by God, you need to!
There will come a time when we get to look at this carefully. There will be time for anger, for hard questions about what has gone wrong here. I will be moving a motion this week so that we can do that. We will start that process, because, God forbid, I do not want to go over this process for another 20 years. I do not want to make the same mistakes again for our kids and our grandchildren who will be serving the country. I don't want it, and they don't either!
We sent troops to a country under the thumb of a brutal regime and, for 20 years, we gave them life free of it. That's not failure in my books. If there was anything we could have done to make the Afghan government and its institutions more resilient to the forces of the Taliban, we should have done it. If there was anything we didn't do that we could have done, we should know about it so that it doesn't happen again in the future. And the only way we honour and respect the sacrifice that has been made by those who served under an Australian flag in Afghanistan is by asking hard questions—and they need to be asked—about what we could have done differently, to have a very different ending to what we have today. It needs to be examined.
It's false patriotism to say that asking hard questions about the results of our longest war in any way undermines or disrespects the contribution those troops made. Patriotism means holding your country to the highest standards you know your country is capable of achieving. We owe it to Australia to ask how we could have done better, how we could have had a better result at the end. That's what I want to do for all of us, because we need those answers. We need them. We need to go over the past to make sure that we don't make the same mistakes in the future.
Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Minister for Emergency Management and National Recovery and Resilience, Minister for Regionalisation, Regional Communications and Regional Education and Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (16:40): As Leader of The Nationals in the Senate, I rise to support the motion, especially the comments of Minister Payne earlier in this place. The images coming out of Afghanistan have been extremely confronting and distressing for people across the world—just as distressing as the images of the planes flying into the World Trade Center were on 11 September 2001. Any Australian who was alive on that day would remember exactly where they were when the reports of what was occurring in New York and Washington broke on our news networks.
It was a never-before-seen attack of terror on the Western world. In response, Prime Minister John Howard invoked the ANZUS treaty for the first time and we stood with our American friends in their time of need. Australia became part of the NATO-led mission and entered Afghanistan to contribute to the fight against terrorism. We worked alongside the United States, NATO and the international community to hunt down Osama bin Laden and those responsible for the attacks on 11 September and to eliminate al-Qaeda's capacity to stage more attacks on the West from Afghanistan, and that was achieved. That mission was accomplished.
In completing that mission, almost 39,000 selfless, brave Australian Defence Force men and women made Australia a safer place and saved Australian lives through their service in Afghanistan. Many returned home with physical injuries and mental wounds, and some will never heal. Tragically, 41 of our brave soldiers did not make it home. They made the ultimate sacrifice in service of our nation. They did not die in vain, and we will never forget them. We'll continue to honour them each and every day. Australia owes a great debt of gratitude to all our veterans who've served with distinction, as well as gratitude to their families who have supported them during their service and beyond.
Their service and that of other agencies gave Afghans a chance for a better future. Afghans gained increased access to basic health care and electricity. We saw reduced maternal mortality rates, rises in life expectancy and in the participation of women in politics, and girls attending school. A generation of young Afghans were given hope; they were educated as a result of our efforts in that place. Our veterans, Border Force personnel, Federal Police officers and humanitarian aid workers should hold their heads up high. The cause was and always will be a just one. They must carry with them the knowledge that they did their nation and the world proud and that their fellow Australians are proud of them, as we are in this place, for serving in our national interest.
During my time in this place I also had the privilege of being part of an Australian Defence Force exchange program. I was able to visit Al Minhad and meet with soldiers being deployed to Afghanistan, and to visit Tarin Kot, a uniquely Australian base with a uniquely Australian vibe. I was able to also visit Kandahar, where things were a bit hot and heavy. There was a siren and we had to run through the appropriate behaviours—dropping to the floor et cetera. In that period of time, there was a very young Australian soldier—well, I thought he was very young; he was probably nearly 30—who was tasked with looking after this group of MPs, the poor thing. I asked him 'How was it?' He felt very, very privileged and proud to be serving in the ADF at a point in time when he could see active service. It was, indeed, his fourth tour, voluntarily. I have often thought of this young man and his approach to service in the years since. He knew what the mission was, he knew what his job within that mission was and he was very, very proud to serve his country, as I was to meet him. I wish him well, wherever he is today.
Heartbreakingly, though, the hope that we and our allies instilled in the Afghan people is now in doubt. The Australian government is responding to the rapidly evolving situation in Afghanistan, and it remains a highly volatile and dangerous environment. Ministers are meeting daily to lead the response to the crisis, and I am sure we all thank them—Minister Dutton, Minister Payne, the Prime Minister and Minister Andrews—for ensuring that we maintain that our top priority is the safe and orderly departure of Australian citizens and visa holders.
The Taliban must ensure the safe and orderly departure of those who wish to leave. The Taliban also must meet the commitments that they've made to the international community on the participation of women and girls in the broader Afghani community, including the commitment to education, and to ensure that never again will Islamic extremism be able to take hold within its borders to wreak havoc on the world.
We've not forgotten the Afghanis who supported our troops over the last two decades and we will not forget the Afghan people. The Prime Minister has instructed the ADF to extract Australians and their Afghani colleagues. Our forces are working with US counterparts to support multinational efforts to ensure those wishing to leave Afghanistan can do so safely. Since 18 August, alongside our allies, we've facilitated the safe evacuation of over 1,000 people from Kabul in some of the most extreme conditions our forces have operated in. This is in addition to the more than 8½ thousand Afghanis who have been resettled in Australia since 2013. The Australian government has also announced that an initial 3,000 humanitarian places will be allocated to Afghani nationals within Australia's overall annual humanitarian program. We anticipate that this initial allocation will increase over the course of this year. As the Prime Minister has said, this is a floor not a ceiling.
I want to express to the people of Afghanistan: we are thinking of you, we will continue to support you and we will do whatever we can to ensure your safety. Right now, our Australian Defence Force personnel are continuing to make sure Afghani people have access to the same lives, the same freedoms and the same protections we in Australia have. We're committed to doing everything we can in the time we have to get as many people out as safely as possible.
Lastly, I ask all veterans and all Australians to do a very Australian thing—check in on your mates, support those who have served during this very difficult time. To those who need it, I remind all veterans and their families of their access to Open Arms Veterans and Families Counselling. Don't hesitate to call 1800011046. We stand ready to support these incredible Australians and thank every single one of them for their service. I'm confident that our efforts as a nation in Afghanistan meant a safer world, meant a safer Australia. Our decisions as a government have always been taken in the national interest and will continue to be so. All in this place thank those for their service and for the contribution that they made on our behalf.
Senator KENEALLY (New South Wales—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (16:48): For years there have been calls to help the locally engaged interpreters and support staff who fought with our troops in Afghanistan. These brave men and women stood alongside Australians in our hour of need, yet we've left it too late to help too many of them in theirs. For believing in our mission and supporting our values of liberty and democracy, they and their families now face grave danger and death at the hands of the Taliban. For months and years, Labor has joined with veterans, retired senior officers of our defence forces and former prime ministers in their call for urgent action to help the locals who helped us.
Australian veterans like Jason Scanes, Glenn Kolomeitz and Stuart McCarthy have been trying to save the lives of their mates in Afghanistan—and I acknowledge as well my colleague in the other chamber Luke Gosling—knowing full well that the window to get them out has been narrowing. Now, with the country in tatters, we are forced to witness the horrific scenes in Kabul as people flee for their lives. The reality is that we simply have not done enough to help our friends. In July other allied nations were evacuating their Afghan supporters as the Taliban advanced. The Morrison government did not do enough. When Kabul fell, the government were left scrambling to send in evacuation aircraft on 16 August. The Prime Minister now says he wishes it could have been different. The reality is that it could have been. Veterans, lawyers and even former prime minister John Howard warned Mr Morrison that he wasn't doing enough to get our allies out.
I've spoken to dozens of people from the Afghan Australian community over the past week. They have shared their stories with me. These are harrowing, tormenting and deeply moving. These are Australian citizens and permanent residents telling me of their relatives who are in hiding, moving every few hours with their children and nothing more than the clothes on their backs, unable to get food, unable to get their documents, unable to fill out the forms and unable to get to the airport. These Australians tell me of the desperate texts, the WhatsApp messages and the fear: the very real threat of death hanging over their wives, their children, their parents, their brothers, their sisters and their cousins. They have more questions than answers, because the humanitarian visa rules are unclear and the process is confounding, particularly in the middle of a humanitarian crisis. MPs and senators, particularly in seats with high concentrations of Afghan Australians, have been overrun—inundated—with requests for help. My office alone assisted in supporting more than a thousand applications in the last week.
Temporary protection and safe haven visa holders are also receiving conflicting advice from the Morrison government about whether they can apply for family reunification visas. The minister, Alex Hawke, said on ABC radio that they can, but the Department of Home Affairs publications say they can't. Legal services and refugee support groups are not able to get clarity either. I've been talking to many of these over the past few days. This confusion adds to the distress and the misery that Australian citizens, Australian veterans, visa holders here in Australia and those who work every day to support them are feeling.
It's not too late to fix this. The Morrison-Joyce government's offer of 3,000 visas is insufficient. Australia has 13,750 humanitarian intake places available for refugees this year, and we didn't exhaust our quota from last year. We should do more. I welcome that the Prime Minister says that this is a floor, not a ceiling. But, again, confusion reigns. The minister for immigration told ABC radio that these places were new. It is clear that they are not. None of this will matter, though—the number of places—if we can't secure safe passage to the airport, a task made exceedingly difficult now due to the government doing too little, too late. I acknowledge the bravery and the hard work of ADF personnel, Home Affairs officials and other Australians who are on the ground, seeking to secure safe passage, but I can share with this chamber that, just today, a woman who my office assisted to get a visa turned up at the airport and was turned away by Australian officials because they didn't accept that the email documentation she had was real. This is the type of bureaucratic process that is simply not working for people who are in a humanitarian crisis. Mr Morrison must ensure, as well, that Afghans in Australia on temporary visas are not deported and that they have pathways to remain here. This has been done for people from Hong Kong. This has been done for people from Myanmar. It can be done for people from Afghanistan who are here in Australia on a temporary visa. We should do this, and all these things, not just because they're right but because we owe respect to our Australian citizens and permanent residents who are desperate and fearful for their family members in Afghanistan. We should do it because we owe a great debt to our military men and women who served in Afghanistan. We honour those who went, those who never came home and those who never came home quite the same.
The reality is that our mission in Afghanistan would have been far more dangerous without the selfless sacrifice of the locals who helped us, and that's why so many of our veterans are fighting to save their mates. How can we let their pleas fall on deaf ears after all they've done for us? Soldiers know better than anyone that mateship is a verb. Mateship means showing up in hard times, and no-one left behind. It's a value woven into our national fabric by the Anzacs. So what do we owe to our mates in Afghanistan? We owe them more than we can ever say, but at the very least we owe them the chance to live in the peace they fought so bravely to bring to their own land.
We will dissect this war for decades to come—why we went there, what we did and why it ended like this. But I beg of the Morrison government, do not let this ending be an enduring shame. That would be the ultimate betrayal of our veterans, of those who helped our soldiers and of our values. The Morrison government must do more for our Afghan-Australian community and for our Afghan mates, and it must happen now.
Senator REYNOLDS (Western Australia—Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services) (16:56): I too rise to support the motion moved by the foreign minister and I also wholeheartedly endorse her words, her emotions and her sentiments as expressed in her comments. I congratulate her and other ministers, and their staff and their many officials, who are working so hard to save so many lives, but the sad truth is they won't be able to save them all.
For 20 years many thousands of Australians in and out of uniform have served our nation in Afghanistan and more widely in the region. This has undoubtedly saved the lives of not only Australians here and overseas but also many others elsewhere. They've saved Australian lives from the threat of terrorism, which has spread from its roots in Afghanistan like a hydra, right across our region and even into Australia. Like so many others, I have been absolutely distressed in recent days to hear some suggest that the efforts of Australian veterans, diplomats and civilians in Afghanistan were for nought. It is simply not true. As a former defence minister, I've been to Afghanistan. I've seen firsthand how Australia's military involvement there, and in the wider region, not only has made our own nation safer from the threat of terrorism but also has made a tangible difference to the lives of so many millions of Afghans, particularly their women and their girls. The efforts of our veterans have not been in vain. I commend Senator Lambie for her words and her expressions of support for the thousands of veterans from Afghanistan. Through our presence and our support millions have seen the possibility and the reality of a much better life—please, never ever doubt that.
I join the foreign minister also in thanking all of those who are currently supporting the evacuation efforts in Kabul and in the UAE. Like so many others, I am now waiting anxiously for news from Kabul and from the UAE about who has made it out and who has made it out past those terrible roadblocks manned by the Taliban, who are subjecting people to beatings and far worse. But I know there are far too many Australians today who are anxiously and desperately waiting for word of the wellbeing of their family members both in Kabul and also right across Afghanistan.
None of us can ever forget where we were on 11 September 2021. I was chief of staff to the Minister for Justice and Customs when the Twin Towers were hit by al-Qaeda. Like all Australians, and indeed the rest of the world, I watched the horror of the multiple attacks on that day in sheer disbelief. That night, none of us who worked in the ministerial wing here slept. The phones rang hot. No-one at that minute could imagine what the tragedy would mean for our nation's safety and security or for the rest of the world. Indeed, in the first few hours, we were even worried about the safety of the Prime Minister and his travelling team.
Over the next months and, indeed, years, I was at the heart of subsequent reforms to our nation's antiterrorism measures. The Bali bombings, which followed hot on the heels of September 11, added to our urgency and brought the reality of terrorism ever closer to our shores. Throughout this time I gained enormous insight into the darkness that inhabited the souls of the perpetrators of that terrorism. That darkness and evil, sadly, continues to dwell in the minds of some today, including the Taliban and those who have seized control of Afghanistan. The tentacles spread so quickly from Afghanistan and al-Qaeda to our region, to Jemaah Islamiyah and the Bali bombings, which claimed the lives of 202 innocents, including 88 Australians. In Bali, I visited the morgue. I met shell-shocked survivors. I worked with the families of those who lost loved ones in Bali. I saw, heard and—as I will never forget—smelled the impact of terrorism on the lives of Australians.
I also witnessed then, as I do every day here in Australia, that the decisions made by governments of the day are never easy and never taken lightly. That time also showed me very, very clearly that democratic freedoms are never truly free and that, all too often, they have to be fought for over and over again. That is what thousands of our troops did in Afghanistan for nearly 20 years, with the loss of 41 irreplaceable Australian lives. These were all Australians who loved and were loved and who will be forever missed, and they will all be remembered.
These experiences also motivated me to begin volunteering with a range of Australian and overseas programs to support and empower young political leaders, particularly women, to help them find their voice in their communities, in their media and in their parliaments and to help them speak out in circumstances that we have no concept of, that really are just so foreign to our own way of life. I've met so many women, including women in Afghanistan, who I'm now proud to call friend and who continue to make me so proud, to inspire me and to humble me.
What did our 20 years of service in Afghanistan achieve for Afghans? For a start, the life expectancy of Afghans has increased from just 56 years to 64 years. The mortality rate of infants has reduced dramatically, from 87 to 46 per 1,000 births. Women's participation in the labour force has risen to over 20 per cent from almost nil. Afghanistan now has more than 200 female judges and over 4,000 women in law enforcement, and 27 per cent of seats in Afghanistan are held by women. But one of our most significant achievements and, I hope, enduring commitments and legacies is the dramatic increase in access to education for Afghan boys and girls. The literacy rate of the adult population has increased to 43 per cent, while the literacy rate for girls has increased dramatically, to 60 per cent. Student enrolments grew from less than a million—of course, all boys—to over 9.5 million students today. Wonderfully, 40 per cent are now girls.
Having worked with women who fight unimaginable political and security challenges each and every day on behalf of their communities, I think it is very fitting to leave my last words in this chamber today on this issue to the words of one of the women who has so inspired me, an incredibly brave Afghan woman, Shukria Barakzai. Shukria is a former Afghan politician and diplomat and a fierce advocate for women's rights. She has chosen to remain in Kabul. Her bravery, her struggle and her sacrifice continue to inspire me and so many others. In her life, she has been subjected to multiple suicide attacks, she has been beaten, she has been wounded gravely, she has lost two children and she has suffered so many other losses that are just so unimaginable to all of us in this parliament today. She ran an underground school for girls during the Taliban, and, today, she still fights in Afghanistan for the voices of young women.
Last week, Shukria wrote a really powerful article from Kabul, which was published in the Daily Mail, about her fears but, amazingly, also about her hopes that enough younger Afghans will continue to carry out her work and the work of many others who have fought for so long on behalf of women and girls. She said that this week her concern is for the young minds—that they survive, that they endure and that they keep on fighting the fight for women and girls. I'll finish with her parting words in the article:
I am trying to place my faith in the resilience of this land and its brave and benighted people.
No matter how dark the clouds are, I am looking at the end of the night and sunrise beyond.
Today my hope is that the passion, the commitment and the bloodshed of so many from Australia and around the globe will continue to inspire women with the resilience that Shukria has.
To all Australian service men and women and all other Australians who served in Afghanistan, and to their families: I thank you for your service. To all veterans and to their families: please always remember that not only have you saved Australian lives here and overseas but you have transformed the lives of a generation of Afghan boys and girls. And, like Shukria, I hope that together we have done enough to prepare them, as she said, with the skills to endure the current darkness so that they may eventually see the 'sunrise beyond'.
Senator LINES (Western Australia—Deputy President and Chair of Committees) (17:08): I think we have all been shocked at the images we've seen on our television screens over the last week and a half. I have to admit I found it very hard to watch, particularly when that US aircraft took off with people desperately clinging to the undercarriage. It reinforces, for us here in Australia, our democracy and our freedoms, and it shows how desperate people are to get out of that country and to escape what they know is going to be the resurgence of the Taliban.
Obviously, the unfolding security and humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan is devastating for the people of Afghanistan, for the Australian Afghan communities and for the Afghan staff that supported our military and diplomatic operations for over 20 years. It's heartbreaking for our veterans and for the women and girls of Afghanistan, who now face the prospect of a cruel and brutal regime. I think none of us in this place can imagine how brutal and horrific it will be. Many Australians, including veterans, are horrified to see the Taliban surge across the country. Labor members are deeply concerned about the stability of Afghanistan, and we certainly urge the Morrison-Joyce government to work with international partners to help support efforts towards a negotiated settlement and a permanent ceasefire. Labor will use all of the avenues available to us to ensure the Morrison government continues to support the people of Afghanistan, including through our humanitarian assistance program. We know that this is a deeply distressing time for Australians of Afghan descent and Afghan visa holders in Australia who are fearful, quite rightly, for the safety of their loved ones. We have been calling for the Morrison-Joyce government to develop a plan to urgently fast-track visas and evacuations for Australians' immediate family members who are in Afghanistan, along with those who supported our operations. Thousands of husbands, wives, partners and children of Australians have been waiting for years for partner and family visas, and others must now be eligible for refugee and humanitarian visas.
Last week—like, I'm sure, many of us in this place—our office received a lot of phone calls from very, very distressed Afghanis, in the main expressing their concern about their families, and I want to put some of those callers on the record. There have been many calls, and they have been heart-wrenching. The calls are from members of our community begging for action to bring their loved ones from the terrors of Afghanistan to the safety of our home, Australia. Of course, this isn't the first time these pleas have been made. Under the Howard government we saw many Afghan refugees arriving in this country. They were Hazara. At that time I wasn't a member of this place, but I used to go and assist them to fill out their visa applications. I was really shocked to be confronted for the first time with people who lived entirely different lives to the way I lived mine. They were people who put their occupations down as blacksmiths, as tinkers or as shepherds. Some people had 16 or 17 brothers and sisters in their family, many of whom were deceased. They told me horrific stories of persecution under the Taliban so many years ago, and those stories and the faces of those refugees have stayed with me. Now we have, yet again, Afghanis in the same situation. They're asking, begging, for our help.
One male caller noted that he keeps trying to talk to people in power. He's emailed the Minister for Defence and has tried to contact his Liberal member and the Prime Minister. To quote him on his experience pleading for help: 'These people don't see me. They don't care about me.' He continued: 'You'—referring to the person on the other end of the phone in my office—'are the only person who has listened to what I have to say. We just want to be heard. I would like you to pass on my message to the senator and to the parliament. I worked as an interpreter in Afghanistan for Australian troops. My sister, my brother and my family are in hiding. If the Taliban find them, they will slaughter them. I risked my life for Australia and now I feel as though I am not Australian. They treat me differently. I do not belong.' These members of our community do belong. They should be treated with the same level of respect as every other Australian. Times like these are when the Australian spirit should be strong. We look out for one another. The Prime Minister needs to remember that he is representing the people of this country, and they are crying out to be heard. Zakiya is a Cannington resident; Cannington is in the Swan electorate in Western Australia. Her sister is a midwife and her brother is a journalist. Both are in Afghanistan and fear for their safety due to their employment. She is fearful for her family and wishes the Australian government would provide more assistance.
We heard from a man on behalf of the Afghan community—again in the electorate of Swan. He called before the Taliban entered Kabul the weekend before last. He was a battlefield interpreter for the Australian government in Afghanistan. In his own words: 'I have helped the Australian counterterrorism mission in Afghanistan by wearing the Australian Army uniform and going to the front line of the war in Kandahar province and putting my life in danger. My family members are still in Afghanistan. They are shocked. They have nowhere to go, and the life of my family members is in danger. If the Taliban catch my family members, they will slaughter them.' Over and over again, we have heard that word 'slaughter'. It's a word that I'm not using, but it's a word that's been said to the people at the end of the phone in my office. The man continued: 'I'm begging the Australian government to save my family's life by providing them with a visa and bringing them to Australia to live in a safe environment. This is what the US and Canada and the UK are doing right now in Kabul. My family is not safe under the Taliban, because of my job as an interpreter for the Australian Army. On top of that, I'm Hazara and the Taliban has a history of slaughtering Hazara. That has included the slaughtering of hundreds of innocent women and children. Recently'—and we've heard this a few times now coming out of Afghanistan, and we heard it again on the phones last week—'the Taliban has taken away 10- to 12-year-old girls from their families and forced them to marry soldiers.' This man told us that he only has his voice left to help his family and others like them.
Yesterday, I'm proud to say, the Western Australian community held a rally—something we can do in Western Australia because we don't have the COVID restrictions we see in the eastern states—in support of the Afghan people. I want to talk about one of the young women who organised that rally, Rahila Haidary. Rahila was one of the organisers of the Perth rally for Afghanistan yesterday. She lives in Perth and came to Australia with her family on a humanitarian visa when she was very young. Rahila lives in my Labor colleague Anne Aly's electorate of Cowan. Rahila is an Australian citizen. Rahila works in the international humanitarian and human rights sectors and is an advocate for education and female economic empowerment throughout Australia and the world. Her husband, Khalid, came by boat to Australia a year after Rahila arrived. Khalid is still being made to reapply over and over for temporary protection visas. They now have a nine-month-old daughter. Horrifically, they recently received a letter from the Department of Home Affairs saying that their daughter, born in Australia to an Australian citizen mother, was unlawful. The letter was quickly established to be incorrect, but imagine hearing at this time from the Australian government, which is supposed to be protecting you, that your daughter is unlawful. This is just one of the impacts of the Morrison government's ongoing policies, which lack any compassion or empathy, particularly for people who are living in our country in constant uncertainty and fear.
I would implore the Morrison-Joyce government to at least immediately fast-track those Afghan refugees who have remained on temporary protection visas in this country for years and years. Show some humanity. We saw it from Mr Abbott when he was Prime Minister. We can and must do better than what's on offer at the moment. I want, as do my Labor colleagues, to see us lift the number of people we take into this country. I'm really sad to hear the demonisation that has crept into the language of the Morrison government—Mr Dutton and others—just over the last couple of weeks.
Senator STOKER (Queensland—Assistant Minister to the Attorney-General, Assistant Minister for Women and Assistant Minister for Industrial Relations) (17:20): It's with a heavy heart that I rise to make a small contribution on the situation in Afghanistan—a place where almost 40,000 ADF personnel and civilians have honourably served, fulfilling a difficult duty and making sacrifices often extending well beyond the deployment. Each one has their own story, with 41 lost on deployment and too many more lost to mental health consequences upon their return. Each one has a family who carried the weight of that duty too. For our veterans, mere thanks is not enough but I extend it nonetheless.
Coalition forces repeatedly defeated the Taliban in battle. In defence tactics, they have been unparalleled in dealing with an irregular adversary. The problem is that the nation hasn't been able to take that success and translate it into a sustained diplomatic and institutional culture that serves the long-term objective of freedom for the people of Afghanistan. In that sense, it's not so much a military failure as an institutional one. That may seem like cold comfort to the Australian veterans who struggle daily with observing the events in Afghanistan today, or the scars they bear from their time deployed, and it will surely ring hollow to the families of the 41 ADF personnel we lost in Afghanistan.
I hope the veterans listening will take this encouragement: you did everything you could. While it may not be viable for Australia to persist with your legacy of service in Afghanistan in the absence of our coalition partners today, much has been accomplished nevertheless. Let me acknowledge what your pain has achieved. You built a local armed force that was ultimately quite skilled, though it couldn't translate tactics into lasting change. You found and held accountable those who, through al-Qaeda, sought to export terrorism globally and you made it clear that they could not hide. You built prosperity: the GDP in Afghanistan rose by more than 250 per cent during the time of our involvement. You reduced infant mortality in Afghanistan by 50 per cent and newborn mortality by 32 per cent. You reduced death in childbirth by facilitating the training of midwives. In 2002 there were just 400 midwives nationwide; in 2018 there were over 5,000. You delivered an increase in functioning healthcare facilities—from 496 in 2002 to 2,800 in 2018. You made it possible to extend life expectancy by nine years in the period from 2000 to 2018. You reduced the number of people who lived with hunger daily so much that, by 2020, Afghanistan rated 99th out of 107 countries for its Global Hunger Index score. Child marriage plummeted. The rate at which children gave birth was more than halved between 2001 and 2019. You made it possible for 37 per cent of Afghan teenage girls to be able to read today. You ensured that more girls than ever before have the opportunity to attend school—80 per cent of girls, even in remote regions. In 1999, not a single girl in Afghanistan was in secondary school and there were only 9,000 in primary school. That number is now 3.5 million. One-third of university students are women, and 1,000 women started businesses of their own in recent times. All of those things were prohibited under the Taliban's last regime.
I don't pretend that these accomplishments are enough to justify the cost to Australians, but I think of Afghan girls, perhaps of the same age as my daughters, who, after the chance to taste just a little freedom—not much, mind you: the right to be seen, to learn, to be heard, to hope that one day they might live in safety at home and in public—now face the real prospect of life under the extreme repression of the Taliban. My heart breaks for them.
But I know that the seed our veterans have planted in the hearts and minds of so many girls and boys, men and women, who do not subscribe to the extremist ideology of repression and cruelty, now has the chance to grow in a way that is sustainable into a nation that does reflect the values we have helped shape. When that happens it will be sustainable. It will be owned by the people who deliver it, and it will be more enthusiastically defended than any regime we might try to establish from afar. It is my sincere prayer that this seed grows into the strongest of trees, bearing the fruits of prosperity, freedom, education and hope.
In this time of crisis, the Australian government takes the compassionate approach that you would expect. We are facilitating the exit of Australians, as well as those who worked with coalition forces, because we must do the right thing by those who trusted us on the ground.
Since 2013, 8,500 Afghans have been resettled in Australia on humanitarian grounds. Three thousand of the places in our humanitarian program this year will be allocated to Afghans. Australia consistently provides one of the world's most generous humanitarian programs. It is in times like these that the elements of it that can seem strict at times pay dividends. When we have policies in place that otherwise ensure the people smuggling of economic migrants is not rewarded, it allows us to provide more help to those in dire circumstances like those we have seen in recent times.
Since 2013, over 1,800 Afghan locally engaged employees and their families have been granted visas. Since 15 April this year, over 570 people in Afghanistan have been granted a visa under the Afghan locally engaged employee program, including family members. I know Minister Hawke and Minister Payne, in particular, are working around the clock to do the right thing by those people who did the right thing by us. And I know that they are working diligently with each and every person, like me, who brings to them cases of individuals in desperation. So I commend their sincere and diligent work.
Afghanis have now glimpsed the health, education and prosperity that are the products of peace and freedom and the rejection of extremist ideology. It is now up to the people of Afghanistan to take the lessons of the last 20 years and use them to build for themselves a stable, functional and fair government of their own.
Senator RICE (Victoria—Deputy Australian Greens Whip) (17:29): [by video link] A tragedy, an appalling tragedy, is the only way to describe what is going on in Afghanistan, which we focus on today. People around the world, including Australians, are shocked, upset and heartbroken and want to know how it has come to this—that, after 20 years of war, the Taliban are back in control and their brutal regime, which the world had hoped was defeated 20 years ago, is back. We need to reflect on the lives that have been lost—the tens of thousands of Afghan people and the 41 Australian Defence Force personnel—and the suffering. So much suffering, so much sacrifice, and it's come to this.
Make no mistake: the Taliban is back, but the newer, softer Taliban—the Taliban who do media conferences—is a lie. We have already heard enough credible reports to know that: the credible reports of them going house to house, executing Hazara people on the spot; of them telling us that the rights of women will be subject to sharia law; and of 10- and 12-year-old girls being married off to soldiers. We have seen footage of the brutality of the Taliban fighters patrolling outside the airport, bashing people with rifle butts. I myself heard a direct account of the people in that maelstrom, that crowd at the airport over the weekend. One person who I was engaged with was bashed by a rifle butt, pushed by Taliban fighters into razor wire and thrown to the ground and had his glasses broken. We know of people who have been evicted from their houses, people living in fear and terror for their lives. We know of Hazara people and others knowing that they are at extreme risk of death just because of who they are.
My office, along with other offices, has been inundated with people—Australians and people from around the world—who are so fearful for the safety of their loved ones, families, friends and colleagues in Afghanistan. My office has been inundated by the emails and phone messages from thousands of Australians who want our government to be doing more. My staff, the staff of our Greens offices, the staff in other MPs' offices, so many of us as members of parliament and so many public servants have worked incredibly long hours over the last week and the weekend, supporting people and helping them work out what to do. We've been advocating to the Department of Home Affairs, advocating to DFAT and advocating through ministerial offices to have visas and applications expedited and for people to be evacuated. Many of the people on the lists that our Greens offices have put together are partners of Australian permanent residents or immediate family members of Australians. Some have had visa applications in to come to Australia for up to two years. They're people who should have been able to come to Australia long before now. Others are human rights campaigners, women's rights campaigners, democracy campaigners, journalists and targeted people, especially Hazara people and other ethnic and religious minorities. They are people who have worked with our government and with NGOs. They've worked in the field with our defence forces, as interpreters, support workers and aid workers.
Over the last weekend, over 20 of the people who our Greens offices had been directly engaged with and were supporting—it was such a relief—managed to get through the gauntlet of the massive crowds outside Hamid Karzai airport. They managed to survive the Taliban attacks on people outside the airport. They managed to get on the list for people to be evacuated. They were approved for travel to Australia and are now on their way to start new lives here.
I personally spent the weekend following the progress of a group of 11 of these folk. They had been brought to my attention by an Australian friend who had been working on an aid project in Mazar-i-Sharif, in the north of Afghanistan, since the beginning of the year. She managed to get out of Afghanistan herself, fleeing in a very dangerous journey, just over a month ago. These were people that she had worked with, who she knew were at extreme risk. She had worked over the last week to put in applications for humanitarian visas to Australia for them. This group of 11 people was typical of the people at risk in Afghanistan and typical of the people in that crowd of tens of thousands outside the airport. They were Hazara people and other targeted ethnic minorities, people who would be at extreme risk of execution by the Taliban. They were human rights and democracy activists and people who have worked with foreign governments and NGOs. They included a family with a four-year-old and a four-month-old. They included a 23-year-old woman who had the audacity to be training to be a pilot. She was one of only 40 women out of 1,000 pilots in the Afghan defence forces and did not want to have her future determined by the brutal repression of women that the Taliban will be imposing—that is, if she even survived. This group had direct experience of the brutality of the Taliban. Some had personal experience from 20 years ago of the massacres by the Taliban, the public executions by stoning, the whippings, the dismembered hands hanging from a tree in the centre of a roundabout, the harassment and the abuse of women.
This group that I was focused on over the weekend were just a drop in the ocean of the people seeking to flee. In my mind, I spent all weekend in Kabul with them. In my mind, I was there with the tens of thousands of people in this maelstrom of humanity outside the airport. Every one of them was there because they are in fear of their lives under the Taliban. This group that I was following spent all of Saturday and Sunday in the awful crowd outside the airport gate. It was 40 degrees. There was no shade. There was no room to even sit down. I could not bear to think of a four-year-old and a four-month-old in those conditions, but they had no option. If they stayed behind, the threat of death was just so real.
I want to thank Ministers Payne and Hawke and their offices for their engagement over the weekend on all the cases that our offices brought to their attention through this last week. In particular, I want to thank them for what is a very wonderful outcome for this group of 11 people. At 2 am last night—eight o'clock their time—I got word that this group of 11 that I'd been following had been permitted to enter the airport and were now waiting for emergency visas to be issued so that they could be evacuated to Australia to begin new lives. I am still crying tears of joy and amazement that they are now safe. I think of four-year-old Daniel and four-month-old Diana beginning their journey to Australia, beginning their quintessential multicultural Australian journey, growing up as Australians in that tradition that our nation has been built on.
Every one of the 450 people Australia has evacuated so far has a powerful story to tell, but so do thousands and thousands more. We need to be doing more. We need to be accepting more than the 3,000 people that our government has committed to—3,000 people who are only being accepted as part of our existing refugee quota. Since we have settled only 8,500 people from Afghanistan since 2013, it is not a number that I would be proud of. And our government should be hanging their heads in shame at their record of locking people up indefinitely—people like these people that we are now evacuating to Australia. People have been locked up indefinitely just for pursuing their right under international law to flee persecution.
Australia should be committed to resettling at least 20,000 people, following the lead of Canada and the UK. The 4,500 people on temporary visas here in Australia must be given permanent protection so that they can fully settle down and establish their roots and know that Australia really values them and wants them to stay. We need to continue the work on fast-tracking visas for the people who are so desperate to leave, and we need to increase aid support, particularly through civil society organisations, to help the people who are suffering so much already and are going to continue to suffer with the Taliban in control. It's the least we can do. The foreseeable future in Afghanistan looks bleak. Our 20 years of war has not created an ongoing peace. Part (b) of this motion says that we have been 'fighting terrorism, promoting freedom and seeking to support the people of Afghanistan'. We might have thought that we were doing that during this longest war, but it hasn't turned out that well, has it?
We must ask ourselves what has gone wrong. Why has it come to this, with the Taliban back in control? Was there anything else that we could have done instead of imposing a colonial war upon the people of Afghanistan, supporting warlords and turning a blind eye to corruption? In this longest war, 41 Australians have died, sacrificing their lives, tens of thousands of Afghans have died, and hundreds of thousands or millions more people have been impacted by trauma and loss. I send our ongoing sympathies to all those people affected and those who have been affected by those who have lost their lives, and I hope that those lives have not been lost in vain. The least we can do in the circumstances is to provide a safe haven for people now. We should have been getting many more people out well before now, so taking 20,000 people to be resettled in Australia is very reasonable in the circumstances.
We should learn from the war of the last 20 years, change the way that we act in the world, and develop and implement policies so that human rights are at the centre of our foreign and defence policies. We need policies and actions in the world that have equal participation of women—we must insist on that. We must have diverse peoples across all hierarchies in all institutions, from ministries to embassies and implementing partners. We need to be supporting political processes to ensure equal influence of the politically marginalised and to actively support civil-society actors promoting gender equality and the rights of political minorities. Yes, there has been progress made in Afghanistan over the last 20 years, but there is so much more that we could have been doing and should have been doing to make sure that those achievements were lasting. We need to acknowledge the continuing colonial legacies within Foreign Affairs and actively work to overcome them. We should be championing cooperation, partnerships and inclusion over domination and exclusion, and emphasising the shared communalities of human beings across the globe.
As we reflect today on the tragedy in Afghanistan we have to realise that we can and we must do better. For the sake of the people who have suffered over the last 20 years, the people who have sacrificed their lives, the people who are suffering at the moment in Afghanistan, and the people who are going to have a very difficult time in the ongoing months and years—who knows how long—we have to do better. We can do better and we must.
Senator AYRES (New South Wales) (17:42): [by video link] All Australians are watching very closely the events unfolding in Afghanistan. They are indeed very distressing. Our veteran community are watching closely, reflecting upon their own experiences, their own sacrifices and the sacrifices of others that they served with. Twenty-nine thousand Australians served in Afghanistan in military roles over our longest conflict. Many thousands more served in our diplomatic corps or worked for contractors, aid organisations or the media organisations that reported on the war. They will all be watching this intensely closely. Members of the Afghan Australian community watch anxiously too—those who are citizens now and those who desperately want to be.
Afghans have made a contribution to Australia for over 150 years. The graves of Afghan cameleers and their places of worship are spread all across the Australian outback. Tens of thousands of Afghan troops and civilians have died in this bitter conflict since 2001.
The focus today is on the chaotic, terrible scenes at Kabul airport, where tens of thousands of Afghans and some Australian citizens are desperate to escape. Like all Australians, I know my thoughts today are with them and with the Australian troops and those men and women of the Royal Australian Air Force who have been deployed to effect our rescue of Australians and the locals who have worked with and for us and for a modern Afghanistan—safe, democratic and decent. It's clear that Prime Minister Morrison has left this effort far, far too late.
For years, veterans have raised publicly, privately and increasingly loudly the absolute moral imperative to act to rescue and return to Australia Afghans who worked with us. For months, since the closure of the Australian embassy in Kabul, it has been clear that this task requires urgency and application—as much urgency and application from the government as was required for the original decision to commit Australian troops to this important venture. There is not just a moral imperative; there is a national interest imperative. There's not just a moral imperative but a national interest imperative to get this right and to do it in a timely, urgent and effective way. The Morrison government has had months. I can't think of many meetings that I've had with members of the veteran community or members of veterans' families where this issue hasn't been raised squarely, often setting aside their own direct interests.
It's crucial to how Australia and Australians are regarded in the world and whether we are trusted as partners and friends that we follow through and deliver for those Australians and the Afghan men and women for whom we owe that duty. Yet month after month, the Prime Minister, the defence minister, the foreign minister and the Minister for Home Affairs have all been frozen in inaction. These failures by the Prime Minister, sadly, reflect on all Australians. Every person removed safely in the months preceding the fall of Kabul would have been one less to extract in the last few days of this unfolding crisis. The situation at Kabul airport is becoming increasingly dangerous. Mr Sullivan, President Biden's national security adviser, said yesterday that there is an acute threat from ISIS detachments in the near vicinity of the airport. Here, in Australia, we can but watch and hope that Australian professionalism and grit, planning and good fortune are enough to see all of our troops, aviators, staff and contractors return safe to our shores.
Of course, these events mean that we must defer a post-mortem analysis of our longest war. It's certainly true that that coalition action, of which Australia was an important part, denied al-Qaeda a safe base to launch acts of terrorism and war across the globe. It is also true that Afghans themselves stepped up. Women went to work. Girls went to school for the first time. Men and women stepped forward to work for a better Afghanistan—democratic, free, well governed and more equal. Of course we wonder: what is going to happen to them? It's so distressing to see so much of that so brutally swept away. It's most distressing for those who fought and for the comrades, family and friends of those who were killed, those who were injured and those who have died in the years since their service concluded. But all of us must stand with them. All of us worry deeply about the girls who have gone to school and the women who've stood up for the country that Afghanistan may become.
Afghanistan is a place that has seen so much suffering, with hundreds of years of imperial invasion and conquest, brutality and subjugation. Most recently the brutal conflicts during the Cold War, fought between proxies of the major powers, followed by a period of brutal Taliban dictatorship has meant that the people of Afghanistan have had no real prospect of the peace and prosperity that all of us take for granted. The post mortem can come later. Today we watch the evacuation effort, pray for their safe return and honour the courage and service of all those Australians who served.
Senator HUGHES (New South Wales) (17:49): I rise briefly today to acknowledge the people of Afghanistan as they're faced with the return of the Taliban and the clock turning back in time, particularly with regard to women and children and the dreadful treatment that was inflicted on them, inflicted upon so many Afghani people. Unfortunately, this looks set to recommence.
But I really wanted to particularly speak to our troops, the men and women who served over the past 20 years whilst the war raged. It's thanks to these incredibly brave men and women that Afghanistan now has a generation of women who've been allowed to flourish, to be educated, to pursue careers and to live in relative freedom. It's because of the work that they did that a generation of children weren't abused or subjugated to child marriage. Young girls were allowed to attend school; they weren't hidden under a burqa or married off in their teen years or, in some dreadful circumstances, even younger. To the 41 Australians who made the ultimate sacrifice in serving your country, our deepest thoughts and gratitude go to you and your families. You will never be forgotten.
I also want to take this chance to acknowledge some of my friends who served, who did multiple tours and who I know are amongst so many of the 39,000 Australians who served that are feeling particularly vulnerable at the moment. There was my friend who, after serving for nine months in Afghanistan, got off the plane to find no-one waiting to greet him, no-one waiting to shake his hand, no-one waiting to thank him for his service. He walked out of the airport and got in a cab to go home. There are those who recently returned, who did multiple tours not only to Afghanistan but also to other theatres in the Middle East, who were too junior to really influence strategy but had enough experience on the ground over those 20 years to see where some of the strategic failures were playing out. And there are those who experienced a decline in mental health, some to the point that it made them consider suicide and others—far too many—who, unfortunately, were successful in their attempts. Please know that all of you are seen, that you are appreciated and that all Australians are proud of you and thank you for your service. Your efforts were not in vain and, as I said earlier, you have influenced and saved a generation of Afghanis who will never forget your help.
To WithYouWithMe, Soldier On and Veteran Support Force, amongst other organisations, thank you for your continuing efforts. All of those organisations are led by people who not only know firsthand what it means to serve but also know the challenges of re-entry into civilian life. To all Australians who've served and to those who are continuing to serve: thank you for your service. Hold your head up high and be proud of what you achieved.
Senator KITCHING (Victoria) (17:54): [by video link] I would like to contribute to the motion on Afghanistan moved by Senator Payne this afternoon. It's now nearly 20 years since the US led intervention in Afghanistan that followed the 11 September 2001 attacks on the United States. Having been to Ground Zero on Christmas night that year, I watched and spoke to people who had lost loved ones on that terrible day. They wandered aimlessly that Christmas night next to the safety fencing around the Twin Towers site seeking closeness at Christmas, except, of course, their loved one was no longer there. By an act of evil they had been killed, so the coalition of democracies went in to prevent the Taliban from continuing to protect and shelter those terrorists. That intervention overthrew the oppressive Taliban regime and gave the people of Afghanistan, at least in theory, the possibility of democratic government, the expansion of human rights, particularly for women, and social and economic progress.
Today, as we stand in this place or connect remotely to talk to this motion, it is with great despair and with great sadness that we note that the Taliban regime is back in control in Afghanistan. Since 2001 more than $2 trillion has been spent on military operations in and economic aid to Afghanistan. Twenty years of intermittent warfare have taken an estimated 250,000 lives, with 2,353 US military personnel having perished alongside 41 members of the Australian Defence Force. We will never forget their sacrifice and we will always honour them. We know that 66,000 Afghan military personnel also died trying to create a safer country for their children and for that next generation. This, however, is not the whole story.
There is also a much more positive story to tell about the past 20 years in Afghanistan. Here, it is important for us to remember that Australia was a force for good in Afghanistan. We are all thinking of the 39,000 men and women of the Australian Defence Force, what they contributed and what they sacrificed. Indeed, there are many in this place and the other place who have served our country in the Defence Force and continue to serve in the parliament. During our engagement, Afghanistan saw the most sustained period of economic and social progress in its entire history—in fact, this has been the only sustained period of economic and social progress in the country's history.
Almost two-thirds of Afghanistan's people are aged under 25. They are the best educated generation in the country's history, particularly those among the rapidly growing urban population. Most of them have little to no memory of the Taliban years. But they know from their families' histories how much worse, how much more fearful, life at that time was for everyone, particularly young people and especially young women. There seem to be green shoots of a view, at least from young people today in Afghanistan who do not wish to live under the restrictions of Taliban rule and who do not wish to have liberties which have become normal for them over the last decade removed from them. Of course, there are also now those in the Panjshir Valley.
Countries like ours have a responsibility to deal with the situation that has arisen in Afghanistan. The best way we can fulfil that obligation right now, as the situation on the ground in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, is to help evacuate those who worked with our defence forces, diplomatic community and aid organisations as well as their families and those who supported our efforts in Afghanistan over the last 20 years. Many are now in immediate danger. Of course, this should be done with consideration for the existing security and immigration vetting processes that are in place. No reasonable person is suggesting otherwise. I note that many of these efforts are currently underway and that we have already evacuated hundreds of individuals out of Afghanistan. I keep looking at the photographs from Kabul airport. I've arrived and departed through both the military and the civilian sides of that airport. It is unrecognisable, with the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, with young soldiers trying to give water, shelter, indeed humanity in this dire situation, and this is why we have an obligation to the people of Afghanistan, to those whose faces are filled with desperation while pressed up against the walls at Kabul airport.
For each one of them we know there are many more who are hiding at home because we have held out the normal freedoms of our country. We cannot now yank that hand back; it would be dishonourable. These people risked their lives to assist us and work with us. It would be a national disgrace if we were to abandon them now to the terrifying revenge of their enemies. Even worse, it would be a failure on the part of the democratic countries if we were just to sidle off into the night. I'd like to thank the government ministers and their offices and departments who have been working around the clock on this. I would like to thank them personally. I also thank my colleagues who have been making representations on behalf of many in Afghanistan.
Normally, when someone in a leadership position makes a commitment, one takes them at their word. The Taliban have guaranteed that they will give safe passage to civilians who want to leave. The international community will be watching closely and will hold them to that commitment. Their own Pashtunwali should also. In addition to this, helping the Afghan people will take many different forms. We should work with the UN agencies, the United States, the European Union, Britain and India, and with international aid organisations, all of which have long histories of involvement in Afghanistan, to provide funds and resources to Afghan civil society, particularly to women's and children's organisations. We should continue to work with and keep looking for those elements of the Afghan state which seem most likely to uphold human rights and resist a return to the past.
In William Dalrymple's definitive history, Return of a King, about the First Anglo-Afghan War in the mid-1800s, Mirza Ata Mohammad, a very witty and clever writer of the period, quotes a Persian proverb: 'Those once bitten by a snake fear even a twisted rope.' We should reflect upon those words over the coming weeks.
Senator WHISH-WILSON (Tasmania) (18:01): [by video link] The Greens have been calling for the withdrawal of Australian forces from Afghanistan for at least the past decade, yet even we were shocked and appalled at the catastrophe that has unfolded in Kabul in the past four days. I was watching some footage of my former Senate colleague Scott Ludlam from the 2012-13 estimates. Going back to 2011, he was initiating debates in this place, the Senate, and asking questions about why our forces were still in Afghanistan. This was following the apprehension of Osama bin Laden and the disruption of the al-Qaeda network, the original intention when going into Afghanistan, which I note for the record the Greens originally supported. Senator Ludlam asked what the withdrawal plan was and what the strategic imperative was for having our forces remain in Afghanistan. All the way through his time in the Senate, he, Christine Milne and Bob Brown—indeed, many of us, including all of my colleagues who have spoken here tonight—were asking the question: when is Australia going to withdraw from this seemingly endless conflict?
We have been repeatedly lied to over many, many years by many politicians. Nearly 200 years ago a military strategist, Prussian aristocrat Carl von Clausewitz, wrote his treatise On War. One of the most famous passages to come from that treatise was that which said that war is simply a continuation of politics by different means. I opposed the Iraq War. I've never felt something as strongly as I did back then. I've never felt a sense of such foreboding that what we were doing was wrong as I felt back then. I opposed that because I could see the politics—the corrupted, self-interested, shallow and dangerous politics—of that war. And it's interesting to note that many experts have said one of the key reasons that we failed in Afghanistan was the illegal and unilateral invasion of Iraq—fighting a war on two fronts.
The answer is a lot simpler than that from my point of view. Afghanistan was always going to be a failure because of politics. Politics reflect the national interest, and what we've seen with the withdrawal from Afghanistan—and the way it has been conducted in recent weeks has shocked the world—is politics. The US are doing what is in their national and political interest. Here I come to a very important point: when the Prime Minister was asked on Insiders on the weekend what he knew about the shambolic and appalling chaos unfolding in Kabul, it was pretty clear he didn't know much. He made it very clear we were there to support our allies in the US and that we receive our advice from our allies in the US, just like we did when we followed them into this war and into Iraq and many, many years ago into Vietnam. And I raise that because Vietnam has been drawn into this messaging fray in the media in recent days—how we could possibly have repeated the same mistakes of history as we did back in Vietnam!
I note Mr Malcolm Fraser, one of the last true Liberals in this country, putting politics aside and urging the Australian parliament to put politics aside and immediately take a significant humanitarian intake of refugees into this country. Many of those refugees I grew up with as a young boy in this country. My dad was a Vietnam vet, and Australians felt very strongly that we should honour the Vietnamese and look after them. And, likewise, today, tonight and this week Australians feel equally as strongly that we should honour those and protect those that have supported us, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Australia's continuing participation in this war in the last 10 years.
What we have seen unfolding in Kabul is either a massive intelligence failure that has led to the Taliban controlling all the arms that have been left on the ground in Kabul—the billions of dollars worth of weapons that they now have—or the Afghan army unprepared for this contingency or unwilling to fight. There are so many questions we need answered, that we need to get to the bottom of, not just so we make sure this kind of catastrophe isn't repeated in history but, as has been pointed out so poignantly in this debate tonight by so many senators, because of the veterans in Australia and their families, for those who have died—for them so that they don't feel that their sacrifice and their time was a waste.
I want to raise two important points that we need to be thinking about as a nation. The first is: this is all the advertisement this country needs to consider war powers reform. I know my colleague Senator Steele-John will talk about this shortly, so I won't go into that in much more detail. But, while we leave the decision-making in the hands of a few people—go back to von Clausewitz—in the hands of politics and the politics of a few, without scrutiny and without debate, we will continue to go into these wars, we will continue to lose the lives of young Australians and we will continue to fail to meet the objectives of these conflicts.
I actually questioned what the objective of this conflict was. It's interesting that Mr Barnaby Joyce, when asked in question time in the other place today, said that we went into Afghanistan because of the Bali bombings and because of the bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Jakarta. Well, Mr Joyce didn't do his homework very well, did he? Those bombings occurred well after we went into Afghanistan and after we went into Iraq. And many of us have pointed out that these wars would not destroy or beat terrorism—indeed, they would make it worse; they would make Australia an enemy. While our national interest was coupled to the US national interest, we would become a target. Indeed, I think there's plenty of evidence that that is correct.
This invasion of Afghanistan, this occupation of Afghanistan, has failed to counter global terrorism. Indeed, I believe it's made it worse. Many of us raised those issues—as, by the way, did many, many experts on this subject—to put the politics aside, which leads me to the second point I would like to make very strongly. This was the first time that the ANZUS treaty was invoked by our Prime Minister: to take Australian troops off to Afghanistan. To use the words of Malcolm Fraser, who wrote about this just months before he died, we now need to revisit that treaty after all these years. We need to question whether that treaty is built for purpose for this age. We need to question whether Australia's interests are always the same as those of the US. I would argue very passionately and very strongly that that is not always the case. Indeed, we need to forge our own foreign policy and determine what is in our national interests, and that should be done by this parliament, not by a few politicians who are making this up as they go along. If we continue to make these mistakes, we will continue to put future generations of this country at risk.
I've got to say that it has appalled me in recent days to see our Prime Minister fronting the cameras—and we saw a bit of it on show today in Senate question time from Minister Payne and others—trying to turn this amazing effort by our military, this evacuation, into some kind of victory at the end of a very shameful and very dark chapter for this country: 20 years of occupation of a foreign country, for what purpose very few people could ever ascertain and for what purpose we were never really told, except for platitudes about why we were there and how it was honourable to fight under the flag.
Over the years, I've worked very closely with our veterans. The Greens initiated the first inquiry into veteran homelessness, suicide and PTSD, in 2015. The reason we did that was that we knew there's a cost to war, and it's not just the fact that we lost 41 Australians, who didn't need to die in this conflict and who have families who still suffer to this day. But many veterans also came home with other wounds—deep wounds, psychological wounds—that will never heal. The same applies to their families. We wanted that inquiry to help veterans, but we also wanted this country to understand the cost of war and the cost of politicians making decisions that put other lives, Australian lives, in harm's way.
We expect a lot from our Australian Defence Force. I have been a member of that institution myself, as have my father and many of my friends, including many who fought in Afghanistan over many years. I can say today that I'm not going to stand by and watch Scotty from marketing, our Prime Minister, try to spin this into a new marketing win for his government. While this catastrophe unfolds, I will, however, thank the Australian Defence personnel, who are doing a magnificent job; the staff at DFAT; and the many officials out there who are working as hard as they possibly can to try and bring these people to Australia or elsewhere. For that I thank them. That is what our priority should be now. That is why we are having this debate today. But soon we need to have an honest appraisal of not just what went wrong at the end of this conflict, why we were there for so long and what purpose it was meant to achieve but, most importantly, how we can avoid this ever, ever happening again.
Senator STEELE-JOHN (Western Australia) (18:14): [by video link] What is unfolding right now in Afghanistan is a humanitarian crisis that requires an urgent response. The Greens and the community are united in calling for a concrete set of tangible actions to be taken by the Australian government to support the people of Afghanistan, to show solidarity with them in this terrible moment of disaster and fear, and to support those Afghanis living here in Australia. The Greens and the community are calling for immediate allocation of 20,000 additional humanitarian visas to be granted so that those in danger can come to safety. We are calling, together with the community, for the immediate conversion of temporary protection and shared visas to permanent visas so that those here in Australia are relieved from this constant state of limbo in which they have been forced to live by governments of all persuasions. We are calling for the immediate return of all Afghan refugees and asylum seekers from offshore detention to be processed here in the community and be granted permanent visas. We are additionally calling for assistance to the internally displaced people who are now in what seems to be a rapidly unravelling civil war within the nation. We are doing all of these things at the urging of the community and are proud to be alongside them in solidarity and support in this very difficult time.
It was an honour and a privilege to be able to gather with the community yesterday in WA at the same time as communities rallied across Australia to show their support for the people of Afghanistan in this moment. And there was a very clear message for everybody who attended: community members across the country demand that the major parties, the federal government and the state governments do all that they can to support Afghanistan, to support its people, to maintain rights and justice and to use all the levers that Australia has to make sure that those human rights are upheld in Afghanistan. It is so important that Australia use its position in the world to make sure that any government that forms in Afghanistan is one which upholds the rights of women and girls, one which upholds the rights of children and one which guarantees the human rights of all ethnic minorities, whether they be Hazara, whether they be Pashtun, whether they be Tajik or whether they be Uzbek. All human rights in Afghanistan must be upheld. These are the urgent concrete actions which must be taken now in addition to the continuation of evacuations of those on the ground in Afghanistan so that they are able to be brought to safety and that no-one is left behind.
As we take these urgent and concrete steps, it is also vitally important that the major parties, and prime ministers and foreign ministers past and present, reflect on how Australia and Afghanistan ended up in this moment. There must be a full and honest reflection upon what has happened here. The crisis in Afghanistan, the return of the Taliban, is the latest in a series of failed experiments in wars of overseas violent intervention participated in by Australia alongside the United States. From Vietnam to Iraq and now Afghanistan, Australia has repeatedly followed the United States to wars of aggression, with the result that many of our service personnel have died, many more have been wounded and hundreds of thousands of civilian lives, if not millions, have been lost in those nations.
There is an urgent need to recognise and to reckon with the reality that there are credible allegations that, during the 20 years that our armed forces personnel were in country in Afghanistan, there were many instances of war crimes committed by service personnel in that country. We must reflect on the importance of not only holding individuals to account but also holding the chain of command to account, holding the strategists to account and holding to account the political leaders who let our presence and our forces in Afghanistan so dangerously drift, without any discernible purpose, into a context where some of the most heinous violations of the laws of war are now alleged to have taken place.
We must reflect also on the urgent need to consider whether there would have been, and will be in the future, ways that we could have been able to promote human rights globally that do not involve doing so at the end of a gun and whether, if ever the people of Australia are called upon to take up arms or to deploy overseas, that only occurs after a vote of this parliament. No Australian service personnel member should be asked to put their lives on the line for a cause for which no MP has been prepared to vote.
All of these things must be done urgently to support the community and to translate the very fine and comforting words that are so easily now spoken by members of the major parties into concrete actions. We cannot have a situation where debates are held in the Senate or in the House of Representatives in which members give contributions singing the praises of armed forces personnel and committing Australia to support the people of Afghanistan while there is also a failure to translate those words into the concrete actions for which the community is calling.
I say again, there must be 20,000 humanitarian visa places issued specifically for those from Afghanistan. There must be the conversion of temporary protection visas, shifting visas to permanent visa status so that health care, education and supports can be accessed. There must be the continuation of evacuations for those who supported the Australian mission in Afghanistan and also for those who are additionally at risk: the journalists, the academics, the MPs, the activists that are now at risk from the Taliban. We must use our position in the world to ensure that any government that forms in Afghanistan is one which upholds the rights of women, children, girls and ethnic minorities. All this must be done out of recognition that the moment that Afghanistan now finds itself in is a moment to which Australia has contributed.
We are not passive actors in this crisis. A decision was made by the political leadership of this country to follow the United States into this conflict, into this war which has claimed so many Afghani, Hazara, Pashtun, Uzbek and Turkic lives, and so many of the lives of our Defence Force personnel, and has wounded so many. Those were political decisions that were made by Australian political leaders, and those leaders must now take those concrete actions, live up to their obligations and leave no-one behind. I thank the chamber for its time.
Senator MARIELLE SMITH (South Australia) (18:24): [by video link] Like so many of my fellow South Australians, I have struggled to process the images coming out of Afghanistan—images of desperation; of fear; of helplessness; of people clinging to the outside of a departing aircraft, people for whom we know that extremely perilous action represents a better option than staying behind; of the crush of people in Kabul airport desperate for safe passage to a safer future. The most haunting of images are those of children, little boys and girls clutching their parents with looks of grief and confusion on their faces—adult emotions that should never find their way into the hearts of children. Of course, these images tell only one part of the story, the story we can see.
These are devastating scenes. This is devastating for the Afghan people. It is devastating for the Australians who remained there. It is devastating for those who worked with us over many years who are yet to escape, who fear what awaits them if they are left behind. And it is certainly devastating for our veteran community, those who served and sacrificed, and the families who loved them. Today I associate myself with the remarks made by Senator Wong, on behalf of the Australian Labor Party, and the remarks made by the Leader of the Opposition in the other place. Importantly, on behalf of the people of South Australia, who I represent, I want to express our solidarity with the Afghan Australian community in our state, with their friends, family and loved ones who are deeply traumatised by these events.
Much will be said over the days, weeks, months and years ahead about the decisions taken that have led to the scenes we are seeing in Afghanistan. There is much to reflect on, including what this means for human rights, for women and girls especially; for democracy; for our national security; and for the world. Today, as we watch this crisis unfold in real time, I will say this: the Australian government must do absolutely everything in its power to ensure that every friend of Australia who supported us in Afghanistan can get out safely. The government must ensure that the Australians left behind can get home, and it must respond compassionately and generously to those who need a safe, permanent home. The interagency team on the ground in Kabul has an incredibly difficult task before it, a task made harder because of the decisions and the delays of this government. We are grateful for the work of this team so far, and we are watching your efforts anxiously.
I know the people of my state of South Australia would support me in saying we stand by our friends in Afghanistan. We stand by those who helped Australians. We stand by our fellow citizens and by our friends, family and loved ones still there. We stand by our veteran community and the families who loved them, and we honour all of those who made the greatest sacrifice—the 41 Australians fallen.
Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New South Wales) (18:28): [by video link] I note the comments made by the minister. We honour the service of the Australian Defence Force in Afghanistan, and most especially those who gave their lives in defence of the values of freedom. Regrettably, the circumstances surrounding our departure raise legitimate concerns about the rationale behind decisions taken that have led to the present extraordinary policy and military failure. As I have repeatedly stated, we had a moral obligation to assist locally engaged Afghanis who provided vital support over the years to the ADF and to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. That is what DFAT told senators in questioning at estimates in May
What I don't understand is that US forces and our forces were withdrawn before the mission of extricating civilians was completed. Now we've had to redeploy ADF forces to assist the security situation at Kabul airport, noting that the US has had to redeploy thousands of Marines as well. In that regard, we seem to have put the cart before the horse. As John Howard stated in the Australian on 9 July, we have 'a moral obligation' to provide asylum. Their fate must not be decided by 'narrow legalism'. Mr Howard told SBS:
That was a moral obligation that we shamefully discarded many years ago, when we pulled out of Vietnam, and I do not want to see a repetition of that failure in relation to Afghanistan …
Further, in this regard Mr Howard made some very clear comments on 18 August on the 7.30 report. He said there was 'an overwhelming belief' in 2001 that Western intervention, following the September 11 attacks, was the right course of action and he did make the point that 'there is no evidence that a major terrorist attack has been orchestrated out of Afghanistan' since the invasion.
A few days ago, we saw the Taliban press conference. Notably, a headline in the Sydney Morning Herald on 18 August stated 'The Taliban are all smiles now but what happens next?' We know what will happen next. The Taliban will revert to being the oppressive regime we know from the past. The reports of brutality by its militants in the different regions of Afghanistan speak to the brutality of a regime that, after 20 years, has seen little change. On the same day the Taliban leadership was vowing to honour women's rights, reports emerged that a woman was allegedly killed for not wearing a burqa. The Taliban promised safe passage to Kabul airport for Afghanis trying to flee the country, yet women and children are being beaten and whipped as they try to pass through checkpoints set up by militants.
We will also see a change in the global geopolitical situation. The enemies of the West, most particularly China and Russia, will be emboldened. Already, China is sabre-rattling in relation to Taiwan.
I note the minister's comment that combating terrorism just got harder. I agree with her, given the sheer volume of military equipment which the United States abandoned in their premature extraction from Afghanistan. This was not the plan that Donald Trump negotiated for the withdrawal. The opportunities for extracting civilians now are very limited and much more dangerous. Sadly, we failed to abide by the maxim 'Hope for the best and plan for the worst'.
Senator FARUQI (New South Wales) (18:32): [by video link] I rise to make my contribution to this motion. My heart goes out to the Afghan people, who are suffering the harrowing, horrific and tragic consequences of war at the moment—and have been for decades. So let's not try and obliterate this reality. The truth is Australia failed the people of Afghanistan by waging a war on them with our so-called Western allies, and it's failing Afghans today. Mr Morrison, you have left ADF interpreters and their families in extreme danger. You've offered a paltry 3,000 visas from the existing allocation and you have the audacity to say you wish things were different. There are tens of thousands in Afghanistan at risk and desperately seeking to flee to safety. There are thousands in Australia waiting to be granted permanent visas. What a terrible show of apathy and action from this government. We know you had months of warning to evacuate people from Afghanistan, and yet you did nothing.
For 20 years, Afghans were subjected to an imperialist war waged in the name of curbing terrorism. They lived under the direct and violent occupation by Western military forces, and warlords propped up by the United States. Allied forces dropped bombs on children, on farmers and on wedding parties. They've been killed in crossfire and by improvised explosive devices, and there have been assassinations. We will never know the full toll of this 20-year invasion, but we do know that thousands upon thousands have been massacred. We know there is more poverty, there is lack of access to health services, and millions of Afghans have been displaced. And now the Taliban are back in power and they are emboldened.
History, unfortunately, is riddled with these colossal and unmitigated failures of Europe, the United States and their allies, like Australia, to intervene, to control and to attempt to extinguish complicated Middle Eastern conflicts. Every time, it has made the situation worse and inflicted an insurmountable heavy toll on the people who have been invaded, all to keep the Western military war machine going—the same war machine that enlists and uses people and then abandons veterans in the aftermath.
For decades now, the people of Afghanistan have been caught between the misogynistic and extremely violent Taliban on the one hand and the deadly consequences of allied forces on the other. In all of this, the hollow self-serving concerns about the safety of women were paraded around to justify the ongoing Western intervention and Australia's involvement in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, when we know full well that women, girls and children bear a vastly disproportionate burden of war itself and the havoc that comes after. People love to speak on behalf of Muslim women—as if we have no agency, no capacity to resist or fight back; as if we need to be perpetually protected by the 'white saviour' industrial complex. I know this very well, even though I am in a position of relative privilege. But no-one knows this better than my sisters in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, who have endured Western military invasion, occupation and war. So this is an important time to step back and listen to what Afghan women have to say.
Malalai Joya, a leading Afghan women's activist and former parliamentarian, has said the plight of women in Afghanistan has always served as a very good excuse for Western military invention and has asked that the occupation be rebranded from 'the war on terror' to 'the war on innocent Afghan people'. All the while, she says, the nature of the Taliban hasn't changed and women are again going to bear the brunt of the current crisis. Malalai Joya says: 'No nation can donate liberation to another nation. What we need from abroad is not war machines but humanitarian aid.' And this is the time for Australia to provide that aid in spades.
History will not look kindly upon John Howard for being part of creating this bloody mess, nor Scott Morrison and his government for their morally bankrupt response to the crisis in Afghanistan. We don't just owe the people of Afghanistan an apology; we owe them permanent protection in Australia. We owe them reparations and humanitarian assistance, the scale of which should dwarf our military spend. This is the least we should do, and we must do it right now.
Senator SHELDON (New South Wales) (18:38): [by video link] The Prime Minister has described Afghanistan as a failed state and is trying to shrug off all responsibility for the countless Afghan citizens who had come to believe Australia would do the right thing by them. Well, right now we are doing the absolute wrong thing by them; and the only failure is in this government's duty of care to the people of Afghanistan, who stood beside Australian forces for two decades. Any Afghan person who has worked with the Australians during the past 20 years now knows that they are likely to become the plaything of a resurgent Taliban. Ethnic Hazaras in particular note that they are in grave danger. Their lives and livelihoods are under direct threat. Many of them have family in Australia. The 2016 census noted that there were nearly 47,000 Afghanistan-born people here. These are real people who are watching their loved ones in Afghanistan face persecution and worse.
Today I spoke to Jamila Gherjestani, an ethnic Hazari woman who is a lawyer, trade unionist and proud Australian, as well as a friend and colleague. Jamila said that the entire Afghan community is horrified both at what has happened in Afghanistan and at what the Morrison government is not doing about it. 'Why were no plans put in place?' she asked me. 'Australia knew this was going to happen.' Jamila went on to say: 'I have cousins in Afghanistan who can no longer go to school and to work. They cannot even leave the house. Women who had jobs in offices are now being told to have their male relatives replace them.' She said, further: 'Afghanistan was not a failed state like Morrison says. It was doing well. Women were doctors. Women were in parliament.' She said she also fears for relatives here existing on temporary protection visas, who now are frightened they'll be sent back to Afghanistan. What a horrific approach by this government; how heartless! It has been reported that there are more than 4,000 Afghan refugees in Australia with temporary protection visas.
Jamila said her young nephew in Australia watched the horrifying spectacle last week of desperate Afghan people clinging to the undercarriage of a US military air transport as it took off, some of them eventually falling to their deaths. He said to Jamila: 'How come the world doesn't care about our people? It's not only distressing to me and my mum and to the adults here, but also to the kids, knowing their cousins are being treated like this.' Jamila is outraged at the Morrison government's dog-whistling about not letting in 'terrorists' and saying that not much can be done for a country that won't help itself. Jamila's apt response: 'Why was it good enough for them to be guarding the Australian embassy with machine guns for 20 years but now you say they're terrorists? It is extremely disrespectful and it makes us angry. You trusted them for 20 years to work with you.'
Jamila arrived in Australia with other family members in 1997, aged seven, as a refugee, after her father was slaughtered by the mujahedin in Afghanistan. Before she was 15 years old, she had a job flipping burgers at McDonald's. When she finished school, she got a law degree so that, 'I could help people like me,' and she has worked in the union movement ever since. Her siblings are all professional success stories. She has a sister who is an engineer, another sister who works in banking, a brother who is a senior figure with the Commonwealth Bank and another brother who is in landscaping. But, without an immediate assistance program for Afghan refugees, she says she knows that there are family members who will never be seen again. She said: 'I can't go to Afghanistan, not even in 10 years time, with the Taliban there. And where are my cousins going to go? They are going to be tortured and persecuted.'
Australia owes people like Jamila and her cousins, nieces and nephews in Afghanistan immediate consideration. We owe a debt to members of the Australian Defence Force and the diplomatic community who have themselves given so much to the Afghanistan cause, particularly in the case of the 41 ADF members who made the ultimate sacrifice. Of course, 39,000 Australians served over there and have done a wonderful job, as we can see from Jamila's comments about women holding jobs in parliament and in civil society, being properly treated, educated and employed. That is a basis for great pride for us as Australians. There have been calls in recent days from across Australian society to increase the refugee intake from Afghanistan, just as Australia did for Syria in 2015, for China after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and even at the conclusion of the Vietnam War and of World War II. Australia has a proud history of offering succour to refugees, a history that is being truncated right now by this callous disregard, dog-whistling and shambolic policymaking. The Prime Minister's opening gambit when Kabul fell to the Taliban last week was to admit, and I quote, 'support won't reach all that it should. On-the-ground events have overtaken many efforts. We wish it were different.' Well, it could be different, if only we were to make it so. Refugees have been the bedrock of modern Australia and have made us the nation we are. We simply owe these people who have laid down everything for Australians in Afghanistan. News reports in recent days have quoted former Australian Army captain Jason Scanes, who said that the delay in processing humanitarian visas applications meant many interpreters, particularly those stranded outside of Kabul, could not be rescued now. Captain Scanes was reported in the Guardian as saying:
The reality is if the government had have been committed to this locally engaged employee visa program efficiently, instead of the lazy, bureaucratic, relaxed attitude to processing application, they would not be facing this huge evacuation operation that the government just doesn't have capacity for.
That was just last month, and yet the wheels have ground ever more slowly. Captain Scanes said the veterans were:
… sick of the marketing of this government … everything is marketing. Just tell us: how many of our mates are left there, what are you doing to get them out, or are you just going to abandon them?
In this crisis, there is no time to dither.
Just last month, the ABC reported a former interpreter who'd worked with Australian forces had been denied a visa to Australia on the grounds he was, and I quote, 'not considered an employee of one of the Australian government agencies'. According to the ABC he said:
When I read the letter saying you are not eligible, I felt like my death warrant has been signed by the Australians.
It is clear that the Taliban will capture and kill me whenever they get a chance.
Even as recently as this weekend, locally engaged employees were reportedly told they did not qualify for visas and should contact a migration agent instead, before being told that they would qualify for asylum after all. We're at a moment in history where we can make decisions we can be proud of and which our children and grandchildren can be proud of, or we can do the wrong thing. The choice is no choice at all. It is Australia's moral imperative to act and to act swiftly by increasing our refugee intake of Afghan people. It's a matter of life and death.
Senator CICCONE (Victoria—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (18:47): [by video link] I rise in support of this motion on Afghanistan and in doing so I want to speak directly to those Australian service men and women, including members of the Australian Federal Police, who have committed to and sacrificed so much throughout our country's long engagement in Afghanistan. I know that many of you may have been wondering over the course of the last week what your sacrifice was for. Why did you and your comrades suffer the injuries that you suffered? Why did some not come home? After 20 years of conflict, exactly what was achieved? To those of you who have thought about these questions, your thoughts are understandable. And whilst I can't pretend to know how to feel watching the scenes which we saw last week as the Taliban marched into Kabul, I can certainly appreciate the despair that must accompany these sights for you. To those who served, stand tall and let me reassure you that your efforts did indeed make a big and positive difference. Your work gave girls, boys, women, men and others opportunities that they had never before had in that land, freedoms previously unknown to them. Because of you, schoolyards were the place of children. Because of you, leaving home without a burqa or a male chaperone was acceptable. Your work gave cities, towns and villages the infrastructure that was so much needed: the bridges, the waterways, the schools and the hospitals just to name a few. Access to education must be one of the greatest differences that has been made. All this was your work. Thanks to you, international terror networks could no longer rely on Afghanistan to be a comfortable home for their hate-filled ideologies. Thanks to you, one of the world's most brutal regimes, al-Qaeda, was dealt a devastating blow and Osama bin Laden was brought to justice. Your work has kept Australians safe. To those 39,000 of you who served your country in Afghanistan, I say thank you. To the 41 families who have lost loved ones in this conflict, no words I can say can take away your grief, but know that the cause for which your loved ones gave their lives was a most noble one and that the price they paid was not in vain.
It is clear that more needs to be done to support Australia's veterans and their families following this war, which is why Labor has been calling on the government to proactively provide additional elements of support. Veterans are disproportionately afflicted by mental health concerns. We as elected members in this place cannot shirk our responsibility to protect those who have protected our nation, our values and our freedoms. Australia is not that kind of nation, and it is time that we put a greater focus on our veterans' welfare.
As I finish, I say to any veteran who is listening to today's proceedings or who later reads these speeches in Hansard: please hold your head high and remember our nation is proud of you, your hard work, your commitment and your sacrifice, and we will never forget the immense sacrifices that you and your fallen mates have made.
Senator McCARTHY (Northern Territory—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (18:52): [by video link] Like the rest of Australia, the people of the Northern Territory were horrified to see the unfolding chaos and tragedy in Afghanistan. We have a large defence presence here in the Northern Territory, and many current and former members served in Afghanistan. My colleague the member for Solomon, Luke Gosling, has been horrified to see the Taliban surge across the country. The situation in Afghanistan playing out now is not their failure. It is not in any way the fault or responsibility of our defence forces or the many others who worked to support our efforts in the country.
Tens of thousands of Australians contributed to our mission in Afghanistan, which was largely successful. We built schools, roads and bridges, and a generation of young women received an education. As Senator Wong said in her statement today, female representation in parliament, where there had been no women, increased to over 20 per cent. Our mission in Afghanistan would not have been possible without the support of the Afghan people on the ground—the interpreters, the guides and the cultural brokers. They are our comrades.
Australia has historic links as well as modern connections to Afghanistan. One hundred and fifty years ago, the first Afghans came to Australia as cameleers. They were employed to explore the arid heart of Australia with their 'ships of the desert' as traditional wagons used for such expeditions were not suitable for the harsh conditions of the outback. The cameleers were collectively known as 'Afghans', although a number of them came from other countries and regions as well. They played a major role in delivering freight and essential goods to the new settlers in South Australia and here in the Northern Territory. The rich heritage of these Afghans is evident—very much so—throughout Central Australia in particular, in the names of places and families, like Sadadeen, Mahomed, Satour, Khan and Mulladad, just to name a few. The connection is there with the name of one of our most iconic rail journeys, the Ghan railway.
We've seen other countries with a much larger contingent of locally engaged staff make huge efforts to move them out of Afghanistan and to safety. Australia did not, and this is to our shame. We knew, and we knew for some time, that the international withdrawal from Afghanistan was coming. We had time to prepare an evacuation plan for our local support workers. We had time to get our diplomatic staff out, but the Australian government is stumbling around, caught up in its own red tape.
There are reports that some applications for protection visas have been rejected because the applicants were subcontracted and not directly employed by the Australian government. This is just bureaucratic fiddling—people's lives are on the line. There have been countless reports of Afghans seeking help but being overwhelmed by paperwork and process while their safety becomes increasingly precarious. The Prime Minister has claimed that everything was being done to bring these Afghans to Australia, but there is really little evidence of that. It is a relief to see that we finally have flights going in, and I thank the brave men and women of the ADF and the officials from the various government departments who are assisting the operation, all at great risk now.
Instead of creating bureaucratic mazes, the government should have been and should now be fast-tracking visas and evacuations for Afghan family members of Australian citizens and permanent residents. We must open up the thousands of unused humanitarian places for Afghans who are at risk of harm by the Taliban, including, especially, the women and girls. And we must ensure Afghans in Australia on temporary visas have pathways to remain and that they won't be involuntarily deported. I wholeheartedly support the call by the member for Solomon to open up Bladin Point, here in Darwin, to Afghan evacuees. The facility already has Defence using it in a limited capacity for quarantine purposes. There is no reason it couldn't be a quarantine point for those Afghans coming to Australia seeking complete safety. We know we do quarantine very well here in the Northern Territory, particularly at Howard Springs.
In Afghanistan our defence forces did great things in extremely challenging circumstances and sometimes against impossible odds. It is coming up to the anniversary of September 11, when we will reflect and remember, and we need to do so with pride in the belief that we did what we could and that we must never abandon those in Afghanistan.
Question agreed to.
MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
COVID-19: Vaccination
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Chandler ) ( 18:58 ): A letter has been received from Senator Urquhart:
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
That after Mr Morrison stated multiple times in March 2021, in connection with the vaccine rollout, that "it's not a race", last weekend Australia experienced its highest daily COVID case numbers since the pandemic began eighteen months ago.
Is the proposal supported?
More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers for today's discussion. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.
Senator GREEN (Queensland) (18:58): [by video link] It is a pleasure to be joining the Senate from Cairns tonight to talk about this incredibly important issue. It is clear that we have been led down a path of complacency by the Prime Minister. 'This is not a race.' Those are the words the Prime Minister used and will be forever haunted by. In what has become the most important event of our times—at least in our lifetimes—where Australians have needed strong and effective leadership, we have been badly let down and we are all suffering the consequences. Half of the country is currently in lockdown. People are under immense stress. Workers are losing their jobs. Businesses that people have spent their entire lives building are closing their doors. Yet our Prime Minister said: 'It is not a race. It is not a competition.' He didn't just say it once; he said it repeatedly. Scott Morrison said the vaccine rollout was 'not a race' on 11 March this year, and he said it three times. He said it twice on 14 March and again on 31 March as well. Why is this phrase so important? Why did it mean so much to the Australian people? Because it led to the complacency that this government has allowed to occur, dropping our vaccine rollout down to the lowest level among OECD countries. We're now seeing, as a result, the highest daily COVID case numbers since the pandemic began, 18 months ago. We all saw those terrifying numbers in New South Wales, announced earlier today, of 818 cases. It is a dire and difficult situation for all of the residents, including my family, who live in south-west Sydney. People are dying. Children are getting sick. The burden on families and businesses is immeasurable. People are struggling to see the light at the end of the tunnel, yet the government think that this is what they need to be talking about.
Scott Morrison says that he doesn't play politics with the pandemic. Yet time and time again we have seen this Prime Minister deem it unnecessary to support a lockdown in New South Wales but crucify other states for imposing restrictions in an effort to save their communities from ongoing pain. It was precisely that encouragement of the New South Wales Premier in her decision not to lock down this delta outbreak, which has caused so much damage to our economy and to our society.
The fact is that we're in this position because Prime Minister Scott Morrison failed to do his job. He failed to do two things: fix quarantine and get the vaccine rollout right. This is, in fact, a race, and it has always been a race. It has been a race for survival for so many communities and for so many people. But the stark reality of the numbers that we have seen in the last couple of days shows that Scott Morrison has failed. You only need to look at the vaccination rates of some of our most vulnerable Australians to understand this. If you're an aged-care worker, a person with a disability or an Indigenous Australian, you have been let down by this Prime Minister. The data that was released recently shows that the vaccination rates for the two states with the largest First Nations populations—New South Wales and Queensland—are sitting at critically low levels. As of last week, both were sitting at around about eight per cent, and these people were priorities under this government.
Today, we're seeing startling figures around the number of staff working in aged-care homes who are yet to be vaccinated. We know that, during the Melbourne and Victorian lockdowns of last year, aged-care workers carrying viruses into homes was devastating for so many people and so many families. This government was fully warned about needing to vaccinate aged-care workers, and yet Scott Morrison said that it was 'not a race'. Today we have reports that, in some facilities in my home town of Cairns, we have vaccination rates of aged-care workers sitting at less than 10 per cent—less than 10 per cent—after six months of the vaccine rollout under Scott Morrison. If you're an NDIS participant, chances are you haven't even had your first dose yet. Just over a quarter of NDIS participants have been fully vaccinated. First doses have only reached 44 per cent. These people, the NDIS participants that we are talking about today, were in priority phase 1A under this government, yet Scott Morrison said that it was 'not a race'.
These are groups that the federal government says are the most vulnerable and the highest priority for vaccination; otherwise, we'll never be able to open up again. But—but—Scott Morrison continued to say that this was 'not a race'. The truth is that, in times of crisis, people need a leader—someone who stands up for us, faces the tough questions and makes big calls, someone who is decisive, someone who can offer hope. Yet what we got instead with this Prime Minister was: 'It's not my job. It's a matter for the states. I don't hold a hose.' We get a Prime Minister who sits back and lets members of his own government ranks spew irresponsible drivel and misinformation about COVID-19, masks and lockdowns. It is no wonder that there is hesitancy in the community when the Prime Minister has failed to stop these people saying that masks don't work, that lockdowns don't work and that you don't need to get the vaccine.
I'm not the only one who feels so bitterly disappointed about the position that Australians find themselves in. I'm lucky enough to live in one of the best parts of the world, Far North Queensland, but our town is hurting badly, and it is a devastating sight to see. Cafes which are normally full of tourists are near empty. At this time of year, the lagoon pool on our famous esplanade is usually bustling with people, but right now it is sparsely attended. The marina is full of boats, as there simply aren't enough people to take them out. North Queensland's tourism industry is on the brink, and there are widespread fears in the industry and the community that this is the end for many operators. They survived 2020, but now they will close their doors. A local tourism leader said recently, 'The tourism industry is on its knees.' Another, who closed their doors last week after operating for 30 years, said, 'I won't be the last one.' Further down, in the Whitsundays, operators are facing a similar situation. As one Airlie Beach business suggests, their struggles are far from over and the outlook is still pretty dismal.
This has always been a race, and the Morrison government must step up and provide certainty to North Queensland businesses as they continue to struggle with the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We are at a crisis point now with these communities. The Prime Minister needs to face these businesses and give them a plan forward, not just a vaccination plan or a plan to end lockdowns—which we know will happen eventually, but not for some time to come. We need a plan for support, and that's what I have been calling for in Cairns and in these speeches in parliament: a wage subsidy scheme for these businesses. That is what they have been calling for.
Extraordinarily, today we've discovered that, instead of approaching the minister, the Treasurer or the Prime Minister directly for additional support, the local member, Warren Entsch, actually wrote to the state government to ask for support, saying that the support that had already been provided by the Commonwealth government was inadequate and that it hadn't gone far enough. It is pretty extraordinary when you've got a member of this government knowing that it would be better to approach the state government for support than to go and ask for it from the Treasurer or from Scott Morrison.
It is also pretty extraordinary that we're now in a situation where we know that people are going to lose their jobs yet the Morrison government has failed to deliver support for these businesses. These are people who have supported the coalition and the local member in the past, but they have been hung out to dry under this government. What these businesses and tourism operators need is a wage subsidy scheme. They need that now because of Scott Morrison's failures. They need that now because we are in lockdown and we're not going to be out of lockdown for quite some time to come. Vaccination rates are increasing, but not fast enough to save these businesses. We know how important it is for these businesses to get tourism support, yet the government has failed to deliver on wage subsidies that will actually protect jobs. The local member, Warren Entsch, said himself that the support so far from the Commonwealth government has been inadequate and falls short of what is required. So we are asking the federal government to finally step up. This is a race. It is a race to deliver support to businesses before they close their doors. It is a race to get people vaccinated.
Senator SCARR (Queensland) (19:09): I'm sure the good people of Leichhardt would know that their MP, Warren Entsch, is an outstanding representative who will always fight for their interests in this place and wherever he has an opportunity to advocate for their best interests. He's done that for many, many years, and I have every confidence that he will do it after the next federal election as well.
Let's have a look at this matter of public interest. The first thing I note about it is that it's backward-looking. It's talking about what was said in March 2021. We were talking about this the last two weeks of sitting, and we're back here today. It's a matter of public interest that's backward looking. It's looking at the past. It's not looking at the present. It's not looking at the future. It's playing a blame game in the past, looking at words that were uttered in March 2021. The Australian people have moved on. They're looking at today, and they want to look towards their future.
If Senator Green is interested in correspondence with the Premier of Queensland, maybe she should pick up the phone and talk to the Premier of Queensland about her comments over the past few days, and those comments of the Deputy Premier Steven Miles, which appear to suggest some sort of resiling from the national agreement that was entered into by the national cabinet. Maybe Senator Green needs to communicate with the Premier of Queensland—just as the MP for Leichhardt, my good friend Warren Entsch, has communicated with the Premier—because some of the rhetoric coming out of Queensland is disturbing. It's political and disturbing.
Let's look at the facts of where we're up to at the moment. There have been 1.8 million doses of vaccine delivered in the last seven days. I don't remember that being referred to in Senator Green's contribution to this debate. There was absolutely no recognition whatsoever as to what the current status is with respect to the vaccine rollout. There was no balanced commentary. How can someone take seriously a contribution in this place when there's a total lack of balance in the representation of what the current facts are? More than 85 per cent of over-70s are protected with a first dose of the vaccine. More than 85 per cent of that most vulnerable cohort are already protected by a first dose of the vaccine, and more than 55 per cent have received a second dose.
Going to the next cohort, more than 70 per cent of over-50s are protected with a first dose and more than 40 per cent have received a second dose. That means more than one in two of the eligible population aged over 16 are protected with a first dose. Look at the facts involved in the case, and if you want to criticise the existing government, make a contribution that's balanced, that takes into account the current situation, and then make some sort of constructive proposal with respect to moving forward. All of that was totally absent from Senator Green's contribution to this debate. It hasn't been absent with respect to the Prime Minister's contributions. While he might have said what he said in March, he also said this subsequently:
… I take responsibility for the early setbacks in our vaccination program.
So when those speakers on the other side get up, they should at least recognise the fact that the Prime Minister has taken responsibility. They should also recognise the fact he said:
I also take responsibility for getting them fixed and that we are now matching world-best rates, with more than 1 million …
Make a balanced contribution to this debate. Stop looking backwards. Move on. Look at the current situation and provide something positive for the Australian people to move forward with.
The Australian public is sick and tired of rank, base politicking on these issues. They really are. The rhetoric is just dreadful, and it continues to be dreadful. We need to come together as a civic society and deal with these issues. It should be recognised that, up to today's date, Australia has done as well as any country on the face of this earth dealing with this COVID-19 pandemic. We've done as well as any other country. Just as we're uniting as a country to assist those poor Afghanis in Kabul and provide them assistance, we've done as well as anyone. Has it been perfect? No. But there was no dress rehearsal for a one-in-100-year pandemic, so there will be mistakes. There will be things that need to be adjusted, but at least be balanced in your commentary. If you're balanced I could at least have some respect for the positive suggestions that come from the other side. Otherwise all your contributions are just tainted with that rank politicking.
The Prime Minister made some extremely positive comments today with respect to our pathway out of this pandemic. The first point he made was this: we need to live with the virus, not in fear of it. That is absolutely crucial. The fact of the matter is that we are not going to eliminate COVID in the foreseeable future. We just won't. I think, generally, the Australian people understand that, and we have to assist them to come to grips with the reality of the situation, which is well documented in the national plan—it is a plan on a page.
We're currently in the first phase, the current phase: vaccinate, prepare and pilot. The next phase, once we achieve that 70 per cent threshold, is the vaccine transition phase, which, and this is the important point, seeks 'to minimise serious illness, hospitalisation and fatality as a result of COVID-19 with low-level restrictions'. It doesn't seek to eliminate it, because that's not possible. It's not possible to eliminate it. It seeks to minimise serious illness, hospitalisation and fatality as a result of COVID-19, with low-level restrictions. Then phase C, once we hit the 80 per cent threshold of vaccinations, is 'seek to minimise serious illness, hospitalisations and fatalities as a result of COVID-19 with baseline restrictions'. Then the fourth phase, phase D, as it's referred to, is 'manage COVID-19 consistent with public health management of other infectious diseases'.
We all have to get on the same page, on the one-page national plan. We all have to be on the same page if we're going to defeat the ramifications of this virus and move forward as a united country. We need to be on the same page, and it's there in black and white for all of us to follow and to support with our community.
If there are constructive suggestions from those opposite, absolutely make those constructive suggestions. But when you do it, at least be fair with respect to assessing the current situation and with respect to Australia as a country—and I include local-level government, the states, the federal government, civic society generally and the Australian people. Be fair and balanced with respect to where we are today, instead of running our own country down. The rhetoric is quite deplorable. We're absolutely not going to get out of this crisis with this sort of rhetoric. This has to be a team game. We can't go on in lockdown indefinitely; we just can't do it. We don't have the financial resources to do it. We can't bear the mental illness that flows from these lockdowns. We're crushing people's mental health. Small businesses are being destroyed. Senator Green referred to the impact on tourism in Cairns, and she's absolutely right: there's a devastating impact in Cairns. But we absolutely have to unite behind the national plan and move forward. There's absolutely no alternative whatsoever.
As we unite behind that national plan, we need to do it with mutual respect for the views of all of those in the chamber and all of those in the community. So many people in this country are struggling on so many levels, and we need to respect and appreciate that everyone has a right to their own views in our democratic society. We need to do it with empathy, appreciating how difficult the current situation is for everyone in this country. We also need to look forward in hope, rather than backwards in bitterness. That's what people are looking to us to do—look forward in hope, not backwards in bitterness.
Senator SIEWERT (Western Australia—Australian Greens Whip) (19:18): I know I have only a couple of minutes before we move to adjournment. I am looking to the future. I'm looking to the future of this country and to the health of our population. In order to do that, we need to get the plan right, and that plan is not right, because it does not include vaccinating. Importantly, there are no targets for young people in the national plan. The government says we're going to open up when we get to 80 per cent. But 80 per cent is actually only 64 per cent of the entire population.
Children and young people under the age of 16 are the ones who are now getting COVID in large numbers. In Victoria alone, 112 children under the age of 10 have COVID, as do 112 between the ages of 10 and 19. Today, there are over 200—I think it is—children in New South Wales, yet children are not included in our targets. Until we include children in our targets, we will not get properly to 80 per cent, and if—
ADJOURNMENT
The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Chandler ) (19:20): Order! I propose the question:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
COVID-19
Senator BRAGG (New South Wales) (19:20): I rise tonight to make some remarks about the ongoing COVID issues in Australia. I think what the Australian people are looking for is clear leadership and a pathway out of this 18-month nightmare, which for so many people has been a defining moment in their lives. If they've been running a small business or they're a young child who may have started at primary school or high school, it's severely impacted their life. One of the issues we have in this debate is that there are people who work for large businesses who have been unaffected or people who are in the public sector who do not feel the weight of the decisions that are made by state and federal governments. So, in looking for that leadership—and I think that leadership has been on clear display over the past few days—it is very important that we are honest with the Australian people about the prospect of getting to COVID-zero. COVID-zero is a dead duck. It cannot be achieved. There is virtually no major city in the world which has been able to turn the delta variant into a COVID-zero situation, and I think anyone who wants to perpetuate this myth and this lie that COVID-zero is an appropriate policy objective is only damning people who run small businesses and kids who want to go to school to a life locked behind the bars of their own home, where they can't earn an income and they can't learn as they usually would.
I represent the state of New South Wales, which has been dealing with a significant COVID outbreak, and I would say that the lockdowns there have had an extraordinary impact on people who are, as I say, running small businesses or people who are working or people who are wanting to go to school. The cure is becoming worse than the illness. I think that the remark made by the Treasurer last week is very important; it is a fallacy for anyone to think we can actually eliminate the virus. Mr Frydenberg went on to say: 'We can't; no country has done it. Based on the vaccines and the efficacy we know today, based on the medical advice, you cannot eliminate the virus. We have to live with it.' That is the message that people need to hear, because that is the truth. We have to live with this virus, and the national plan gives us a way out of this. Most importantly, we have to get away from this idea that lockdowns are going to be appropriate going forward, because the impact of lockdowns is very hard to quantify in an economic sense, but I think the social impact is very clear: it is hugely damaging to people's mental health. The inability to visit a friend and the inability to visit a dying relative are things that cannot be quantified.
I want to move on to the issue about the different views on COVID-zero. COVID-zero is a policy that is being pursued by the state of Western Australia, where the Premier of Western Australia, Mr McGowan, has said:
We still reserve the right to lockdown in specific locations if absolutely necessary.
This is after Western Australia is meeting its 80 per cent benchmark of vaccination. This is absolute madness. If this is a policy that Western Australia is going to pursue, Western Australia will be a hermit kingdom. No-one will want to go there. Why would you invest a cent in Western Australia if they're going to pursue lockdowns even after they've met their agreed targets in the national plan?
Much has been written and said about the events of the past few months in New South Wales, but I have to say that I think that the Premier of New South Wales has been honest and clear and up-front with the people. Premier Berejiklian has said in the past few days that of course we want to see the case numbers go down; there's no doubt about that. But the number that we need to focus on is vaccinations. When we've reached 70 per cent double-dose vaccinations, we'll be able to live more freely, and when we get to 80 per cent double-dose vaccinations, essentially we will have normalised the way that we treat COVID. You start to transition it and you treat COVID as you treat the flu in terms of how you record hospitalisations and the way the community is going. That is leadership, because that is the truth—we have to get to the point where COVID is treated just like any other illness. People need to stop focusing on case numbers and focus on admissions into ICU and vaccination rates. That is the only way. The only reason that you would want to maintain a policy of having these dreadful, dreaded lockdowns once you've reached 80 per cent of people being vaccinated is that you're addicted to political power and the control that you have over your citizens. Well, that is not the way that the Australian people can and will live in the future.
If you look at the numbers today for vaccination rates, we have done well in New South Wales. In the next few days, we are going to hit 60 per cent of people having had their first dose. That is 15 points ahead of Western Australia, so my advice to Western Australia is that they need to get on board with getting vaccinated, because that is going to get them, hopefully, to a position where they can have some more freedom. But who knows? The fellow in charge over there sounds like he really has a major problem if he wants to pursue lockdowns even after they've got 80 per cent of people vaccinated.
At the end of the day, the cost of the lockdowns is $2 billion a week. It is not something that the nation can afford in an economic sense. We have to get to the point where we can live with this virus. I commend the leadership and the plain speaking of the Treasurer, the PM and Premier Berejiklian over the past few days. We are being open and honest with the people. This is a virus that cannot be eliminated. It will be there permanently. It needs to be managed in a way where we reflect upon the numbers of people in ICU and the vaccination rates. We don't care about case numbers anymore. The more that people obsess about case numbers and the fallacy, the big lie, of COVID zero, the more damage we will do to people's mental health and the more economic damage we will do to the whole nation.
Of course we are a Commonwealth of states and we don't want to see hermit kingdoms emerge in any part of our great Commonwealth. So we don't want to see Western Australia pursue crazy policies like COVID zero. We don't want to see Western Australia flagging and lagging in its vaccination program. We want to see Western Australia remain a strong, connected state. It has been a great contributor to our federation in recent times. We really urge our Western Australian state government to wake up to itself, to forget about COVID zero. It has not been possible for any country or any major city to pursue a policy of COVID zero against the delta variant. Certainly Mr McGowan will not be successful in the long run, and all he will do is damage his own jurisdiction and inflict great damage and great confusion upon the Australian people. We now have a clear plan which is working. The vaccines are kicking off. I urge Mr McGowan to get real and get a grip.
Chlorpyrifos
Senator GRIFF (South Australia) (19:28): [by video link] Two weeks ago I spoke here about the disturbing history of chemical regulation in this country and why we need to pay close attention to what is going on. For too long this has been a subject many of us have ignored. It's dry and technical, not something that naturally holds our interest. But chemical regulation is also vitally important—important for the health of our loved ones and for the quality of our natural environment. When we don't pay close attention, special interests take advantage and tweak the rules in their favour—tweaks that enable them to profit, at a cost to everybody else.
Just last week the US Environmental Protection Agency made an important decision that throws this issue into stark relief. They chose to ban the use of chlorpyrifos in the United States. This chemical was patented by Dow Chemical in the 1960s and has been used around the world, including Australia, as a pesticide. It is highly toxic and damages the nervous system of insects such as beetles, fruit flies and locusts and worms. This has made it particularly useful as an agricultural pesticide. The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority allows its use in Australia, and the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code implicitly accepts its use as a pesticide by allowing food to be sold even with chlorpyrifos residue. While it is particularly useful in agriculture, it also has residential uses as a way of controlling cockroaches, fleas and termites.
But the problem with chlorpyrifos is the same thing that makes it useful: it is unbelievably toxic. It doesn't just interfere with the nervous system of pests and other insects; it does the same thing with humans and especially children. Chlorpyrifos exposure is associated with lower birth weights, slower motor development and attention problems. The risks and the harms are now well established, built on an evidence base that has accumulated over many decades. The science is clear: chlorpyrifos is harmful, and it is very, very dangerous. But chlorpyrifos is not just harmful on its own. It interacts with the other chemicals in our environments and our bodies and, importantly, it is not just toxic in isolation; chlorpyrifos can interact with other chemicals and become even more toxic and even more harmful.
Concerns over the safety of chlorpyrifos have been raised by scientists and medical experts for decades. Initially, those concerns were linked to the accidental poisoning of children and side effects suffered by those applying the chemical. But, over time, it has become clear that chlorpyrifos is a developmental neurotoxin, a chemical that affects the development of a baby's brain. That is why the US EPA chose to ban the residential use of chlorpyrifos back in 2000. It is also why the Australian regulator banned the chemical from household use.
But, in regard to banning household use, it took Australia an unbelievable 19 years longer than the US to do so, almost two decades after the scientific evidence of harm became overwhelming and forced overseas regulators to act—two decades in which the evidence continued to pile up; two decades in which the regulator failed to act; two decades in which a number of ministers and a number of governments failed to act; and two decades in which Australians continued to be exposed to this dangerous chemical. How many children were born in those two decades? How many were exposed to chlorpyrifos and now suffer from learning and developmental disabilities? How much pain and suffering could have been avoid if our government acted to protect our health and wellbeing sooner? We will never know.
Last week's EPA decision was welcomed by many who have seen firsthand the devastating effects of chlorpyrifos. The US EPA has done the right thing, which is more than we can say for Australia's regulators. It should be noted that this outcome was in spite of considerable political and corporate pressure. Fifteen years ago, the weight of scientific evidence showed that chlorpyrifos was harmful at much lower concentrations than expected. Those expectations had been set by data produced by Dow Chemical, which held the chlorpyrifos patent back in the 1960s. Regulators around the world, including Australia, relied on this data to determine how the chemical could be used and they continue to do so. By the mid-2000s, the science was telling us this data was wrong. The US EPA was aware of the new evidence at that time, but they refused to act. The decision was ultimately one for their administrator who is, in the US, a political appointee.
The Obama administration only began the process of phasing out chlorpyrifos in 2015, in the last months of that presidency. The process was, not surprisingly, abandoned under the Trump administration, and the Biden administration has done very little. It took a court to force the US Environmental Protection Agency to make a science based decision. Their ruling was scathing about the EPA's conduct, stating, 'The EPA's delay exposed a generation of American children to unsafe levels of chlorpyrifos.'
This ruling ultimately led to the chemical being banned in the US, but it's interesting that the political leaders, both in the US and here in Australia, are often so reluctant to take action that protects public health. There can be no doubt that delays and inaction benefit industry players. Fourteen years of delay in the US, and who knows how many in Australia, must be worth a lot of money to Dow and its industry colleagues. Clearly, it's worth more to them than the health and wellbeing of Australians.
The question we must ask is: When will Australia follow the lead of the American and European regulators and finally ban this dangerous and harmful chemical? If the regulators won't take action, will the minister step in and force them to take action? I'm certain the minister would point to the reviews, the consultations and the engagements that have been undertaken and claim that the appropriate processes are being followed, but the fact is that farmers can still use chlorpyrifos. The regulator has 37 permitted uses listed on its website and more than 90 different products which use the chemical. It is legal for them to use these products on our food, food that can be consumed by pregnant mothers and will affect their children. It is well and truly time for that to change.
It is also time for us to change how we approach chemical regulation in Australia. How many other chemicals like chlorpyrifos are out there—chemicals known to be harmful but legal for use on farms and in homes, chemicals that would be banned if regulators followed the science and were free from corporate and political interference? How many chemicals that are just not safe are out there?
As I've said in previous weeks, we must adopt a precautionary principle in chemical regulation and assume a product is unsafe until it can be proven otherwise, and we need to do this immediately—immediately—for our own health, for our children's health and for our environment's health.
Senate adjourned at 19:38