2018-03-26 45 1 5 House of Reps 0 1

Monday, 26 March 2018

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 10:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 1 Report 1 10:01 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson Today I present the 22nd report of the Petitions Committee for the 45th Parliament, together with 15 petitions and five ministerial responses to petitions previously presented. Falun Gong 1 Department of Veterans' Affairs 1 Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 1 Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975 1 Asylum Seekers 1 Health Care 2 Broadband 2 Taxation 2 Higher Education 2 Taxation 2 Asylum Seekers 3 Taxation 3 Parliament House 3 Health Care 3 West Papua 3 PETITIONS 4 PETITIONS Responses 4 Paid Parental Leave 4 Vietnam 4 Vietnam 4 Industrial Chemicals 5 Mining 6 Mining 6 DELEGATION REPORTS 8 DELEGATION REPORTS Australian Parliamentary Delegation to Greece and Turkey 8 10:08 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen In September and October last year I travelled to Greece and Turkey alongside my parliamentary colleagues the member for Hindmarsh, Mr Steve Georganas, and Senator Barry O'Sullivan, the great latte-sipper from Queensland—I know Barry will be shaking his head when he hears me say that; he's not a latte man, but we got him to have one, just for a bit of fun—with our wonderful secretariat, Ms Ann Palmer. It is a pleasure to speak about the tabling of this report on our parliamentary delegation. We met with various Greek government officials and stakeholders to discuss trade, economic opportunities, our historic relations and issues surrounding border management. Our discussions gave us the opportunity to reiterate the strength and warmth of the relationship between Greece and Australia. The recovery of the Greek economy and the future economic opportunities were central points of the discussions throughout the visit. It was a pleasure to tour Creta Farms, a leading producer of olive oil, meat and deli products. Creta Farms has a strong alliance with Primo Smallgoods, which locally produces Creta Farms's unique olive-oil based products on our Aussie shores. These kind of partnerships are vital in the rebuilding of the Greek economy, and I hope we can see more opportunities for cooperation. A particular highlight for me, coming from an electorate with such a rich military history, was our focus on the military engagements which underpin our relations with both Greece and Turkey. It was an honour to visit many memorials commemorating the role played and sacrifices made by Australian soldiers defending Greece and Crete during World War II. We paid our respects at the Souda Bay Allied War Cemetery and memorial and at Phaleron War Cemetery in Athens, where 250 fallen Australian soldiers are buried, as well as the Athens Memorial, where 329 Australians are buried. To commemorate the role of Australian soldiers during the Battle of Crete in 1941, we visited the Stavromenos Memorial, where we met George Pouloudakis. George's father, Mark, was instrumental in establishing the memorial. We were incredibly humbled to lay wreaths at the Hellenic-Australian Memorial Park in Rethymno an the memorial of the Battle of 42nd Street in Crete, an Anzac memorial near Chania. The issue we've had is that the 42nd Street memorial is famous because Red Saunders, the first Australian Indigenous person to be commissioned officer, led a battalion there. Unfortunately, so far this year we've had to write to three different veterans affairs ministers to try to get this memorial upgraded and treated properly. It's a beautiful memorial, but it needs whoever does the mowing at the other cemeteries nearby—they're only a couple of miles away—or someone to come down, clean the gardens and keep it neat and tidy. It is a very important part of Australian history. Of course, our time in Turkey was also defined by the deep military history we share. There aren't words to describe the feeling you get when you walk on Anzac Cove at the Gallipoli memorial. It is something that I know touched me very deeply. I had an opportunity to visit the wall at Lone Pine and see Keith Mitchell from Whittlesea, a relative who passed away, killed on the Anzac Day landings, and to appreciate just how great the Turkish people have been with the memorials at Anzac, what it means to Australians and the respect they showed us and they showed our soldiers in that time. We had fruitful discussions with the chair of the Turkish parliamentary friendship group, who noted the priority in establishing direct flight between Turkey and Australia for Turkish Airlines. There is movement in this respect, and we look forward to seeing an expansion of stopovers in Asia and the introduction of a nonstop flight route. Recently Turkey began importing Angus cattle to use as breeding stock. We went through issues that they are having with keeping that stock going. Senator O'Sullivan, being a good cattle producer, was able to talk through a whole range of things to help them. Our officials have got in touch with each other, so we're building support for the Turkish cattle industry as well. We looked at the influx of refugees throughout Turkey, what they've had to face and how they've been able to handle it. We're talking three million refugees heading to Turkey, and the way they've been able to work very closely with the refugee community, bring them in and help them get work and support was something that we should look more and more closely at as we deal with this global crisis. It was an important visit for the trade relations. It was an important visit for our cultural relations and a great opportunity, as I said, to go to Anzac Cove but also to see just how important trade is to Australia and Australia's future. I present the report to the House. 10:14 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Hindmarsh It's a great honour to be speaking on this report on the delegation that visited Greece and Turkey back in September and October last year. For someone like myself, who has a Greek background and also represents a seat with a very large Greek-Australian population, it was an absolute honour to be there, to have discussions with ministers and officials and to see firsthand some of the challenges under the economic crisis that Greece is facing. Could I first of all say a big thankyou to the people who looked after us while we were there: Ann Palmer, from our secretariat in the Senate, who ensured that we were at the correct place at the right time; and the wonderful staff at the Athens embassy, including Sophia McIntyre, Mr Andrea Biggi and of course—someone who is a stalwart at the embassy—Leonie Kowalenko, who has set up many meetings for me over the years with ministers, deputy prime ministers, speakers et cetera. I pay tribute to her, because she's a wonderful Foreign Affairs staffer who does amazing things in Athens. The delegation, as we heard from the member for McEwen, looked at border management and border protection. We met with Frontex in Athens, who told us about the way they're dealing with the massive influx of refugees, not just from Syria but from all over the world. When they tell you that there are over 500,000 refugees living in Athens alone you can see the enormity of the problem they have and the assistance they require from Europe and other parts of the world to help with the issue. We spoke about the economy of Greece and how there's approximately 23 per cent unemployment—the official figure is 23, but it's more likely to be around 40 per cent. We visited Crete, and it was a very special moment to visit the place where the Battle of Crete took place. Many Australians participated in the battles there during World War II. As the member for McEwen said, we visited the memorial at Stavromenos, and they raised with us the upkeep of that particular memorial. We've written to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs to ensure that we can get some sort of support to keep this very special place clean and tidy and to ensure that it is a special place for Australians when they visit Greece. We also had meetings with the deputy foreign affairs minister, Mr Terence Quick. Mr Speaker, you would remember that we welcomed him here, in this place, in the Greek language, together with the member for Chisholm. It was great to see Mr Terence Quick again and have discussions with him. One of the things we spoke about with Mr Terence Quick was the finalising of the working holiday visa with Australia. Only the other day he telephoned me to tell me there was one more tiny thing to be done, one thing to be signed, for that to become reality. We discussed Greek-Australia relationships, with the massive Greek Australian community that we have here, the wonderful experiences people have and the ties between our two nations. Mr Speaker, it was a very informative visit where we saw all the aspects of the people-to-people ties, the economic challenges that Greece is going through and, of course, our historical ties through World War I and World War II. We also visited Gallipoli and, as the member for McEwen said, it was very moving to be on that peninsula and still to find things on the ground that were left by our troops back in World War I. We laid wreaths at different memorials. We visited Hagia Sophia, one of the major Christian churches in the world and one of the first, built by Constantine the Great. It was very moving for me. Unfortunately, I had to leave—I had a family issue that popped up in the middle of the delegation's trip—and didn't make it to Ankara, but it was a good delegation. We ensured that we made the ties between those two nations and Australia stronger through the discussions we had and ensured that there is continuing thought given to trade and to the people-to-people contact we have with both of those nations. Both of them are very good allies of Australia through our ties with NATO in Europe and through the historical ties that exist in Greece because of World War I, World War II and the history of the mass migration of people to Australia. I'm looking forward to seeing some of these things come to fruition, especially the working holiday visa and the upkeep of the memorials we spoke about, because they are significant for Australia and for Greece. Many, many people have an interest in this area. BILLS 9 BILLS Higher Education Support Amendment (National Regional Higher Education Strategy) Bill 2018 9 First Reading 9 Second Reading 9 10:19 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Colleagues, I'm pleased to stand in the House today to introduce this Higher Education Support Amendment (National Regional Higher Education Strategy) Bill 2018, which focuses on regional higher education. I'd like to recognise in the gallery Dr Caroline Perkins, the executive director from the Regional Universities Network, RUN, who's in the chamber. RUN includes a network of universities: CQ University, Federation University Australia, Southern Cross University, University of New England, University of Southern Queensland and the University of the Sunshine Coast. They've worked with our office to strengthen and promote the contribution of regional universities to national development. I'd also like to acknowledge colleagues in the House from the Alpine Valleys Community Leadership program, and stress to you that it's all about leadership. The delivery of higher education in regional Australia is central to the economic prosperity of this nation, and this bill provides a way forward to ensure that regional Australia has a comprehensive higher education strategy underpinning policy decisions of government. The bill mandates that the government maintains a strategic plan and analysis of regional higher education, and recognises the role of regional universities in sustaining economic growth and supporting employment in regional Australia. Support for the delivery of higher education in regional areas is often seen only as an issue of equity, focused on improved access, participation and completion rates. And, while equity is important, regional education is also an essential driver of the national economy. I call on a national regional higher education strategy to actually put regional higher education at the centre of integrated policy and programs about education, research, innovation, employment, and, of course, regional development. Mr Speaker, as you know, regional universities play a unique role in developing our regional economies, contributing to social and cultural development. They act as an anchor for investment and, importantly, workforce development. One of the biggest threats to sustainability of rural communities is the great export of our young people to cities. Three-quarters of students who study at regional universities actually stay in regional areas after they graduate. So regional universities educate the future workforce and help to grow and stabilise the population of regional Australia in regional Australia. This strategy must be developed in partnership with all levels of government and with regional higher education providers, their representative bodies and their industries. So before I conclude my comments I'd like to invite the member for Mayo to value-add to this in her role as seconder of the private member's bill. But I say to my colleagues opposite—I say to the National Party and to members of the Liberal Party from regional Australia—where are you on this? Why are you letting one size fit all? The consequence is that regional Australia gets left behind, we fall into a deficit model and we are not able to take our place—our rightful place—in developing this whole country. One size does not fit all: the tyranny of distance and the issues facing regional Australia need to be taken and addressed in their own right. I absolutely call on the National Party and I call on the regional members from the Liberal Party: get up here! Can I say to my colleagues: 'See their interest. Where are they? Why are they not here today to be part of this debate?' I say they're not here because they don't care. This is a stunning call-out to all the people in rural and regional Australia who vote for the coalition, hoping that they would bring their voice to parliament. They singularly, repeatedly fail us. The SPEAKER 00APG Is there a seconder? 10:24 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I rise to second the Higher Education Support Amendment (National Regional Higher Education Strategy) Bill 2018 and to support the motion of the member for Indi, and to congratulate the member for Indi for the work she has done to further the cause for regional universities. I support this bill because I understand how important it is for the future of our regions and the future of our country that we have a strong, growing regional educational sector. Regional universities are vital to the success and prosperity of Australia's regional centres. The economic benefit that universities provide to a regional town is immense. For example, the University of New England is responsible for 12.6 per cent of the total employment in the New South Wales town of Armidale. Similar stories are replicated across Australia in towns like Burnie, Launceston and Albury-Wodonga. Just last Friday I was invited to Geelong to speak at a coastal conference. When I met with local government there, they said it was Deakin University that was the anchor point in changing the prosperity of the community of Geelong. I am working very hard to make sure that we can have campuses in Mayo. We need university campuses, like we have in my home state in Whyalla and Mount Gambier. The benefits of having a university campus in a regional area are, indeed, immense. Universities provide employment opportunities for locals and they collaborate with local businesses on research that will directly impact the area, but, most importantly, they provide a genuine opportunity for rural and regional students to obtain higher education without needing to leave their communities—their home towns. Universities Australia has equated the shortfall in funding as the equivalent of 10,000 university places. While this is a major concern across the nation, the impact of the MYEFO cuts is disproportionately felt by regional universities. These universities, by virtue of their location, will struggle to attract full-fee-paying international students to meet the funding shortfall. They often struggle to attract the same level of research investment as the traditional universities in the capital cities. They simply do not have the ability of the larger metropolitan based universities to draw on alternative funding sources. The statistics are damning. For people aged between 25 and 34 in major cities, 42.4 per cent have obtained a bachelor degree. Compare this to those in regional areas and the number falls dramatically to just over 20 per cent. It is still lower in remote areas, where the rate is less than one in five. I'm on the record as saying that university is not for everyone and that many people would perhaps be better served by undergoing VET courses or apprenticeships, but to have such a divide between regional and metropolitan education levels in our country is staggering and something that I believe the government must address. As the member for Indi says, this is something that the National Party should be picking up with both hands. Finally, it is worth recognising that the government has a clear decentralisation agenda. I recognise the excellent work that the member for Indi has done in her role on the Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation—not just being part of the committee but making sure that committee happened. There is significant evidence that shows the only way for decentralisation to truly work is for the region to contain a skilled supply of labour supported by a university. Not having a regional higher education strategy puts the government's decentralisation agenda, I believe, at risk, and it puts the future of Australia's regional areas at risk. The member for Indi's bill identifies the need to increase the representation of regional students in higher education. It identifies that the future of the regions lies in encouraging students to stay and study in their local area and receive a good-quality education, and it identifies that the federal government is not supporting our regions by providing them with the tools necessary to succeed. We need to do this. We need to keep our young people in the communities that they want to live in, and not all of us, indeed, want to live in a capital city. Once again, I congratulate the member for Indi and encourage all members of this House, particularly those from regional areas, and, again, I call on the National Party: show some leadership in this area. You represent the seats where these universities are needed and the regions that, where universities already exist, are struggling. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. BUSINESS 11 BUSINESS Rearrangement 11 10:29 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne Pursuant to standing order 113, I fix the next sitting Monday as the day for presenting the Fair Work Amendment (Making Australia More Equal) Bill 2018. BILLS 11 BILLS Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill 2018 11

Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill 2018

First Reading 11 Second Reading 11 10:30 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Under this coalition government, working people have less control over their lives than ever before, but the problems have been around for a while. The last time I introduced a version of this bill to give people more control over the hours and arrangements of their working lives, back in 2012, the Labor Party refused to support it even though we were in a position where we could have got it through the minority parliament. Now, six years later, we still have the same problems and some of them are getting worse. Take unemployment, for example. Just last week, unemployment ticked up to 5.6 per cent—the last time it was under five per cent was in November 2008. In 2012, when I last introduced this bill, it was 5.3 per cent, but now it looks like it could reach six per cent. In my previous speech in 2012, I noted that Australians performed $72 billion of unpaid overtime each year. Now, it's estimated to be $130 billion. In 2012, according to the ABS, our underutilisation rate was 12.7 per cent, but now it's 13.9 per cent. It's the same story with the underemployment ratio, which has gone up from 7.8 to 8.9 per cent. To move away from percentages—this is a huge number of people. The amount of underemployed people in this country was around 872,000 in 2012, when I last stood here on this matter, and is now over 1.1 million people. In my last speech, I said that 'if people want to work different hours or work from home so that their life is better, then the law should allow it and society should encourage it, provided it does not unduly impact on their employer. The ironic reality of how trickle-down economics or neoliberalism is twisting workers is painfully borne out by the data, which shows why we need this reform. In Australia people are both overworked and underworked simultaneously. According to research conducted by the Australia Institute in November last year, 27 per cent of full-time workers said they would prefer to work fewer hours. In contrast, part-time and casual workers work far fewer and more uncertain hours, and they want to work more. In fact, 45 per cent of part-time workers and 60 per cent of casuals said they want to work more. The Australia Institute's report Excessive hours, unpaid overtime and the future of work: an update puts it best: It is painfully ironic that so many Australians in insecure jobs want and need more hours of paid employment—while many more, who currently work long hours, would like more time off. At the same time as we're rightly worried about the effect of technology and automation on the workforce, it also becomes clear how, if we had control over it, it could actually be beneficial. It could provide workers with more flexibility—not just the flexibility to work from home but the flexibility to reduce their hours as well. Technology could help create more jobs, but only if the community has control over how that technology is used and implemented in our workplace and if people as workers have control of it, so it's used not to displace workers but to make work better. We need the law to keep pace with changes in society and technology. Our job in this place is to examine society to identify problems—and then to work as hard as we can to correct them. It's not our job to just sit back in this chamber and allow markets, big corporations and those that have power to wield it with no consequences. One of the fundamental reasons we have government is to intervene when the system is no longer working in the best interests of the people that it's meant to serve, and right now, with so many people clamouring for more work and so many others saying, 'Hang on; we're actually being overworked,' it's clear that the law is not serving people. We need this reform and we need it urgently. Right now there too many people who are not in a job that matches their circumstances. The trends identified by the Australia Institute match the ABS data, which shows that 23½ per cent of 20-to-24-year-olds want more hours in their main job, but meanwhile, if you go to the other end of the spectrum, a staggering 20.1 per cent of 55-to-59-year-olds want less. Overall almost three out of 10 employees are dissatisfied with the number of hours they work in their main job. We have a national crisis when it comes to young people. When you add together the number of young people who are unemployed and the number of young people who want more work—that is, those who are underemployed—about one in three young people in this country either doesn't have a job or doesn't have enough hours of work. And it's got worse since the GFC, not better. We are on the verge on condemning a whole generation of young people to never having decent jobs and income. Meanwhile at the other end of the spectrum there are people who are saying, 'I'd be happy to work less, in fact, I want to work less,' but our law does not allow for them to have an enforceable right to do it. In this respect, we are behind other countries. If we gave people more control over their working lives and an enforceable right to ask for different working arrangements, we could share available work around more fairly, and we could relieve the pressure on people, on young and older workers, especially those who are juggling work and caring responsibilities. Right now under Labor's Fair Work Act, all you have got in law is a right to have a conversation with your employer. If the boss says no, you've got nowhere to go. It's not an enforceable right, and we need to make it enforceable. This bill, the Fair Work Amendment (Better Work/Life Balance) Bill, gives people that enforceable right to request different hours and arrangements for work, especially if they have caring responsibilities. Employees would have the right to ask that their working hours be decreased or increased, which the employer could refuse only on reasonable business grounds, and the Fair Work Commission would be empowered to decide whether the employer's refusal was reasonable. Employees with caring responsibilities would have greater rights, with employers only able to refuse on serious countervailing business grounds. I think most people in this place would agree that caring—caring for kids or caring for your parents as they get older—is work. It is work. Increasingly, it is becoming difficult to balance that with work responsibilities. So many people are saying, 'We are being overworked,' at the same time as many people on the other side of the spectrum are saying, 'We are being underworked.' We are doing a very bad job in this country of matching the hours people actually work with the hours that they want to work. Unless we tackle it, we not only condemn a generation of young people to underemployment and unemployment for a very, very long time but condemn other people to having unfulfilling family and personal lives, because their employer is able to dictate what counts as flexibility. For too long, flexibility has been a one-way street. It's been something employers have been able to demand, but when employees want it, when employees want a bit more control over their life, a bit more certainty over how many hours they're going to work—a bit more or a bit less—they're unable to get it. It seems the flexibility only ever works from the top down. And in a country like Australia, especially as we see rising unemployment and underemployment, we should be able to tackle this. We're going to need to change the rules and accept, as the Greens have been arguing since 2012, that the Fair Work Act is broken, that it tilts the balance in favour of big corporations and that it does not give people the rights to control their own working environment. So the stakes are high. If we keep going as we are, we condemn a generation of young people to not having enough work and to not having good enough incomes. And we also know that, at the other end of the spectrum, we are impacting on people's health. A recent study conducted by Indiana University's Kelley School of Business found that those who work in high-stress jobs with little control over their arrangements at work are more likely to die sooner than those who have more control over and balance in their work. That stands to reason. It stands to reason that, if you don't have control over the hours that you're able to work—whether it's a bit more or a bit less—and it impacts on your life outside because your life is too insecure or you're balancing too many responsibilities, that causes stress and that makes people less happy and less healthy. Workers who are happier and healthier are more motivated and are more likely to stay in a workplace longer. Changing the law and giving workers this right is not an attack on business. This should make business better. And, in other countries where they have made the right enforceable, there hasn't been an outbreak of litigation. You end up with a few decisions from the tribunal that sets the ground rules and then people adjust accordingly. This reform is long overdue. The Greens have been pushing for action on it since 2012. We will keep pushing for action, and I hope that others support it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Mr Wilkie C2T I second the bill and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E I thank the member for Denison. The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. Fair Work Amendment (Tackling Job Insecurity) Bill 2018 13

Fair Work Amendment (Tackling Job Insecurity) Bill 2018

First Reading 13 Second Reading 13 10:41 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Mr BANDT M3C In Abraham Lincoln first's annual message to Congress on 3 December 1861, Lincoln sought to correct—to warn against—what he saw as a false assumption about the relationship between employers and employees, or, as he called it, capital and labour. He rejected the effort, in his words, 'to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labour in the structure of government', where it is 'assumed that labour is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labours unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labour'. Instead, Lincoln corrected this assumption noting: Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. It is this false assumption that Abraham Lincoln was referring to that we are still correcting today. It's this false assumption that this government clings to in 2018 and wields in an attempt to destroy the rights and security of working people in this country. Today—157 years later—I'm proud to echo Lincoln's correction. I'm proud that I'm part of a party that stands in parliament now to fight for an idea—the idea that people have built this country, that they create value and that their rights must be protected. But the combination of technological change, neoliberal trickle-down economics and a government that loves cosying up to the billionaire class is threatening these rights, and working people are under attack. Wage growth is stagnating while company profits are increasing. Penalty rates have been cut. Inequality is at record highs. Underemployment is rife in this country. Casualisation is up. Employee organisations—unions—are attacked and demonised regularly in the media. All the while, this government is trying to give big companies a tax cut that will deliver them billions more in profits. And this comes despite mountains of evidence that delivering a tax cut to companies who already avoid tax won't do anything for the rest of us. Companies that don't pay tax don't need a tax cut. Crikey notes a report released last year that examined over 90 big US companies who paid well below the headline rate of tax, and it found that instead of wage and job growth those companies were associated with job cuts: the median job growth for those companies over the period from 2008 to 2016 was minus one per cent. The balance is undoubtedly shifting away from working people. In 1959, wages share of GDP was 46 per cent and gross operating surplus share was 17 per cent. Now, while wages share is roughly the same, gross operating surplus has climbed to 24 per cent. In terms of total factor income, the trend is the same. The long-term trend is not tipping towards everyday people; it's tipping towards profits at the expense of everyday people. The laws need to change. It is time to give everyday people more control over their lives, and nowhere is this clearer than in the question of job insecurity. That is why we are introducing this bill, a version of which we introduced several years ago. We couldn't get support from either Labor or Liberal at that stage, but I am hopeful, as the national debate shifts and people recognise that job insecurity is wrecking people's lives, that now parliament will finally step up and fix the problem. I am proud to introduce the Fair Work Amendment (Tackling Job Insecurity) Bill 2018 which will tackle rising job insecurity by giving casual and rolling contract workers the power to convert to secure employment. We have a problem in this country when teachers work at Bunnings over the Christmas break because their contract only lasts for as long as the school term lasts, but that is happening around this country. We have a problem in this country when someone could work in a university, in the same department, doing the same work for 10 years, and not be entitled to a day of sick leave during that because they have been casual all that time, but that is happening in this country. And we have a problem when one in three young people either don't have a job or don't have the hours of work they want, and when they do the right thing and finish education and go on to TAFE or go on to university, they still find themselves facing a world of having to pay sometimes to go to work or, if they're lucky enough to get work, it's often on a short-term basis or on a casual basis. Australia is amongst the worst offenders in the world in this respect. It is no wonder that people are feeling anxious and angry. It's not just the way people are feeling; it is the way the society is changing. Insecure work is increasingly on the way to becoming the norm and not the exception. Under the legislation that we would introduce, we would fix the holes in the Fair Work Act that the Greens have been pointing out since 2012. Workers employed on a so-called 'permanent casual' basis—which is really something that only exists in Australia to the extent that it does—or on rolling fixed-term contracts where you're left in the same job but on repeated short-term contracts, will have the right to request to convert to ongoing employment. The Fair Work Commission will decide if the employer has serious countervailing business grounds to justify a refusal of that request. Unions will also be able to seek industry-wide orders to regulate the use of insecure work. We desperately need it in places like the higher education sector, where many people have this fantasy of the tenured academic in higher education, but about one in three people there have full-time permanent ongoing work. We need to be able to regulate this on an industry basis. We also need to recognise that there would be exemptions. Under this proposal, genuine short-term casuals employed by small business during seasonal work, for example, would be exempt. So you'd be able to employ casuals for up to three months at a time, but you wouldn't be able to exploit it. As I said, according to some reports, Australia has the highest level of casual workers in the world. And these workers are much more likely to face irregular and insufficient hours of work and fluctuations in earnings. According to the Parliamentary Library's public document, Characteristics and use of casual employees in Australia, 53 per cent of casuals experienced variable earnings from one pay period to another in August 2016, compared with only 15 per cent of permanent employees. Just under a third, about 31 per cent, of casual workers wanted more hours of work per week, compared with 10 per cent of permanent employees. Casuals are much less likely to be given a guaranteed minimum hours per week than their permanent counterparts. Casual workers are more concerned about their job security than permanent employees—and for good reason. So many things in life require certainty and planning. Qualifying for and paying off a mortgage, having children, looking after family and loved ones. How can you regularly pay the rent or pay off a mortgage if your pay fluctuates wildly from month to month, week to week or even day to day? You front up to the bank manager and say, 'Look, I'd like to get a mortgage to go and buy a place to start a family, and, yes, I've been working at the same employer for the last few years', but they look at your payslip and see that you're employed on a contract basis or on a casual basis. I've heard reports that people are getting turned away. Even as rapacious as the banks are, and as much money they want to make from writing large mortgages, people are getting turned away from that. It's even happening at the rental stage as well. People are unable to get a secure and affordable roof over their head. A large part of the problem is that so much of the work in Australia at the moment is insecure, and we haven't even touched on those areas not covered by the Fair Work Act—those people other than employees. There's a growing number of people who are being forced, through sham contracting arrangements, to call themselves independent contractors. They don't even get the basic minimum rights of employees, full stop. When you add all of that up, the ACTU's claim that 40 per cent of people in this country are now in forms of non-standard employment is right. Our laws have just not kept up. This bill will update our laws. I say to all of the other parties in this place: I'm sick of people talking about job insecurity when there's an election or when there's a by-election, but then failing to back it up with votes in parliament. The Greens have been pushing since 2012 to give people rights to more- secure employment, and I'm proud to reintroduce this bill again. I hope that the changing nature of the debate in Australia and the fact that so many people are hurting because their lives are becoming riskier and more insecure will push other parties in this place to back this very sensible bill. This very sensible bill has been well thought through and will give our laws the teeth to tackle the scourge of rising job insecurity. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Mr Wilkie C2T I second the bill and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and resumption of debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 15 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Gold Coast Commonwealth Games 15 10:51 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges that the XXI Commonwealth Games will commence on the Gold Coast with the opening ceremony on Wednesday, 4 April 2018 and the closing ceremony on Sunday, 15 April 2018; (2) notes that: (a) more than 6,600 athletes and team officials from 70 Commonwealth Nations and Territories will be competing; (b) the athletes will compete in 275 events in 18 different sports and seven para-sports; and    (c) beach volleyball, para triathlon and women's Rugby Sevens will make their Commonwealth Games debuts and for the first time at a Commonwealth Games, an equal number of men's and women's medal events will be contested; (3) acknowledges that this year the Commonwealth Games motto will be 'Share the Dream'; and (4) encourages all Members of Parliament to support the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games and the Australian sports people representing Australia at the Commonwealth Games. I'm delighted that the 21st Commonwealth Games are due to start on the Gold Coast from 4 April and will run for 11 days, concluding on 15 April. There will be 71 nations competing, including Gambia, which has been readmitted to the Commonwealth. We will see the best of the best competing, with more than 6,600 athletes and team officials already moving into the villages, competing in 275 events in 18 different sports and seven parasports. Some of the traditional inclusions in this year's games are swimming, athletics, basketball, boxing, gymnastics, hockey, netball and triathlon. I'm probably proficient in about one of those sports. Hopefully the people competing are much better than I am! This year, it's great to see that beach volleyball and paratriathlon are included, as well as the women's rugby sevens making their Commonwealth Games debut. For the first time in the Commonwealth Games, an equal number of men's and women's medal events will be contested, which is an absolutely fabulous outcome for equality. There are 1.5 million tickets to watch the games and more than a million have already been sold. Preparations are well underway for the opening ceremony on 4 April. A number of communities have participated in the Queen's Baton Relay as the baton has made its way up to the Gold Coast for the 21st Commonwealth Games. The relay has travelled a record 230,000 kilometres around the world, and, while in Australia, will be carried by just under 4,000 baton bearers, including through my own community of Lindsay. I would love to congratulate all of the baton bearers and make special mention of those people in Lindsay who took the baton throughout our community: teacher Craig Beacroft from Penrith, who has been inspirational with his school in fundraising for Relay for Life; Mitchell Beggs-Mowczan from Glenmore Park, the Young Penrith Citizen of the Year 2017, who has contributed to improving the health of our region's Indigenous community; Betty Gallagher from Colyton, an amazing woman who has fostered more than 100 children; Cathy Gardiner from St Clair—St Clair is slightly out of Lindsay, but, as with all good things, we like to claim people from St Clair as our own—who has represented Australia in athletics and now trains athletes with a disability; Alysha Pearson from Cranebrook, who is the current New South Wales under-16 women's hammer-throw champion and recipient of a Local Sporting Champions award—I can throw a hammer, but not really to a medal standard and only usually in frustration during home renovations!—so well done to Alysha; Robert Wearn from Mulgoa, the patron of the Great Walk Foundation; and Cheryl Webb from Werrington, a Commonwealth Games bronze medallist. Thank you to all of those people, who made an incredible show bringing that baton through our community. The world will be watching our games. It's estimated that we will have a global audience of about 1.5 billion people. Hundreds of international media organisations will begin arriving this week. Let's hope that we are on our best behaviour. Viewers will see the sporting talents and be enthralled by the games, and they will see our beautiful country. These games are a great opportunity to showcase the Gold Coast, Queensland and Australia to the world and, if we're watching at home, they might encourage some of us to get up off the couch, stop being armchair athletes, be a bit more active and catch up with our mates for a game or two. The economic benefits to holding the games are about $4 billion, including a $2 billion boost to Queensland's economy, including $1.7 billion for the Gold Coast. There are also around $2.6 billion of additional government and private sector investments. To support businesses and to take advantage of the opportunities arising before, during and post games, a number of programs to build capability and capacity have been developed, including the Be Games Ready program, tourism initiatives, support for Indigenous businesses and major event capability development. Everything is absolutely on track for the games. Eighteen world-class venues were built or upgraded, and the amazing infrastructure program supported 1,000 full-time construction jobs. The first nations welcome ceremony will be hosted on 1 April, and I'm proud that there has been a reconciliation action plan, which has actually delivered a really great outcome for the Yugambeh people on the coast. Gold Coast 2018 is the first major sporting event to have a reconciliation action plan driving employment opportunities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and for arts and culture. More than 200 employment opportunities have been created for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as one of the key outcomes of the Gold Coast 2018 reconciliation plan. I'm really, really pleased to see that this has happened. And it will be Gold Coast's biggest event. It is a tremendous effort to prepare for the games, and I congratulate Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and Commonwealth Games minister Kate Jones and make mention of the Commonwealth Games stakeholders and thank them. It is very exciting for Australia to be once again involved in hosting the games. We can all share the dream. I would like to say a special mention to the 1,500 volunteers who will be out there making sure that everyone gets to the venues on time. I thank them for their volunteerism. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? 10:57 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I'm happy to second the motion from the member for Lindsay. As we enter another sitting week here in parliament followed by Easter, already we see the focus turning to the event that will occur after Easter, which is the 21st Commonwealth Games, on the Gold Coast. What a spectacle it will be, I'm sure, and hopefully the rainy weather we have had up in Brisbane and on the Gold Coast of late will disappear so we can show the people of the Commonwealth what a wonderful place the Gold Coast really is. As we see more than 6,600 athletes and officials from over 70 Commonwealth nations and territories making their way there, it will be terrific to see and showcase the Gold Coast in all its glory. We already know that the Gold Coast is one of the most visited destinations in Australia. We will see some 275 events in 18 different sports and seven parasports. The 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games is much more than a sporting event, though. It's about the opportunities and the benefits the games will bring to the Gold Coast and to all Queensland before, during and after the event. While the competition itself will be fierce and the tourism opportunities for our part of the world like no other, the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games is also about creating exciting opportunities for young people in my electorate of Forde. I recently had the pleasure of visiting Marsden State High School to present a cheque for the Stronger Communities grant. The funding was going towards some new equipment for their catering and restaurant facilities. But, while I was speaking to the students, congratulating them on their success and also congratulating Principal Andrew Peach, I was very pleased to learn that 35 students from Marsden State High School will be working in the athletes' village during the Commonwealth Games. I'd like to congratulate the school's food, design and technology department, who have supported these 35 students in gaining paid employment. Their proactive approach to working with Delaware North has led to real-world learning experiences and opportunities for Logan's youth. These will result in an outstanding head start for their future careers in the hospitality industry. These students have shown great skill and a fantastic work ethic to be chosen to take on paid employment in catering and services at the Commonwealth Games, and will now get some fantastic real-world experience to put their skills to the test. It will be an experience that will be remembered for a long time and one that they'll be able to put on their resumes. The students who have been chosen to work in the athletes village deserve the praise and the media attention they have received, as they did on ABC radio a couple of weeks ago—as does the work and the effort of Marsden State High School and the principal and the teachers there. This is an outstanding school, with an excellent reputation for hardworking teachers and students. The organisers, staff and volunteers of the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games have also worked hard to ensure the games run as smoothly as possible. With thousands of people already arriving on the Gold Coast, the logistics of so many people visiting one city is phenomenal. My electorate of Forde is playing its part in ensuring that spectators, staff and volunteers can get to their events on time with the park and ride at Beenleigh State High School. From there, people will be able to access all Gold Coast venues via train and shuttle buses. To witness this event in its entirety is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for many Queenslanders. I'm looking forward to attending a number of events and cheering on our fantastic Australian athletes as they compete for glory on their home soil. It will be an opportunity like no other, and I hope the 2018 Commonwealth Games will leave a positive and lasting impression as the world listens on. Equally, we will see a legacy of wonderful sporting venues and opportunities for the future use of these great facilities once the Commonwealth Games concludes. So I commend everybody involved in the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games, and wish them every success for the coming couple of weeks. 11:02 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I'm very pleased to speak on the motion moved by the energetic and passionate member for Lindsay. There are just nine more sleeps until we experience the spectacle and excitement of the opening ceremony of the 2018 Commonwealth Games. This year, I'm happy to say, it's on my home turf of Queensland. In 2006 Australia last hosted a Commonwealth Games in a city—I think it's called Melbourne, Deputy Speaker? And the time before that, 36 years ago, was in Brisbane. The athletes village for the 1982 Brisbane Commonwealth Games was in my electorate of Moreton. The Griffith University Nathan campus was transformed into an operations centre. The student accommodation housed athletes and officials, new-release movies were shown in the university cinema and the grounds were a rolling venue for live entertainment to fill the athletes' downtime. We saw this on the Channel 7 news the other day in a flashback. The Commonwealth Games from 1982 left a lasting legacy on the Nathan campus. This year's Commonwealth Games will be held just down the road at the Gold Coast—again, next door to a Griffith University campus, but this time on the Gold Coast. Hosting the Commonwealth Games is a massive undertaking. There will be 71 nations and territories competing. Six thousand six hundred athletes and team officials have already started moving into the Gold Coast, ready for the start of the games. Queensland's Minister for the Commonwealth Games, Kate Jones, and Annastacia Palaszczuk, the Premier, have done a wonderful job preparing for Queensland's biggest event—an event that has created thousands of jobs and opportunities for Queenslanders. Obviously, they have been ably assisted by their chairman, the indefatigable and ever-astute Peter Beattie. More than one million tickets have been sold so far. But there are still some tickets available, including a new release of 40,000 tickets. There are still tickets available for athletics, basketball, squash, hockey, lawn bowls, badminton and weightlifting, and I hear that more tickets for the swimming are about to be released. I'm lucky enough to be able to take my family along to the swimming, to the boxing and to a few other events. Fifteen thousand volunteers and thousands more staff will be deployed to venues on the Gold Coast. Not only will the event itself be fantastic as a sporting spectacle but it's great for Queensland. I can't wait to take my family to some of the events, and I know that other people from all around the world will be turning up. Up to 30,000 jobs have been created and 18 world-class facilities have been built or upgraded through a $320 million infrastructure program. The games venues were completed some time ago and the temporary overlays to specifically house the Commonwealth Games events are all but finished. The magnitude of preparing the venues becomes apparent when you hear what was required to be installed before the games could start: 61,000 temporary grandstand seats, 500 tents covering 45,000 square metres, 50 kilometres of temporary fencing and over 38,000 branded elements to ensure that everyone will be well aware that they are celebrating the 2018 Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. The games will have a global viewing audience of about 1½ billion and will showcase the Gold Coast, Queensland and Australia to the world. Hopefully, some of these viewers will then be tempted to come for a visit themselves, bringing more tourism dollars for businesses. The Commonwealth Games will leave a lasting legacy, as the new sporting infrastructure will make Queensland more attractive as a location for other international sporting meets. More immediately, the games will generate $4 billion and support 16,000 full-time jobs. As for the events themselves: what can I say? They will be a feast for sporting spectators: world-class athletes competing at world-class venues, and just a short train ride from my home. The games will be using the very best venues and the most beautiful natural resources that the Gold Coast can lay on. The 20-kilometre race in both the walking and road cycling will take place on the beautiful Currumbin beachfront. The marathon and triathlon will be staged at the Southport Broadwater Parklands, a route familiar to all who have done the Gold Coast half-marathon or marathon. Lawn bowls will be held at the Broadbeach Bowls Club, just metres from one of the Gold Coast's famous white sandy beaches—beaches that are easily, I believe, the best in the world. We must not forget the most important part of the Commonwealth Games: the athletes who have trained and are striving for gold. Importantly, this year, for the first time, female athletes will receive the same number of medals as males. I wish athletes competing all the best, especially those who grew up in Moreton and started their playing careers in some of our wonderful south-side sporting clubs, athletes such as the talented Charlotte Caslick, who's already won a gold medal—at the Olympics—and will be competing in the Australian rugby women's sevens and Tom Lucas who'll be competing in the Australian men's Rugby Sevens squad and who started his Rugby at Sunnybank. I wish you athletes all the best—that is, anyone connected with my electorate and everyone in the Australian team. I will be cheering some of you from the sidelines and others from my lounge room. 11:07 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner The countdown is on for the 2018 Commonwealth Games at the Gold Coast, the largest sporting event to be held in Australia in a decade. As we all know, the coalition government has helped make these games a reality, investing $154 million in 2013-14 to fund permanent infrastructure for the games and a further commitment of $2 million for legacy programs to encourage more Aussies to get active. I'm glad to have seen some of the investment dollars being spent in my own electorate of Bonner as we prepare to host the track cycling and shooting events. The construction of two state-of-the-art venues in Bonner has created hundreds of jobs and will provide local families and athletes with awesome opportunities for many years to come. Earlier this month I visited the Anna Meares Velodrome. I must say, it's a masterpiece, a state-of-the-art construction ready to host the track cycling. The Belmont Shooting Complex has been fitted with brand new electronic targets, in preparation for the games, and will play host to some of the world's finest shooters as they compete in the clay target, full-bore, pistol and small-bore events. I'm excited to be attending some of the shooting events with Senator Bridget McKenzie, the Minister for Sport, as we cheer on our Australian athletes. As we near the opening ceremony, on 4 April, the spirit of the games is being felt all over the country, including in the electorate of Bonner. Last month I visited 26 local schools, delivering hand-waving flags to the students, encouraging them to get into the spirit of the games. I'm hoping that all the local kids will take their hand-waving flags to events they may be attending and cheer loudly for our great athletes in the green and gold. Thanks to one local student I, too, will be taking a very special item with me to the games. I held a competition for local primary schoolchildren to design supporters' banners for the chance to win a prize pack. The entries received were amazing and featured everything from the iconic boxing kangaroo to the games mascot, Borobi, playing basketball. It was almost impossible to pick just one winner from all the great entries, but Jessica Kelly of Carina State School was chosen. Congratulations, Jessica, and thanks for the awesome poster. I'll gladly be waving it at the games. With just over a week to go, I would like to wish all of our Aussie athletes good luck. In Bonner we will be cheering extra loud for local girl Madison Keeney, who is representing Australia in the one-metre and three-metre synchronised diving events. Harnessing the determination of her favourite show, Pokemon, Madison is striving to be the very best, like no-one ever was. I'm urging all of my Bonner locals to keep a keen eye out for Olivia Brown from the Annette Roselli Dance Academy in Tingalpa as well. Olivia will be joining the thousands of other amazing young entertainers performing in the closing ceremony. It's not just the athletes who deserve a massive thanks. It's going to be a huge job keeping the thousands of visitors, athletes and locals safe during the games, too. Last week I met with the local police in Carindale and Wynnum and was given a snapshot into the work they're doing to prepare for the games. Our local and state police crews, emergency services and all the volunteers are putting in so much of their time and deserve a huge round of applause for the hard work they are putting in prior, during and after the games. It's going to be a big job, but somebody has to do it. I'm glad to say that what I have seen so far is that we've got the best women and men on the job. Let's get ready for the games. 11:11 Ms LAMB 265975 Longman In just over a week the 21st Commonwealth Games will commence on the Gold Coast in my home state of Queensland. It will be the fifth time that Australia has hosted the Commonwealth Games and, by the look of things, it may very well prove to be the best one yet. It's really exciting to think that more than 6,600 athletes and team officials from 70 Commonwealth nations will come together for this huge showcase of international sportsmanship. What is even more exciting is that there are young Australians standing up, wearing the green and gold very proudly, representing our great country on the world stage. There are young Australians like Liam Wilson. Liam is only 21. He's a light welterweight boxer and he comes from Caboolture, a great suburb in our great electorate of Longman. Liam is going to be a world champion, I'm sure. He already holds an outstanding record of 122 wins from 135 fights. For someone so young, he's got the experience, having been boxing since he was just 10 years of age. It's great to see Liam representing our region, our state and our nation. I know he will do well. Proudly, our region's talent doesn't stop there. Representing our wonderful area in South-East Queensland, we have sisters Taylor and Kaylee McKeown, who will compete in the swimming. Caboolture's own superfish, Lakeisha Patterson, will also be competing. I don't know what it is—maybe it's something in the water, if we are talking about swimming—but Australia always shows its strength when it comes to competitions. That is why I'm so pleased to see women truly showing their strength at this year's games. For the first time at a Commonwealth Games there will be an equal number of men's and women's medal events being contested, with sports like women's rugby sevens and beach volleyball being contested for the very first time. The motto for this year's games is 'Share the dream'. It's so good to see this motto being lived by. We have some truly incredible female athletes in this country. It's great to see them finally getting the recognition they deserve. It seems women's sport has hit a turning point in the last few years. We've still got a long way to go, but it's great to see them hitting that turning point. This is a really huge step forward. I'm excited to be able to sit and watch in my lounge room as it starts to pay off. As I said, the 21st Commonwealth Games are going to be huge. It's going to be the largest sporting event to be staged in Australia this decade. In fact, the GC 2018 is going for gold to deliver an inclusive games by hosting up to 300 para-athletes in 38 medal events across seven sports. An event of this magnitude requires a great team to get it all together. I commend the Queensland Palaszczuk government, with a special mention to the Minister for the Commonwealth Games, Kate Jones, for all of their efforts in having a focus on equality and inclusion; efforts towards making South-East Queensland games-ready; and hard work towards supporting 30,000 full-time equivalent jobs required for the games. It's developed infrastructure across Queensland's south-east corner that will benefit Queensland long after the closing ceremony. It will showcase South-East Queensland to the world, to all of the interstate and international visitors and many, many millions of people who watch the games at home, and their hard work will inject around $2 billion into our economy. I really am looking forward to watching the games come 4 April. I'm looking forward to seeing the young Australians proudly represent our country, standing in front of the flag and wearing the green and gold, and I'm looking forward to seeing the medal tally at the end of the games. Australia, I am sure, will have won gold after gold after gold. To all the athletes competing, I wish you all of the best of luck. All of Australia will be right behind you. We'll all be barracking for you and we'll be sharing the dream with you. I'm sure you'll do our nation proud. But I can't sign off without acknowledging the wonderful work that all of the volunteers will be doing at the Commonwealth Games. I know there are people from my electorate that are heading down to the Gold Coast and will be volunteering their time to make sure that the Commonwealth Games go smoothly, that they are inclusive, that we do see equality, that we all have a great time and that we do it safely. Thank you. 11:16 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher For those of us who represent regional Australia, the 21st Commonwealth Games is a particularly welcome occasion. This is the first time that the games have been hosted in a regional Australian city. This year, we'll show the world that regional Australia and the regional coast of Queensland, like my electorate of Fisher, in particular, are not simply an unforgettable destination for tourism. We will prove that regional Australia can mount a multibillion-dollar world event; efficiently manage a team of thousands of employees, volunteers, athletes and officials; and provide world-class security for all. As the world's attention turns to regional Australia, we will show them that our regions have fantastic local businesses and innovators, world-class cultural experiences and, most importantly, hundreds of thousands of highly-skilled and highly-motivated people with a great deal to offer any project. The Sunshine Coast is heavily involved in these Comm Games. Our world-class sports facilities, as well as our relaxing environment and welcoming people, have attracted more than 500 athletes and officials to train during the games' build-up. These include: Australia's rugby sevens and netball teams, England's triathlon group and athletes from the Isle of Man, St Helena and Niue. Wales has chosen to bring its athletes and swimming teams to the Sunshine Coast while Scotland is basing its entire team in our community. The biggest contributions will be made by our people. Twenty-four Sunshine Coast locals are carrying the Queen's Baton, and hundreds of our residents will work as volunteers, including my own daughter Sarah. However, Sunshine Coasters will not just be represented behind the scenes but at the heart of the action in the Australian national team. The many fantastic swimming clubs in our region are really producing the goods for Australia. The University of the Sunshine Coast Spartans, alone, are sending nine athletes. Taylor and Kaylee McKeown, Jake Packard, Leah Neale and Mikayla Sheridan will be going to the Commonwealth Games while Blake Cochrane, Ellie Cole, Daniel Fox and Logan Powell will be representing Australia in the integrated para-sport program. And you know what, Deputy Speaker? One of the best things about the Commonwealth Games is the integration of the Paralympics with the able-bodied athletes. The Olympic movement can take a huge leaf out of what the Comm Games do, because we've all seen those, what I regard to be, very unfortunate situations where, for the Olympics, we get excited about our able-bodied athletes and then, a week later, the Paralympics start and they just don't get the same attention. When you look at the sheer grit and guts that those Paralympic athletes have taken to get themselves to that level of sport, I think that we, as a sporting-mad community, really drop the ball. I want to congratulate, from the bottom of my heart, the Comm Games team that integrate those two sports together. As the father of a disabled child who dreams of being a Paralympian one day, just to see the integration and how they're all mixed in together and is just a fantastic thing. Those that run the Olympic teams really need to get their act together and follow the lead from the Comm Games. Kaylee McKeown's performance at the national trials was particularly remarkable. She defeated Australian icon and double-world champion Emily Seebohm to claim her first national title in the 200 backstroke. At 16 she's also the swimming team's youngest member, so congratulations, Kaylee. The University of the Sunshine Coast will also send two coaches, Chris Mooney and Nathan Doyle; as well as sports scientist Dr Daniella Formosa to be part of the Australian team. Kawana Waters Swimming Club Paralympian finalist Liam Schluter has also been selected and I'm certain will have a great chance for a medal in the S14 200-metre freestyle. There are plenty of other clubs, like Pelican Waters Swim Club, with Tessa Wallace, who I met the other day and is no relation. Tessa Wallace, good luck. Good luck also to Lucky Patterson. You're all great, and I know that you will do us all proud. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and resumption of debate will remain an order of the day for a later hour this day. Israel 20 11:21 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this House: (1) notes that 14 May 2018 is the 70th anniversary of the creation of the modern state of Israel, a seminal event that occurred in 1948, and congratulates Israel on an amazing seventy years of democracy, growth and prosperity; (2) recognises that 15 July 2018 marks the 80th anniversary of the end of the fateful Évian Conference, convened by President Roosevelt in 1938 in Évian-les-Bains, France, with 31 countries, to discuss the issue of the plight of Jewish refugees fleeing the horror of Nazi persecution; (3) further notes that: (a) the Australian Minister for Trade and Customs in 1938, Lieutenant Colonel T.W. White, declined to further assist the Jewish people, stating 'Australia has her own particular difficulties...migration has naturally been predominantly British, and it (is not) desired that this be largely departed from while British settlers are forthcoming. Under the circumstances Australia cannot do more, for it will be appreciated that in a young country manpower from the source from which most of its citizens have sprung is preferred, while undue privileges cannot be given to one particular class of non-British subjects without injustices to others. It will no doubt be appreciated also that as we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one by encouraging any scheme of large-scale foreign migration...I hope that the conference will find a solution of this tragic world problem'; (b) post Kristallnacht, when the Nazis burned Jewish synagogues, businesses and books, Australia did reassess its policy to admit 15,000 refugees over three years, compared to the previous quota of 1,800 per year; (c) an estimated 6 million Jews and millions of others died during the Holocaust, exacerbated by the failure of Australia and other nations of the world to more fully protect the Jewish people; and (d) Lieutenant-Colonel White's statement on behalf of the Government of Australia is still visible at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem, as a representative response for all other nations' responses of indifference at the Évian Conference; (4) states that this Parliament, as representative of all political parties and the people of Australia, issues a profound apology and says 'sorry' to the Jewish people for the indifference shown by the Parliament in 1938 that worsened the impact of the Holocaust; and (5) notes that: (a) in doing so, we seek to honour the memory of all those who lost their lives in the Holocaust and make right, a great wrong, perpetuated by Australia on the Jewish people; (b) a request will be made for this motion to be presented to Yad Vashem this 70th year asking that the parliamentary apology be displayed beside Lieutenant-Colonel White's statement of 1938 that he issued on behalf of the Government of Australia; and (c) this motion will be provided to the Knesset this 70th year, one parliament to another. This year celebrates a number of historic milestones for the great state of Israel. 14 May is the 70th anniversary of the creation of the modern state of Israel, a seminal event that created the only free democracy in the Middle East. This parliament warmly congratulates our sister in democracy, the Israeli Knesset and the people of Israel for what they have achieved: an amazing 70 years of democracy, growth and prosperity. Israel remains the light, a beacon of hope for the Middle East, and we are so proud to stand with her. But, amidst the 70th anniversary of joy, 15 July this year unfortunately marks the 80th anniversary of sorrow, for it's the anniversary of the end of the fateful Evian conference convened by President Roosevelt in 1938 in Evian-les-Bains, France with 31 countries to discuss the issue of the plight of Jewish refugees fleeing the horror of Nazi persecution. It's an anniversary of the world turning its back on God's holy chosen Jewish people. It's an anniversary that this parliament will seek to atone for today. As we do so, I acknowledge that his issue was raised a decade ago in this place by the member for Isaacs. His reasons were genuine, and it's doubtful whether we would have reached today without his sincere, heartfelt intervention a decade ago. I therefore offer a thankyou to the member for Isaacs and all those who spoke with him for their humanity and quest to make things right 10 years past. It's a pleasure to stand in the House of Representatives with him and my other good colleagues today representing both major political parties. I acknowledge the member for Eden-Monaro at the desk. Today this parliament, as representative of all political parties and the people of Australia, issues a profound apology and says sorry to the people for the indifference shown by the parliament in 1938 that worsened the impact of the Holocaust. We do this because the Australian government sent to Evian the Australian Minister for Trade and Customs, Lieutenant Colonel TW White, with a message of indifference. Doubtless he did not go and speak on his authority but on that of the executive government of the day, but his words were not challenged by this parliament. At Evian the Australian Minister for Trade and Customs declined to further assist the Jewish people in their hour of need, stating: Australia has her own particular difficulties ... migration has naturally been predominantly British, and it (is not) desired that this be largely departed from while British settlers are forthcoming. …   …   … Under the circumstances Australia cannot do more, for it will be appreciated that in a young country manpower from the source from which most of its citizens have sprung is preferred, while undue privileges cannot be given to one particular class of non-British subjects without injustices to others. It will no doubt be appreciated also that as we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one by encouraging any scheme of large-scale foreign migration…I hope that the conference will find a solution of this tragic world problem. Those words spoken by the minister in 1938—'As we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one by encouraging any scheme of large-scale foreign migration,' and, 'I hope that the conference will find a solution for this tragic world problem'—have haunted our nation. Our nation's government turned its back on our Jewish friends at the exact time they needed us. Our parliament said nothing. Understandably, Lieutenant Colonel White's statement on behalf of the government of Australia is still visible at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem as representative of all other nations' responses of indifference at the Evian Conference. Australia was not alone; the world turned its back. For Australia's indifference, this parliament says sorry. Five months later, post Kristallnacht—when the Nazis burnt Jewish synagogues, businesses and books, and hauled Jews to concentration camps—thankfully Australia did reassess its policy of only taking 1,800 refugees per year. News of the Nazi's dreadful pogrom strengthened the position of many organisations arguing for a liberalisation of the country's immigration policy. Support for the admission of Jewish refugees now came from unexpected quarters. On 18 November 1938, the New South Wales Trades and Labour Council, which had traditionally been opposed to immigration, passed a resolution asking the government to accept Jewish refugees and, if necessary, to support them financially. At the same time, from London, Australia's high commissioner, former Prime Minister Stanley Bruce, told the government on 21 November that 'strong feeling is rapidly developing', that an unprecedented international effort was required to deal with Jewish refugees from Germany and that Australia might find itself in an 'embarrassing situation' if it did not make a statement regarding its approach. He suggested a quota of 30,000 refugees over three years. Cabinet agreed to Bruce's proposal in principle but halved the figure. On 1 December, the Minister for the Interior, John McEwen, announced the new policy that had been approved by cabinet the night before in parliament. He said that Australia would admit up to 15,000 refugees from Europe over three years. Hansard from 1 December 1938 records McEwen's speech. The government feels that, if a solution of this problem is to be found, countries must be prepared to receive a proportion of those to be expatriated, in relation to the capacity of the countries to assimilate them. By the outbreak of World War II in September 1939, more than 7,000 Jewish refugees had arrived in Australia. Our country's indifference had started to change. As the horrors of the Second World War unfolded, the tragedy of Hitler's venom against God's holy people, the Jews, was becoming known. In December 1942 the Allies, including Australia, issued a joint announcement about their recognition of the massacre of Jews in Poland. Soon, the United Jewish Emergency Committee was instituted in Sydney, while the United Jewish Overseas Relief Fund was founded in Melbourne. In 1943, all Jewish communities in Australia presented a joint resolution to Prime Minister Curtin asking him to support Jewish immigration to Australia and soon-to-be Israel, and to take part in any international relief effort for the survivors of the Nazi horrors. However, the government responded negatively to these requests. Unfortunately, people were just not aware of the true extent of the Nazi horror and, thus, were not empathetic to the cause. The lack of understanding in Australia is reflected by the label given to Jewish refugees from Europe: they were called 'enemy aliens'. On this 80th anniversary of sorrow, I sought guidance on atonement for wrong from the Jewish law, theTorah, represented, of course, in my Bible in The Old Testament in Leviticus 5:14-19. It said: The Lord said to Moses: "When anyone is unfaithful to the Lord by sinning unintentionally in regard to any of the Lord's holy things, they are to bring to the Lord as a penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value in silver, according to the sanctuary shekel. It is a guilt offering. They must make restitution for what they have failed to do in regard to the holy things, pay an additional penalty of a fifth of its value and give it all to the priest. The priest will make atonement for them with the ram as a guilt offering, and they will be forgiven. "If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord's commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible. They are to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for them for the wrong they have committed unintentionally, and they will be forgiven. It is a guilt offering; they have been guilty of wrongdoing against the Lord. Today, this parliament recognises we have been guilty of failing to do something in regard to the holy things. We failed to protect more of God's holy people, the Jews. Our ram and the additional one-fifth value we present today, our guilt offering, are our words of atonement, our apology, our profound sense of sorry. We do this from both sides of the aisle. Both the Labor and Liberal parties argued for the expanded refugee intake in 1938 to save Jewish lives 80 years ago. So today both parties stand together to say sorry for the indifference at Evian. Both Labor and Liberal MPs did not do enough in 1943 to support the Jewish community's joint resolution to more fully embrace Jewish refugee migration. Again, we say sorry. An estimated six million Jews and millions of others died during the Holocaust, exacerbated by the failure of Australia and every nation of the world to protect the Jewish people more fully. Thus today we seek to honour the memory of all those who lost their lives in the Holocaust and to make right a great wrong perpetuated by Australia and the rest of world on the Jewish people—that of indifference. Today we present our parliament's guilt offering through our words and draw a line under this Evian conference of sorrow. Today we vow never again to turn our back on Israel, or on our Jewish brothers and sisters, wherever they are in the world. Today we reaffirm our love and commitment to Israel. As we do this, I request that this motion be presented to Yad Vashem in this 70th year, asking that the apology be displayed beside Lieutenant Colonel White's statement of 1938 that he issued on behalf of the government of Australia. I formally passed this request along to the secretary of Israel's foreign minister, and sought his assistance. I also request that this motion be provided to the Knesset in this 70th where year, one parliament to another. Again, I formally passed this request along to the convenor of the Israel Allies Caucus Knesset member Robert Ilatov. I'll be in Israel in September this year, during Sukkot, as one of the chairs of the Israel Allies Caucus, made up of over 30 parliaments of the world. I look forward to bringing our guilt offering, this motion and its speeches, personally both to the Knesset and to Yad Vashem. Let me conclude this morning with the words of Psalm 122: Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: "May those who love you be secure. May there be peace within your walls and security within your citadels." For the sake of my family and friends, I will say, "Peace be within you." For the sake of the house of the Lord our God, I will seek your prosperity. Amen. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Mr Irons HYM I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:31 Dr MIKE KELLY HRI Eden-Monaro I thank the member for Fadden for bringing forward this motion and wish to associate myself with his comments in relation to those bitter days of 1938 and the Evian Conference. One of the broader messages and lessons to be taken from that was that the result of that conference effectively sent a loud message to the Nazis and to Adolf Hitler: 'You can do what you like with the Jewish community, not only of Germany but, of course, later on, all of eastern Europe and Europe in a broader sense.' That was the fatal consequence of that Evian Conference—compounded, I have to say, by the later support of Australia of the 1939 British white paper which, of course, had the very unfortunate consequence of denying thousands of Jewish refugees their lives when they could very easily have been absorbed into Palestine at the time. That history of Australia and the Jewish peoples of that region are deep and meaningful, and also forged in blood. During the First World War, my own family and many Australians were in Egypt and Palestine as part of the light horse endeavours to free that region from the Ottoman Empire. Australian light horsemen had an initial encounter with Jewish refugees who had been expelled from that area because of the suspicions the Ottomans had of their loyalty to the Ottoman Empire. They were put up in refugee facilities in Alexandria. A lot of Australian light horsemen went to those facilities to do what they could to support those refugees, including giving the kids rides on their horses and the like. My own family and other Australians had their first contact then and, of course, through the Palestine campaign. Before that, in the campaign on Gallipoli, Australians serve alongside the Zion Mule Corps. Membership of that unit was formed largely by refugees who were in Alexandria. So right from that very earliest battlefield experience, Australians were side-by-side with members of the Yishuv, the Jewish community of Palestine. It didn't end there, of course. Following the experience of the Zion Mule Corps, a Jewish legion of volunteers was formed. Eventually, that became a force of about 5,000 troops. In particular, there were three battalions, which were designated as the 38th, 39th and 40th battalions of the Royal Fusiliers, which served in Palestine alongside the Australians through the remainder of that campaign. In fact at one point those units were placed under the command of Major General Edward Chaytor, who was the commander of the Anzac Mounted Division. So we were actually in command of the Jewish Legion in Palestine through a number of major engagements in the Jordan Valley, north of Jerusalem and in that final critical battle of Megiddo, serving alongside them. Not only that, one of our greatest war heroes of the First World War, Lieutenant Colonel Eliezar Margolin, was made a CO of the 38th battalion. He'd been a hero of Gallipoli, and was wounded several times on the Western Front before he was put in command of the 38th battalion, a battalion which had as one of its members David Ben-Gurion, future Prime Minister of Israel. Eliezer Margolin is honoured today in the village that's dedicated to the Jewish legion Avichail, and a square in that village is named after Eliezer Margolin. Of course, that didn't end the story. Last year we celebrated the centenary of the battle of Beersheba. I was there on the day, as part of that contingent of Australians, when so many of us flooded the town. There was a warm reception. The entire town was decorated and plastered with Australian flags. The community of Beersheba embraced the Australians who came. It was a wonderfully warm reception. It was such a significant event in their own history that they will never forget. I'm sure the Australians who were there for that centenary will never forget. That relationship continued into World War II. Again, my family and thousands of Australians enjoyed the support and welfare provisions that were provided by the Jewish community in Palestine. It was a centre of activity for the 2nd AIF, who were engaged in the campaign in Greece, the Western Desert, Syria and Lebanon. My grandfather, on my father's side, was in the 2/3rd Machine Gun Battalion in the 7th Division, which was the critical formation involved in that Syria-Lebanon campaign. They were based around the Nazareth area before going into that campaign. To give a flavour of the experience of the soldiers who were looked after by the Jewish community, there's a terrific book that's just been published, which I'm reading at the moment, by Richard James called Australia's War with France: the Campaign in Syria and Lebanon, 1941. One passage in there struck me as summarising that relationship with the troops at the time. In it he said, 'The 7th Division headquarters was established in a monastery at Nazareth overlooking the fertile plains shimmering in the blue haze of the summer heat. The men camped for several pleasant days among orange groves and gumtrees. They enjoyed hospitality from the surrounding Jewish settlements.' In Albert Moore's recollection, each night the troops flocked to the communes, or kibbutzim, until the CO felt that it was too good. So he set up a ballot system to rotate leave to the kibbutzim where the Australians, as it says in the book, 'feasted on poultry and farm produce and drank iced milk, the local libation of choice.' In the book, James mentions that the Jewish way of life made a favourable impression on the men. He says, 'Their fine physique and comely appearance, their willingness to do their share of manual labour, their charming family life, and their softly murmured shaloms.' 'It was a wonderful relationship we had,' remembered Keith Norrish, one of the veterans. The Australian soldiers took up a collection in thanks for the way they had been treated and bought a player piano with a silver plaque and gave it to the settlement kibbutz that they had enjoyed such wonderful times with. That reassures me of the fact that my grandfathers were looked after. It was pretty much the last time we heard from my grandfather on my father's side, who went on to fight in the Far East. He was captured in Java and ended up on the Burma-Thai railway. It is some comfort to the family to know that he was looked after before that hellish experience. Serving in that campaign with the Australians was Moshe Dayan, who was a scout for the 2/14th Battalion advance party that went in. It was a unit of the 21st Brigade under Jack Stevens and part of the 7th Division that my grandfather was in. In that advance party, he went forward with Lieutenant Jim Kyffin and Lieutenant William Allan to the town of Iskadrun, and there he suffered the injury that left him with the famous eye patch. Using a machine gun from a roof of a police station he raised his binoculars to see where fire from the enemy was coming from and a round hit straight into the binoculars and destroyed his eye, and he was out of action. He and Kyffin fought extremely bravely in that contact and in that battle, and Kyffin was awarded the Military Cross for his own actions in that battle. Kyffin later on lost sight in his eye in a wound he received later at Jezzine—quite a coincidence. Kyffin and Moshe Dayan were very close friends and kept in constant contact until Kyffin's death in 1976. That was also the campaign in which Roden Cutler earned his Victoria Cross. Those experiences in World War II were deeply affecting for the general Australian attitude. At the time, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al Husseini, was in Germany helping to organise the genocide of the Jewish people of Europe and looking to, hopefully, repeat that effort against the Jewish community of Palestine. He helped recruit many soldiers into SS units for the Germans. So the comparison with those attitudes was, I think, a big factor in the way that our troops were looked after. It was a big factor in the attitudes of Doc Evatt and Ben Chifley after the war in very actively pursuing and achieving acceptance of the partition plan that led to the creation of the state of Israel. Doc Evatt's efforts, in particular, were enormous at that time and in the subsequent battles of recognising Israel and admitting Israel to the UN. Those things were not supported at the time across the entire political spectrum because they were contrary to British policy. Thankfully, we later moved on to a very solid bipartisan approach to these issues, as we still have today. So this is a bond formed in blood. It is a bond that is growing today with the wonderful technological achievements of the state of Israel in renewable energy and technology in general. We now have an MOU with them, which has been a long time coming. We obviously are going to benefit from learnings in those technologies as well as advances that have been made in water efficiency and farming. I'm pleased to have been in Israel in the capacities of defence and of agricultural and broader technologies. It's a relationship that will continue to grow. Obviously, both sides of this House will work as hard as we can with the peoples of that area to move to a two-state solution to make sure that the people of Israel and the Palestinians can live in peace and harmony in the years ahead. We owe them nothing less given the experiences that I've outlined, which have been forged in blood. I look forward to making my own contribution in whatever way I can. I thank the member for his motion. 11:41 Mr IRONS HYM Swan I rise today to support the motion the honourable member for Fadden has put forward in this chamber today. The state of Israel has strong supporters and long friends in the member for Fadden and the member for Eden-Monaro. Listening to both their contributions I thought that for anyone who wants to know the historical links between Israel and Australia, particularly through the AIF, listening to those two speeches would be a good start. I thank the members for their contributions and I also note that the member for Fadden acknowledged the motion moved by the member for Isaacs 10 years ago. The motion was as heartfelt then, 10 years ago, as the member for Fadden's motion is now. This year marks the 70th anniversary of the creation of the modern state of Israel, the home for the Jewish people. Since 1948 Israel has flourished and become one of the powerhouses of emerging technology, democracy and prosperity. As the only democracy in the Middle East, the nation of Israel is one steeped in institutions that support the individual, and that is based on the rule of law and equal rights for its people. In an ever-changing world, Israel has shown how a nation can harness uncertainty and embrace the market and the innate worth of the individual. The modern state of Israel has come as a result of the immense suffering, at the hands of the Nazi regime, of the Jewish people during the 1930s and 1940s. This year also marks the 80th anniversary of the Evian Conference. This conference was convened by President Roosevelt in July 1938 in France to discuss the plight of Jewish refugees fleeing from persecution at the hands of the Nazi regime in Germany. The conference was a precursor to the creation of the state of Israel after World War II. Unfortunately, our government at the time, during the early stages of the Nazi persecution, was unaware of the extent of the plight of the Jewish people. This is a dark part of our history and one that is remembered at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem with the words of the then Minister for Trade and Customs, Lieutenant Colonel White. I will not repeat those words, as they were mentioned in the motion put forward by the member of Fadden, but those words show our past. The then minister for trade, Colonel T W White, declined to assist, noting Australia was a young nation and wary of giving 'undue privileges' to 'one particular class of non-British subjects without injustices to others'. The member for Fadden gave us good insight into the message that Colonel T W White delivered. These are past indiscretions that this House today has the chance to amend. It is one part of our history that should be corrected. On the night of 9 November and long into the morning of 10 November in 1938, the Nazis torched synagogues, vandalised Jewish homes and businesses, and killed nearly 100 Jews. Although Jews had been suppressed by Hitler's policies since 1933, it was the actions of the Nazis on this date that marked a significant turn to violence. It was only after this, the 'Night of Broken Glass', that the Australian government—rightly—reassessed its policy to help the Jewish people of Germany by admitting 15,000 refugees over three years, rather than the quota of 1,800 per year used previously. The Australian government and many other nations around the world failed the Jewish people. It failed to do more to fully protect the Jewish people from persecution. In years to come, an estimated six million Jewish people would be killed during the Holocaust. This number was exacerbated by the Australian government and other governments around the world being naive to the extent of the persecution of the Jewish people by the Nazi regime. In this great place and in our strong democracy we have the opportunity to right the wrongs of our past. As the member for Fadden noted, we can do that by having this House—the house that represents all political parties of Australia and all Australians—issue an apology to the Jewish people for the indifference demonstrated by the Australian parliament in 1938. If this motion is supported by the House, the parliamentary apology will be presented to the Yad Vashem in this significant anniversary year. We will also request to have our apology displayed alongside Lieutenant Colonel White's 1938 statement issued on behalf of the Australian government. War is an atrocity, but the atrocities visited upon the Jewish people by the Nazi regime must be set right. I support this motion by the member for Fadden. 11:46 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs This year marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the state of Israel. I congratulate Israel and its citizens on this momentous milestone. Australia is not merely an ally of Israel; it is a friend. This is a friendship that has stood the test of time, through the upheavals of our political cycles here in Australia and through the ever-changing diplomatic and political conditions of the world in which we live. Through all of this change I've been proud to see successive Australian governments, Labor and Liberal, supporting the state of Israel, and we will continue to provide this support. Clearly, we have learnt from mistakes in our past. In the dark months before the outbreak of World War II, Australia, like many Western countries, failed Jewish refugees seeking to flee Nazi Germany and other parts of Europe. At the Evian Conference in France, in 1938, our delegate, Lieutenant Colonel Thomas White, declared on Australia's behalf: … as we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one … This deplorable sentiment was soon replaced with heartfelt compassion. Having learnt of the horror of the Holocaust in the postwar period, Australians overwhelmingly welcomed survivors coming to our shores. Indeed, while the Australian Jewish community dates back to the beginning of European settlement and the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788, by far the largest number of Jewish immigrants arrived after the end of the Second World War. The first boat of postwar Jewish refugees docked in Sydney Harbour in November 1946, with nearly everybody aboard survivors of the Holocaust. The following year, on 29 November 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations voted 33 votes to 13 in favour of the establishment of the state of Israel. And in 1949 the Chifley Labor government ensured that Australia was among the first nations to formally recognise the newborn state of Israel. Labor's own Doc Evatt presided over this historic vote, in May 1949, that admitted Israel as the 59th member of the United Nations. I'm always moved when I recall the comments of Abba Eban, who, in acknowledging the Australian government's contribution of the recognition of Israel, declared: … the warmth and eloquence with which you welcomed Israel into the family of nations have earned for you the undying gratitude of our people. It's important to remember that while the Jewish people's claim to Palestine was established long before the United Nations was even dreamed of, with the passing of resolution 181 the community of nations made a clear, unequivocal and irrevocable statement of Israel's right to exist under international law. I'm deeply proud that Australia has important historic links to the creation of the state of Israel and I'm equally proud of the enduring friendship our nation has built with Israel in the nearly 70 years since its establishment. Like many friendships that extend back over generations, Israel and Australia do not agree on everything, but differences of opinion cannot shake the rock-solid foundations of our friendship or of our commitment to each other. I commend and congratulate Israel on its achievements and successes of the past 70 years and repeat Australia's commitment to the existence of the state of Israel as well as Australia's ongoing support for the peaceful establishment of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite the enormous challenges Israel has faced since before its founding, it not only has survived but also is now a thriving nation of over eight million people. It is home to a rich history of cultures, and champions many of the freedoms lacking in other parts of the Middle East. In the words of David Harris, an international champion of Israel who is currently visiting Australia: … Israelis have never succumbed to a fortress mentality, never abandoned their deep yearning for peace with their neighbors or willingness to take unprecedented risks to achieve that peace … I, like many Australians, will be celebrating the 70th anniversary of the state of Israel on 14 May. The story of Israel is one of success against enormous odds, a story many Australians can relate to. I wish the state of Israel the very best on the 70th anniversary of its modern rebirth. I am looking forward to May when I say to the people of Israel and those celebrating in Australia, 'Yom Ha'atzmaut sameach; happy Independence Day.' I thank the member for Fadden for his motion. 11:51 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I commence by also thanking the member for Fadden for bringing this motion forward for the parliament to consider, because there is never enough opportunity to stand in this place and restate our commitment and support to—as the preceding member referred to in his speech—not just an ally but a friend. I share that sentiment resolutely. Today we acknowledge the 70th anniversary of the rebirth of the modern state of Israel and also the 80th anniversary of the conference at Evian-les-Bains on the plight of the Jewish people and refugees in the lead-up to the Second World War. One of the things I'm most proud of about the Goldstein electorate is not just that it is named after a woman and a suffragette—a Jewish one, at that—but that it is one of Melbourne's and Australia's largest Jewish communities, because of the migration waves of South African and Russian Jewish people particularly towards the northern parts of the electorate as well as many other people of European Jewry in parts of Brighton. The Jewish community enriches the Goldstein community as well as Melbourne and Australia. Every day I'm reminded of that in engaging with the Jewish community, who are full participants in our community and support each other. Only last week I was at the UIA dinner in Melbourne with Dennis Prager from the United States, a radio talk show host who'd come out to speak at the event to celebrate the way Jewish people support each other as well as the communities that surround them. Our need to support them in return is critical. As the previous speaker noted, Israel is not just an ally of Australia; like the United States, it is a friend. It's an enduring friendship which we should all be proud of. Our relationship with Israel is built very much and clearly on strong foundations of mutual shared values, our mutual commitment to democracy around the world and within our own countries. It's a commitment built on anchoring the rights of the individual to be free to pursue their life, their opportunities and their enterprise, and a commitment to human rights and progress as the foundations of our nations and what we aspire to achieve together. We know the rich history of Israel and its modern state. It is a nation that has taken sand and tradition and turned it into a modern state of culture, progress and economic opportunity and is a beacon for the light of the world. The people of Israel should be enormously proud of what they have achieved and what they have succeeded in delivering together. But we should never lose sight of the fact that there are always those with causes who want to delegitimise the state of Israel in its current form. We see this emerge in our country and others, around boycott divestments, sanction programs, and political movements and efforts to create moral equivalence about the state of Israel and its place in the world. I want to make it clear that there is no moral equivalence in my mind. There is no preparedness to turn a blind eye and to suggest that we should not truly value the important role of Israel as the home state of the Jewish people. Particularly I want to stand up and speak out always against the efforts to delegitimise the state of Israel through the United Nations, where some countries want not just to continue the stigmatisation of the Jewish people but to sever their connection to their homeland. We have seen this in resolutions, particularly in the past couple of years, to try to sever the connection between the Jewish people and the Temple Mount. The tragedy of the holocaust, of course, was a human genocide—there were millions of people who died, were displaced and were treated in the most appalling conditions. But we should never underestimate that part of the objective of the holocaust was not just a human genocide but a cultural genocide as well. When we see international bodies moving motions or resolutions to try to continue to sever those relationships between culture and tradition, and homeland and state, we continue that cultural genocide. We must stand proud and we must stand clear against these efforts. We must do it in celebration of the 70th anniversary of the rebirth of the state of Israel. 11:56 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise to support the motion presented by the member for Fadden and to thank him for raising in the parliament today this important and significant event: the 70th anniversary of the creation of the modern state of Israel. As we heard, it was David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel, who publicly read the declaration of independence of Israel in 14 May 1948. We know that Israel is counting down to this special day on 14 May this year, with Israeli culture minister, Miri Regev, recently revealing a series of ongoing events, beginning with the Independence Day ceremony on the Wednesday and ending on Saturday evening. This is 70 hours of Israeli festivity that will bring citizens together across the country in varied and joyous events held under the tagline 'a legacy of innovation'. This is drawing upon Israel's successes as the start-up nation and recognising the cutting edge technology which is developed locally. In announcing the celebrations, the minister said that the Israeli society is creative, looks to the future, thinks outside the box and is a trailblazer in research, medicine and agriculture, thereby providing a vital contribution to all humanity, which I couldn't support more. Israel and Australia, as we know, have had warm relations and strong economic ties due to our strong people-to-people links and our commercial relationships for many decades. The trade between our two nations is worth around $1.2 billion, and we continue to explore partnerships to strengthen our economic ties to this day. Israel is a progressive, modern and forward-thinking state, and our two countries share not only the same values but also a close bond. We cooperate internationally with Israel in many fields, including international development assistance. Importantly, this includes Australia's international development assistance in Gaza in the West Bank, which supports human development, institution building and economic growth, which is so critical for peace in the region. I rise also today to place on my record my strong support of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Former Labor leader HV 'Doc' Evatt, as President of the United Nations General Assembly from 1948 to 1949, was prominent in the negotiations that led to the creation of Israel. He wrote in his memoirs: 'I regard the establishment of Israel as a great victory of the United Nations.' It was only last year that I had the pleasure of visiting Israel alongside a delegation with other new members of this place. It was an honour to visit and be guided by experts through a series of in-depth meetings alongside parliamentary colleagues, officials, academics, union and community leaders, and other Israeli and Palestinian representatives. The trip coincided with the 100th anniversary since British politician Arthur Balfour, later Lord Balfour, presented a declaration of the British government stating the case for the Jewish homeland. 2017 was also the 90th anniversary of the Zionist Federation of Australia, and I'd like to acknowledge the ZFA president, Dr Danny Lamm, the secretary, Mr Sam Tatarka, and my good friend the President of the State Zionist Council of Queensland, Mr Tony Leverton, who are all hardworking and dedicated members of the federation. However, as is well known, the creation of the state of Israel is a story long filled with horrors and travesties inflicted upon Jewish people. What is also written in the history books is that Australia could have done more during these tumultuous times for Jewish people. As mentioned by the member for Fadden, whilst our country initially offered quotas of just 1,800 places for refugees, this was later increased to 15,000 refugees over three years. As we know, it's estimated that six million Jews and millions of others died during the Holocaust. Had the world acted sooner to more fully protect the Jewish people, this number could have been far lower. The SPEAKER 00APG Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour this day. PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS 28 PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS Deputy Speaker 28 12:01 The SPEAKER 00APG I inform the House that I have received a letter dated 5 March 2018 from the honourable member for Parkes tendering his resignation as Deputy Speaker of the House. The next item of business is the election of Deputy Speaker. 12:01 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray I move: That the honourable member for Page, Mr Hogan, be elected Deputy Speaker. The member for Page has a strong reputation for fairness and is well respected by all members of the House. He will be able to represent this House in the position of Deputy Speaker very, very well. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 12:02 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee I second the motion. I believe he will be a very good candidate. The democracy of Australia must be upheld by someone who has dignity and who has integrity. The member for Page has both of those things. I think he will uphold fairness in this chamber, which is very important so that people can have confidence in the robust discussion that takes place in this House of Representatives. The SPEAKER 00APG Is there any further motion? There's no further motion. The time for motions has expired. I declare that the honourable member proposed has been elected Deputy Speaker of this House. 12:03 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne I'd like to congratulate the member for Page on his appointment as Deputy Speaker. I've known the member for Page since 2010, when we hit the hustings at the same time and campaigned to be representatives in this House. He has worked tirelessly for the people of Page. He's brought all his knowledge from education and finance to good effect in this House. He is an excellent character and I wish him well in his future role as the Deputy Speaker. 12:04 Mr BURKE DYW Watson ( The opposition congratulates the member for Page on being elected to the position of Deputy Speaker. We had great respect for the member for Parkes in the role and there is no doubt we look forward to the way in which the member will conduct the role, in particular that most important event of the day being the MPI, which is when the Deputy Speaker traditionally takes the chair. Like other members, I've known the member for Page for some time. We tend to spend most Easters together at Bluesfest. The music festival will have a new aura about it with the Deputy Speaker in attendance. We wish him well in his role and send our congratulations to him. 12:05 Mr McCORMACK ( 219646 Riverina — ) ( ): I thank the member for Watson and the member for Lyne for acknowledging the important elevation of the member for Page to the Deputy Speaker's role, which has been filled very admirably by the member for Parkes since the last election. I congratulate the member for Page. I'm sure he will uphold the fine traditions of this parliament. I'm sure he'll be an able assistant to you, Mr Speaker, and to the rest of the Speakers panel. This is an important role and I know the member for Page acknowledges that. He continues on a fine tradition in that particular role. I thank the opposition for their words of acknowledgement and also thank the member for Parkes for the job that he has done in this very auspicious position. 12:06 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page Mr Speaker, I acknowledge you, who have been a wonderful Speaker of this House for many years, and I look to support you in this role. I thank, obviously, my colleagues who nominated me, the Leader of the Nationals, Michael McCormack, as well, but also to the leader of opposition business. I know the member for McEwen as well, who is also on the Speakers panel. This is an important role. We hold a very important place, and we know that when we walk into this place we are very lucky and privileged people, to uphold the democracy of this country and the great institutions of democracy, of which this is the premier institution in this country. Debate is important; passionate debate is important. I look forward as Deputy Speaker to encouraging that passionate debate but with a great deal of respect about it. To the leader of opposition business, I don't know if there will be an aura about me at the blues festival, but I look forward to seeing you there soon The SPEAKER 00APG I congratulate the Deputy Speaker and look forward to working with you and, can I also place on record, my sincere thanks to the former Deputy Speaker, the member for Parkes, who worked so closely with me—our offices work very closely together. He's been a magnificent Deputy Speaker. He's now joined the ministry and that's a fitting tribute to his talents as well. From a selfish point of view, obviously, I will miss him, but welcome you, Member for Page. He's a template Deputy Speaker, can I say, and I'm looking forward to working with him very much indeed. BILLS 29 BILLS Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill 2017, Therapeutic Goods (Charges) Amendment Bill 2017, Treasury Laws Amendment (Banking Measures No. 1) Bill 2017, Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017, Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Radio) Bill 2017, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment (Authority Governance and Other Matters) Bill 2017, Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Consumers First—Establishment of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority) Bill 2017 29

Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill 2017

Therapeutic Goods (Charges) Amendment Bill 2017

Treasury Laws Amendment (Banking Measures No. 1) Bill 2017

Financial Sector Legislation Amendment (Crisis Resolution Powers and Other Measures) Bill 2017

Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Digital Radio) Bill 2017

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Amendment (Authority Governance and Other Matters) Bill 2017

Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Consumers First—Establishment of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority) Bill 2017

Assent 29 COMMITTEES 29 COMMITTEES Committee on Constitutional Recognition Relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 29 Appointment 29 12:08 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Mr Speaker has received a message from the Senate concurring with the resolution of the House relating to the appointment of the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Corporations and Financial Services Committee 29 12:08 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Mr Speaker has received a message from the Senate informing the House of a resolution of the Senate referring matters relating to the operation and effectiveness of the Franchising Code of Conduct to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services.. The message read as follows— That the following matters be referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services for inquiry and report by 30 September 2018: (a) the operation and effectiveness of the Franchise Code of Conduct, including the disclosure document and information statement, and the Oil Code of Conduct, in ensuring full disclosure to potential franchisees of all information necessary to make a fully-informed decision when assessing whether to enter a franchise agreement, including information on: (i) likely financial performance of a franchise and worse-case scenarios; (ii) the contractual rights and obligations of all parties, including termination rights and geographical exclusivity; (iii) the leasing arrangements and any limitations of the franchisee's ability to enforce tenants' rights; and (iv) the expected running costs, including cost of goods required to be purchased through prescribed suppliers; (b) the effectiveness of dispute resolution under the Franchising Code of Conduct and the Oil Code of Conduct; (c) the impact of the Australian consumer law unfair contract provisions on new, renewed and terminated franchise agreements entered into since 12 November 2016, including whether changes to standard franchise agreements have resulted; (d) whether the provisions of other mandatory industry codes of conduct, such as the Oil Code, contain advantages or disadvantages relevant to franchising relationships in comparison with terms of the Franchising Code of Conduct; (e) the adequacy and operation of termination provisions in the Franchising Code of Conduct and the Oil Code of Conduct; (f) the imposition of restraints of trade on former franchisees following the termination of a franchise agreement; (g) the enforcement of breaches of the Franchising Code of Conduct and the Oil Code of Conduct and other applicable laws, such as the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and franchisors; and (h) any related matter. BILLS 30 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017-2018, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017-2018, Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 1) Bill 2018, Treasury Laws Amendment (Income Tax Consolidation Integrity) Bill 2018, Social Services Legislation Amendment (14-month Regional Independence Criteria) Bill 2018, Treasury Laws Amendment (National Housing and Homelessness Agreement) Bill 2018, Proceeds of Crime Amendment (Proceeds and Other Matters) Bill 2017, Imported Food Control Amendment (Country of Origin) Bill 2017 30

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2017-2018

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2017-2018

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 1) Bill 2018

Treasury Laws Amendment (Income Tax Consolidation Integrity) Bill 2018

Social Services Legislation Amendment (14-month Regional Independence Criteria) Bill 2018

Treasury Laws Amendment (National Housing and Homelessness Agreement) Bill 2018

Proceeds of Crime Amendment (Proceeds and Other Matters) Bill 2017

Imported Food Control Amendment (Country of Origin) Bill 2017

Returned from Senate 30 COMMITTEES 30 COMMITTEES Membership 30 12:08 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Mr Speaker has received messages from the Senate acquainting the House of the appointment of senators to certain joint committees. I do not propose to read this message, which will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation 30 Membership 30 12:08 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 I have to report to the House that, on 8 March 2018, the Speaker received advice from the Chief Government Whip nominating Mr Drum to be a member of the Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation. In accordance with standing order 229(b), as the House was not expected to sit for several weeks, the appointment became effective at that date. I now call the minister to move a motion to resolve membership of the committee. 12:09 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I move: That Mr Drum be appointed a member of the Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation. Question agreed to. Committee on Constitutional Recognition Relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 30 Membership 30 12:10 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne by leave—I move: That Ms Burney and Mr Snowdon be appointed members of the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Question agreed to. BILLS 30 BILLS Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 30

Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017

Assent 30 Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 30

Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017

Consideration of Senate Message 30 12:11 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I move: That the amendments be agreed to. 12:11 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga This Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 is an extraordinary one. It contains some 17 different measures that will hurt many vulnerable Australians, people who are unemployed, single parents, and women and children escaping violence. As Ross Gittins said in an article, just today: You've never seen such a list of pettifogging nastiness, yielding tiny savings to the budget. From the title of the bill—'welfare reform'—you might get the false impression that this was part of some big once-in-a-generation change to our social security system. But it isn't. It's a grab bag of nasty and mean cuts that will hurt vulnerable Australians. I'm sure everyone here will remember that when this bill was introduced, in September last year, it had some even nastier measures. It initially had the government's plan to trial drug testing of social security recipients. That measure doesn't have any support of medical, health or community organisations. The government cannot find one expert, person or group that supports the drug-testing trial. All the experts say that it won't work and completely runs counter to the evidence of what does work. The government couldn't convince the Senate crossbench of the merits of its controversial drug-testing trial, so they've taken it out of this bill. Unfortunately, they haven't got the message: they've decided to put it in a separate bill that is on for debate later this week. I want to go to another schedule of the bill that is also very nasty, particularly for a group of people who find it very difficult to find work in the current labour market. Schedule 9 relates to activity tests for people aged 55 to 59. Schedule 9 was intended to remove the ability of Newstart and some special benefit recipients, aged between 55 and 59, to fulfil the activity test by volunteering 30 hours a fortnight. People would need to fulfil 30 hours a fortnight of activity with voluntary work and suitable paid work. Fifteen of the 30 hours must be of paid work or approved job-search activities. As a result of this measure, the government would have seen many community groups having to cut the amount of time people can volunteer and still receive jobseeker payments. As I say, we already know how hard it is for people in this age group to find work. The government ignored the views of volunteer organisations, who believe that this change will decimate the number of people and volunteer hours available to community organisations that help neighbourhoods right across Australia. Volunteering Australia has said that this would 'have a profound impact on the volunteering sector'. I remind all the Liberal and National party members opposite that they all voted for this change that Volunteering Australia said will have a profound impact on the sector. Volunteering Australia went on to say that this proposal 'will do little to improve the job prospects of older Australians, an already disadvantaged group in the job market'. The government hasn't provided any additional support to help Australians aged 55 to 59 to overcome the significant barriers they face in the labour market. There's overwhelming evidence, put to the Senate inquiry on this bill, that mature job seekers face significant age discrimination in the labour market and find it very hard to get back into the workforce after they've lost their jobs. As a result of the amended schedule we've got before us, there will now be 12 months full jobseeker participation, and then people will be able to go back to the old arrangements. It shows the complete chaos of this government. They put a bill in. They've now got a 12-month arrangement. It really is not the way to do good policy. I say to the government that this is one part of this legislation and these amendments—they might have found a short-term fix but the long-term problem still remains. I'm highlighting one of the schedules today, and I will go on to another in a moment. There are so many parts of this bill that will hurt many, many vulnerable Australians. We will support the amendments, because they soften the blow, but I absolutely and clearly say to the House that we will continue to oppose the bill overall. The government may have made some concessions of a short-term nature, but this is a straight-up attack on vulnerable people. There might be some short-term, small backdowns in these amendments but there are certainly nowhere near enough to get us to support the bill. 12:18 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I reiterate the sentiments expressed by the member for Jagajaga about how nasty, unnecessary and discriminatory the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 201 7is. This bill is indicative of the mindset of the government. It is out of touch, and it does not give very much consideration for those people who rely on governments for support, and for those people who rely on governments for support at the most difficult times of their lives. In truth, this bill may have been returned amended, but it remains just as reprehensible. As the member for Jagajaga said, this bill reflects the disdain and contempt which the government holds for vulnerable Australians who rely on income support. In short, it is trying to save money—not very much money—and it doesn't seem to give a damn about people who rely on governments to speak up for them. It is a cynical exercise in politics, and I think the minister understands that. According to the Australian Council of Social Services, this will negatively impact on at least 80,000 Australians who are out of work; single parents; and women and children, who are fleeing domestic violence. This bill completely ignores common sense and dismisses extenuating circumstances. It is simply designed to make it more difficult for Australians who find themselves in difficult and uncertain times in their lives to claim income support. The government is more concerned, as we saw this week, with a big tax cut to multimillionaires and multinationals than with our government's responsibility: protecting the most vulnerable people in the community. I'm particularly concerned with how this bill will impact on the Human Services portfolio. In schedule 10 the bill will change the payment start date and backdating for Newstart and youth allowance. In schedule 11 the bill will cut intent-to-claim provisions which consider a person's extenuating circumstances. This is so concerning. One would think, with the debates raging about this, that the government would have a rethink. In schedule 17 the bill will also allow information obtained by DHS from claimants to be used against them in investigations and prosecutions, as the member for Jagajaga indicated. I'm very concerned about the government's axing of the bereavement allowance. Schedule 10's proposed changes to backdating for Newstart and youth allowance are punitive and arbitrary. By moving the payment start day from initial contact to initial appointment, claimants potentially lose out on much-needed income support at very uncertain and vulnerable times in their lives. What is particularly concerning about this schedule is the impact it is going to have on rural and remote communities. They may have limited access to job providers or consideration to travel arrangements for applicants living in rural and remote communities. We know that is going to particularly affect young people in these communities. This is nothing more than a cash grab from people who are in between jobs. These changes will mean applicants need to wait longer to access income support on top of the existing one-week waiting period that applies. The implications are not just for the young people that this will apply to; there are implications for the families and for the communities that these young people reside in. The government's removal of intent to claim is yet another cash grab. Intent to claim allows the department to deem a claimant entitled to a payment from the day of initial contact in the following circumstances: if a person lodges a claim for the payment or concession card within 14 days of initially contacting the department; if a person has a medical condition or is caring for a partner or someone suffering from a medical condition which impacted on the person's ability to lodge a claim earlier; or if the claimant was otherwise unable to lodge a claim by reason of special circumstances. These circumstances are homelessness, separation, hospitalisation, health issues or difficulty accessing technology. I understand the government introduced amendments to retain these intent-to-claim provisions for vulnerable individuals in extenuating circumstances. The truth is that there is absolutely no reason to amend the intent-to-claim provisions. Labor remains opposed to schedule 11. As the member for Jagajaga says, we will support the amendments, but overall the bill will be opposed. 12:23 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I'll start with a big call at the outset: if there were a competition to choose the government's nastiest, meanest bill—it is a long list to choose from—the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 would have to be near the top, if not at the top. That's coming alongside the bill to let people say more racist things—that was a good one!—the bill to give the minister for immigration the power to deport people based on the class of race and religion, the cuts to the pensioner energy supplement and so on and so forth. Another day, another attack on the most vulnerable from this government, the Prime Minister and the Liberals. This is not the first time that we've debated this bill or these measures. It was six months ago that I and many Labor members spoke in this House when it was coupled up with some of the more outrageous proposals around the drug testing of people on welfare, which could be better named the 'drive up crime bill', as the former Australian Federal Police commissioner called it. All that bill would do is drive up crime. The government banged it through the House and took it to the Senate, and it was defeated. Those measures were quite rightly rejected by senators. Yet the government, like goldfish swimming around in a bowl, has no vision for the country and no real policy agenda, so we're back here six months on, debating the same nasty, mean little cuts. It is a nasty, mean bill. It will make life even harder for the most vulnerable Australians. The cut to 80,000 people on income support is bad enough. Social services groups have called these cuts out as worsening homelessness, which we saw in the latest census figures reach record levels across the country. We've come to expect this stuff, unfortunately, from the Liberals, but I had hoped the Senate crossbench would stick to their original position and defeat these kinds of measures. I draw attention to and make some remarks on one particular clause in the bill, amended as a result of the Senate's work. The bill kills—pardon the pun—the bereavement allowance. It should not die without a fight. What is the bereavement allowance? It's a short-term payment to people whose partner has died. It's paid for a maximum of 14 weeks at the rate of the age pension with the same income and assets tests, so it's a well-targeted, tightly targeted payment. If you are a pregnant woman, you can stay on this payment until your pregnancy ends, until you give birth. How decent! This is not a forever payment. This is not a payment where people live their lives on welfare, as we keep hearing; this is a short-term, targeted payment. How many people does it go to? All this fuss is about cutting a payment that goes to 900 Australians every year. The government tried, by axing this payment, to push people whose partners had just died onto Newstart. Every one of those 900 people would have had $1,300 taken off them while they were grieving. I say unashamedly that I'm proud to live in Australia, a country where we can do things like treating people decently when their partner has just died. We don't force pregnant women to go onto Newstart and go to job interviews. The government wants to chop it and pay it at a lower rate, as I said. It's absolutely pathetic. It's a mean, nasty, small little cut. It's not about fiscal repair at all. We moved amendments to this bill in the Senate to make it a bit less awful, to protect the bereavement allowance. Senator Hanson voted with the government to kill it. It is important that this point is understood because, after she did so, there was an enormous backlash on social media, so she posted stuff trying to pretend she didn't vote with the government to kill the bereavement allowance. The voting record shows she voted with the Liberal Party to kill the bereavement allowance. The 'battler's friend' is a Liberal stooge. Time after time she talks a big game in the community, whether it's on penalty rates, cuts for pensioners or whatever, but then she lines up and votes with the Liberal Party. Let there be no mistake about it. After that ridiculous display, once she realised, 'I might have a bit of a political problem here; that's a bit much,' she introduced a series of amendments in a panicked way to pretend she had not just killed the bereavement allowance. All this legislative mess, as I said, is about saving $1,300 over 14 weeks for 900 people. Senator Hanson's amendments, which make the whole thing more complex—she could have just left the bereavement allowance there; it's well understood, well administered and well targeted—instead make things a little bit less awful for most of those 900 people but still leave an indeterminate number, maybe only 30, worse off. Why are we doing this? Why are these our priorities? 12:28 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga I ask the minister at the table to clarify some of the issues the member for Bruce just raised. As the member for Bruce indicated, there was an absolute farce in the Senate last week, where the government went all out to kill the bereavement allowance. The Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation voted for the abolition of the bereavement allowance, Labor voted to keep the allowance, there was a tied vote, and then all the things the member for Bruce outlined followed. But what we're still not clear about—and I would ask the minister to explain it to the House before we vote on this amendment—is what the impact of the government and One Nation's change will be. How many people will actually be worse off as a result of this change? I mean worse off compared to the existing arrangements, not worse off compared to the bill that the government previously put into the House. We currently have a bereavement allowance that's paid, as the member for Bruce said, at the rate of the age pension for 14 weeks. A very limited number of people are entitled to it right now. How many people will be worse off as a result of the amendments that are before us compared to the current arrangements, and by how much? Really, the House needs to know. 12:30 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Under the changes put forward by One Nation, everyone who qualifies for bereavement allowance under the jobseeker payment will be no worse off, and some people will be better off, than under current arrangements. 12:30 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga That answer is how many won't be, not how many will be. How many will be worse off? 12:31 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon As I've said, under the changes put forward by One Nation everyone who qualifies for bereavement allowance under the jobseeker payment will be no worse off, and some people will be better off, than under the current arrangements. Payments are targeted to those who need them. Bereavement allowance is paid to people in lieu of work, and that is why it is exempt from normal mutual obligation tests and waiting periods. Income and assets tests only apply during the period of bereavement and are designed to assist those people who have no access to leave or other income. To be found ineligible based on the assets test, a single person needs to have assets of more than $253,750, not including the family home, if they're a homeowner, and $456,750 if they are not a homeowner. Bereavement allowance is available for people earning up to $1,053.34 per fortnight during the bereavement period. In regard to casual workers or people who have no access to leave arrangements, these people will qualify provided they do not earn over the income threshold during their bereavement period or hold assets higher than the limit. That is because these people would be with little or no income during this period due to a lack of work. 12:32 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga Unfortunately, Minister, you've just repeated the income and assets test rules, which we all know are the rules for the bereavement allowance, but you still haven't said how many people who would currently be entitled to the bereavement allowance will no longer be entitled as a result of this change. Please don't just repeat what you have already said twice, because that's not answering my question. 12:33 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I just wanted to make sure that we're very clear on the context of the changes that have been made. Anyone who qualifies will be no worse off, and those— Ms Macklin PG6 What about the people who don't qualify? That's the point. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Order! The member for Jagajaga will get her turn. Mr TEHAN 210911 What we're talking about are the people who won't qualify. Of course, as the shadow minister would know, getting exact figures on those people who would or wouldn't qualify is not easy, but on our assessment, given the income and assets tests, approximately 30 people might not qualify. 12:34 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I spent Saturday at five street stalls, in Springvale, Noble Park, Dandenong, Dandenong North and Mulgrave. I spent an hour or more in each place talking to people. I must say, as someone who actually participates in this institution, respects it and holds it in high regard—I always have—it saddens me how little people think of us. And you wonder why so many people in Australia say they hate politicians. Well, you can't get a straight answer to a question. You duck and you weave, and you read out key messages and eventually you come out with a number of, 'Well maybe 30.' You could have just said that at the start, if these changes are going to hurt 30 people. So now what we're doing is debating an amendment to take $1300 off 30 people and pretending that is in some way welfare reform. That's your government's priority? That's welfare reform? I would have thought reform was about making something better—improving something—but instead reform now under this government has boiled down to using the House's time to take $1,300 off Australian people whose partners have just died—30 of them. That's what we're now doing. So we keep getting told the other reason that we have to have these kinds of bills, apparently, is because we have got a structural deficit—a debt and deficit disaster. Well, let's just read into the Hansard a few facts—the context that this bill sits in. This year's deficit has blown out by eight times. The 2017-18 deficit was $2.8 billion in the Liberal's 2014-15 budget and it's now $23.6 billion in the mid-year financial update. Net debt since this government has been elected more than doubled: net debt was $175 billion in September 2013 and was $335 billion in January 2018. Gross debt is more than half a trillion dollars, it has never been higher and it is growing with no end in sight. Both types of debt are growing faster under the Liberals than Labor. That is the context that this nasty, mean, sneaky little measure that we're standing here debating sits in. It's not too late, Minister Tehan. You could just stop this. You have the delegation; you could say: 'We'll put this debate aside. I'll go back to the government and say, "Maybe we've got this wrong. Maybe we don't need to try to pretend we're going to fix the budget in Australia by picking on 30 vulnerable people."' How much of a contribution do you think that's going to make to closing the debt and deficit gap? Do you think this makes any contribution in any meaningful way to budget repair or to addressing the structural deficit? Words fail me. 12:37 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon The reason for this Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 is that we want to simplify the complexity around Newstart and other payments, and that's what we do by creating the jobseeker payment. We are bringing seven payments into one. This was what the McClure report recommended. That is what the government are doing. We want to make sure that we have a simple welfare system that is easy for people to navigate. 12:37 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga I don't think anybody in the House would argue against simplification. But to use simplification as the reason to get rid of the bereavement allowance that is currently paid—for 14 weeks or for the duration of her pregnancy, whichever is longer—to a pregnant woman who has lost her partner, as the member for Bruce says, just defies belief. It just defies belief that every member of the Liberal and National parties and One Nation voted to get rid of this bereavement allowance for these pregnant women. Anyway, we have now dragged out of the Minister for Social Services that this affects around 30 people; they don't actually know exactly how many. Can the minister confirm that these 30 people will lose the full $1,300? Is that how much worse off they'll be? 12:38 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon As I have explained to the shadow minister, whether people qualify or not will be dependent on their assets and their income. I will explain again: to be found ineligible based on the assets test, a single person needs to have assets of more than $253,750 not including the family home, if they are a homeowner, and $456,750 if they are not a homeowner. 12:39 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga So does this mean the Minister for Social Services doesn't know how many worse off they'll be? Is that the truth? I understand the rules. I know the income and asset test rules. There's no point just repeating those. The question is: how much worse off will they be? Is it $1,300 or some other figure? 12:39 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon If the shadow minister knows the rules so well, she will know the answer to her question. Ms Macklin PG6 It's your amendment. Tell the House the amount. Mr TEHAN 210911 What does the word 'ineligible' mean? To be ineligible, they won't qualify. 12:40 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga Just to confirm, they will be worse off by $1,300. That must be the implication of the minister's answer. It's the minister's amendment that we're debating. The minister should tell the House what the impact will be. We have dragged out of him that it's 30 people. Is it a fact that those 30 people will no longer get $1,300 that they were previously entitled to? The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Before I call the minister, I remind the honourable members that we each have ample time in five minutes to raise issues; therefore, cease the interjections. 12:40 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon As the shadow minister clearly knows, if you are ineligible, you can't qualify for the payment. 12:41 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga As they currently would be $1,300 worse off compared to the existing arrangements, we'll have to assume given the minister won't actually say the words in the House. I don't know if he doesn't know, which is possible, or he doesn't want it on the record, which is a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace that this government and this minister will come into the House, move amendments and not be prepared to say how many people they will hurt or how much worse off they'll be, but that just sums up this government. 12:41 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I just did some maths on 30 people times $1,300—and $1,300 is actually a conservative estimate, because let's say there's a pregnant woman or two amongst those people, and it's entirely possible that pregnancy will last longer than 14 weeks under the current rules. But let's say it's $1,300. Now we're using the House's time to debate hurting people by taking $39,000. That's the annual saving to the Commonwealth budget we're now talking about. You mob have run up a deficit of $23.6 billion a year, and your answer to that is to take $39,000 a year off the most vulnerable Australians. I tried to work out what percentage that is on the iPad there. I divided $39,000 by $23.6 billion and it just says 'error'. It's too small even for the iPad to calculate. You'd think that, if you're going to address structural deficit, you'd look at the big systemic things and cast 10 years out, wouldn't you? There are things like negative gearing, which goes overwhelmingly to the top 10 or 20 per cent of income earners and enables someone to buy their 13th investment property with a big free kick from the taxman while first home buyers are struggling to get in the market. You'd think you'd look at that. Or look at capital gains tax discounts, which overwhelmingly go to the wealthiest people in the country. But that, I suppose, is me projecting our values onto you, because what this bill shows is that taking $39,000 from the most vulnerable Australians is your answer to the Commonwealth budget crisis. What this bill shows clearly, in stark relief, if there was any doubt, is your values. Your party exists to protect those who have wealth. Your party exists to protect those who already hold capital. If there's ever a reminder for anyone listening about what our role is as a Labor Party sticking up for the most vulnerable people in society then this bill is it. Shame on you. Question agreed to. Treasury Laws Amendment (Junior Minerals Exploration Incentive) Bill 2017 40

Treasury Laws Amendment (Junior Minerals Exploration Incentive) Bill 2017

Consideration of Senate Message 40 12:45 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne I move: That the amendment be agreed to. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 41 COMMITTEES Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit 41 Report 41 12:45 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra On behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, I present the committee's report entitled Report 470: Defence sustainment expenditure. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Ms BRODTMANN 30540 by leave—Some would say I have a rather unhealthy obsession with the sustainment of defence capability. Prior to becoming the member for Canberra, I worked in the Defence Materiel Organisation for nearly 10 years, got a very clear understanding of the acquisition process and tried to get a clear understanding of the sustainment process that supports our defence capability. Given the lack of clarity and transparency around sustainment, I decided that when I became a member for Canberra I would pursue the Holy Grail of trying to get greater clarity and transparency around the sustainment of our defence capability, with a view to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the sustainment of our defence capability. The reason I have had this unhealthy obsession for quite some time, probably nearly two decades now, is that this is a significant Defence spend. For 2017-18, the spend on acquiring defence capability was $11 billion. For 2018-19, acquiring defence capability will go up to nearly $13 billion, for 2019-20 it will go up to $14 billion and in 2020-21 it will go up to nearly $16 billion—that's for the acquisition of defence capability. The reason I have such a strong interest in improving the transparency and clarity around sustainment of our defence capability, as much as our acquisition of defence capability, is the following figures. In 2017-18, nearly $9.5 billion will be spent on the sustainment of our defence capability; in 2018-19, it will be nearly $10 billion; in 2019-20, it will be nearly $11 billion; and, in 2020-21, we're looking at $11.5 billion. The percentage of sustainment to the acquisition budget will be, in this financial year, 82 per cent; in 2018-19, 77 per cent; in 2019-20, 77 per cent; and, in 2020-21, 72 per cent. So we are talking big dollars here being spent on the sustainment of our defence capability. There are big dollars spent on the acquisition and there are big dollars spent on supporting our defence capability—our ships, our planes and our tanks. Lots of money is spent in these areas, in both acquiring and sustaining capability. For those who are listening, I think it's probably worthwhile to outline what sustainment actually is. Defence defines it as: The provision of the appropriate goods and services required to achieve readiness and sustainability goals for the life of the Defence Element. In plain English, that is capability capacity. The report says: Defence Sustainment involves the provision of in service support, including repair and maintenance, engineering, supply and replacement parts, configuration management and disposal action. Also, it's not just the support and the disposal of that capability. Sustainment can apply to platforms such (ships, aircraft, vehicle fleets), commodities (clothing, combat rations, munitions) or services (calibration, provision of maritime target ranges). It's across a very broad range of areas, and it is, as I said, a very significant sum of money from the Defence budget that's being spent each year. In 2015, when reviewing the Defence major projects report, the committee noted the size of sustainment expenditure at $5 billion per annum and recommended that, following the implementation of the Department of Defence's First principles review, the department improve how it reports on sustainment. In November 2016 the committee readopted a lapsed inquiry into Defence sustainment expenditure and on 21 June 2017 resolved to inquire into this area also, hence this report. The sustainment budget, as I said, is expected to grow year-on-year across the forward estimates to over $11.5 billion in 2020-21 and the percentage of that budget over the course of the forward estimates will average 77 per cent. This is a significant amount of expenditure and further work is needed to improve the transparency of sustainment reporting both to the public and to the parliament. This has been my mission since I have been the member for Canberra. Compared to the level of reporting across any level on acquisition in the Defence major projects report, we are underdone when it comes to actually taking a close look at sustainment spending. We've got the projects of concern, we've got the projects of interest and we've got the Defence major projects report, which is an incredibly comprehensive document. The committee had a close look at that last Friday. But the level of transparency that is applied to acquisition is certainly not applied to sustainment. Having been on this case for some time, I know that there are sensitivities. I know that the chiefs of the services have concerns about sensitivities around sustainment. I understand those concerns and I respect those concerns. I respect the fact that by taking a close look at sustainment we do not in any way want to give away what's actually happening on deployments or operations. I do not want the operational capability or the operational sensitivity to be compromised in any way. What I want is to ensure that the Australian taxpayer dollar is being spent efficiently and effectively, which is why I have been on this mission on sustainment reporting. As I said, we've been trying to get greater transparency around sustainment for some time. We are getting it gradually, and this report is just another effort towards trying to improve the transparency around that issue. It's going to be an iterative process and it's going to be a slow process; it's probably going to move at a glacial pace. But I'm pleased to report to the Australian people that we are actually getting some traction on this. We have actually improved the transparency on it, but it will take time. And it will certainly take time, a long time, before it gets to the level that I would like to see it at. We made a number of recommendations, particularly on getting a clear read across reporting documents. We made recommendations that Defence can improve on getting a clear read—getting a clear understanding of what is actually going on. For the record, I will outline here that a clear read means that: … the objectives for each project should be clearly stated at the start of the year and achievements against those objectives are reported at the end of the year. It ensures that there is consistency across all the public reporting statements. We've suggested that Defence improve the clear read on sustainment. We have also recommended … that the Department of Defence consolidate information extracted from its Corporate Plan, Portfolio Budget Statements, Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements and Annual Report in one place online in a format that allows for clear and easy scrutiny of sustainment expenditure. We made some recommendations on the Defence annual report, and we recommended: … that within six months of the tabling of this report the Department of Defence provide to the Committee: a report on progress in driving First Principles Review reforms detail of the positive changes that have been realised to date with the implementation of the First Principles Review an update on the progress of the Systems Program Offices review a report on progress of the whole-of-life costing model a report on progress to selecting a candidate to run the Major Projects Office. There was a concern that Bechtel had been engaged to provide those services, and we were assured Defence was now undertaking a competitive process to find a suitable candidate to run the major projects office. The committee, as I said, has made a recommendation on that. We also recommended: … that the Auditor-General consider reviewing the Department of Defence's new Monthly Reporting system … and: … that the Department of Defence provide a detailed progress report on behavioural changes that have accompanied improvements in internal performance reporting within six months … They're the recommendations in a nutshell. In closing I thank the committee for the work that they did in compiling this report. I thank the committee secretariat. I also thank the Department of Defence and the ANAO for their contributions to this inquiry. It is an important contribution. As I said, it is proceeding at a glacial pace, but we are gradually moving towards greater transparency and clarity on sustainment, and I say we bring it on sooner rather than later. Public Accounts and Audit Committee 43 12:56 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra by leave—I present executive minutes on reports Nos. 461 to 465 and 468 of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit. Privileges and Members' Interests Committee 43 Report 43 12:56 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I present the report of the Standing Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests on its inquiry concerning the former member for Dunkley in the 44th Parliament, possible contempts of the House and appropriate conduct of the member. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr VASTA E0D by leave—This report details the committee's consideration of two complaints relating to the now former member of Dunkley in the 44th Parliament, the Hon. Bruce Billson. The first matter was raised directly with the committee by the member for Isaacs, who wrote to the committee on 15 August 2017 querying whether the former member for Dunkley had acted contrary to the House resolutions on the registration of members' interests, specifically in respect of his association with the Franchise Council of Australia (the FCA) while he was still a member of the House. The second matter was raised on the same day, in the House, by the Manager of Opposition Business, as a matter of privilege. This matter related to whether the former member for Dunkley, by accepting an appointment as, and acting as, a paid director of the FCA whilst still a member of the House gave rise to any issues constituting a contempt of the House or any issues concerning appropriate conduct in respect of a member's responsibilities. Following the Speaker's statement in response to the complaint in the next sitting week, the House agreed to a motion moved by the Manager of Opposition Business to refer the matter to the committee. As the two matters related to the same set of circumstances, the committee considered them together. The committee received submissions from Mr Bruce Billson and from representatives on his behalf in relation to both matters. The committee received a submission from the FCA in relation to the matter referred by the House. In addition, the committee examined Mr Billson's statement of interests in the 44th Parliament. The committee considered the two complaints on the basis of the submissions it received, and through the framework provided by the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 and the resolutions of the House on the registration of members' interests. In respect of the matter relating to the registration of members' interests, the committee determined that Mr Billson had failed to provide alterations on his statement of interests relating to his engagement as executive chairman and independent director of the FCA, his receipt of payment by the FCA relating to that engagement, and on the separate issue of his receipt of payment for advisory services through Agile Advisory. The committee accepted Mr Billson's comments that he had failed to comply with the resolutions of the House due to error and oversight, and acknowledges Mr Billson's apology to the House. The committee concluded that, in the circumstances, Mr Billson's failure to comply with the House's requirement did not amount to any intention to interfere improperly with the free exercise of the authority or functions of the House, and therefore do not constitute a contempt under section 4 of the Parliamentary Privileges Act. In respect of the second matter examined by the committee, the matter of privilege referred by the House, the committee determined that Mr Billson's acceptance of payment for services to represent the interests of the FCA, while a member, was in the nature of an interest where a conflict with a member's public duties could foreseeably arise or be seen to arise. Evidence to the committee from Mr Billson was that his appointment by the FCA had no bearing on the duties that he performed as a member and that his behaviour and position on relevant issues after his appointment did not change. The FCA stated that its motivation in appointing Mr Billson was not to have him use his position as a member of the House, rather it was based on his consistent position of advocacy in relation to relations important to the FCA. The committee concluded that it did not receive clear evidence that Mr Billson had been improperly influenced in the performance of his duties as a member, nor that the FCA had intended to improperly influence Mr Billson while a member, and therefore no finding of contempt is made against either Mr Billson or the FCA. Addressing the final aspect of the reference from the House, the appropriateness of Mr Billson's conduct in respect of his responsibilities as a member, the committee concluded that Mr Billson had misunderstood his obligations to the House. The committee's view is that it would have been more appropriate for Mr Billson to wait until he was no longer a member of the House before he accepted paid employment with the FCA, and that his decision to accept the role while still a member falls below the standard expected of a member of this House. The committee has recommended that Mr Billson be censured for his conduct when he was the member for Dunkley for failing to discharge his obligations as a member in accepting payment for services to represent the interests of an organisation, and for failing to declare his personal and pecuniary interests in respect of this paid employment. The committee has also recommended that the standing orders be amended to include an express prohibition on a member of this House engaging in services of a lobbying nature for reward or consideration. The committee would like to take the opportunity afforded by this inquiry to inform members that it is the committee's strong view that it is highly inappropriate for any member of this House to accept an appointment and payment for services to represent the interests of an individual or organisation. The principle that members should base their conduct on is the primary consideration of the public interest, and they must exercise the influence gained from their public office as a member of the House, only to advance the public interest. I would like to thank the committee members for their careful and considered approach to the conduct of this inquiry. It has raised issues that are vital for the representation of members individually and as part of the institution of parliament. We were fortunate to have on the committee many experienced members with wide-ranging backgrounds, including some former ministers. I must note that we were at all times respectful of each other's opinion and that the committee has worked together, in my opinion, in an exemplary way. I would like to thank each member of the committee for the way they conducted themselves throughout the inquiry. It was a pleasure to work with you all, and may I pay special attention to the deputy chair, the Hon. Pat Conroy, the member for Shortland, for being an exceptional deputy chair and working so well with me and helping me to compile this inquiry. It would also be remiss of me not to mention the outstanding job the secretary has done, especially mentioning Ms Claressa Surtees, the Deputy Clerk; Mr Peter Banson; Ms Laura Giles; and Ms Nicola Matthews. Thank you on behalf of the committee members. I commend the report to the House. 13:05 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I seek leave to make a short statement associated with the tabling of this report. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Leave is granted. Mr CONROY 249127 I thank the House. I'm going to begin by agreeing with the chair of the committee and thanking the secretariat for their excellent work; applauding the chair's careful, deliberative and consensus-driven approach to this committee; and paying tribute to all the committee members. The House Standing Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests is, I say—and I'm biased—the most important committee in this House because it protects the autonomy, the independence and the reputation of the House of Representatives. I think this report goes to that quite directly. On the Labor side there are over 80 years of parliamentary experience in our five members. On the government side there is the Father of the House in the member for Menzies. So there's a wealth of experience, and in all our reports we make a commitment to withdraw from partisan rancour and to concentrate on what is in the best interests of this House in maintaining the reputation of the House of Representatives as the paramount heart of democracy in this country. That's why this report is so important. I want to begin by reflecting on the draft code of conduct for members of this House. It hasn't been adopted, but sections 5 and 6, I do think, guide the work of every member of this House. Section 5 is 'Primacy of the Public Interest', which states: Members and Senators must base their conduct on a consideration of the public interest, avoid conflict between personal interests and the requirements of public duty, and resolve any conflict, real or apparent, quickly and in favour of the public interest. Section 6, 'Personal Conduct', says of members: They should act at all times in a manner which will tend to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the Parliament and its Members. Now, while it is a draft code of conduct, I can say with certitude that every member of this House strives to follow those two commitments to the primacy of public interest and personal conduct in their behaviour in this House and as MPs. I regret to say that this inquiry found that the former member for Dunkley, the Hon. Bruce Billson, failed on both those counts. I say without any duplicity that I would draw the same conclusion and I'm confident the committee would draw the same conclusion if it was a Labor member, a Greens member or an independent member. The actions of Mr Billson did not meet the expectations and the standards of this House. First, on declaration of members' interests, Mr Billson failed to comply with requirements in relation to his registrable interests, and an additional failure was discovered during the inquiry. This was quite incredible. Mr Billson disclosed to the committee that he'd also failed to disclose his activity of a personal company called Agile Advisory during the conduct of this inquiry. While the committee found that this did not constitute contempt as it was an oversight rather than deliberate, it was a failure to live up to the expectations and standards of this House. Second, around the role of lobbying while a member of parliament, Mr Billson's acceptance of payment for services to represent the FCA represented a conflict of interest with his duties as a member of parliament. While there was no clear evidence that would have met the burden for contempt, it is very clear that Mr Billson generated a perceived conflict of interest. Let's be clear here: members must make decisions to avoid misunderstandings and perceived conflicts of interest. That is the finding and the strong view of the committee, and to do otherwise damages the reputation of the member in question and the parliament. It's clear that Mr Billson damaged the reputation of himself, sadly, and the parliament, by not understanding that there was at a minimum a perception of a conflict of interest. In fact, the committee expressed serious disappointment that Mr Billson continued to misunderstand his obligations throughout the process of this inquiry. The correspondence is attached to the inquiry's report. It's clear Mr Billson still does not understand that beyond an actual conflict of interest—the committee could not find that there was an actual conflict of interest, or there was a lack of evidence of such—there was most definitely a perception of a conflict of interest, and Mr Billson did not do anything to allay that perception. He should not have accepted the job he took with the FCA whilst a member. The committee found that his decision and behaviour fell below the standards expected of a member. As the chair discussed, recommendation 1 is that the House censures the former member for Dunkley for failing to fulfil his responsibilities to put the primacy of the public interest first and to conduct himself along those lines. Recommendation 2 is that standing orders be amended to include an express prohibition on a member engaging as a lobbyist while an MP. I would say that common sense would suggest that that prohibition should already be in place. I think it's long overdue that the committee has recommended that. I think this House should definitely adopt that. I will end where I began, by emphasising the bipartisan nature of this committee. There was no partisan rancour in the deliberations. I can say quite earnestly that if the behaviour we examined were undertaken by a Labor member I would be equally forthright in my criticism. These are really strong recommendations that demonstrate this committee is working effectively. We've held two substantive inquiries in the life of the parliament. This one has strong recommendations around banning lobbying whilst an MP and censuring a former member. The first one reasserted the authority and the autonomy of the chamber against the executive arm of government through the Federal Police raids conducted against the member for Blaxland. This is a very important committee doing very good work. In conclusion, I want to express my disappointment at the way Mr Billson interacted with the committee. His correspondence is there to be seen. Probably more worryingly, given the high esteem they are held in in this House, I am also disappointed in the lawyers acting on behalf of Mr Billson, MinterEllison. I think their submission is quite incredible. They reflected on the ability of this parliament—this House of Representatives in particular—to be able to manage itself. It said, 'the fractious nature of the 45th Parliament and the precarious political balance impedes this self-management', which I find to be incredibly offensive and a slur on every single member of this House. The House Privileges Committee demonstrates that parliament and the House are able to get on and do their job no matter the numbers in the chamber, because ultimately the parliament is made up of good women and men committed to advancing the public interests of this nation. I commend the report to the House. BILLS 45 BILLS Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 45

Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018

Second Reading 45 13:13 Ms BUTLER 248006 Griffith I rise to contribute to the debate on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. This is an unfair bill which attacks students and puts up further barriers to getting a university education in this country. It's not driven by reform principles; it's merely an attempt by the government to make budget savings. Consequently, I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "the House declines to give the bill a second reading because it attacks students and would undermine the fairness of Australia's world-class student loans scheme". This bill is yet another example of the Liberals' war on young people. Since they came to office, we've seen repeated attacks on universities and students through funding cuts and attempts to increase fees. It's always been part of the Liberals' agenda: cut unis and make students pay more. If it weren't for the strong opposition of Labor and the crossbench, as well as the community across this country, we would already have $100,000 degrees and real interest applied on student loans. This bill is yet another example of how the government is going after students. The changes to HELP are part of the government's mid-year economic and fiscal outlook package of cuts announced in December. Unable to get their third higher education package of cuts through the parliament, the minister and the government resorted to a grants freeze as well as changes to the HELP income-contingent loan scheme. This sneaky, reckless, backdoor cut will see $2.2 billion ripped from higher education funding. According to Labor's analysis, this means $60 million from the ACT, $736 million from New South Wales, $15 million from the Northern Territory, $436 million from my state of Queensland, $160 million from South Australia, $58 million from Tasmania, $572 million from Victoria and $208 million from Western Australia. The greatest tragedy is that the cuts will effectively kill the demand-driven system in this country. Universities Australia say that because of the cuts almost 10,000 places will be underfunded this year alone. This means nearly 10,000 Australian students could miss out on their dream of getting a university degree. These cuts will particularly hurt in the outer suburbs of Perth and Brisbane and in Central Queensland, outer Melbourne and Western Sydney. This bill proposes to enshrine the government's MYEFO attack on students. It would lower the HELP repayment threshold to $45,000 and change the way that repayment thresholds are indexed in the future. It's all designed to find savings in the budget and help the Liberals pay for their extraordinary $65 billion in tax cuts for the big end of town and the big banks. It's simply a recycling of their plans from last year, albeit with a slightly higher rate than the $42,000 rate previously proposed for the commencement of HECS repayments. Labor believes this new rate is still too low. It's still only around $9,000 more than the minimum wage. Very little work has been done on how the new payment thresholds intersect with the tax or social security systems. Young people are already faced with a range of pressures: an increasingly out-of-touch housing market; cuts to penalty rates; tax increases from this government and, in parts of the country, very high rates of youth unemployment. This bill adds to the Liberals' attack on young people. In rising to speak on this bill, I want to congratulate Labor senators for their work on the recent inquiry on this bill, led by senators Jacinta Collins and Deb O'Neill. I'm glad Labor's senators showed up—there wasn't anyone from the Greens or the Senate crossbench there to defend Australian students. I know that, at least, the Greens party contributed a dissenting report. If you look at the inquiry transcripts, submissions and reports, it's pretty clear that there is very little support in the community for this bill. I want to particularly congratulate the new president of the National Union of Students, Mr Mark Pace, for his contribution. Mr Pace said that recent data from the NUS and from Universities Australia on student finances found that two-thirds of Australian students lived below the Henderson poverty line and one in five students would regularly skip meals. Under the proposed new HELP repayment threshold in this bill, many students would have to start paying their higher education income-contingent loans back before they even graduate—that's income-contingent loans. How does this new threshold reflect private benefit from higher education when it's barely above the minimum wage? The government should also note that its changes to the HELP repayments would disproportionately impact women. The government has not put enough thought into this point. Sixty per cent of all Australians with a HELP debt are women, and two-thirds of the Australians affected by the new arrangements will be women. It was Labor that created Australia's world-class income contingent loan scheme. It was first called HECS, of course, the Higher Education Contribution Scheme, and was introduced by the reforming Labor minister for education Minister John Dawkins in 1989 and designed by Professor Bruce Chapman. It was introduced in order to fund a major expansion of the higher education system. When we introduced it, we said that it was fair that students who receive a private benefit from a university qualification should make a contribution to the costs of higher education. These changes were a result of a number of years of policy development and consultation. But how could you say that the private benefit of higher education is reached when you're earning only $9,000 more than the minimum wage? This new repayment threshold is a nonsense. Unlike the Liberals, Labor has a proud record of higher education reform. It was Labor that moved Australia's higher education system from a small elitist model to the broad high-participation model that we have in this country today. One of the greatest achievements of Labor's last period in office was our further opening up of the higher education system in this country. In fact, and as Universities Australia has recently noted, it has been HECS, now HELP, in conjunction with Labor's demand-driven funding and equity and participation scheme, that has been responsible for low-socioeconomic status undergraduate student enrolments increasing by 55 per cent, from 90,467 in 2008 to 140,462 in 2016. Indigenous undergraduate student enrolments have increased from 7,038 in 2008 to 12,320 in 2016, a growth of 89 per cent. Enrolments of undergraduates with a disability have more than doubled from 24,311 in 2008 to 50,206. And enrolments of students from regional and remote areas have increased from 110,124 in 2008 to 163,292 in 2016, that's a growth of 48 per cent. The MYEFO decision to kill off the demand-driven system will put a handbrake on opportunity in this country. A substantial amount of the enrolment growth in higher education has come from students who are first in their family to attend university, just like I was. Killing off the demand-driven system will have only a modest impact on the wealthy parts of Australia but it will hit the suburbs and regions hard, because that's where we've seen the biggest growth in university enrolments. This measure will kill aspiration. The second proposal in this bill is to introduce a loan limit on how much students can borrow under HELP. Currently, students enrolled in Commonwealth supported places have no limit to the amount they can defer through the HELP scheme. There are restrictions on the amounts that students can borrow for full-fee places. The proposal in this bill would create a borrowing limit across all of the HELP programs—the VET Student Loans scheme, HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP. While Labor is not unsupportive of loan limits operating as price signals—it's something that we committed to doing in the VET Student Loans space at the last election—we believe that the proposal in this bill would have too many unintended consequences. In a period of rapid change, we need to accept that more and more students will want to take on additional study throughout their lives. Lifelong learning is important, given the particular changes that we are facing in the nature of work and the nature of our economy. That's why Labor supports a system where students can defer the cost of further study, be it postgraduate or vocational. As our system becomes more dynamic and responsive to the changing needs of the labour market, more students will need to take various courses throughout their lives. They will need a menu of options—vocational education as well as higher education—throughout their working lives. We can't simply assume the old linear way our post-secondary education system operates will continue to serve us into the future. The proposal for a one-off borrowing limit in this bill is clearly inadequate. Even the government senators recommended an amendment to this particular change. Labor wants to see a more dynamic model, which is better designed to support lifelong learning needs, which our economy needs. Looking at the system of fees and loans in this country provides a timely reminder of the rising costs of getting a university education in Australia. Australian students already make the sixth-highest contribution to the cost of their degrees, as compared with other OECD economies. There are many full-fee courses that already go beyond the current FEE-HELP limits, and there are dozens of courses where students already pay more than $100,000. Many of the students enrolled in these courses have to ask their families for assistance to meet the fee loan gap. It's simply not good enough. As we have seen before, loan limits can act as an incentive for providers to set their fees in line with the maximum borrowing limit. Labor doesn't want to see the rise of commercial, American-style student loans in this country. This bill does nothing to address some of the recklessly high fee-setting that goes on. While a loan limit would help the government with its budget, it doesn't do anything to ensure that students can get the support that they need for affordable education, both after school and across their working lives. The jobs of the future will, of course, be very different from the jobs of today. With everybody living longer, we can expect people to have large numbers of career changes throughout their working lives. With economic transitions happening, that will also mean people being displaced from old occupations are needing to skill up for new jobs. Young people born today will enter the workforce in 2040. We must ensure that we have a post-secondary education system that is fit for purpose. That's why I was delighted to join with our shadow minister for education and training and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Tanya Plibersek, and the shadow minister for skills, TAFE and apprenticeships, Senator Doug Cameron, in announcing that Labor, in government, would undertake a once-in-a-generation inquiry into Australia's post-secondary education system. The time for an inquiry has come. It's been 44 years since the last major vocational education and training inquiry in this country. There's never been a full—holistic—whole-of-post-secondary inquiry in this country. We've certainly had a lot of inquiries in respect to higher education. We need to look at all of post-secondary education, collectively, so that we can see what we need to do to make it fit for purpose. As issues from the debate on this bill remind us, we need a system that supports lifelong learning. We also need a system that has a strong, vibrant public TAFE at the centre of our vocational offering and we need to ensure that we have a system where all students are treated equitably. I want an Australia where a poor kid is as likely to go to university as a rich kid. I also want an Australia where a rich kid is as likely to choose TAFE as a poor kid. We need to have a system where we have high-quality, high-status educational offerings in both vocational and higher education. This bill does nothing to set up Australia for the challenges and opportunities of the future. As the Mitchell Institute has said, a majority of jobs in 2020 will require a post-secondary qualification. We need to boost investment in TAFE and university to ensure that we don't get left behind in the Asian century. We can't continue to go down a path of moving more and more of the cost of education onto the student. Deputy Speaker, I know that you are well aware of this and that you have a lot of students in your electorate who have high debts already. This government, since it was elected back in 2013, has been trying to find ways to increase the debt that people carry in response to getting a higher education qualification. One of the first things this government did, after getting elected in 2013, was seek to bring in a package of 20 per cent public funding cuts for universities and full deregulation of fees for university degrees. The community, the opposition and the crossbench were able to defeat these attempts by the government to cut public funding and increase fees. The next package, of course, you'd be aware, defeated more recently, was a 7½ per cent fee increase for students, a commensurate cut to public funding for higher education, then a further cut to public funding for higher education to increase the proportion borne by students, in terms of their own private debt and, of course, the reduction of the HECS-HELP repayment threshold in that legislation. The parliament fought off these changes, the community fought off these changes, and they were successfully defeated. But now we're seeing this round of cuts. The government has bypassed the parliament. They couldn't be under any doubt about the parliament's view of their attempts to cut funding to higher education, yet that's what they're doing in this bill. They're doing it administratively, through freezes announced at MYEFO. It's $2.2 billion worth of cuts to higher education and, as I said, the measures in this bill accompanied those announcements. We can't have a situation where university gets further out of reach, where there's a failure to invest properly in TAFE and where students are left in more and more debt in order to get a higher education, particularly given most jobs in the future will need post-secondary education qualifications. The entire approach of this government to higher and vocational education in this country is wrong. It's why we oppose the government's reckless MYEFO cuts and why we oppose this unfair bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Burke DYW I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 13:28 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde In the very brief time I have before 90-second statements, it's my pleasure to rise in this House and speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. I agree with the contribution from the member for Griffith, to this extent: our higher education system is incredibly important for those who wish to, after secondary school, go on to higher education and a professional career and, equally, our vocational education training system is important in ensuring that we have the appropriate education pathways for those, as they leave secondary school, who want to follow a trade or a vocational career. I see, regularly, the opportunities that are created for those students, both through vocational education training and the pathways that they pursue with school based apprenticeships and other things, but also— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order No. 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 48 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Environmental Conservation 48 13:30 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I congratulate you on your new role, Deputy Speaker. Last week, the government completed what has been a four-year process in the largest removal of area under conservation that any government has been involved in anywhere. Some people have reported this as the largest reduction in marine conservation. There is no government in the world that has taken as much area out of conservation—on land or sea—as this government has just done. Australia has gone from being a world leader in ocean protection to being the worst in the world when it comes to removing areas from conservation. The process began under the Abbott government, and it was completed last week under the Turnbull government. The two arguments given as to why they wanted to make this change were that there had not been enough consultation and that Labor's plan had not been based on sound science. Yet their own hand-picked panel found that the science on which it was based was a sound basis and drew upon the best available information. And, when they consulted with people, they reported back that there was consultation fatigue because there had been so much consultation. Be in no doubt: this is a direct attack from this government on the future health of the oceans around Australia. The health of the Coral Sea—the cradle to the Great Barrier Reef—and the resilience of our oceans are directly threatened by this government. (Time expired) Fuel 49 13:31 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson I rise to speak about the ongoing challenge of high petrol prices in my electorate. With around 30,000 commuters in our region, they often have daily reminders when they're driving along our local roads about the price differences in nearby markets. In 2015 we launched the Robertson petrol price petition because we heard the concerns of so many local residents. Since then, we've received around 1,000 responses, including comments such as, 'It's out of control,' with claims that petrol is around 30 cents a litre more expensive in one suburb compared to another. We've heard from local business owners and we've heard from people with chronic illness who've got no option but to purchase fuel at high prices. Over the last three years, I understand the government has taken practical steps to give the ACCC the powers to investigate and, locally, we've kept fighting against high petrol prices on the Central Coast and fighting to put a spotlight, particularly, on petrol prices on the peninsula. Last week, I wrote again to the ACCC to request an update on this issue. I look forward to a reply. Sadly, Labor's approach is full of stunts. The Labor candidate—along with the state member for Gosford, according to local reports—is encouraging locals to boycott local petrol stations. But, of course, with this stunt Labor will put local jobs at risk. I call on local residents to sign our Robertson petrol price petition and ignore Labor's empty, hollow stunts. (Time expired) Makin Electorate: Pooraka Cricket Club 49 13:33 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin Yesterday, the Pooraka Cricket Club senior team won its third consecutive cricket grand final in the Adelaide Turf Cricket Association A1 division competition by very easily defeating Walkerville. In recent years, the club has dominated the competition, having only lost one game in the last three years. Last year, the club also took out premierships in all three of the A, B and C senior grade divisions. Since the club was founded in 1968, it has won 16 A grade premierships, numerous other junior and senior grade premierships, and many individual association-wide cricket awards. The club's success can largely be attributed to club loyalty from players who have stayed with the club year in, year out and to the club's commitment to junior cricket players. It could also be attributed to the leadership of the club currently coming from President Bill Kirkwood, Secretary Jan Jarrett, Senior Coach Craig Pocock, Captain Matt Rogers, the senior team players themselves, and the loyal band of ex-players and supporters. I expect to see them all again at the upcoming presentation, where I know the celebrations and the camaraderie will continue. My congratulations to all involved for the 2017-18 premiership, and my best wishes to the club for the future seasons. Climate Change 49 13:35 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson Last week Australia was treated to more shameful politicising of natural disasters by the Greens. The burnt ashes of people's homes weren't even cold before Senator Di Natale alleged Australians suffering natural disasters were bearing the brunt of some government policy. He said: In the last few days, we've seen bushfires savage Tathra, Bega and south-west Victoria. We've seen a cyclone hit Darwin. News flash for the Greens: it's not the first cyclone to hit Darwin, and bushfires are hardly new. In the century before last, even before Al Gore's grandfather was born, a bushfire in Victoria killed 12 people, a million sheep and thousands of head of cattle. In 1926 bushfires killed 60 people and damaged 1,000 properties. The Black Friday bushfires in 1938 to 1939 killed 71 people and damaged 3,700 properties. What government policy do the Greens blame for these tragedies which pre-date their climate-change religion? According to the Bureau of Meteorology, Australia has seen an 18 per cent reduction in cyclone numbers over the past 20 years compared with the 20 years prior. In the same period we've seen a 30 per cent reduction in the number of severe cyclones. The politicisation of a natural disaster is bad enough but in this case it's based on lies. Why? Because the Greens want to link everything back to coalmining in an effort to shut down the industry and destroy jobs in my region. While I'm in this place, I will call out Green lies for what they are and I will support jobs for North Queenslanders. (Time expired) Butorac, Mrs Hazel Dawn, OAM 49 13:36 Mr HAMMOND 80109 Perth I rise today to pay tribute to an extraordinary woman, Hazel Butorac OAM, who, on International Women's Day, on 8 March, was inducted into the Western Australian Women's Hall of Fame. Hazel has long been an advocate for women and is passionate about supporting marginalised people. She was honoured with a Medal of the Order of Australia in 2013 for services through a range of organisations, including the Council on the Ageing WA, Mature Adults Learning Association, Midland Women's Health Care Place, Citizens Advice Bureau, Koolkuna women's refuge, the soroptimists and a host of others. Hazel is no stranger to this place. She is a former staffer of long standing and was instrumental in the creation of the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 after finding herself in the frustrating position of being the sole typist and secretary to three male MPs and two male researchers. Ms Claydon 248181 Oh my God! Mr HAMMOND 80109 Indeed! As the member for Perth, it is an absolute privilege to have someone of Hazel's experience, competence, capacity and expertise around the place. We speak often and run into each other at all sorts of community events. She is a tireless advocate for the most vulnerable in our society as well as a font of endless wisdom. I commend Hazel for all she has been able to achieve so far and congratulate her on her induction into the WA Women's Hall of Fame. Hazel, I must say, your star continues to shine just as bright in your local community, across the state and across Australia. Well done, Hazel. Meningococcal Disease 50 13:38 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I rise today to speak about meningococcal disease. It's my melancholy duty to inform the House of the death of six-month-old Jordan Braddock of Mount Gambier. Jordan died within hours of showing symptoms of contracting meningococcal, which was later confirmed as the meningococcal B strain. As a father of two young children, I can only imagine what Jordan's parents are going through right now. I extend my deepest sympathies to Jordan's family. Jordan's death has prompted me to again speak in this place about this devastating disease and the need for a vaccine. The federal government has recently introduced the quad-strain meningococcal vaccination to the National Immunisation Program for children 12 months old. This followed a submission to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and the committee's subsequent recommendation to include the vaccine on the National Immunisation Program. This is fantastic news, but the quad strain doesn't cover the B serotype of the meningococcal bacteria. The vaccine for the B serotype, Bexsero, will not be up for consideration by the PBAC until mid-2019, when the trial in South Australia is complete. I am lobbying for a state based vaccination program in South Australia to cover our children against the disease until such time as the national program can be implemented. We know that the disease has a high rate of presentation in South Australia, with infants under two years of age being most at risk. I will keep working to ensure deaths like Jordan's are avoided. Vizovitis, Ms Georgia 50 13:39 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra Over the weekend, Canberra lost a beautiful young girl in a tragic boating accident at Moruya on the New South Wales South Coast. Georgia Vizovitis was just 13 years old. She was a year 8 student at Mount Stromlo High School. Georgia has been described as a gorgeous girl with a love for the coast. Her passions included reading, the great outdoors, good food, the beach and fishing, which makes this boat accident on the weekend even more tragic. Georgia was on a fishing trip with family and friends when the boat she was in was overturned in rough seas. They were trying to navigate the bar near the Moruya breakwall. It's a breakwall that many Canberrans would be familiar with because the New South Wales South Coast is essentially Canberra by the sea. It's where Canberrans holiday, particularly over the Christmas holidays as well as over the Easter break. This is a tragedy that will challenge the Moruya community and the New South Wales South Coast community. It's a tragedy that will challenge the strong and close community of Waramanga and Mount Stromlo High School. I know that Principal Kate Marshall and the Mount Stromlo High School community are supporting their students and staff through this difficult time. My deepest condolences go to Georgia's family, her friends, and all those who knew Georgia in her all-too-short life. My thoughts are also with the other passengers of the boat who experienced injuries. The community of Canberra sends condolences to everyone involved. APY Art Centre Collective 50 13:41 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey It's good to see you in that chair, Mr Deputy Speaker Hogan. Last Friday was a special day for the arts centres of the APY lands and their contributing artists in the far north-west of South Australia, when the APY Art Centre Collective opened its own gallery in Darlinghurst, Sydney. I was very pleased to represent Senator Nigel Scullion at the event. I thank the minister for his personal and financial support of this project. Special recognition of the work of establishing this project must go to Skye O'Mara, the CEO and, recently, the arts coordinator at one of the centres on the lands. The Indigenous Entrepreneurs Fund has provided $107,000, and another $39,000 was from the Jobs, Land and Economy Program. Indigenous Business Australia is providing a $100,000 package, including—I think, very importantly—a $49,000 loan, giving it a very business feel, if you like. There are about 3,000 people living on the lands, and very few jobs not directly reliant on the taxpayer for their existence. Basically, they are service jobs, and independent businesses are rare. The art centres are quite different. They are small business enterprises selling an article to the outside world. Currently, after production, transport and commission, artists receive 36 per cent of the face value of their proceeds. Owning their own vertically integrated marketing system would dramatically cut the costs—in particular, commission—and artists will receive 56 per cent of their sale proceeds. Increased reward for effort is a powerful and important message, and it will provide an extra 35 jobs across the seven centres. Pensions and Benefits 51 13:43 Mr WILKIE C2T Denison Pensions for retired Commonwealth public servants and some military personnel increase twice a year, in line with the consumer price index. But using this indexation is obviously flawed because such pensions, more often than not, are falling relative to the incomes of many other members of the community. It's simply not fair for some people's retirement incomes to increase by an often much smaller amount than increases to wage growth, increases to other government pensions and payments, or the rapidly rising cost of living. We all know, and economists agree, that the CPI doesn't adequately reflect the real cost of living. Indeed, in the 12 months to December 2017, the CPI increase was 1.9 per cent, but when you look at average weekly earnings over roughly the same period, the increase was 2.3 per cent. That's why the Abbott government's plans to index payments like the age pension and the disability support pension to CPI was such a disastrous policy. We're often talking in here about people on modest incomes who've worked their whole lives. It's beyond time we stopped talking and did something tangible to help these people. The government must immediately ensure that Public Service pensions and all military pensions are indexed by the higher of CPI and average weekly earnings. That's the fair way to do things. Fadden Electorate: Schools 51 13:44 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I rise in the House of Representatives to recognise the 2018 school leaders from the northern Gold Coast schools—549 outstanding young Australians from 26 local schools have answered the call of their communities to serve. It's important that we both encourage and nurture those young leaders in our society who are willing to step up. They've commenced their journey of discovery that if service is beneath them leadership is beyond them. These young Australians are learning the timeless truths that leadership starts with service. The students I'm recognising here today all put their hand up to serve their local community. This is something worth acknowledging here. These schools are: A.B. Paterson College, Arundel State School, Biggera Waters State School, Coombabah State School, Coombabah State High School, Coomera State School, Coomera Rivers State School, Helensvale State High School, Helensvale State School, Jubilee Primary School, Labrador State School, Livingstone Christian College, Lutheran Ormeau Rivers District School, Mother Teresa Catholic Primary School, Ormeau State School, Ormeau Woods State High School, Oxenford State School, Pacific Pines State High School, Pacific Pines Primary, Park Lake State School, Pimpama State Primary College, Pimpama State Secondary College, St Francis Xavier Catholic Primary School, Toogoolawa School, Trinity Lutheran College and Woongoolba State School. I've had the privilege of visiting all of these schools, and it's so pleasing to see a common theme across them of service. Congratulations to all the 2018 student leaders. I seek leave to table the names of 549 extraordinary young Gold Coast leaders who are stepping up to serve their community. Leave granted. Petitions: Seismic Testing 51 13:46 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle Congratulations, Deputy Speaker Hogan. In the wake of the Turnbull government's savage attacks on marine parks with the largest removal of conservation area ever by any government in the world, I rise today to bring to the House's attention a petition signed by 2,100 people in my electorate about plans to undertake seismic testing off the coast of Newcastle and the Central Coast. Conflicting messages from the state and federal Liberal governments about the impact of seismic testing are causing deep concern in my community. People are worried about this testing and whether it'll cause harm to local marine life and our fishing and tourism sectors. I contacted the federal minister well over a month ago seeking his assurance about the robustness of the approvals process and the safety of seismic testing, but he's yet to respond. I truly hope the minister shows my constituents—these 2,100 people—a little more respect. They deserve nothing less than a full response from this minister. The Turnbull government needs to give an ironclad guarantee that this testing won't hurt Newcastle's precious marine life, or impact on our local fisheries or the tourism industry. Nothing less will suffice. Gilmore Electorate: Relay for Life 52 13:47 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore Congratulations Deputy Speaker Hogan. I've mentioned Shoalhaven Relay for Life before, and I congratulate them again for the work they do, along with relays in Eurobodalla, Kiama and Milton. Thanks for your efforts to raise money for vital research. It's great to see the list of over 70 cancer drugs and treatments that have been added to the PBS by the federal government since the 2013 election—thanks to everyone's walking and fundraising, which have accelerated cancer research, and thanks to their letters and calls, which have inspired me to advocate on their behalf to the federal Minister for Health, the Honourable Greg Hunt. Thank you all for your efforts to get these drugs evaluated and then added to the PBS, changing the costs—sometimes from thousands of dollars—now down to the cost of a script. Since October 2013, our government has invested over $4.8 billion for these 70 new treatments to be listed on the PBS. Just a few treatments include those for malignant melanoma and in 2014 for advanced soft tissue sarcoma, bone tumour, cancer of the blood or lymph nodes, some brain cancers and prostate cancer. There are so many, it's hard to list in this really short time. But, this April, three more will be available on script: one for non-small-cell lung cancer, or NSCLC, for many of those who suffer from it; another for basal cell carcinoma, BCC; and another one for one of the T-cell lymphomas. On an equally joyous note, I welcome Polly Hill, president of the Rotary Club of Nowra, and our exchange student, Carla from Denmark. Carla Jenson is interested in international issues and how our different levels of government work. Hopefully, ours works politely today, but I've explained it's not like it normally is. (Time expired) Lalor Electorate: Flinders Street Station 52 13:48 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Congratulations, Deputy Speaker Hogan, on becoming the Deputy Speaker. I rise today touched with sadness, as I saw on Facebook a post that has alarmed me greatly, and I speak on behalf of all the residents of Werribee. Today there's a story in the Herald Sun online: 'On the nose: Commuters report noxious smell at Flinders Street Station'. But on Facebook it carries the headline, 'Worse than Werribee: Why Flinders Street Station stinks today.' I understand that reputations are hard won and easily sullied, but it is 40 years since Melbourne Water's sewage treatment plant carried noxious odours. So I rise today to correct the record for the Herald Sunand to do their journalists' and their subeditors' work for them. Werribee does not stink, as many who have commented today on Facebook have assured them. While I'm here, I would give a shout-out to one Monika Schott, who is doing her PhD research, called 'A faraway land', in which she is collating all of the stories that came from the Board of Works, as we used to know it, or 'the farm', from the 500, at its peak, families who lived and worked at the Board of Works. I'd like to encourage Monika and have her name mentioned here in the chamber for the incredible work she's doing raising our history locally. Logan House Fire Support Network 52 13:50 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Hogan, and congratulations on your elevation to the role of Deputy Speaker. I'd like to take this opportunity to commend the Logan House Fire Support Network and its founders, Louis and Christine Naumovski, who have not only worked tirelessly to support people in my electorate of Forde who have lost their homes to a fire but also campaigned for real change, which has made a real impact in the city of Logan and far beyond. Louis and Christine, with the support of a number of sponsors, have helped those who've lost everything since the devastating house fire at Slacks Creek in 2011 which claimed 11 lives. Through their support network, they have helped get families back on their feet, with care packages to help them in that short period after the fire. Their most tremendous work to date, however, was their successful lobbying in 2015 of the Queensland government to mandate photoelectric smoke alarms—an effort which resulted in world-leading legislation in 2016. Since then, in Logan, the statistics have seen a 17 per cent drop in house fires. In the south-east, there has been a 30 per cent drop in house fires. Across the state of Queensland, there's been a 22 per cent drop in house fire call-outs. These statistics are the first yearly figures released since the smoke alarm legislation was passed in parliament. I'd like to personally congratulate Louis and Christine for this tremendous result. They've helped so many people through times of hardship, and now their hard work and lobbying to save lives have paid off. (Time expired) Western Australia: PROSH 53 13:52 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand Congratulations, Deputy Speaker Hogan. At a time when this Liberal government is attacking universities and students, I am pleased to acknowledge a great student-driven institution in Western Australia known as PROSH. The 2018 PROSH was held last week, on 21 March. It was the 87th anniversary of the first PROSH, which was held in 1931. Between then and now, PROSH has raised millions of dollars for charities in Western Australia. For those who don't know what it is, PROSH is a satirical, some might say tasteless, paper written by students and sold by students— An honourable member: Better than The West. Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 That is true; it's better than TheWest—annually, on a Wednesday morning in the first semester. Sometimes there's a procession; sometimes there is not. PROSH has weathered many storms—it's learned from its errors and mistakes—but it survives and it thrives. Last week, students selling The Bitcoin Depreciation raised $50,000 for Leading Youth Forward, Orange Sky Laundry, the Samaritans and angelhands. It far eclipses the $25,000 we raised when I ran the show in 1995 for Legacy. I want to congratulation the 2018 directors, Jacob Colangelo and James Royer, also the UWA Guild of Undergraduates, and all those that signed the table last week. I also thank former PROSH directors Tim Leggoe, Simon Collins and Emmanuel Hondras, who today reminded me of some of the great PROSH titles past, such as TheWasted Austrian, ThePacker and, of course, that perennial favourite, TheWet Alsatian. I also want to thank the people of Perth for their generosity in giving so generously to PROSH over many years. Bonner Electorate: Community Projects 53 13:53 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Some of my proudest accomplishments have been securing funding for small-scale projects throughout my electorate. Despite the size of the funding, these projects still have a massive impact. I've been particularly happy to help fund projects through the federal government's Stronger Communities Program, projects that will benefit many young children and families in Bonner. I visited Manly Community Kindergarten this month to see their completed sensory space project, which has been built to provide children with a safe space. The federal government contributed over $2½ thousand dollars to this project. The sensory space is equipped with soft furnishing, soothing materials and technology to help children de-escalate when they feel upset, anxious or in need of some quiet time. The kids love it, and it's clear the funding has been put to good use. Wynnum General Gordon Community Kindergarten is another community based not-for-profit kindy that I've helped secure Stronger Communities funding for. They received a $6½ thousand dollar grant to upgrade their outdoor area with new turf and a new automatic sprinkler system. They were also able to open up their tree canopy with the funding. It's important for the children to have outdoor spaces to play and learn in, and I'm glad to be able to secure this funding for Wynnum General Gordon Community Kindergarten. Despite the small scale of these projects, they have a huge impact on the learning experiences of every child who goes through their doors and I'm passionate about fighting for them. Solomon Electorate: Cyclone Nora 53 13:55 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Good afternoon, Mr Speaker! The SPEAKER 00APG Good afternoon, member for Solomon! Mr GOSLING 245392 As you're well aware, Mr Speaker, Darwin was hit by a category 2 cyclone last Saturday. I just want to update the House on how we're going with the clean-up. There was much damage done but, thankfully—touch wood—there have been no injuries and no deaths. But thousands of people went without power—500 households, in fact, are still without power. Can you imagine that, Mr Speaker, in the heat of Darwin? No fans, no air-con and no fridges? The power and water staff are working as hard as they possibly can to restore those services and I want to thank them. I want to thank the community. I want to thank the neighbours who checked on neighbours and the strangers who checked on people that, obviously, they didn't even know. The community really pulled together. I want to thank the US Marines, the 1st Brigade and the emergency services, who've done a splendid job to make our city safe again. We had a difficult time there for several days, and we were very glad that the Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, came to visit us to see how we were going and to see whether we were getting enough federal support. Now, it is a matter of fact that it took the Prime Minister four days to even pick up the phone. However, I digress: the Prime Minister has an opportunity to redeem himself and to support Darwin with some services that we do require. Some underground power would be a good start. (Time expired) Fisher Electorate: Fisher Community Awards 54 13:56 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Last week, I held the inaugural Fisher Community Awards to recognise the individuals and organisations who are helping to make Fisher the place to be for education, employment and retirement. I can only list them today, but I'll say more about our winners in future speeches. The Fisher Educator of the Year was Simon Richardson of Chancellor State College. Our Student of the Year was Tea Carter of Kawana Waters State College, while Education Provider of the Year went to STEPS Pathways College. The Fisher Business of the Year was All Love Pest Control and Carpet Cleaning, while the Fisher Employee of the Year went to endED's Millie Thomas. Fisher Innovator of the Year went to Dr Evan Jones. The Fisher Senior of the Year was Kevin Stroud and CCSA Hall in Caloundra won Senior Community Group of the Year, while Senior Support Service of the Year went to Coastal Caring Clowns. The 'Andrew Wallace Award' for a special contribution in 2017 was won by SunnyKids for their work protecting thousands of children from domestic and family violence. It was exceptionally moving to hear our winners' stories and to feel the community spirit shown by all attendees. I hope these awards will help all locals give something back and to know that their contribution is valued by the people in Fisher. Coalition Government 54 13:58 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons The Senate is faced with a big choice this week: to look after the national interest, or to look after the interests of this government. What we're looking at is a $65 billion handout to corporations and banks—a $65 billion handout that they do not need. It's a $65 billion handout at a time when they are recording record profits; a $65 billion handout that is better invested in hospitals, in schools and in national infrastructure. This is the choice facing the Senate this week. And how does this government intend to pay for this $65 billion corporate handout? By putting up taxes for Australian workers earning less than $87,000 a year. That's what this government's agenda is: handouts for the rich, tax slugs for the workers. That's what this government does. What we heard today in this very House was an extraordinary admission from the minister about what they're doing to widows. They are taking $1,300 from widows. And how many widows are we talking about? Thirty widows, each to lose $1,300. That's this government's grand plan to pay for their $65 billion handout in corporate tax handouts: to take money from widows and to take money from workers. They should be ashamed of themselves. The SPEAKER 00APG It being 2 pm, in accordance with standing order 43 the time for members' statements has concluded. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 54 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Members Sworn 54 14:01 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received the return to the writ which I issued on 7 February 2018 for the election of a member to serve for the electoral division of Batman, in the state of Victoria, to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Mr David Feeney. By the endorsement on the writ, it is certified that Gerardine Mary Kearney has been elected. Ms Gerardine Mary Kearney made and subscribed the oath of allegiance. PARTY OFFICE HOLDERS 54 PARTY OFFICE HOLDERS The Nationals 54 14:03 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I inform the House that the honourable and hardworking member for Wide Bay has been appointed Nationals whip. MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 54 MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 14:04 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I table for the information of the House a revised ministry list reflecting changes to the ministry made on 5 March. The document read as follows— TURNBULL MINISTRY Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there is one department in each portfolio. However, there is a Department of Human Services in the Social Services portfolio and a Department of Veterans' Affairs in the Defence portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a minister in all cases. Assistant Ministers in italics are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952. Mr TURNBULL 885 I also advise that the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment will be absent from question time this week, as he is in the United Kingdom on trade and investment matters. The Minister for Health will answer questions on his behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 56 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Taxation 56 14:04 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. Working Australians are already doing it tough, with this Prime Minister presiding over the lowest wages growth on record, so how is it fair that this Prime Minister is giving a $65 billion handout to big business while slugging workers with a $300 tax increase? 14:05 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The honourable member knows very well why we are supporting reductions in company tax. The arguments were made by him very, very well here only a few years ago. In fact, he stood at the dispatch box as a minister in the Gillard government, and he said, 'Lower company taxes result in more investment, higher productivity and higher wages.' That's what he said as he made that case. And that was orthodox economics. It was absolutely accepted from both sides of politics that lower business taxes— Dr Chalmers 37998 You opposed it! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Rankin! Mr TURNBULL 885 result in more investment, higher productivity— Dr Chalmers 37998 You opposed it! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Rankin is warned. Mr TURNBULL 885 higher wages and more employment. We managed to secure, despite the ferocious opposition of the Labor Party, cuts to company tax for businesses up to $50 million, with the last group over $25 million, starting on 1 July this year. Small and medium businesses have got tax cuts under our government—overwhelmingly Australian owned, overwhelmingly family owned. And we are seeing the growth in those businesses in the jobs numbers—420,700 jobs in the last 12 months. That's the highest annual jobs growth in our history. There have been 17 consecutive months of jobs growth—the longest run of monthly jobs growth in our history. We see the highest female participation rate in our history. And 78 per cent of those 420,000 jobs are full-time. We saw last month a decline in part-time jobs overwhelmed by a much larger increase in full-time jobs. Only last week, I was at Bisalloy at Unanderra near Port Kembla, a company making the best steel in the world—who we have been defending, obviously, internationally—and that company told us how they are increasing their employment numbers as their growth continues. They're encouraged by the business tax cuts, and they are re-engaging casual workers as full-time employees. So you're seeing more full-time employment, more employment, higher female participation and the highest jobs growth in our history; that's what our economic policy delivers. We promised jobs and growth, and that's exactly what we're delivering, and the honourable member knows full well that the company tax cuts are a huge part of that, and the arguments for making them are exactly the ones he presented from this dispatch box when he was in government. Taxation 56 14:08 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore My question is also to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister advise the House how the government's plan for lowest business taxes will help generate jobs and grow wages for Australian workers and their families? Can the Prime Minister describe how alternative approaches will impact on our economy? 14:08 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question. The member for Gilmore was with me when I visited Bisalloy last week. She knows full well that so many of her constituents work at Bisalloy or BlueScope, and they know exactly how important the encouragement we're providing to business is, with more than 420,000 jobs created over the last 12 months and 17 consecutive months of jobs growth—both records. But we want to see even more jobs, and we want those jobs and skills to stay in Australia, rather than going overseas. We risk all of this without policies that support business and encourage investment because, as we know, investment creates jobs. Investment drives productivity. Investment drives the productivity that delivers higher wages, and that's why we're supporting both. Businesses will only increase investment where they have an incentive to do so, and that's why we need to have a competitive tax rate for all businesses. We've already seen this. As I said in my previous answer, for small and family businesses with up to $50 million in turnover, they are responding, they are investing, they are employing and they are paying more workers higher wages as a result. We want that same support for all businesses so that even more jobs can be created for Australians. The average full-time worker would have an extra $650 in their pockets each and every year as a result of our enterprise tax plan. We stand for lower taxes, because they create jobs and grow wages. The Labor Party, on the other hand, do not have a single policy that would encourage one business to invest $1 or hire one employee. They have no policies at all. The Labor Party have none. They practice a form of fantasy economics where you can raise taxes and increase spending and then promise Australians they will somehow be better off. Australians can see through that. They know what happens if you raise an additional $200 billion in tax, which is what Labor is proposing—the equivalent of $8,000 for every, man woman and child in Australia. Labor claims that is going to encourage economic activity. We all know what higher taxes do: they discourage investment, they discourage employment and they reduce opportunities for Australians, when we owe it to Australians to be increasing them. Whichever way you look at it, the Labor Party is against investment and it's against jobs. (Time expired) Opposition members interjecting— Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister's time has concluded. Members on my left and the member for McEwen. I don't need any help with the clock. Taxation 57 14:11 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Prime Minister. Over the last two years wages have grown by only four per cent while company profits have increased by a very substantial 32 per cent. When companies are already pocketing massive profits, which they haven't passed on to workers, why should Australians believe that a $65 billion handout to big business will mean higher wages for them? 14:12 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question. National accounts data show that over the past year private sector company profits grew by five per cent while compensation of employees grew by 4.8 per cent. So the premise of the honourable member's question is wrong. ABS business indicators data show over the past year aggregate wages and salaries, and company gross operating profits, both grew by 4.3 per cent. Even if we were to accept Labor's two-year time period, it ignores the fact that in the four years prior to that company profits have been declining. And, indeed, over the past six years compensation of employees has grown by 21.8 per cent while company profits grew by 13. 7 per cent. So the whole proposition that companies are making gigantic profits at an ever increasing rate and employees' wages are not keeping up is completely and utterly false, and the figures I've just quoted prove that very point. The honourable members opposite are now in the business of denial on the question of tax and investment. They seem to now think that higher taxes are good for investment. If we go back to the member for Lilley's 2010 budget speech, that was a cracker. We all remember he was proposing to cut company tax by one per cent. He said: Cutting the company tax rate will make Australia a more competitive destination for investment. Greater investment in capital will support higher productivity and real wage increases for Australian workers. Then he went on to say: Our key business tax reforms will increase real wages by around 1.1 per cent in the long run, putting an extra $450 a year into the pockets of workers on average earnings. So what sort of fantasy economics is it where reducing company tax increases investment, increases productivity and increases wages if it's done by a Labor government, but doesn't if it's done by a Liberal-National coalition government? This is the way in which the Labor Party has shifted from being a party that used to recognise that the private sector was important for employment to being a party that—as the Leader of the Opposition said very clearly when he met the Business Council of Australia—has declared war on business, on aspiration, on investment, and thus on jobs. (Time expired) Dividend Imputation 58 14:15 Ms BANKS 18661 Chisholm My question is to the Treasurer. Tony is a constituent in my electorate of Chisholm. His income is $32,000 from his self-managed super fund. Under Labor's retiree tax, he will lose $5,000. Treasurer, how will Labor's retiree tax hurt Australians like Tony in my electorate, and what is the government doing to guarantee the essential services that Australians rely on? 14:16 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Chisholm for her question. She is right that under the Labor Party Australians will pay more: they will pay more in higher taxes; they will pay more in higher private health insurance premiums; they will pay more in higher electricity bills; they will pay more in higher rental costs for their housing; and they will pay more as retirees, with Labor's cruel retiree tax. And Tony is no different to Alan in the electorate of Canning. He will be paying $10,000 more in the refunds, the tax refunds, he will lose as a result of what the Labor Party proposes to do. It's like others in all of the electorates on both sides of the House: people whose only crime, according to the Labor Party, is that they have gone out there and bought shares and those shares are providing them with income to pay the electricity bill, to pay their medical bill—thousands of dollars that they rely on because they went and bought shares. The Labor Party says that this is a loophole. Mr Dreyfus HWG It is a loophole. Mr MORRISON E3L It is a loophole—it's said! It is a loophole! That is what those opposite have said. Maybe they can explain this to me: why is it okay for someone on a high income to get the full value of the tax benefits of franked dividends? It's okay for them. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Isaacs and the member for Bendigo! Mr MORRISON E3L You can be earning $500,000 a year and you can get the full value of your franked dividends, but if you're earning less than $18,000 a year, if you're earning less than $37,000 a year, there's no tax refund for you under the Leader of the Opposition's plan. There's no tax refund for you because he's getting his hands in your pockets, because this Leader of the Opposition is addicted to tax, because he's addicted to spending, and nothing can control him, other than the Australian people, by ensuring that this Leader of the Opposition can never get his grubby hands on the hard-earned earnings of retirees around this country. As we have seen, this policy, announced just two weeks ago, has turned to custard in a matter of days. First, they are going to compensate people. Then they are not going to compensate people. Then they are going to compensate people again. Now, here today, they may compensate people. This policy has been an absolute dog's breakfast. The shadow Treasurer—I don't know what it's worse: the idiot who put it forward or the idiot who agreed with it. Dividend Imputation 58 14:19 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin My question is to the Prime Minister. How is it fair that under the government's policies a wealthy retiree couple would get a cash bonus from dividend imputation, despite the fact they have $3.2 million in super, own their own home, have $200,000 in Australian shares outside of their super, draw $130,000 a year in super income, receive $15,000 a year in dividend income, and pay no tax? 14:19 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The honourable member overlooks, in his question, that what his party is seeking to do is prevent any Australian—no matter what their financial status is—from getting the cash from a franking credit that they have not been able to offset against other income. The justice in allowing self-funded retirees, pensioners and people on low taxable incomes to do this is very apparent— Opposition members interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 Look at the outrage, the indignation, from the Labor Party when I make that point. I want to delve into recent history— Opposition members interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 Yes, you're right. You'll regret this. Twenty years ago—Labor's election policy in 1998— Opposition members interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 this is what the Labor Party said. They went on a unity ticket with John Howard to the election, and this was the policy: Low income older people will be able to use their imputation credits even if they do not pay tax. This will mean that they can effectively 'cash out' the value of their imputation credits and increase their disposable incomes. Mr Khalil interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wills is warned. Mr TURNBULL 885 The Labor policy went on to say, 'This reform will benefit many low-income retired Australians, including full rate pensioners, who are otherwise not embraced by the taxation system. Many thousands of pensioners, who have modest investments in public companies, currently obtain no tax benefit from the franked dividends they receive. The full value of these credits will now flow through to the pensioner shareholders. In addition, the reforms will ensure that investors, who currently pay little or no tax, will not be unfairly disadvantaged.' That was Labor's policy then. It was also the coalition's policy. The reform was legislated with bipartisan support in 2000. What was an act of compassion and fairness— Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Griffith is warned. Mr TURNBULL 885 in 1998 is now, according to the honourable members opposite, a tax rort, a loophole and a scandal that has to be put an end to— Ms Husar interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Lindsay is warned. Mr TURNBULL 885 It is an insult to hardworking Australians who've saved through their lives to be financially independent. It is robbing them. It is picking their pockets when they deserve our respect. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG Before I call the member for Indi, the level of interjections is far too high. A number of members have been warned. They know what happens next. I'm not going to raise my voice to try and compete with them. Renewable Energy 59 14:23 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. Minister, last week I was pleased to welcome you to Indi to meet with communities embracing renewable energy, pumped hydro and battery storage. You noted that there's a dramatic transformation that's taking place in Australia's energy system—a once in a lifetime transformation—as we move into the world of microgrids, demand management, rooftop solar, pumped hydro and battery storage. Would you agree that partnerships that upskill communities and build capacity can help deliver affordable, reliable and secure energy? And can the Minister please outline to the House how microgrids will provide energy stability under the government's National Energy Guarantee? 14:23 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Indi for her question. It was a real pleasure to join her and the local communities in her electorate last week, including meeting representatives from Albury-Wodonga, Beechworth, Benalla, Wangaratta and Yackandandah. In Yackandandah the local community has put in place a 90-kilowatt solar system, which will save $1 million for the community over the life of that project. We also went to the Winton Wetlands where they're looking at a 10-megawatt solar project. These are local communities who are taking responsibility for their own power generation, and in doing so reducing their power bills and helping Australia transition to a cleaner energy future. As the member rightly says, we are going through a once-in-a-century transition in our energy system, from a centralised system with traditional synchronous sources of generation to one with much more distributed generation, microgrids, renewables and storage. We are helping, through the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, to support the rollout of these projects. While I was in Indi I spoke about the $12½ million funding round the Australian Renewable Energy Agency has announced, where it will support pilot projects in local communities like Indi that bring together renewables and storage. It could be batteries or it could be, as they are looking at in this community, pumped hydro, inverters or other smart control systems. Other projects that the Turnbull government and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency continue to support include the Garden Island Microgrid, which brings together wave energy, storage and solar in Western Australia; wind, solar, batteries and reducing the reliance on diesels in Coober Pedy in South Australia; and the Lakeland Storage and Solar Project in Northern Queensland in the member for Leichhardt's electorate, which is a 10-megawatt solar and 1.4-megawatt-hour battery project. All this is coming together under the National Energy Guarantee, the recommendation from the independent Energy Security Board, which is a key opportunity that we cannot let pass to properly integrate energy and climate policy to ensure a more reliable and affordable system. Australian households will be $300 a year better off under the National Energy Guarantee than they would be under the Labor Party's plan. The Turnbull coalition government are delivering microgrids, storage and renewables, but most of all we are ensuring a transition to a more affordable and reliable energy system for those people in Indi and beyond. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 60 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:27 The SPEAKER 00APG I inform the House that joining us in the gallery this afternoon is the Sri Lankan State Minister of Foreign Affairs, accompanied by the Deputy High Commissioner to Australia. On behalf of the House I extend a very warm welcome. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 60 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Taxation 60 14:27 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Treasurer. How does a competitive tax system help promote the investment needed to build on record jobs growth and lift wages for hardworking Australians? What risks are associated with alternative approaches? 14:27 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Boothby for her question. She's pleased to be part of a government that in the last 12 months has delivered 420,000 job in the Australian economy, more than 1,100 jobs a day, a record in jobs growth. She's part of a government that over the last 2½ years has seen the unemployment rate fall, business confidence lift by 10 per cent, consumer confidence lift by 10 per cent, and investment in the non-mining sector rise by 12.4 per cent in the last 12 months. This economic plan is working. It is an economic plan that must stay the course to ensure Australians enjoy higher living standards, better wages and more secure jobs into the future. There are risks to this plan, and all those risks sit on the other side of the chamber. One of the many policies the Labor Party have been touting is their policy for higher taxes. I said in answer to a previous question that, under Labor, Australians will pay more. They will particularly pay more in higher taxes. Those taxes, to refresh everyone's memory, include a higher tax on housing. If you're one of the 32,000 nurses who own an investment property in this country, you're going to pay higher taxes. If you're out there, you've worked hard and you have been able to earn more in your life, you're one of those who are going to have to pay higher income taxes under the opposition, some $24 billion worth in higher taxes on earnings. If you're running a family business, like the member for Reid is well acquainted with, there will be $22 billion in higher taxes on you from the Leader of the Opposition. There will be higher taxes on small and medium sized businesses, but not just there; over all businesses, there will be $60 billion in higher taxes for you under Labor. You are going to pay higher taxes on your savings for superannuation, another $25 billion, as we have been discussing, and an extra $60 billion—just shy of that, at $59 billion—on retirees who will have their tax refunds swiped, stolen, taken away by the Leader of the Opposition. Now, this is the difference between the Labor Party and the Liberal and National parties. We understand, when you go out, and you go to work and you earn money, it's your money. Those opposite think they own it all when they're in government. They think a tax cut is the same as a welfare payment, and that is an indictment on every single one of them. They do not respect the earnings of Australians. They see that the earnings of Australians are all there to put in their pockets. They boast about a war chest for the election, a war chest that will be paid for by the savings and earnings of Australians and Australian business, because they are reaching deep. The leash is off this Leader of the Opposition, and he won't tax until he— (Time expired) Taxation 60 14:30 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister: How is it fair that the Prime Minister is hitting seven million working Australians with a tax increase while he's giving a $65 billion handout to big business, including a $9½ billion handout to the big banks? Mr Pyne interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister has the call. 14:31 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his question. He gives me the opportunity to continue with my consideration of the 2010 Labor budget, because this was such an enthusiastic endorsement of a relatively small cut to company tax. It was only one per cent. They actually booked a $600 million reform dividend in additional revenue as a result of it. They said here, in their budget papers, 'The government's tax plan will promote growth across the entire economy. Independent modelling of the plan indicates it will deliver a reform dividend of 0.7 per cent increase in GDP in the long run which, over time, can be expected to flow through into taxation revenue,' which is why they booked the dividend. 'The reduction in the company tax rate is expected to increase— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Shorten 00ATG On direct relevance. My question was about the 2017 government budget increasing taxes on seven million Australians. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. His question was about tax rises, company tax cuts, and the Prime Minister is talking about company tax in a policy area. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr TURNBULL 885 Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'll go on. It said, in the 2010 paper, 'The reduction in the company tax rate is expected to increase GDP by 0.4 per cent in the long run.' So that was just a one per cent cut in company tax. That's what Labor said. That's the advice they got from Treasury. They put it in the budget papers. It wasn't a political speech. It was right there, in the papers, signed by the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance, at the time. And the logic remains precisely the same. The reason we have cut company tax, up to $50 million turnover businesses and we're seeking to cut it for all businesses, is precisely the same logic that Labor advanced in 2010: it increases investment, increases productivity, increases wages and, of course, has a result in increasing government revenues. And you can see how much Labor thought it would do then. In terms of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the very simple fact is that Labor was dripping with compassion talking about the NDIS, claiming it is a great Labor enterprise and a great Labor achievement—but did not fund it. They did not fund it. You can have all of the compassion under the sun, but you cannot look into the eyes of a mother with a disabled child and say, 'I want to look after you,' and then not provide the funds to do so. So that's what we're doing with the Medicare levy, and Labor should stop their hypocrisy, stop all their bogus compassion, and get behind it and make sure that we pay for that great national enterprise of the NDIS. Economy, Dividend Imputation 61 14:34 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite My question is to the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services: Will the minister update the House as to how the government plans to grow the economy for the benefit of all Australians? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:34 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins I thank the member for Corangamite for her question. She is one of the hardest working members in this place for her constituents. She knows how important it is to drive growth, to increase investment and to boost jobs in this country. The government has already alleviated tax pressure for middle-income Australians by increasing the threshold from $80,000 to $87,000. We have cut taxes for small- and medium-sized enterprises down to 27½ cents in the dollar, although we want it to drop further to 25 per cent. And we have seen the creation under our government of hundreds of thousands of new jobs. The government wants to continue these gains in employment by legislating tax cuts for all companies. But sadly, those opposite refuse to support us. Their stance isn't based on longstanding principles. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Treasurer have previously supported company tax cuts. So, why the change of heart? Well, the Leader of the Opposition is all about tax and spend. So ferocious is his appetite to slug Australians with new and higher taxes, more than $200 billion at last count, he is willing to slip his hand in the pocket of low-income earners in this country—pensioners, part-pensioners, war widows and self-funded retirees—through his new retiree tax policy. This is a policy that takes refunds away from 1.1 million Australians, around one million of whom have got a taxable income of less than $37,000. Upon this announcement, the shadow Treasurer assured everybody that it was a well-targeted measure. Yet in the same breath he was forced to admit that more than 200,000 pensioners would suffer. Presumably, he also knows that close to 40 per cent of those pensioners are women over the age of 70—grandmothers using refunds of their own taxes to meet day-to-day living expenses or to buy presents for their grandkids. We hear rumours today that those opposite are going to change their policy, a policy that they described only a week ago as 'carefully designed, properly designed, sensible'. The fact is that Labor are snatching at the handbags of thousands of Australian grandmothers. They have lied about the impact of their policy, they continue to lie today and those Australians know that the only people who are prepared to protect their retirement income are sitting on this side of the House. We will protect those people in this country who aspire—we will protect their retirement income— (Time expired) Taxation 62 14:38 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, how is it fair that the Prime Minister is hitting ordinary workers with a $44 billion tax increase to pay for his $65 billion big-business tax cut? 14:38 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to respond. I'll answer the member with his own words, which were, as we recall, when he was talking about DisabilityCare, a scheme which is overdue in Australia. I'm glad the opposition, to give them credit, has come onboard to support it. He was referring, of course, to us when we were in opposition: It was not easy to introduce. We took it to the Productivity Commission. They gave a report on how it should be done. We did have to increase tax to pay for it, increase the Medicare levy. That's something that was very controversial when we did it but I think the right thing to do because all Australians would recognise that as a decent, compassionate nation, it is the right thing to do now. It is overdue. What a hypocrite the shadow Treasurer is, Mr Speaker! What a pathetic hypocrite! Mr Bowen DZS What are you talking about? Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 00APG The Treasurer will withdraw. Mr MORRISON E3L I withdraw, Mr Speaker. But, through you, Mr Speaker, he cannot run or hide from the fact that the shadow Treasurer, on this matter, has had more faces even than the Leader of the Opposition. They're all around; they look in every direction—every single direction! What the shadow Treasurer is seeking to do to the Australian economy is to tax it within an inch of its life—more than $200 billion in higher taxes. And I've only talked about the ones they've announced so far. I notice today that the shadow Treasurer is out there quoting Per Capita research; The cost of privilege, it's called. He basically says that a person owning an investment property—one in five police officers and 38,000 nurses—is engaged in some sort of tax rorting. If a retiree is simply getting a tax refund because of the dividend imputation system, then apparently this is a big rort. The insult from the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Treasurer is to treat these Australians with contempt and tell them that they're somehow cheating the tax system. But what he doesn't refer to in the Per Capita research today is that that research that he's referring to, which is apparently the cost of these great privileges and loopholes, includes an estimate of the cost of the CGT exemption for family homes. And, as he goes around and quotes research from the Grattan Institute when it comes to the issue of their retirees tax, let's not forget that it's the Grattan Institute themselves that want to include the family home in the assets test for the pension and also to apply capital gains tax to the family home. This Leader of the Opposition is off the leash on tax. Taxation 62 14:41 Mr ANDREWS HK5 Menzies My question is to the Minister for Small and Family Business, the Workplace and Deregulation. Would the minister update the House on how small businesses will benefit from a lower taxing economy, and whether there are any alternative positions? 14:41 Mr LAUNDY 247130 Reid I thank the member for Menzies for not only his question but also his long-held faith and belief in the small and family businesses in his electorate, some 16,500 of which are already benefiting from the Prime Minister's and the Treasurer's enterprise tax plan. The member for Menzies knows that the small and family businesses in his electorate don't exist in a vacuum. The economy is full of businesses of all sizes. And in the most recent survey, when they surveyed small and family businesses, on a ratio of six to one, they have argued that tax cuts be extended to big businesses as well. Why? Because they benefit from it because they form part of their supply chains. I mentioned the Treasurer, the finance minister and I visiting Qantas recently and talking about the 3,000 companies. And I noted that, when I did that, the member for Kingsford Smith took to Twitter and said, 'But they don't pay income tax.' No. He's obviously a fan of Alberici-nomics. They made a loss in company tax. They made a loss and they're carrying that forward, but what have they done in that period? They have taken some of that money, they've turned around, and they've invested it in their staffs' pockets. So far, since 2014, they have paid non-executive staff bonuses amounting to $220 million. Why? Because when you cut taxes—in this case, perfectly reasonably, because there was a turnaround off the back of large losses—businesses will then incentivise and bonus their staff. We are seeing it in the US across the board as we speak. That is the reality of how small and family businesses—in fact, businesses irrespective of size—conduct their operations. What is the alternative approach? On the other side of the House, they believe that the Leader of the Opposition is the best person to tell small and family businesses in this country how much of their money they can keep. Why? Because he's the best-placed person to tell them how they should spend it. He has never run a family or a small business in his life, yet he wants to determine how much they have left in their pocket—their own profit. What do they do with their profits? They reinvest in themselves, they back themselves, they take on bank debt, they hire people and they put their home on the line every day. They head off, and they're the last to pay themselves when they do this. But 1.1 million small and family businesses that made not $1 in profit last year nevertheless paid $39.5 billion in salaries to their staff. The reality is the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and we on this side of the House have a plan. We are prepared to back small and family businesses. Those opposite aren't, and I'm happy to campaign against them. Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting— Mr Howarth 247742 The member for McEwen was reflecting on the minister's family, and I'd ask that he withdraw. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Petrie will resume his seat. Pensions and Benefits 63 14:45 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond My question is to the Prime Minister. How is it fair that this Prime Minister is making it even harder for pensioners who are struggling with their power bills by cutting the energy supplement of $14 a fortnight whilst giving a $65 billion handout to big business? 14:45 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The honourable member, of course, in her seat of Richmond has many self-funded retirees and many pensioners, and I'm sure she's been getting a lot of messages about her leader's effort to double-tax hardworking Australians who've retired and saved their money. It's important to remember that the franking credit that a person on low taxable income is able to cash out is tax that's already been paid. By denying them the ability to get the cash, what the Labor Party is doing is, in effect, double-taxing people on lowest incomes. That's what they're doing. Honourable members interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 That's exactly what they're doing. Yes, they are. Absolutely. That's the effect. Let's be quite frank about it. Now, the honourable member will know I met, with the member for Cowper, a couple in their late 80s last week. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat for a second. I warned earlier about the level of interjections. I've warned a number of people. The member for Wills will leave under 94(a). A repeat of that will see further ejections. The Prime Minister has the call. The member for Wills then left the chamber. Mr TURNBULL 885 I met a couple with the member for Cowper in their late 80s—of which there would be many counterparts in the honourable member's seat of Richmond up there on the Tweed—who had very carefully saved, counting every penny. The Labor Party's policy would result in their income being reduced by 17 per cent, or about $3,500 in net terms. And do you know what their solution was—how they felt they would afford that? They would cancel their private health insurance. That's what the Labor Party, with all of its compassion, with all of its determination to chase after millionaires—that's what it's doing. The Labor Party has gone after the pockets, the purses, the bank accounts of hardworking Australians who've saved all their lives, who have complied with an encouragement to put their money into blue-chip Australian shares that pay franked dividends—a policy that the Labor Party campaigned on 20 years ago and welcomed the introduction of in 2000 by the Howard government. They're going after them. It will not hit multimillionaires with big portfolios. You know why? Because they've got income that is not franked income, because they've got rents, they've got interest and they'll offset the franking credits against that other income. The honourable members' opposite tax policy on pensioners and retirees is going to hit people on low incomes, hit the most vulnerable people— (Time expired) Infrastructure 63 14:49 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport: Will the Deputy Prime Minister update the House on the agreement reached with the Victorian government to deliver the Inland Rail? How will this project help rural and regional Australia, including creating local jobs? 14:49 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I do thank the member for Mallee, a very hardworking Victorian member. He's a passionate advocate for regional Australia, which is home to hardworking Australian families, farmers and small and medium family enterprises, as the minister, the member for Reid, just talked about—hardworking people who Labor purported to represent but now ignores. The government wants to ease the pressure on these hardworking families and create jobs for their children and grandchildren. Inland Rail is transformational. Two Fridays ago I stood on the Southern Cross railway station platform in Melbourne having just signed the first bilateral agreement, the first intergovernmental agreement, with the Victorian government. I'm looking forward to getting onboard with the New South Wales and Queensland governments. Inland Rail is a $9.1 billion Commonwealth investment and the largest rail project that the Commonwealth has been involved in for more than a century. It is a 1,700-kilometre corridor of commerce. It is transformational. It is nation-building infrastructure. Most importantly, it is job creating, particularly for regional Australia. As I said, the first intergovernmental agreement has been signed with Victoria, a state which is going to have $7 billion of additional gross state product added to it because of this corridor of commerce. I look forward to future agreements with New South Wales and Queensland. While the line doesn't directly go through Mallee, the region is going to benefit with $440 million for the Murray Basin Rail Project, brought about by the Liberal-Nationals federal government. The refurbishing of rail lines in northern Victoria will be the biggest Commonwealth contribution to freight rail in Victoria's history. The Mildura line alone carries $650 million worth of agricultural freight annually. It moves local produce safely and efficiently to port and to market. The benefits cannot be understated. We need to take advantage of the trade agreements that we've got with South Korea, Japan, China and Peru. The TPP-11 is very good. It was arranged through the Liberal-Nationals government. Those opposite talk a big game before an election, but they never deliver when they are in government, but we get on with the job of building nation-building infrastructure and of brokering free trade agreements. Just look at the job figures in February. Not only will the Inland Rail deliver jobs, so too have small and medium enterprises—thanks to the Liberal-Nationals government—17,500 in February alone. (Time expired) Pensions and Benefits 64 14:52 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How many pensioners across Australia are worse off today because of this Prime Minister's changes to the pension assets test? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my right! The Treasurer will cease interjecting. The minister will resume his seat. The Treasurer and the Leader of the House are warned. 14:53 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I thank the member for her question. I'd like to point out that since the coalition formed government in 2013, pensions have increased by $86 a fortnight for singles and about $130 a fortnight for couples. Pensions continue to rise twice a year, and the age pension is paid at the highest fortnightly rate of income support payments in Australia's social security system. On 1 January 2017, the pension assets test and taper rate were rebalanced to make the system better targeted and more sustainable into the future. Around 165,000 Australians received a higher pension as a result of changes to the assets test from 1 January 2017. This includes about 50,000 people who moved to the full pension. Around 90 per cent of pensioners are either better off or have had no change to their pension under these measures, and you supported it. Defence Procurement 64 14:54 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. Will the minister update the House on how the recent announcement to acquire 211 combat reconnaissance vehicles will not only deliver the best capability to our military but also create jobs around Australia? 14:54 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt I thank the member for Fairfax for his question. Recently, the Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence and I announced the largest acquisition in the Army's history: a $15.7 billion vehicle acquisition, the combat reconnaissance vehicles, which will protect our soldiers, offering them the best safety and the greatest lethality in the battlefield. It is a step change for the Army in its capability. After a very long process between Rheinmetall and BAE, Rheinmetall won the contract for that massive acquisition, so we are supporting our capability. It's $15.7 billion over the life of the project—$10.2 billion of that will be spent in Australia; $5.2 billion will be spent in acquisition—of which $2.8 billion will be spent in Australia. When the tender was first started, the two bidders expected to do five per cent Australian industry content. By the end of the process, they'd announced 55 per cent Australian industry content in the acquisition phase, and 70 per cent Australian industry content over the life of that project. That is $10.2 billion being put into our economy, growing jobs and growing investment. Forty businesses in the supply chain of Rheinmetall will be beneficiaries because of this government's decision to back Australian industry, high technology and advanced manufacturing. In Queensland alone, it's worth $1.8 billion in acquisition, 330 jobs and 1,450 jobs overall, and will involve companies like Allplates, DGH Engineering, Frontline Manufacturing, G&O Kert, GCI Group, Hetech, IntelliDesign, NIOA and Penske. In Victoria—of course, because all these projects are national projects—they will get $635 million in the acquisition phase alone, creating 170 jobs and involving companies like Nezkot, Supacat, Tectonica, AW Bell, Cablex, Albins, ANE, APT and Extel. The list of Australian businesses is endless, because this government is backing Australian business in defence, growing their jobs and growing our economy. We will get to two per cent of GDP on defence spending a year in advance of what we had promised. By stark contrast, under Labor they took our defence spending to the lowest level since 1938—since the last year of appeasement—at 1.56 per cent. That was the contrast. This government is delivering capability, jobs and growth in the economy. That side is using defence as something they can cut in order to give more money away. Pensions and Benefits 65 14:57 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga My question, again, is to the Minister for Social Services. Can the minister confirm that this conservative government is cutting the energy supplement for 400,000 pensioners; is increasing the pension age to 70; did a deal with the Greens political party which meant 92,000 pensioners lost their pension and left a total of 370,000 pensioners worse off; and has included cuts to pensioners in every single budget it's handed down—every single one? 14:58 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon What I can confirm to the minister is that this government— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Mr TEHAN 210911 What I can confirm to the shadow minister is that this government has, from the word go, started repairing the mess that this Labor Party left for us. We've had to make some tough decisions. You were so, so desperate when you were last in government that you put 80,000 single mothers onto Newstart. What we want to do is make sure we don't have to do that again. So what are we doing? When it comes to welfare, we're making sure we're creating 1,100 jobs a day. That means that people will go off welfare and into work. We all know that that is the best thing that we can do for people. Dr Chalmers interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Rankin will leave under 94(a). The member for Rankin then left the chamber. Mr TEHAN 210911 When it comes to pensioners, we're making sure that we do not introduce tax policies which will make them worse off. We are not going to increase taxes on part pensioners. We're not going to do it on self-funded retirees. What this government is about is making sure that we have a sustainable budget which means that we will be able to look after those who need it most. We will also make sure that we will encourage people off welfare and into work. And that is the best thing we can do. When it comes to pensioners we will not be introducing the type of policies that you opposite have just increased which will make pensioners and part pensioners worse off. All you want to do is tax, tax, tax and tax. Well, we on this side don't want to tax, tax, tax and tax. We want to make sure that we're getting people working, that we're encouraging people into work and that we're encouraging companies to employ more people. That way, we can make sure that we won't be doing to pensioners and part pensioners what you opposite would do to them if you get on this side of the chamber. Energy 65 15:01 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. Will the minister update the House on how the government is creating jobs by delivering a more affordable and reliable energy system and investing in nation-building energy projects such as Snowy 2.0? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 15:01 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Robertson for her question. I know she's deeply committed to creating more jobs for the people of Gosford, the people of Mooney Mooney and the people of Woy Woy across her electorate. She's proud to be part of the Turnbull government, which has helped create more than 420,000 new jobs over the last 12 months, more than 327,000 of which are full time. We've had 17 consecutive months of job growth—the most consecutive months of jobs growth on record—something that we on this side of the House are very proud of. Project Snowy 2.0 is a nation-building project that will create jobs in three key ways. Firstly, it will see the creation of more than 5,000 jobs in building 27 kilometres of tunnel and the new power station. We will be standing on the shoulders of giants, like the grandfather of the member for Hume, who was the chief engineer on the original Snowy project that was championed by Sir Robert Menzies and Chifley. The member for Chifley himself, whose father worked on the Snowy project, like many on that side of the House, is proud. Somebody who's particularly pleased that we're going ahead with Snowy 2.0 is the member for Eden-Monaro. Do you know what he said, Mr Speaker? He said this is an exciting project for the nation. That's what he said. So the Labor Party is supporting the Turnbull government's plan. The other way this will create jobs is by creating a big battery for the east coast of Australia. It will smooth out the volatility as more renewables come into the system. The big lesson out of South Australia's big experiment that went wrong under Labor was that as more wind and solar comes in the system, you need the backup storage, whether that is batteries or pumped hydro, and this is what Snowy 2.0 will do. The third way we will be creating jobs is by the Commonwealth now taking 100 per cent ownership of Snowy 2.0. The Treasurer has unleashed more than $6 billion for productive infrastructure in the states of New South Wales and Victoria. That's more than $4 billion in New South Wales and more than $2 billion in Victoria for roads, rail and bridges funded by the federal government in the states of New South Wales and Victoria. So Snowy 2.0 will help us not only improve our energy system but will also ensure that thousands of new jobs are created. Minister for Home Affairs 66 15:05 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left. Mr NEUMANN HVO I refer to concerns raised in the media today relating to the minister's use of his ministerial discretion to grant a tourist visa to an au pair. Was his decision based on departmental advice? If not, what prompted the minister to intervene? And will the minister undertake to provide the opposition with a departmental briefing at the earliest opportunity so the facts can be made clear? 15:05 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. At last a question from the member for Blair! Well done! Fighting away on tactics each day—finally, you've risen to the top of the pile. It is six past three. You have missed out on television but, nonetheless, it's throw the dog a bone, I guess. There are media reports around today which talk about a decision that I made in relation to a visa. There are defamatory parts of that which I'm going to address with the journalist. Our family does not employ an au pair. My wife takes very good care in my absence of our three children. We have never employed an au pair. I have instructed before that that story is completely false and yet it still continues to be published. In relation to the matter otherwise, I will release more detail which I'm putting together at the moment. As I say, it is defamatory. I won't tolerate it being printed again. I make decisions— Opposition members interjecting— Mr DUTTON 00AKI I won't! I won't have my family— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Mr DUTTON 00AKI I won't have false details, as the Leader of the Opposition would appreciate as well, about my wife and my children printed. I won't stand for it. That's the reality. I make hundreds of decisions each year in relation to ministerial discretion under the Migration Act, as has been the case with many ministers passed. There are cases brought to me by members on the frontbench and members of this parliament on a regular basis. I look at the individual circumstances around each matter. If I determine that there is an interest in me intervening in those cases, I do. In many cases I look at the particular facts. For example, the honourable shadow Treasurer—nodding away—writes to me regularly in relation to matters. If I deem the circumstances to be appropriate, I intervene. In this particular matter—again I'm happy to release further detail—I was advised at the time there were two matters, only one to which you are referring at the moment. Ms Catherine King interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Ballarat will cease interjecting. Mr DUTTON 00AKI There were two young tourists who had come in on a tourist visa and declared in an interview with the Border Force officers at the airport—I was advised—they were here on a tourist visa but intended to perform babysitting duties while here. The decision that was taken, I was advised, was that the tourist visas would be cancelled, that those two young tourists would be detained and that they would be deported. I looked into the circumstances of those two cases and I thought that inappropriate. I thought if they gave an undertaking they wouldn't work while they were here, I would grant the tourist visas and they would stay, which they did. They didn't overstay; they returned back home. Now if there are facts there you dispute or you think there is another scurrilous point you want to put, put it outside of this chamber. Western Sydney 67 15:08 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes My question is to the Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities. Will the minister update the House on how the government is delivering its commitment to a City Deal for Western Sydney? How will this process improve liveability and encourage jobs and growth in the Western Sydney region? Is the minister aware of any other alternate approaches? 15:09 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I do thank the member for Hughes, who is a strong advocate for Western and south-western Sydney. As he rightly says, on 4 March the Western Sydney City Deal was announced by the Prime Minister together with the Premier of New South Wales and the mayors of eight Western Sydney councils, reflecting the cooperation between three levels of government. This is a coordinated plan, designed to deliver long-term prosperity for the region. And there are multiple pillars of this plan—planning reforms and the release of land for housing over the next 20 years, and transport infrastructure so that the people living in that housing can be connected to jobs and other places they want to go. Of course, there is the Western Sydney Airport, a $5.3 billion investment; the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan, a $3.6 billion investment in multiple roads— Dr Freelander interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Macarthur will cease interjecting or leave the chamber. Mr FLETCHER L6B And, of course, there is a commitment to rail, a joint commitment by the Australian government and the New South Wales government to stage 1 of the north-south rail to run from St Marys to the Badgerys Creek aerotropolis, via Western Sydney Airport, and with a joint objective to have rail connected to Western Sydney Airport in time for its opening. And the third pillar is generating jobs in Western Sydney. At Western Sydney Airport itself, there will be 13,000 jobs by 2031. Then there is the aerotropolis, an urban area near the airport which will become Western Sydney's advanced manufacturing, research, medical, education and commercial hub. We're going to drive investment and attract high-value jobs. There are many other elements to the Western Sydney City Deal, including a $150 million liveability program. This is a clear plan for Western Sydney across three levels of government. But I'm asked, 'Are there other approaches?' Of course, there's Labor's 2015 plan, under which they were going to deliver 14 kilometres of rail, from Leppington to the airport, for $400 million. It's a miracle! Fourteen kilometres of heavy rail for $400 million. That shows a complete lack of understanding of how much heavy rail costs. Then we had the New South Wales Leader of the Opposition, Luke Foley, say, after the City Deal was announced, that a state Labor government would deliver the rail link faster. New South Wales Labor is claiming they would deliver a rail link faster than the coalition! This is the same New South Wales Labor that was in power from 1995 to 2001. They announced 12 separate rail projects. They delivered exactly half. We never saw the Bondi Beach rail line. We never saw high-speed rail from to Sutherland to Wollongong. We never saw the CBD to Rozelle metro. Labor has a hopeless record of delivery. We've got a plan for Western Sydney. (Time expired) Broadband 67 15:12 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway My question is to the Prime Minister: Last year, the NBN halted its HFC rollout because of ongoing problems. This year it was confirmed the cost of the HFC rollout had increased by another $310 million. Is the Prime Minister still committed to deploying his expensive HFC network to 3.1 million Australian households and small businesses or is he planning to dump parts of his HFC network for a copper rollout instead? 15:12 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question. I'd just remind the honourable member—she's obviously forgotten what I said when we were last together—that HFC stands for hybrid fibre-coax, and the coaxial cable is made out of copper. I would just make that point to the honourable member for future reference. Natural Disasters 68 15:13 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt My question is to the Minister for Law Enforcement and Cybersecurity. Will the minister update the House on the assistance the government is providing to communities impacted by natural disasters this summer? 15:13 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I thank the member for Leichhardt for his question, and I know he has concerns about the impacts of Tropical Cyclone Nora on isolated communities in his electorate. In the last two weeks we've seen nature throw her worst at many communities, here in Australia, at either end of the country. In the north we've seen two category 2 cyclones and in the south we've seen a number of communities ravaged by bushfires and floods in northern New South Wales. We know that the impact on many communities has been devastating. We saw in the north, from the cyclones, power damage and downed trees on an enormous scale. In the south, we saw destroyed homes, farms and businesses and a thousand livestock, dairy cattle, lost around the Cobden region. Yesterday and last week the Prime Minister and I were able to visit Tathra, and Cobden, in south-western Victoria, to talk to impacted communities. We saw firsthand the devastation caused but we also saw resilience, courage and selflessness. We saw communities rallying together to respond and to recover from incredible hardship. Fortunately, very fortunately, there has been no loss of life despite the devastating impacts. We know from experience that the most challenging time for these communities will be the coming days, weeks, months and, in some cases, years as they recover from these disasters. A huge thanks to the volunteers and the professional workers who provided fire and emergency services, and thanks to independent organisations—like BlazeAid, which right now is doing an amazing job in Wannon to get farmers and their businesses back on their feet. It is extraordinary work from those sorts of organisations. We thank also the ADF, because the ADF have provided over a thousand people for clean-up services in the Darwin area—alongside 50 US marines, who have made an extraordinary contribution as well. State and territory governments have primary responsibility for responding to natural disasters, but we provide support, very significant support, under the NDRRA. This is a critical role of the government and we have contributed over $11 billion for relief and recovery from natural disasters in the last decade. We expect these areas to receive support under that program as well. Our thoughts and prayers remain with the farmers, the families and the businesspeople impacted. I commend the resilience of these communities in the face of great hardship. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition on indulgence. 15:16 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong On indulgence, I rise to associate the opposition with the remarks of the Minister for Law Enforcement and Cybersecurity. It was a miracle—we sometimes use that word too easily, but I think in this case it's fairly used—when you look at the fire damage in south-western Victoria or South Coast New South Wales, or the cyclone damage in the Top End, that no-one was killed. Any of us who've been up there in the days afterwards—for example, at Tathra 100 dwellings out of 500 were destroyed—know it's a great testament to the resourcefulness of the locals and to the emergency services personnel, both volunteer and professional, that there was no loss of life. At the same time, I think it's important that this parliament records its recognition that for a lot of people the rebuilding task will seem very daunting. In the first 24 to 48 hours after these disasters there's a lot of adrenaline, a lot of attention; the media's interested; there are visits, and everyone's right there beside the people affected. But after that 24 to 48 hours, as the adrenaline subsides, there will be many of our fellow Australians who think, 'How do we start again?' The damage done will see the loss of school reports and photos, memorabilia which simply can't be replaced. The cost of rebuilding will seem daunting. I want to conclude by saying to those Australians: it is legitimate to be unsure about what to do. There is no textbook reaction in coping with this adversity. I say to those Australians: please ask for help. And, if other people see them and see how they're coping, please ask them how they're going. Recovery is an individual matter, a journey that each individual and family goes through. It's important in this place that we encourage all Australians to look after the people who've been hard hit, because the recovery will take a long time for some of our fellow Australians. Mr Turnbull 885 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER 68 QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER Billson, Mr Bruce 68 15:19 Mr BURKE DYW Watson This morning the Privileges Committee reported back on the inquiry concerning the former member for Dunkley, Mr Bruce Billson. In their report they've unanimously recommended a motion of censure from the parliament. Could you advise the House on what next steps will be taken in this instance? 15:19 The SPEAKER 00APG I thank the Manager of Opposition Business. I'm aware of the report and its recommendation. Any action on the matter is a matter for the House. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 69 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 15:19 The SPEAKER 00APG The Manager of Opposition Business has indicated to me he's been misrepresented— 15:19 Mr BURKE DYW Watson A number of times. The SPEAKER 00APG We will start with the first. You claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BURKE DYW I do. Last week the environment minister issued a statement claiming I had welcomed a supertrawler to Australia and was not responsible for it being banned. The facts are these: when the supertrawler MV Margiris first came to Australia there was no power under environmental law to refuse it entry. I introduced amendments to the House to provide the environment minister, who was then me, with the power to ban the supertrawler. Those laws were put to the House on 13 September 2012, with the member for Kooyong and the member for Flinders voting against them. Once the laws were in place I used them, and the supertrawler left Australian waters. Mr Speaker, I seek to make another personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the Manager of Opposition Business claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BURKE DYW Again, yes. The SPEAKER 00APG The Manager of Opposition Business may proceed. Mr BURKE DYW Last week on Radio National the Minister for the Environment and Energy claimed that his government was not reducing environmental protection in the oceans, on the basis that I personally had only introduced draft management plans in 2012. This is incorrect. In 2012 final management plans for marine reserves were made legislative instruments. The minister should be aware of this, as they were subject to disallowance votes and he personally voted six times that they be disallowed. On each occasion the disallowance vote failed. Mr Speaker, I seek to make another personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the Manager of Opposition Business claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BURKE DYW I do. The SPEAKER 00APG You may proceed. Mr BURKE DYW Last week the Minister for the Environment and Energy issued a statement that I had never properly introduced management plans for marine parks because they 'didn't pass the disallowance period in the Senate in 2013'. There is no such thing as a requirement for a legislative instrument to have to pass a disallowance period in order to become operable. It is law immediately and continues to be so unless disallowed. The management plans I introduced were not disallowed. Considering the minister has registered 85 legislative instruments, I would have thought he was aware of this. Mr Speaker, I seek to make another personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the Manager of Opposition Business claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BURKE DYW I do. The SPEAKER 00APG You may proceed. Mr BURKE DYW On 22 March on a Radio National report on marine parks dealing with the consultation I had personally undertaken in 2012, the Minister for the Environment and Energy, Minister Frydenberg, claimed I made the decision 'without proper consultation', and fisherman Bruce Davey stated that I had personally made the decision 'without even consulting with any fishermen'. Any claim I did not adequately consult on marine parks is false. I undertook six rounds of consultation, held 250 stakeholder meetings personally attended by over 2,000 people, and received almost three-quarters of a million submissions, which is almost six times more submissions than the minister's process received. Even the government's own hand-picked review panel found that my consultation had been extensive, with the report saying that a common initial comment from stakeholders was: 'We've already been through this. Can't we just get on with it?' With respect to the criticism made by the fisherman Mr Davey, not only did I consult with fishermen; on Sunday, 6 May 2012 in Cairns, I personally consulted with him to conduct a meeting about the marine parks. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 69 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Reports Nos 31 and 32 of 2017-18 69 15:23 The SPEAKER 00APG I present the following Auditor-General's performance audit reports for 2017-18: No. 31, Managing mental health in the Australian Federal Police, Australian Federal Police, and No. 32, Funding models for threatened species management, Department of the Environment and Energy. Ordered that the reports be made parliamentary papers. PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS 70 PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS Speaker's Panel 70 15:23 The SPEAKER 00APG Pursuant to standing order 17(a), I lay on the table my warrant nominating the honourable member for Calare to be a member of the Speaker’s panel to assist the chair when requested to do so by the Speaker or the Deputy Speaker. DOCUMENTS 70 DOCUMENTS Presentation 70 15:24 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 70 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Timor-Leste, Trade 70 15:24 Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P Curtin by leave—On 6 March at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, I signed a maritime boundary treaty with Timor-Leste, on behalf of the Australian government. The treaty is an historic achievement for Australia and Timor-Leste. We have settled a long-running dispute, established permanent maritime boundaries, and laid the foundation for a new chapter in our relationship with one of our closest neighbours. The treaty is also a landmark for international law and the rules based order. It was the result of the first ever compulsory conciliation under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, known as UNCLOS. It is an example of the value and importance of international law in resolving disputes and disagreements between states through peaceful negotiation. As we said in Australia's Foreign policy white paper released last year, Australia believes the international rules-based order is fundamental to our collective security and prosperity. I signed the treaty alongside Timor-Leste's Minister in the Office of the Prime Minister for Delimitation of Borders, His Excellency Mr Hermenegildo, or Agio, Pereira. The United Nations Secretary General, His Excellency Mr Antonio Guterres, and the Chair of the United Nations Conciliation Commission, His Excellency Mr Peter Taksoe-Jensen, witnessed the treaty signing. The Secretary-General's presence reflected the treaty's significance, both for our countries and for international law. Mr Guterres congratulated Australia and Timor-Leste for their constructive engagement in a ground-breaking conciliation. Both countries demonstrated goodwill and preparedness to compromise during negotiations. The parties, and the independent conciliation commission, recognise the outcome is fair, balanced and consistent with international law. The government has always ensured that the interests of Australia, Timor-Leste, and commercial partners are protected with respect to arrangements before the conciliation began and after it commenced. I had the pleasure of hosting senior members of the Timor-Leste government and negotiating team, members of the commission, and representatives from the Greater Sunrise Joint Venture companies at a reception held on 31 January in Sydney. In my public and private remarks to these stakeholders, I reassured them of our sincerity and desire to conclude a boundary agreement and a framework to develop Greater Sunrise in a manner which promotes the interests of all parties. The treaty provides for both countries to jointly develop the Greater Sunrise gas fields and share in the benefits. This recognises both Australia and Timor-Leste have legitimate sovereign rights as coastal states under UNCLOS. The conciliation commission worked extensively with the parties to broker a way forward on Greater Sunrise. We recognise that developing this resource will deliver significant benefits to Timor-Leste in particular. We look forward to collaborating with Timor-Leste as it works with the joint venture companies to find a commercially viable pathway to develop Greater Sunrise. Australia consulted closely with companies that have offshore petroleum investments in the Timor Sea in the lead-up to signing the treaty. The treaty's transitional arrangements will ensure certainty and security for stakeholders. The government will continue to consult with these companies to give effect to transitional arrangements and as we develop implementing legislation for the treaty. The conciliation that led to our treaty under UNCLOS's dispute resolution procedures was the first of its kind. As two democratic nations and close neighbours, our joint success through the conciliation sets a positive example for the region and the international community. The independent conciliation commission played a vital role in supporting the negotiation of the treaty. Timor-Leste and Australia each selected two conciliation commissioners and the commissioners selected the chair. As eminent diplomats, legal scholars and jurists, the commissioners played an objective, forthright and rigorously independent role. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague supported the conciliation commission, reinforcing its important role of the international legal framework to help states resolve disputes. The commission also drew on its own independent technical advice regarding the development options for Greater Sunrise. Australia will continue to be a staunch supporter of international law, including UNCLOS and its dispute settlement processes. Australia has an enduring interest in a stable and prosperous Timor-Leste, and the treaty opens a new chapter in our relations. As good friends and close neighbours, we support Timor-Leste's aspiration to achieve its economic potential. We have historical and geographical ties, and deep people-to-people links, which we will continue to nurture. We will continue our support for Timor-Leste's economic and human development. While the treaty will benefit both countries, we recognise in particular its significance for Timor-Leste. The government will work to bring this treaty into force, including by preparing implementing legislation and working with Timor-Leste and the joint venture companies on transitional arrangements. The government aims to introduce the bill later this year, following review of the treaty by parliament and its committees. I hereby table the maritime boundary treaty with Timor-Leste. I also table a copy of my ministerial statement. I now turn to the tabling of two historic trade deals: the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP-11; and the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement, along with the accompanying national interest analyses for consideration by the parliament. The TPP-11 is a very significant trade agreement which includes Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam. Remarkably, the market access commitments made under the original deal which included the United States have been honoured by all TPP-11 members, and will apply among TPP-11 members. With elimination of 98 per cent of tariffs in the TPP-11 bloc, the agreement will provide preferential access for more than A$5.5 billion of Australia's dutiable agricultural exports to TPP-11 countries. This includes expanding opportunities for industries such as beef, dairy, sugar, rice, grains, seafood, horticulture and wine. The deal will also afford new levels of market access for iron and steel products, ships, pharmaceuticals, machinery, paper and auto parts, to name but a few. Secondly, the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement, or PAFTA, complements the TPP-11. As one of the fastest-growing countries in Latin America, and with a GDP similar to the size of Vietnam, Peru represents a largely untapped market for our exporters. Under PAFTA, Peru will eliminate tariffs on 93.5 per cent of Australian goods on entry into force of the agreement and on 99.4 per cent of Australian goods within five years. The tabling of these two agreements today is evidence that the Turnbull government is delivering on its ambitious trade and economic agenda to secure the prosperity of all Australians. 15:32 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney The opposition warmly welcomes the tabling of the Treaty Between Australia and the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste Establishing Their Maritime Boundaries in the Timor Sea. This treaty establishes a maritime boundary in the Timor Sea that settles more than 40 years of uncertainty over our shared maritime border. The resolution of this dispute with Timor-Leste vindicates the strong position taken by Labor two years ago, when I urged a speedy resolution to this matter. As I said to the National Press Club in February 2016: If we want to insist that other nations play by the rules, we also need to adhere to them. Australia has a good record of acting in defence of this system, but not a flawless one. Timor-Leste suffered decades of war and starvation before gaining independence. Australia played a key role in securing that independence … It was a proud moment for many Australians, and I should mention now the role of the member for Solomon in that proud time for Australia. I also said in February 2016: The maritime boundary dispute has poisoned relations with our newest neighbour. This must change. For their sake, and for ours. The dispute put a strain on our bilateral relationship with Timor-Leste that was as unnecessary as it was prolonged. Labor also acknowledges that this treaty is a landmark with respect to both compulsory conciliation under the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention and the effectiveness of the rules based system under which the international community operates. Labor has long been committed to multilateralism and a rules based international system. We are strongly of the view that all nations benefit from acting in accordance with international norms. Labor congratulates the independent conciliation commission on its work in bringing this matter to a successful conclusion. It's a reassuring development that the work of the conciliation commission was supported by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. With our strong emphasis on constructive internationalism, Labor has long sought to draw upon the technical, scientific and legal skills of experts to provide objectivity to the resolution of such disputes. Now, of course, we need to proceed with the business of developing the Greater Sunrise gas field to the benefit of both Timor-Leste and Australia. The maritime boundary treaty is a necessary first step because it settles any uncertainty concerning the rights of both Timor-Leste and Australia as coastal states. The task now is for the joint venture companies to chart a commercially viable course to the development of Greater Sunrise and the exploitation of gas reserves in a way that is economically and environmentally efficient. Labor's pleased that the treaty's transitional arrangements will provide certainty and security to the stakeholders. It is important that the joint venture partners continue their consultations with the government as legislation to implement this treaty is prepared Turning now to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. As the opposition leader has previously said, if this agreement is good for jobs and good for Australia, then we'll support it. But, of course, this is a different agreement to the one signed in New Zealand in 2016. It has a new name: the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. It no longer has the TPP's largest signatory, the United States. It now captures just 13.5 per cent of the world's GDP and 15.3 per cent of world trade. The previous agreement, including the United States, captured 40 per cent of the world's GDP. The new agreement also suspends a number of articles of the original Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, in particular some of the more contentious clauses negotiated by the United States, such as those covering biologics and copyright. It also includes a number of new side letters. I note, for example, that New Zealand was able to secure side letters with Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Peru and Vietnam, which mean that compulsory ISDS will not apply between New Zealand and these countries. The agreement will be considered by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which will invite written submissions, hold public hearings and consult with stakeholder groups. It will make a report to the parliament as to whether this agreement is in Australia's best interests. We on this side of the chamber look forward to participating in that work. We note the increase in market access for Australian farmers—for example, beef, cheese, rice and sugar into Japan, and rice and beef into Mexico. I hope that the elimination of 98 per cent of tariffs in the CPTPP region will lead to more Australian exports and more Australian jobs. There are things in this agreement that Labor would not have agreed to. We would not have agreed to waive labour market testing for six countries, which would allow companies to bring in workers from overseas before checking if there is an Australian who can do the job. Labor doesn't believe that's fair and will seek to fix this in government. Labor also does not support the inclusion of ISDS provisions and would not seek to include them if we were in government. We would have also submitted the entire agreement to independent modelling, so that the public, the parliament and the committee would have been properly able to understand what impact this agreement will have. The government hasn't done this, despite its being recommended by the Australian chamber of commerce, the government's own Harper review and the Productivity Commission, as well as Liberal Party members of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. If we want to build public confidence in trade, we can't rely on rhetoric. We actually have to provide evidence that agreements like this one will benefit Australian workers by creating jobs and benefit Australian consumers by lowering the cost of goods. We're also concerned that there's been no independent analysis undertaken of the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement. Labor would do that; we will do it. We urge the government to do it for this and for other future trade deals. Peru is currently Australia's 53rd-largest trading partner. I went to Peru at the beginning of 2017, and I very much enjoyed my trip there. I think there's great capacity for closer relations between our nations. Labor supports high-quality trade deals that benefit Australian workers, farmers and businesses. Australia is a trading nation, and we hope that this agreement will lead to more Australian jobs and to more Australian exports. COMMITTEES 73 COMMITTEES Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition Relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island 73 Membership 73 15:40 The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 Mr Speaker has received advice from the honourable member for Indi nominating to be a member of the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition Relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. 15:40 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland by leave—I move: That Ms McGowan be appointed a member of the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Question agreed to. BILLS 73 BILLS Security of Critical Infrastructure Bill 2017 73

Security of Critical Infrastructure Bill 2017

Report from Committee 73 15:40 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's advisory report on the Security of Critical Infrastructure Bill 2017. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr HASTIE 260805 by leave—I'm pleased to present the committee's advisory report on the Security of Critical Infrastructure Bill 2017. The bill introduces new measures to protect Australia's critical infrastructure from threats of sabotage, espionage and coercion. The security of critical infrastructure is essential to the effective functioning of Australian society and provides continuous access to essential services for everyday life such as water, energy and communications. The bill will establish two key measures—a register of critical infrastructure assets and a ministerial directions power. The register will enhance Australia's capability to understand exactly who owns, controls and has access to our critical infrastructure. The directions power will enable a minister to issue a direction where existing mechanisms and cooperation cannot be used to mitigate national security risks. The committee has made 10 recommendations in its report. These recommendations focus on providing greater clarity to the public about the operation of the bill. The committee has recommended that the Department of Home Affairs review and develop measures to protect Australia's fuel supply from national security threats. Australia's fuel industry is nationally significant. Ensuring fuel supply and stock is crucial both to our defence and our domestic economy. The committee's recommendation will ensure that supply chain vulnerabilities in the fuel industry are identified and protected. To ensure the smooth implementation of the scheme, the committee has recommended the development of guidelines. These guidelines will be vital for owners and operators to understand their reporting obligations and the risk assessment process. In the interests of preserving data integrity, the committee has also recommended that the Department of Home Affairs examine the viability of developing a common data entry portal for use across Commonwealth, state and territory databases. The committee seeks to ensure that the face of the legislation and its accompanying explanatory material clearly reflects the intent of the bill. The committee has recommended amending the bill's definition of 'direct interest holder'. Similarly, the committee has recommended that the explanatory memorandum to the bill should clarify that the bill does not affect the operation of existing privacy obligations. The committee considered strengthening the bill's information-sharing provisions to ensure greater transparency of decision-making. The committee has recommended that the explanatory memorandum to the bill clarify the factors that the secretary must take into account when exercising discretion to disclose protected information. The committee compared the bill to the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2017. In August of last year, I presented the committee's advisory report on that legislation to this House. The committee considered evidence from the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. The committee has recommended that a person must be notified if they are the subject of an adverse security assessment under the bill. The recent telecommunication laws require the committee to review the operation of the scheme three years after royal assent. The committee has recommended that this bill also be subject to a review, given the similarities in powers and the national security risks that both laws are designed to manage. Finally, the committee has recommended that subject to the implementation of these recommendations the bill be passed. I commend the report to the House. DELEGATION REPORTS 74 DELEGATION REPORTS Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 26th Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum 74 15:44 Mr HAMMOND 80109 Perth I present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 26th annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum, held in Hanoi, Vietnam from 18 to 21 January 2018. I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report. Leave granted. Mr HAMMOND 80109 It gives me tremendous pleasure to present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 26th annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum, held in Vietnam from 18 to 21 January 2018. I had the great honour of participating in that delegation, which was led by Senator Williams from the other place and also included the hardworking members for Wright and Whitlam. I'm delighted to see the member for Wright here. His perseverance and tenacity in seeing this through to its end was only matched by his perseverance and tenacity in a number of the plenary sessions. The APPF is an assembly of members of national parliaments in the Asia-Pacific region which has met each year since 1993 to discuss matters of mutual concern. The issues the APPF deal with are mainly strategic, economic, social and cultural in nature. The APPF is important to the Australian parliament as a parliamentary association of members who share Australia's region. Key regional countries with which Australia has strong links send delegations to APPF meetings. These countries include Canada, China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, South Korea, Thailand, a number of Pacific island countries and, of course—not to be outdone—our wonderful hosts, Vietnam. Each conference is structured around a number of plenary sessions, working groups, and a drafting committee that considers a range of resolutions arising from the discussions. Participating countries submit draft resolutions that form the basis of the discussion sessions, and subsequent conference resolutions are finalised through consensus. The sessions were under the themes of political and security matters, economic and trade matters, and regional cooperation. Reflecting the commensurate levels of hard work done by all delegates, four draft resolutions forwarded by the Australian delegation reflected those interests of the delegation members. Senator Williams took carriage of a resolution on food security in the Asia-Pacific region. He met a number of officials from the Vietnamese department of agriculture and prosecuted the case most admirably, I must say. The member for Wright devoted much time, energy and tenacity, speaking on combating international terrorism and trans-border crime. He also chaired a working group debating regional security matters of some complexity, I must say. The member for Whitlam—again, not to be outdone—spoke very eloquently on the importance of fostering regional tourism cooperation, and also chaired a working group on economic cooperation in the region. At the forum I was most privileged to be invited to attend the regular meeting of women parliamentarians as a representative of the Australian parliament. This reflected the long tradition of advocacy by Australian delegations to the APPF to give female parliamentarians a greater say in APPF deliberations and in the region generally. I am pleased to report that the APPF unanimously passed a resolution establishing a meeting of women parliamentarians as a standing item of future APPF meetings. I also attended working party meetings and represented the delegation on the drafting committee. In comparison to the numbers in some national delegations, it's true the Australian delegation was comparatively small. But what we lacked in numbers we made up for in tenacity, dedication and attention to detail. It meant that we did have a busy schedule, contributing to as many of the sessions as humanly possible. The forum provided an excellent opportunity for us to forge links with our parliamentary colleagues in the region and to discuss the many issues we have of common concern. On behalf of the delegation, I would like to thank the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for assistance with briefing papers for the forum meetings, and for the support provided in Vietnam by the Australian ambassador and his colleagues. The Parliamentary Library also provided most useful briefing material, which all of the delegation found incredibly valuable. Special mention at this point must go to our very own Mr Catchpole, the delegation secretary, who dedicated much time and attention to ensuring the delegation was kept on track, on time and on budget and turned up to where it needed to be. And, of course, we must also thank our very hospitable hosts, the National Assembly of Vietnam. Our thanks, in particular, go to the President of the National Assembly and her staff. Our hosts were exceptionally generous in their welcome and their hospitality. It was obvious that a tremendous effort had been made to ensure the event was a success. Special mention should also be made of support staff and student volunteers who were unfailingly helpful and enthusiastic and helped make the forum a most successful event indeed. I commend the report to the House. COMMITTEES 75 COMMITTEES Public Works Committee 75 Report 75 15:50 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I associate myself with the words from the member for Perth and acknowledge the leadership by Senator 'Wacka' Williams from the other place in that delegation. On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the following reports: the first report of 2018 concerning referrals made in the year 2017 and the Eighty-first annual report (2017). Reports made parliamentary papers in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present two reports—the first is a report for 2018 and the second is the 81st annual report. The first report of 2018 looks at four proposals referred to the committee over the course of last year. The first proposal is the Engine Test Cell 1 Upgrade at RAAF Base Amberley. This involves enhancing the existing engine test cell to enable it to test the new F-35 engines, as well as the engines of the Super Hornets and Growlers. This will be the only test facility for F-35 engines in the Southern Hemisphere. The project cost estimate is $23.7 million, excluding GST. I can report to the House that that facility will also be a cost-recovery facility for other air force facilities around the Southern Hemisphere that want to come and test their engines, and we will pick up some coin out of that on cost recovery. The second proposal is for the Joint Health Command Garrison Health Facilities Upgrade Project. The project proposes to deliver 13 fit-for-purpose health centres across Australia, constructing eight new health centres and refurbishing an existing five. In making this recommendation, the committee recognises the importance of suitable health facilities in enabling defence capability. The project cost estimate is $212.5 million, excluding GST. The third proposal is JP157 Replacement Aviation Refuelling Vehicles Infrastructure Project. This project will provide new and upgraded infrastructure at 15 sites to accommodate replacement aviation refuelling vehicles, including new vehicle shelters, bunding around fuel tanks which is designed to contain fuel leaks, hardstand and roads, and fuel treatment facilities. The project cost estimate is $40.4 million, excluding GST. The final project is SEA1654 Phase 3 Maritime Operational Support Capability Facilities Project. This project will provide suitable facilities and infrastructure to support the new supply ships which will be based on the west coast at HMAS Stirling and on the east coast at Garden Island in Sydney. The project estimate is $220.5 million, excluding GST. The committee recommends that the four proposed projects should proceed. I also present the committee's 81st annual report, which reports on the committee's activities for the 2017 calendar year. In summary, it was a busy year for the committee. Twenty-four projects were reported on, with a total combined value of more than $2.03 billion. The committee also had a significant increase in medium works projects, examining 147 proposals, with a total value of $718 million. The committee held 45 meetings during the year, in Canberra and at locations around Australia. May I suggest that one of the more successful meetings we held was in the member for Griffith's electorate, where we held a public forum at the request of the member, and I think, from feedback from your constituents, the meeting was well appreciated. I'd also like to acknowledge the exceptional work that is undertaken by the secretariat. In the chamber here at the moment we have Pauline Cullen, and not in the chamber is a gentleman who is a powerhouse of work for us—James Bunce. James, we wish you the very best and a speedy recovery to get your feet back under the desk as soon as possible. Can I also say that, when we are examining projects, the committee looks for best practice in looking for value for money. In turn, when we are examining the cost of getting the committee to projects right around Australia, we will create subcommittees, and those that are situated on the west coast will often go and do inspections on projects, without any regard for what side of the House they sit on. When you sit in this Public Works Committee, your opinion is valued. There have been a number of occasions where members of the opposition have gone, as part of a subcommittee, and come back and made diligent recommendations which have been wholeheartedly accepted. I only highlight that to show the collegial spirit that exists when it comes to spending taxpayers' money and having an open, fair and transparent process. I'd like to thank my fellow committee members for all their hard work during the year of 2017. As chair, I appreciate firsthand the work of every individual and the collegial way in which we work. Their commitment and valued contribution to the work of the committee is appreciated. In closing, I want to acknowledge some of the members of the committee who will no longer sit on that committee, who have been elevated because of their exceptional skill sets. I speak of Mr David Coleman, the member for Banks, and Senator Dean Smith, from the other place, who's stepping down to take up another role. He's a former chair of this committee, and his experience will be greatly missed. I commend the report to the House. BILLS 76 BILLS Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 76

Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018

Second Reading 76 15:57 The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Griffith has moved, an as amendment, that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form 'that the amendment be agreed to'. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to. 15:57 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde As I was saying before I was rudely interrupted by 90-second statements, we do agree, across both sides of this House, in the importance of higher education and vocational education to ensure that students leaving high school have a pathway to a career that they wish to pursue. I rise today to speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 to provide a new minimum repayment threshold for the compulsory repayment of Higher Education Loan Program debts. The government is committed—and this is the importance of this bill—to a stronger, more sustainable student-focused higher education system for all Australians. The government has, over the past two years, consulted extensively on higher education reforms in order to seek to achieve this. This bill plays a key role in delivering sustainability to our world renowned student loan scheme, which is underwritten by the taxpayer. This bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 by providing a new minimum repayment threshold of $45,000. This bill also indexes the HELP repayment thresholds to CPI, instead of average weekly earnings, and introduces a limit on the amount that a student can borrow under the HELP scheme of $150,000 for students studying medicine, dentistry and veterinary science courses, and $104,440 for other students. These provisions are about ensuring a fairer deal for Australian taxpayers, who, ultimately, provide this support to students. Through consultation with key stakeholders, the government found that there was strong evidence that we needed to get the cost of higher education under control, that universities were capable of making a contribution and that the student loan program needed to be made more sustainable. It's worth noting that taxpayer funded student loans currently stand at some $55 billion, and, without changes to current policy settings, a quarter of all new loans are expected to never be repaid. The government has found that since 2009 taxpayer funding for Commonwealth Supported Places in higher education has increased by some 71 per cent, growing at twice the rate of the economy. Independent analysis from Deloitte also found that average funding per domestic student for universities increased by some 15 per cent between 2010 and 2015, while, over the same period, the cost for universities to deliver courses only increased by some 9½ per cent. Lowering the starting repayment threshold for loans to $45,000 with a one per cent repayment rate is an affordable and fair ask for students to start repaying their debt to Australian taxpayers. When the Turnbull government worked to bring the Australian people higher education reforms, the government put in the time to consult students, academics and policymakers, review more than 1,000 submissions to our discussion paper and work with a panel of experts guiding the development of this policy. The government is delivering on its promise to pursue quality and excellence in Australia's higher education sector. We're ensuring students have the support they need to succeed, while also making sure the system is financially sustainable for future generations. We want future students—our children and grandchildren—to have the same opportunities that this and other generations have had. Our reforms guarantee students will not have to pay a cent up-front and not face fee increases. Our reforms ensure the government continues to be the majority funder of higher education Commonwealth supported places on average and demonstrate that the scare campaign by those opposite, about prohibitive fees, has no validity. But we're used to that from those opposite. They sit there and they carp and complain about everything, but they never actually demonstrate anything useful to the Australian people, other than wanting to increase taxes, regulation and red tape. We've seen from their past record with the VET FEE-HELP debacle that they're not much good at managing anything either. One of the most important points I want to make about this bill is that students from disadvantaged backgrounds will continue to benefit from support through the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program, in which we're investing over half a billion dollars over the next four years. The government's reforms strike the right balance in fairness for all parties involved. The reforms will ensure our record level of investment in higher education results in better opportunities, better results for students and better value for Australian taxpayers. The government is providing record funding for higher education, with over $17 billion this year, and is supporting regional students through the $290 million in regional loading for regional campuses over the next four years, rural and regional scholarships and a new initiative around regional hubs. Australia has a world-leading higher education system that continues to provide employment and income advantages to its graduates. Our government cannot afford to be complacent and risk jeopardising these opportunities for future generations of students who also want to be able to access student loans that remove all up-front fees from higher education, facilitating their enrolments, no matter their background or their financial circumstances. Australia's higher education system is excellent and recent rankings put it as very highly regarded, on global terms. In my electorate of Forde, Griffith University's Logan campus has gone from strength to strength, with students recognising its excellent educational opportunities and convenient location. I want Griffith University at Meadowbrook to continue to prosper and grow. By working with us, students, universities and taxpayers will see this government deliver improved choices, financial stability and accountability to Australia's higher education sector. I reiterate my opening comments: it is important that we provide the opportunities for Australian students to pursue a career of their choice as they leave high school, whether that's facilitated through higher education study at university or through study at TAFE or a private college, through VET FEE-HELP. It is important that we ensure our students are given every opportunity as they seek to enter the workforce and further their careers in the future. This is in stark contrast to the approach of those opposite, who when last in government announced $6.6 billion worth of cuts to funding for the higher education sector. The coalition government is delivering a responsible suite of reforms that are fair and, importantly, seek to empower student choice. I commend the bill in its unamended form to the House. 16:06 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I reflect on a couple of things the member for Forde said earlier about the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. One is the consultation said to have been done with the sector and students. I struggle to find any support for the measures the government is trying to introduce in this bill before the House. Universities Australia has done quite a lot of study into exactly what contribution universities and students have made to budget repair, and estimates that since 2011 universities and students have contributed over $3.9 billion to the task of budget repair in this country. I agree with what Universities Australia has said, that perhaps they have contributed their fair share to budget repair in this country. This government might want to consider its tax reform and the $65 billion worth of tax cuts it's giving to large companies, as well as to individuals earning more than $180,000 a year, rather than attacking universities and students earning $45,000 a year, if they even get to do that. This side of the House does not support an attack on students, as I've suggested. This bill would attack and undermine the fairness of Australia's world-class student loan scheme. We on this side of the House, the Labor Party, have a proud record when it comes to higher education. Back in 1989 Labor introduced the first income contingent loan scheme, HECS, the Higher Education Contribution Scheme. It contributed to an expansion of higher ed in this country and was part of the foundation of our fair and accessible higher education system. When last in office we increased funding for universities from $8 billion to $14 billion a year. We introduced the demand-driven funding system, which enabled more people to go to university. This led to an increase in participation from disadvantaged students. In fact, the system allowed an extra 190,000 students to go to university. This is an important point to consider when research tells us that by 2020, in only two years, two out of every three jobs created in Australia will require a diploma or a higher education qualification. Despite this, the government introduced a bill that ignores the reality of the modern world, where further and lifelong study is essential to our economy. It is working to limit the aspirations of students and their families, denying university access to students and undermining the qualifications this country needs from its workers and workforce in the future. We need more, not fewer, people to go on to further education and gain the qualifications they need for the benefit of this country. This government has systematically attacked universities, students and education as a whole. This Liberal government has attacked higher education with a freeze on university grants—effectively a $2.2 billion cut—meaning 10,000 university places will be unfunded. So that means 10,000 fewer students at universities. We witnessed this government introduce an unfair funding regime that cut $17 billion from schools, hitting public schools the hardest. We all remember the 'not a dollar difference' campaign—well, there's a lot of difference. We've witnessed this government wallop vocational education and TAFE, with a whopping $3 billion being ripped from their funding. This government has the gall to say these cuts are necessary, while, at the same time, they can throw a staggering $65 billion tax cut bonus to the big end of town. I mean, what a nerve. We have consistently fought this Liberal government's attempts to introduce $100,000 degrees in this country, and we'll continue to fight this attempt to undermine the repayment threshold on student loans. It's known that higher student debt is a genuine barrier for low-income and disadvantaged students when it comes to study. We know these government cuts will affect students from Brand, from across the towns of Rockingham and Kwinana. We know this, yet instead of increasing participation and assistance in higher education this government is making it harder for people to study and harder for their families to support them. This is not the first attempt by this Liberal government to lower the repayment threshold for HELP. In last year's budget they tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000 a year, and they failed. We will not support this latest attempt at lowering the Higher Education Loan Program repayments to a $45,000 threshold, which is only $9,000 a year more than the minimum wage in this country. It is simply too low. It will be a millstone around the necks of new graduates who are looking to begin their working lives. This debt will be a burden to people. How can someone starting out even think of paying a mortgage or getting married, or starting a family, when their income is sequestered by student loan repayments? Add to that the increased casualisation of our entire workforce, across the professions as well as in blue-collar work, where long-time employment contracts no longer exist or rarely exist. People find it impossible to secure housing loans, even personal loans for cars and the things that everyone takes for granted. Then you add in, with your profession, a debt of this magnitude—much higher than when I went to university and paid HECS—and they have to start paying it off at $45,000 per annum from their income. Contrary to the Prime Minister's advice that people go out and buy homes for their children, in the real world—certainly in the real world of Brand—this does not happen. In my electorate, I can tell you, parents struggle with paying their bills, thanks to this government's attack on penalty rates. I can tell you that parents are struggling every day with underemployment, unemployment, rising costs of living and stagnant wages growth. I can tell you that parents are struggling to pay their own mortgages—never mind being able to help their kids buy a house. I can tell you that in the everyday world, when they finish uni, young people, students, are on their own when it comes to finding their own homes and paying for them. Another concern to be had with this bill is the impact that the proposed changes to the HELP repayment thresholds will have on women. Mark Pace, the president of the National Union of Students, has stated: 'We know from the National Tertiary Education Union's submission to this Senate inquiry that 60 per cent of all Australians with outstanding HELP debt are women and that two-thirds of the Australians who will be dragged into the debt pool with the new proposed repayment thresholds will also be women.' So I cannot support this. In conjunction with this, student debt overall is a major concern in this country. Australian students already pay the sixth-highest contribution to the cost of their degrees in the OECD. This is significant. Making it harder for students to study, we are risking participation in post-secondary education that we need for the benefit of this country and for the economy of this country. We risk being left behind the rest of the world with short-sighted punitive measures such as those in this bill. We do not want a system where students have to take out commercial loans, or their families have to take out commercial loans, in order to fund their university fees. By putting universities in a funding vice, I can only imagine that the intention of this government is to push institutions toward having to institute higher fees. We saw this happen under the Abbott government when they tried to deregulate the entire system. That's when we saw the announcement of $100,000 fees—sadly, out of my home institution at UWA. There is no equitable scenario in the agenda being pushed here. What we are seeing is the opportunity of a better future that higher education affords being taken away from those who cannot afford it. This bill is about the wrong priorities of this government. We have a government driven on giving tax cuts to millionaires—to the detriment of those in need of support. It's a government delighting multinationals with tax cuts—showering the big end of town with a $65 billion tax cut—and then getting them to write letters to crossbenchers. This is the great compact that this government has with large corporations to buy some votes in the other place—a letter. The flipside to the largesse of this government is the educational future, the employment opportunities and the standard of living for everyday people for whom university will be out of reach. Instead of breaking down barriers to higher education, this government is actively looking to build up barriers that prevent access to university. What we need to be doing as a country is investing in people and enabling them to realise their potential. We need to embrace the fairness of our world-class student loan system and we need to protect it, and we certainly should not be doing this act of destruction. I mentioned at the start of my contribution on this bill the magnitude of what universities themselves, as well as students, have done in the activity of budget repair. I'm going to read from a Universities Australia paper from April of last year, 'The facts on university funding', where they conclude: Australia's universities and their students have made a very substantial contribution to repair Australia's Budget position since 2011. They have done their bit. Any further reductions would increase financial pressures for students already under stress and put at risk the ability of our world-class universities to continue to deliver excellence in education and research—the foundation of our third-largest export industry and the bedrock of future economic prosperity. It's important to understand how universities are funded. To ignore the fact that, over the many years of universities in this country, student fees do end up subsidising research is to ignore what is true. Maybe people don't agree with that being the case, but it is the case and, until we have a greater reform of our research and science funding system and how it intersects with our higher education student payments and fees system, it will remain the case—and we need to address the world as it is. I want to chat briefly about the student experience because the bill before us will affect that. It puts the current student experience at risk, and I note that the student experience has been in decline for some time. It's a critical part of the role of universities to provide a safe and inclusive environment that enables young people—and mature age students, of course—to actively participate in the university community through clubs and societies, sporting or interest based, or culturally based focusing on international students, who provide us with our third-biggest export in this country. As costs to attend universities increase, especially for local students, and students are exposed to ever-increasing fee liability on completion of their degree, it becomes harder for student societies, student unions and guilds to attract members, participants and the volunteers that keep these groups running—groups that add so much to the life and vibrancy of university campuses around this country. In parliament today, I spoke with the Australasian Union of Jewish Students, which is celebrating its 20th year. Groups like this get together and depend on the volunteer students who can generate interest on topics. Today, they were asking parliamentarians to talk about their experiences in this place and the road to this place. Firstly, I'd like to thank those students for their terrific work and what they're doing, and for organising for 60-odd members of the Union of Jewish Students to be here in the House today. But these kinds of groups are at risk when people can no longer afford the time because they have to work ever-increasing hours at their jobs, which pay less because penalty rates are cut, so that they can, in some way, contribute to their education because their parents are unable to support them, or they're simply not able to move out of home—all the things that seem to go along with a university education, or did once. I'd also like to thank Ariel Zohar for the invitation to speak to the Australasian Union of Jewish Students today. There are other institutions that are important across universities. At the university I studied at, unbelievable fundraising activities took place. These groups face the very real challenge of students no longer being able to participate in them. I think of the university camps run at the start of each year for disadvantaged children across Western Australia. It's been going for a long time, but it's increasingly challenging for those groups to have students involved because of the pressures that the costs of education are placing on what we might think of as not study time but, nonetheless, a valuable part of the student experience at universities in Australia. These institutions and international societies—the Association of Malaysian Students and the Singapore Students' Association—of course, are very important in the system in Western Australia, as they are where our educational exports come from. The highest number of Singaporeans outside of Singapore reside in Perth, and a lot of that is off the back of Singaporeans having come down from Singapore to study in Perth because it's close to their home. And so I thank all those students who participate, who help to welcome new international students to our shores and who make them feel welcome at our campuses. Obviously, many of us in this chamber have been to orientation days. Recently, I was at Murdoch University and Curtin University, and whilst I did say hello to the Liberal clubs, of course I stayed and said hello to the Labor clubs. I would like to shout out to some good people who are engaging with local students about getting involved in talking politics: Lewis Whittaker, Kai Donaldson, Erin Horrigan, Chris Lesiter, Jay Wood, Conor McLaughlin and Braydon Wagstaff. Over at Curtin, a great institution where I went with the member for Kingsford Smith, we talked about the Australian republic and the move for an Australian head of state. We had the great support of Jason Lawrence, Beck Bogdan and Bridget Edwards. There will always be students who can do it and who will do it, but I think it's time that all governments laid off students at universities in their passion for budget repair. We know that budget repair is critical. We support that, but these people—students and universities—are not the people to use to correct the budget. 16:21 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I rise to speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. I thank the member for Brand for her contribution, and heartily endorse her work with the Australian Republican Movement to make sure we get some progressive change there. I want to say up-front that Labor opposes this legislation. I feel strongly about the measures that the Turnbull government is attempting to legislate in this bill. I begin with a bit of history, both personal and national. I taught English, geography and a few other subjects in state and Catholic schools for 11 years. I have two sons, one in grade 4 at a state school and the other in grade 8 at a Catholic school. I was also a union organiser for private schools for a couple of years. I'm very passionate about the education of my own children—although neglecting them often by coming to Canberra—the education of all children in Moreton and the future of education in Australia. There is a quote from Confucius that I like to use when talking about this topic. It says, 'If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for 10 years, plant trees. If your plan is for 100 years, educate children.' Clearly, as a nation we should be planning for 100 years, but, instead, this bill before us is an unfair piece of legislation that attacks students and undermines the fairness of our world-class student loan system. In 1989 Labor introduced the Higher Education Contribution Scheme. It was the first income contingent loan scheme, and would become the foundation of Australia's fair and accessible higher education system. I do declare up-front that I did not pay HECS in my first qualification to become a teacher. That was a different time, and it is unfair that someone in my generation got the benefits of free education coming through under Whitlam and the like. Nevertheless, Australian Labor brought in these changes, based on the belief that it is fair and reasonable in the current economic climate that students should contribute to the cost of their public education to the extent that they obtain a private benefit from such studies. It enabled many young people who would otherwise not have gone to university to gain a tertiary degree. It gave them an educational opportunity. I know that as the first of 10 people in my family, raised by a single mum, to obtain a higher education qualification. It is not always an easy or direct path to university education, but we, as a nation, should be making it easier, not harder, for people. There are many examples of Australians who have gone on to make extensive contributions to society after taking a more meandering road, shall we say, to their educational attainment. Our country is far better off for their having made those sacrifices and taken those brave decisions. After becoming a teacher, I became a lawyer. I went through night school while I was teaching, and I saw how difficult it was. But I would like to point out two particular lawyers who work in the legal system. One is the Chief Justice of the High Court, the Hon. Chief Justice Susan Kiefel, a Queenslander. Chief Justice Kiefel left school at 15 after completing grade 10. She completed her secretarial training at the Kangaroo Point Technical College in Brisbane and worked as a secretary for a variety of companies, including a building society and an exploration company, before working for a group of barristers. While working she completed her secondary schooling and then began studying law. I think the Chief Justice has done all right for herself—being Chief Justice of the High Court—all things considered and by any measure. Another example that many in this chamber would know is my friend, the Queensland Attorney-General, the Hon. Yvette D'Ath. Yvette left school at 15 and worked in clerical and hospitality positions. Eventually, she put herself through night school while continuing to work and raise a family. The Attorney-General of Queensland obtained a Bachelor of Laws from QUT and she is now Queensland's first law officer—a great success in anyone's eyes—and is well loved by many in this chamber. They're just two examples. There are many other people, who may not be as well-known as the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General of Queensland, who for whatever reason have not thought that tertiary education was something they could or should attain when they finished high school but who have later obtained a higher qualification and achieved great things. HECS and, more recently, the HECS-HELP scheme, along with other measures designed to encourage university participation, have successfully boosted university attendance by minority groups, including first-in-family tertiary students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds and Indigenous students. In particular, participation for students with a disability has increased by more than 106 per cent; Indigenous students—an increase of 89 per cent; low-SES students—increased by 55 per cent; and regional and remote students by more than 48 per cent. One would think that the National Party—those supposed champions of the bush—would be doing all they could to support this legislation. Instead, they bend over and let it go through on behalf of the Liberal Party. The MYEFO package of $2.2 billion of cuts is the out-of-touch Turnbull government's fourth attempt since coming into office to cut universities and make students pay more. At Christmas the Turnbull government froze university grants effectively ending demand-driven funding. Also announced were the measures contained in this bill which seek to enact a number of changes to Australia's world-class income contingent higher education loan scheme. This legislation sets a new repayment threshold for HELP from 1 July 2018, starting with a new minimum repayment of $45,000. It aligns indexation of HELP repayment thresholds to CPI instead of average weekly earnings. It introduces a new combined loan limit on how much students can borrow under HELP, including VET student loans, HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP. The new limit would be $104,000, or $150,000 for students studying medicine, dentistry or veterinary science. It also makes changes to the Student Financial Supplement Scheme and its repayment thresholds. This legislation is unfair, out of touch and a complete rip-off for students. Students should not be looked at as cash cows for budget repair—the very same budget that is handing out $65 billion to large corporations, particularly banks and multinationals. We know that higher student debt and the potential for significantly earlier repayment are genuine barriers to study for low-SES, disadvantaged and regional students who may need to travel for study—so extra hurdles in front of them. These students are less likely to be able to rely on parental support during university or the early years of their careers—yet another reason this policy will cause those from certain backgrounds the most suffering. We should be doing all that we can to increase participation in higher ed, not making it harder. If we don't boost participation, we risk being left behind compared to the rest of the world. Universities should never be only for the elite. We need our brightest to be given opportunities, not just those who are the most well-heeled. Universities should be melting pots of society, bringing all parts of our community together—the bush and the city; Indigenous and non-Indigenous; and rich and poor. They should be bringing people together to research and make discoveries that will make all our lives better and develop the industries and jobs of the future. This bill is another episode in the sorry saga of this government trying to gut education in Australia, whether it's in schools, vocational education or at universities. Last year, the Turnbull government tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. That was just one of the measures in what was a fundamentally unfair LNP budget. It was the same budget that saw the big business tax giveaway to the top end of town blow out to over $65 billion. Labor joined with students around Australia and fought to stop this measure being implemented by the Turnbull government. Now it is proposing a new minimum threshold of $45,000, but it's still too low. Labor believes the current repayment rate is about right. We don't want to make students repay their debts right when they're starting a career, trying to start a family or save to buy a house. This is yet another example of the Turnbull government failing to act to make Australia fair. Labor's proposal to limit negative gearing will give young first home owners a chance to compete in this market. Recent analysis revealed that low- and middle-income areas of Australia will be hurt most by Prime Minister Turnbull's $2.2 billion of university cuts. Western Sydney, western and outer Melbourne and outer metro Brisbane and Perth are all being hit particularly hard. When Labor uncapped university places these areas saw a huge increase in the number of students attending university, because that's where the demand was. Statistics show that participation in higher education in outer suburban and regional areas still lags behind the wealthier inner urban areas. I've said in this place before that your bank balance or your parents' bank balance should not affect your ability to go to university; it should be your intellect, not your postcode, obviously. Labor opened the door to higher education for hundreds of thousands more Australians, but the eternally out-of-touch Prime Minister Turnbull has slammed that door shut. It's estimated that up to 10,000 people could miss out on a place at university this year and next year, because of Prime Minister Turnbull's cruel cuts. This is a sorry blow to the many year 12 graduates who studied so hard in the hope of getting into university but now might not be able to enter. Since the cuts were announced before Christmas, there have already been reports of some universities turning away students and cutting programs. This bill puts higher education further out of reach for Australians. In my own community, Griffith University is set to lose $92 million. I oppose this bill on behalf of all university students at all universities, but particularly the more than 13,000 students who attend Griffith University in my electorate. I was at Griffith University on the weekend for a citizenship ceremony as part of Harmony Day. It was a joint venture with the World Arts and Multi-culture Inc. I'm wearing the tie that Professor Martin Betts, from Griffith University, gave me to show my support for Griffith University. I also give a shout out to Lewis Lee who emceed a wonderful event on the weekend. The Higher Education Loan Program, referred to as HELP, is the cornerstone of Australia's higher education system. In a submission to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee inquiry into this bill, Universities Australia, the peak body representing the university sector, recommended that the government not set the minimum repayment threshold below a level that reflects a reasonable graduate earnings. A number of other submissions to the Senate committee inquiry raised concerns about the possible impact of a lower HELP minimum repayment threshold on access to higher education and graduate living conditions. The NUS and the Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations have collaborated on a campaign called Bury the Bill to oppose this piece of legislation, stating it: …condemns lower-earning graduates to pay back their student loans when barely earning minimum wage. That's right, the government's proposed repayment threshold is only $9,000 more than the minimum wage. Another submission, this time by the NTEU, raises significant questions about whether this government has bothered to fully understand the impact this change to HELP repayment thresholds will have on women. In their submission they analysed data obtained from the ATO showing that 60 per cent of people with a taxable income and an outstanding HELP debt are women. The same data also showed that the taxable income of these women was significantly lower. So not only are the majority of HELP recipients women, they are also earning less than their male counterparts. It is a real double whammy, made worse by the Turnbull government's further increase in the repayment burden in a system that is already skewed against women. The Australasian Council of Deans of Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities argued in its submission that the measure will have a disproportionate impact on graduates of humanities, arts and social science courses. They often take a longer time to establish their careers and are more likely to be women, resulting in periods of lower earnings. The Equity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia, in their submission, suggested the limit: … may impact negatively on students who incurred a VET student debt as a pathway to higher education. In addition, the method of determining the loan limit is not explained, and may have implications for students accessing Start-up loans. Likewise, Science and Technology Australia raised concerns about the impact on those entering university from VET pathways and then undertaking further training to become teachers, especially in science, technology, engineering and mathematics—the industries of the future creating the jobs of the future. Labor believes in fairness for all Australians. Labor believes in everybody having a fair go. Labor believes in all Australians being able to achieve their potential. That is why Labor opened the door to university for hundreds of thousands more Australians. But Prime Minister Turnbull has slammed that door in the face of young Australians who dreamt of a university education. The Turnbull government is ripping $436 million from Queensland universities. Griffith University, in my electorate, will have $92 million ripped from their funding. The Turnbull government's cuts to universities have effectively reintroduced a cap on the number of uni places, taking us back to the dark days of the Howard era. We should be supporting our young people to strive hard and let them get ahead. Some young people in my electorate who will now be prevented from enrolling in university will have worked hard throughout their schooling in the hope of going to uni, but they've had their hopes dashed by an uncaring Turnbull government. The Turnbull government have their priorities wrong. They're keen to make life easier for big business by giving away $65 billion in tax, but at the same time they're prepared to prevent our children from receiving a quality education, dashing the hopes of these young people, these smart people, these people who will create the jobs of the future. These proposals, coupled with the other MYEFO higher education cuts, raise significant questions and cast doubt over the future of the demand-driven funding system. They take a swipe at the ability of HELP to genuinely increase access and participation in tertiary education. That is why I do not support this legislation. (Time expired) 16:36 Ms LAMB 265975 Longman I'm proud to be part of the party that stands up for education. In Labor, we believe in education. It's why Labor's been fighting for strong educational outcomes for Australians for many years. I don't believe investment in education is something we should be having to fight for, of course. We should be just fighting for what's right, for what just makes sense for the future of our country, for what all of the research says is a good idea, both in educational outcomes and as an investment in the future of Australia. But fighting for education is what we need to do with this government, because this Liberal-National government is doing whatever it takes to undermine every single educational system in Australia, from early childhood education all the way to tertiary studies. What we know is that families with young children will be affected by the government's planned childcare package, which will see 2,239 families in my electorate worse off, 2,239 families whose children will have reduced access to affordable early childhood education. Families with school-aged children will suffer the brunt of the Liberals' $17 billion cut from schools and, once you're out of school, young people are faced with a $3 billion cut to vocational education and training. For those who would rather go to university, they will have to endure a $2.2 billion cut to unis. The University of the Sunshine Coast, which has just begun its first semester operating at the Caboolture campus, will be hit with a $34 million cut. I've been having a number of conversations with the USC staff, who are worried about the impact of cuts on their existing operations and on their grand plans for the future for our region. These cuts are disgraceful, and they are in stark contrast to how we on this side of the House see priorities. When Labor were last in government, we lifted investment in universities from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion in 2013. The steps that Labor took opened the doors of universities to 190,000 more Australians, many of whom became the first in their family to go to university. This was a great step forward, but the conservatives are determined to stand in the way of progress, and they're seeking to do this today with a bill that directly attacks students seeking to further their studies. It attacks students and undermines the fairness and integrity of Australia's world-class student loans scheme, the Higher Education Loan Program, or, as we know it, HELP. Any changes to the HELP scheme need to be considered and evidence based. I'd like to point to a quote from Ms Catriona Jackson, the Deputy Chief Executive of Universities Australia. She said: … the first principle—the first thing you must keep in your mind when you're changing this fundamentally important scheme—is to do no harm. In last year's budget we saw the government attempt to compel students to start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. That's barely more than the minimum wage. That failed, thank goodness, and unsurprisingly so, because Australians value people who seek to further their education. That's why, we know, the Liberals are trying again with a slightly higher repayment threshold. It's $45,000 this time but it's still far too low. In fact, as the ACTU have stated, it's a mere $9,000 more than the minimum wage. The point of these loans isn't to churn someone through a degree and be done with them; it's to give them an opportunity to set themselves up with a career that will benefit them, benefit their families and, of course, benefit the country. Students should not have to repay all of their debts in their first, low-paying job after university, especially not when the cost of living has grown to such exorbitant heights under this government. We must do all we can to increase participation in higher education, not make it harder to access. It's already hard enough for a student from a low-SES or disadvantaged background to access higher education. For many students in Longman, this is a genuine barrier. If you're already struggling to get by—maybe you've suffered a pay cut through the government's cuts to penalty rates or maybe you're already working two jobs to help support your family—your capacity to go to university is already severely limited. I'd like to further pick up on that limitation when it comes to women. The National President of the National Union of Students, Mark Pace, stated to the inquiry of the Education and Employment Legislation Committee into the bill: We know from the National Tertiary Education Union's submission to this Senate inquiry that 60 per cent of all Australians with outstanding HELP debt are women and that two-thirds of the Australians who will be dragged into the debt pool with the new proposed repayment thresholds will also be women … There's already enough day-to-day stress. Adding yet another financial burden would certainly take its toll. Let's be very clear: the government made no significant case in this Senate inquiry for a change to HELP beyond some budget savings. As I mentioned, the University of the Sunshine Coast have just started up their Caboolture campus in my electorate of Longman, and they're doing their part to ensure that disadvantaged students have a pathway into tertiary education. Earlier this month I facilitated conversations between staff at the USC and a number of our special assistance schools in the area. We discussed how we could get our disadvantaged students interested in tertiary education—how to open up a pathway and help get them there. What was pretty clear at that roundtable was that the changes proposed by the government will have a devastating effect on getting disadvantaged students to engage in tertiary studies. Experts have warned time and time again that if Australia does not boost participation in post-secondary education there is a strong chance that we will be left behind by the rest of the world. It is estimated that about 10,000 people could miss out on a university place again next year because of the Turnbull government's cuts. This will affect people in the regions, particularly in areas like Narangba and Caboolture. It will hit students in these areas the hardest. These areas are already lagging behind the wealthier, inner-city urban areas when it comes to participation in higher education. Now, with all the cuts the Liberals have forced upon TAFE and the vocational education sector, it's not like there are many opportunities left to turn to if you're a student in my electorate. But what makes it even worse is that the reason that the Turnbull government is pursuing these cuts is to give a $65 billion handout to big businesses. I find this truly, truly disgraceful. I also find it disgraceful that Pauline Hanson, who likes to claim she's a friend of battlers, has sold them out once again. After conspiring with her dear friends in the coalition here, Senator Hanson has agreed to throw $65 billion worth of taxpayer money at banks and big businesses. She's agreed to throw that money, while, at the same time, that will force the government to see universities like the University of the Sunshine Coast face $34 million worth of cuts in their aim to educate students, and we'll see $600 million worth of cuts to TAFE. That's what will happen. When Labor win the next election, we will be putting Australia back on track. What you'll see is a government taking education seriously and investing in the future of this country, right from early childhood education through to tertiary education and TAFE. We'll be bringing Australia back to a position where we don't need to rely on so many 457 visa workers, for example. We'll be able to employ locally. The Liberals and One Nation seem to think that the answer to a shortage of workers skilled through university or TAFE is to look overseas. Well, it's not. That's simply a bandaid solution. It does nothing to move more Australians into work, and it does even less to prevent this issue continuing into the future. Senator Hanson's big-business-tax-cut sweetener, as we know, was 1,000 apprenticeship places. That barely scratches the surface. Under this government, we've seen 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships lost. That's right. So what we've got here is a One Nation vote in the Senate that will cost this nation $65 billion worth of tax cuts for banks and big businesses in return for less than one per cent of the number of apprenticeships that have been lost under this government. That's what it will cost. But I can tell you that Labor's commitment to reversing the government's cuts to TAFE and training will take a huge step forward, as will the 20,000 fast-tracked apprenticeships for people facing redundancies or whose jobs have been lost, and our revolutionary national inquiry into postsecondary education will bring it all together. Within our first 100 days of government, we will examine every aspect of the vocational and higher education systems, and we'll make sure that they have the resources and systems in place to best assist Australia's economy and society. Investing in education always pays off. Whether we're talking about early childhood education or schools or we're talking about TAFE, vocational education or our universities, it always pays off. By any other name, investing in education means investing in people. It's investing in Australians. What we know are cruel changes that the government want to pass show that they're too busy throwing money at big business to look ahead. I'd like to invite the government—any government member they like—to come out to my electorate. Come to Caboolture and visit some of those special assistance schools with me. Come and talk to those young students from disadvantaged backgrounds, the ones who are looking for a pathway, those who, even before turning 18, are struggling to get by and have struggled to get by. I visit them quite regularly because, whether it's Horizons College or Alta-1 or YJET, they're doing some really great work. So I visit them quite often. They're inspiring young minds to believe in themselves, to give themselves some aspiration in life to do better for themselves and their families, not just to accept hardship that's been dished out to them but to strive for something more. That's why we're having these conversations with the University of the Sunshine Coast: to give them that pathway. We want them to look at tertiary institutions—like, as I said, the University of the Sunshine Coast or maybe, if they want to head into Brisbane, QUT or UQ—and just know that that's not out of reach for them. So I invite any government member to come and talk to these students at any of those schools. Ask them about the impact of these changes and what effect not having that pathway would have on them. Ask them if watering down our world-class student loans makes it easier for them to get into university. I openly give this offer, because I'll tell you what those opposite will hear if they come out. They'll hear students unanimously saying changes to HELP are anything but helpful to them. We're not just talking about school leavers. I'd like to extend that invitation. Come and speak to some of the students that are in their 30s and 40s and for whatever reason didn't get the opportunity or didn't take that pathway and now want to. Come and talk to them about how the government's changes to HELP will affect those people who want to create a better future for their families. The other thing those opposite will hear is about cutting funds to TAFE. They'll hear just how those TAFE funding cuts are affecting students and children that might want to head down that pathway. Those opposite need to stop looking up at big business. Instead, we need them to look forward—and look forward to our students and to investing in their education. If they do that, they'll see that investing in people is the fastest way for our country to go forward into our future. Thank you. 16:51 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson I rise to speak against the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 because it is a blatant attack on Australian students. This bill stands to undermine the fairness of our nation's student loan scheme. Once again, my colleagues and I stand in this House railing against the Turnbull government's unfair and inequitable policies, which rip funding away from the most vulnerable to pave the path for the big end of town. This legislation stands against everything we know to be vital to encourage post-secondary education. It throws up yet another roadblock for the socioeconomically disadvantaged. It is a disincentive to the lifelong learning all progressive Australians know will be necessary to build the agile, smart workforce needed to futureproof our nation's industries and economy and to keep pace on the global stage—something the Prime Minister repeats over and over again as he ties our students' hands behind their backs. As it stands, the bill sets a new minimum repayment threshold of $45,000, which is just $9,000 above the minimum wage. It introduces a new combined loan limit, capping the amount students can borrow to cover their tuition fees. In these two points alone, there are two clear disincentives to post-secondary study. Those coming into the workforce on entry-level wages are often at a stage in life where they're trying to plan for a family or save for a home, and they are going to be slugged with extra financial imposts they can ill afford. Placing a limit on the amount students can borrow across their lifetime will really greatly hinder their ability to adopt the long-term theoretical, academic and practical skill development we know will be vital as technology changes what we do and, more importantly, how we live. In typical fashion, this bill is all about saving the Turnbull government money, and a lot of it. The changes to programs including VET student loans, HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP will save the government $345.8 million in fiscal balance across four years. Changes to the Student Financial Supplement Scheme will claw the government back an additional $32.3 million in cash balance across four years. Of course, those two amounts alone will very neatly cover the Turnbull government's $65 billion tax breaks for big business. But what's the real cost to our country? I am a proud alumnus of the University of Newcastle. I was born in the regional town of Heddon Greta, and I'm fortunate I came through my tertiary years at a time when education was truly accessible for all Australians. I started in 1989, the first year of HECS. I was happy to contribute to pay my bit, but now things aren't so rosy. Australian students in the year 2018 already make the sixth-highest contribution to their university fees in the OECD. I know many families in my electorate—and there is profound socioeconomic disadvantage in some of these areas—where an erosion of the existing student supports will mean post-secondary education becomes nothing more than a pipedream. And, being first in family to go to university, I understand just how powerful that can be. These are areas where unemployment rates outstrip the national average, where youth joblessness is at crisis point, where people struggle to pay their electricity bills and where public transport is non-existent or so intermittent it might as well be useless. We know beyond doubt that higher debt is a massive disincentive for lower socioeconomic and disadvantaged students considering further education. They don't want that millstone around their neck. We also know that, in this time of global economic transition, we need to invest in people. We need to build lifelong learners who embrace change and accept that growth and development are the only guarantee of future success. Why then are we making it harder for people to get post-secondary qualifications? Why are we making it more expensive to be smarter? It is just crazy economics. If we can for a moment take a break away from the Turnbull government's budget-centric view of managing our nation, there are many, many ways we could take a holistic approach towards encouraging post-secondary education. Earlier this month, I met with Professor Caroline McMillen, the outgoing Vice-Chancellor of the University of Newcastle, and Leah Anderson, from the Tomaree Business Chamber, who also happens to be the Port Stephens Woman of the Year. We were discussing the barriers to post-secondary education faced by young people in Port Stephens. You may not have heard of Port Stephens, Deputy Speaker, but I imagine you have heard of Nelson Bay, which is the heart of this blue-water wonderland. It's an idyllic place for a beach getaway, but if you're a young person it can feel like the end of the earth. There is literally one road in and the same road out. There's only public transport via bus. The services are infrequent and the trip to Newcastle is long. Connectivity is a massive disincentive for students, jobseekers and even employees. There is a steady bleed of established professionals out of the area. It's blatantly obvious, then, that offering young people transport so that they can access training, education and even employment would make a massive difference to their lives, their futures and our economy. As Deputy Chair of the Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation, I have sat in on a great many hearings across our country, hearing from people in our regional and rural communities about the issues they face. Whilst each area is diverse and boasts its unique set of opportunities and challenges, many could be cut and pasted from one town to the other. The big issues include connectivity, whether it be physical connection through public transport or internet connection through our failed NBN. I note the shadow minister sits at the table. She has worked so tirelessly for people across the nation who are just screaming out for decent connectivity. Educational opportunities are also going begging, as is quality health care. These are the things that people want in regional and remote parts of Australia. We must get these fundamentals right from day dot if we're going to level the playing field and ensure more young Australians get on a pathway to success earlier in their lives, especially if we'd like them to take up places in regional and rural Australia. Australia must do everything it can to support its young people, and the Turnbull government must really end this war that they seem to be waging on our youth, making it so hard. Young people are the very future of this nation, at every level and in every way. We must facilitate, encourage and enable, not throw up roadblocks and disincentives at every turn. Universities Australia and the National Union of Students found that in 2012 two-thirds of Australian students lived below the Henderson poverty line and one in five students regularly skip meals. How can the Turnbull government, with any conscience, now lower the student loan repayment threshold? In many instances, these young people have worked in casual, low-paid positions to fund their education. Then, when they finally graduate and embark on their new career, they are immediately slugged with loan repayments. It just isn't fair. It wasn't fair when the government proposed an income threshold of $42,000, and it is not fair under the $45,000 threshold that this bill prescribes. This short-sighted approach from a government that trumpets its economic nous really is quite ludicrous. Experts warn Australia risks being left behind if it doesn't boost participation in post-secondary education. Instead of accepting this truth and stepping up to re-examine and re-invigorate our current model in favour of something that truly reflects the current landscape, this government continues to cut and cut and cut. We need to build, build and build something new, something that is built to meet the needs of this era, something that is built to meet the needs of the future, something that spans the whole of the post-secondary sector. It needs to be dynamic, it needs to be responsive to a changing system and it needs to happen quickly. The systems in place are not well equipped for lifetime learning, and this bill's cap on loans further restricts that potential. It is yet another example of the Turnbull government's myopic focus on the budget. This government is more concerned about the numbers on a page year to year than the long-term economic prosperity of our nation and its people. I have a long-held passion for encouraging industries in my electorate to diversify and adapt to economic and technological change. I've been inspired and educated by many in the lower Hunter who work every day towards these goals. I'm proud to be part of the Hunter Youth Transition Advisory Group, and I commend to you an organisation called Youth Express, which facilitates young people's transition from education to employment and builds bridges between students and industry. Similarly, Alesco Senior College, which has campuses in two towns in my electorate—Raymond Terrace and Nelson Bay—is doing great things for young people in my area. Alesco is passionate about filling voids, not reinventing the wheel. It creates a place for young people who, for a variety of reasons, have opted out before completing their secondary education. Alesco gives them another chance, another pathway, another choice. The University of Newcastle has three fantastic enabling programs. There is one geared towards Indigenous students; one called Open Foundation, which builds a bridge to university for those who did not achieve a TER; and one called Newstep. These are exceptional programs that change lives and in turn change our economic and social fabric. The University of Newcastle is also actively exploring innovation hubs in collaboration with local industry. There is a highly successful hub at Williamtown, which benefits from synergies with the defence and aerospace industries. I know other businesses are keen to explore the potential for similar hubs in the Hunter. These are all great examples of ways that we can create educational opportunities for our young people and encourage post-secondary study, all while working with industry and really capturing true innovation. The government could be encouraging these wonderful initiatives. It could be funding our schools and giving them the resources to allow them to more actively engage with our local government and business chamber representatives to learn where our economy is headed. Educators could learn where the new jobs are likely to be and create educational opportunities based on these scenarios. Instead, the Turnbull government has cut school funding by $17 billion. The government could be exploring initiatives such as satellite campuses for our tertiary institutions. Instead, people such as Professor Caroline McMillen are dealing with the fallout of the federal government's $2.2 billion in budget cuts. What of vocational education and training? What of it, indeed. Under this government, we have seen nearly $3 billion cut. That translates into 140,000 apprenticeships and trainees lost since the Liberals took the reins. That is 140,000 opportunities for people to better their skills and their lives. I will vote against this government's proposed changes to Australia's student loan scheme. I stand with Labor. Under a Labor government real and meaningful reforms were delivered to students pursuing higher education. Labor believes a fair and accessible higher education scheme must include income contingent loans, and that is why when in 1989 we introduced HECS as one of many reforms, it was broadly welcomed. People knew it was a fair system. We lifted Australia's investment in universities from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion in 2013. In more recent times Labor's equity and participation measures, including demand driven funding and HECS-HELP, transformed our tertiary education system. History proved Labor's measures worked: 190,000 more Australians were able to go to university. Many were the first in their families, as I was, to achieve that level of education. Universities Australia research shows marked improvement in the participation rates of students from underrepresented or disadvantaged groups. Between 2008 and 2016 the number of domestic undergraduate students with a disability rose by 106.5 per cent, Indigenous student numbers went up by almost 90 per cent, the number of students of low socioeconomic status increased by 55.3 per cent, and the number of students from regional and remote areas went up by 48.3 per cent. The world is changing quickly, and our policies must keep pace with those changes. We must look to the future and invest in our people if we are to help our young grow into smart, agile, lifelong learners who will innovate and adapt to survive this changing technological landscape. Without this investment right now, Australia will be left behind. 17:06 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney I rise to speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. At its core these amendments ensure the sustainability of our student loan system, recognised as one of the most generous in the world. The bill introduces a new set of repayment thresholds for student loans, changes indexation arrangements for repayment thresholds, amends the order of repayment of some student loan debts and introduces a combined lifetime loan limit for taxpayer funded student loans. I support these amendments because I understand the importance of a tertiary education and want to ensure future generations have the same opportunity I had. Like the previous speaker, I was the first in my family, and one of only a handful at my high school, to go to university. It was a privilege to receive my university education with no up-front cost. My student loan was funded by people like my brothers, who work in the construction industry, and my family members, who work hard in their small business and who didn't go to university but paid taxes to give me the opportunity to borrow from them, the taxpayer, through the government to better myself and get the education. The privilege of receiving that student loan came with a responsibility for me to repay it. Unfortunately, under the current system some students will never accept the responsibility of repaying their taxpayer funded student loans. They are happy to accept the student loan provided to them by the hardworking Australian taxpayers but have not repaid it. As of 30 June 2017 only $35.9 billion out of the total debt of $55.4 billion will likely be repaid. I absolutely support these amendments, which I believe will ultimately reduce the debt load. However, I believe that for the long-term sustainability of the system we will need to go further. I was pleasantly surprised by the contribution from the Labor member for Bruce, who last year spoke about the importance of debt recovery from the states. To be very clear, this would not be a death tax. As the member for Bruce said, it is simply: … requiring HELP debts to be repaid, just like tax or social security debts … I agree that there is a strong policy case to look at the option of recouping student debts from certain estates. I believe those who enter into student loan agreements do so freely. There needs to be an understanding that these loans are from the Australian taxpayer and must be repaid. It would be my absolute pleasure to work with the member for Bruce on further measures in a very bipartisan way. It remains our intent to ensure Australians who have not gone to university are not unfairly bearing the costs of those who have not repaid their loans. In the same way, those who have had the opportunity to attend university and have diligently paid off their loans should not be made to bear the cost. We must continue to work on this issue. It is all about fairness. The reality is that taxpayer funded student loan repayments have not kept pace with lending growth. Since 2009 funding for Commonwealth supported places has grown at twice the rate of the economy, and from 2011 to 2017 the level of new debt not expected to be repaid increased from 16 per cent to 25 per cent. It is a serious concern that, according to the 2016 Australian National Audit Office estimates, on its current trajectory, by 2024-25 outstanding HELP debts will total $192.5 billion and almost 30 per cent—$55 billion—will not be repaid. Imagine the differences that $55 billion would make if invested in our education system or other government services. We need to take action now the ensure that our higher education system is sustainable. Announced in MYEFO, these policy measures will replace the previous legislative proposals from the 2017-18 budget. I supported the previous reforms and I was disappointed they were voted down in the Senate. We all have skin in this game of education, whether it be as a former, current or future student, a parent, a taxpayer, an educator, as administrators or, ultimately, as employers in business or service providers in every corner of Australia. The new amendments propose that from 1 July 2018 there be a lower minimum repayment threshold of $45,000 at a one per cent repayment rate. There will be smaller incremental rises in thresholds and repayment rates up to a top threshold of $131,989, at which 10 per cent of income is repayable. The minimum repayment threshold is $10,000 less than the current threshold of $55,000. This repayment threshold will then be indexed according to the consumer price index rather than the average weekly earnings. This change is consistent with recommendations from both the National Commission of Audit in 2014 and the Grattan Institute. This change in indexation is important to ensure that those who have dropped out of the repayment streams as the thresholds rise faster than their income growth are brought back in and are repaying their student loans sooner. This will ensure repayment requirements are adjusted in line with the cost of living. Other key changes come in the form of student thresholds for the Student Financial Supplement Scheme, which will be brought into line with the HELP repayment thresholds from 1 July 2019. This is to improve rates of repayment by replacing the three-tier threshold approach applied to Student Financial Supplement Scheme repayments with a new HELP threshold. This change ensures the HELP debt takes priority over other student loan debts. Finally, there will be an introduction of new combined loan limits on how much students can borrow under taxpayer funded student loans to cover their tuition fees. The combined limit is $150,000 for students studying medicine, dentistry and vet science courses and $104,440 for other students. These limits would be sufficient to cover the study of even the most expensive courses for almost nine years as a Commonwealth supported, taxpayer supported student. The loan limit is not new, but it will now apply to HECS-HELP as well as students accessing the FEE-HELP, VET FEE-HELP and VET student loans. But these amendments are all about fairness. Income contingent loans, the basis of our taxpayer funded student loan system, were introduced as an answer to maintaining access and equity as well as providing less of a burden on the taxpayer. From inception, the repayment threshold was never set according to an optimum economic model or theory. It was purely driven by a sense of fairness. I'm proud that this government is making changes to ensure that there is real fairness in student loans. It is not fair to take a loan from the taxpayer to further yourself, to better yourself, and then not pay that loan back to the taxpayer, because taxpayers are people like my brother and my family members, who work hard in small business, who have never been to university, who have worked hard and paid their taxes to give me that opportunity. If I was to take from them a loan in order to get an education but then not to pay that back, that would be robbing future societies and generations of the opportunity that I've had. It is not fair that everyone who's paid off a taxpayer funded student loan in full, like I have, should shoulder the burden of those students who have chosen not to. The failure of some students to pay their loans makes our education more expensive for everyone. Taking a student loan from hardworking taxpayers and not repaying it is taking a free ride. But let's not forget that students currently only pay an average of 42 per cent of the cost of their degree. The rest is already subsidised by the taxpayer. When we're talking about student loans, we're not talking about students borrowing the total cost of their entire education. As I said, 42 per cent of their degree, on average, is funded through student loans—the rest by the hardworking taxpayers in Australia. Research from the Grattan Institute indicates that the split for average contributions would move to 64 per cent government and 36 per cent student if we take into account debt that would probably not be repaid, and this is unsustainable. I congratulate Minister Birmingham on these new amendments. Unfortunately, those opposite and a select group of education institutions have chosen to cloud and misrepresent this critical debate. Labor's Treasury spokesman called the measures an attack on one of the sources of Australia's long-term prosperity. Well, the shadow Treasurer is right about one thing: education is a source of Australia's long-term prosperity. This government's approach to student loan repayments is consistent with intergenerational equity. It is consistent with ensuring university education will be sustainable in the long term. This is a responsible suite of reforms and is in stark contrast to the brash approach from the Labor Party, who, when they were last in government, announced $6 billion worth of cuts to the higher education support sector. We cannot afford to be complacent and risk jeopardising opportunities for future generations of students, who will also want to access student loans that remove all up-front fees from higher education. The time to change is now, and the opposition's position on this legislation only puts the entire system in jeopardy. I would like all Australian kids to have the opportunity I had, the opportunity to go to university at no up-front cost. But if we don't have a sustainable system, we won't have that opportunity in the future. We need to ensure that our system can respond to the impact of the tremendous expansion in student numbers. Over the last quarter of a century, private education student numbers grew at more than three times the rate of the population as a whole. This growth has imposed significant costs on taxpayers. The astounding thirst for education has been enabled by the demand driven system in recent years. It has also been driven by the reality that a post-school qualification remains one of the best investments an individual can make. University graduates enjoy consistently higher employment and incomes than those who only complete high school. Our higher education system is exceedingly successful and has an excellent reputation, both here and overseas. Tertiary education now spans a competitive market, where providers are more numerous, more diverse and more commercially oriented than they ever were before. Education is one of our most successful exports and is a significant source of income for our universities. In 2016 education export income reached its highest level ever at $21.8 billion. This legislation lays out achievable reforms that can safeguard the position of the education sector for the future. We cannot underestimate the importance of a sustainable student loan scheme. It brings certainty to the sector, which has been unanimous about the need for change and has been left waiting long enough. The Australian taxpayer student loan scheme remains one of the most successful public policy innovations ever, ensuring a vibrant education export industry, support for student career aspirations and a skilled workforce for our industry. Where this legislation does have a financial impact on students, we will implement changes in a way that is gradual, fair and appropriate. These reforms ensure our high-quality tertiary education system can grow while meeting the global challenges it will increasingly face. It guarantees that students will continue to have access to higher education, irrespective of their background or financial means. These amendments, in line with the broader government plans, will deliver $1.2 billion in savings over the next two years. In the lead-up to last year's budget the Prime Minister said: … we call on the other parties … to support us in bringing the budget back into balance. It is a responsibility that weighs heavily on the shoulders of every single member of the house and— in particular— … the Senate … This government has made substantial progress, with MYEFO showing this year's federal deficit has improved by $5.8 billion compared to forecasts in the May budget. Education savings are an essential part of this broader budget strategy. Frankly, we're all in this together. Taxpayers, whose support means that no-one must pay up-front course fees, will get a better deal knowing that the Turnbull government is looking after them and making sure their investment is repaid. Our taxpayer funded student loan scheme was not designed to facilitate a lifelong limitless cash pool for students who choose not to pay back their student loans. Taxpayer generosity should not be taken for granted. The measures in this bill were designed with fairness and sustainability at their core. Commonwealth financial assistance through taxpayer funded student loans still means that no student will need to pay one cent up-front for their higher education. But students cannot take this assistance for granted. Taxpayer funded student loans must be repaid to ensure that the system is sustainable and is available for future generations. These amendments are about fairness. These amendments are about someone entering into a loan. These are amendments about making sure that people who enter into a loan repay that loan. To think that there is opposition to a situation where you're asking someone to pay back a loan that they've entered into means that my mind boggles. This is about fairness; it's about fairness for the taxpayer that funds these loans and it's also about ensuring that more and more students can have the opportunity that I've had in receiving an education with no up-front fees. I hope that more students can have the same opportunity that I've had as well. Thank you. 17:21 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell I rise to speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loans Sustainability) Bill 2018. I oppose the bill, as it attacks student and it undermines the fairness of Australia's world-class student loan scheme. As we have heard, the bill makes a number of changes to Australia's income contingent loan scheme, the Higher Education Loan Program—HELP—and makes technical changes to the Student Financial Supplement Scheme. This is the first point on which I will focus. This bill sets new repayment thresholds for HELP from 1 July 2018, starting with a new minimum repayment of $45,000 and with a one per cent repayment rate. There are a further 17 thresholds and repayment rates, up to a top threshold of $131,989, at which 10 per cent of payment would apply. It aligns the indexation of HELP repayment thresholds to CPI instead of to average weekly earnings and introduces a new combined loan limit on how much students can borrow under HELP to cover tuition fees from 1 January 2019. The combined limit would be $104,440, or $150,000 for students studying medicine, dentistry or vet science. The government has previously tried to make changes to the HELP repayment threshold, attempting to lower the HELP repayment rate to $42,000 a year. Labor argued that this was too low. The bill did not make it through the Senate and was subsequently withdrawn. The proposal for a lifetime borrowing limit is a new proposal from the government and has significant implications for students. While the borrowing limit has been introduced in the VET student loan system—a proposal that Labor took to the last election—there has yet to be a limit for all loan schemes in the system. Traditionally, Commonwealth supported places, or HECS places, did not have a borrowing limit for students. Students taking other courses that are not subsidised, like full-fee postgraduate coursework places, could take out a loan for the fees through the FEE-HELP scheme. Full fees were set by universities and higher education providers and have not been regulated, which has led to some students taking on significant debt. While there is some merit to sending a price signal through a lifetime borrowing limit, the proposal in this bill may have a range of unintended consequences and therefore must not be supported. Labor referred this bill to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee, and the committee tabled its report on 16 March. I support the position of the Labor senators in their dissenting report. This bill would have unintended and negative consequences on students, particularly students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and therefore must not be supported. Income contingent loans have been a part of higher education since Labor introduced HECS in 1989. More recently, Labor's demand-driven funding, in conjunction with the HECS-HELP scheme and other equity and participation measures, has transformed higher education in Australia. As Universities Australia has shown, there has been a significant boost in university enrolments from underrepresented and disadvantaged students. This is such a critical point: universities are now open, more than ever before, to students from those underrepresented and disadvantaged backgrounds. It is important that we spend some time looking at those numbers. From 2008 to 2016 the following growth occurred: the number of domestic undergraduate students grew from 24,311 to 50,206, a staggering 106.5 per cent. The proportion of students with a disability participating rose from 4.3 per cent to 6.4 per cent. The number of Indigenous students grew from 7,038 to 13,320, an increase of 89.3 per cent. The number of students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds grew from 90,467 to 140,462, an increase of 55.3 per cent. The number of students from remote and regional areas, such as mine, grew from 110,000 to 163,292, an increase of 48.3 per cent. In total, the number of undergraduate students from all these backgrounds—students with a disability, Indigenous students, and students from remote areas—grew 39.6 per cent. What a remarkable success story that we have nearly 40 per cent more students from these groups going to university. Why are they doing that? Because there are pathways available, because higher education is seen as valuable and it's accessible because barriers are being removed. We know that high student debt is a genuine barrier to study for students from low-SES and disadvantaged backgrounds, so we must remove barriers, not put them up again. In my electorate of Dobell, on the Central Coast, we have the Ourimbah campus of the University of Newcastle, which is playing a vital role in removing these barriers. I want to quote—I know she's been quoted already this evening—the Vice Chancellor and President of the University of Newcastle, Professor Caroline McMillen, who said to a parliamentary committee hearing earlier this month: As our mission, we are committed to equity and excellence. We have some 37,000 students, 27 per cent from low socioeconomic backgrounds, which reflects our demographics in the regions we serve, and around 1,000 are Indigenous, which is the largest number of any Australian university. She further said: … this university since its foundation has served the demographics of the region by ensuring we do not trade equity for excellence. 'We do not trade equity for excellence' are important words, and that is an important mission. In higher education, excellence is vital, equity is vital and access is necessary. Yet this government wants to increase student debt and make it harder for students from disadvantaged backgrounds to get a foot in the door. At the Central Coast campus of the University of Newcastle, health is a big area of study. The university partners with the Central Coast local health district, where I used to work, and the PHN. Health and social services, my area of training and background, is one of the largest employers in our region on the Central Coast. Importantly, it is also one of the growth areas for future work. With higher education comes jobs—local jobs, quality jobs. At the Central Coast campus of the University of Newcastle, enabling programs such as Open Foundation and Newstep are trusted pathways for students to get started, pathways to further study. Almost one in four commencing students at our campus starts their education through these enabling programs. They are the pathway for so many, for nurses like Michelle, who was recognised as Wyong hospital nurse of the year last year. I have spoken about Michelle before. She would not be a nurse without enabling education. She would not be serving our community at Wyong hospital without access to higher education. I've also spoken about Sam, who is now a speech pathologist and whose sister is training to be a teacher. Sam said she really noticed the impact on her sons of seeing her study. They could see their mother was studying at university, and they could see that they might be able to study at university too. Today I'd like to speak about my friend Renee, a graduate of the Central Coast campus Open Foundation course, and now a neonatal intensive care nurse. These are Renee's own words: The fact that there is an opportunity like Open Foundation has given me the confidence to do something I never knew I could do. I never thought I was smart enough when I was at school to commence university. Never once did I ever think that I would complete a bachelor degree. I ended up completing a bachelor of nursing with distinction. Now I work within one of the elite hospitals and it's my privilege to work with vulnerable families in the neonatal intensive care unit. Labor understands the benefits of education to families. We understand that it can transform lives. Dr Joyleen Christensen, who I went to primary school with, is a program convener for enabling education at the same campus. Joy speaks about the impact of higher education on students who are the first ever in their family to go to university. She said: These students have so many obstacles already. The reason many of them are involved is to improve the financial situation for them and for their families. They are taking time away from work. They are taking time away from their families and money away from their families to find out whether they can do this. They have incredible potential. This program is life changing for them, their families and our community. It transforms lives. It's transformed the lives of Michelle and Renee, and the contribution they make through their nursing is invaluable to our community. The Dean of the Central Coast campus, Dr Brok Glenn, told me earlier today that in 2018 more than half of commencing students, 55 per cent, are the first in their family to go to university. It is an outstanding achievement. This, he said, is about enabling programs, working with high schools and actually getting students and their parents onto the campus so they can see for themselves what is possible. On the Central Coast, only half of students have the opportunity to finish high school, and fewer than half of the working-age population, 45 per cent, have qualifications post-school. Access to higher education is making a difference. The effect on women of the changes to HELP repayment thresholds must also be considered, as women will be disproportionately affected by these changes. Sixty per cent of Australians with outstanding HELP debt are women, and two-thirds of the Australians who will be dragged into the debt pool with the proposed new repayment threshold will be women. This bill should be rejected on that premise alone. Labor believes that the time for an inquiry into Australia's post-secondary education system has come. We must have a scheme that is fit for purpose, that intersects with our tax and social security systems and that treats all students equitably. We must have a system that suits the needs of a changing post-secondary education system; that suits the needs of lifetime learners. While Labor is not opposed to sending a price signal through a loan cap, this bill would have unintended consequences. Under the current FEE-HELP scheme there are a range of courses which have fees in excess of $100,000. Labor fully supports a system that allows Australians to defer fees for postgraduate and further study. These days many students will choose both vocational and higher education qualifications. The proposal for a one-off borrowing limit is clearly inadequate for lifelong learning needs. Labor is concerned about reckless fee setting, and a price signal needs to be accompanied by further reforms. We must not have a system that forces students to take out commercial loans to pay for the gap between fees set by universities and the loan borrowing amount. This bill does nothing to discourage reckless high-fee setting. Student debt is a major concern for students, for their families and for all of Australia. The contribution Australian students make to the cost of their university education is already the sixth-highest in the OECD, and two-thirds of Australian students in 2012 were found to live below the Henderson poverty line, with one in five regularly skipping meals. This government often talks about choice, but choice is a privilege. We need to make pathways to higher education easier, not harder. Labor is determined to end the war on young people in this country that's being waged by this government. We must not put barriers in their way, and the barriers to higher education are ones we have started to break down. This government continues to cut services and to try to charge students more. It is not the way to equity and it is not the way to excellence. Students at the Ourimbah campus of the University of Newcastle cannot afford cuts to education. They cannot afford to pay more. As I said at the outset, I oppose this bill as an attack on students and an attack on the fairness of our world-class student loan system. Labor will not support any legislation that puts education out of the reach of the most vulnerable people in our community, people who are starting out in life, people who are starting over in life and people who have never had a start in life. 17:34 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle ( I rise to join with my Labor colleagues on this side of the House in our complete opposition to this bill. We have a series of grave concerns with the Turnbull government's Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. Firstly, it's an unfair bill that actively undermines Australia's world-class education system. It would penalise women, disadvantaged and vulnerable Australians, and hurt regional communities and economies like mine in Newcastle. It's yet another example of this government's relentless war on young Australians. It's telling that only two government members were willing to stand up today and back this bill. When government members can't even bring themselves to support their own legislation, you know something is wrong. The bill proposes a number of changes to the Australian income contingent student loan scheme, HELP, formerly known as HECS. It sets a new, lower threshold of just $45,000 at which students must start repaying their student debt. It also introduces a lifetime limit of $104,440 on how much students can borrow for their tuition fees. This bill represents a terrible betrayal of young Australians, as it will make it harder for them to gain higher education. It will be the final nail in the coffin for some with university aspirations. From the beginning Labor had concerns about the impacts of this legislation, particularly for low-income earners, disadvantaged students and, as I mentioned before, women. We were concerned about the impacts it would have on young people in regional areas and the communities they live in, so we sent it to a Senate inquiry for consideration. Regrettably, the inquiry did little to allay our concerns. The first measure proposed in the bill is to lower the repayment threshold to $45,000. This is the second attempt by this government, after failing to reduce the threshold to $42,000 last time around. Labor supports HECS-HELP. There is no argument from us on that front. We believe in the principle that Australians should contribute towards the cost of their education, from which they and all of us benefit, but we agree with those many people who made submissions to the Senate inquiry that $45,000 is simply too low. As the Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations pointed out in its submission to the inquiry, $45,000 is only slightly more than half the average wage; it is in fact only $9,000 more than the minimum wage, as the Australian Council of Trade Unions rightly stated. On this income, take-home pay is $37,928 a year, a little over $700 a week, after tax and Medicare levies are subtracted. Once you cover the basic costs of living, including—let's not forget—the skyrocketing rents many of these students are paying, transport, food, insurance and ever-increasing power bills, there is precious little left. For many, every spare dollar is funnelled into scraping together a deposit for a home, which could easily top $100,000 in many parts of the country. That is in no small part due to the Turnbull government's absolutely dogged refusal to do anything about the outrageous tax concessions provided to support property investors over and above what we offer to first home buyers. Incredibly, many young people are trying to do all of this with the extra financial burden of raising a young family at the same time. You can see no clearer example of pressure on our young people. Yet, in another stunning display of just how out of touch it is with Australians on low incomes, the Turnbull government has decided it is completely fair and reasonable to start taking even more money from these people—utterly unbelievable! It's no wonder that young Australians are furious with the Turnbull government. They have, of course, every right to be, especially given that a large number of government members went through university at a time of free education, bought their houses with the help of government subsidies and now get to rake in the tax benefits of negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions at the federal budget's expense. Labor doesn't believe that we should make students start repaying their debt at the same time when they're trying to start their careers and start families and when they're earning, often, the very lowest rates in their respective professions. Labor also has grave concerns about the impacts of reducing the HELP repayment thresholds on disadvantaged Australians and discouraging them from ever undertaking higher education in the first place. This is particularly relevant for many communities in and around the Newcastle and Hunter region, because those areas are characterised by very significant disadvantage and, indeed, lower levels of education attainment. I'm extremely proud of the equity record of my local university, the University of Newcastle, where 27 per cent of students come from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Many are the first in their family to go to university. But these are exactly the kinds of people who are going to be hurt by this bill, as they are more likely to decide against higher education rather than put themselves in a precarious financial situation. In a submission to the Senate inquiry on this bill, the University of Newcastle raised concerns that these cohorts are much more likely to be sensitive to price—I couldn't agree more—and that they are disproportionately likely to decide against taking on higher education if the repayment threshold were lowered. The submission also made the important point that, for some students, repayments could kick in before they even have completed their studies. This would only serve to further intensify the financial pressures potentially affecting completion rates and graduate outcomes. This will be a great shame for our universities and a huge loss for our region. When you add these measures to the estimated $69 million that the government is ripping out of the University of Newcastle through the MYEFO cuts, there's going to be a lot of pain ahead for our community. I'm also very concerned about the disproportionate impacts this lowering of the HECS repayment threshold will have on women. As the President of the National Union of Students, Mr Mark Pace, stated: We know from the National Tertiary Education Union's submission to this Senate inquiry that 60 per cent of all Australians with outstanding HELP debt are women and that two-thirds of the Australians who will be dragged into the debt pool with the new proposed repayment thresholds will also be women … I agree with Mr Pace that this is yet another reason for rejecting this bill. I'd now like to turn to the proposed cap in the bill which would put a lifetime limit of $104,440 on the value of higher education that can be supported through the loan system. For students doing medicine, dentistry and veterinary science, that cap would be $150,000. The new HELP limit would apply to HECS-HELP loans, FEE-HELP loans, VET FEE-HELP loans and VET student loans. Again, this is a measure Labor cannot support. As many people giving evidence to the Senate inquiry pointed out, many prospective students will find that there simply isn't the scope to take on further studies or to expand their expertise into new areas. Others pointed out that the cap is likely to hurt people who haven't taken a traditional pathway to study and many have taken extra courses to achieve their academic goals. The proposal for a lifetime cap also stands in stark contrast to the unavoidable reality that education is becoming a lifelong process, something that you don't bid farewell to in your early 20s. In fact, continuous upskilling will be increasingly important for people who want to remain competitive in a highly dynamic jobs market. Again, this proposed measure will have a disproportionate impact on regional communities like mine. As the University of Newcastle points out in its submission, this limit will hurt our region's economic transformation by preventing some people from engaging in critical retraining and reskilling, especially in the high-cost fields like STEM and health, which may require specialist postgraduate qualifications. This bill provides yet more evidence that the only ideas this government has shown for higher education are to levy cuts and to force students to pay more. Just look at its destructive plan for university deregulation, which would have led to $100,000 degrees and lifelong debt sentences for students. Or perhaps we could consider the bill that preceded this one, which included $2.8 billion worth of cuts. Of course, the Senate refused to pass this. But, in a shameless display of its true 'born to rule' character, the government completely disregarded the will of the parliament and snuck $2.2 billion worth of cuts through the back door in the midyear budget update. In contrast, Labor has a fantastic legacy of which I am very proud. When we were last in government, we increased funding for universities from $8 billion to $14 billion each year and introduced a demand driven funding system. This saw an additional 190,000 students get a place at university, many of whom were the very first in their family to ever set foot on a university campus. Investing in education is one of the best means we have to drive productivity and economic growth, especially by encouraging people from disadvantaged backgrounds to go to university, and we know that these reforms work. As Universities Australia presented in its submission to the inquiry on this bill, there was a 106.5 per cent boost to people with disability undertaking undergraduate study. In the same time frame, there were 89.3 per cent more Indigenous students, 55 per cent more low socioeconomic status students and 48.3 per cent more regional and remote students. It is unquestionably a positive thing, not just for the individuals that improve their education levels and their life opportunities but for the entire country, because investment in education has flow-on effects for the whole society. This is backed up by recent figures from the OECD, which showed the Australian public, not individuals, benefit most from higher education. In fact, this OECD work shows that the public rate of return from tertiary education in Australia is twice the rate of return to the individual, despite the fact that individuals shoulder more of the cost. The Turnbull government wants you to believe that the current HECS arrangements aren't sustainable. They want you to think that we need to rein in the amount of education that people can undertake and make them start repaying their student loans sooner. I'll tell you what's not sustainable: giving people who earn over $180,000 a year a tax cut while you're hiking up taxes for people on $30,000—that's not sustainable. Refusing to act on the billions of dollars of cash handouts that are going to Australian shareholders who don't pay any tax—that is not sustainable. And doing absolutely nothing to rein in excessive tax concessions for property investors—that is not sustainable. But I'll tell you what's really not sustainable: hiking the national debt to more than half a trillion dollars and then hatching a diabolical plan to shovel a further $65 billion out the door in corporate tax cuts, because that's what this bill is really all about. It's not about a crisis in the HECS or HELP scheme; it's about a government desperate to pay up on its promise to big business. This is a shameful bill before this parliament. I stand strong and proud with Labor in our opposition. 17:49 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo As I rise to speak on this bill, I must begin by reiterating my support for Australia's higher education sector. For the sector to thrive, it must be sustainable. There is a delicate balance to be struck and I believe that the government's previous reform package, which failed to pass the Senate, did not get the balance right. I believe this bill comes a lot closer, although there are amendments that NXT will be seeking before we give our wholehearted support. This bill presents two major changes to the current system: firstly, a reduction in the HELP repayment threshold to $45,000, and, secondly, a cap on the loan amount a student can access in their lifetime. The idea of a cap on the amount of money a student can borrow from the Commonwealth is one I agree with in principle. In fact, I first raised this idea with Minister Birmingham last year. I believe that Australia's Higher Education Loan Program is world leading and something this country can be proud of. It allows students from all backgrounds to access university education without having the burden of up-front cost that students in many other countries face. However, as with any Commonwealth loan, it should not be a free-for-all. A university education gives a proven benefit to Australian society, but it is not in the nation's interests for the HELP scheme to be open slather with mounting debts, some of which will never be repaid. A cap sends an important message to students that the government will not support elongated study where it results in excessive loan amounts that are unlikely to be repaid. A student should understand that. Just like any other loan or debt, student loans must be repaid. Being a professional student, collecting endless degrees and not moving into a job really isn't viable for our nation. However, a lifetime cap is also not the answer. Increasingly, it's becoming clear that lifelong learning will become a regular feature of the Australian way of life. This government has, indeed, foreshadowed this. I again make reference to the Prime Minister's first statement as the leader of our country, where he stressed that he wanted Australia to be innovative and agile. Clearly, the ability to learn new things and to upskill is a fundamental part of being an innovative nation. For that reason, I struggle to understand why the government has proposed a lifetime cap on student learning. We should not be asking Australian students to be put in a position where they can graduate, work and pay off their HELP loans and yet be prevented from accessing Commonwealth support for future study. We know that today's graduates are likely to change jobs 17 times in their lifetime, and will most likely change career sectors completely. So, for this reason, I'm calling on the government to amend this bill to ensure that we can place a cap on student outstanding debt but that we can also ensure that if a person does pay off that debt, if they get below their cap, they can continue to study in another area at another time in their life. I note that this recommendation was put forward by the Senate Standing Committee on Education and Employment and, indeed, government members of the committee supported that the cap would be replenishable. I understand the government will be moving amendments to change this aspect of the bill, and I look forward to those amendments being moved. This bill also seeks to reduce the payment threshold for HELP loans to $45,000. I spoke on this issue during the debate of last year's higher education reform package, where I and my NXT colleagues rejected a proposal to lower the threshold to $42,000. I said then that I was willing to consider alternative thresholds, and that is the position that I maintain and NXT maintains. Australia's HELP system is one of the most generous in the world, significantly more so than the New Zealand system, which has a repayment threshold of $18,000, and the UK system, which has a repayment threshold of approximately A$36,000. I recognise that there is a growing amount of outstanding student debt, and the government does not expect this to be repaid. For this reason, NXT is willing to consider the proposed change to the thresholds if the government can commit to changing the lifetime cap to being a replenishable cap. I believe that a significant benefit of this measure over the government's previous proposal is ensuring that the repayment rate does not lift above one per cent until a graduate is earning over $51,000 per year. We believe this is a reasonable balance. I take this opportunity again to reiterate my previous calls for a comprehensive review into the post-secondary education sector. I called for such a review last October, and I am pleased to see that this has become part of the policy for the Australian Labor Party. This review must involve the federal and state governments. It must involve universities and the vocational education sector, including, of course, apprenticeships. We need to examine how we prepare the next generation for the world of work and ensure the pillars are in place for young people to successfully transition to sustainable employment. Australia's higher education sector is one of the best in the world, but it needs to be supported. The government's recent cuts to universities during MYEFO were a cruel blow to the sector, and it is a sector that has faced so many cuts in recent years from both sides of the House. I believe this bill should be amended and that it will contribute to a stronger higher education sector. So for this reason I support the bill in this House, pending those amendments by government, as I referred to. Thank you. 17:55 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler I, too, would like to speak on the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018. From the outset, I make it clear that Labor will be opposing this bill, and I also note the cacophony of voices opposite—all those rallying to support this piece of legislation! I just looked at the speaking list, and I noticed that of all those opposite they have only two members willing to come along and speak in support of the legislation. This is an unfair piece of legislation and one that attacks students. It undermines the fairness and accessibility of Australia's higher education system. The bill is another example of the government's relentless attack on our universities, which are, no doubt, integral to the future of our nation. The bill also gives effect to a policy measure announced in the government's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. This is very, very short sighted. It is a package of $2.2 billion of cuts for universities—measures that represent the government's fourth attempt since coming into office to cut universities and make students pay more. Nevertheless, we heard the Turnbull government—and the Minister for Education and Training, in particular—boasting that these cuts will put our higher education system on a more sustainable and responsible path for the future. This is the same style of rhetoric that we heard when the government tried to introduce their original package of cuts in the 2017 budget. That was $3.8 billion of cuts to universities and an increase in student fees. Those measures were not passed by the Senate and they were not passed for a very, very good reason: they were bad policy. It seems nothing has changed. These were the biggest cuts to the sector proposed since the Howard government's horror 1996 budget. These cuts were accompanied by a number of poorly designed policies and thought bubbles, and that continues today. None of the ideas that the government have proposed were really about reform that would produce or promote enhancement of the sector, and the same can be said about those legislative measures proposed by the bill we are debating today. Real reform actually requires vision for the future, rather than a government solely driven to cut and diminish the significant role that universities play and, to that extent, that students who attend universities play in our future. This is solely about cost-cutting, and there's no doubt there's a reason that underpins that. Of course, you can't expect those opposite to change their spots and to take a different view of higher education. After all, they are the same bunch that came into this place intent on taking $17 billion from our schools, $637 million from our TAFE colleges and now $2.2 billion from our universities. The targets of the cuts are our higher education institutions—institutions which are, I submit, absolutely vital for our nation's future. But the justifications of these cuts and whether they're issues about pension or a whole raft of other things all fall back to that signature policy of this government: handing out $65 billion of tax cuts to millionaires and big business—effectively, the tax cuts to the top end of town. That justifies what these measures are all about. Far be it from me to give the government advice, but I will chance my hand on this occasion. If you can't afford it, simply don't do it, but never, ever do it at the expense of future generations. That's precisely what is occurring here today. The unfairness of these cuts is plain and clear. This is a government that keeps proving that it can't be trusted when it comes to the most important investment in our nation's history. An investment in education is an investment in our future. It's an investment in the nation's future. Arguably, it's probably the most important investment decision governments can make, because a lot turns on this. While the measures in this bill are significantly narrower than the scope of the bill in 2017, the point I want to make is that it has the same underlying objectives. For the purpose of discussion, I'll be focusing my time on talking about the proposed changes in the HELP scheme as opposed to some of the other, technical amendments that are also incorporated in this bill. The income-contingent loan has been a keystone or foundation of the architecture of Australia's fair and accessible higher education system. We on this side of the House understand the role that income-contingent HELP loans play. After all, it was a Labor government that introduced the concept in HECS in 1989. Universities Australia, I think, actually highlighted the integral role played by the HELP scheme when they noted that the scheme underwrote the growth of mass higher education in Australia, and it continues to support the expansion of opportunity. I think that's pretty right. In conjunction with Labor's demand-driven funding, the HELP scheme has seen historic growth in higher education participation over decades. The transformation of higher education in this country has very much been a key aspect that's flowed from this scheme. As Margaret Gardner, Chair of Universities Australia, demonstrates, there's been a significant boost in the participation of underrepresented and disadvantaged students. To put that in some perspective, I'd like to share with the House some statistics released by Universities Australia. Universities in Australia now educate 55 per cent more Australians from the poorest one-fifth of households, 48 per cent more students from regional and remote communities, 89 per cent more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and 105 per cent more students with a disability. I think they're outcomes that we should all be particularly proud of. Obviously those opposite have probably hung their heads in shame about this, because they're not participating in this debate—or only two of those opposite are. But this is something where we've shown we can actually transform higher education in this country and make it more accessible. As I say, that's something the House should be proud of, not condemning. Labor opposes the government's move to lower the HELP repayment threshold to $42,000, because we recognise that it is unfair. As a matter of fact, we actually think the current proposal of a threshold of $45,000 is also unfair. As the Australian Council of Trade Unions indicated, the proposed threshold of $45,000 is only $9,000 more than the minimum wage today. Illustrating the ramifications of the proposed payment threshold on individual earnings of $45,000 per annum, the ACTU observed that this would leave an individual with a take-home pay of $37,928 once income tax and the Medicare levy is deducted. We believe that the current repayment threshold strikes the appropriate balance. We cannot expect students to repay more than their current debts at the same time as starting a career, setting up and saving for a house—particularly in Sydney and Melbourne and probably Brisbane—and, in many instances, starting a family. We know that higher education debt is a genuine barrier to low socioeconomic and disadvantaged students. Equity practitioners in higher education encapsulate the heart of this problem, saying that this measure would disproportionately affect people of low socioeconomic backgrounds, people with disabilities, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. This measure will no doubt have an impact on the community I happen to represent. It's a community I'm certainly very proud of. It's very colourful; it's very vibrant—much like the community of my colleague the member for Werriwa. But our communities are not rich communities. The average household income in my community is just a tad over $60,000. We're not a rich community. As a matter of fact, my community's made up heavily of migrants and current refugees. So changing the income rate for all HELP thresholds from average weekly earnings to CPI is also a measure that will be hard-felt by many individuals in low socioeconomic backgrounds, certainly in communities like mine and, no doubt, those communities in regional Australia purportedly being represented by some of those opposite. As the Southern Cross Postgraduate Association has noted, it will place an additional hardship on low socioeconomic HELP debtholders at a time that combines with a stagnant wage growth and a rising cost of living. The proposed lifetime borrowing limit also has an impact of eroding the underlying objectives of universal access enshrined in the HELP scheme and the importance of lifelong learning, including the ability of workers to upskill. This will prove critical, given the considerable uncertainty of a future workforce in this country. We are all looking to the future and what that might hold, what the future industries might be, and workers will be undergoing upskilling and training. But this will be putting university education beyond the grasp of many in that situation. At a time when we have significant economic transition we should be investing in our people, not making it harder for them to get a university qualification. Australian students already make the sixth-highest contribution to their university fees in the OECD. As Catriona Jackson, the deputy chief of Universities Australia, has emphasised, when contemplating change to the magnitude of this, there should be a first principle in the legislator's mind: do no harm. This government, quite frankly, has done the exact opposite when it comes to education and, in this case, higher education. The changes to the HELP scheme are simply budget driven, and it's all about supporting the government's $65 billion tax cut to the big end of town. These measures are not fair, they're not good for universities and they're not good for students. On that basis, they cannot be good for the future prosperity of this nation. In the words of Margaret Gardner, I call on the government not to slam the door of opportunity shut, once more, to Australia's bright minds. Our nation cannot afford it, societally or economically. We must restore our nation's investment in Australian students and, in doing so, our investment in Australia's future. 18:09 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra What is it with conservative governments and access to opportunity and education for all—no matter what your postcode, no matter your gender, how much your parents earn, your race and your religion is? It took the Whitlam government to open the doors of opportunity for tertiary education. Prior to that, my mother and my father were bright, young Australians—bright, young Victorians. My mother grew up in a Housing Commission house in Preston in Victoria, just down the road from an abattoir. My father was sent off to do a trade, to become an electrician at the ripe old age of 15 because his parents couldn't afford for him to go to university. My mother was dragged kicking and screaming from high school—she also had to leave school at 15. She would have loved to have matriculated, as she calls it, but she was denied that opportunity, thanks to the conservative government that was running this nation for so long and that denied opportunity for young Australians from working class backgrounds and from disadvantaged backgrounds. It is the tradition that conservatives deny opportunity to those who are less well-off, to those who are doing it tough. My mother and my father are testimony to that. It wasn't until the Whitlam government and the opportunities that he opened through tertiary education—through free education for so many Australians—that I and my sisters, so many other Canberrans and so many other Australians were the first in their families to be educated. What did that mean? For me it meant an awful lot. My father left me, my sisters and my mum with $30 in the bank in the seventies, when I was 11. There was no child support agency then, so things were pretty rough. I've spoken about this many times in this chamber, about the fact that we used to eat out every second or third night at family or friends' houses because mum couldn't afford to put food on the table every night of the week. On the nights of the week that we actually did eat at home mum invariably didn't eat, because she was on a seventies diet. The reality was that she couldn't afford to feed herself and her three daughters. So I come from what I call a working class matriarchy. My great-grandmother was a cleaner in the Western District in Victoria. She left school at 11, denied choice and denied opportunity. She brought up 13 children on her own. She was denied choice and opportunity because she left school at 11. My grandmother left school at 13, and was also a cleaner. She worked three cleaning jobs in hospitals and theatres in Victoria. She brought up seven kids on her own in a Housing Commission house in Preston. Her abiding fear was that the state was going to take her children away. The reason she had that fear was not that she was a bad mother—she most certainly wasn't; she worked three jobs to put food on the table—but that she was poor. When my dad left my mother and my sisters we were facing the same sort of cycle of disadvantage that had dogged three generations of the working class matriarchy of my family. But, thanks to the power of education—thanks to the transformative power of education—I broke that cycle, my middle sister broke that cycle and my little sister broke that cycle. Here I am, thanks to the transformative power of education, because it is a game changer. It is a silver bullet. I broke that cycle of disadvantage—three generations of disadvantage—and now I have the great honour of representing my community here in parliament. Thanks to the opportunity of education, my middle sister is now Australia's first female Master of Wine, and a scientist and a winemaker in her own right. My little sister is a neurologist, a world expert in dementia and stroke. What was the game changer? What was the reason for this whole cycle of cleaning and cleaning, denial of opportunity and choice, poverty and disadvantage? The timidity with which you lead your life, where you don't think particular parts of the world are the right place for you, was because of lack of education. As a result of access to education, my sisters and I have been able to live bold lives determined by the choices and opportunities we sought. Education is the silver bullet, the game changer, and the opportunities, choices and game-changing abilities it provides are constantly denied by those opposite, through barriers such as this legislation, to all students, particularly disadvantaged Australians of low socioeconomic backgrounds and people in regional and remote Australia. The government, as my colleagues have said, is proposing a new minimum repayment income of $45,000 for compulsory repayment of the Higher Education Loan Program, HELP. This change is absolutely outrageous. We've heard from the member for Fowler—I commend him on that speech—that Australia has the sixth-highest rate of student debt in the OECD, yet the government is making it even more onerous for students through these changes. This government is busy giving out $65 billion of tax cuts to the top end of town, yet is continuing to target students in universities right throughout the country. We're not just talking about the University of Sydney, the University of Canberra or the University of Melbourne. Shame on those opposite who represent regional and remote communities for talking in support of this bill! You are denying the young in your communities the opportunity to have a big life. This government has already cut $28 million over the next three years from the Australian National University in my electorate. Last year the government introduced a plan to make students repay their HELP debts on incomes as low as $42,000; they're currently looking at making it $45,000. Labor opposed that change then and opposes this change now. University graduates face a housing affordability nightmare, a spike in the price of utilities, a second-rate NBN, cuts to penalty rates—the list goes on. Now the government wants students to start paying back their fees at an unreasonably low income. It is unfair: $44,999 sole income is not a lot of money. It's $865 per week. The average rental price for a house in my electorate of Canberra is $540 per week. Factor this in, and university graduates are left with just $325 each week to pay for utilities, transport, mobile phone bills and groceries. This amendment would add student fees to that already long list of expenses. And, if a sole income earner had any dependants, it would force them close to the poverty line. Can you imagine trying to pay back the debt and deal with those utility costs, particularly rent here? The average rent here in the electorate of Canberra is $540. If you've got dependants, it's mighty tough. The government is asking people to pay back their student loans before they even consider what they'll be able to feed their family. Students in my electorate are already struggling with the prospect of paying back these debts. This amendment will change the future of students who have planned their life after university. Students will feel forced to take a job they may not have studied for because the salary's bigger, just so they can pay back that loan sooner than expected. I've heard of students who, as I said, are doing it tough—rent, utilities, and just trying to get food on the table. We all know that textbooks are expensive. They're always a huge hit for parents doing it tough at secondary schools and they're a huge hit for students doing it tough at the tertiary level, because we are looking at hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of dollars for textbooks. I've heard about the concerns amongst Canberra's students about this proposal. They are very, very concerned about it. Some of them are wondering whether they'll continue to study. We've got a student who says she feels betrayed by the government, particularly if this amendment's passed. She labels it 'a new level of pressure'. These students are already under significant pressure and here they are faced with a new level of pressure by this conservative government—another cut in education. It's just constant. The 2014 budget was probably the piece de resistance when it came to the tone, values and principles of this conservative government opposite. The government haven't learnt from the 2014 budget. Nothing has been learnt from the 2014 budget. It's just constant attacks particularly on those from low socioeconomic backgrounds, particularly on those doing it tough, particularly on those from regional and remote Australia, and particularly on the disadvantaged. Not only is education about opportunity but it's about fairness. The same opportunity should be offered to every Australian, no matter where they live or what their income. I've spoken about my story and how it unleashed so much opportunity and choice for me and my sisters. I am blessed to have participated in a quality public education and am blessed to have participated in free education as a result of a Whitlam government—a government that realised the opportunities for all Australians in innovation, in creating a modern society, in creating an inquisitive society, in creating a curious society. It was a government that realised the wonder that is offered up as a result of education. Then we've got conservative governments. We started with Menzies and then Fraser, and now we've got this Abbott-Turnbull government, a government that has never, ever had one plan for education. It's had multiple plans, and they were all about cuts—at the secondary level, at the tertiary level, at the vocational level. Since this government took office, $17 billion has been cut from our schools, nearly $3 billion has been cut from vocational education, and Australia has lost 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships. My electorate of Canberra has seen a 30 per cent decline in apprentice and trainee graduates since this government's been in power. And, with universities, we've seen cuts after cuts—$2.2 billion worth of cuts nationally; $28 million worth of cuts from here in Canberra under this government. It was Labor that opened the door of universities to 190,000 more Australians, many of whom were the first in their family to be educated. This government just slams it shut in their faces. (Time expired) 18:25 Ms O'TOOLE 249908 Herbert Labor does not support this bill and nor do I. I believe that a university education should not be denied to anybody. My parents would dearly have loved to go to university, but they came from families where it was financially not possible. My parents went without so that my siblings and I could have a good, quality education, and that included a university education. I am privileged and honoured to be here representing my electorate in this parliament, and that is as a result of my hard work and the university education that I had. I have two brothers, one who is principal of a boys college and one who is executive principal of a large secondary college, and I have a sister who is a family law barrister, all because our parents worked hard to ensure that we had the opportunity they were denied—that is, a university education. This then begs the question: what is wrong with the entitled members sitting opposite me on the government benches, given that a large number of these Turnbull government members have happily risen to the top of their careers and entered this parliament on the back of Labor policy? Many government ministers and backbenchers have benefited from Labor's free higher education, yet when they come to power in government they simply slam the door shut in the faces of others. There are a number of Turnbull government ministers who attended university between 1974 and 1988, when students did not pay fees. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and other frontbench figures, such as our former Attorney-General, George Brandis, and the Minister for Defence, Marise Payne, are among those who attended university when education was free. Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott received a free university education. Foreign Minister Bishop, the former Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce, Treasurer Scott Morrison, and the Minister for Defence Industry, Christopher Pyne, attended university for one year when education was free. The Minister for Health, Greg Hunt, the former Minister for Social Services, Christian Porter, and the Minister for Jobs and Innovation, Michaelia Cash, also attended university for at least one year when their education was free. In total, seven Turnbull government ministers were at university when students were not charged fees, while the other eight would have had at least one year of free university education. It is an absolute disgrace and a blatant demonstration of double standards that these Turnbull government elected representatives have benefited from a Labor policy—that is, a free university education—but they in turn feel justified in making it harder for anyone else wanting to attend university. Labor has always been a party of high aspirations for all of our citizens. Labor has always said that it should never be your financial status that decides whether or not you can attend university. Whether you are a young kid from Kelso or from inner Sydney, Labor does not discriminate based on your postcode. No matter who you are, Labor believes that you have the human right to access education in order to better yourself and increase your contribution to society. Labor is very aware of the strong links between education, quality employment and prospering economies. The skills of the future will be taught in our universities, and particularly in regional universities. Yet this government is hell-bent on punishing students from disadvantaged backgrounds by denying them the opportunity to attend university and to build a competitive Australia, because they most likely will not be able to afford to attend university. That is why Labor opposes this bill, and that is why I once again say I am proud to stand with Labor and fight these unfair cuts. The Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 is an unfair piece of legislation that attacks students and undermines the fairness of our world-class student loan system. The MYEFO package of $2.2 billion cuts is the government's fourth attempt since coming to office to cut university funding and make students pay more. In all of Australia there is only one degree that is internationally ranked, and I am proud to say that it is at James Cook University, in my electorate of Herbert. ANU, University of Queensland, Monash—none of them can lay claim to having an internationally ranked No. 1 degree, but James Cook University in Townsville, North Queensland, can. Yet this university will be severely punished by this unfair cut. James Cook University holds the prestigious honour of being awarded the No. 1 status for a marine science degree, yet this government is cutting $36 million to James Cook University. James Cook University is a genuine regional university that was built by the blood, sweat and tears of local business people because our community dared to dream that our young people, whose families could not afford to send them south to study, could study at home. Then there is my university, Central Queensland University, where the Turnbull government is cutting $38 million. These are universities that are embedded in regional Queensland communities. These are universities that strive for excellence to deliver across vast distances and provide quality education for all regional, rural and remote Queenslanders. Clearly the Turnbull government is totally unaware and out of touch with regional Australia and, in particular, Queensland. This government does not understand that the participation rate in universities in regional communities is almost half of what it is in metropolitan universities. Linking funding to population growth is absolutely unfair and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the regional challenges. In the last couple of weeks, I attended graduation ceremonies of both JCU and CQU, with both delivering outstanding results. It was really exciting at both ceremonies to witness young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students receiving their degree awards. It was great to see international students coming to our great city to study at these quality universities. This is particularly the case at JCU in the marine science area. It is unfair and it's a complete rip-off to students. At last year's budget, the Turnbull government tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. Now the government is proposing a new rate of $45,000. It's still far too low. Why is this government changing the threshold when new graduates are really struggling? New graduates need time to get their feet on the ground, to establish themselves in their chosen career and not be forced into a state of anxiety as to whether they can afford to immediately start to pay their HELP debt, pay rent and survive. It is not fair that new graduates will have to choose between paying their HELP debt or saving to buy a house. It is also not fair to make graduates choose between starting a family or paying their HELP debt. There are a large number of graduates who are barely surviving whilst trying to make ends meet on a wage of $45,000 a year. In my community, rental prices are high, cost of living is expensive and energy prices are through the roof under this government, so students and graduates are already doing it tough. This government's decision to lower the income threshold to $45,000 for graduates to start to pay their HECS debt is just another burden for them to carry. It is unfair and it does not reflect a fair go for all. In fact, it is quite the opposite. In my last meeting with James Cook University Vice Chancellor Sandra Harding, we discussed how we want more people enrolled in higher education across North Queensland because higher education leads to greater employment choices and opportunities. Across North Queensland, we have some of the highest rates of unemployment in the country, and that is particularly the case for youth unemployment. A university education is the beacon of hope for employment. A university education is the vehicle that will deliver the industries and jobs of the future. University education builds a community's capacity to grow its economy. But the Turnbull government is hell-bent on strangling North Queenslanders' hopes for future employment based on a quality university education. These added burdens on students and graduates will not entice people to enrol at university. Placing additional barriers and making it harder for students to pay back their debts will simply deter students from enrolling at university, and that is the very last thing we need in regional Queensland. In regional Queensland we need to create an environment that increases participation and does not make it harder. Experts have warned Australia that if we do not boost participation in post-secondary education we risk being left behind by the rest of the world. But this back-to-the-future government probably wants that. This is 1920s style thinking from the government. If you want a country to get back on track, then you must invest in its people. In a time of significant economic transition, we should be investing in our people, not making it harder for them to get a university qualification. Labor has always been a party for the people. Labor is the party for the many and not just the few people who have healthy credit cards and a strong social status. Labor does put people first. But it's pretty clear that the Turnbull government have only ever had one plan for higher education, and that plan is to cut funding and make students pay more. Of course, that always affects those disadvantaged in our community. It is critically important in regional Queensland, and particularly in my electorate of Herbert, that our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people have the opportunity, once they finish high school, to access a university education. Financial status is not an indicator of capability, but it is an indicator of ability to participate. Australian students already make the sixth-highest contribution to their university fees in the OECD. But the Liberals can't help themselves. They have consistently tried to make students pay more. Why? That is the question. It would appear, at the moment, it's all about paying for their $65 billion tax cut for wealthy corporations. We've seen it in schools, with a $17 billion cut. We've seen it in the vocational education and training sector, with nearly $3 billion cut and more than 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships lost since the Liberals came to office. In my electorate alone, that is 1,591 apprenticeships. Again, we see it in universities with a $2.2 billion cut. Labor delivers real reform to higher education in this country. When Labor was last in government, it lifted investment in universities from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion in 2013. Labor opened the door of universities to 190,000 more Australians, many of whom were the first in their family to go to university. Coming from that situation myself, I completely understand what a privilege it is to have the opportunity to attend university when you know how desperately your parents would have loved to have had that opportunity. The Liberals, through their latest round of cuts, are slamming that door firmly shut for many people in our community. The Turnbull government will never be a government for the people. They are a government for the top end of town. Investment in people starts with education. However, this government have completely missed this fact, as they are completely out of touch with people. I don't think we can emphasise enough how absolutely important it is that we invest in the people of this country, that we invest in our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people, and that we also invest in the people who are leaving the defence forces, people who need to reskill or get skills to transition into new employment. University is the ticket out of poverty and disadvantage. I urge this government not to make these severe cuts to university funding. 18:38 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi Tonight, in my comments regarding the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 I particularly want to focus on its impact on rural and regional Australia. Today, in this place, I introduced a private member's bill which spoke of the importance of positive discrimination in favour of, just as my colleague has just expressed, rural and regional Australia, and that one size does not fit all. So I want to take my opportunity tonight to further that argument. I want to take the opportunity to ask the government to seriously consider a regional strategy that actually takes holistic thinking and looks at the national good and at how we, as a nation, can educate ourselves, have the workforce that we need and have the economic growth that we need, as a direct result of good education. I just can't enforce enough in tonight's debate, as I know many of my colleagues have, the fundamental importance of education—tonight we are talking about post-school higher education—as one of the pillars of a developed nation. What I'm so sad to see in the discussion we've had from the government is the lack of a vision, the lack of a strategic approach, in how education is going to come together to be the driving force that we need. In the five years that I've been in this parliament, higher education and the government approach to it has been one of the significant disappointments with the lack of vision, the lack of a way forward and often the lack of partnership in our ability to actually move forward. I wanted to talk a little bit tonight about my electorate of Indi, why this topic is just so important and why I think that the changes are going to have a negative impact on my community. I quote from Higher education information navigation: an exploration of parent information needs in the Hume region, presented by Regional Development Australia and RDV. It says on page 6: It is of concern, therefore, that the Hume Region has some of the lowest educational outcomes in Victoria. For example, the region shows lower retention rates for Years 7-12 than the average for non-metropolitan regions. The region also has an estimated 22% of young people leaving school through years 10-12, in comparison to metropolitan Melbourne where only 15% of this cohort leaves school. The percentage of people aged between 25-34 years in the Hume Region in 2006 with a Bachelor degree or higher was 17.35%— Let me read that again: The percentage of people aged between 25-34 years in the Hume Region in 2006 with a Bachelor degree or higher was 17.35% compared to the Victorian rate of 30.4%. Hence, the region has just over half the Victorian average of people aged under 34 years with a university degree. They're shocking statistics, and I live in a really well connected part of Australia. We are getting better internet. We've got trains that sometimes work. We've got roads that work. Yet we've got those appalling statistics for young people accessing tertiary education. So what happens? The young people leave. It's our biggest export. The consequences for a nation that doesn't pay attention to this are really serious. Obviously you have bigger cities, but not having a young, educated, well-trained cohort and not having universities in our regional centres to drive economic growth are just the most short-sighted policies we could possibly have. So I'm beseeching the advisers tonight. I'm beseeching the minister to actually seriously do something about this, to do something about a region. If you can't solve the problems for the nation—and I get that it's complicated—surely for regional Australia we can begin work on a strategy and we can actually do something for the regions where I live and where those appalling statistics are in existence. Not wanting to be totally negative, my office has been working with the Parliamentary Budget Office to come up with solutions for how there might be some positive things we could do to make it easier and better for the regions. I've sent them across to the minister's office with some of the costings the Parliamentary Budget Office did around changing the HELP repayment-free period and amended it for rural regions. I've got all the details but, in summary, they came back with an expected fiscal balance impact of minus $9.7 million over the 2017-18 budget forward estimate if we just changed the payment-free period. This is such a small impact compared with the government's expected saving of over $3.8 billion. So I say to the colleagues in the House: at what cost do we keep going with this track of making higher education harder and harder to get and we as a nation not accepting the responsibility I believe we have not only to give people equity but to actually provide education, which provides the driving force for our regions and will enable the whole of regional Australia to take its place in the nation in the years ahead? By this legislation, by not paying attention to the impact on the regions, we're really working against the ability of our regions to do that. I say to my colleagues here tonight: you can make some great friends listening to what I've got to say, because it's not just me who thinks this. Clearly I'm on the back bench. I'm an independent member of parliament, but the Rural Universities Network put out a press release that says: The Regional Universities Network (RUN) strongly endorses Cathy McGowan MP's motion on regional universities before the House of Representatives, and the need for a National Regional Higher Education Strategy. That's the RUN universities. La Trobe University's John Dewar supports strong local campuses because we need them for regional development. The thing I really want to bring to the House tonight is a letter from what I thought was a most surprising ally—and please forgive me for making that assumption—the Group of Eight. I have a letter today from the Group of Eight and I'd like to read it into Hansard as part of my speech. It is signed by the Vicki Thomson, Chief Executive of the Group of Eight, which represents the universities in our cities: Dear Ms McGowan, As Chief Executive of Australia's leading research universities, the Group of Eight (Go8), I'm writing to you to offer my support for your Private Member's Bill, the National Regional Higher Education Strategy. There often appears to be the view that the Go8's teaching and research is confined to the major cities. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The Go8 remains committed to ensuring not only equitable access for students to higher quality education, but also long-term sustainability and economic growth for the regions— as should the government be, let me say. The letter goes on to detail the Go8's contribution to regional Australia: More than 25,000 regional and remote students study at a Go8 university each year— that's our great export— One in eight rural and regional students study at a Go8 university 50 per cent of agriculture and environmental students in Australia study at a Go8 university 60 per cent of veterinary students in Australia are trained by Go8 universities. They tell me they invest in outreach to regional communities, which of course they do, and it's important. But the point is: imagine the situation we've got today. Here I am on the back bench, independent and a strong advocate for the regions and I've got the Go8 onside, we've got the rural universities onside and I'm beseeching the government to please do something to make sure that the unintended consequences—and I say that kindly—are not going to be felt in the long term by the nation because at this particular time we fail to pay attention to the impact of this legislation before the House tonight on rural Australia. I don't know how to say it other than the consequences are going to be enormous for us. We can't say we didn't know because the debates in this House tonight were so strongly put forward by my colleague from Herbert talking about the impact on rural and regional communities. I really want to say to the minister, to the Prime Minister, to the advisers in the House tonight, to my colleagues on the government side and to the members of the National Party, in particular: stand up for your principles and your values, and stand up for rural and regional Australia. And to members of parliament from the Liberal Party who represent our regional electorates, I say: stand up for rural and regional Australia. Just don't let this go through tonight. It's poor law. It's poor law and it will have incredibly bad consequences for us. What is so distressing and so disappointing is this sense that one size fits everybody when clearly with university education we need to differentiate. We need to make the case that those in the regions need special treatment. Government has done it in some areas—there's a limited loading there, but it doesn't go nearly far enough to actually address the imbalance of those statistics that I put up earlier. Seventeen per cent of my young people are going on to higher education—it's an appalling figure. It's something we really should be ashamed about. Certainly, it's something that I absolutely want to see changed. Part of the reason why I became a member of parliament was to do something very specifically about accessing higher education in the regions. I say to the minister: it's time for a vision, and, if you can't have a vision for the whole of Australia, could you please have a vision for regional Australia? Could you please really consider the call from the Go8 and the call from the RUN universities and work together on a strategy that, over a period of time, will deliver equality. Sure, equality is important, but then it will deliver us a trained workforce. We are doing all this international work to bring foreigners to the country because we can't, in the regions, get enough of our own labour force, yet we do nothing positively to make sure that our young people are trained in the jobs that we've got. We've got so many jobs that we could have people working in in the country. It just seems to me quite ludicrous that we're not addressing the labour shortage in this most obvious way by training people in the regions, which seems so sensible. The third area, to me, is so obvious. I'm on a committee at the moment, with many government members and opposition people, looking at regional development and decentralisation. It's a very productive committee to be on. We are working together to say, 'How do we grow the regions? How do we use decentralisation as a tool of government?' Universities have to be one of the most cost-effective ways—cost-effective investment of government money—for growing our regions. So much money goes from the Commonwealth coffers into the regions. It's such a good opportunity for us; with such a small increase—or appreciation of the impact—we could have the most amazing multiplier effect. It's a call from the heart to the minister, to the Prime Minister, to my colleagues on the government side. Really, if you can't support us on the move here, could you please pay attention to a regional strategy and work with the parties so we can make sure that in the longer term, when we look back on this particular parliament, we can say: 'That was the year the government got the regions. The government got the role of education in supporting the regions and helping the regions be the answer that they can be to so many of the problems this nation is facing'? I bring my comments to a close with a real call-out to the advisers in the box tonight and to the minister: reconsider your decisions around a regional strategy for rural and regional Australia. 18:51 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay Let me start by reiterating all the things that have been said on this side of the house, in relation to this. Labor does not support this bill. This legislation is completely unfair and attacks students and undermines the fairness of our world-class student loan system. As I have said in this place many times before, one of the things that led me here was a comment made by my Liberal predecessor, Jackie Kelly, when she famously decreed that Western Sydney did not need a university; we were pram city. The people I get to represent—people like me, back then, as a 20-year-old—didn't deserve to have a university in their electorate, because they were capable of producing babies and nothing more. That's the difference between us and them, really. Outraged as I was at the time, my only ability, or the only thing available to me at that time, was to write a cranky letter to the editor of my local newspaper about my disgust. I'm glad Jackie Kelly's comments weren't heeded. But now, a few years later—just a few; I was 20 then and am only a few years older than that now—I get to stand in this place and defend the thing I came here for originally. I'm really glad that her comments weren't heeded. Instead, we have Western Sydney University right in my backyard. It's a university whose alumni I belong to, in fact, as does my mum, the first in our family to go to university. Through uncapping places, Labor opened the door of university to 190,000 Australians—many more who were the first in their family to go to university. This resulted in huge increases in the number of students going to university in Western Sydney, a place that is the jewel in the crown and a place where everybody comes to launch their campaigns. We've had former Prime Minister Tony Abbott coming into the electorate and spruiking all things great about Western Sydney—well, fund my university. Labor delivers real reform to higher education in this country. When we were last in government we lifted investment from $8 billion in 2007 to $14 billion—almost double—in 2013. But that growth will come to an absolute standstill because Malcolm Turnbull, the Prime Minister, has effectively reintroduced a cap on the number of university places, taking us back to the bad old days of John Howard when your family's income and bank balance determined whether you could go to university or not. This MYEFO package of $2.2 billion worth of cuts is the government's fourth attempt, since coming to office, to cut universities and make students pay more. These cuts do real damage to our universities. At last year's budget they tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. Now they're proposing a new rate of $45,000. It's still too low when facing the crippling costs of higher living and no wages growth, not to mention penalty rate cuts. That is too low for people to afford to live and pay back their debt. We believe the current repayment rate is about right. We don't want to make students repay their debts when they are starting a career, saving for a house or starting a family. But what do we see from this coalition government? We see $2.2 billion in cuts to universities, and Western Sydney University is the second-worst affected by these cuts. Sixty per cent of the students who attend the University of Western Sydney—or Western Sydney U, as it's now called—are the first in their families. That is a staggering figure: 60 per cent are the first in their immediate extended families to be able to go to university. That is an extraordinary number. Families in Western Sydney want their kids to have a great education. That extends to me. When we talk about City Deals and 30-minute cities, closing down the University of Western Sydney by defunding it and these cuts by stealth are not helpful. They will not create the 30-minute city this government constantly rattles on about. The people of Western Sydney and Lindsay in particular are being let down by this government. My community faces fewer employment opportunities in traditional jobs like manufacturing. Families in Lindsay need to be prepared for the jobs of the future. They want a learning pathway for their kids to give them a better job and a better life. Education will make a difference to the lives of people in my community. We need our kids to stay in school and go on to TAFE or university. I'm not even going to start on the VET sector tonight; I don't think we have enough time on the clock to talk about the cuts and lack of apprentices we now have. The Turnbull government should properly fund universities and not attack students through these measures. I was privileged to attend O-week at the University of Western Sydney and talk to students excited about their future, their opportunities and the jobs they'll get when they have finished their degrees. They talked about their anxieties about HECS repayments when they're done. These students, most of whom have casual jobs and don't get support from their families, because their families are struggling to get by, don't need to be slugged any further by this government. These are not the wealthiest students going to university; they are from hardworking families, some from the lowest socioeconomic backgrounds. It is pretty clear the government only ever had one plan for higher education—that is, for cuts and to make students pay more. To make matters worse, the New South Wales Liberals, who are spending $2.7 billion on demolishing and rebuilding two Sydney stadiums, are deaf to this problem as well. The Turnbull government is effectively slamming the door to educational opportunity in the faces of Western Sydney kids. Enrolments in university under Labor increased by 60 per cent in the seat of Lindsay. The University of Western Sydney will be the hardest hit, as I said before, with $93 million worth of cuts to funding. That is the greatest cut to any New South Wales university and the second highest to any university in this country. In 2016, the latest year with available data, about 25,000 women were enrolled at the University of Western Sydney out of a total of 44,000. Just over half the students were women. Instead of being supported, students are getting locked out. We are already facing an uphill battle, with the level of tertiary qualified people in my electorate sitting well below the state and country averages. We need to lift that, so we need more investment out there. The Liberals' funding cuts also mean that the University of Western Sydney's critical programs that reach out to people in communities and ensure a pathway or option to get into university for everyone who wants one, and industry and government partnered programs, are all at risk, as is the Launch Pad, a great initiative built under Labor during the time of David Bradbury, a fantastic former Labor member for Lindsay. We built this Launch Pad, which is now serving as a tech hub. We have heaps of start-ups in there building 3D printers that were formerly being built in people's garages and are now being exported all around the country. This funding cut threatens that exact site, the place where we are training young people for the jobs of the future. These programs are focusing on addressing the pronounced equity gap in education in my area. We know student debt is a genuine barrier to study for anyone in a low-SES or disadvantaged background. We should be doing all we can to increase participation in higher education, not making it harder. Why do we put challenges and hurdles in the way of our young people? Why don't we roll out the red carpet and give them every opportunity? They'll be here long after I'm gone. They'll be here making things and adding to our GDP well and truly after all of us have finished. Why are we making it harder? It is not good enough that these students are being left behind by this government. It is an especially cruel blow to the hardworking year 12 graduates who are now denied a place at university. Kids who studied last year and thought, 'Yes, I will get into university,' were denied a place because of the funding caps. Kids are starting their year 12 careers now, looking to go to university, and there is just so much uncertainty for them. They can have goals and aspirations but, because of this government, may have the door closed smack-bang in their face. It is incredibly galling to see Malcolm Turnbull ripping funding away from students to pay for tax cuts for multinationals and millionaires. I think that's what leaves the foul taste in the mouths of so many people on this side. It's that we can seem to find $65 billion in the Treasury coffers to give to the big four banks, for example, who have already announced that they're going to slash 6,000 jobs, in the face and on the backs of those university students. How does he justify making it easier for big business to pay less tax but harder for kids who are 17, 18 and 19 to go to university? These are kids who just want to get ahead, who just want a decent job and who just want to be productive members of our communities. Learning is a lifelong journey. I learnt that when I was studying to be a teacher back at university in 1999. It is a journey that starts well and truly before we are born and continues right up until the day we die. We need to make sure that our universities are there for everyone when they want to attend. The coalition government wants to slam the door on that lifelong journey. We know that the disadvantage some families in my seat of Lindsay are facing prevents them from being able to go to university. In times of significant economic transition we should be investing in our people, not making it harder. The people in my community need a decent, well-funded university that supports their desire for a better life. People in Lindsay are calling out for courses at the Western Sydney University city campus, right in the middle of Penrith, to make it more accessible to go to university. As Tanya Plibersek has said, Labor understands that a strong university sector needs certainty and stability. You can't do anything without a stable policy. This undermines all of the planning that universities are able to do. Taking away the 9,500 university places that are estimated to be unfunded in the coming 12 months, this government is again being cruel and out of touch—I don't think that they ever had the touch to be honest. They are denying opportunities to a better future and it's an absolute rip-off in the faces of those young people. But they can't help themselves. They have consistently tried to make students pay more, and why? All to pay and fund their $65 billion tax cut to big business, on the backs of hardworking students, who just want to get ahead. They say that it'll trickle down, but we're yet to see any evidence of that, and I can't find an economist who tells them that it's going to trickle down and rain on their heads. No wonder the people of my community, and of Lindsay, feel incredibly let down by the Turnbull government, and the Abbott government before them. We deserve better. We deserve better than people who think that we're only capable of producing babies. We deserve better than people who think that all that we can get is an airport out there that's all the effects of a 24-hour airport. Where we have planes flying overhead 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Where we don't get investment in our people. We've seen funding cut after funding cut to education. In the VET sector we've got 140,000 fewer apprentices than in times past. We're seeing this absolute demolishing of the funding for the Western Sydney University. Once again, Labor will not support this cruel, out-of-touch policy, and I ask those opposite to reconsider their support for this $65 billion tax cut on the back of university students. 19:03 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I've often spoken in this place about the government's priorities and how they impact on everyday Australians. Have you ever wondered where students and universities sit on the scale of those opposite? You need to look no further than this bill that we have before the House today. I want to acknowledge the member for Griffith, who has moved a second reading amendment to this bill, the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018, and place on record my thanks to her for moving this amendment, which is that the House declines to give the bill a second reading, because it attacks students and would undermine the fairness of Australia's world-class student loan scheme. I know the member for Griffith, alongside our deputy leader, Tanya Plibersek, had been listening and consulting with the student sector, as we all have as representatives in this place. In one way or another we all represent higher education students in our combined electorates across this country. The bill attacks students. It simply attacks students and undermines our world-class loan scheme, which has been a proven success for decades. I want to place on record how proud I am that Australia's higher education system is world leading. It supports more than one million students, both international and domestic, and our universities, as we've heard, directly employ 120,000 people and support another 40,000 jobs. Our higher education system must be protected. But, just like with everything else, it seems this government is hell-bent on tearing it down. And this MYEFO package with $2.2 billion worth of cuts will be the fourth attempt of the government's. I say again: it is their fourth attempt, since coming to office, to cut universities and make students pay more. It's not just the second or third time; this is the fourth attempt they've had at going after Australia's higher education students with a cheap tax grab. The government, as we know, are relentless when it comes to attacks on students. In last year's budget, they tried to make students start repaying their HELP debt when they started earning as little as $42,000. Now they're proposing a new rate of $45,000. How generous! The government want to increase the threshold and want to be congratulated for it. They simply either don't understand the ramifications that this bill will have on Australians trying to earn a living who have a uni or TAFE debt or they're deliberately targeting those who can least afford to pay it. Either way, in my books, it's a shameful act. But this seems to be the common theme within the Turnbull government. Pensioners, jobseekers, young families, you name it—if you're a working Australian doing it tough, then you're in the government's sights. Whereas if you're one of the big banks you're in line for a tax cut. The hypocrisy is astounding. In this bill the government has raised the threshold from the previous attempt of $42,000 to $45,000, but the truth is it's still too low. $45,000 is barely more than the minimum wage, and would mean Australians with a HELP debt on low incomes would be required to make repayments. This change would also have a greater impact on women, particularly those who have returned to the work force part-time after taking parental leave. For example, Australians with a HELP debt earning $51,000, most of whom are likely to be women, will have less disposable income that someone earning, say, $32,000. How is that fair? What the government doesn't like to talk about is that the lower repayment threshold for HELP debt will also apply to TAFE and vocational students who take out VET FEE-HELP or VET student loans. This means some of the hardest working but most modestly paid people in the country will be affected. That means people with a diploma or advanced diploma qualifications, like early childhood educators, enrolled nurses and technicians, will be caught up in this. We know that this week thousands of early childhood educators will be walking off their jobs as part of the Big Steps Campaign. They are highly qualified professionals, yet are paid one-third less than those teaching and caring for children just a few years older. Despite the incredibly important work they do, many early childhood educators are paid as low as $20 per hour, half the average national wage. Making matters worse is that 97 per cent of educators are female, which only further widens the gender pay gap in Australia. Because of these measures and their inadequate pay they will be paying their HELP debts well into their forties. These are the people who will bear the brunt of this government's awful piece of legislation we have before the House today—not big bankers, not executives and not those with mansions down by the harbour side. No, it will be childcare workers, teachers and nurses. It will be those who can least afford it. Once again, that doesn't seem to faze this government. Australia's future economy will require a high-skilled workforce, and this bill does nothing to support it. In fact, the government is going out of its way and making deal after deal with One Nation, to prove that point. Just last week we saw One Nation, the so-called party of the battlers, do a deal to deliver $65 billion in tax cuts for the big end of town, in exchange for 1,000 apprenticeships. That is nothing more than a pathetic con job. It is selling out young Australians in particular. We know that since this government came to power Australia has lost over 140,000 apprenticeships—a decline of over 35 per cent. Locally, the apprentices in my electorate of Oxley have been hit harder. Our community has seen the loss of almost1,500 apprenticeships, which is equivalent to a 43 per cent decrease, and the signs are that this will only continue to get worse. The 2017 budget cut a further $637 million from TAFE training and apprenticeships, and the government's proposed Skilling Australians Fund, which is supposed to deliver 300,000 apprenticeships, has been widely panned as unworkable. It seems the only thing the government is interested in is lining the pockets of the big banks and, as we know, foreign investors, while Australia's apprentices and students are left behind. I wonder whether those opposite are actually aware of where Australia currently sits in the OECD as far as public investment in universities is concerned. Are we near the top? Not even close. About mid-range? Nah. Australia has the second lowest level of public investment in universities in the OECD, and this government only wants to make it worse. In contrast, our students already pay the sixth highest fees in the OECD. So we're towards the bottom, or the second lowest level, for investment in universities but our students are paying the sixth highest fees in the OECD. And we know that the fee hikes in this bill will only make that record worse. I'm proud to represent the people of Oxley, in the south-west of Brisbane, in this place; however, for some of them things can be tough when it comes to going to university or TAFE. We know that high student debt is a genuine barrier to study for low-SES and disadvantaged students, so why would this government possibly want to make it harder for young people who are trying to pull themselves out of the cycle of disadvantage by furthering themselves at university or TAFE, and harder for parents who are trying to support their kids? We should be doing all we can to increase participation in higher education, not putting up extra barriers to further education and training, yet that is what this government is doing to young people in this country. Picture this, Mr Deputy Speaker: four years from now, as a 22-year-old, you have recently graduated with a degree in engineering and you can't wait to take the skills and knowledge you learned at university and apply them to the real world. The past four years of university have been tough. Since moving out of home you have had to fork out the expensive rent that comes with living near enough to the closest capital city university. You've been working casually more than 20 hours per week—maybe in a cafe, maybe late at night—to support your study. But it's been made tougher since the government cut penalty rates. Sundays used to bring that little bit of extra cash to help with the groceries, increasing electricity costs or just getting to and from university on public transport, but getting your pay cut, as a young person, hasn't helped with this. Nonetheless, you've graduated from university and you're ready to take on the world. However, you quickly learn that the job market is pretty tough out there and finding employment in your field isn't easy. The youth unemployment rate for people aged 15 to 24 is still double the national average. You're desperately keen to get your foot in the door, so you take an admin role at a leading engineering firm until something opens up for you. The starting pay is just 48 grand but it's better than nothing. You soon learn that, because of the government cutting the threshold for HELP repayments, your take-home pay is now even less. On top of hoping to land an entry-level engineering job, you also hope to save a home deposit. But, as the government has done nothing about negative gearing, house prices have continued to rise. The average modest home on the outskirts of a capital city will now set you back $500,000. With tight budgeting you're able to save $50 per week. The bank will require a 20 per cent deposit, meaning you have to save $100,000. At your current rate, this will take 2,000 weeks to save, or the next 38 years of your life. It's pretty sobering, but that is the story facing thousands of young people right across the country. It is the story I hear when I'm out doing mobile offices at Orion shopping centre or Jindalee Village or the Forest Lake village near my own home. Parents say, 'Milton, I'm worried my kids can't get a long-term job but I'm more worried that they'll never be able to have the great Australian dream.' What we're seeing today very clearly, in clear language, is: we're going to hit students with higher fees, we're going to give them higher bills and we're going to make them pay them off sooner. Among my Labor colleagues on this side of the chamber I note the member for Macquarie, the member for Brand and the member for Chifley have been, in particular, outspoken advocates in the area of kids from disadvantaged backgrounds getting ahead. That is a key reason I'm in this place—to make sure that the kids who have the brains, the abilities and the talent can reach their full potential. It should be government helping them to do that. Instead, we've got a government with a lousy set of rules and bills before this parliament today that are simply not going to achieve that. It's why Labor has recently announced a national inquiry into post-secondary education, a once-in-a-generation national inquiry that will look at every aspect of the vocational, educational and higher training systems to ensure they can best respond to the needs of Australia's economy and society. It's about making sure that Australians have access to the best post-secondary opportunities in the world. We all want our kids to get the education and the skills they need to thrive. We need to make sure Australians have the opportunities of lifelong learning. It makes good economic sense. We are competing against a fast sector across the South-East Asian market. If Australia is to be a wealthy, highly educated nation, we must boost participation in quality post-secondary education. It's pretty clear that other countries in our region are not doing what this parliament is doing tonight. They are investing in education and skills. Experts have warned that if we rest on our laurels Australia risks being left behind. We on this side of the chamber know that we delivered real reform to our universities. We invested in universities. We lifted funding from $8 billion to $14 billion in 2013. We opened the doors to our universities to an additional 190,000 Australians, many the first in their family to attend university. Why did we lift participation in universities? Because it's good for the individual, but it's better for the economy. We know that a qualification, be it from TAFE or uni, can set you up for life. We know that many jobs of the future will require a post-school qualification. Yet tonight we are making a decision which is going to make it harder for kids to get ahead. The minister at the table may think it's funny. He may think what I'm saying is not serious, but the reality is that with this bill tonight we will make it harder for kids in his electorate and kids in my electorate to get post-secondary education. We know the reason the government is keen on this. There's only one reason this government exists. Let's be clear: it's to make sure that those at the very top who rely on government support—the multinational companies and the millionaires—are looked after. And at what expense? The expense tonight, on this day of parliament and in this moment in time, is to slug the university students of today and tomorrow to pay for that. Well, I say I'm not going to support it. Bill Shorten and Tanya Plibersek, the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, say that our side of politics will not support it. We believe in a better way—more importantly, we believe in a fairer way. Tonight I call on the government to abandon what I call a reckless policy that threatens the viability and future of students attending higher education, and to stand with working Australians and middle-class Australians—the people whom we are sent to represent in this chamber—to protect the right of every Australian to better themselves through university, further education, or TAFE. 19:18 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie There will be a lot said about allowing access to education, and the impacts that the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 will have. I'm very pleased to be able to speak against this bill, because that is the key. As the member for Oxley has outlined, it's the disincentive that it creates and not just the cost that it forces still-young people to bear while they're trying to move from university and transition into a working life. I want to tell you the story of Ellie. Ellie struggled to get through year 11 for a whole lot of family reasons. She was a bright student, but it wasn't always a place where she could concentrate. However, she made it through year 11 and she made it through year 12. In fact, she did so well that she was offered a place at university. She was to be the first person in her family to go to university. That seemed like a fantastic thing to start with—the idea that you get to university and this whole life would open up for you. At the time, she looked at what the costs of surviving university would be, but not the debt she would accrue and pay back—that conversation came later, and that whole process in itself was pretty daunting. But Ellie was lucky that she had people around her who said, 'You know what? This is worth it. This is an investment in yourself that is worth it.' And that was in spite of other voices saying to her: 'Why do you want to go to university? You're going to do an arts degree. That won't get you anything. Why don't you go and do hairdressing?' Well, Ellie wasn't terribly gifted at hairdressing, so that wasn't an option. But what appealed to her was the unknown of a degree at university. So, in spite of different voices having different influences on her, she did accept her place at university. She went to the University of New South Wales and she began her arts degree. As luck would have it, Ellie thrived in that environment, but that doesn't mean it wasn't hard. Anyone who has taken a child through their first year of university knows the challenge of those first assignments: the tears, the late nights, the computers not necessarily doing what they ought to do and the struggle—not just the struggle of the practical but the struggle of the mind when you're struggling to deal with stuff you don't understand—but the very process of being at university and working through it is where you get the benefit. Ellie got through this process. She got through her first lot of exams. She got through her next lot of exams. She got midway through second year, and suddenly the debt that she was carrying started to weigh on her. She started questioning herself: 'Can I actually repay this debt? I'm doing an arts degree. Will I ever get a job that will allow me to pay back all this money I owe?'—and by then it was already more money than she could ever imagine paying back. Again there were good people around her to encourage her, to keep her going, to say: 'You know what? This is the hard bit. You're halfway there. Keep going.' She managed to get through, but always there were other voices saying to her: 'You don't need to do this. You don't need to be worrying about this. You could go and get a job.' Fortunately, Ellie stuck with it throughout it all. There were lots of tears. She finished her final year, she did really well, she got offed a place to do honours and she did honours—the first in her family to have a degree and the first in her family to have an honours degree. When I think about this legislation, I think about the one extra straw that it would have taken to dissuade someone like Ellie from going down a path that is hard. If anyone sits here and thinks, 'Oh, what a bludge, going to uni,' you have obviously forgotten what it was like going to university or you sailed through it differently from most of us, because it is hard. You are struggling with things that are making your brain explode. When I see legislation like this I think, 'Is this really what we want to do to young people? How much hope and possibility do we want to take away from them? How much debt do we want them laden with?' That's one aspect of it. And then, as they move from one phase of their life to their next, how much do we want to make it hard for them? Clearly the government has decided it wants to make it a bit harder than it already is—in fact, significantly harder than it already is. I think the Prime Minister and this government think that, for students who are transitioning into the work environment, it won't really matter to them. I talked to some young graduates about their budget. I asked them what it would look like to repay on $42,000 a year instead of starting to repay their debt on an income of $45,000 a year. Here are the sorts of things that they told me. For a budget for someone who's just graduated from a university in Sydney and has a job nearby, let's assume that the weekly take-home pay of someone who is earning, say, $45,000 is $736. That's the weekly breakdown. So let's do a weekly budget. Let's assume this person is trying to avoid the two-hour commute each way from the Blue Mountains or the Hawkesbury, which my electorate covers, but is happy to do a bit of commute into the city, so they rent in Strathfield. The average rent for a three-bedroom house is $680, and they pay a third of that. That leaves them with $510. Let's take away the cost of their mobile phone, their train tickets to get to work each day and about $150 a week for food: they now have $300 a week left. Then you've got the house-running costs, such as the cost of home internet, because, of course, we all work in a mobile world, and the chances of their job being nine to five, clock-on clock-off are pretty remote. Like all of us, they will be working late from home. Hopefully they will be able to download the odd Netflix here and there, but I haven't got that in the budget so I'm not sure that's going to be a viable option unless they can share someone's Netflix account. They've got their home internet, their water and their electricity, and those average at about, let's say, $200 a month—about $50 a week—and that's very conservative. Now they have $250 a week left, and that's if you somehow manage not to get a shock electricity bill for summer or winter. But that's only $250 left after the basic costs come out. Now that doesn't include putting in for your fair share of cleaning products in the house, nor does it include medical, dental or optical expenses. It doesn't address occasional costs like renewing a licence, maybe paying a fine, replacing a broken phone or computer, getting a haircut, or even joining a local sporting team or the gym. If you have a car, that's at least $50 a week in petrol and whatever the weekly breakdown of rego and insurance is. I haven't mentioned home contents insurance; of course, young people find that really stretches their budget. What if the washing machine carks it? What if you get a hole in your shoes in the rain? What if you're using a dodgy washing machine and it rips one of your tops and you need to replace it? There is no room in this budget for buying new clothes. You sure as hell can't afford to go out to dinner to celebrate a friend's birthday. You probably can't afford to buy your mum much of a birthday present or a Christmas present, and you certainly can't have a pet. You might be able to afford one of these things: maybe you can allow yourself a haircut one week; the next week you might get petrol; you might go to the doctor the next. There really isn't even room for two of those things to happen in the same week. I don't actually think that you've got the opportunity to think about having children, buying a dog or buying your first home. There really isn't room in that budget. That is what we are saying; that's how you should live. What about a deposit for a property? Well, to get a deposit for a $600,000 property in the situation that I've just outlined, that person would have to not spend a cent outside of the bare necessities budget—certainly no children and no medical expenses or one-off expenses, like replacing a fridge. They could not buy one item of clothing, eat out, buy friends or family gifts, or even get a haircut. If you saved every one of those cents for five years, you might get yourself a bit of a deposit for your home. Of course, in that time the costs will have gone up and so you'll need even more. So this is what this government thinks is a suitable position for people to be in when they start paying back their HECS debt. This government wants to stick its hands into the pockets of people and take a chunk of the $250 that's left over. Not only do I fear that this will leave young people short of enough money to live properly, to eat properly and to look after their health properly, but the feedback I get is that it will absolutely reduce the number of people who even consider going to university in the first place, and that would be a tragedy. It's a tragedy for our economy, because our future depends on people, young and old, wanting to educate themselves. We know that accumulating a student debt is a genuine barrier to study for people from particularly poor and disadvantaged backgrounds. We already know that. It isn't an unknown; it's not a possibility. It is a fact. We also know that investing in education gives more back to society in the long term than it costs us in the short term. Let's picture Australia in 20, 30, or 40 years from now, and ask ourselves the question: do we want people who are doctors, nurses, journalists, teachers, engineers, planners, scientists, health professionals—anybody who requires a university degree—only to be coming from wealthy and privileged families? Do we only want one type of person who can afford to do those courses? We're already seeing an imbalance in professions like veterinary science and medicine. This sort of legislation is going to exacerbate that. I would have thought we'd want a mix of people. We want industries to be filled with people of different colours, different abilities and different genders—people from rural and regional Australia, Indigenous Australians, and people who know what it's like to go to school with a pair of shoes that has a hole in them. Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 109 ADJOURNMENT Whitlam Electorate: Railways 109 19:30 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam The Prime Minister has visited my electorate twice in the last three weeks, and we welcome the attention. He didn't come by train, and we all know his affection for catching a train. There's a very good reason for that. It's because his party—the government, in fact—have abandoned the rail commuters across the Illawarra and South Coast. At both the state and the federal levels, the Liberals have failed to take opportunities to improve the rail network throughout the Illawarra and South Coast. In 2017 the Turnbull government heralded a better rail service, including for Wollongong, through its faster rail prospectus. In fact, it released this plan, highlighting in its explanatory material the reality faced by commuters travelling from Wollongong to Sydney: travel times of up to two hours each way. This is a journey which even the former Deputy Prime Minister, Tim Fischer, said belonged in the 19th century. Commuters and their parliamentary representatives from Wollongong agree with the former Deputy Prime Minister. The government's own material highlights that increasing speeds from 60 kilometres an hour to 80 kilometres an hour would reduce the travel times by almost one-half. The government's material mentions the Wollongong commute to Sydney—the Illawarra line—more than any other journey in its entire document. You can imagine how surprised we were when it published the results of the prospectus program and announced the programs that it was going to fund. There was not a single cent for any region in New South Wales south of Sydney—abandoned by the federal Liberal Party. Despite the Prime Minister continually talking about his affection for trains, he seems to be blind to the needs of commuters on the Illawarra and South Coast. My state colleagues, Paul Scully and Ryan Park, have been taking up the same issue with their state colleagues, because the state Liberals are just as bad as the federal Liberals. In 2012 the New South Wales government released its long-term transport master plan, which was to address faster road travel times and reliability for Illawarra residents. It's been six years since the publication of that. I see the member for Cunningham is in the chamber with me now. She is shaking her head as well, because her constituents, like mine, understand the pain that these commuters are going through. It has been six years, and last week the New South Wales government released the results of their studies and what they intended to fund. There was not a brass razoo for the Illawarra and South Coast! This is how the Liberals, at both the state and federal levels, treat the commuters from the Illawarra and South Coast. The Illawarra is more than just a southern suburb of Sydney, even though over 24,000 people make the journey from the member for Cunningham's electorate, from my electorate and even from the member for Gilmore's electorate through to Sydney to do their work on a weekly basis. Fast rail is not an option: it is essential if we are to grow as a region and to get the jobs and investment that we need. Fast rail and fast internet are absolutely essential. The Turnbull government talks a lot about regional development but doesn't do much when it comes to the suburbs and the regions south of Sydney. With regional universities and state-of-the-art hospitals throughout regional Australia and throughout southern New South Wales, the commuters and the residents of these regions need a better deal from the government. Freight rail also needs a better deal. The Maldon-Dombarton freight rail project was commissioned by the Wran Labor government in New South Wales and, indeed, half-built by the Wran Labor government in New South Wales, only to be cancelled by the Greiner Liberal government in 1998. Labor governments have been doing their best to get that project back on track. In two elections, the member for Cunningham and I have been so happy to be able to present a promise to the electorates for $50 million to get that project back on track. On each and every occasion the New South Wales Liberal government has thwarted the progress in this freight rail project. We need to get rail back on the agenda, and the Prime Minister needs to stop taking selfies on trains and start looking after the commuters of the South Coast. Cricket 110 19:35 Mr BROADBENT MT4 McMillan As long ago as I can remember—as a very small boy—I remember my father playing cricket against the Pakenham Cricket Club. In finals, every match was important. We learned lessons out of cricket, espoused by our parents and others, about the importance of playing the game and not just winning. On Saturday a week ago, Kooweerup, where I was born, played Pakenham in the grand final. I'm going to read from an article by Russell Bennett out of the Pakenham Gazette: It wasn't just the legend of Kooweerup that grew on the weekend. So too did the legend of Phil Anning, the Pakenham Cricket Club president and former Kooweerup coach. The little man with a heart of gold has always been a class act, but what he displayed on Sunday afternoon in the Kooweerup rooms straight after the Demons had belted out their song following a crushing win over his side was nothing short of inspiring. Here are some excerpts of what Anning told the Kooweerup players, support staff, committee, and fans. "I've got to say I'm extremely disappointed in the Kooweerup Cricket Club first off ... because I thought we had a mutual agreement that we took it in turns to win these! "It's really interesting that for the past five or six years, through social media and comments from talking with people, every year after Kooweerup has been successful you hear things like 'Tubsy (Chris O'Hara) is too old' and 'the Bright boys (Paul, Matt, Chris, and John) have been there too long', but we sit back at Pakenham and think those people are living in a fantasy world to think that this club is just going to slide away and not want to better itself and continue to grow. "We sit there and think that if we want to win another premiership, we're going to have to beat the best side in the competition—which is Kooweerup. "We know that, and we were fortunate enough to win it two years ago, but over the past two years we've been beaten by a better side and that's undisputable. "Dom (Paynter) said that to our players, and we've got a lot of work to do if we want to match you blokes. "We'll do everything in our power at the Pakenham Cricket Club to make sure that your run comes to an end next year. "If it doesn't, we'll put our tails between our legs again as we will tonight and we'll start planning how we can do it, because you are the benchmark and you should be very proud of that—whether it's Mark (Cooper) as coach, or Gilesy (Michael Giles) before him. Whoever. "Our season will not be defined by the result of today's grand final. It will be defined by getting four sides into the grand final. "It's no coincidence that our Premier sides are playing off in a grand final, our second sides are both playing off in grand finals, and our junior sides are playing off against each other in the under-16s. We're doing something right, and while every other club wants to sit back and have little snide remarks and play silly mind games, we'll continue to go out there and play the game in the spirit it was meant to be when it was first developed. "No other club has taken the mantra of the Pakenham or Kooweerup cricket clubs and thought 'maybe this is the way we need to improve ourselves'. That was last Saturday week. What we woke up to Sunday morning was quite different. I read from Catherine McGregor's article in the paper today: Cricket, according to Smith, has a "rich poetic heart". And Dravid was the embodiment of its finest instincts. The Great Wall of India was a "timeless champion of steel and dignity". Having been the beneficiary of Dravid's grace and chivalry at a very difficult time of my life I can attest to his integrity, humility and decency. Today that rich poetic heart is broken. And the Australian public feel betrayed and enraged at the failure of our national cricket team to live up to the tenets of that amorphous, imprecise code known as "the spirit of cricket". The spirit of cricket mentioned at Kooweerup for their grand final spirit and here by Catherine McGregor has been something important to this nation. We held ourselves up as doyens of people who played the game in the spirit it ought to be played. Someone said to me, 'How dare you be enraged about this issue, when there are so many other important issues that we should be addressing.' That's fine, except this game of cricket has been part of our national DNA, part of who and what we are, and it's going to be embarrassing to walk on the national stage ever again after this event. I felt personally upset about this. I know that people I spoke to were personally upset about this, because we—as a nation, as sportspeople—believed we were better than that. We are better than that on the ground at Kooweerup and Pakenham, and Phil Anning explained that beautifully when he said: … play the game in the spirit it was meant to be when it was first developed. Braddon Electorate: Electoral Boundaries 111 19:40 Ms KEAY 262273 Braddon I rise this evening to welcome the communities of Bakers Beach, Harford, Hawley Beach, Moriarty, Northdown, Port Sorell, Sassafras, Shearwater, Squeaking Point and Thirlstane into the federal division of Braddon. Last year, the Australian Electoral Commission completed its redistribution of Tasmania's electoral boundaries, and I am pleased to welcome the fact that the entire Latrobe municipality of these towns will be now in the Braddon electorate. The Port Sorell area continues to be one of the fastest-growing areas in Tasmania. The ALP, in its submission to the AEC, called for the Latrobe municipality to be united in the electorate of Braddon. It is one that I understand and I know that the people of that area feel a closer affinity to the north-west of Tasmania than they do to the remainder that lies, particularly, to the south of the state. The Latrobe Council also made a submission to the AEC calling for the same, and for the same reasons. I must declare a conflict of interest, Mr Speaker. My dear mother and stepfather live in the town of Shearwater on the main road. My stepfather is a member of the Thirlstane Golf Club. I know they'll look forward to supporting me and Labor at the next federal election. My mum is clearing space in the garden for my poster, which is all very exciting. Then, of course, there are the magnificent attractions that the area has to offer. Ghost Rock vineyard produces multi-award-winning pinot noir, pinot gris and sparkling chardonnay. Rhuby Delights produces chocolate coated rhubarb, strawberries, blackberries and blackcurrants. The Narawntapu National Park—I'm going to have to learn to say that a bit better—is a hidden gem with inlets, small islands, wetlands, sand dunes, lagoons and an amazing variety of plants and animals and, sadly, has some wombat mange—I inherited this from the member for Lyons who has an intense interest in this issue, and it's one that I am hoping to share with him. It is one of the best places in Tasmania to easily observe native animals in their natural habitat. The park is also rich in Aboriginal heritage, with many shell middens and artefacts that can be seen on walking trails across the park. I know my colleague the member for Lyons was not too happy losing Port Sorell from his electorate, but there is very little community of interest between Port Sorell in north-west Tasmania and the outer suburbs of Hobart in the Lyons electorate, which I have just mentioned. However, there is that strong community link between Port Sorell, Latrobe and my home town of Devonport—which is only a 20-minute drive away—and, more broadly, the Cradle Coast region. The Liberal Party, for some strange reason, ignored the wishes of the Latrobe Council in its submission and stated that this area should remain in Lyons. Even stranger, were the actions of the state Liberal government when it came to Tasmania's electoral boundaries. In Tasmania, our five state electoral boundaries are normally the same as the five federal boundaries. Premier Will Hodgman had the opportunity in November last year, before state parliament rose ahead of the state election, to change those boundaries to mirror the federal boundaries. For his own selfish reasons he chose not to. This has resulted in the ridiculous situation where people within the Port Sorell area at the recent state election earlier this month were voting for state representatives who will not represent them into the future. The Port Sorell area is traditionally a conservative area, and, clearly, the Premier wanted to use that community as political pawns to offset the popularity of state Labor leader Rebecca White, who is a state member for Lyons. The Premier should do the right thing once the parliament resumes—I believe in May—and amend the state electoral boundaries so the Port Sorell areas in Braddon will be the same at a federal level as at a state level. I want to assure the wider Port Sorell community that I will not take this area for granted. I have already planned next week to have mobile offices at Port Sorell and Shearwater. The first will be held at George and Dave's Café in Shearwater on the afternoon of Thursday, 5 April, between 1.30 pm and 3.00 pm. The second will be at The Trend Shed cafe at Port Sorell on Friday, 6 April, also between 1.30 pm and 3.00 pm. I encourage the local community to come along and discuss any issues that they have with me, whether they are state, federal or local. I'm really looking forward to representing the remainder of the Latrobe municipality, being able to campaign there, listening to the concerns of the community and seeing how we as a federal Labor government after the next election can further their interests. Dividend Imputation 112 19:45 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I rise today to call out Labor's favourite political tactic, and that would be the old class warfare dog whistle—rich versus poor; haves versus have-nots; a black and white, zero-sum game that holds to the socialist ideals and those communist undertones. It's such a poor and lazy substitute for a real, wholesome debate, and yet Labor, the Greens, GetUp! and just about every modern leftist movement trot out the same tactics and use them mercilessly, usually when they don't have solutions to put forward themselves. The Leader of the Opposition's Press Club address last month and his follow-up comments since are a case in point; the opposition leader and Labor have been big on class warfare rhetoric. The Leader of the Opposition tried the old bait and switch, stating that we should end division and create a more cohesive and constructive political discourse but then accusing the business sector and the conservatives of being responsible for a 'left-behind society', insinuating that one section of society is benefiting at the direct expense of the other—what absolute rubbish! I'm not for a minute suggesting that there aren't people doing it tough. There certainly are many people in my area who are doing it tough. They are struggling in the face of serious challenges—financial, social and health difficulties—and it's incumbent on all of us in this place to do more to improve the situation of our fellow Australians who are marginalised, no doubt, and no-one would oppose that. There are also many people who would not see themselves as marginalised but who feel that the agenda, policies and values that they see played out on the national stage are not the things that matter to them the most. We have to strive to align our priorities with theirs, absolutely. I'm not saying that business as usual is good enough, but I do say that we have to shake things up. But the answer isn't bigger government controlling more of the levers. Labor's plan for wage fixing, higher taxes, robbing people's retirement incomes, capping health insurance and mandating the use of green energy is only a recipe for more pain and alienation, especially for the poorest in our community and for the poorest in my electorate of Wright. Labor's plan to steal from our retirees, pensioners and low-income earners by changing the dividend imputation rules not only will directly affect 1.1 million Australians who have worked hard, saved and paid taxes their entire lives—and they have paid taxes their entire lives, so don't come in here and say that they're not paying any tax—but also will affect every Australian with a superannuation account, as the managers of those accounts will be forced to change their investment strategies. It will hurt Australian companies that traditionally pay higher dividends than overseas companies. The consequences of Labor's other tax policies, which include limiting negative gearing and halving the capital gains tax discount, are equally huge. These have the potential to adversely impact the financial future of so many hardworking Australians who are doing the right thing and trying to plan for their retirement. Labor also plans to ride roughshod over the private health system. This will only drive people out and put more pressure on the public health system, meaning longer waiting times for the most vulnerable people, who rely on the public hospital system. As for their ideologically driven plan to replicate South Australia's disastrous 50 per cent renewable energy target, that is expected to drive electricity prices up even higher and add to the price squeeze families currently face. Their plan to trash over 100 years of an independent body setting the minimum wage is expected to cost businesses over $8 billion, and that cost will be felt by all Australians in the form of increased prices and less business growth, which means fewer jobs. Tonight, you heard those on the other side in the previous debate say that they are going to reintroduce free university education. I look forward to seeing how they cost that out in the upcoming budget! These aren't solutions. They are more of the same big-government Labor policies that proved so disastrous under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments, sidestepping more and more to the left under pressure from the Greens and the monster they helped create—GetUp! What I put to the House is that Labor simply can't provide the solutions that Australians are looking for, and they'll only make our problems worse. Their divisive, class-warfare dog whistle is a glaring example of how they're only focused on hoodwinking people to win votes. Abraham Lincoln said, 'You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.' That is pretty basic economics—everyone knows that. Unfortunately, Labor is not aware of that. Wills Electorate: Infrastructure 113 19:50 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills I'm regularly contacted by residents in my electorate of Wills regarding the pace of new developments in our neighbourhoods, and I hear their concerns about the pressure on open space and social infrastructure and amenities as this cracking pace of development intensifies across the electorate. I've seen the phenomenon across the suburbs of Brunswick, Coburg, Pascoe Vale, Glenroy, Hadfield and Fawkner, and on numerous occasions I've met with residents, from the southern part of the electorate, in Brunswick, right up to the north in, Glenroy, and discussed this issue of overdevelopment. The conversations generally turn on three key points. Firstly, developments tend to occur, despite the best efforts of local councils, without clear strategic oversight or being part of any broader plan for the entirety of the northern suburbs of Melbourne. The developments are driven solely by the profit, or commercial, motive and occur in an ad hoc manner. As soon as someone sells to a developer—even if a resident passes away and the estate sells to a developer—it is a very random process. Not much consideration is given to whether the development fits into that local area, whether there are sufficient amenities and social infrastructure such as schools, childcare centres, medical clinics or open park space available to meet the increase in population that the development will naturally bring. Obviously, when a developer knocks down a three-bedroom home and puts up five two-bedroom units, you're going to have an increase in the population in that space. Secondly, these new units tend to have no car parking space. You get an additional 10 people living in that plot and, suddenly, there are all these cars being parked out on the street adding to the traffic congestion issues that local residents face. Thirdly, developments tend to be put up quickly. The developers wants to make their money, so the more quickly they can put up the building and sell it or rent it out the better. The standards—and aesthetics to a certain extent—tend to be left as an afterthought. There's been some thought that it may be necessary to have an independent planning committee, a statutory body at the state level outside of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, made up of independently appointed town planners, architects and engineers to assess the appropriateness of developments across the benchmarks—social infrastructure, traffic congestion, aesthetics and environmental impact—that we consider important. Of course, I suspect the developers would resist such a move but there is precedent for such statutory bodies, particularly in Europe in cities like Rome and Berlin, where heritage is so important. The congestion issues are not unique to my electorate. They are becoming a problem all over our capital cities, particularly in Melbourne and Sydney. Yes, we know it's because the vast majority of migrant intake is to Melbourne and Sydney. In addition to the migration to Melbourne and Sydney, a baby is born every one minute and 44 seconds in Australia. Over the next 30 years, Melbourne is projected to be Australia's biggest city with a population of around eight million, and Sydney will also hit around eight million. Australia needs to really think about its long-term planning for sustainable growth. Rather than call for a flat cut to migration, as the government has—and, on the way through, bash new migrants and minorities like the member for Warringah and the Minister for Home Affairs are wont to do—we should be having a constructive discussion about Australia's future with creative ideas about how we can maintain the economic benefits of migration while addressing the strain on our infrastructure and services. This is something the federal government is not doing, despite the fact that we've seen substantial growth in Melbourne. The coalition federal government continues to short-change Victorians. The hypocrisy of calling for a cut to migration because of infrastructure pressure is breathtaking, considering it was the Turnbull and Abbott governments that have cut infrastructure with respect to Victoria. To be able to plan ahead, Victoria needs to have its fair share to build infrastructure and major transport projects across the state, yet we only get the equivalent of only $90 per person, whereas New South Wales receives the equivalent of $278 per person. We hear the Minister for Home Affairs lament the strain on our capital cities' infrastructure and say that the cities are overcrowded. This is despite the fact that his own department is contributing to that strain and making it harder for local workers to find jobs. Eighty-five per cent of 457 visas it has approved have been for jobs in capital cities that could otherwise have been filled by local workers. It's well accepted that migration is an integral part of our economic growth. But rather than fearmongering about migrants and minorities, the government should be planning ahead and encouraging sustainable growth in regional and rural areas. Instead of the member for Warringah and the Treasurer taking pot shots at each other with a simplistic argument over cutting migration, what about some creative policies? What about investing in infrastructure? What about some incentives for migrants to settle in other capital cities or support for advanced manufacturing, research and development, IT and biotech jobs? What about restricting some of the temporary migrant visa restrictions? These are the things that we need for this country. (Time expired) North Queensland: Insurance 114 19:55 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson Exactly one year ago today, Cyclone Debbie was officially named as a tropical cyclone, and families in North Queensland began evacuating their homes ahead of it crossing the coast. While North Queenslanders are well prepared for these disasters, as evidenced by the fact that no lives were lost, it can be a frightening and traumatic experience when a category 4 cyclone crosses the coast in a highly populated area. I would like to take the time here to acknowledge those in the Top End and around the Gulf of Carpentaria who have lived through this experience in recent days. I wish them the best of luck for their safety and in their recovery. But, for many businesses and families in Mackay, Bowen, Proserpine and the Whitsundays, the recovery process has been more difficult and more traumatic than Cyclone Debbie itself. We have businesses and homeowners still finalising their scopes of work, and one of the common reasons for long delays has stemmed from building inspections and engineering reports from people who are not qualified nor able to perform that task. In more than one instance, a tradie was sent to conduct an engineering report. One property owner knew they were in for a rough ride when the 'engineer' couldn't tell if the structure was made of concrete or fibreglass. In another case, an insurance company twice sent qualified engineers to produce engineering reports on a damaged property but they rejected both of them. They then sent a third inspector in, who I've been informed was not an engineer but another tradie. The insurance company accepted that report because it was the only one of the three that said the damage was not caused by the cyclone. The property owner brought in a third qualified engineer, and the resulting report concurred with the original qualified engineer's report. Eventually, the insurance company increased their payout offer almost tenfold. I have received reports of engineering companies passing off the work of non-qualified and/or non-accredited staff as being the work of a qualified and accredited engineer. According to section 115 of the Professional Engineers Act 2002, an engineer must be registered with the Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland in order to complete engineering services in Queensland. The Courier-Mail, on 6 March, reported that at least three of the state's top insurance companies have been using a building firm that was unlicensed in Queensland and employed unlicensed building consultants. In December, the Queensland Building and Construction Commission censured US based multinational Crawford & Company for operating without a licence. The QBCC confirmed that scopes of work form part of the building process, which requires the appropriate licences. The report stated that Crawford subcontracted CRD Building Consultants & Engineers to produce scopes of work. Although presented as different entities, CRD is a wholly owned subsidiary, and both Crawfords and CRD use the same Australian company number and the same Australian business number, raising further questions about a breach of the Corporations Act. My fear is that in the rush to process claims and get reconstruction work completed, some corners have been inadvertently, or deliberately, cut. The results for families and businesses making claims are long and costly delays, inaccurate and inadequate scopes of work, protracted arguments over repairs and repairs that are not up to standard. There is also another matter of breaches to the insurance industry's own code. In relation to standards for suppliers, the Insurance Council's General Code of Insurance Practice says: We will only appoint Service Suppliers who: (a) reasonably satisfy us at the time of the appointment that they are, and their employees are, qualified by education, training or experience to provide the required service competently and to deal with you professionally (including but not limited to whether they hold membership with any relevant professional body); and (b) hold a current licence, if required by law. From the reports I've received in the wake of Cyclone Debbie and through the recovery process, I believe an investigation is warranted. It appears that insurance companies may have breached their own code, and possibly breached the law. I'll be writing to the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services to request that the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, or whatever relevant regulatory body might be appropriate, conduct a full investigation into the processing of insurance claims relating to Cyclone Debbie. Coping with cyclones is a natural part of living in northern Australia. Our resilience, in terms of people and property, is a testament to our preparation and building regulations. The true test of our resilience now is the aftermath. Better preparation and adherence to regulations will help us through this most testing of times. The SPEAKER 00APG It being 8.00 pm, the House stands adjourned until 12.00 pm tomorrow. House adjourned at 20 : 00 NOTICES 115 NOTICES

Monday, 26 March 2018

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Coulton ) took the chair at 10:30.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 117 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Turnbull Government 117 10:30 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor This week the government is pushing their agenda of $65 billion worth of tax cuts to big business instead of investing vital funds into education and health care. This government has its priorities all wrong. As a former teacher and principal, I understand, personally and professionally, the importance of properly funding our schools in a needs-based, sector-blind manner to ensure that our kids have access to the best quality education so that all schools get to the student resource standard. However, this Prime Minister's cuts to education are ruthless and demonstrate just how out of touch this government is. I know: I visited Iramoo Primary School, sat with the principal, Mrs Findlay, and looked at that school's performance data across a five-year period. They are doing amazing things at that school. It's a school of 800 students in a very low-socioeconomic area in my electorate, and everybody's getting the care and attention they need and they are making great learning progress. But, over the next two years, nearly $17 million of funding is not going to appear in the schools in the electorate of Lalor. Of our 57 schools that are state schools, every single one will be disadvantaged. It's not just about that; it's also about population growth in Victoria. The Victorian population is predicted to reach 6.26 million by the end of June 2018 with an average growth rate of 1.79 per cent over the last seven years. That population density is extraordinary and rising every day. Locally, in the electorate of Lalor, the City of Wyndham is one of the fastest growing areas in the country. Over 80 babies are born each week to a mother in Wyndham, and our population has surpassed 250,000 people—that means we are building schools at a rate of knots. I am proud that the Victorian state Labor government is building those schools while maintaining our local schools. The Victorian Labor government is also making a commitment to our local hospital with an $80 million investment in the Mercy Hospital set to open soon. The problem is that, while the Victorian Labor government is busy spending billions on infrastructure, the federal LNP government is cutting costs to our schools and hospitals. It seems they have little care for the ordinary people I represent in this place. They care little about our health and even less about our education. This Prime Minister is absolutely out of touch when it comes to providing for working-class people. Carrick, Lady Diana Margaret 'Angela', AO 117 10:33 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise today to acknowledge the passing of a great Australian and somebody who was a selfless volunteer in the community of Bradfield. Lady Angela Carrick AO was at one stage Chief Commissioner of Girl Guides Australia. She was the beloved wife of Sir John Carrick AC KCMG, mother to Diane, Jane and Fiona and had five grandchildren and six great-grandchildren when she passed away peacefully on 2 February 2018. Lady Angela Carrick was married to Sir John Carrick, the former Liberal senator for New South Wales in the Fraser government, who served variously as the Minister for Education, Minister for National Development and Energy and Leader of the Government in the Senate. He was one of the most distinguished figures in Australian political history in the last 80 years. The Carricks lived in Killara for many years, and Lady Angela Carrick was an active member of the community. She was president of the Killara women's branch of the Liberal Party and was a very, very active member of the party for many decades. Her involvement in the Girl Guides began in 1960, when her daughters joined the Brownies. She saw a need and she became a volunteer. It was her strong belief that 'girls in Guiding gain so much and receive so many opportunities to extend their knowledge and potential'. Over the years, Lady Angela Carrick held a wide range of appointments within the Girl Guides, including division commissioner, deputy state commissioner for New South Wales, assistant chief commissioner for Australia, and chief commissioner for Australia from 1983 to 1988. She was also vice-president of Girl Guides Australia. Her passion for Girl Guides was also reflected in the international Girl Guides community. She was a member of the Australian guide delegation to four world conferences, in the USA, in Kenya, in Singapore and in Denmark. In 1988, Lady Angela Carrick was made an Officer of the Order of Australia for her dedicated work in Guiding. Lady Angela Carrick was a well-known and much-loved figure in my electorate of Bradfield and more broadly, including particularly in the Girl Guides movement. She made a very substantial contribution to the Girl Guides in Australia throughout her life. She also made a substantial contribution in my electorate. She was the much-loved wife of the very distinguished figure Sir John Carrick. I express my consolations to her husband, Sir John, to her daughters, Diane, Jane and Fiona, and to her extended family, and I thank her for all that she has done. East Turkestan 118 10:36 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin On Thursday, 15 March, members of the East Turkestan community of South Australia, often referred to as Uyghur people, held a rally on the steps of Parliament House in Adelaide drawing attention to the persecution of their people in their homelands by the Chinese government. This week, I understand Australians of East Turkestan origin are here in Canberra to similarly raise awareness of the situation in East Turkestan. Over the years, I have met with several people who originate from East Turkestan and who now live in Adelaide. They have approached me with individual stories about human rights violations and incarceration, often for trivial offences, of relatives and friends by the governing authorities in their homeland. Last year, I wrote to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Julie Bishop, about some of those concerns. In her response to me, the minister acknowledged the government had deep concerns about the human rights situation in Xinjiang. I understand that the international organisation Human Rights Watch has also reported on the religious persecution of Uyghurs in East Turkestan. I have not been to East Turkestan, but I have no reason to doubt the claims of persecution are legitimate, and I know the concerns of people whom I have spoken with are very real. Local Uyghur people state that since March 2017 at least 120,000 Uyghurs have been confined against their will in so-called education camps, otherwise referred to as concentration camps. Within the centres, those detained are subjected to physical and psychological abuse. Outside the centres, Uyghur people are stripped of their right to free movement and to free speech. I understand that the Uyghur people have their own rich historical, cultural, linguistic and religious identity and that they want an autonomous region of their own. That has been denied to them and of course contributes to the current situation. Their message to the Australian government, and to this parliament, is that in their homelands Uyghur people are being persecuted, that the concentration camps are profoundly inhuman and that every day Uyghur people are disappearing from their communities, often with other family members not knowing where they have been taken. For those family members, both in East Turkestan and here in Australia, the situation is deeply distressing. I have seen their faces and I've heard their stories for myself. I bring these concerns to the attention of the House and to the government in the hope that international attention to the situation in East Turkestan may lead to a restoration of human rights, and I know that that is exactly what those people coming to Canberra this week will be hoping for. Cricket, South Africa 118 10:40 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman Without further building on the events of yesterday, I just want to note that the prevarication by Cricket Australia over this incident is very, very disappointing. We've had the Australian Sports Commission come out and say that in an instance in amateur Olympic sports the athlete would be sent home on the next plane. That throws into light the completely inadequate response from Cricket Australia. I accept the need for an investigation, but where someone enters a guilty plea there traditionally is no trial; that person is guilty. I'm happy to have an investigation of everything else around those individuals, but once you're guilty we need Cricket Australia to act. Reducing the match fee to 25 per cent is patently inadequate and has embarrassed this nation over the last 48 hours far more, potentially, than the incident itself. But on longer term issues, on the murders and the slaughters of South African farmers, I want to say that this is an incredibly complicated issue that obviously generates a great deal of interest and concern in this country and needs to be dealt with extremely carefully in this parliament, particularly if it does come to questions of the government. We need to be extremely cautious about the words we use around this issue lest it actually do more harm than good. There's a tiny town in South Africa with the longest place name in that nation. Translated into English, it means 'two buffaloes with one bullet, absolutely dead' and ends with 'fontein'. What we're talking about here is a single, carefully crafted strategy that gets both governments on board to finding a sensible solution. Now, I'm not going to meddle in South African domestic policy; that's definitely not the job of anyone here. But we need to remember that the very impressive immigration system on which we have relied for so long, and the visa subclasses around humanitarian protection, are there to be used. My concern specifically is that DFAT might have taken a position that there are simply no grounds for using them in relation to South Africa. I simply urge my own department to look carefully at recent cases—the five-year increase in attacks on farmers and the very clear language coming out of a political party that is part of the parliament in South Africa. Here is one comment: We need to unite as black people‚ there are less than five million whites in South Africa vs 45 millions of us. We can kill all these whites within two weeks. We have the army and the police. If those who are killing farmers can do it, what are you waiting for? That is a voice within South African political life. I acknowledge the important role that Cyril Ramaphosa has in this very sensitive issue. That is a decision for South Africa. But here we need to ensure that these cases are thoroughly investigated and that we do not take a default position that these people are not eligible because of the colour of their skin. There is no racist overtone here, except that we are seeking the reverse—fair and equal treatment of people wherever they live—and, under the immigration system that we have, we are perfectly capable of delivering it. Schools 119 10:42 Ms BUTLER 248006 Griffith There's been a lot of concern expressed in the community about the Liberal and National government's $17 billion in school funding cuts, and of course my community is no different. Labor has committed to putting all of that amount—the full $17 billion—back into education in the event that we win government at the next federal election, and we've made it very clear that that money will go where it's needed, in a genuine sector-blind fashion, to bring all schools in Australia, for the first time, up to the schooling resource standard. That means that of that $17 billion about 86 per cent would go into the public school system and the remainder into Catholic and independent schools. These are really important questions for parents across my electorate and across this country. You'll often hear people say that money doesn't fix problems. Well, of course it doesn't alone. But I tell you what: when it comes to properly resourcing education in this country, you can't fix problems without money either. I recently held a couple of really useful events in my community. I held a town hall style meeting, which Tanya Plibersek, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the shadow education minister, attended, as well as Matthew Campbell, who's a local education expert in my community. We had a great roll-up from locals despite terrible weather that night. They were interested in hearing what Labor would do, if we were elected to government at the next federal election, to try to bring back some focus onto schooling education—making sure that teachers are equipped with the skills they need and also the time they need to devote to teaching and making sure that kids have the resources they need in order to have a quality education. So, as well as Tanya and Matthew, I want to thank Jo Briskey, who's Labor's candidate for Bonner, who also came along and spoke at that event, and of course St Martin's Catholic Primary School in Carina for hosting us, as well as local father Martin Pook for running the event for us. I also had, at the request of one of my local Catholic schools, a Catholic schools roundtable. You would be aware that I've got a lot of Catholic schools in my electorate, Mr Deputy Speaker. Some of those schools are in quite wealthy areas, but they all have a lot of students in their student body who are from lower socioeconomic status areas, as well. I might say that some of the Catholic schools in my electorate also have a high number of refugee children and asylum seeker children. Those schools are very concerned about what this government is doing to the quality of Catholic education with its significant funding cuts that have been introduced through the deal that was done in the Senate. I want to thank very much all of the people who attended that roundtable and also thank Andrew Giles, who is the shadow assistant minister for schools, for coming along and speaking with the Catholic schools sector at that roundtable. We had a really great turnout, and I thank St Laurence's for hosting it. Queensland: Indigenous Affairs 119 10:45 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt The right to housing is an absolutely fundamental right of all Australian citizens. Sadly, the Queensland Labor government, in a campaign led by Jackie Trad, is more interested in playing politics than putting roofs over people's heads. This year marks the end of the 10-year Remote Housing Strategy. The Commonwealth provided $5.4 billion over a decade to the states and territories under the Remote Housing Strategy to assist states in meeting their housing responsibilities. The hugely successful NPARIH program delivered 4,000 new homes and 7,500 refurbishments and reduced overcrowding in Indigenous communities. While the strategy has been a success, more remains to be done, especially in Cape York communities in my electorate. Let me be very clear: the federal government is 100 per cent committed to helping Queensland with its remote-housing responsibilities. The federal government has invested $1.13 billion in Queensland remote Indigenous housing, and this has delivered 1,144 new homes and 1,490 refurbishments. The shortfall to overcome overcrowding in Queensland stands at around 1,100 houses. Shamefully, the Queensland Labor government is intent on using Indigenous people as political pawns. Queensland is now the only state or territory that has refused to negotiate a new housing deal with the Commonwealth. Recently, Queensland Labor minister Jackie Trad embarked on a scaremongering mission across Cape York, claiming that the federal government was cutting funds in Indigenous housing. However, Ms Trad made no mention during her fly-in fly-out visit of the 14 per cent administration fee that her government is adding to every element of building a house in Indigenous and remote communities. The money is skimmed off the top and put straight into consolidated revenue. How disgusting is that? Fortunately, Cape York community leaders saw straight through Jackie Trad's blatant lies. I saw firsthand the success of NPARIH programs during my recent visit to Cape York, especially in Lockhart River, under the guidance and leadership of Mayor Wayne Butcher. In fact, one young Indigenous apprentice is living in the house that he helped to build. Apart from the funds that were made available under NPARIH's program, how much have the state Labor government invested, and how many houses have they built in remote Indigenous communities? The answer is zero. The Queensland government need to get on board, or we should cut them out completely and provide housing funds directly to the council. In fact, after speaking to several Cape York mayors and CEOs during my recent visit to the region, I know that the majority of them would prefer this method. I know for a fact that, if we went down this path, Cape York communities would get far more bang for their buck. Cambodia: Human Rights 120 10:48 Mr BUTLER HWK Port Adelaide Last week, the ASEAN leaders' summit was held for the first time in Australia. Amidst a great triumph for our nation and what should have been a positive display of unity, there was a dark shadow as threats of violence were made by a world leader against peaceful protesters. Hun Sen, the Cambodian leader, warned that he would follow home and beat up any people who protested here in Australia against his regime. The Cambodian regime has taken an increasingly authoritarian and alarming path in recent times, imprisoning Mr Kem Sokha, the leader of the Cambodia National Rescue Party, the CNRP, the official opposition, over a speech that Mr Sokha made here in Australia several years ago. The Hun Sen regime then dismantled the CNRP entirely, forcing many opposition figures to flee the country. In July, Cambodia will go to an election where the Cambodian people will now only have the choice between the ruling CP Party and a number of very minor parties, none of which garnered even four per cent of the vote in the last election. The Cambodian-Australian community has stood up bravely in the face of these outrages. They came together in Sydney last week, including many who travelled from my electorate in Port Adelaide, to protest against these threats and show they will not be cowed by any regime. Bou Rachana—widow of the assassinate political analyst Dr Kem Ley—who was granted asylum in Australia only a month ago, said she felt determined to attend the protests. The Cambodian Australians who stood with her showed the bravery of that community and their determination to see Cambodia given the same right to democracy and freedom of speech that we enjoy here. Hun Sen's response was just more threats and more heavy-handed authoritarianism. He stated: When you burn my image, it means you are building more coffins. Speaking about himself in the third person, he said: Hun Sen doesn't need to negotiate with the ones who are in jail. There is no need ... The key is in the hand of Hun Sen, and when you burn Hun Sen's images, it is the end. For political prisoners in Cambodia, who include not only Kem Sokha but the Australian filmmaker James Ricketson as well, these threats are chilling. Forty five nations, including Australia, supported a joint statement of the United Nations Human Rights Council recently to condemn the increasingly authoritarian actions of the Cambodian regime. However, Cambodia dismissed the statement out of hand, expressing contempt for the council as well as for Cambodians. Australians must live up to our stewardship of the Paris Peace Accords. We must speak out and support the Cambodian people. Kem Sokha and James Ricketson must be released. Hun Sen cannot be allowed to continue to trash the spirit and the letter of the Paris Peace Accords without a clear response from the international community. These responses have already been formulated in places like the US and Europe. I hope the Australian government will follow those examples. Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 120 10:52 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane I've spoken here about before the promising breakthroughs in both treatment and prevention of HIV and my support for World AIDS Day, raising awareness for those who suffer from this disease, as well as those who've tragically passed away. Today, I can advise that an all important anti-HIV medicine, called PrEP, is about to be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. I congratulate the Minister for Health for this important announcement. I'm very pleased that this government is investing further in the community's health by listing PrEP on the PBS from the end of this week—that's from 1 April 2018. Without the government acting, it would have cost someone about $2,500 per year for this medicine, clearly out of the reach of many Australians. However, the listing means that the government will pay the majority of the cost, so that people will only have to pay about $39 per script or $19 if they've got a concession card. The PrEP treatment is a once-daily antiretroviral medicine, and it works by reducing the risk of HIV infection. It's not a cure. It's preventative, and people will need a prescription from their doctor. Taken and used in conjunction with other protections, PrEP has proven itself in clinical trials to be highly effective at preventing HIV transmission without any significant known side effects. However, listing PrEP on the PBS isn't the final step if we are to achieve the Australian government's goal of ending Australian HIV transmission. It will be critical that we make sure everyone who needs PrEP is aware of it, is aware its benefits and can access it. We'll need effective on-the-ground coordination and targeted communications to raise awareness of PrEP's potential, especially for the population groups most at risk. We'll also need good information and resources to support the clinical workforce, following the listing date of 1 April, and the involvement of all the state and territory health departments. This will save lives. I want to again pay tribute to the Queensland AIDS Council and all of the local community groups, health groups and practitioners across Brisbane and, indeed, right across Australia whose efforts continue to do so much for those who are managing their own chronic conditions on a day-to-day basis. Its important that these community groups are deeply involved and engaged in the communications strategy and efforts to raise the community awareness that will need to occur from now. The past few decades have seen significant and important progress in tackling the HIV epidemic through prevention and treatment, both around the world and here in Australia. We look forward to the day when HIV has been eliminated in Australia. The investment by this government, by listing PrEP on the PBS, is bringing that day one step closer. Barton Electorate: Save Marrickville South, Barton Electorate: F6 Action, Barton Electorate: Bay Community Garden 121 10:54 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton On Saturday, 24 February, I attended, along with the Mayor of the Inner West Council and many hundreds of local residents, a rally of Save Marrickville South against the proposed rezoning of Carrington Road in Marrickville, which of course is in the electorate of Barton. The proposed rezoning would allow Carrington Road to be transformed into a string of 10 residential buildings, some up to 35 storeys high, that would accommodate some 2,600 apartments. I stress it is a proposal. There are real concerns that this proposed rezoning would have an overshadowing, traffic and congestion effect and would affect jobs and local small businesses in the precinct at the moment, as well as impacting on the character of our beloved Marrickville. The proponents, Mirvac, have now made a commitment that this proposal will go back to first principles and to consult with the local community. I would like to thank Paul Mortimer and Kelsie Dadd of Save Marrickville South, as well as their colleagues, for their tireless advocacy and hard work in protecting Marrickville from unreasonable and unsympathetic overdevelopment. They should keep up the good fight. I'd like to acknowledge the attendance of my Labor colleagues: the Inner West Council mayor, Darcy Byrne, and the Labor member for Summer Hill, Jo Haylen. I also want to acknowledge the involvement and the very strong political leadership and voice on this important issue from the member for Grayndler, Anthony Albanese. On Saturday, 3 March, I attended the F6 Action town hall against the planned freeway which will run right through Kogarah, which is part of my electorate. This proposal will bring more congestion to our local streets, disrupt surrounding suburbs, run through parklands and place smokestacks and exhaust fumes right near residential housing. It is clear that what we need is not more roads but more public transport. We need to see a greater investment in public transport from the New South Wales government which will get people to where they want to be quicker. I acknowledge Anne Field for her work and also the people from the Labor side that attended the rally: Steve Kamper, the member for Rockdale; Chris Minns, the member for Kogarah; and Ed McDougall of Bayside Council. Finally, some good news: I want to commend everyone that's worked in the Bay Community Garden, which I visited at Kyeemagh not so long ago. It is a wonderful effort by the local community to develop a communal garden, which has doubled in size. The garden also allows local residents to grow their own plants, fruits, vegetables and herbs, which I got great samples of. I congratulate all of the Bay Community Garden people for their really hard work. This is a wonderful initiative for the local community. Mackellar Electorate: South Narrabeen Surf Life Saving Club 122 10:57 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar Last Saturday, I had the pleasure of joining members of the South Narrabeen Surf Life Saving Club as they celebrated their 95th anniversary. The club was formed in 1923 by former members of the North Narrabeen surf club Archie McLean, Allen McLean and Norman Cox. Land was donated to the club and a new clubhouse erected on the site, with the new club officially opened on 15 December 1923. Originally the club was to be called Narrabeen Surf Life Saving Club, but after protests from North Narrabeen the name South Narrabeen was adopted. The sporting newspaper The Arrow recorded that in its first years South Narrabeen was affectionately known as the baby club of the metropolis but that members lost no time in becoming a part of the surf life saving community. I'd like to congratulate everyone on the executive who was part of making Saturday night so successful, including President Martin Hayward, Sarah Oaten, Charles Longley, Richard Dowling, Rohan Fisher, Jake Warner, Kylie Ryder, Marnie Gordon, Mark Dimento and Zoe Hodges. Not to be forgotten is life member and club stalwart Tony Haven AM, who has given so much to the club and surf life saving over the years. I would especially like to congratulate Chica O'Reilly and Peter Clarke for their 70-year service medals. Both Chica and Peter have been stalwarts of the club, and their service over so many years should be an inspiration to all of us. Yet the service of this club goes far beyond the northern beaches. Since the inception of Bush to Beach in 2016, Ken Passmore and Jack Cannons AM have worked tirelessly to raise funds in our community so the Brewarrina community in remote outback New South Wales can bring 50 Aboriginal students and their carers to Narrabeen Beach to familiarise them with the beach and talk about water safety. The program aims to encourage school attendance and reward hardworking students with a weekend at the beach. It creates a bridge from what is too often a disadvantaged present and a bleak future to a world of possibilities. Without the support of South Narrabeen Surf Life Saving Club Sadly and its members, the remarkable event would not be possible. Sadly, this year's event is under a cloud as the necessary funds to provide transport from Brewarrina may not be found. I hope grants and funding will be soon found to allow the event to proceed. I once again congratulate the South Narrabeen Surf Life Saving Club on their successful event and the 95th anniversary. On behalf of the community, I thank you for 95 years of service protecting our beaches. I have every confidence that you will be here long into the future. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has now concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 122 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS International Women's Day 122 11:00 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a)International Women's Day is celebrated on 8 March; (b)the theme for 2018 is 'Press for Progress', recognising the strong and growing global momentum striving for gender equity; and (c) now more than ever, governments must recommit to addressing entrenched gender inequities including:    (i) high rates of family and domestic violence, sexual violence and harassment;    (ii) pay inequity and the undervaluation of work in traditionally female industries; and    (iii) the under-representation of women in Australian public life and leadership; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) end its complacency and ensure gender equality is a central priority for government; and (b) commit to urgent action to improve Australian women's:    (i) safety and physical security;    (ii) economic security and retirement incomes;    (iii) health and reproductive rights; and    (iv) representation in Australian parliaments. I could not be more pleased than to be standing here to recognise International Women's Day for another year. The 2018 event, which was held during our parliamentary break on 8 March, calls on us all to press for progress, and that's exactly what I and my colleagues in Labor intend to do. International Women's Day provides us with a terrific opportunity each year to take stock—to recognise and celebrate the advances we've made, but also to knowledge our failings and to reaffirm the direction that we need to be heading in. In too many areas of Australian life, gender inequality remains entrenched. Women still earn 15 per cent less than their male counterparts. Political and broad representation is years off gender parity, and, 10 years after the establishment of the National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, one woman every week is killed at the hands of a current or former partner. In so many areas there is much more for us to do. But this won't happen automatically. Sadly, progress is not inevitable, and, if we're to bring about real change, we need determined will, political will and action. Nearly a year ago today, I addressed this House about International Women's Day 2017. I reported that Labor's Status of Women Committee, which I chair, was about to embark on a series of consultations across the country with Australian women and the organisations they represent. I reported that we planned to talk to women from all walks of life, from right across the country, about the issues they faced and the solutions they wanted to see in place. I am very pleased to report, a year on, that this is exactly what we did. Committee members hit the road throughout 2017 for a series of national conversations. This included 35 community meetings, workshops and roundtables, with more than 500 women engaging. We reached out to women in every state and territory, in the cities, rural and regional areas, including my home town of Newcastle. We heard from thousands of women across the country who attended these meetings, took part in the online survey or made a submission or whose views were represented as members of women's organisations. Participants said that their top five priority areas were: (1) ending violence against women and girls; (2) closing the gender pay gap; (3) preventing sexual harassment; (4) supporting marginalised women; and (5) improving access to reproductive rights and healthcare in Australia. Labor has listened, with this feedback already helping to shape Labor's first policy response. In fact, on the eve of this year's International Women's Day, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and shadow minister for women, Tanya Plibersek, launched Setting the Agenda, a national strategy for gender equality which places gender issues at the very centre of government decision-making. It does this by setting out targets and frameworks for gender-responsive policy. This includes running a gender lens across every piece of legislation to consider its gender impacts, returning the women's budget statement, and convening a ministerial council for gender equality. The strategy also includes a range of concrete targets that will deliver measurable change. Under the strategy, a Labor government will work with the states and territories to set a family and domestic violence reduction target. We will take measurable action to close the gender pay gap and report back to the parliament on our progress. We will aim to reduce the gap in workforce participation by a quarter by 2025. We will increase women's participation on government boards to 50 per cent in our first term and set a target of 40 per cent of chair and deputy chair positions to be filled by women by 2025. We will boost funding for the six national alliances, which represent more than 180 women's organisations, and fund the ABS to deliver a time-use survey in 2020 and 2027 so we can get real data to help us understand how government policies impact women. We will act to protect university students from harassment and sexual assault. We need to do a better job of considering the impact of government policies on Australian women. There is no clearer example than the fact that Australia still levies GST on tampons but does not for Viagra. I agree with our deputy leader and shadow minister: this was a dumb decision when it was made in 1999; it is still a dumb decision, and we must fix it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 Is the motion seconded? Ms Husar 263328 I second the motion. 11:06 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong Thank you to the member for Newcastle for calling for this debate today. International Women's Day is perhaps the most important issue day in the calendar. Women are half of our population, but not half of this parliament and not half of most workplaces. They aren't equal to men in pay and, devastatingly, they are dramatically overrepresented in statistics regarding domestic violence and sexual assault. This year we have seen the rise of the #MeToo movement, outing numerous predatory males who for years have been feted as exemplars. My mother was a teacher. When she married my father she was forced to leave her job because having a female breadwinner just wouldn't do. Decades later my sister followed her into the teaching profession. On her marriage in the sixties, she was downgraded to a temporary employee. Today, thankfully, these are both abhorrent ideas that would be rightly criticised, so we have come a long way or, as when women's professional tennis began and Virginia Slims was their advertiser, the motto was: 'You've come a long way, Baby.' But there is still much further to go. I was fortunate enough to celebrate the day at Medtronic, one of our great local medical companies. They put on a breakfast to commemorate the day, and I was honoured to be invited to speak. There was a lot of talk and aspiration about teaching gender equality in the workplace, but Medronic have put their money where their mouth is, with over 50 per cent of their employees being women and 40 per cent of the executive positions held by women. The sector, more broadly, much of which is based locally, also boasts fantastic results in this area. Health care has one of the highest proportions of women in senior leadership roles across any industry, with 70 per cent, according to the recent Workplace Gender Equality Agency report. I would like to take this opportunity today to recognise the thousands of incredible women in the electorate I have the honour of representing. Bennelong is an incredible electorate with a fiercely vibrant community. Everywhere you look, we have people working together with businesses leading the world and strong cohesive narratives. But look a little closer: so much of this is because of the women who are giving their all to make our community a better place with people like Roseanna Gallo, who is giving our community a voice and getting us all to sing in tune together—a work in progress. Or, on the sporting field, Anne Doring has been getting girls into netball and sport by the thousands for decades. Every Saturday, through winter, Meadowbank courts are packed to the rafters with players from Anne's Eastwood Ryde Netball Association—one of the largest in the country. There are also groups like Ryde District Mums, promoting women across our community, giving them support and ensuring they have access to everything they need. Of course, our community is one of the most ethnically diverse in the country, and there are many women in the many community groups representing their different diasporas. Agnes Shim from the Korean Women's Association and the ladies of the Australian Asian Association of Bennelong, including Melissa Foong and Ester Lee, exemplify this. These groups help new arrivals to fit into their new home and ensure those who have been here for a long time retain memories of their roots. They are responsible for the vitality of our community and we can't thank them enough. Bennelong is also home to over 14,000 small businesses, many thriving and many run and supported by women. There are clearly too many to name, but I'd like to highlight the great work done by some who bring this all together. Nora Etmekdjian has been a stalwart of the Ryde small business community for many years now and was integral to the success of the West Ryde Easter fair, which was celebrated this past weekend. Similarly, Lydia Scuglia and her sister Marcella Letteri are small business owners who manage to juggle their workload with work for the Riverside Business Forum, which brings together and supports businesses across the electorate. Time is short, shorter than I hoped. So many of the people I would like to mention here today, I can't. Many know who they are, and I hope all the women that I deal with through representing Bennelong know how grateful I am to them. Before I conclude, I do need to mention my family, in which my son and I are thoroughly outnumbered. Thank you to all the women in my life: my mother, my three sisters, and now my daughters, who take up the task. 11:11 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay I rise today proudly to speak on International Women's Day, which is the focal point for the movement of women's rights right around the world and has been celebrated for over 100 years. Disappointingly, though, we're going to have to keep celebrating and keep going to all of those breakfasts for the next 200 years if we continue on the trajectory that we have already set for ourselves. The day helps us to recognise and honour some of the amazing women and the important, impressive achievements of women right around the globe. International Women's Day also helps us to galvanise collective action across the globe. We have seen this movement gain more momentum and we've seen the fourth wave of feminism, if you like, across the globe, fuelled by movements like #MeToo, Time's Up, and the one that Tracey Spicer, our own, launched right here in Australia over the weekend, the NOW movement, which is a way for Australian women in the workplace to be heard on sexual harassment. International Women's Day marks a call to action for accelerating gender parity, which the World Economic Forum's Global gender gap report 2017 tells us is 200 years away. That's a lot of International Women's Day breakfasts right there, just to be treated equally. We don't want to get above you guys—don't panic. We just want to be treated equally: pay, conditions and all of those things. And we must take steps to close the gender gap. As Bill Shorten, our leader, has said: Achieving equality for women and men is a test of our national character and an essential building block for national prosperity. I am incredibly proud of Labor's rich legacy in addressing the gender gap, not just delivering empty words. 'Legacy' is probably the wrong word, given that we're still championing this cause and taking steps to reduce the unfairness between the sexes, including introducing the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act; the national women's alliances, so women had a voice in government; and the Workplace Gender Equality Agency to help close the gender gap. We set up 1800RESPECT and had to fight for the funding to continue, and we saw the dreadful privatisation of that service last year. We introduced the National Women's Health Policy in 2010. We raised the childcare rebate to 50 per cent—not entirely a women's issue though. We listed RU486 on the PBS. And we set ourselves quotas for female representation in the halls of power. We are on track to deliver those quotas and the key targets that we set for ourselves. We haven't stopped and will not stop fighting for the 75 per cent of women who have lost their penalty rates. Last year on International Women's Day Bill Shorten announced that we would develop a comprehensive blueprint for gender equality, which my colleague Sharon Claydon ran through before. Through our Labor Status of Women Caucus Committee, which I am very pleased to be a secretary on, chaired by the member for Newcastle, we spent last year hearing from over 5,000 women at 35 hearings as part of our Setting the Agenda conversation, giving women in our communities a voice. I am proud that a Labor government will work to set up frameworks for gender responsive policy and decision-making. We will introduce gender impact assessments on cabinet submissions and new policy proposals, and bring back the Women's Budget Statement, unbelievably scrapped by then Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who was also the Minister for Women, disgracefully. Further, a Labor government will convene a ministerial council on gender equality. When International Women's Day first began, women were championing their rights and demanding that they be given the right to vote. We have moved on from that argument. In terms of political representation, back in 1994, Labor said we needed more women in parliament. Back then, we had about 14 per cent. In 2018, and with the recent election of Ged Kearney in the seat of Batman, today we are now at 48 per cent. The coalition, by comparison, pathetically, are at 22 per cent. I did hear the member for Bennelong talking about the importance of women. I challenge him: set up your own status of women caucus committee within your own party. The motion that is before us today is not even supported by the Minister for Women, who is supposed to represent half the country. Also, two out of the three speakers offered up by this government are blokes—telling us about our women's issues. Having women in parliament and in positions of power makes a massive difference to all women around the country and also around the world. Sadly, we're seeing the coalition have to play catch-up, and all we ever hear from them is whingeing about our quota system. Well, guys, boys, it works. I am proud that, in Lindsay this year, we brought together 130 women for my International Women's Day event. We had Jane Caro join us as our special guest, and she was inspirational and formidable, as she always is. We had an awards ceremony for the incredibly impressive women who are doing great things in our electorate that you never hear about because, typically, women go about what we're doing quietly, amongst ourselves, and we don't put ourselves out there to be recognised or big-note ourselves and put ourselves up for awards—which is one of the challenges that we've got. I want to thank all of those people and wish everyone a happy International Women's Day. 11:16 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I want to begin by saying how important it is to have men stand up for women. On International Women's Day, it's a celebration of women's achievements and what women can do, but critical to that is making sure that men have the courage and capacity to stand up, and will not be derided for standing up, for women. We know International Women's Day has been celebrated since the early 1900s. The advancement of the interests of women and fighting for their rights, for gender parity, has been critical, but no more critical than having incredible role models. I have the great privilege of being able to represent an electorate that is named after one of Australia's most significant women, Vida Goldstein. In 1984, the division of Goldstein was founded to honour a particularly courageous woman, Vida Goldstein, who was instrumental in winning the right to vote for Australian women, two decades before the United Kingdom. Vida Goldstein's legacy was not just as a suffragette; she was one of the first women ever to stand for parliament in the entire British Empire—for the Senate for the great state of Victoria. She fought for the right for women not just to vote but also to buy property and enter into marriages on the same terms as men. Some might say that she was the marriage equality advocate of her times. Today we have female CEOs, prime ministers, soldiers and astronauts. Progress is visible. Female success, through freedom, choice and empowerment, is there for all of us to celebrate on International Women's Day. But we must continue to press for more progress. In acknowledging the progress, 8 March was also about recommitting ourselves to smashing the remaining barriers to true gender parity in society—in particular, the high rates of domestic violence, sexual violence, and harassment that many women still endure. A recent ABS survey of 21,000 women shows, tragically, that as many as half of all women in Australia have been sexually harassed. Many other statistics still have alarming numbers. Globally, each day, 830 women die from preventable causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. Women also make up 64 per cent of the world's illiterate population. A century ago, Vida Goldstein fought for these foundational rights and freedoms for women in our country. Today, in the same vein, we must take up the battle, and it must be about men and women working together to advance the interests of women. It isn't just a fight by women. We have to fight for women's domestic safety, as well as for their economic health and reproductive freedoms. In the Goldstein electorate we are lucky to have many female role models to celebrate, many of whom we acknowledged with Australia Day honours this year: Beryle Campbell Foster OAM, from Brighton, for her service to women in Victoria, including legal service, the National Council of Women Victoria and the League of Women Voters Victoria; Faye Haskin-Dubrowin OAM, from Caulfield South, for service to interfaith relations and to community as the first female president of B'nai B'rith Victoria; and Hatice Basarin, from Hampton, for her dedication to the preservation of Australian and Turkish military history. Featuring in the Bayside City Council awards this year we had Millicent Roper and Stevie-Lou Answerth, who are new, up-and-coming women trailblazers. They were the recipients of the 2018 Young Citizen of the Year award for their work to develop an inclusive culture at Bayside schools, including for LGBTI students. Meren Reid received the City of Bayside's 2018 environment award for her longstanding volunteer contribution to Bayside's wonderful natural environment. Similarly, in Glen Eira, we had Cara Morgan, from McKinnon, who won the Young Citizen of the Year award as chair of the 5th/6th Central Moorabbin Scouts Group's Venturers. That was along with Lital Weizman, from Caulfield South, who volunteers with Stand Up's Encounters Mentoring Program and tutors year 8 Sudanese students while also assisting with Sudanese youth and culture events. I'd also like to give a special mention to Martine Harte, a fierce women's advocate who was awarded a prestigious Melbourne Press Club Gold Quill award for excellence in journalism. Martine also received a Logie award nomination and is judging this year's Telstra Business Women of the Year awards. We're very proud to have her as part of our community. She was described by The Age newspaper as 'an ideal general for the growing female army'. Martine uses new media to challenge thinking about the rights of women and girls, and I'm proud to be able to say that we're working with her to try to advance and celebrate women in the Goldstein electorate and the capacity they can have to influence and shape the future of our community, our state and our nation. I'd also like to acknowledge Michelle Ayyuce, from Black Rock, who is another leading voice working towards a future where women are able to successfully manage career breaks and family commitments and to recognise the modern reality that women need to be able to make choices and continue with their careers without disadvantage. Lastly, to finish on an optimistic note—and I say this with difficulty as a Melbourne Football Club man—the Western Bulldogs took home the AFL women's 2018 premiership over the weekend. It's great to see so many talented young women finally given the opportunity to inspire on our sporting fields. 11:21 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra It is with great pleasure that I'm able to speak today about the importance of International Women's Day. It's a time to observe and reflect on the progress that we've made in attempting to achieve parity for women and also to focus on the fact there are many, many areas that still need addressing if we are to achieve real progress for women. We're pressing for progress, and we need to keep pressing for progress, because there is still a lot that we need to do to ensure equality for women throughout the world. I want to thank my colleague and friend the member for Newcastle for bringing this motion forward. I just want to comment on those opposite. We had an opportunity for five speakers on this motion. Two speakers on the opposite side have been blokes; one of them is a woman who hasn't fronted yet, as far as I'm aware; and there are still two opportunities that are going begging. There are still two opportunities to speak on International Women's Day, which those opposite can't bring themselves to do. They can't muscle up a speech to talk about the inequality that faces women throughout Australia, throughout their communities and throughout the world. It's an absolute disgrace that those opposite cannot muscle up five speakers to speak on something as important as International Women's Day, something as important as press for progress, something as important as equality for women in their communities, in Australia and throughout the world. In speaking very proudly on this motion, I acknowledge and support the sisters who have blazed the trails for us, who have led the way over decades in some hard-fought fights in their fight for fairness and equality. Thank you, sisters, for fighting the good fight over those many, many years, over many decades, but unfortunately there is still a long way to go, so we cannot rest on our laurels. Each day, women are confronted with injustices at every level, be it the high rates of family violence, be it the pay gap, be it underrepresentation of women in leadership positions. Every woman has a right to feel safe in her community and in her home. We know that in Australia one woman is killed by a current or former partner every week. In my own community, Canberra was devastated by the death of Tara Costigan at the hands of her partner. Tara was killed in 2015. She was a devoted mother of three children, and her life was stolen as a result of the scourge that is domestic violence in our community. Unfortunately, Tara's story is not rare. It's one that many Australian women face each and every day as they fall victim to family violence. One of the real concerns that I have is the fact that these women are not just suffering at the hands of domestic violence but also don't feel that they can escape these abusive relationships—because of a lack of financial independence, because of a lack of economic opportunity or because of a lack of somewhere safe to go in terms of a home. Globally, less than 20 per cent of women own land and 70 per cent of people living in poverty are women. We have the responsibility of ensuring that women have viable plans for financial stability, including in retirement. Relying on a man for financial security is not a financial plan for the future. This is what I tell women and girls in my community endlessly: a man is not a financial plan. Sisters, you have to become financially independent. You have to take control of your fertility if you are to determine your own future, if you are to have choice in life and if you are to have opportunity in life. If you want to pursue the dreams that you've had since childhood, you have to be financially independent and you need to take control of your fertility. And the framework, the premise, behind all of that is education and having access to education, no matter what your background is, no matter how much your parents earn, no matter what your gender is, no matter what race you are and no matter what your religion is. That's why it's deeply concerning to learn that our early educators are struggling to be treated seriously and struggling to get decent pay and conditions. We've got a campaign rolling out this week that acknowledges the significant contribution these educators make to educating for our future and to ensuring that the children of our nation have opportunities to get a decent education. I encourage Australians to support their campaign. 11:27 Ms BANKS 18661 Chisholm I rise to speak to this motion that acknowledges that we celebrated and observed International Women's Day on 8 March. International Women's Day celebrates the social, economic, cultural and political achievements of women. It is a big day for inspiration and change. This year the theme of International Women's Day was 'press for progress'. I am very proud to be a member of the Turnbull government, a government that is continuing to deliver progress and better outcomes for women in my electorate of Chisholm and indeed across Australia. To put it simply, the Turnbull government is fully committed to supporting and encouraging women in Australia so that there will be no limits to what they can aspire to achieve. The Turnbull government is certainly pressing for progress regarding the status of women in our society. Indeed, equality for all Australians underpins our government's agenda. The Turnbull government is committed to redressing entrenched gender inequities through striving to achieve equality of opportunity for all Australians by implementing integral policies, including a focus on galvanising women's safety and economic security through access to employment, as well as minimising homelessness and optimising educational outcomes, to name a few. As the chair of the newly formed Parliamentary Friends of Women's Health, which is to be launched today, I'm particularly pleased to speak today about our broad-based health initiatives, which target the health issues that specifically pertain to women or for which there are high incidences or differing symptoms between women and men. Most notably, I'm proud to report on the Turnbull government's groundbreaking policies that are saving and will continue to save lives by significantly reducing the incidence of health challenges such as the diagnosis of ovarian, cervical and breast cancers. The Turnbull government is committed to tackling cancer and provides, through Medicare, support for women who are suffering from cancer. Last November we added two new Medicare items for the testing of gene mutations that predispose women to cancers. We've also moved to ensure that medicines to treat cancer are more affordable by increasing government spending on PBS medicines in the last financial year. With regard to early detection and screening for breast cancer, the last federal budget announced funding of $64.3 million over the next four years to allow BreastScreen Australia to continue to actively invite women aged 70 to 74 to screen for the early detection. More broadly, the government has invested over $10 billion for cancer control activities, and in the last financial year the government invested around $2.9 billion for cancer control activities. These measures are just some examples of how our government is striving to ensure that all Australian women can reach affordable and timely health care. The Turnbull government is committed to ensuring the safety of Australian women and children and redressing the rates of family and domestic violence in our nation. Most notably, our $100 million Women's Safety Package is directly targeting the causes and effects of violence against women, including $59 million for practical and immediate action to keep women and children safe, including provision of security technologies; the development of the Australian government's eSafety Women website, which empowers women to take control and safeguard themselves and their children from technology-facilitated abuse; $36 million for training in frontline services; $5 million for outstanding educational resources; importantly, $25 million to address family violence in Indigenous communities; and $30 million for frontline legal assistance and family law services. The Turnbull government is fully committed to supporting women's employment, encouraging women into leadership positions and increasing financial empowerment of women. We've set an ambitious but achievable target for women to hold 50 per cent of Australian government board positions. From a productivity and intergenerational perspective and given our ageing population, there must be increased participation of women in the workforce and in leadership. As such, our government has made it a priority to reduce the workforce participation gap for Australian women by 25 per cent by 2025. More women in the workforce means more women being made ready for leadership positions. Increased participation of women in the workplace is intrinsically linked to providing these opportunities for women, so the Turnbull government's significant childcare reforms include the allocation of an additional $2.5 billion for a number of childcare initiatives and also investing $430 million to support universal access to preschool and $263 million for the rollout of ParentsNext, as well as other measures to boost women's workforce participation. I'm proud to be part of the Turnbull government which has focused on support for women to ensure progress for future generations of Australian women. 11:31 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I commend the member for Newcastle for proposing this motion in support of International Women's Day, which was celebrated on 8 March this year. The theme for 2018 is 'Press for Progress', recognising the strong and growing global momentum striving for gender equality. Now, more than ever, governments must recommit to addressing entrenched gender inequality. An important issue that must be addressed is paid domestic violence leave. Domestic violence leave will cost only about 5c per day per employee, but the real point is that the human cost of a type of leave that is used only in the most critical of circumstances must come before profit. The statistics in this area are shocking. One in five women experience harassment within the workplace; on average, one woman is killed every week by a current or former partner; Indigenous women and girls are 35 times more likely than the wider female population to be hospitalised due to family violence. A lack of domestic violence leave means further trauma for domestic violence victims, rather than the assistance a compassionate society should provide. The Western Australian, Queensland and Victorian state governments have now introduced 10 days paid domestic violence leave for public servants. That is a terrific decision. Here, the minister for employment, who is also the former Minister for Women, instructed this government's departments and agencies to oppose paid domestic violence leave in their enterprise agreements. Frankly, this is disgraceful. Those who oppose this policy due to cost need to think about the human cost of not acting. If you believe the issue is too prevalent and, therefore, too costly, focus on reducing the scourge of domestic violence; don't stop the protection of the victims. Penalty rates, also, are a fundamental part of the Australian way of life. They protect our weekends, seek to compensate for a loss of time with family and provide a way for low-paid workers to get a bit more in their wallets each week, making it easier—though not easy—to make ends meet. Many Australians earn an annualised salary where they trade off those penalty rates for greater flexibility for both their employers and themselves. The quid pro quo here is that these salaries should compensate for that reasonable overtime and weekend work penalty rates that they forgo. But analysis shows that women earn 33 per cent less than men in Australia when rates of part-time work are taken into account. The cut in penalty rates will exacerbate the gender pay gap, with women making up the majority of workers in these lower paid jobs that are affected by these cuts. Juggling family life and work is a tough gig. I know that, and my wife, Annabel, especially knows that. Everyone in this place should know that. So, with this government cutting penalty rates for the people who need them the most, the result is another hurdle for equality for women in the workplace. But gender equality is not just about those individuals. It is an issue of international economic and social importance. For too long, it has largely been women who have been advocating at the front, achieving hard-won improvements, while so many men hold the power and influence to help advance this work. The Male Champions of Change movement and approach is a growing part of removing entrenched gender inequalities. The Male Champions of Change coalition now encompasses eight action groups, with over 130 leaders from across Australian industry, but, of course, this needs to grow, and it needs to grow much more. Currently there are, frankly, unacceptably low levels of women in leadership in politics, especially in this government, and business, with the percentage of women on ASX 200 boards now at a whopping 26.7 per cent! That's half the proportion of the actual population. It's also less than the number of men named John, Peter or David on those boards. In the legal profession, which I hail from, it is clear that the pace of change has been especially slow, with over 63 per cent of graduates now being women, yet women only occupying 10 per cent of high-level positions in the profession. With the election of Ged Kearney to the Labor Party, we now have a magnificent gender balance in our caucus of 48 per cent, demonstrating that gender quotas do actually work and are needed. Of course, there's still more work to do. The Prime Minister, though, likes to talk a big game about his support for women, yet, as evidenced by the proportion of women in his party room and ministry, the Prime Minister is all talk and no action. Unfortunately, the results for women's policy under this government are also woefully inadequate. I commend this motion to the House, and I stand here as a proud feminist in support of it. 11:37 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie It's a delight to speak on the member for Newcastle's motion on International Women's Day. I had the privilege this year of partnering with two organisations to bring International Women's Day to the Blue Mountains. Springwood Neighbourhood Centre, led by Toni Quigley, has marked International Women's Day with a breakfast for as long as any of us can remember. Women with Altitude is a networking and support group for businesswoman started in the mountains by Andrea Turner-Boys, who has organised International Women's Day events in more recent years. So the coming together of these two groups was destined to be a success. I joined a panel discussion that included Jen Ballard, who has been a woman in the sport of motorcycling racing; Molly Cameron, a Winmalee High School student; and SJ Staszak, a mum who lost the use of her legs after a supposedly simple operation on a bulging disc, but that hasn't stopped her from abseiling. The panel discussion brought a whole group of women, everyone who was in the audience, to consider the progress that has been made to date, the sort of progress that we need to see and how to press for that progress, living the themes of International Women's Day. I'd like to add that it was wonderful to have Winmalee High School senior students there, represented by Erin, Hayley and Georgie, and the deputy principal, Voula Facas. It's just wonderful to see the sort of support that this community gives to young women. I'd like to congratulate all involved, including Jacinta Tobin for her very moving and beautiful welcome to country. Let's hope that it's the first of many collaborations, which are, of course, what women do well. The North Richmond Community Centre continued its tradition of hosting an International Women's Day event. This year, Anne Lowe revealed some of the challenges of being a woman in an Australian defence coding unit during the Vietnam War. It was quite a pertinent choice, because the movie that the group saw was Hidden Figures, which is, of course, the story of a team of female African-American mathematicians who served a vital and secret role at NASA in the early years of the US space program doing coding. They were women in non-traditional roles. It was wonderful to hear Anne's stories about what it was like for her. As always, Birgit and her team at North Richmond provided an inclusive and supportive event for women of all ages, and my thanks go to Stacy Etal and Maree Fayne from the Hawkesbury Community Outreach Services, both of whom played a key role in the event. While International Women's Day is an important day, there are many women who celebrate and support the power of women every day. One such group is Pink Finss. They provides practical and emotional support to women with cancer. Saturday night was the third Pink Tie Ball to raise funds for the many things that Pink Finss do—and yes, almost a pink tie over there; coming close. Two brave women told very powerful and gut-wrenching stories of their experiences of losing their sister and friend Amanda to breast cancer. Once again, as is always the case at this event—and this is my third time there—they proved to be totally inspirational. Pink Finss founder, Jodie Amor, and a team including Emma-Jane Garrow, Kym Burton and Maria Miller focus on supporting women as they recover. They go through the treatment and they ensure quality of life when the days that remain are short. Jodie, the founder, was just 33 and married with two young children when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. It was a journey that changed not only her life forever but also that of hundreds of other women and their families. The work Pink Finss do from their base in Windsor is an incredible model of women supporting women. They also support families and friends, so it enhances the environment in which women can deal with their treatment or come to terms with the fact that their treatment hasn't been successful—and, sadly, it happens. Pink Finss are master fundraisers, as Saturday night's event was evidence of. They attract terrific support from the Hawkesbury community, and I would like to congratulate all those who made donations on the night or beforehand, including the Hawkesbury Race Club which proudly hosts the ball. They've raised more than $1 million and helped over 100 women. This group has extended the support to women with any cancer now, and they are doing a great job. I commend their work as women who every day push the progress. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. World Tuberculosis Day 129 11:42 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) 24 March is World Tuberculosis Day, and marks the anniversary of German Nobel laureate Dr Robert Koch's 1882 discovery of the bacterium that causes tuberculosis; (b) tuberculosis is contagious and airborne, ranking as the world's leading cause of death from a single infectious agent; (c) in 2016, 1.7 million people died from tuberculosis worldwide and 10.4 million people became sick with the disease, with over 60 per cent of cases occurring in countries in our region; (d) large gaps in tuberculosis detection and treatment remain with 4.1 million cases of active tuberculosis that were not diagnosed and treated in 2016, including 600,000 children; (e) Papua New Guinea (PNG) had one of the highest rates of tuberculosis infection in the Pacific in 2016, with an estimated 35,000 total cases including 2,000 drug-resistant cases, not taking into consideration the large number of cases that go unreported in many regions; and (f) tuberculosis is: (i) the leading cause of death among HIV positive people globally—HIV weakens the immune system and is lethal in combination with tuberculosis, each contributing to the other's progress; (ii) now linked to non-communicable diseases like diabetes; and (iii) considered a preventable and treatable disease, however many current treatment tools—drugs, diagnostics and vaccines—are outdated and ineffective; (2) recognises: (a) the funding that Australia is providing to support the testing and treatment of tuberculosis in PNG, including the joint program with the World Bank, is already leading to an initiative to achieve universal testing for tuberculosis in Daru; (b) the commitment of up to $75 million over five years for Product Development Partnerships in the Indo-Pacific Health Security Initiative to accelerate access to new therapeutics and diagnostics for drug resistant tuberculosis, and malaria and mosquito vector control—an increase in funding to build on the successes of Australia's previous investments; (c) Australia's three year $220 million pledge to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (2017-2019)—a fund that has supported tuberculosis testing and treatment to 17.4 million people since 2002, including over 8.2 million people in the Indo-Pacific region; (d) that through our endorsement of the Sustainable Development Goals in September 2015, we made a bold commitment to end the tuberculosis epidemic by 2030; and (e) the scheduling of the first United Nations High-Level Meeting on Tuberculosis in September 2018, which will set out commitments to accelerate action towards ending tuberculosis as an epidemic and provide Australia with an opportunity to showcase the success of our investment in tuberculosis in our region; and (3) calls on the Australian Government to attend the United Nations High-Level Meeting this year, and commit to increased Australian action and leadership on research and development, prevention, testing and treatment as part of the global effort to eradicate tuberculosis. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT Is the motion seconded? Mrs Prentice 217266 I second the motion. Mr ENTSCH 7K6 TB is a disease that most people thought was in the past or isolated to small pockets of some impoverished countries. It is one of the oldest human diseases and has been identified in Egyptian mummies. My mother was inflicted with TB in the early 1960s and spent a year in the Cairns Base Hospital. Let me assure you: it had a profound effect on my family, especially my younger siblings who didn't see our mother for that full year. I, for one, also assumed the disease was no longer an issue, but nothing could be further from the truth. The reality is: TB is the largest infectious disease killer in the world. Despite many cases being curable with a six-month treatment regime that costs less than $40, there are still more than 10 million people who contract TB every year, including one million children. One of the greatest challenges in dealing with TB is the complexity of its treatment. Until recently, to treat a drug-resistant TB patient, there was a requirement for that patient to take up to 25 tablets and have two injections a day for up to two years. There is no question that this would be a challenge for a person living in the most affluent of circumstances; however, imagine the challenge for a patient living in an underdeveloped country without access to potable water. In Australia, we enjoy a common boundary with Papua New Guinea. The distance between the outer Torres Strait Islands and the coastal villages of PNG's mainland Western province is less than four kilometres. Papua New Guinea is one of the highest burden TB countries in our region with a large number of TB victims living and dying undiagnosed. With the treaty arrangement between Australia and PNG including unrestricted family travel, we're already seeing TB making its presence known in the Torres Strait and in my home town of Cairns. I will also add that one of the highest burdened countries in the world is Indonesia, so we are surrounded by this dreadful disease. There have been significant advances in the diagnosis and treatment of TB. The development of the GeneXpert Omni testing device means a sputum sample or mouth swab can be taken and a diagnosis can be confirmed within 60 minutes via a machine no bigger than a milkshake maker. This is a far cry from the previous testing procedures where diagnosis could take up to two months, leaving that delay in treatment. The beauty of the GeneXpert Omni device is that it's solar powered and rechargeable, which makes it amazingly portable. The stark reality is that with modern travel TB can be transmitted anywhere in the world in less than 24 hours. In fact, the only continent that has not recorded an incident of TB is Antarctica, and that's not because of its environment, it's because of the quarantine arrangements in Antarctica and the very heavy screening. There is a very, very heavy burden of TB on the Inuit population in the north, in the Arctic Circle. In treatment, the fantastic work of the TB Alliance, under the leadership of Mel Spigelman and his team, means that we are now trialling and treating with patients who have drug-resistant tuberculosis with four tablets a day and no injection. That treatment is for six months. They're also working on a treatment that will see drug-resistant tuberculosis cured with one tablet per day for three months. So there's been amazing progress in recent times with a focus on this. The second major achievement for the TB Alliance has been the development of a world-first oral paediatric TB medicine. This is a game changer for treating children. Up until this point in time there was no drug treatment for children because there was a belief that TB didn't inflict young children, so they had to break existing tablets up and try to guess the amount for treatment. This new one, which is a syrup that children can take orally, is absolutely fantastic. There has never been a communicable disease that has not been cured by a vaccine. Most of us in Australia, at some stage in our lives, would have received a TB vaccine, and there will be a scar on our upper arm to prove that we've had it. But, I say to you all, don't feel protected. The current TB vaccine, developed in 1921, is absolutely ineffective against any new strains of TB. In fact, it's less effective than a cup full of cold water. It is only effective, in fact, for a small number of children under the age of five. This is an area where we need to focus. I'd like to congratulate James Cook University in Cairns, which has, through the Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, established a research group led by Professor Louis Schofield that focuses on developing a TB vaccine. No-one should die of TB, a disease that has been neglected for far too long. The disease can be cured but more needs to be done. According to the World Health Organization's Global tuberculosis report2017, there was an estimated 10.4 million new TB cases in 2016 worldwide. The Asia-Pacific region is home to six countries—India, Indonesia, China, Philippines, Pakistan and Papua New Guinea—that account for 60 per cent of the total worldwide tuberculosis burden. An estimated 1.7 million people died from TB last year, including 400,000 people who were co-affected with HIV. Alarmingly, the report found that underreporting and underdiagnosing of TB cases continued to be a challenge, especially in countries with large unregulated private sectors and weak health systems. Of the estimated 10.4 million new cases, only 6.3 million were detected and officially notified in 2016, leaving a gap of 4.1 million. The report also found that for TB care and prevention investments in low- and middle-income countries fell almost US$2.3 billion short of the US$9.2 billion needed last year. In addition, at least an extra US$1.2 billion per year is required to accelerate the development of new vaccines, diagnoses and medicines. The United Nations has convened its first ever high-level meeting on tuberculosis due to take place in September this year in New York. The high-level meeting is the biggest and best opportunity to raise the political priority of TB. It is also the most significant political meeting ever held on TB and one I am proud to say that I played a part in making a reality during my three-month secondment to the United Nations last year. This is a golden opportunity for Australia to stand up and be counted and lead the charge in the fight against TB. We are not talking about a disease in a faraway land; TB is already on our doorstep. In conclusion, I would like to acknowledge the work of an outstanding number of NGOs who have been instrumental in supporting me in my journey on TB advocacy, including the Global TB Caucus, the Global Health Caucus on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, RESULTS International Australia, and Stop TB Partnership, just to name a few. I would particularly like to mention and thank Sarah Kirk and Maree Nutt. Without their ongoing support and mentoring, we would never have been able to achieve the outstanding progress we have made to date. I would also like to thank my colleague and dear friend Julie Bishop for her ongoing support in dealing with this horrible scourge. Through her outstanding leadership, Australia is recognised as being at the forefront of tackling this disease. I would like everybody here today to take a few seconds to think about this: humans generally blink every three seconds; every three seconds someone in the world contracts TB. There is one death from TB every three minutes, but it can be absolutely cured, it can be absolutely avoided and I think it's absolutely imperative that we move on this and move on it very, very quickly, because it's a disease that actually drives people further and further into poverty. It usually hits the breadwinner, particularly in developing countries, which makes it impossible for them to work and therefore drives them further and further into poverty. It is so avoidable, but, sadly—as I cough as I am speaking here today—it is the only disease that is delivered airborne, which makes it a real threat. Believe you me, nobody is immune from this, and, unfortunately, because most people assume that this is a disease that has been dealt with, when you present, particularly in First World countries, it is the last thing they look for. By the time they run out of options and look at TB as one of those way-out-there options, the disease is very well advanced. So we need to stamp it out. I also acknowledge my friend and colleague Matt Thistlethwaite for his excellent support as we worked on this together. We are getting real results, and I am very proud to say that. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? Mrs Prentice 217266 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:53 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Can I thank the member for Leichhardt for his motion and recognise his lifelong commitment to the eradication of TB and the search for a workable vaccine. On Saturday, the world recognised TB Day—it was the UN-recognised World Tuberculosis Day. TB is often thought of as a 19th century disease, particularly in modern-day Australia—something we got rid of decades ago that doesn't afflict many Australians anymore and is something that still plagues the developing world. But, while Australia has largely won the battle against TB, the broader battle throughout the world continues. TB is the world's leading cause of death of all infectious diseases. In one year alone, TB will kill approximately 1.7 million people throughout the world. That's almost the equivalent of the population of Perth dying each year from what is a preventable and curable disease. It's sad to think that more than 75 million people will needlessly die from tuberculosis over the course of the next 35 years, and to go with that human cost there's a financial burden as well. It's estimated that $15 trillion will be spent globally on TB care in the next 35 years, unless we find a workable vaccine and coordinate with an international response. There are also an estimated four million cases of those who are sick with TB but go either undiagnosed or unreported through the health system. TB's also, as we've heard, the leading killer of people living with HIV, being responsible for one in three HIV-related deaths, and it's among the top three causes of death for women of reproductive age. The Asia-Pacific region, unfortunately, is the epicentre of the public health crisis when it comes to TB. More than 60 per cent of the world's TB cases are located in our region. Drug-resistant TB remains a major issue for several of our neighbours, particularly Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. PNG alone accounts for 60 per cent of our region's drug-resistant TB cases. There are more than 30,000 cases, including 2,000 drug-resistant cases, in PNG today. When I was the Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs I travelled extensively throughout Papua New Guinea, talking to people working in this area and seeing firsthand the great work that Australian aid dollars are doing in trying to prevent TB and treat PNG citizens who are afflicted with tuberculosis. But unfortunately this scourge continues in that developing neighbourhood today, and it's a great shame that we haven't been able to make more significant progress in some of the countries in our neighbourhood, particularly in PNG and Indonesia, with respect to TB. Australia's bilateral investment in TB has already helped many patients in our region and in our community. However, Australia's funding for PNG still needs to increase in order to address the drug-resistant TB epidemic. The global response to TB has been hampered by the use of old drugs and diagnostics. This makes it challenging to accurately diagnose and treat TB. Current estimates point to a US$1.2 billion gap in financing for TB research and development. New tools and targeted funding will help make a huge impact on the goal to end TB. When you look at the advances that have been made in medical science and research over the course of the last few decades, it is remarkable, given the number of people who are infected with TB each year, the number of people that die from TB each year and the fact that it is preventable, that we haven't been able to find a workable vaccine that can do more to inoculate larger proportions of the world's population against this insidious disease. A lot of work is going into research and development for a workable vaccine at the moment, but unfortunately we haven't been able to come up with something that is practical and workable. The member for Leichhardt's also pointed out that when someone contracts TB the treatment regime and regimen in terms of the number of tablets that people have historically had to take is quite remarkable and often outrageous, and it impinges on that person's quality of life for many years. One of the major drivers of TB today is that treatments are so tough. To cure standard TB, patients have to take 4,000 pills over the course of six months, and people with drug-resistant TB suffer 18 months of treatment—a total of 14,000 pills in a six-month period and in some cases daily injections. As the member for Leichhardt's mentioned, advances are being made, and that is bringing down the number of pills that people have to take, But for many in the developing world the cost of those medicines is prohibitive, and they're still on these very arduous and burdensome treatment regimens. And when you're talking about developing nations, where access to potable water, to sewage, to electricity and to transport can be a challenge for many, taking 4,000 pills over the course of six months is in itself a challenge. And people forget. They don't take the treatments and they relapse, or they think they've cured themselves of the illness and they pass it on to others. In addition, the emergence of drug-resistant strains of TB means even longer treatment times, much higher costs to treat and even more troubling side effects. It's clear that we need new drugs, diagnostics and vaccines, and Australia has made significant investments in research and development to help turn the tide to fight TB. Australia can be proud of our global health research and development investment. It benefits both our region and its growing prosperity and Australia's own health security. Our investment in the product development partnership TB Alliance has also led to shorter treatment duration for drug-resistant TB. But we still need to seek to do better to target the overall TB investment and leverage if thorough policy is going to result at a national and international level. For the first time, the United Nations will host a high-level meeting on TB in September in New York. This meeting is the most significant of its kind to be held on TB. It will result in a political declaration on TB endorsed by the heads of state, which will then form the basis of a global TB response. This meeting will also provide Australia with an opportunity to highlight the success of our regional investment and efforts to combat tuberculosis. This motion, which I'm proud to speak on, calls on the government to do more in terms of investments in research and development, in innovation, for the cure for this disease and for a workable vaccine, but it also calls on the government to participate in this meeting that will occur in New York through the UN later in the year. This will be a very, very important meeting and an opportunity for Australia and the world to show leadership on this issue that afflicts so many in our region. As we pointed out earlier, TB is preventable, and it is curable with the right investment, the right diagnostics and the right vaccines and drugs becoming available. We also need to work even harder to support the development of new tools and strategies to combat and ultimately end the scourge of tuberculosis and make sure that it does become—as we all imagine it is and perceive that it is—a 19th century illness. We need to make sure that we work together as a global community to properly fund the research and development of a workable vaccine, a cure, and to finally eradicate tuberculosis. I also wish to thank those very, very dedicated people who've worked in this industry around infectious disease and its spread for many, many years—in particular, the Global TB Caucus, which I, the member for Leichhardt, and others in this parliament are very proud to be part of; RESULTS Australia and the work that they do; and of course the Stop TB Partnership, which does wonderful work in this area. I commend this motion to the parliament. 12:02 Mr CREWTHER 248969 Dunkley As a proud member of the Australian parliament tuberculosis caucus, I want to raise my voice as well in support of this motion. Tomorrow morning, my parliamentary colleagues and I will join together at the World TB Day breakfast to throw our renewed support behind the efforts to eradicate tuberculosis worldwide. TB is a serious infectious disease and, despite many people having little to no awareness about TB in Australia, the disease has an incredible reach worldwide and especially so in our own region. TB is recognised as a major obstacle in our quest to raise the base level of health in the Indo-Pacific region, which boasts the unfortunate status of having more than half of the TB cases and also the majority of the multidrug-resistant TB cases worldwide. If that is not enough of a reason to act on TB, the sheer proximity of tuberculosis to our borders, four kilometres away in Papua New Guinea, should prompt concern in those who may have found themselves unaware of this conversation. We find many parts of our society blissfully unaware of the continued existence and threat of TB, with it relegated to being a thing of the past, a historical killer, seemingly eradicated, along with many of the other diseases or illnesses that characterised our past. The reality is that, in 2016, 10.4 million people fell ill with TB, and 1.7 million people died from it. People with HIV are at even more risk, with TB being the leading killer for those living with HIV. TB is very much still out there, and many Australians are somewhat sheltered from the devastation that it can leave behind. I am proud, though, of Australia's support in addressing the threat of TB, and I urge the support of my colleagues for continuing to do so. Last year, in 2017, I had the opportunity to travel with the Pacific Friends of the Global Fund, to look at our work in tackling TB, malaria and HIV in Myanmar and Thailand. I saw firsthand the benefit of our funding to tackle TB. Despite achieving and maintaining one of the lowest rates of TB incidence in the world, it is important for Australia to support research and development into better tools to fight TB in Australia, our region and abroad. Since 2011, Australia has committed $60 million to comprehensively support TB control in PNG alone. We are partnering with PNG and the World Bank to address drug-resistant TB. Just last year, we pledged $220 million for the fifth replenishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. To examine the funding and support to end TB from another perspective, there are additional reasons for action on TB globally, and for our involvement. To allay the concerns of those who urge lower aid funding overseas, it is in our own interest to act on the threat of TB. Growing immigration levels, for example, have seen a recent rise in new cases of TB from higher burden countries. With Australia's population predicted to rise by over 10 million people by 2056, it is important that future immigration policies can adequately detect and control TB in new arrivals and allow for ongoing monitoring. These risks can be responded to with a pre-emptive approach as well. By working to lessen the spread of TB worldwide, we address and reinforce our own health security in Australia. It can always be argued that there should be more done to address global health risks, but I am proud that Australia continues to advocate for increased global attention to TB, especially in the Indo-Pacific region, and I am proud that, in response to my esteemed colleague's motion, Australia will be strongly represented at the high-level meeting of the UN General Assembly on ending TB. Continuation of Australia's high standard of diagnosis and treatment relies on current TB control infrastructure being continued and improved, including new diagnostics, treatment and vaccinations. I join with the member for Leichhardt on this in calling for increased Australian action and leadership on research and development, prevention, testing and treatment. Saturday may have marked the 136th anniversary of the discovery of the bacterium that causes TB, but we are undoubtedly closer to its eradication than we were 136 years ago. 12:07 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I'm very pleased to contribute to this motion recognising World Tuberculosis Day 2018, which was held on the weekend to raise awareness of the devastating health, social, and economic consequences of tuberculosis. The theme this year is 'Wanted: leaders for a TB-free world'. It urges people across the social and political spectrum to do what they can to lead the change in their part of the world. I'd like to thank the member for Leichhardt for moving the motion. He's been a longstanding and passionate advocate for bringing an end to this disease, and he's done a fantastic job, as has the co-chair of the Australian parliamentary TB caucus, the member for Kingsford Smith, Matt Thistlethwaite. The TB caucus, of which I'm also a member, brings together federal parliamentarians to develop strategies and raise awareness of TB, with a focus on its impact in our own region. It's just one of a global network of parliamentary groups in the Global TB Caucus. Tuberculosis is a diabolical disease, caused by exposure to bacteria from an infected person. It usually attacks the lungs, but it can also spread to other parts of the body. Symptoms include extreme cough, chest pain, coughing up blood, sweats, chills and fever. It's still the top infectious killer globally, with more than 10 million cases in 2015 alone. Of these cases, 1.4 million people lost their lives. If left untreated, half of those who are infected will die. While there are some treatments for TB, they are lengthy and incredibly burdensome to patients, taking more than a year to complete. For a range of reasons, many people just aren't able to complete the treatment course, and there's a growing problem with the strains of the disease that don't respond to antibiotics at all. In 1993, the gravity of the situation was recognised by the World Health Organization, which declared TB a global health emergency. In 2015, it released the End TB Strategy, which aims to reduce TB deaths by 95 per cent and to cut new cases by 90 per cent between 2015—which I remind us was three years ago—and 2035. In 2017, goal 3 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals set a 2030 date for eradication, and I believe we can get there. We're now at a critical juncture, with an enormous number of game-changing advances before us or just around the corner. Defeating TB means giving patients and health systems better and simpler tools. We must invest in new technologies and innovation to deliver shorter, more effective treatments. We need to move from the old TB wards and isolation rooms, with the need for refrigeration and injections and the onerous treatment regimes, into some space that is simpler, with faster tests, and safe, effective tablets that can be taken at home. We also need an effective vaccine. While Australia has one of the lowest TB rates in the world, we mustn't think it's not our problem. In fact, TB remains a critical issue in our country, with 60 per cent of cases occurring on our doorstep, in the Asia-Pacific region. As this motion outlines, Papua New Guinea has one of the highest rates in the Pacific, with an estimated 33,000 cases. Some great work has been done in PNG to fight the disease, including the treaty village resilience project, in which the Burnet Institute and the global fund worked in partnership with the PNG government and the Reef and Rainforest Research Centre to build capacity for improved health services in the Western Province villages. But we cannot drop the ball now. The Australian government absolutely must provide continued funding for tuberculosis prevention and treatment in PNG, and continued funding for the development of improved diagnostics and medicines to combat TB into the future. This year, 2018, is going to be critical in the global fight to end TB, not least because of the United Nations high-level meeting in September. Heads of state from around the world will gather in New York City to discuss and commit to the actions that will be needed to eradicate TB—and Australia must do its share. Now is the time to reaffirm our commitment to the global fight against TB and to redouble our efforts to end this damaging scourge. 12:12 Mrs PRENTICE 217266 Ryan Designated by the World Health Organization as World Tuberculosis Day, on 24 March every year we seek to continue to raise awareness of TB. It is an important initiative that acknowledges that a very preventable and very treatable disease still claims the lives of up to 1.5 million people every year. I rise to speak on this motion today, and I thank the member for Leichhardt for bringing this issue to the attention of the parliament. Tuberculosis, also known as consumption, has been all but eradicated in developed countries. Sadly, this disease remains a major problem in most developing countries. The harsh reality is that tuberculosis remains one of the top 10 causes of death worldwide, with 10.4 million people falling ill with TB in 2016, and 1.7 million dying from the disease. In that same year, one million children became ill with TB, with the tragic result of 250,000 of their young lives ending. Significantly, on Australia's doorstep, within our local neighbourhood, the Asia-Pacific region has more than half of all global tuberculosis cases. Papua New Guinea experiences one of the highest rates of this highly contagious and airborne disease in the Pacific. In 2015, PNG was struck by an estimated 33,000 cases of tuberculosis. To put that into perspective, that is the equivalent of the population of the city of Gladstone, in Queensland. Currently, more than one-quarter of the world's population is infected with latent TB, five to 10 per cent of whom become sick or infectious at some time in their life. For sufferers of TB, who are often living in impoverished, isolated locations, treatment of this disease is not without challenges. The standard short-course TB therapy is six months in length and involves 28 pills a week. For those patients who have drug-resistant TB, treatment is considerably longer: 20 pills a day, plus injections, for three years. The case for early prevention and targeted strategies is very strong, as infectious suffers will, on average, infect between 10 and 15 others each year, contributing to the pandemic nature of this disease. We know that a person may be infected with TB in the dormant stage for many years, ultimately having active symptoms when their immune system is weakened. Unfortunately, even with the aid of modern medicines and technology, not all cases can be successfully treated; 2,000 cases of drug-resistant TB were recorded in 2015 in Papua New Guinea. An outbreak of drug-resistant cases on Daru, near the PNG-Australian border, in 2016 demonstrates the real threat of this disease to Australia. This very concerning position means that there are strains of TB that are resistant to all of the major anti-TB drugs that we currently have available. The prevalence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis continues to increase worldwide: 490,000 cases in 2016 alone. The World Health Organization's End TB strategy was endorsed by all member states at the 2014 World Health Assembly and aims to end the tuberculosis epidemic by 2030, with full elimination by 2050. In 2015 the Australian government announced a $30 million investment over three years that will help bring new diagnostic tests and drugs to market to tackle the threats of TB and malaria. As part of this announcement, the TB Alliance received $10 million over three years to support late-stage clinical trials of new TB treatments. These include the phase 3 trial of a new drug regimen that is the first to treat both drug-sensitive and multidrug-resistant TB. This new treatment has the potential to shorten and simplify TB therapy and reduce the cost of treating multidrug-resistant TB by up to nine per cent. There is some hope for sufferers in nearby PNG, and I would like to place on record my appreciation and recognition of the work undertaken by the YWAM Medical Ships. They continue their fight by helping to improve access to diagnosis and treatment in PNG's more isolated areas. The Australian government is continuing to work towards combating the challenge of TB in the region and the need for discovery, development and rapid uptake of new tools, intervention and strategies to achieve this goal. To continue the fight against tuberculosis, I call on the Australian government to ensure that funding is committed to prevent and treat this insidious disease, particularly in Papua New Guinea, and I commend the motion to the House. 12:17 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell Milton House in Flinders Lane, Melbourne, is today notably known for its magnificent Art Nouveau architecture. But when built in 1901 it was a private hospital, equipped with a free X-ray service provided by the federal government to assist in the fight for the elimination of tuberculosis. On Saturday, March 24, World Tuberculosis Day was commemorated, and the theme of this year's World Tuberculosis Day is 'Wanted: leaders for a TB-free world'. This will of course allow for a focus on building an international commitment to end TB. Almost 100 years after Milton House was built in 1901, tuberculosis is still an issue in Australia—not so much in our own country, but it certainly is a major health concern for us internationally. So I want to thank the member for Leichhardt for raising this very important issue, and I'm very pleased to be speaking to it. This year, 2018, marks the beginning of this commitment to world leadership—so much so that in September the heads of state who will gather in New York at the United Nations will do so to conduct the first ever high-level meeting on tuberculosis. The aim is to fast-track the international community's efforts to end tuberculosis. In 2016 TB was one of the top 10 causes of death worldwide, causing some 1.8 million deaths, including 0.5 million people with associated HIV complications. It is the leading cause of death from a single infectious agent. There were an estimated 10.4 million new TB cases worldwide in 2016, of which 1,500 were in Australia, just 29 of which included an HIV-positive diagnosis and 53 of which involved multidrug-resistant TB. In 2016, 1.67 million people died from TB, and, of those, 48 were Australian. So we can compare our efforts, in not having to deal with high levels of TB, with those of the rest of the world. One area in particular—the countries in our neighbourhood, such as India, Indonesia, China, the Philippines and Pakistan—accounts for 56 per cent of people living with TB. Although TB is curable and preventable, it is transmitted very easily, so it's very important that we all work together—the developing world, the developed world and the international community—in order to stem the possible spread of TB and ensure that everyone globally has access to treatment. Thirty countries are assessed as having a high TB burden by the World Health Organization. These account for 80 per cent of all TB cases, Of these countries, our nearest neighbour, Papua New Guinea, had the fifth lowest success rate for treatment. The WHO also reports that, in 2016, PNG had the seventh highest incidence of TB per 100,000 in population. From 2006 to 2017, happily, the funding levels for TB prevention, diagnosis and treatment have doubled from US$3.3 billion to US$6.9 billion. Many high-TB-burdened countries rely heavily on international sources of funding in order to manage TB in their countries. Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar, Cambodia, Vietnam, Pakistan and Bangladesh rely heavily on global funding to meet more than 70 per cent of their strategies for ending TB. Funding provided by Australia for PNG in the health program specifically includes up to $609.1 million over the period 2012 to 2018. And, according to DFAT, the program provides funding to partners working in various areas, including the detection, diagnosis and treatment of TB. In 2016, the Australian government recommitted to continue its aid contribution to PNG in order to tackle TB. The Torres Strait Cross Border Health Issues Committee meeting in April 2017, of which Australia was a part, identified several remaining challenges for ending TB in our region. These were lack of human resources; poor understanding and implementation of the basic principles of the treatment short course; and a weak laboratory capacity in Papua New Guinea. Our efforts in our region are commendable. They need to continue until such time as the world is free of TB. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Age Pension 136 12:22 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I move: That this House: (1) notes that the: (a) OECD: (i) calculates that the average old age dependency ratio in Australia was 25 in 2017, and is projected to increase to 41 by 2050; (ii) calculates that Australia’s expenditure on age pensions is currently 4 per cent of public spending, and is projected to be 4 per cent in 2050—this compares with 9 per cent and 10 per cent respectively for the OECD; (iii) stated that ‘The old age income poverty rate in Australia is high at 26% compared to 13% across the OECD in 2015’; and (iv) further stated that ‘While taking out lump sums create flexibility in retirement it can also increase the risk of falling into poverty in case retirees outlive their assets’; and (b) Benevolent Society: (i) released ‘The Adequacy of the Age Pension in Australia’ report in September 2016, concluding from its research that ‘The Aged Pension in Australia is inadequate’; and (ii) concluded that ‘Home ownership constitutes the single biggest factor contributing to financial hardship among pensioners. Age pensioners who are renting, in particular those who are single, are the worst off’; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) establish an independent tribunal to assess the base rate of the pension and determine the best mechanism for annual review; (b) increase the maximum rate of Commonwealth Rent Assistance to reduce the gap between aged pensioners who are home owners and those who are renters; and (c) establish a roundtable to review services provided to age pensioners. It's often said that Australia has a well-targeted tax and transfer system—one of the best in the world. The age pension is quite different to working-age payments, such as Newstart, and should be treated differently, as the unique challenge that faces age pensioners is that they have little future opportunity to earn extra money. The age pension is not welfare. I would argue that it should be managed separately to Centrelink, as it is a payment for older Australians who have worked and contributed to our community. I would say that age pensioners and all older Australians in my community are continuing to contribute every day. Certainly, we have such a high rate of volunteering simply because of the older people in our community. For older Australians without assets, the age pension also has a critical role in lifting them out of poverty. This is why, in 2017, NXT negotiated an energy assistance payment of $75 for age pensioners and $62.50 for those who are part of a couple. It's also why NXT could not support cuts to the energy supplement in the face of rising energy prices. Age pensioners are particularly vulnerable to changes in government decisions. The Benevolent Society is spearheading a 'Fix Pension Poverty' campaign to provide a fair and decent standard of living for older Australians. To quote their campaign: 1.5 million older Australians rely solely on the Age Pension. Almost a third of them are living in poverty. They suffer substantial deprivation; going without food and heating, ignoring the need to see medical specialists and skipping medications to make ends meet. Some are missing food in order to ensure that they can manage to visit medical professionals. Unfortunately, big structural changes are underway in the Australian economy which are eroding the efficacy of our system's ability to keep older Australians out of poverty. Firstly, there is a great demographic change. The average Australian is getting older and older. This means that the dependency ratio burden, the proportion of people on the age pension relative to the proportion of people working, is increasing. That is making it particularly difficult, particularly in my electorate. I have the oldest electorate in South Australia and the eighth oldest electorate in the country. Immigration is easing this challenge somewhat. Australia does not face the same steep decline in the working-age population as countries such as Japan and Germany, but the shift is well and truly underway, and it is already putting great pressure on governments to consider how we manage the age pension and how we best support people who are beyond their working lives. This leads me to another big structural economic shift: the rapidly declining rate of home ownership in Australia. What we are seeing is that more and more people who are moving onto the pension no longer have the family home, or any home, and have been renting for much of their life. Indeed, in 2015, the difference in expenditure on housing between home owners and renters of over 65 years of age was dramatic. The average fortnightly expenditure on housing for renters was over $300, whereas home owners spent less than $40 on repairs and remaining mortgage payments. The difference is vast. Owning your home makes you $240 a fortnight better off, and that was back in 2015. Rent prices have increased. Home ownership is the biggest source of average Australian household wealth, and we need to ensure that we continue to have high home ownership so that future Australians who are moving onto the pension will have the ability to have some sort of financial security. The coalition's changes to age pension indexation, which began in September last year, may well have simplified the job of the Department of Social Services, but they have not addressed many of the concerns about the current pension rate, which many see as inadequate. So it is with great satisfaction that I give my support to the Benevolent Society's Fix Pension Poverty campaign, and I hope that we can make a positive difference to the lives of older Australians with it. I would encourage all members in this place: please meet with the Benevolent Society and hear what they have to say. Hear about the older Australians in your community who are going without meals so that they can have their medications and those who are going without heating so that they can cover their bills, particularly those who are renting. It is important that in this place we do all that we can to support every older Australian. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT I'd like a seconder for the motion, please. 12:28 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I'm happy to second it, Deputy Speaker. I'm very pleased to speak on the motion moved by the member for Mayo. It's a wonderful opportunity to reflect on the adequacy of the pension and the degree to which the Turnbull government has cruelly deserted Australian pensioners. In every single budget that this Liberal and National Party government has handed down, the Liberals and the Nationals have tried to cut the pension. Let's have a look at the very recent history under this government. In the 2014 budget, they tried to cut pension indexation, a cut that would have meant that pensioners would have been forced to live on $80 a week less within 10 years. This unfair cut would have ripped $23 billion from the pockets of pensioners in Australia. The Prime Minister and every one of his Liberal-National Party colleagues voted to index the pension to CPI only. If this out-of-touch Prime Minister had had his way, the pension would have dropped from 28 per cent of average weekly earnings today to just 16 per cent by 2055 because of the Turnbull government's decisions. In the very same budget, the LNP cut $1 billion from pensioner concessions, support designed to help pensioners cope with rising cost-of-living pressures. They also axed the $900 seniors supplement to self-funded retirees who receive the Commonwealth seniors health card. In the 2014 budget, these mean-spirited Liberals tried to reset deeming-rate thresholds, a cut that would have seen 500,000 part-pensioners made worse off. In 2015, the Liberals and Nationals did a deal with the Greens political party to cut the pension to around 370,000 pensioners by as much as $12,000 a year by changing the pension assets test. In the 2016 budget, the Liberals and Nationals tried to cut the pension to around 190,000 pensioners as part of a plan to limit overseas travel to pensioners to six weeks. So what plans are still on this out-of-touch Turnbull government's books? The Liberals and Nationals still want to make pensioners born overseas wait longer to get the age pension by increasing the residency requirements from 10 years up to 15 years. They still want to increase the pension age to 70, meaning Australia would have an older pension age than the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand. In the first four years of this policy, around 375,000 Australians will have to wait longer before they can access the pension. That would be a $3.6 billion hit to the retirement incomes of Australians. The Liberals and Nationals still want to axe the energy supplement to two million Australians, including around 400,000 age pensioners—a cut of $14.10 per fortnight to single pensioners or $365 a year, and couples would be $21.20 a fortnight, or $550 a year, worse off. This out-of-touch Prime Minister also wants to completely take away the pension supplement from pensioners who go overseas for more than six weeks. This will see around $120 million ripped from the pockets of pensioners, and they still refuse to adjust deeming rates for pensioners. It's been nearly three years since the out-of-touch Turnbull government last lowered deeming rates, and pensioners are paying the price, with current deeming rates now significantly higher than real rates of return. Interest rates have fallen from 2.25 per cent in February 2015 to 1.5 per cent today, yet Prime Minister Turnbull has done nothing. Why is all of this relevant to the member for Mayo's motion? It is because this motion proposes to establish a tribunal to govern future increases to the pension. Currently, the pension's indexed twice a year, in March and September. It is indexed to the higher of three indices: the consumer price index; the pensioner and beneficiary living cost index, which is like the CPI for older Australians; and male total average weekly earnings. Unlike income support payments like Newstart, the pension is linked to wages. This is very important. Linking wages growth in the broader economy to the adequacy of the age pension is hugely important. It enables the pension to keep up with broader living standards. Labor understands the need for the rate of the pension to reflect community standards and to ensure that pensioners have an adequate standard of living—that they can afford to have a shower, that they can afford to eat and survive. We understand that older Australians should be able to enjoy certainty, security and a decent standard of living in retirement. That's why the Labor government in 2009 increased the base rate of the pension by $30 a week. It was and still is the largest increase to the pension in its history. Increasing the pension is a proud Labor reform. Labor's pension increase was responsible for helping one million older Australians out of poverty. Labor has runs on the board in this area and Labor will always stand for up pensioners. When we roll out a tax policy that has a small impact, I notice that the Prime Minister jumps on board and says, 'No, we care for pensioners.' Labor has runs on the board. Let's look what the Prime Minister actually does rather than the words coming out of his mouth. 12:33 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler 'I came to this meeting for the free food.' 'We often reach the point of having to decide between food and medication. Sometimes we cannot afford both.' That's an extract from the recent report of the Benevolent Society into the assessment of pensioners' living standards in Australia. I decided to use this extract not because I'm proud of the real-life experience of pensioners in this country but because I think it succinctly puts in perspective the dire situation that many of our most vulnerable Australians are facing on a daily basis. Some pensioners are taking drastic measures to make ends meet, such as turning off the hot water in summer, blending food because they cannot afford to see a dentist and choosing between food and medication. That's not a good position for us in a First World country. The OECD calculates that Australia's expenditure on the pension is currently four per cent of public spending. Despite our aging population, they go on to say that, projecting it forward to 2050, our spend on pensions will be four per cent. In other words, it won't have changed. This compares with nine per cent and 10 per cent respectively for other OECD countries. The government is happy to penalise pensioners who are struggling to make ends meet, and those who have worked hard all their lives, with massive cuts—all while the government is committed to handing out $65 billion to the top end of town in the way of tax cuts. This government keeps reminding us that they cannot be trusted when it comes to the treatment of the most vulnerable Australians. This government has misled Australian pensioners time and time again. Right before the 2013 election—and you will recall this, Deputy Speaker Vamvakinou—one of the promises they made on the eve of that election was no change to pensions. But despite that promise, on the very first opportunity, in the first budget, and every subsequent budget handed down by this government, they have made cuts to pensions. Labor will hold this government to account. We will not let the government get away with the savage and unfair cuts to Australia's pensioners. We will not let the government fool every Australian into thinking they actually care about pensioners. History has shown us otherwise, and time and time again we see the Liberals failing to understand the notion of fairness. It's a concern, particularly with the rising costs associated with living expenses for Australian pensioners. You only have to take a look at the past four budgets delivered by the Abbott-Turnbull government to see that this government has no hesitation when attacking pensioners. First, they tried to cut the pension indexation rate by $23 billion over 10 years. In the 2014 budget, the Liberals tried to reset the deeming rate thresholds—a cut that would have seen over half a million pensioners made worse off. Then they abolished the $9,000 seniors supplement for Commonwealth senior health card holders, and let's not forget the changes to the pensioner assets test, which left 370,000 part-pensioners losing income of up to $12,000 a year. The Liberals' track record when it comes to Australian pensioners has been nothing short of an utter disgrace. The government wants us to believe that they care about older Australians but, at the same time, they are relentless in their pursuit of an age of 70 for the pension age. We will have, if that be the case, the oldest pension age in the world. This is definitely not a fair and reasonable way to reward Australian pensioners who have contributed so significantly to our country. On top of this, we have all heard the government is seeking to cut the energy supplement to nearly two million Australians, including new pensioners, a cut which will see pensioners worse off to the tune of $550 a year. While it might not sound like much to those opposite, for those Australian pensioners this is certainly very much a blow to their standard of living. Australians are entitled to know that they are being let down by this government. The government needs to stop looking after their friends at the top end of town and turn a good eye to the dire situation facing many of our elderly Australians. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT There being no further speakers, debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Defence Industry 139 12:38 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax I'm delighted to stand in the chamber today to support the member for Fisher with this motion, because I don't think there are many areas of policy that demonstrate the difference between this coalition government and the Labor Party like that of defence. There is a $200 billion recapitalisation program that is starting to make up for years of absence in this policy space. We all know there is no greater responsibility for government than the protection of its people—the safety and security of Australians. As this motion notes, we need to ensure that not only are we protecting Australians but we also have an industry that is sustainably doing so over the longer term. And that is why our Defence Export Strategy aligns perfectly with our defence industry strategy—about the need for us to build sovereign capability, capability in defence which is owned by Australians and defence products that are manufactured by Australians, so that as time goes on our Defence Force is truly a strong, sovereign Defence Force, a Defence Force that has an industry behind it with the intellectual property owned in Australia by Australian based companies. Only if we own the IP, the intellectual property, can we ensure that we are always first in the class, best of breed with Australian product. This motion also goes to the importance of small and medium enterprises in that industry supply chain, and it is absolutely vital. Let me use as an example the recent announcement by the Australian government of the Project Land 400, which was awarded to the company Rheinmetall Defence Australia. This contract, which is for the building of 211 combat reconnaissance vehicles, is really in the sweet spot for where the Australian government wants to see defence industry continue. It's in the sweet spot because, firstly, we are talking about the single best vehicle in the world, the vehicle that will provide the greatest safety to our troops on the ground. There are many people who have loved ones out there on the frontline. Should I ever have a loved one of mine on the frontline, I'd want them in one of these vehicles because they're the best. Secondly, it aligns with our policy and our strategy because the intellectual property of key components of this vehicle, including the turret, is going to be transferred from Germany to Australia. It will be owned and domiciled here in Australia. When the vehicles are exported to the rest of the world, as other countries, including our allies, want to have the best 8x8 CRV in the world, guess where they will be coming from? Australia. Do you know where the steel is going to be made for that vehicle? The steel is going to be made here in Australia. We're talking level 6 steel, level 6 protection grade. It was built only in Europe, until this contract. Because of the incentives by the Australian government strategy, we will have steel built in this country and exported from this country which is equivalent to the best in the world when it comes to the protection of troops. What's more, we have small and medium enterprises right across the country—in particular, in regional areas of Queensland—that will be feeding their products and services into this contract—a contract worth $5 billion with a maintenance estimate of $10 billion. That's $15 billion that will go to businesses residing in Australia. When each of those small and medium enterprises joins that supply chain, it's not just jobs that will be created but long-term careers for all the people who join those companies. Those companies themselves have their own intellectual property, and, when they join such supply chains, their intellectual property will grow and refine. That is how we as a country develop a sovereign expertise, and that is why this government is so right with its policy when it comes to defence industry. 12:43 Ms KEAY 262273 Braddon I'm pleased to be able to speak on this motion, because in my state and electorate there is bipartisan support for the opportunities arising from the defence industry, as evidenced by a motion that I wrote that was presented in the Senate and signed by Tasmania's Liberal and Labor senators. It was carried in the House of Representatives and spoken to last year—obviously only spoken to by Tasmanian Labor MPs, because there aren't any Tasmanian Liberal ones. The honourable member for Fisher's motion—unfortunately, the member isn't speaking on this motion—highlights that more needs to be done when it comes to investment in Australian defence industry. As the member states in his motion, Australia ranks 13th in the world for defence expenditure but is only 20th when it comes to defence exports. When it comes to this area, the government needs to look no further than my state of Tasmania and my electorate for some of that capability. The Australian Maritime College, or the AMC, has researched and developed autonomous underwater vehicles, or AUVs. In August last year, the first of these AUVs was launched to support Australia's Antarctic program. The AUV is capable of diving up to 5,000 metres and operating underneath the ice. It is not too big a stretch to see how this research could transpose to the defence sector. The AMC has also secured a $3 million three-year research grant into marine research in partnership with the Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative run by the US Department of Defense. In southern Tasmania, there are a number of industries with a defence capability in and around Prince of Wales Bay on the River Derwent. Incat has sold catamarans to the United States Navy. Taylor Brothers, who are specialists in marine accommodation, have successfully won contracts with the Australian air warfare destroyer project and previously provided services to the Royal New Zealand Navy. Specialist antenna suppliers Moonraker Australia has also been awarded a contract for the new Australian destroyers. In November last year, Liferaft Systems Australia, who design and manufacture marine evacuation systems and life rafts, won contracts to support the United Kingdom's type 26 global combat ships. They are also suppliers to the Royal Navy's Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers. So, while we are exporting from Tasmania to other countries' defence capabilities, I'm sure the Australian government could ensure that Tasmanian manufacturers do more in our own country. In my part of Tasmania, there are a number of local manufacturing businesses that have the capability to deliver defence product. Local manufacturer Elphinstone Group partnered with Elbit Systems to construct new combat reconnaissance vehicles as part of the Land 400. While the bid was not downselected, sadly—with most of it Australian content—for the next stage, it did demonstrate the capability that exists in Tasmania and at Elphinstone. It certainly put Tasmania and my region on the defence manufacturing map. Another local manufacturer is Direct Edge Manufacturing of Burnie, which produces high-quality sheet metal manufacturing products that are exported throughout the world. Direct Edge Manufacturing has also completed maritime projects for the Tasmanian government's port authority, TasPorts, and recently it was announced that Rheinmetall, who won the contract to construct the Land 400 combat reconnaissance vehicles, will be using Direct Edge as one of their small- to medium-sized businesses in the project. Another highly-skilled local manufacturer also in my electorate is Penguin Composites. They have separate facilities for recreational vehicle assembly, metal workshops and fibreglassing. They have built igloos for Antarctica and worked with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority on the construction of small lighthouses. In October last year, Penguin Composites won a three-year $8 million contract with Thales Australia to build bonnets and various parts for the new Hawkei protected army vehicles. It is clear that more work needs to be done to bridge the gap between Australian manufacturers and the defence materiel that we need and, of course, the defence materiel that we can export. I urge this government to continue to look towards Tasmania and my region when it comes to defence capability. I know the Tasmanian Liberal senators and all the Tasmanian Labor senators and members are on the same page. We have the skills, the capability, a stable workforce and an enthusiastic and innovative university and maritime college. We are geographically secure. We need those jobs. They are long-term and sustaining jobs. We just need more opportunity to show it. Thank you. 12:48 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia When the government spends on defence, the whole country benefits from not only increased national security but a stronger and more diverse economy. My electorate of Capricornia is home to one of the nation's premier military training facilities. Shoalwater Bay has played a central role in Australia's training and war-gaming programs since the seventies and is revered across the ADF and our allies as a superb facility for simulating real combat situations. This facility and the whole region are set to benefit from a close to $1 billion joint investment between the Australian and Singaporean governments. I, for one, am thrilled to see our local businesses working to ensure that they get their fair share of this. The money is being invested to grow the capabilities of the Shoalwater Bay facilities in a range of ways by increasing the area it covers and building new infrastructure on the site to make it more usable. I congratulate Minister Payne on her resolute intention to see the bulk of the work in this facility upgrade carried out by local subcontractors. Also, so-called primes will contract the whole project. The Department of Defence has worked tirelessly to ensure local content goals are achieved. This is not a simple task and has required work on the prime contractors to ensure that they are really engaging with locals, and on the local subcontractors to ensure that they are setting themselves up to be able to do the work. Due to the complexity of this suite of relationships, last year, with the help of local stakeholders, I formed the Capricornia Business Advisory Alliance Committee. This committee, which includes representatives of local government, the defence department, economic development agencies and local businesses, helps work through the issues at the heart of this huge project and is designed to provide feedback on how these relationships are forming. I believe this committee has been hugely successful so far in illuminating some of the shortfalls and opportunities posed by this project, particularly with respect to how the big contractors are interacting with local subcontractors. While the intention of this government is undeniably in favour of having as much work as possible carried out by local subcontractors, it is clear from feedback that this is not always the desire of the prime contractors. A number of local contractors have put forward their concerns that they may be used as padding for tenders by primes essentially using their businesses as a front for the submission, with no real plans to use them when the work is on. This would represent an abject misdirection of the government's investment, and I, for one, call on those companies tendering for the Shoalwater Bay contract to be fair dinkum and use local contractors. I know the locals will be more reliable and more economical than their blow-in counterparts. I am determined to see this major project deliver real jobs to the region, and the only way this can be achieved is if locals get to do the work. I am serious about this and will continue to work closely with the minister to see that the government's local procurement targets are met by Central Queenslanders. I want to congratulate the Rockhampton and Livingstone councils on their continued effort to see these communities profit from the expansion of Shoalwater Bay. Congratulations must also go to Capricorn Enterprise on the effort they have put in for their members in negotiating with the primes to see that their members, all local businesses and CQ get a serious crack at the work on offer. Without the work of these organisations, both public and private, the impact on the CQ economy would be minimal. As it is, we all look forward to the tender being awarded to a contractor with a serious commitment to using local contractors. Whoever is able to secure this major contract can rest assured, knowing I'll be on their case to ensure Capricornia's local businesses get what they deserve. With the recent announcement that Queensland will be the epicentre of the Land 400 project, I look forward to the state's reputation continuing to develop as a defence industry powerhouse, in the same way it has developed within the resources and agriculture industries. Regardless of where the work is done, the focus must be on delivering through small business and local jobs. 12:53 Mr CHAMPION HW9 Wakefield It's a great pleasure to speak on defence matters in the parliament. I'm very fortunate in Wakefield to have the Edinburgh Defence Precinct, with a number of Army units and RAAF units, industry and a significant representation of white-collar public servants, and of course the DSTG, along with the Port Wakefield proof range; north of it, Cultana and Woomera; and, south of it, the Keswick Barracks. South Australia has always been a defence state, but, increasingly, it has a larger and larger defence footprint. This is due to, in part, good planning by the national government and, in part, good planning by the South Australian government and Defence SA. It is a decision that was deliberately made by Premier Rann, was continued by Premier Weatherill and I hope will be continued by Premier Marshall. Defence and its planning, the defence estate and its planning, and defence procurement and its planning should have a strong bipartisan focus and a strong recognition that when we use the Defence Force, in the unlikely and unwanted scenario where we might have to use our Defence Force for war-making or for defence purposes, we will do that as Australians and not wearing our Labor, Liberal or other party caps. In many ways this motion is a self-congratulatory motion from the government. A little bit of that is understandable, but we really need to remember that defence procurement in particular needs to be undertaken with small-p politicisation, rather than big-P Politicisation. What we should be aiming for is strong bipartisanship and high levels of trust between government, the Public Service, industry, unions, and all stakeholders like state governments and their instrumentalities, because when we're dealing with procurement decisions we're talking not just about multigovernment decisions but about multigenerational decisions. When I say 'multigenerational', I mean that today's politicians might make a decision that the next generation of politicians—Labor, Liberal or perhaps something else—will have to deal with. We have to be very careful, I think, of engaging in the sort of partisan commentary that the member who spoke previously gave. I can remember seeing partisan commentary about Kim Beazley and about dud subs, something that has plagued our submarines. That commentary was immensely damaging to our sovereign capability in terms of submarines. Frankly, we saw it when Brendan Nelson was opposition leader, too, over the Seasprite scandal. So we don't want to use defence procurement in this place in an irresponsible way, because all procurement decisions have problems. All defence procurement has challenges. We only have to look at the F-111 for an example of that. It is something that underwrote our security for a very long time indeed but was mired in controversy in the beginning. I hear the members opposite from Queensland talking about Land 400, and it's interesting to hear them make commentary about that. I would have thought a third government speaker could have been the member for Corangamite. She might have come in here and given a decision, because on Land 400 the government didn't just match itself against the opposition, the states or minor parties; it pitted itself against itself. It pitted one lot of backbenchers against another, and I think that that was a particularly poor way— Government members interjecting— Mr CHAMPION HW9 Well, I'm just telling you the facts. It was a particularly poor way of conducting itself. In fact, it took that procurement decision to a new and ridiculous level where you had members of the same government opposing tanks and other things. We have a special responsibility in this place to make sure that these things aren't politicised. Government members interjecting— Mr CHAMPION HW9 Well, we do have to make sure. I'm just telling the facts. These things happened. The member opposite might want to interject because I'm raining on his day, but these were the facts. This is a government which has maybe come to the right conclusion, but the pathway has been very rocky indeed, and I think we should conduct ourselves in a more mature and reasonable manner. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Sitting suspended from 12:58 to 15:59 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 143 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Indi Electorate: Renewable Energy 143 15:59 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi Last week I had the opportunity to welcome the Minister for the Environment and Energy, Josh Frydenberg, to my electorate of Indi to meet with a wide and diverse community of representatives, including Winton Wetlands, Wangaratta Sustainability Network, Renewable Energy Benalla, the Murrindindi Climate Network, Up2Us Landcare Alliance in Mansfield, Yackandandah Health, Totally Renewable Beechworth, Renewable Albury Wodonga Energy, Totally Renewable Yackandandah, AusNet Services and Mondo Power. The minister noted, 'I'm amazed to see the depth of commitment from local communities.' But I'm not amazed. This is true rural Australia. It is this commitment which has resulted in the report called Towards a totally renewable Indi: a case study in community action. It shows how communities across Indi are working together to create a clean energy future, and there are opportunities for everybody. So I encourage anybody and everybody to talk to your local council, form a group, go to the web page and download a copy, or go to my office in Wodonga or Wangaratta and ask for copies for your community. I really encourage you to get your friends organised because, if not now, when are we going to take action on climate change and, if not you, who's going to do it? We've begun the work. There's so much going on in Indi, and now there's an opportunity for every single community to do something about renewable energy. Calare Electorate: Cumnock Show 143 16:01 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Cumnock is a strong and vibrant country community in the heartland of our nation. On 10 March, the Cumnock community came together for their annual show. You can't beat a country show, and Cumnock certainly didn't disappoint. There was an action-packed program, including cattle, wool, art and photography judging, a vintage car display, woodchopping, dog jumping, egg throwing, a tug of war and, of course, the lawnmower racing. This year's show was another great triumph, and it's testament to the hard work, passion and effort of the Cumnock Show Society. I would like to acknowledge some of the people who helped make the Cumnock show such a terrific success this year, including President David Weston; vice-presidents Don Bruce, James Flick and Ed O'Brien—Ed did a great job being the MC for a number of parts of the show; treasurer and public officer Donna Strahan; secretary Christine Weston; assistant secretary and publicity office Bronwyn Flick; ground stewards Bruce and Charles Cary—and, of course, Ross Cary is a famous lawnmower racer—licensee and RSA officer Sal Morse; group delegates Moira Reynolds and Pru Atkinson; ground committee members Barb Gavin, Ben Lawson, David Lawson and Peter Downey—Peter Downey is also the safety officer; and the catering officer, Rhonda Watt, who did a terrific job this year. I'd also like to mention the honorary vet, Jean Gavin; the auditor, Richard Maunder; and patron Moira Reynolds. The Cumnock show was a triumph, and I congratulate all concerned. Early Childhood Education 143 16:03 Ms LAMB 265975 Longman I rise today to proudly stand with the early childhood educators right across Australia in opposition to the Turnbull government's mistreatment of the sector and undervaluing of early childhood educators. Ninety per cent of a child's brain development occurs between birth and five years of age, and it's the early childhood educators who shape and guide these minds for the future. But the reality is that the 153,000 educators across Australia who provide that care and education for over one million families are severely undervalued, underpaid and underappreciated. Despite having studied between 18 months and four years, early childhood educators earn some of the lowest wages in the country, a third less than their counterparts in schools, and this just isn't good enough. So tomorrow, when thousands of educators walk off the job, I'll be supporting them. I'll be standing beside them calling for change, for a government to come up with a solution to the issue of professional wages. I'll be standing side by side with those early childhood educators, because we value our children and we value their educators. For all of those people walking off the job tomorrow in Burpengary and other parts of Australia, I want you to know that you are valued. You are appreciated. I say to educators: together, with a united voice, nothing can stop you achieving the recognition and reward you deserve for your profession. Fish Creek RSL Memorial Garden 143 16:04 Mr BROADBENT MT4 McMillan Last Wednesday, we gathered at the Fish Creek RSL to open the garden created by the people on corrections in memory of Vietnam veterans and the special part of the garden to recognise 100 years of the Light Horse. The welfare officer down at Fish Creek RSL is Ros Bryan. Ros said in her introduction that individuals on corrections may have made the wrong choice at some stage, but the thought and emotion they put into designing the garden to honour those who served shows that they really do have a heart. The heart that they created on the ground in rocks was to represent the bleeding heart of the Vietnam vets. They then placed a Long Tan cross of rocks surrounded by red roses. She said: The colours of the garden are mainly red which symbolises the blood spilt, and the white roses represent our Nurses. The only Pink bush in the Garden is in memory of Sister Rosalie Wright who was killed in action. It was a pleasure to be there. One of the families represented on this important day was that of Wilma Jennings and her son Stephen Jones. Wilma's father, William Jones, was a light horseman in the 14th Battalion, No. 221. She was honoured to be at the opening of the garden and wore her father's Rising Sun badge in his memory. What they've done is really good. They have the Light Horse on the wall of the RSL, done in steel. It's beautifully done. Mike Lovell, as the president of the RSL branch, was there. I was there and another of my colleagues was there with me. We care about our RSL, and we care about our Vietnam vets. Petitions: Gambling 144 16:06 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt Deputy Speaker, you may have seen the ads on TV for Lottoland, touting itself as the latest market disruptor, advertising jackpots in the hundreds of millions of dollars. It offers the US Powerball prize of over a billion dollars; the EuroMillions, prizes of hundreds of millions of dollars; as well as our local Lotto. However it operates more like a bookmaker than a lottery, taking bets on the outcome of numbers drawn. While large prizes can be won in lotteries, the chance of winning can be extremely slim. While you have a one-in-76-million chance of winning division 1 in the Australian Powerball, and you are much more likely to die from a venomous snake bite—that's one in one million—even smaller prizes can be won. There is one chance in 110 for division 8 in the Australian Powerball. The chances of a winning the jackpot prize on an overseas lottery, though, are minuscule. The odds are usually less than one in 250 million, but, worse, these lotteries rob local small businesses, Lotto retailers, of valuable income. They put their businesses at risk and the jobs of their employees at risk. Even worse, though, in Western Australia they rob income from Lotterywest. Lotterywest distributes, every year, millions of dollars to Western Australian charities. It could be even said that buying a Lotto ticket through the proper means in Western Australia is a non-tax-deductible way to make a donation to charity. We need to protect that as well as the jobs of our local lottery retailers. That's why I seek to table the petition of my local lottery retailers against these Lottoland schemes and internet schemes. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Thank you. The petition s read as follows— Gambling 144 Gambling 144 Gambling 144 Gambling 145 Chisholm Electorate: Harmony Day 145 16:07 Ms BANKS 18661 Chisholm Last Wednesday was Harmony Day, where multiculturalism is celebrated all around the world. There is no greater place to celebrate Harmony Day than in our great country, Australia, the most successful multicultural nation in the world, or indeed in my electorate of Chisholm, where every day over 130 languages other than English are spoken and well over 50 per cent of people have both parents born overseas. There are many events across Chisholm in our communities, in our schools and in our local organisations, where celebrations of our multiculturalism and diversity are being held over the coming weeks and indeed have been held in the past weeks, including the wonderful Harmony Day event I attended last Friday evening at the Waverley Community Learning Centre. It was a delight to join so many members of the Chisholm community for a night which was a wonderful reflection of our warm and diverse community in Chisholm, with a fantastic program of events including Turkish coffee tasting, Chinese lion dancing, Indian henna painting, Korean drumming and of course the great Aussie barbecue. I would particularly like to thank Jan Dempsey, the president of the Waverley Community Learning Centre's committee, and her team, the centre's staff and the many wonderful volunteers, including Liz and Mark at the door, for an outstanding event. Being Australian, celebrating Australian values and enjoying our wonderful multicultural diversity are a true joy for us all. Forman, Mr Oscar 145 16:09 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to a great ambassador for the fantastic sport of basketball, NBL great—and one of Wollongong's favourites—Oscar Forman, who announced a week and a half ago that he was stepping down from his professional career as a basketballer. He wasn't born in Wollongong. In fact, he started his basketball career shooting hoops in the driveway in suburban Adelaide. He started his professional career in 2001, a career which extended over 17 years. He played over those 17 years for the Adelaide 36ers, the New Zealand Breakers, and, most recently, for my team, the Illawarra Hawks. He won a championship with the 36ers in his first season and when he came to Wollongong, in his first season with the Hawks, he was named the NBL's most improved player. He played two grand finals for the Hawks and, on his retirement, his 511 games ranked him 11th of all time. He was fantastic from outside the boundary. His field goal record will be famous for a long time in the NBL. His 904 three-pointers rank him 13th of all time. He's a great human being. We wish him well in his future life. He's recently become a dad. We wish him, his partner and his family all the very best for the future. Beaudesert State High School 145 16:11 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I recently had the pleasure to attend the Beaudesert State High School's leadership induction ceremony and congratulated each of the students on reaching their final years in their step on their schooling journey. I challenged them to follow the exemplary work of the class of 2017. This year's seniors have very big shoes to fill. Analysis conducted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education and Employment of educational outcomes for 2017 Queensland high schools shows that Beaudesert State High School was the best within the Brisbane region. They did haven't the most OPs in the state, let alone the most OPs in one year, but the school did have students who put in an amazing effort and exceeded expectations, with dedicated teachers to guide them along the way. The exceptional thing that happened to the school is that when they compared the year 9 NAPLAN test that last year's graduates completed in 2014 to that completed by this year's year 12s, it suggested that only 28 per cent of them would be OP-eligible. From that NAPLAN testing, the reality is that Beaudesert State High School went on to produce 49 per cent of senior kids that were OP eligible, changing the complete outlook of employment opportunities into the future, changing the way that those senior students see the school. Beaudesert State High School is a place where you can be anything that you want to be. I commend everyone. Member for Batman 145 16:12 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I want to congratulate Ged Kearney, today affirmed into this place as the new member for Batman. It has been my great pleasure to be campaigning alongside her for the past several weeks, and I look forward to having a chance to work with her in this place not only on issues that are of concern to the electorates we both represent in the northern suburbs of Melbourne but also on matters of national concern. I am sure that she will make a great impact on national life in this place. I want to also talk about the wonderful campaign that Ged ran, so ably led by Labor's assistant national secretary, Paul Erickson. We built a campaign in Batman that brought so many people together in just cause, in a campaign which showed off all our candidate's qualities and also her capacity, and I think this capacity to effect real change is what pulled so many people into the campaign and what persuaded the electors of Batman to put their faith in Ged Kearney and Labor. And that is what's so important about the result in Batman the other day. It isn't just about electing a fantastic local MP; it is a big step towards changing the country, and Ged Kearney will be a major agent of effecting that change towards a more equal and more sustainable Australia. Dividend Imputation 146 16:14 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson And too bad about the North Queensland coal workers who got thrown under a bus! When the opposition leader opened another round of class warfare earlier this month, it was pensioners and low-income retirees in his sights. Despite claims of targeting millionaires, 97 per cent of those slugged by Labor's retiree tax have taxable incomes below $87,000. More than half of Labor's retiree tax slug will come from people who earn less than $18,200—people who should not be paying any tax at all. Among those people badly affected in my electorate are 88-year-old Jolyon Forsyth and his wife, Enid. His and his wife's income depends on the cash flow from share dividends. Labor's retiree tax would mean his income would be reduced by about $10,000 a year—possibly up to $12,000. Because their income does not place them in the same tax bracket as the tax applied to companies, they are overtaxed. When ordinary workers pay more tax during the year than their level of income requires, they receive a tax refund, and so should retirees. It's no coincidence that, while robbing pensioners for a vote-buying slush fund, Labor's retiree tax also hurts self-managed super funds, which are the enemy of the union-controlled industry super funds. TheDaily Telegraph reported last week: CFMEU slush funds and Labor-aligned campaign groups have been given secret exemption from Bill Shorten's plan … Unlike pensioners and self-funded retirees, they vote and donate to Labor— (Time expired) Conti, Ms Monique 146 16:15 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell Today I'd like to acknowledge a very talented young sportswoman, Monique Conti. On Saturday, Monique's team, the Western Bulldogs, defeated the Brisbane Lions in the first Australian Football League Women's grand final, and Monique herself was best on ground for her brilliant performance in seeing her team take out the flag. And it's not just in footy. Monique is also a very gifted basketball player. Next month she will play for the Melbourne Tigers in the SEABL competition, and then put her football boots back on for the Victorian Football League Women's season that starts later in the year. Monique was a Calwell constituent when she received a Local Sporting Champions grant, and she is proof that this grant program is crucial to helping young talented athletes. Monique is just one of the many athletes that have shone through this program, and I want to commend the program and make sure that we continue it well into the future. I want to congratulate Monique on her wonderful sportsmanship. I also want to extend my best to her family, who have been very supportive of her—and, certainly, that grant was very useful, because, as we know, many families have to spend a lot of money supporting their children's sporting interests. Monique is also a student at Deakin University. I want to wish her all the very best in her studies and say to her that we are very proud of her. The Calwell community is very proud of Monique Conti. Clean Up Australia Day 146 16:17 Mr CREWTHER 248969 Dunkley Sunday, 4 March, was Clean Up Australia Day. Community groups all over Dunkley got involved to clean up our sunny natural landscape, from the beach to the bush. At least six different Clean Up Australia Day sites were registered for the 4th on the official website. I know other groups like schools and scouting groups run their own events on meeting nights. I was proud to join the Kananook Creek Association in their clean-up of banks of Kananook Creek and its surrounds, where some enterprising participants even brought their boat and tackled the rubbish from the water. I later joined the Friends of Langwarrin Outdoors and Waterways at Boggy Creek and Lloyd Park, with the 1st Langwarrin Scout Group, Peninsula Rotaract and my state colleague Neale Burgess. There was an enormous amount of rubbish picked up, as well as dumped goods including old bikes, desks, chairs, parts of couches and more, with 700 kilograms collected at the Langwarrin site that day—all accumulated since the last clean-up in October. I want to thank each and every Dunkley resident who joined in a Clean Up Australia Day activity and those who are out there tirelessly, month after month, doing what they do without thanks or acknowledgement, for the love of our incredible environment. Clean Up Australia Day really recognises the need to ensure that we are not polluting our environment or contributing to local rubbish or dumped goods, and the need to look after our environment, which is very important. National Day of Action against Bullying and Violence 147 16:18 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie Friday, 16 March, was the National Day of Action against Bullying and Violence. This year, more than 4,000 schools and community groups took a stand against bullying, among them Leura Public School. I visited Leura Public School to present them with a new Australian flag, but, at the end of the assembly, awards were given out to the students for their antibullying posters, so I got a chance to see the wonderful efforts they made. Not only was I amazed at the quality and the artistic talent; importantly, the message that those posters were sending was loud and clear, which was: bullying is not acceptable. Those posters not only featured in our local paper, the Blue Mountains Gazette, but were hung on the walls at Leura Public School, which wants to ensure that the commitment to end bullying is permanent and not a one-day wonder. Congratulations to students Madi Saez, Eden Opie and Levi Russell on their winning poster. The stand against bullying comes in many forms. It might be covering your school in posters, standing together on playing fields to make an antibullying slogan or a specialised lesson plan. But, no matter what form it took in schools in my electorate of Macquarie, the message was the same—Bullying. No Way! We all know the profound effect that bullying can have, particularly on young children. No-one should be made to feel left out, alone or unwanted. Getting this message across is something we have to keep doing. Bourchier, Sir Murray William James, CMG, DSO, VD 147 16:20 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray Sir Murray Bourchier is a local Goulburn Valley war hero and former Deputy Premier of Victoria who served in World War I and led one of the most famous Light Horse charges in Australian history. In World War I, he was commissioned into the 4th Light Horse Regiment and served in the Gallipoli, Egyptian, Sinai, Palestinian and Syrian campaigns. It didn't take long for Bourchier to climb the ranks as he was known to be cool, calm and collected, which had a good effect on the men he commanded. On 15 March 1917, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel and took command of the 4th Light Horse Regiment. Later that year, on 31 October, Bourchier led a four-mile charge against Turkish positions at the Battle of Beersheba, which many believe was a turning point of the war. After the war, Bourchier returned to Strathmerton, before being elected to the Victorian Legislative Assembly in 1920, representing the Victorian Farmers' Union in the electoral district of Goulburn Valley. He was re-elected unopposed in 1921. During his political career, he was a Minister for Agriculture and Markets, Minister for Labour and Deputy Premier from 1935-36. Recently, I met with Peter McPhee from the Shepparton RSL and former state MP Jeanette Powell, who are working with a committee to erect a statue in honour of one of our greatest local war heroes. I commend the work that has been undertaken to commemorate Sir Murray Bourchier's service, and I'm looking forward to helping where I can to bring about this fitting memorial. Climate Change, Taxation 147 16:21 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner Coming up to Easter, my three little boys are looking forward to one of their favourite parts of the celebration—Easter eggs. I, on the other hand, prefer the other kind—the inside jokes and hints left by writers in films and games. If you look hard enough, you can find them in real life, like that 2004 moment when reality TV star turned US President Donald Trump presented an Emmy to TV star turned gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon. It's not just in US politics, though. Here in Australia, you can find Easter eggs if you're willing to hunt. For example, in 2015, Treasury outlined revenue concerns with the refundability of imputation credits. Scott Morrison forgot about that, but those paying attention would have been rewarded. Labor shared the concerns and were acting. Or how about in 2009 when Prime Minister Turnbull declared he would 'never lead a party not as committed to climate change as I am'. The Easter egg: Prime Minister Turnbull had lost his commitment to climate change. Or what about that 2007 moment when Prime Minister Turnbull said that using superannuation to buy a house was 'a thoroughly bad idea'. The Easter egg was, of course, that the idea was included in his thoroughly bad budget a couple of months later. Plenty of thought for those who will be enjoying chocolate and Easter eggs this Sunday. Hinton, Ms Betty 148 16:23 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt I rise today to pay tribute to a much-loved and respected member of the North Daintree community, Betty Hinton. I'm proud to call Betty my friend. Betty is the owner of Floravilla Ice Cream Factory and Art Gallery at Cow Bay, a business she has operated for more than 35 years. You'll often find her perched on a chair in front of her ice-cream machine making culinary delights for tourists and locals. Betty creates ice creams that capture the essence of local ingredients and produces a unique range of flavours. I'm sure that there are many people scattered around the world who have fond memories of tasting Betty's homemade, organic ice cream. In fact, only last week, during a visit to the region, I sampled her signature ice cream. It was a green ice cream called Daintree Rainforest. I have to confess that maybe I had two. I would urge anybody who is planning a trip to the Daintree to make sure that they stop at the Floravilla ice creamery. You should make sure you have that on your agenda; you certainly won't be disappointed. Another thing that not many people know about Betty is that she's recognised by the Smithsonian Institute as one of the best flora artists in the world. She has started a project of painting every single ancient flowering tree in the Daintree Rainforest. It will be a magnificent collection when it's completed. For an artist with Betty's talents, there is no better place to be than in the Daintree forest in our beautiful world heritage area. Defence Facilities: Chemical Contamination 148 16:24 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson While considering the ethical dilemmas brought to the fore by the former Deputy Prime Minister's recent personal turmoil, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull revealed that he had sought the counsel of his wife. This news prompted Ann Clout, who resides in the PFAS contamination red zone within my electorate, to pen a letter to the Prime Minister and his wife. I will endeavour to deliver it. Even so, Ann fears it may never be read. On her behalf, I read it here for the parliamentary record. Dear Prime Minister, I invite you, Malcolm, and I invite your wife, Lucy, as you have stated you seek her counsel and turn to her, your "life partner", for advice. I hope Lucy will see first-hand the human side; the impact and toll this contamination is having on our communities. I invite you to hear the full and correct facts; information which you have not received from the Department of Defence or PFAS Taskforce advisors. I invite you, for you to understand the full impact this contamination has had on our health, lives and the devaluation, to zero, of our properties, and therefore the inability for us to be able to leave. I am asking you and Mrs Turnbull to please visit us, hear us and put an end to our plight of nearly three years. Yours sincerely, Ann Clout Dividend Imputation 148 16:26 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane The radical agenda of today's high-taxing, high-spending Labor Party is becoming clearer by the day. Labor's now unveiled this plan to abolish the tax concessions that so many retirees and pensioners rely on to make ends meet. It's one more area where Labor, sadly, is abandoning what used to be long-term bipartisan policy positions. Labor's radical plan to slug pensioners and retirees is just the latest in their, sadly, long list of tax hikes—capital gains tax, up; negative gearing, abolished; higher company taxes; higher personal income taxes; and now abolishing income tax credits for people with shares or super. The hardest hit by this radical change will be pensioners and retirees on low incomes. Labor's radical tax plan will effectively force one million Australians to pay tax a second time on taxed company earnings. Of course, the Labor Party never saw a tax they didn't love, so to them double taxation is a double treat. At my mobile offices around Brisbane last week, I had so many constituents bail me up in the street to explain the negative impact this will have on their modest incomes. Many of them were pensioners and part pensioners. Bill Clinton's guiding mantra in the 1992 presidential campaign was, 'It's the economy, stupid.' Labor's appears to be shaping up as, 'Tax it, stupid.' South Asian Public Affairs Council 148 16:27 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I rise to record my appreciation of the South Asian Public Affairs Council for their literary evening on Saturday night. It's a beautiful annual community event—the third time I've attended—where people come and read and reflect on poetry in their first languages. We heard poetry in all sorts of languages—Hindi, Tamil, Sinhalese, Punjabi, Urdu, Pashto, Bengali and many more. Most people author their poetry; some find one that they like. I congratulate SAPAC, a non-profit organisation devoted to preserving and promoting South Asian culture, and their hardworking executive—their president, Bandu Dissanayake; their vice-presidents, Dr Kaushal Srivastav and Dr Sharif As-saber; the treasurer, Dr Noel Nadesan; the secretary, Kaushaliya Vaghela; and the executive members, Dr M Shahbaz Chaudhry, Neeraj Nanda, Dr Mo Jamal, Dilkie Perera, Manoj Kumar, Aloke Kumar and Dor Aschna. They are a hardworking executive, and it's one of many community events. I also assured them that Labor would stand with them, yet again, and stand with multicultural Australia in opposing, yet again, the government's racist bill to try and introduce an English language test, a university grammar English language test, to become an Australian citizen. People in that room are doctors, lawyers or heart surgeons or own businesses, and they would not pass that grammar test. What the government is saying to them is, 'You're not the kind of people we want in Australia.' We don't agree with that. We think conversational English has served this country well and can do so in the future. We oppose, yet again, this bill. Austin Cove Baptist College 149 16:29 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning I rise to report on the recent opening of the Austin Cove Baptist College practical skills centre. Austin Cove is a primary to year 12 school located in South Yunderup in my electorate of Canning. Since opening in 2011, Austin Cove has grown significantly, drawing students from across the Peel region. It has a reputation for affordable private education that seeks academic and artistic excellence alongside a respect for Christian values. Such is the popularity of Austin Cove that the school has struggled to keep up with the demand of students. Officially opened on 9 March, the practical skills centre will further expand the school's capability. The centre includes science labs, preparation rooms and technical skills workshops in addition to conventional classrooms and staffrooms. This will help cater for students considering a profession in science and technology, as well as those seeking a trade apprenticeship. The centre was co-funded between the school and the Commonwealth, with $1.05 million provided by the Commonwealth government through its capital works program. I commend Principal Paul Venter, the college board and all the staff at Austin Cove for their commitment to the Peel region. This was again on display last Friday afternoon, when the school held a free community fair on its grounds, which I thoroughly enjoyed attending. Local institutions take years to build and can only be built with strong community support. I see evidence of such an institution in Austin Cove Baptist College and can say with confidence that the Commonwealth has helped fund a worthy contribution to local education. Parramatta Electorate: Newroz 149 16:30 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta I would like to wish a happy Newroz or Nowruz to all who celebrate it in Australia and around the world. Newroz is a Persian celebration of the new year and coincides with the March equinox and the beginning of spring in the Northern Hemisphere. It has been celebrated all around the world for over 3,000 years by 300 million people and it's celebrated right here in Australia every year. It's a time for new beginnings. One tradition that I'm particularly fond of and that I'm getting into this year is 'shaking the house', when people do a major spring clean and purchase new clothes and flowers to start the new year. Although I was lucky to be invited to celebrate with the Kurdish community this year, I was unfortunately unable to take part as I had other events to attend and I was coming back to Canberra. Thank you to Necla Dag, Carolin Axtjarn and all of those at the Democratic Kurdish Community Centre of New South Wales. I hope your event in Blacktown on Sunday was a huge success. Thank you to Sam Baban and the Sydney Kurdish Youth Society for the invitation to celebrate on 17 March in Edensor Park. When I met up with the Democratic Kurdish Community Centre of New South Wales a few week ago, they spoke to me of the suffering that Kurds have faced around the world and are still suffering. Newroz is supposed to be about new beginnings, and I know I share with them their hope for the Kurdish community around the world that Newroz this year brings new hope and new beginnings. Kennedy, Mr Robert 'Bob' 149 16:32 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby Last week, we lost a great South Australian. Robert 'Bob' Kennedy was a talented businessman, a great supporter of the arts and a kind and generous man. I wish to extend my condolences to Bob's wife Cathy and his children Jason, Rachel, Shane, Mark and Tricia. In every way, Bob Kennedy truly was larger than life. He was talented and funny and kind. He excelled at everything he tried. Bob founded Robert M Kennedy & Co Accountants. He spent 17 years as chairman of Beach Energy and almost 21 years as a non-executive director of the company. He served as chairman of the governors of the St Ann's College Foundation and as chairman of National Pharmacies. Bob was a keen and talented artist, established the Kennedy Arts Foundation and the annual, very generous, Kennedy Prize. Bob also had a beautiful singing voice and loved nothing more than bursting into song at restaurants and functions, to the surprise and delight of everybody nearby. Bob was a wonderful supporter and friend to me and I know he was a mentor to many young business people in Adelaide. The number of condolence notices in The Advertiser since Bob's death indicate the kind of man he was and the broad range of people and organisations that he generously supported. Bob's legacy will live on through his work, through his businesses and through his wonderful family, and our thoughts are with them all at this very sad time. Darwin: Fuel 150 16:33 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Petrol prices in Darwin are too high. As the NT News put it with admirable directness, as they are wont to do, Darwin motorists are being ripped off at the bowser. Today in Darwin the price of 91 octane unleaded is $149.9 a litre, a shade under $1.50 a litre. In Sydney, however, the price today is $124.5. I was in Melbourne two weeks ago and I saw fuel for $1.21. Madam Deputy Speaker Claydon, how can this be, I hear you ask—or you must be thinking? It's pretty clear that it's an abuse of market power by those fuel companies and unconscionable price gouging at the petrol pump. Darwin's just a small market with limited competition, so Darwin motorists have to pay what the fuel companies demand. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the ACCC, reports that around Australia petrol retailers' margins are the highest they have ever been and motorists are paying for it. In Darwin, retail petrol prices increased significantly between October and December 2017 and by much more than the increase in wholesale prices. I support the ACCC's suggestions and I suggest that Darwin motorists support our 'Let's do the right thing.' School Chaplaincy Program 150 16:35 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee I wish to talk about school chaplaincy. There are 129 schools in the electorate of Mallee. A lot of those schools are reasonably stressed in their budget, but one of the things they are very passionate about is the School Chaplaincy Program. In 2014, in the 44th Parliament, we were able to dedicate ongoing funding to chaplaincy and I look forward and hope we will see it funded in the forthcoming budget. I have written to the Minister for Education and Training, Simon Birmingham, and passed on multiple letters from all those schools. It surprises me: Mallee is not particularly religious. However, we need to be clear that the chaplaincy program, when it's run in Victoria, is not a religious program; it is actually working with students. Had those students in those country towns not had a chaplain, they wouldn't have had someone to go to, someone to talk to or someone who's in their corner when they're going through difficult times. The chaplaincy program must be funded in the next budget. It is so worthwhile. It is something that I hope will be supported in a bipartisan sense, and we must work with students and travel with them on the journey of life. When you're a country student, there often aren't the services available. When I started as a member of parliament, we had no headspaces in Mallee. We now have three—they are very welcome—but we'd like to see the chaplaincy program funded in the next budget. I think it would be a good thing to fund. Dragons Abreast 150 16:37 Ms KEAY 262273 Braddon If members haven't done so, I encourage them to go out for a paddle with their Dragons Abreast dragon boat club. I had the good fortune to join my local club, Nipples on Ripples, as we paddled on the Mersey River in the Mersey Maiden. I enjoyed it so much that I asked to go out with them again to compete in the Devonport Regatta—I use the term 'compete' very loosely. This experience increased my awareness that Dragons Abreast is also for supporters of breast cancer survivors and that more members are needed. It gives breast cancer survivors an avenue to return to an active healthy lifestyle through dragon boating. Since 2004, Dragons Abreast has provided enormous support to breast cancer survivors. It has been medically proven that upper arm exercise after treatment benefits not only physical health but also emotional wellbeing—and I can attest to that upper arm strength, which I totally lack. Fundraising is an important activity for Dragons Abreast for the Breast Cancer Network Australia and the Cancer Council through Relay For Life. I'll hopefully return and paddle with the Nipples on Ripples—I'm sure they'll want me back. I did give it my best, and it gave me a fabulous insight into the lives and camaraderie of breast cancer survivors. These inspiring, strong women provide a face for breast cancer awareness through participation in the wonderful and strenuous sport of dragon boat racing. Immigration 150 16:38 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore There is a large and prominent South African community in my electorate of Moore, representing the second-largest group of migrants behind the British and ahead of the New Zealanders. Respected members of that community have raised concerns about discriminatory policies and practices relating to land and agriculture and a gross breakdown of law and order which is adversely affecting their families. I acknowledge that South Africa has had a troubled history; however, past events should not be allowed to be used as justification for current day wrongs. Australia has a proud history of resettling persecuted minorities from countries all over the world. Given our strong and close association with South Africa, a Commonwealth nation, I call upon our government to give favourable consideration to a humanitarian program for a resettlement of a quota of South Africans as part of our overall annual immigration program as we have done recently with Syria. This intake would be based on merit, selecting farmers with relevant agricultural and business skills who would be prepared to settle in rural, regional and northern Australia to make a contribution to the economic development and sustainability of these remote communities. I see merit in bringing these migrants, who are likely to give mutual benefit to our nation by bringing their skills, talents and expertise, alongside our regular intake from other countries of the world. Cooper, Professor David, AO 151 16:40 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I rise to pay tribute to Professor David Cooper AO, who passed away on 18 March in Sydney. Professor Cooper dedicated his life to the prevention, treatment and cure of HIV and other infectious diseases. He made Australia a global leader in the fight against HIV/AIDS and contributed to every therapeutic drug used in HIV. His experience in the US led him to diagnose the first Australian case of HIV in 1982. His case report on HIV seroconversion illness, which defines initial HIV infection in many people, published in The Lancet in 1985, was seminal. In 1986, Professor Cooper established the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research, now known as the Kirby Institute for infection and immunity in society, and he was its inaugural director. Professor Cooper remained working in clinical trials his entire life, and his record of clinical and academic achievement was unparalleled. He was a past president of the International AIDS Society and a past chairman of the World Health Organization UNAIDS HIV Vaccine Advisory Committee. In 1996, he co-founded HIV-NAT, a clinical research and trial collaboration based in Bangkok, and was proud to be able to stand back as it became a fully independent centre of excellence and training in South-East Asia. Professor Cooper was made an Officer in the General Division of the Order of Australia in 2003 and awarded the James Cook Medal by the Royal Society of New South Wales in 2016. He will be much missed by his family, his many friends and his colleagues. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Thank you. Just indulge me. I would like to associate myself with the member for Sydney's comments. The passing of Professor Cooper is a very sad day, and all our world is the poorer for his passing. Armenian Genocide 151 16:42 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I would also like to associate myself with the comments previously made by the member for Sydney. Today we acknowledge the incredible contribution of Victorians and Australians toward the relief funds to aid the victims—the families, children and orphans—of the Armenian genocide. In February 1916, the Melbourne Argus published an article arguing that 'few people in Australia have had the opportunity of knowing much about this interesting ancient nation, and therefore do not realise the appalling magnitude of her present manifold miseries'. The stories of Armenians being marched into the Syrian desert, of human and cultural genocide, slowly drifted back to Australians from our Anzacs. By 1917, The Age newspaper was reporting Armenians as 'the martyr nation of Christendom', saying, 'Think of the fact that 600,000 of these virile people were rounded up, as stock is rounded up, and done to death.' The marching of Armenians to their death started a mobilisation of Australians for their lives. The then Lord Mayor of Melbourne, Sir David Hennessy, wrote to The Age newspaper of his opening of 'a fund for the relief of the remnant of Armenia'. The Lord Mayor trusted in 'a liberal response by the citizens of Victoria to this urgent appeal'. Subsequent editions of the newspaper carried the names of many citizens who liberally supported the fund. In addition to the Commonwealth dispatching a ship for humanitarian efforts, Australians and New Zealanders established an orphanage with the hundreds of thousands of pounds of relief funds needed. Today we honour the memory of Armenians who lost their lives and the Victorians and the Australians who rallied to the cause of their relief. Moreton Electorate: Broadband 151 16:43 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Time after time, we hear more revelations about this out-of-touch Turnbull government's sham copper based NBN—that's right, the internet network of the future that's using centuries-old copper wire. In my electorate, Lee is a constituent who lives in Sunnybank Hills. He contacted me about his rubbish broadband connection. Most of the Moreton electorate was planned for HFC connections, and I refer to reports in Fairfax earlier about further delays in NBN Co providing advice about when the HFC rollout will be working again. As it stands, most of Moreton has an indefinite wait for the NBN. But Lee in Sunnybank Hills already has a fibre-to-the-node connection available to his suburb. He explains that he has not been contacted by his telco outlining options to take an NBN connection, but, from his own research, an NBN connection is significantly more expensive for no guarantee of a better product. His current connection is too slow. Off peak, he can barely get 10 megabits per second, but in the afternoon or in peak times this slows down to six megabits per second. He told me that sometimes it's even too slow to reliably check emails. Six megabits per second is a far cry from the 100 megabits per second enjoyed by the out-of-touch Prime Minister Turnbull in his Point Piper palace. Even the cheapest NBN plan he can find costs more than he's currently paying for speeds that aren't any faster. Why would Lee even bother? My office receives so many complaints about NBN services in Sunnybank Hills. Australians are entitled to ask: what is the point of building a second-rate copper NBN that costs more and does less? The Turnbull government's NBN is in crisis. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. BILLS 152 BILLS National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill 2018 152

National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill 2018

Second Reading 152 16:45 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I'd like to start by commending the member for Perth and his staff for championing the small-amount credit contract and consumer lease reforms. The National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill will improve the lives of some of our most vulnerable Australians and may very well prevent others becoming trapped in dodgy and shady small-amount credit contracts, or SACCs. In the Territory, we have had many instances of individuals being ripped off by payday lenders and rent-to-buy operators. In one instance, a payday loan client who borrowed $150 was told within six weeks by a payday lender to repay over $1,000. We also had a Centrelink recipient who had four rent-to-buy payments deducted from her Centrelink payment each fortnight, leaving her with only $50 to feed her family. On top of that, she had a payday lender attempting to withdraw a further $66 repayment each fortnight by direct debit. We've had a case of an age pensioner paying $1,500 for a set of drawers worth $600, and we even had a ridiculous case where a lender charged a $50 dishonour letter fee on top of a $49 payment dishonour fee. We also had the case of Amazing Rentals Pty Ltd in the Northern Territory. In one disturbing instance, a man on Newstart allowance, with English as a third language, could not afford to pay for electricity or food because his lease payments to Amazing Rentals were so high. But for the great work of ASIC and the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency—NAAJA—this organisation would still be operating and ripping off Territorians. In the Territory, there are 72 remote Indigenous communities where services are coordinated by the NT government, and we also have about 500 homelands in the Territory. The final report of the Review of the small amount credit contracts laws in 2016 noted: The issue of unsolicited sales (of any products or services) in Indigenous communities has been long recognised as causing significant harm, with these communities targeted as suppliers can make multiple sales in a short period of time with little effort or outlay of capital. Officers from ASIC's Indigenous Outreach Program have been told of instances where businesses, including rental companies, have given inducements to senior or respected community members to obtain introductions to individuals in the community so that they can make as many sales as possible. That is shameful. They have heard, both firsthand when visiting a community and second-hand through financial counsellors and consumer advocates, of regular instances of this practice being used in numerous communities around Australia. In some instances, unscrupulous lenders are able to operate in these remote communities due to loopholes in current regulations. So, I am very pleased that this bill will prevent door-to-door selling of consumer leases at residential homes and introduces broad anti-avoidance protections to prevent SACC loans and consumer lease providers from circumventing the rules and protections contained in the credit act. The reforms in this bill aren't groundbreaking or revolutionary. We know that members opposite support the measures—or at least they should, because this bill implements the government's own policy in relation to SACC reforms. I'm sure that we can all agree that strengthening penalties will increase the incentive for SACC providers and lessors to comply with the law and that imposing a cap on the amount that can be paid will protect consumers. ASIC agrees with the changes. The bill adequately balances the need to protect consumers from harm whilst ensuring that the useful parts of the industry remain viable. We know that there are times when those on low incomes need quick access to cash, and we are not—not!—advocating the total elimination of payday lending. Instead, we are protecting those people from exploitation by predatory lenders. Needless to say, it would be a disgrace if members opposite voted against its implementation when we all know they agree with the changes being proposed. We have a chance to help vulnerable Australians, some of whom are suffering because of payday lenders and small-amount credit contracts, so I urge the government to accept the member for Perth's proposals and pass their own legislation. 16:51 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin This issue is one that is pretty close to my own heart. There are something like seven different payday lenders within 450 metres of the front door of my electorate office. Two of them are in fact right next door to each other. So in great communities like mine, which have a lot of disadvantage, we see a concentration of payday lenders. I want to commend the work of the member for Perth and the member for Oxley. It's an honour to speak after the member for Solomon, who made some very good points a moment ago in his characteristically eloquent way. This is an important issue. It touches communities like mine and communities right around the country. It treats vulnerable people very poorly, so I appreciate the work not only of the members for Perth and Oxley but of all of my colleagues here. It is disappointing that there aren't any speakers from the other side. The payday lending industry makes a lot of promises about fast cash, giving everyone a fair go, and being there when they are needed, so it is not surprising that people who are doing it tough, including people in my community, turn to payday lenders or rent-to-buy schemes to get through those tough times. I do understand that in some cases these loans can play a legitimate role for low-income families in smoothing out some of those unforeseen financial pitfalls. But in the main I think it is true their promises don't always match up with reality. There are a lot of rip-offs and a lot of damage is inflicted on communities like mine. There are leases and loans going to people already crippled with the debt of existing loans. You have rent-to-buy contracts, where families are paying more than $3,000 for a clothes dryer that would normally cost $345, which is equivalent to an interest rate of 884 per cent. You have leases where an item isn't replaced when it's faulty. You have credit providers using rent alone to calculate people's living costs, but not all of the other costs associated with life. I could go on and on, unfortunately. I want to make it really clear that when we talk about the concerns we have with payday lending and consumer leases we are not in any way reflecting on the good people who work in these businesses, a lot of them being in those seven outlets near the front door of my electorate office. We're in no way reflecting on the people who work there, but we are reflecting on a system that allows this sort of behaviour to go on. We need to fix it, to change it, and that is what this private member's bill is about. It is about protecting consumers and not demonising the workers who sit at the front counters of those businesses. All we are trying to do here is to implement the key recommendations from the small-amount credit contract laws review. We want a cap on the total payments that can be made under a consumer lease. We want small-amount credit contracts to have equal repayments and equal payment intervals. We want to remove the ability for providers to charge monthly fees on the leftover length of a loan when the loan is paid off early. As the member for Solomon said, we want to prevent the door-to-door selling of leases at residential homes. We want to introduce broad anti-avoidance protections and strengthen the penalties for people who do the wrong thing. These asks that we have of the government are not that ambitious, frankly. They simply reflect what the government said they were interested in doing in the first place. We are seeking a bipartisan outcome, where the government would introduce its legislation and we would support it. Unfortunately, for reasons that are really beyond comprehension, it is left to us on this side of the House to move the government's own legislation to implement the recommendations of the government's own review. That's a pretty unfortunate, pretty shameful outcome, really, and we would prefer that it were otherwise. There are all kinds of other elements to it, including the proportion of people's incomes that can be paid on loans and all of these sorts of things. We want to adopt, for example, the same 10 per cent income cap for lease payments on rent-to-buy schemes that we are proposing for payday lenders as well, to get that cap on how much you have to pay out of your income down to 10 per cent. As I said, we've introduced this private member's bill because the government has failed to act. There hasn't been the action that has been promised, and so we are once again stepping into the leadership void left by those opposite. We just want to implement the government's own policy, and we think that enough is enough. We think that the government needs to realise this is about helping people trapped in a vicious cycle of debt and dependence on these schemes, whose lives can only be improved by this parliament standing up for them in the way that we've outlined in this private member's bill. 16:55 Ms LAMB 265975 Longman It's not often that I eagerly await legislation from this government. Actually, I usually dread it, but that's because usually legislation from this government hurts people who don't deserve it, as with cuts to TAFE and cuts to university—I've just come from the chamber downstairs, where I spoke against the cuts to universities—or maybe the attacks on hospitals or the public health system. But I've been waiting for their promised small-amount credit contract, or SACC, legislation for some time now—too long, in fact. I've been waiting because this legislation should provide protections to vulnerable consumers who've been ripped off by unscrupulous payday lenders and rent-to-buy schemes. Just to go through a quick time line of what has led us up to today, when Labor was in government we enacted the National Consumer Credit Protection Act, a national regime for regulation of consumer credit, with some additional protections. This legislation included a mandated review of the legislation, which was commissioned by the then Assistant Treasurer Josh Frydenberg back in 2015. When the government received the review in March of 2016, they waited eight months before noting, in November 2016, that they supported the vast majority of recommendations in part or in full. So, a year later, in October of 2017, the then minister, Michael McCormack, gave us a promise that the government would introduce the legislation later that year. Well, here we are, still waiting, months after yet another government promise has been broken. We are still waiting despite Labor repeatedly calling upon the government to introduce this legislation. We are still waiting despite the member for Perth doing the government's job for them and bringing forward this private member's bill, the National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill 2018, which replicates, word for word, the exposure draft legislation that the government released in October last year. This bill that we're speaking about today is consistent with the small-amount credit contract review recommendations. It seeks an imposition of a cap on the total payments that can be made under a consumer lease, it removes the ability for an SACC provider to charge a monthly fee in respect of the residual term of a loan when a consumer is able to repay the loan early, and it strengthens the penalties to increase incentives for providers and lessors to comply with the law, amongst other measures. These are all critical reforms that are vital to protect vulnerable consumers. You see, some small-amount credit contract providers prey on people with low incomes. They know that 40 per cent of people who enter into an SACC loan are unemployed, and they know that 25 per cent of those people receive more than 50 per cent of their income from Centrelink. They know that these people are struggling and are looking to SACC loans as a way to smooth out some unforeseen swings and roundabouts that affect low-income families. Yet some providers are locking these vulnerable people into contracts that end up costing three or four times the retail price of the good that they're purchasing. They use rent alone to calculate an applicant's expenses, not taking into account the cost-of-living bills, even for things as simple as groceries. I'm not saying that all providers are bad. I'm not saying that there's no place for small-amount credit loan contracts; I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that we need protections in place to ensure that vulnerable Australians don't fall victim to unscrupulous lenders who are taking advantage of their situation. There are people in places like Caboolture in my electorate of Longman who are being trapped in cycles of debt by exploitative lenders. Without proper regulation, this is going to keep happening time and time again. It's time the government took charge and introduced the legislation that they promised all those months ago. It's time to do it. So I say to the government that this is something that Labor will work with you on. We will work with you to pass this through parliament as quickly as we can, because we know just how important this is. We say to the government: quit stalling and introduce this legislation. There are people in my community who are counting on this legislation moving through. I say to this government: once and for all, do your job. 17:01 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor In their current form, the small-amount credit contracts have become a blight on our community and on my community in particular. Payday lenders are preying on vulnerable low-income earners who are trying to keep their heads above water, with leases and loans that are causing them to spiral further into debt. We've all seen or heard the flashy advertisements in the media where payday lenders are promising quick and easy loans. We don't need to detail them, but the most affronting of those for me is the one that suggests that if your child's having a birthday party it might be a good idea to take out a loan. It all looks like a quick and easy fix to help in circumstances where the finances are tough. But these loans are ripping off vulnerable consumers and causing them further financial strain in the long term. And it doesn't stop there. When I sat with the Victorian Consumer Action Law Centre more than two years ago, they told me that one of their major concerns was that people didn't have one of these loans or one of these contracts or one of these leases; people had three or four of them. In those circumstances you've got to wonder about the impacts on the anxiety levels in households and the flow-on effect of that anxiety to their children. As someone who worked in schools, let me tell you: for a child coming from a home filled with anxiety and financial stress, it comes into those children's lives in very detrimental ways. So it's important that this parliament and this government do something about this. Labor knows this, and in fact the government knows this too, because this bill, the National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill 2018, is identical to Treasury's exposure draft in every way—word for word. Others here have highlighted the sorry tale in which the member for Higgins did the work in this space and the now Deputy Prime Minister, Michael McCormack, completed the work—had the bill drafted. But what happened after that? Beyond reason, this bill has not been brought into the parliament. I believe the member for Deakin is the person who failed to do that—failed to bring it into this parliament to protect vulnerable people from seeking loans that they cannot afford. In my electorate of Lalor we have three payday lending shopfronts within a 500-metre radius of the Werribee train station. Further to this, Digital Finance Analytics, in the report The stressed finance landscape data analysis, commissioned by the Consumer Action Law Centre, identified payday lending hotspots and indicated that the postcode 3030, including Point Cook, Werribee and Werribee South, was the ninth highest hotspot for small-amount credit contracts. This is the same area that last year was identified as having the highest mortgage stress and mortgage default rates and for many years had been in the top 10 for people being evicted from their rental properties. So what we're seeing is layer upon layer of financial stress. You've got to start to understand that these payday lenders are acting with full knowledge of the stress these people are under, yet they're giving loans. They are providing loans when they know. Digital Finance Analytics recently estimated that over $1 billion in small-account credit loans would be written in 2018—that is, this year—and that there will be an increase of about 10 per cent in overall loans taken out this year. They know that families can't afford these loans. This legislation takes some small steps to make sure that, in situations where the loans are becoming easier to apply for, with 75 per cent estimated to be online, we need to take action now. Amongst other important measures, reforms in this bill will prevent payday lenders from facilitating loans with consumers that exceed 10 per cent of the individual's net income and, further, these reforms will prevent lenders from offering loans for household goods that exceed more than 10 per cent of their net income. I welcome the bill into the House because it will crack down on unfair deals which are exploiting vulnerable people. I go further and suggest that we need a national database so that these lenders can be held to account when they give a loan to someone who is already in deep financial stress because they have a payday loan with somebody else. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 The time allocated for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 155 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Israel 155 17:06 Mr DANBY WF6 Melbourne Ports I want to thank the Speaker and the member for Fadden. This motion mentions the 70th anniversary of a very exciting, vital and happy nation of eight million people, but I'm not going to focus on that; I'm going to focus on the main point of the member for Fadden's motion: the sharp contrast with what nearly happened during the Second World War. This was synthesised in a sinister speech delivered at the Berlin Sportpalast on 30 January 1939 by Adolf Hitler. It was an attempted repudiation of President Roosevelt's attempt to deal with aggression throughout the world and to seek some assurances from the German Chancellor. I want to particularly thank the member for Fadden for his thoughtful taking up of the member for Isaacs' raising of the 80th anniversary of the fateful Evian conference, convened by President Roosevelt in 1938 at Evian-les-Bains in France, with 31 other countries to discuss the plight of refugees fleeing the horror of Nazism. It's an anniversary the member for Fadden has given us an opportunity to atone for. Unfortunately, the representative of Australia at the conference, Lieutenant Colonel TW White, brought a message of indifference to that conference. He didn't go on his own authority; he spoke for the executive government of the day. Australia said it didn't have a racial problem and didn't seek to import one—a grotesque message given the sinister events of the time. I also want to commend my good friend the member for Eden-Monaro, former Brigadier Mike Kelly, who recounted in his speech little known connections with the Jewish people of Palestine, who were trying to survive the Second World War, and connections with the First World War, including with his extraordinary family. They were amazing stories. I didn't know that David Ben-Gurion, the first Labour Prime Minister of Israel, served under the Australians in the First World War and that Moshe Dayan lost his eye with the Australian machinegun battalion, spotting for the 7th Division as a forward artillery observer in Lebanon in the Second World War. I focus on the fact that the member for Fadden has organised for the resolution, supported by all sides of the Australian parliament, to be presented to the Israeli museum, Yad Vashem, which is famous throughout the world. It's a memorial museum to the murdered millions of the Second World War. The idea of this resolution was to be presented as a bipartisan, non-partisan repudiation by modern-day Australians of that terrible indifference to our colleagues in the Israeli Knesset and to be placed right next to Colonel White's infamous declaration: 'We don't have a racial problem and we don't seek to import one.' I think nothing could be more thoughtful than this, and I commend the many members who spoke on it in the debate earlier today in the House. On the weekend I had the joy of celebrating my niece's wedding in Byron Bay to Gil Baker, the grandson of Yossele Baker. I danced with Yossele Baker, the patriarch of the shattered Baker family, who came to Australia after the Second World War. The Baker family is now united with the equally small Danziger family from which I come. My father was one of the refugees who luckily made it to Australia. Australia's rhetoric prior to the Second World War was a lot worse than its actual actions. Eight thousand refugees from Germany were accepted into this wonderful country. Our two families who survived—indeed flowered—in this extraordinary country are a repudiation of the indifference of Lieutenant Colonel White. My late uncle's firm is responsible for all of the woodwork around us in this very parliament—all the floors, all the parquetry, everything—because he was sent to Schleswig-Holstein by his parents to get him out of Germany to Australia to learn, and he had to have carpentry. All I can say, in response to this resolution is: Am Yisrael Chai. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. National Partnership on Remote Housing 156 17:12 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I move: That this House: This motion is in four parts. It observes the national partnership remote housing program. It notes that it expires on 30 June this year, which makes this motion very urgent. It also recognises many aspects of the program, including additional houses and what it means in terms of employment. It acknowledges that the loss of funding would mean jobs going at a local level. It also acknowledges that, without this funding, there is not only an implication for less housing; there's an implication for what it means for overcrowded housing in Indigenous communities. It also talks about the responsibilities in terms of closing the gap. Most importantly, this motion calls on the government to urgently restore the commitment to this program. It also calls on the government to recommit to a further 10 years of the program. I rise to speak about this strategy. Ten years ago the Rudd government launched its $5.8 billion program to help address the overcrowding and homelessness, and poor housing conditions, in remote and rural areas, essentially in First Nations people communities. Without continued support of funding from the government, this strategy, as I mentioned earlier, is due to expire in June 2018. It has delivered 11,500 homes and contributed to a significant decrease in overcrowding in rural and remote Australia. The number of overcrowded houses dropped from 52.1 per cent in 2008 to 41.3 per cent in 2014-15, and the expected drop is to 37 per cent this year. By these measures alone, the strategy has been a success. These findings are supported from the government's own review into the agreement released last year. I want to address the issue of discrete Aboriginal communities in Queensland. In Queensland alone, the agreement has delivered 1,150 new homes and refurbished about the same number, well beyond the initial targets set. It's also been a great generator of local jobs and apprenticeships, with 800 trainees and apprentices in Queensland alone. Local businesses and organisations benefit too, and their participation was projected to rise from 10 per cent in 2011 to 70 per cent in 2017. This is a success story, and I just don't understand why there wouldn't be a continued commitment at a federal level to sustaining this program. It seems that the federal government has decided to cost-shift to the state governments almost entirely, and we know that there has been little discussion about this. I don't need to explain in great detail the importance of housing. We know it creates functioning social units. It provides a fixed address, which means people can get things like registration and driver's licences and register their SIM card for a mobile phone. It's very important, particularly for people on Centrelink payments who are enrolling and seeking a jobseeker program, to have a fixed address. The importance of a home in building a strong and self-sufficient community cannot be understated. Housing provides shelter, privacy, safety and security. It provides better health and education outcomes. It also impacts on the workforce, provides protection and shelter, and negates very significant physical and mental health issues. These are the sorts of things that guaranteed housing can provide. I want to address the issue of overcrowding. I have seen reports from rural and regional Queensland that up to 30 people living in a single house is not unheard of. These numbers in single houses mean poor access to hygiene health. It provides intolerable conditions. It also means there is not regular access to hot water, functioning sewerage systems and working washing machines, as well as the electricity supply. Daily tasks we take for granted—showering, washing clothes, washing bedding, removing household waste and the ability to cook and prepare food hygienically—are things that guarantee safety. If this housing program is not continued, that is what we are risking. The government's report notes an increase in leprosy and tuberculosis among remote Indigenous communities in Western Australia and other parts of remote Northern Australia. This happens at a rate that is seven times higher than it is for non-Indigenous people. Those things cannot be allowed to continue. That is why this program is so important. I have extensive notes on case studies, which, given the time that I have, I won't go into. But I want to say that we need to take into account the increasing population rates of Indigenous communities in remote areas. Half of this need for additional dwellings is in the Northern Territory. We also need to provide support in overcrowded places that aren't considered remote—places like Yarrabah, in Queensland, or Elliott in the NT. Those places need to be considered. I have extensive notes on maintenance and return on investment, which are absolutely crucial in relation to the importance of this particular housing program. Maintenance of toilets, taps and other fixtures is a small thing which we take for granted. When you've got overcrowding, there is a great strain on maintenance. There is also a great strain on investment. A $5.4 billion investment is lost if remote housing is not recognised as a government priority, as well as, of course, the call to action that we are making in relation to Closing the Gap targets. This housing partnership helps local economies and provides local jobs and traineeships. All of those things are being risked. I understand that the program cannot cover all housing outcomes and I understand that there are complex funding arrangements from various states and territories, but the federal government cannot walk away from its responsibility in this area. This goes to the heart of what I'm talking about. This motion also addresses issues around domestic violence and child safety, which are pretty obvious if you do not have reasonable and dignified housing. Assistance for remote Indigenous housing has been in place since at least 1968 through a number of state and federal government initiatives. We are calling for this $5.8 billion program to be committed to for another 10 years. It is showing success. It is one of those programs where, if you don't continue, that success that I've outlined will absolutely disappear. It just does not make any sense, if you want to address some of the fundamental issues existing in Indigenous communities, that you would not continue to support such a program. In 2008 the target for the strategy was 4,200 new homes; 4,020 homes were built. The target for refurbishing homes was 4,800, and just over 7,500 have been refurbished. That is success. That is success, so why stop it now? I urge this government to restore its commitment to this program. The Indigenous community needs this program to build new dwellings, as does the broader Australian community, in terms of investment and addressing those really fundamental issues that I've outlined in moving this private member's motion. We need this program to maintain and refurbish existing dwellings and double down on our existing investments. Secure housing is a key element in last year's Closing the gap report. Indigenous people have poorer housing outcomes than other Australians. Continuing to fund this program brings us closer to those goals. It is not about who is on what side of the chamber and who sits in the Independent seats. This is a program that has demonstrated success. The government in its own review recognises that success. We need this program to continue to reduce overcrowding and provide, as I've outlined, many of the basic human rights that we all enjoy. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 Is there a seconder for this motion? 17:22 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay I second the motion. This government has fought, since the last budget was delivered, for a $65 billion corporate tax cut for millions of multinational businesses that absolutely do not need it. They will not provide any assurances on this private member's motion that's been moved by my colleague the hardworking member for Barton, Linda Burney, on what we actually need in this country, which is housing for our first-nations people. Every single one of us has the right to a stable house, to a house where health and safety are an absolute priority. You cannot walk into this place and say that you support Indigenous communities or you support the reduction of family violence when—imagine for one second—three or four people are living in one bedroom, or 15 people are living in one three-bedroom house with one toilet, which is the current case for many of our first-nations people in remote and discrete communities right around this country. Proper, affordable and well-maintained housing is a right. It is not a privilege; it is an absolute right; otherwise, what are we doing as a country? It seems that we are about to witness another failure by this government with public hand-wringing and placing the issue vital to all Australians in the far-too-hard basket. Linda Burney, the member for Barton, has rightfully highlighted the gross inequality and hypocrisy that are on full display here. We need to discuss a problem that has affected countless lives, fostered resentment, fostered increased drug and alcohol abuse and torn families apart. The National Partnership on Remote Housing is an agreement that has the potential to give Indigenous people in remote and discrete communities a chance to improve and take control of their own lives, something that everybody welcomes and something that I think, by and large, everybody supports. But, if you've got a program that's about to expire on 30 June and no promises or forecasts in the budget estimates to say that you're going to keep funding it, what kind of insecure tenure are these people on? What kind of agreement have you actually made? You've made no agreement. You've made no promises to do anything different. You are simply stringing it out and hoping that no-one's going to notice while the states and territories fight it out with the Commonwealth. This needs to be something that we all agree to, something that we do moving forward, not keeping these people living in limbo. The partnership needs to reflect local cultural factors and sensitivities. We're yet to hear from the government whether the agreement will be extended. What we see in this area right now is confusion and differences between all of the agencies. The Turnbull government's own housing review—a review they released just before Christmas last year—said that there's already a shortfall of 5½ thousand homes in the national partnership agreement, although some have the figures as high as 36,000 short. The New South Wales Aboriginal Housing Office says that the current undersupply of Aboriginal housing stands at 36,025 dwellings. I'm not holding my breath for a New South Wales Liberal government to prioritise Aboriginal housing over their $2.7 billion stadium rebuild, which is a disgrace. The review predicts that this undersupply will increase to about 90,000 in 2031 if we sit on our hands and do nothing. It might be convenient for this government to flash around $65 billion in corporate tax cuts, but if we leave this festering as the sore that it is it's only going to get worse. In the Northern Territory, with a population of about 200,000 people, media reports have estimated the need for about 2,000 to 5,000 properties, and the state of the existing stock does not a pretty picture make. Today we welcomed women from the Tangentyere Women's Family Safety Group, which is a group of town camp women who live in Alice Springs and all kinds of town camp arrangements. They are from all the town camps, and they are represented in big numbers. They came here today to talk to us about domestic violence affecting their communities. We know that Aboriginal women are 32 times as likely as non-Aboriginal women to experience violence. If we have nowhere to take these women after crisis and if we have no transitional homes—there is already a shortage of homes for people who are not escaping domestic violence—where do these women go? They go to the local refuge. The local refuge can offer a woman escaping family violence three nights and, on that refuge's own admission, those women can be exited into homelessness. That is not a solution. That is not a fix. That is not doing anyone any favours, and it is certainly not helping women out of a dangerous situation. It is an absolute disgrace that this government has not committed this funding, and I would ask that Malcolm Turnbull, the Prime Minister, and Minister Scullion take immediate steps to ensure the continuation of funding for remote and Indigenous housing. Failure to do so will be another example of a government that is too out of touch—and I'm not sure that they ever had the touch, to be quite frank—and concerned only with their internal disputes rather than the living arrangements of people in remote Indigenous communities. In those houses, where there's overcrowding, health becomes an issue. I know as a mum with four people living in the house that if you get an outbreak of gastroenteritis in the house and you don't sanitise everything and wash it down then everyone's sick. So, this is urgent, and I urge the government to act immediately. 17:27 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I give my gratitude to the member for Barton for this important motion on the National Partnership on Remote Housing. As members may remember, in question time on 6 February this year I asked the government to explain why they appeared to be abandoning their commitment to the National Partnership on Remote Housing, which delivers housing security to Indigenous Australians. Two days later Minister Scullion wrote to the governments of Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory to discuss future arrangements for the funding for remote housing, and I am grateful to the federal government for this timely coincidence. Approximately half of Indigenous Australians in remote areas live in overcrowded housing, with some three-bedroom homes containing as many as 17 occupants. In contrast, only five per cent of non-Indigenous Australians live in overcrowded housing. In his response to my question, the minister representing the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, the honourable member for Hasluck, highlighted the success of the funding, indicating that there was 'a 15 per cent reduction in overcrowding in the four jurisdictions it affected'. So, there appears to be no dispute at all as to the overall general efficacy of the program that is being implemented, although I will have more to say on that. The minister spoke of the government's willingness to engage in equal partnership, calling on the states to equally commit to matching Commonwealth funding. Now I think it is right and proper that states and the Northern Territory contribute to housing for remote Indigenous communities within their jurisdiction. Indeed, all the remote housing partnership states do directly fund community housing programs for remote Indigenous Australians. But none of this lessens the federal government's concurrent responsibility for Indigenous Australians. States and territories have varying capacity to rapidly secure the additional funds required to induce matched funding from the federal government. So if any of the states or the Northern Territory cannot raise the additional money, the federal government can hold itself out as not being responsible for real cuts to expenditure. However, I want to give the federal government the benefit of the doubt. There is still time to make good on this future funding. South Australian state government finances are in a troubling state, so even a 50 per cent reduction in federal government funding would mean at least a $120 million funding cut for the program over the next 10 years. Without this funding, South Australia, along with Western Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland, will have to consider cuts to other elements of their budget, an outcome that would not bode well for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians alike. None of this should let the states and territories off the hook. As per a recommendation of the 2017 Remote Housing Review, there should eventually be a fifty-fifty cost split between the federal government and the states and territories, but an orderly transition is what is needed. I would like to briefly turn to the other recommendations in the Remote Housing Review. The review made 12 key recommendations, and I urge the federal government to heed all of them. But, in particular, a minimum five-year rolling plan for the program should be established. This will create the funding certainty necessary to retain strategic momentum and talent in the program's workforces. And a higher level of transparency should be implemented. This means that a sound performance framework for this program needs to be established and published as well as the results against the framework. In closing, I would strongly urge the federal government to maintain funding for the National Partnership on Remote Housing and to implement, in an orderly fashion, over time, shared funding arrangements with the states and territories. Together, all levels of government must show leadership and cooperation if we are to meaningfully close the gap. 17:31 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari Recently, I attended an Indigenous housing forum in Darwin with first nations representatives from right across the Northern Territory. We were there to discuss issues to do with housing in their communities and their concerns about the lack of government funding and support—in particular, the failure of the current government here in Canberra to renegotiate the National Partnership on Remote Housing. This has particular resonance in the Northern Territory because, of all the remote housing needs across Australia, almost half are in the Northern Territory alone. Whilst the Commonwealth's review estimated 5,500 houses in the shortfall will reduce overcrowding to 15 to 30 per cent of what it is for the general population, the number needed if we are to get equity, so that overcrowding in the first nations communities is the same as the rest of the community, is close to 6,500 dwellings. In the context of the Northern Territory, the Northern Territory Labor government has committed itself to put forward $1.1 billion over a decade for Indigenous housing in remote communities. In addition to that, there's $500 million for preparatory works, groundworks et cetera. There was a valid expectation, because of discussions they'd had with Minister Scullion, that this funding would be matched by the Commonwealth. And, indeed, Minister Scullion told the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory that he would be looking to fund on an equivalent basis. Not long after, the Prime Minister tells us that, in fact, that's not to be the case. The very best that's being offered to the Northern Territory at the moment is a guarantee of funding for two years. Of course, that falls far short of the mark. If we're ever to address the issue of overcrowded, inadequate and inappropriate housing in remote communities, we need the funds allocated. Whilst it's a simplistic notion to say you can build a house, if you build new houses and provide appropriate, safe and secure accommodation for Aboriginal communities across the country, you'll have a dramatic improvement on health outcomes for First Australians. That, to me, is really what this is about. It's not a debate that should be had just about money; it's a debate that should be had about what we see as our priorities in closing the gap in Indigenous mortality rates, life expectancy et cetera. If we are fair dinkum about closing these gaps, what we need to do is understand the importance of the social determinants of health and the primary importance of providing adequate housing. If we don't provide adequate housing, we will not address the underlying issues involved in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health. I speak particularly of rheumatic heart disease, renal failure and diabetes—the sorts of lifestyle diseases that come, in many parts, as a result of overcrowding. We need to make sure that this government and the broader community understand that this is not an esoteric debate just about numbers. This is a debate about the reality of the lives of everyday Australians living now in areas where, in some cases, as the former speaker said, there are 17 to a house. I know of communities where there are 25 and 30 people to a house. It is simply unsustainable, yet we're not getting the response we should expect from the federal government, which claims that it's looking after the interests of all Australians. And what I do know is that the people who attended this conference in Darwin were very concerned about the failure of the federal government to respond adequately. It was also clear, and this is part of the evidence which we've now seen—I don't believe that the Turnbull government has sufficient data on first-nation housing needs and the precise funding requirements. I think it's a very contested space, but what I do know is that there is a gross underestimation of what the liability is. Unless that liability is properly addressed and accepted in the first instance, and sufficient money allocated for providing housing through national partnership agreements—I have no issue about states making a contribution. They ought to. That's not the issue here. The issue here is making sure there is a partnership which provides adequate housing to meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. My colleague from Herbert, I'm sure, will speak about Palm Island, which has particular issues and needs. The bottom line is that we need these national partnership agreements to be re-established. We need the Commonwealth to commit to funding Aboriginal housing—first-nation housing—across this country and to live up to the expectations of the community to improve the life outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people. 17:36 Ms O'TOOLE 249908 Herbert I support this motion brought forward by the member for Barton, the honourable Linda Burney. What an absolute disgrace this Turnbull government is. Not only has this government ignored the calls from the Statement from the Heart at Uluru, but now this government is making savage cuts to the national partnership on remote housing. If this government were serious about closing the gap, it certainly would not be cutting $245 million of funding over two years to a program in Queensland that is a huge success. In Queensland alone, the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Housing includes the delivery of approximately 1,150 homes, approximately 1,500 refurbishments, as well as maintenance for almost 4,300 houses over a 10-year period. This partnership has created a large number of local jobs, particularly in Queensland, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. As outlined in the Remote housing review, Queensland leads the nation in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment for projects funded through the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Housing—to the tune of 87 per cent in recent years. This achievement is well beyond the 20 per cent target that was set for all states under the NPARH, and it is well above the next best state's result of 47 per cent. In Queensland, 16 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander local governments and businesses delivered nearly 80 per cent of the value of all new housing construction projects in their local communities, a huge improvement on the historic norm of 10 per cent, as well as 80 per cent of minor works and repairs. And over the last 10 years, the total number of employment opportunities funded through the NPARH has been 2,640. That's concreters, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, roofers, labourers, painters, tilers and cabinet-makers. Today, the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Housing supports the ongoing employment of over 850 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees, apprentices and trainees, and seven of those apprentices live in my electorate of Herbert, on Palm Island. These cuts will result in these seven apprentices losing their jobs, as well as thousands of jobs in regional Queensland, not to mention the impact on small business. Remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities already face severe housing overcrowding and job challenges. My life my lead, released in December 2017, cites adequate housing as a significant contributor to developing strong, healthy children who grow into healthy adults and, thus, can lead long and fulfilling lives. When we talk about housing, particularly in remote regions, it's very important to understand the cultural obligation and humanitarian need for Indigenous Queenslanders to welcome extended families into their homes. Quite simply, the shortage of accommodation in remote Queensland communities means that extended families will be homeless if their relatives cannot welcome them into their homes. Typically, overcrowding can cause or exacerbate domestic and family violence, drug and alcohol misuse, mental health problems, personal hygiene issues, risk of disease and physical injury. It makes it very difficult to get children to school and exacerbates wear and tear on houses, particularly in wet areas. Overcrowding is also a proxy indicator for homelessness as people move between relatives' houses and out of communities to regional centres. Although Queensland has achieved remarkable success over the past 10 years in reducing overcrowding in remote areas from 46.6 per cent of households in 2007 to 24 per cent in 2017, there is still so much more that needs to be done. In my electorate of Herbert on Palm Island, there are people living in self-constructed accommodation with no electricity, no plumbing and no running water. In fact, at the end of last year, Dr Mike Freelander, the member for Macarthur, met with a local Palm Island resident who suffers from diabetes. This woman has nowhere to store her insulin, because she has no fridge. She has no fridge, because she has no home. She has no home therefore she has no electricity and her medication cannot be kept cold. This funding is vital for Palm Island. Right now Palm Island is flooding from the effects of Cyclone Nora, and hundreds of people are desperately in need of shelter—people without a home. Palm Island does not have a cyclone shelter—something else this government has refused to fund. More homes are desperately needed. The Remote Housing Review identifies the need for 1,100 additional homes in remote Queensland communities over the next 10 years. It's a national shame that the Turnbull government will cease these funds on 30 June this year, despite overwhelming independent advice that it should continue. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 I thank the member for Herbert for her contribution. There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. ThinkUKnow 162 17:41 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra As the shadow assistant minister for cyber security and defence, I welcome the opportunity to speak on cybersafety and cyberbullying. I thank the member for Forrest for raising this important topic through this motion. As we know, the member for Forrest has been a staunch advocate of the ThinkUKnow program for quite some time and a major proponent in raising awareness about cyberbullying and cybersafety and the impacts it has particularly on young Australians. As more and more of our daily interactions move online, people are looking for assurance that those interactions are safe. ThinkUKnow is one strategy deployed by the police forces in each state and territory to teach young people, parents and carers how to engage safely when they're online. It is vitally important that it's not just the young people who are targeted here but also the parents, grandparents and carers. I can't tell you how many U3A classes I go to where grandparents are really keen to hear about cybersecurity, cybersafety and the strategies to help their grandchildren and their children stay safe online. Last year we passed the Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Minors Online) Act 2017, but there is another battleground we need to turn our policy minds towards—that is, the scourges of cyberbullying and cyberhate. Just months ago, over the Christmas break, tragically, 14-year-old Amy 'Dolly' Everett took her own life after becoming the victim of relentless online bullying. We all bore witness to the pain and suffering caused to Dolly's friends and family as the backdrop to our Christmas holidays. We all felt the same anger that she was put in a position where taking her own life seemed the only option. We all felt the same guilt, believing that the death of a 14-year-old child to be preventable. I've heard of a similar case, tragically, here in my own community in Canberra of a young person taking their own life as a means of escaping cyberbullying—I heard this news just last week, and it's heartbreaking. Here we have these beautiful young Australians with so much potential, taking their own lives as a result of the scourge that is cyberbullying and cyberhate. How did we let it get this far? Just how prevalent is it? According to the Office of the eSafety Commissioner's 2016 research, of the 2,278 children who took part in the survey, who were aged between eight and 17, eight per cent of those children and 19 per cent of the teens had been cyberbullied. This is in contrast to five per cent of children and nine per cent of teens who were contacted by strangers while online, another insidious scourge. The impact of cyberbullying is significant: 42 per cent of children and teens were adversely affected after experiencing a negative incident online. Sadly, less than half of these children and teens took action after experiencing a cyberbullying incident online. Of the actions that they did take, most told their parents or their friends and less than a quarter blocked the person bullying them. Journalist Ginger Gorman—a friend of mine, who used to be the producer for my husband when he was on local radio here—is fast becoming an expert on cyberhate. There are real questions about what can be done about the nastiness and the bile that is cyberhate. In one of her articles, Ginger asks whether victims of cyberhate and trolls should mute, block or resort to 'digilantism'. Clementine Ford is one of Australia's high-profile women on social media and makes a point of naming and shaming her trolls. She said: There's no way to 'fight back' that is considered acceptable by everyone. … … … … The reason I name and shame is to show men what other men do and also to show women they don't need to quietly tolerate it. It has so far proved an effective means of fighting back. Tracey Spicer's view is different, however. She said: I never troll back, as I don't believe in lowering myself to their level. If I'm feeling confident, I use humour. It's the most marvellous device to disarm someone. If it's obviously a serial misogynist, I ignore, mute or block. Awareness is a great start, as we are seeing with ThinkUKnow, but we need to be ever vigilant on this issue. As legislators, we need to be thinking about options to address cyberhate and cyberbullying. 17:47 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Protecting children online from predators who are planning to cause harm or to engage in sexual activity with a child is vital. The Criminal Code Amendment (Protecting Minors Online) Act 2017 was a critical step forward. It updated the law to take account of our changing digital world and allowed law enforcement to take action against online predators sooner, hopefully preventing many more harmful crimes from taking place. However, we can and we must do more. This morning, we've learned more about an excellent example of the vital role that police in Australia play in protecting children online both domestically and overseas. The Queensland Police Service, QPS, leads a task force called Task Force Argos. It has a worldwide reputation for excellence in this area. Following the arrest of Canadian website founder Benjamin Faulkner in 2016, Task Force Argos began operating one of the internet's most popular child abuse websites, called Childs Play. Using the founder's login details, they maintained the site for over a year. They gathered evidence on the identities of some of the more than 3,000 active users and their victims. Unbelievably, the site had attracted more than one million worldwide user registrations. In total, Argos identified around 100 active offenders who produced child abuse material for the site, and resulting arrests are already underway in countries all over the world. The offenders unfortunately included a healthcare professional, who worked with children; lawyers; and even military personnel. Critically, more than 100 victims were identified and have been rescued from their abusers as a result of the investigation. This was the second investigation of this type successfully carried out by Task Force Argos. In 2014, Argos took over another website called The Love Zone and similarly gathered evidence which led to the arrest of serious serial offenders in Australia and Britain. Once again, 85 victims and more than 100 offenders were identified through this investigation. The Turnbull government is acting to help and go further to identify and rescue more than 200 victims each and every year. We're setting up an office called the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, the ACCCE, to drive a national effort to disrupt, prevent and investigate child abuse. The government will allocate $68.6 million in the coming budget to the ACCCE. It will draw resources and expertise from the AFP, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, AUSTRAC, the office of the cyber coordinator, Australian Border Force and the Australian Institute of Criminology. The agency will work with non-government and third-sector organisations with expertise in child exploitation. It will also link Australian efforts even more closely with international law enforcement and national agencies overseas like the US National Centre for Missing & Exploited Children. I'm pleased to say that, building on the excellent work of Task Force Argos and because of our region's reputation as a cyberhub, the new agency will be based in South-East Queensland. This law enforcement action is vital, and Task Force Argos, the Australian Federal Police and the government should be commended for their commitment to rescuing children and prosecuting offenders. However, to protect children and to prevent more of these crimes from taking place, we have to educate children, parents and grandparents about these online threats and how to avoid them. Like I've said often in this space, you wouldn't drop your 11-year-old off at the Valley on a Friday night and say, 'I'll see you in two hours.' As parents, we've got an obligation to ensure that we know what they're doing online just as we know what they're doing in the real space. Programs like the AFP's ThinkUKnow as well as the excellent resources provided by the eSafety Commissioner and organisations like the Daniel Morcombe Foundation, based on the Sunshine Coast, are critical in turning around this growing threat by helping kids to understand how to avoid becoming a statistic of sexual crime on the internet. I've been engaged in this space for about 12 months. I'm working with the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General on ways that we can improve cybersecurity for our young people. I'll have more to say about that shortly. 17:52 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan I rise, first of all, to support and acknowledge this very important motion and to pay heed to the member for Forrest for bringing forward this motion. As my colleague mentioned earlier, the member for Forrest is very well regarded and very well respected for the work that she does with the ThinkUKnow program. Previous members who have spoken before me have talked about cyberbullying as well as predatory crimes online, and I can't stress enough just how important it is to have evidence-based programs for helping young people navigate the challenges, as well as the opportunities, of the online world. I believe it was the director of Microsoft who once described young people as 'AORTAs'—Always Online and Real-Time Available. They live in and have grown up in a world where the online space becomes not just their social world but also a world where they find information and interact with others. And, yes, there are lots of opportunities, but we also know that there are a lot of dangers. I've often thought that we just haven't been doing enough to help our young people navigate this new world and to make sense of all the information that they're consistently bombarded with. The ThinkUKnow program certainly contributes to education in that regard. But I'd like to speak on a different point around online safety. I would like to see our efforts in online safety, particularly for young children, and our education on online safety for young children extended to other forms of online challenges and predatory behaviour. A couple of years ago, before I became a politician, I did a research program with the Institute for Strategic Dialogue in the UK. We tracked the online behaviours of young people who were becoming engaged with violent extremism and terrorist propaganda online. What we found in tracking those behaviours is that they start with what we call 'seeking behaviour' and that what we loosely term 'online radicalisation' often begins with seeking behaviour. The fact is that young people go online for a whole range of reasons. They certainly go online for social connection, which might then put them at risk of predatory behaviour in terms of sexual exploitation. They might go online for personal connections, which may then put them at risk of being exposed to forms of online bullying. But they also go online for information—to find the answers to the big questions that they have. It may be that their teachers, their parents, their educators or the people in their world aren't able to offer the answers that they're looking for. So they go online and will start this seeking behaviour around some existential questions about personal identity and belonging. For some of them, that puts them at risk of several things. First of all, it puts them at risk of confronting terrorist and violent extremist propaganda, with no capability to analyse that information critically and navigate the barrage of information and propaganda that is being put out by terrorist organisations or violent extremists or, indeed, online predators who are seeking to recruit them to violent extremist causes. This is a different form of predatory behaviour but, to be honest, I think it is one that we still struggle with. I've given a lot of presentations about how this online behaviour begins with seeking but can then lead some young people into a spiral of violent extremism to the point where they may engage with negative propaganda and become operative. In summary, these evidence based programs, particularly the ThinkUKnow program, are hugely critical for younger generations of Australians but also, as the member for Canberra stated, for older generations who haven't really got their heads around how this online world works. I commend the ThinkUKnow program and I commend the AFP for this program. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 I thank the member for Cowan for her contribution. There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 164 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Gold Coast Commonwealth Games 164 17:57 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor It's 10 days to go until the 21st Commonwealth Games begin on the Gold Coast. What an exciting time it is for Australia, for fans, for sportspeople—we have watched our sports progress over the decades on television—and, of course, for the players themselves. It's no secret in this place that I am a very keen netballer and a great fan of the Australian Diamonds. I can't wait to cheer them on as they once again play for the gold medal at the upcoming Commonwealth Games. It will be a great Commonwealth Games for women. I'd like to thank the member for Lindsay for bringing this timely motion on. We missed celebrating International Women's Day because we were away from the parliament. So I've shaped my contribution on this motion around women's participation in the Commonwealth Games. In the first Commonwealth Games, in 1930, women competed in just seven medal events. Haven't we come a long way since then! At the 2014 games, women competed in 48.5 per cent of medal events. That's an interesting statistic because today in the Labor caucus we are celebrating the representation of women in our federal parliamentary team reaching 48 per cent. In 2018, at the upcoming games on the Gold Coast, history will be made. There will be an equal number of opportunities for men and women to compete in medal events. This is a breakthrough moment for women's sport. It's a fantastic achievement for sport and for women's involvement in it. It's exciting that young girls can watch the Comm Games and aspire to have the same opportunities to compete in sport as their brothers do. The gender barriers are slowly being broken down, paving the way for more involvement and participation. In that regard, I commend the leaders in sport who have a vision for women's participation over many years and who have actively implemented strategies to make what we're going to see a reality. We will see Sally Pearson leading the charge on the athletics track, the Wallaroos battling it out in the rugby sevens and the Hockeyroos on the hockey field among the 6,600 athletes and team officials vying for gold when the games begin. Importantly, I want to celebrate the Diamonds and their terrific build-up towards these Commonwealth Games. Of course, you can never take a gold medal for granted. There's no doubt that they are the premier team, coached exquisitely by Lisa Alexander. The team is being led, again, by Caitlin Bassett, who I think was named the world's best netballer, joined by our fabulous goal shooter, vice-captain Gabi Simpson, who is always there in that wing defence position and always putting the pressure on. Laura Geitz will join the Diamonds again for the Comm Games, and I know every Queenslander in Australia will be celebrating that fact. She'll be joined by April Brandley, Courtney Bruce and Melbourne's own Jo Weston in the defence line-up for the Diamonds. Liz Watson, our fabulous Victorian centre, will also join the team. Stephanie Wood will play in goal with Caitlin Thwaites, another great Victorian. Kim Ravaillion will join the team again. She has appeared in more than one Comm Games. And Madi Robinson, the champion from Melbourne, will, of course, be on the court with them. There is no doubt in my mind that in terms of netball and women's commitment to netball—and women leading a sport, a women's game, if you like, in the past—it is a fabulous game, and there are some features of it that I think are really worth celebrating. When these girls take to the court, they take to the court representing hundreds of thousands of young girls who play netball every week. They also have created pathways for women into the hierarchies in sport, into administrative roles and into board roles. It really is a celebration. The Commonwealth Games is a great way for us to celebrate how far women have come in sport. It's a breakthrough moment, with 50 per cent of gold medals up for grabs available to women, and I will be at home on the couch cheering on the Diamonds. Go, Lisa Alexander! I know you'll have those girls expertly prepared, and I know they will give 100 per cent for their country and for their teammates. 18:02 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong I hope I can match that passion. I'm very grateful to speak today about the Commonwealth Games and the wonderful opportunity they present for people across the Commonwealth to come together and celebrate the best our sports men and women have to offer. This year's game will be held on the Gold Coast, which is pleasantly close to home for our team, who have been training tirelessly for years. We will be represented by 473 athletes across 275 events in 19 sports—an absolutely incredible array of talent, skill, determination and sportsmanship. The Commonwealth games have a long and rich history, which, I'm proud to say, Australia has done particularly well in. The games started in 1930 and, with the exception of 1942 and 1946, they have occurred every four years since. This year will be Australia's fifth occasion hosting the Commonwealth Games, but it is the first time the games will be held on the Gold Coast. Australia has an extraordinary record in the history of the Commonwealth Games. Indeed, we are one of only six nations to have attended every single games, and, unsurprisingly, given our reputation on the track and in the pool, we have the highest medal tally of any nation, which includes 852 gold medals. The Commonwealth Games are particularly important to my electorate of Bennelong, which has produced a number of Commonwealth Games legends, including the late Betty Cuthbert AM MBE, who won gold in the 1962 Commonwealth Games in Perth, and Karen Moras OAM, who won triple gold in swimming at the 1970 British Commonwealth Games. We have every faith that our current team will live up to the reputation and achievements of these fine women. I think it's also important for our parliament to acknowledge that, in addition to the 473 regular athletes attending, the team will also be joined by an honorary addition, 99-year-old swimmer George Corones. Mr Corones not only finished the long-course 50-metre freestyle trial in the 100 to 104 age bracket, which at his age is an incredible effort by itself; he also managed to knock 35 seconds off his previous best record. Mr Corones first started his Commonwealth Games career in 1938—the year Donald Budge won the Grand Slam in tennis—as a 19-year-old when he attended the third games, then titled the British Empire Games. He is an exemplary Commonwealth athlete and embodies so much of what the games are about. In Bennelong we just recently awarded another round of Local Sporting Champions grants. This excellent program runs through the Australian Sports Commission grants fund to young sports men and women who are competing in state, national and international competitions, to aid in their personal and sporting development. The program has helped dozens of high-performing athletes to reach their potential. If it weren't for wonderful programs such as this, we would scarcely be doing as well in the Commonwealth Games as we now do. As the opening ceremony date soon approaches, I would encourage all of us to consider how we can support our Commonwealth athlete stars and rally around them as much as possible. The skill required to perform at the standard of the Commonwealth Games requires years of dedication and sacrifice. The early morning rises, the thousands of dollars invested in sports dreams, the tears, the sweat and the heartbreak make this a truly wonderful competition to behold. Often years of preparation amount to only a few glorious minutes in the spotlight, but, irrespective of the outcome, I would like to congratulate our wonderful men and women in green and gold and have no doubt you will make us proud. On the other hand, events in South Africa do not make us proud, in that all international sport has the Olympic tradition, which was commenced as a way of forging goodwill between countries. Our cricketers have conspired to cheat, thinking it would be all right if they didn't get caught. This is not a good thing at all. Furthermore, though, the real crime is against those who have preceded them, the great Australian sports men and women who have been Australia's best ambassadors and who have promoted goodwill and Australia in their efforts. Conspiring to cheat is not a good thing, but the damage that they have done to our international reputation will take a long while to mend. 18:07 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I welcome this motion from the member for Lindsay regarding the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games. I'd like to note that I'm one of the few Queenslanders who have spoken today on this motion. I note that the member for Lindsay, herself from New South Wales, brought it forward. Also the member for Lalor spoke recently, and she tried valiantly to give me a scarf from the Australian netball team, the Diamonds, but as a hockey player I'm of course not allowed to wear anything associated with netball, so I'll leave it there for now. Also I acknowledge the comments of the member for Bennelong, also from New South Wales, and I'm from Western Australia. We'll acknowledge that the Commonwealth Games are truly a national effort, but Queenslanders and those on the Gold Coast can be rightly proud of the event they're about to host, the challenges they're about to face and the fun they're about to have. There'll be 6,600 athletes and officials from around the world, around the Commonwealth—70 Commonwealth nations, in fact—playing 18 sports and seven para sports in over 275 events. It's a truly mammoth logistical challenge. The Commonwealth Games have been to Australia five times before. Who can forget Matilda, the kangaroo in the Brisbane Commonwealth Games, with her big winking eye? Of course we don't remember Sydney in 1938, but the games have also been to Perth in 1962 and to Melbourne, more recently, in 2006. The mascot this year is Borobi the blue koala, so that's another gift from Queensland to the nation. As I am from Western Australia, I will talk a little bit about hockey. WA hosts the Australian Institute of Sport's hockey program, so the women's and men's teams, the Hockeyroos and the Kookaburras, both train and do their camps and compete in Perth based competitions when they're not competing in international competitions. They got a fairly substantial farewell from the Governor, Her Excellency the Hon. Kerry Sanderson, and Premier the Hon. Mark McGowan last week. All 36 players from across those teams got to attend this lunch and have a great WA farewell. Everyone wishes them well in their upcoming competition. The Hockeyroos have a great record at the Commonwealth Games. They have previously won three gold medals. I'm very excited about their prospects on the Gold Coast. Unfortunately, no Western Australian athlete made the final team, but there are Western Australians in the squad. I note their coach, Paul Gaudoin, who's a legend of Australian hockey, also from Perth, and an Olympian in 1996 and 2000, when the Kookaburras won bronze, will lead the Hockeyroos into what will no doubt be a very successful competition. I want to acknowledge Rachael Lynch, the goalkeeper for the Hockeyroos. She lives in Perth and supports and trains up-and-coming hockey players who have the courage to be the goalkeeper for their team. She's also an RU OK? ambassador, and I thank her for her commitment to the cause of mental health. The Kookaburras, which is the men's hockey team, will be pursuing their sixth consecutive gold medal at the Commonwealth Games. We're very excited to see them playing in this competition. There are four Western Australians in the team: Jake Harvie, from Dardanup; Tyler Lovell, from Perth; Trent Mitton, also from Perth; and Aran Zalewski, from Margaret River, a beautiful part of the world producing great hockey players, as always. I'd like to acknowledge the work of the Commonwealth Games WA team appeal committee chairman, Graham Moss, the great footballer. The committee has raised $180,000 to help WA athletes get to the Gold Coast, and again I would like to acknowledge the contribution of the WA state government, which has contributed $60,000 to the quite large expense of getting athletes from Western Australia over to the Gold Coast, and also to enable their training. My home town of Rockingham was an Australian celebration community for the Queen's Baton Relay, which left Buckingham Palace with the Queen on 13 March 2017 and arrived at Penguin Island, the home of many fairy penguins and pelicans, on 23 February this year. The baton went across Shoalwater Bay and landed on Mersey Point and then travelled along the most beautiful coastline in the world, along Shoalwater Bay into old Rockingham, where the city of Rockingham welcomed all the baton bearers for the day in true Rockingham style. The baton bearers included 10-year-old Jordan Mears from Port Kennedy, a sufferer of cystic fibrosis who still managed to play her part in the relay; and Sharon Young, an advocate and fundraiser for Lifeline WA, who has raised over $100,000 for suicide prevention. I would also like to acknowledge Eileen Frith, a stalwart of the Rockingham community, a freeman of the City of Rockingham, who also participated in the baton relay and honoured the Commonwealth Games. Good luck to all participants. It's going to be a cracking event. 18:13 Mr GEE 261393 Calare In a matter of days the nations of the Commonwealth will come together for the 21st Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. There is no doubt that sport is a great unifier. It unifies countries and it unifies communities, particularly country communities. Indeed, sport often helps define the identities of villages, towns and cities across country Australia, and some of our country's sporting rivalries are legendary. We saw the unifying effect of sport recently when the communities of the Central West again came together to participate in the Queen's Baton Relay. I'd like to pay tribute to those relay participants from the Calare electorate and acknowledge their important achievements and contributions to our communities. Firstly, Harry Betts, from Ophir, is the youngest of Calare's baton bearers. This 17-year-old from Canobolas High is a stand-out basketballer, taking out the award for Orange District Basketball Association's Most Valuable Player Under 18 for the 2017 season. Sister Mary Trainor, from Orange, has been a wonderful contributor to her community for many years. She worked as a chaplain at Bloomfield Hospital for over 20 years and is presently a member of the Bloomfield Hospital/Riverside Auxiliary. Louise and Matthew Best, from Mudgee, have been dedicated organisers, supporters and volunteers within the equestrian organisations of our area for over 40 years, giving hundreds of hours of their time at branch, state and national levels. John Collins from Orange has founded the Orange Bush Nippers, an organisation which teaches our country kids water safety. Three groups of Nippers from Orange have now attained their surf rescue certificates through the Orange Bush Nippers. Tony Gorringe from Orange has been deaf since he was two, but this hasn't held him back at all. He's represented New South Wales and Australia at lawn bowls at the championship level, joining this with his sporting and civil advocacy for the deaf community at state and international levels. Pearl Butcher from Orange has passionate community spirit, exhibited in the fact that she started the Colour City Dragon Boat Club, which now counts over 50 breast cancer survivors within its membership, and she often press-gangs me into competing in local regattas. Les Hopkins from Blayney has shared his love of competitive swimming with his community. Since competing internationally for Australia in the 1970s, he's moved on to coach dozens of young swimming champions in the Blayney district over the subsequent years. Carolyn Sheehan from Mudgee is a committed volunteer with the Lions club, with her parish and with the local cricket, netball and softball sporting clubs. She has received a lifetime award for cricket coaching and has been named assistant coach for the New South Wales country women's team for two years running. Dr David Howe from Orange has contributed tremendously to the Orange community through his work in local health, particularly as a general practitioner, and he builds on this with his volunteering for Camp Quality. Edwina Bone, a gold medallist for Australia as a Hockeyroo at the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games, moved on to an Olympic debut at Rio. She's a current member of Hockey Australia's 25-member senior women's squad for 2018. Dr Anna Windsor is from Orange, and she is a dual Olympian swimmer. She represented Australia in the relay in Atlanta in 1996 and again at the individual medley at the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games. She led the Australian team to take out gold in the 4x200-metre freestyle relay at the 1998 Commonwealth Games. Tony Rodd from Orange is an intrinsic part of the Salvation Army's Red Shield Appeal, chairing its 2017 fundraising efforts. Russell Tym from Orange is a prime mover in our local community and, as race director of the Great Volcanic Mountain Challenge, has galvanised citizens to race 11 gruelling kilometres to the top of Mount Canobolas. They are people of all ages. They come from stations near and far. Toireasa Gallagher from Perthville is a multiple-medal-winning Paralympian and world champion cyclist. She's worked with the Rural Fire Service, has been president of the Perthville Public School P&C and continues to support competitive cycling in the Central West. Jenni Buckley from Mudgee is an active member of the Mudgee community. Her community commitments saw her undertake a fun run of over 500 kilometres during a five-month period, raising $21,000 for Parkes Hospital. Kathleen Keech from White Rock is active within the Anglican diocese of Bathurst and is a keen contributor to the Bathurst Netball Association. She's also a coach with the local Nova Pursuit netball team. Des Crawford from Bathurst teaches at Denison College. He's played and coached rugby league over many years in Bathurst. Ben Austin OAM from Wellington is a paraswimmer who has competed at three Commonwealth Games and has since retired from competition but gives his time selflessly, speaking to and inspiring children and adults from all over Australia. As this House can see, all of the Queen's Baton Relay participants were very worthy, and we congratulate them on their achievements and their contributions to our local community. 18:18 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise in support of the motion moved by the member for Lindsay and to show my support for the almost 7,000 athletes that will be competing in the Commonwealth Games beginning on the Gold Coast next week—in particular the Australian team of 710, including 473 athletes and 119 Queenslanders who will don the green and gold to do our country proud. A special mention goes to a former student of St John's Anglican College at Forest Lake, Trae Williams, who will be competing in the 100-metre sprint. Whether they be athletes, coaches or support staff, we know that each and every one of them has sacrificed so much and shown incredible commitment to their craft to be part of the Australian team. I congratulate each and every one of them. I also pay tribute to the team's chef de mission, the legendary marathon runner Steve Moneghetti AM, who will be performing the role for the third time. Recently Steve announced: One of the themes for the Australian Team for Gold Coast 2018 is Greater Together … It is embracing the importance of every role within the 710 strong Team. Greater Together is about celebrating all those family, friends and loved ones who have been part of the journey to Gold Coast 2018. It is about being proud that our team represents the millions of Australians cheering from the stands and watching our athletes strive for success on TV. This will be Australia's 21st appearance at the Commonwealth Games and will mark the fifth time we've hosted the games, having done so previously in 1938, in Sydney; 1962, in Perth; 1982, in my home town of Brisbane; and, most recently, in 2006, in Melbourne. But the road to hosting the games is not an easy one, and tonight I want to pay tribute to the Queensland state Labor government in 2008, under Premier Anna Bligh, that led the charge to secure the games against a competing bid from Sri Lanka. Indeed, it was on 22 August 2008 that the Premier officially launched the Gold Coast bid to host the Commonwealth Games in 2018, which set off a chain of events, including negotiations for the centrepiece of the games, Carrara Stadium, which will host the opening and closing ceremonies. This is the same stadium that the then LNP in Queensland rejected funding for, in the same Gold Coast city for which the then state LNP—which some members here in this Chamber belong to—rejected funding things like light rail. Members opposite shake their heads. They need to go back in time and realise that it was the LNP that opposed the $144 million upgrade to Carrara—opposed it every step of the way. We know that since that time the state Labor government, under the leadership of Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, and the minister appointed to the Commonwealth Games, Kate Jones, have championed the games' success. Writing in The Courier Mail, Minister Jones said: The Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games will deliver a multi-billion boost for our state and support thousands of jobs. It is not just about 11 days of sporting action, it's an opportunity for businesses to capitalise on the biggest and best event in Gold Coast history. Further to success on the field in the pool or the track, the Queensland economy also stands to be a big winner. The local tourism industry in particular stands to benefit the most from the more than 600,000 visitors who will spend more than $320 million in Queensland during the event. With a broadcast audience of around 1.5 billion, this event will put Queensland on the map as a global powerhouse for major events. On so many levels, the Commonwealth Games is a game changer for Queensland, and a golden opportunity for businesses to take centre stage and showcase all that Queensland has to offer. I also want to tonight acknowledge the pivotal role that former Queensland Premier and games chairman Peter Beattie has played in promoting the games to Australia and the world. Peter has been at the forefront of the games to ensure the success of the games and Queensland's success as not only the sporting state but also the smart state when it comes to capitalising on all that the games have to offer. Perhaps the most important level of congratulations and best wishes goes to the athletes themselves. Although there are 53 member of the Commonwealth, we will see 71 teams participate in the games, as a number of dependant territories compete under their own flags, such as Great Britain's England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland In our very own Australian team, there are 473 athletes, capped off by the selection of 99-year-old George Corones as an honorary 474th and final selection. I also acknowledge the 61 para-athletes who have been named in the Australian team. To the athletes competing: know that Australia stands shoulder to shoulder with you as you compete at the games, and that, whether you win, lose or draw, you've done your nation proud. We wish you all the very best of luck. 18:23 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I rise to speak on this motion as well. It's a very exciting time for Australia and for Queensland, as, starting next week, we host the Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. Last week, on Harmony Day, I had the opportunity to pop out to Grace Lutheran Primary School, at Clontarf in my electorate. I presented an Australian flag and spoke about Harmony Day, and I spoke about the Commonwealth Games. Being Harmony Day, we spoke about the fact that Australia is the most successful multicultural country in the world; we have people from all over the world, including Commonwealth countries, who now call themselves Australians; and we are should be very, very proud of that. The school dressed in orange, as did Norris Road State School, which I also visited that day, to celebrate Harmony Day. But Grace Lutheran Primary School in particular was also celebrating the fact that the Commonwealth Games were coming, and the different grade levels, from prep through to year 6, dressed to represent the different countries—the preppies came along dressed as Australia; the year 6s came along dressed as Canada—on different continents, of course, which make up the Commonwealth. There are some 53 countries in the Commonwealth, including Australia, and there will be over 70, with the territories also represented, at this year's Commonwealth Games. Members of the Commonwealth are, of course, from Europe, from Asia, from the South Pacific region, and they were all represented at Grace Lutheran College when I was there last week. I spoke about the fact that there are over 1.4 billion people in the Commonwealth. As Australians we're proudly part of those 1.4 billion people in the Commonwealth. There will be, as I said before, over 70 territories and 53 countries represented at the Commonwealth games. Some 6,600 athletes will be on the Gold Coast to compete. I was at the opening ceremony of the 1982 Commonwealth Games; I remember that really well. My parents took me along; I was only ten years old at the time. It was quite an exciting time to go to the 1982 Commonwealth Games. I'm looking forward to seeing it on the Gold Coast. We have athletes in the Moreton Bay and Brisbane regions competing. Next week, the Queen's Baton relay will come through the main street of Redcliff and other parts of Moreton Bay. I congratulate everyone involved. Finally I'd like to wish all the athletes well. I look forward to watching them compete. And I know all of the Australian Parliament is behind them. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 The time allotted for this debate has now expired. The debate is adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Federation Chamber adjourned at 18:27   QUESTIONS IN WRITING 170 QUESTIONS IN WRITING Australian Taxation Office (Question No. 820) 170 820 Dr Leigh BU8 asked the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services, in writing, on 14 September 2017 ‑ (1) Has there been a delay in the release of the 2014-15 individual sample file (taxation statistics, 2% sample of records) by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO); if so, (a) what is the cause of the delay, and (b) has the Government sought or received correspondence from the ATO on this incident and its impact, if so, will he provide it.(2) On what dates were the previous three sample files released? (3) When will the 2014-15 individual sample file be released? Ms O'Dwyer LKU The below answer is an amended response to the honourable member's question, published in the Hansard for 5 February 2018: (1)   (a & b) The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) has released new guidelines for the release of sensitive unit record level data. The guidelines are intended to ensure that such data is "protected to the highest standard". As part of the guidelines, the ATO are required to engage a data privacy expert to review its methodology with a view to ensuring the risk of re-identification is sufficiently low. The ATO takes seriously the protection of data and is working to ensure all releases of data comply with PM&C's guidelines and the law. (2) (3)   The ATO is working to ensure all releases of data comply with PM&C's guidelines and the law. Defence Sites (Question No. 894) 170 894 Mr Georganas DZY asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, in writing, on 6 December 2017: 1. How many tests have been conducted around Defence and non-Defence sites for perfluroctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or other chemicals related to fighter fighting foams and retardants. 2. What were the results, broken down by location tested, and including maps of the impacted areas. 3. Specifically, have the estuaries, beaches and waterways around the Adelaide Airport been tested for contamination; if so, what were the results. 4. What remediation, if any, has been considered for contaminated sites around Australia. 5. Do any sites in South Australia require treatment or further testing; if so, what are the timelines. 6. What resources have been allocated to test firefighters and other personnel exposed to PFOS and PFOA. 7. What ongoing testing and treatment and or medial monitoring have been considered or implemented by the Government. Mr McCormack 219646 The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1 & 2) The Department of Defence (Defence) is currently undertaking detailed site investigations for per‑and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) at 23 Defence bases throughout Australia, including RAAF Base Edinburgh in South Australia (SA). Information on the progress of investigations and results to date for each Defence site are available at: www.defence.gov.au/environment/pfas/. Airservices Australia (Airservices) is currently investigating 20 civilian airports, including Adelaide Airport, under its PFAS national management program. This work includes site investigations to understand the extent of PFAS contamination from Airservices' operations, research into possible remediation activities and close collaboration with all relevant Commonwealth, state and territory regulators to develop a nationally consistent approach to managing PFAS. Airservices provides airport-specific PFAS information on its website as it becomes available: www.airservicesaustralia.com/environment/firefightingfoam/airport-specific-information/. 3) Testing of the estuaries, beaches and waterways on state land around Adelaide Airport is the responsibility of the SA Environment Protection Authority (EPA). Further information is available at: www.epa.sa.gov.au/environmental_info/perfluorinated-compounds. 4) Due to the persistent and ubiquitous nature of PFAS and its emergence as a contaminant of concern, remedial technologies are still being developed internationally. Defence and Airservices are trialling a number of remediation technologies which include stabilisation/immobilisation, solidification, reverse osmosis and nanofiltration, thermal desorption, pyrolysis, in-situ oxidation or reduction, pump and treat, foam fractionation and ultrasonification processes. The Australian Government has established a $15 million National Remediation Research Program administered through the Australian Research Council to facilitate the development of innovative technologies to investigate and remediate PFAS-contaminated media including soil, groundwater, waterways and marine systems. Further information on the program is available at: www.arc.gov.au/pfas-remediation-research-program. 5) Refer to the web links in the response to questions 1 & 2 for information on available timelines for PFAS investigations in SA. 6) To date, Airservices has already commissioned five independent health-related studies to better understand potential PFAS-related human health impacts, to provide Work Health and Safety (WHS) advice to workers within the airport environment and to inform a staff blood testing program. In 2013 Airservices offered voluntary blood testing to all its aviation rescue and fire fighting service (ARFFS) employees. This program tested approximately 150 staff at a total cost of $142,000 or approximately $947 per individual tested (not including internal labour costs and other associated costs). In October 2017, Airservices announced its intention to commence several new PFAS-related health and wellbeing initiatives for its ARFFS staff which may include further blood testing to measure exposure levels. Airservices remains committed to the safety of its staff and has undertaken further action to minimise PFAS-exposure, including transitioning to PFAS free firefighting foam at all civilian airports in 2010, implementing the use of personal protective equipment and providing guidance to staff on good hygiene practice. Airservices continues to engage with Comcare, its WHS regulator, which has advised it is satisfied with Airservices' WHS practices. 7) Defence is providing alternative drinking water, including connection to town water, to residents who use PFAS-contaminated bore water for drinking purposes, as well as installing water treatment plants in Williamtown (NSW), Oakey (QLD) and Katherine (NT) to filter PFAS‑impacted water. The Australian Government has also committed to a number of health initiatives to assist PFAS‑impacted communities which include: a $5.7 million community support package encompassing an epidemiological study, voluntary blood testing and mental health and counselling services for residents in Katherine; an extended voluntary blood testing program, epidemiological study and mental health and counselling services for the expanded investigation area around RAAF Base Williamtown, in addition to the previous provision of these services to Williamtown and Oakey communities; the establishment of an Expert Health Panel to advise the Australian Government on the potential health impacts associated with PFAS exposure and to identify priority areas for research by February 2018; and a $12.5 million National Research Program administered by the National Health and Medical Research Council which will be informed by the Expert Health Panel's advice on priority research areas. At a national level, environment regulators in all jurisdictions have been actively collaborating to develop a PFAS National Environmental Management Plan (NEMP) to provide a nationally consistent, risk-based framework for the environmental regulation of PFAS. The NEMP is expected to be released in the first quarter of 2018. Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments have developed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) on a National Framework for Responding to PFAS Contamination which commits all parties to high level principles of collaboration and cooperation to deliver a more effective and consistent PFAS management response. In February 2018, the Prime Minister signed the IGA on behalf of the Commonwealth and wrote to all State and Territory Governments inviting them to sign up by 29 March 2018. Road Safety (Question No. 909) 171 909 Ms Sharkie 265980 asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, in writing, on 5 February 2018: 1. How many Mass Management Accreditations (MMAs) have been issued by the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) since its creation in 2014. 2. What total number of accredited heavy vehicle operators have been found to be non-compliant by NHVR audits. 3. What sum of revenue has been generated by the NHVR through the issuing of MMAs. 4. Can he advise why the NHVR is now issuing permits for Road Trains and B-Triple combinations in states where these vehicles have not been able to operate in the past. 5. Can he advise what measures the Government has implemented to reduce the amount of damage caused by the increasing amount of heavy vehicles on Australian roads. Mr McCormack 219646 The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1. 2702 accreditations as at 8 February 2018. 2. 2000 operators (6856 audits conducted on all 5608 Mass Management participants where a non-conformance/corrective action was identified and addressed). 3. Revenue of $2.895 million 4. The issuing of permits for Road Trains and B-Triple combinations by the NHVR reflects the COAG-agreed productivity agenda to open up road access for restricted access vehicles. Issuing of permits requires the consent of states, territories and local government road managers. 5. In addition to supporting the work of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator's Performance Based Standards program to deliver higher productivity vehicles through innovative vehicle design, the Australian Government is investing $75 billion in infrastructure from 2017-18 to 2026-27. The Australian Government also provides road maintenance funding, including $350 million per annum to state and territory governments for roads such as the Bruce, Calder, Hume and Pacific Highways, which form part of the National Land Transport Network. The Government also provides funding to councils through the Roads to Recovery Program to help meet the cost of building and maintaining roads. Councils throughout Australia will receive $4.4 billion from the Australian Government under this program from 2013-14 to 2020-21. Therapeutic Goods Administration Complaints Resolution Panel (Question No. 912) 172 912 Mr Zappia HWB asked the Minister for Health, in writing, on 06 February 2018: Have all annual reports of the Therapeutic Goods Administration Complaints Resolution Panel been released; if not, (a) why not, and (b) when will they be released. Mr Hunt 00AMV The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Complaints Resolution Panel (CRP) do not publish annual reports. They do however publish an annual summary of complaints. The complaints summary documents are available on the CRP website (www.tgacrp.com.au). Summaries are available from 2007 through to the 2016-17 financial year. Health (Question No. 913) 172 913 Ms Sharkie 265980 asked the Minister for Health, in writing, on 07 February 2018: (1) What Australian Government programs provide subsidies for personal medical supplies for healthcare card holders.(2) What are the uptake rates for these programs, and what measures have been taken to ensure awareness amongst eligible recipients.(3) How effective are these programs in addressing poverty and financial distress amongst older Australians. Mr Hunt 00AMV The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Australian Government funds a number of programs that subsidise personal medical supplies for eligible Australians, including those on Health Care Cards. Examples of programs include the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS), the Stoma Appliance Scheme (Stoma scheme), the Life Saving Drugs Program (LSDP) and the Hearing Services Program (HSP). Each of these programs provide partial, or in some cases fully subsidised products to eligible patients. The PBS provides timely, reliable and affordable access to necessary medicines for eligible Australians. From 1 January 2018, a patient with a concession card, including a Health Care Card, Pensioner Concession Card, Commonwealth Seniors Health Card, or Department of Veterans' Affairs White, Gold or Orange Card, pays a maximum of $6.40 (known as the co‑payment) for a medicine listed on the PBS with the Government paying the remaining cost. The co‑payment for non-concession card holders is $39.50. A pharmacist may also choose to discount the PBS patient co-payment by up to $1.00. For high medicine users, when a concessional patient or their family exceeds the safety net threshold, they no longer pay a co-payment. In 2016-17, Government expenditure on concessional patients for general schedule medicines was approximately 75 per cent of total PBS expenditure. The NDSS delivers subsidised syringes and needles, blood glucose test strips, urine ketone test strips, and insulin pump consumables to Australians with diabetes. The NDSS also provides fully or partially subsidised education, information and other services to assist in the best use of products and self-management of diabetes. Through the NDSS, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are fully subsidised for eligible children and young people under 21 years of age with type 1 diabetes. As at 31 January 2018, over 7,600 people have been approved to access fully subsidised CGM products. The Stoma scheme assists people with stomas to better manage their condition by providing subsidised access to stoma-related products. This includes access to fully subsidised products on the Scheme's Schedule. The products are distributed to people with stomas through 22 stoma associations across Australia. Participants pay a small annual fee to their stoma association to access the Scheme. The LSDP provides fully subsidised access for eligible patients to expensive and life saving medicines for very rare and life-threatening medical conditions. There are currently thirteen medicines available for the treatment of nine conditions. There are currently around 400 patients accessing this program. Eligibility includes being a permanent Australian resident qualifying for Medicare and that the patient must satisfy the relevant criteria for treatment with the medicine. The HSP provides a range of fully or partially subsidised hearing services to eligible Australians to manage their hearing loss and improve their engagement with the community. The HSP has around 300 contracted service providers who see both program and private clients, comprising of the Community Service Obligations component and Voucher component. Eligibility for the Voucher component of the HSP is for Australians over the age of 21 who are, in the main, Pension Concession Card (PCC) holders or DVA Gold or White card holders. While Health Care Card holders do not automatically qualify for a Pension Concession Card and subsequently eligibility to the HSP, some recipients of Newstart, Youth Allowance or parenting payments may qualify for a PCC and be eligible for the HSP.   National Sport Plan (Question No. 916) 173 916 Ms Sharkie 265980 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Sport, in writing, on 13 February 2018: On what date will the National Sport Plan be released. Mr Hunt 00AMV The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Release of the National Sport Plan is anticipated mid-2018. Ministerial Offices (Question No. 917) 173 917 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—In 2016-17, what sum was spent on replacing lost, stolen or misplaced equipment in all ministerial offices, and what goods were replaced. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance Ministerial Offices (Question No. 918) 173 918 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—In 2016-17, what sum was spent on replenishing the drinks cabinets in all ministerial offices, on what date were these purchases made, and what was purchased. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Parliamentary Offices (Question No. 919) 173 919 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—What sum did each ministerial office spend on office furniture in 2016-17. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Ministerial Offices (Question No. 920) 173 920 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—In respect of all ministerial office expenses in 2016-17, (a) what sum was spent on the use of private dining rooms for ministerial purposes, and (b) where were these dinners held. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Ministerial Offices (Question No. 921) 174 921 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—In 2016-17, were there any instances of cyber security breaches within ministerial offices in respect of the hacking of (a) mobile phones, and (b) social media accounts; if so, (i) how many, and (ii) what sum did it cost to investigate and remedy these breaches. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Parliamentary Offices (Question No. 922) 174 922 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—In respect of all ministerial office expenses in 2016-17, what sum was spent on (a) indoor plants, (b) office decorations, and (c) artwork. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Parliamentary Offices (Question No. 923) 174 923 Mr Keogh 249147 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 14 February 2018 : To ask the Minister representing the Minister for Finance—From 1 January 2014 to 14 February 2018, what sum was spent on external media and public speaking training for all Ministers. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: This information, as it pertains to all Ministers, is not held by the Department of Finance. Government Procurement (Question No. 925) 174 925 Mr Zappia HWB asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance, in writing, on 15 February 2018: In respect of the Joint Select Committee on Government Procurement report Buying into our Future (June 2017), (a) how many of the 16 recommendations have been adopted by the Government, and (b) what actions have been taken by the Government to implement these recommendations. Mr Morrison E3L The Minister for Finance has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: (a) How many of the 16 recommendations have been adopted by the Government? The Government response to the Joint Select Committee on Government Procurement Report of June 2017 was tabled in the Senate on 14 November 2017, and is publicly available on both the Finance website (www.finance.gov.au/publications/) and the parliament house website (https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Former_Committees/Government_Procurement/CommProcurementFramework/Government_Response). Six recommendations were supported, supported-in-principle or supported‑in‑part, two recommendations were noted and the remaining eight recommendations were not supported. (b) What actions have been taken by the Government to implement these recommendations? With regard to Recommendation 5, Finance is currently developing a set of clauses, which could be used as appropriate in contracts that are valued at more than $200,000. Following consultation with stakeholders, we expect this to be available by July 2018. With regard to Recommendation 15, Finance will shortly commence a review of the new rules that were included in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules from 1 March 2017. We expect this review to be completed by the end of 2018. As noted in the Government's response: With regard to Recommendation 9, Finance already provides extensive guidance on assessing economic benefit. Additionally, for procurements valued over $20 million, Australian Industry Participation Plans require detailed information from successful tenderers on engaging with Australian suppliers. Recommendation 11 is reflected in an existing requirement under the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (Paragraph 7.2). Recommendations 12 and 13 are already part of Finance's ongoing activities.