2018-05-31 45 1 6 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 31 May 2018

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

TARIFF PROPOSALS 1 TARIFF PROPOSALS Customs Tariff Proposal (No. 2) 2018 1 09:31 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I move: Customs Tariff Proposal (No. 2) 2018. The customs tariff proposal that I have just tabled inserts a new concessional item into schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act 1995. The new concessional item, item 56, provides a free rate of customs duty for eligible clinical trial kits and for placebos used in clinical trials. Item 56 is part of the Australian government's commitment to growing international collaboration and investment in Australia's medical research industry. Item 56 brings the important requirements for clinical trial kits into line with industry practice. It does this by removing the requirements for importers to classify separately the medicaments and/or placebos in the kits. Removing this requirement will simplify the import process for these goods and maintain the integrity of the kits and the results of the clinical trial. The creation of item 56 is estimated to have a negligible impact on the revenue over the forward estimates period. Item 56 will commence on 1 July 2018 and will apply to eligible goods imported on or after this date and to goods imported before 1 July 2018, where the time for working out the rate of customs duty on the goods had not occurred before 1 July 2018. Debate adjourned. BILLS 1 BILLS Export Legislation Amendment (Live-stock) Bill 2018 1

Export Legislation Amendment (Live-stock) Bill 2018

Second Reading 1 Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 1

Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018

Second Reading 1 09:34 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's a pleasure to rise to address the Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018. Liberals believe in a sustainable health system that delivers quality, equity in access and choice. The very foundations of a health system are that people are free to choose how they seek their care and get their assistance. Think about the millions of Australians in this country right now who face impairment or health challenges and want to decide how to seek care. It is important for them to be able to have choice. Particularly with an ageing population and those wanting to make sure that they can guarantee themselves care at a time of security in their life, the importance of freedom to choose health care is now more important than ever. But freedom to choose health care is based on the system having equity in access and being, of course, critically affordable for all Australians. That's why this legislation and the agenda of the Turnbull coalition government is to make sure that private health insurance is affordable and accessible for those people who seek the freedom to move beyond the public system. With this bill the government is preparing our health system for the 21st century and beyond. By understanding the drivers of health expenditure we can prepare the private health sector for the times and what we need for the future. Whether it's private health insurance, public hospital funding or primary care, these issues must be debated in the context of Australia's rapidly expanding health sector. One of the critical things that this government is doing, despite the deception of those from the opposition, is making sure that there is record funding for public hospitals. There is also important funding for primary care. But we also see the public system working hand in hand with a robust, strong and competitive private health system. Health expenditure exceeded 10 per cent of gross domestic product for the first time in 2015-16. Private health insurance expenditure grew by 4.6 per cent in real terms from 2014-15 to 2015-16. Projections by health economist John Goss show that health as a percentage of gross domestic product will increase by roughly one per cent every 10 years, so, in 2032-33 for every $100 spent in the economy $12 will be spent on healthcare service provision. Of course, a lot of this correlates directly to the drive and need associated with an ageing population and the expansion and use of technology to assist people and manage chronic conditions that might once have been fatal. We need to reform the health system now—and this piece of legislation is one prong in that process of reform—so that Australians can get bang for their health buck and continue to live long, healthy lives into the future. Any discussion about reform needs to have this in mind and also examine what is driving the growth in expenditure and demand. Between 2004 and 2013 the average annual growth of government funded admitted patient expenditure was 7.8 per cent. Hospitals were responsible for the lion's share of this growth, rising by $8 billion from 2002 to 2013. Analysis of these growing costs shows that there are multiple factors driving the increase in hospital demand. There is excess health price inflation, particularly from the cost of prostheses, which has been an issue that has been addressed in part by this government. Of course, population growth has been critical for part of the rise in healthcare expenses. Ageing is critical because people are living longer, healthier, happier lives. They are living with chronic conditions that once would have been fatal. Of course, they are getting higher levels of care, particularly at the latter stages of life, including palliative care. There is the growth in the real volume of services per person. What that means is that demand for medical services is rapidly rising. This measure accounts for over half the increase in healthcare expenditure. Medical advances mean that we can do more to help more people. That's always welcome news, given the rates of chronic diseases, such as diabetes and kidney and urinary disease, have increased significantly. The private health insurance sector has the potential to better meet these demands and improve satisfaction among hospital users. This is the core mission of this bill. Some 13.5 million Australians rely on private health insurance when they need it—and I am one of them and the Goldstein electorate is proud to have a very high rate of private health insurance policy take-up, because people in Goldstein value freedom in choice. Private health cover accounts for two out of every three non-emergency procedures. And it's not just for the wealthy: one in four policyholders have an annual income of less than $30,000, and almost half make $50,000 or less. These reforms are about getting those people, low- and middle-income earners, a better deal so they can have choice and not be compelled only to the system that our political opponents demand be provided for them. And it's about modernising our healthcare system so that it can meet the needs of today and tomorrow. This bill addresses the high out-of-pocket costs for consumers as well as a lack of transparency and sustainability in the sector. Australians spend more on out-of-pocket costs than the OECD average. Unexpected out-of-pocket costs are a major issue for private health insurance users. While 86 per cent of services are covered under the no-or-known-gap arrangements, the remaining 14 per cent of services incur out-of-pocket covers not covered by insurance. Procedures in hospitals include bills from multiple sources: of course, the surgeon, the assistant surgeon and the anaesthetist, among many others. For instance, you might have been booked in for spinal surgery and thought you were fully covered, but end up facing large, unexpected out-of-pocket hospital expenses. One in seven private patients experience these costs, and they are often significant bills. The average out-of-pocket cost for spinal surgery is $2,250. Transparency regarding these charges is, of course, desperately needed. The government has established an expert committee to work with consumers, the medical sector and private health insurers on the best method of simplifying out-of-pocket expenses, and these recommendations will resolutely benefit consumers. Furthering our transparency and accountability objective, the bill also strengthens the power of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman. Increasing costs of medical prosthesis have put upward pressure on premiums for years. These reforms will deliver immediate relief for private health insurers by reducing benefits paid for medical devices on the prosthesis list. The benefit will contribute to the lowest premium rise consumers have faced in 17 years. I'll repeat that: the benefits from this legislation will contribute to the lowest premium rise consumers have faced in 17 years. Despite this, health insurance membership is falling, particularly among young Australians, and we must tackle that challenge now. To have a sustainable private health insurance system you need people participating at all stages of life. We owe it to younger Australians to fix this problem, especially given the importance and the long-term sustainability of the health system. Healthcare costs most not become another hindrance preventing young people from getting ahead. So if you're 18- to 29-years-old, this bill allows insurers to offer you products with discounted premiums of up to 10 per cent. It also allows insurers to offer lower premiums to everybody, offset by policies with higher excess payments. On top of the $92.4 million investment in frontline mental health services in this year's budget, this bill continues to address the mental health concerns— (Quorum formed) It's always good to have a bigger audience. Let's get back to the point—that is, we're passing this piece of legislation, and it is a good bill. On top of the $92.4 million investment in frontline mental health services delivered in this year's budget, this bill continues to address the mental health burden faced by many Australians. Mental disorders are one of the highest drivers of increased volume of services per person between 2004 and 2013. Once implemented, these changes will allow people to upgrade their cover and access mental health services without a waiting period on a one-off basis. This contributes more value to the health insurer products, particularly for young Australians, who are disproportionately affected by mental illness. Value is also added by allowing insurers to offer travel and accommodation benefits for people in rural and regional areas. Access to private hospitals is limited in rural, regional and remote areas. Given one of the largest barriers to ongoing continuity of care is the tyranny of distance across the great brown land we call home, these very welcome reforms reflect the Turnbull government's understanding of the challenges facing all Australians. Currently many insurance policies are hard to disentangle. There are inconsistencies in treatment definitions and coverage levels, making them difficult to compare. This bill requires insurers to categorise products as gold, silver bronze or basic and use standardised definitions for treatments to make clear what is and isn't covered in their policies. The PrivateHealth.gov.au website will also be upgraded to make it easier to compare insurance policy products. This bill represents a series of considered evidence based changes to enhance patient satisfaction. It helps all Australians, but particularly young Australians, with their health costs, empowers consumers through policy transparency and sets up the private health sector for ongoing, enduring and meaningful reform so the health system can deliver for the Australians it was designed to serve. 09:48 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I too rise to speak on the Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 before the House, which has been called on much earlier than it was on the Notice Paper, hence my contribution is a little later than anticipated. Australia is in the midst of a private health insurance crisis. That word gets thrown around a lot in this place, but I don't use it lightly in this instance. There is no other way to put it. We are facing a private health insurance crisis. Faced with relentless price rises, double and sometimes triple the general inflation rate, many Australians simply cannot keep up with the cost of private health insurance any longer. Under the Liberals, premiums have increased by 27 per cent since 2014, costing families on average $1,000 more a year. This year alone Australians will have to find $1 billion extra out of their own pockets for the same level of private health insurance cover. Health insurance is now a leading cost-of-living concern for many families, right up there with energy bills and child care. Every year, when they get that letter from the health fund telling them how much more they are required to pay, for no extra benefits or services, families ask the question: can we really afford to keep paying for this? Is there anything else we can cut from our budget to keep our private health insurance? Maybe they'll try to make savings at the grocery store or skip the summer trip down to the coast, if they're lucky to be able to afford that. But 12 months later they'll be forced to have exactly the same conversation and make the same sort of choices, and before too long there is nothing else in their budgets to cut. At a time when wages aren't rising, meaning household budgets aren't getting any bigger, something has to give. Australians aren't just paying a lot more for their health insurance policies; they're also getting a lot less bang for their buck. Ten years ago only 6.6 per cent of health insurance policies contained exclusions. Now, that is at 40 per cent. Under this government, the number of private health insurance policies with an exclusion has soared to more than two million, an increase of 65 per cent since 2014. It's no wonder that, eventually, many families decide to try to live without their health insurance. Tens of thousands of people have ditched their hospital cover in recent years. The latest official figures show that the number of people with hospital cover as a proportion of the population continues to decline—down another 0.1 per cent in just three months, to 45.5 per cent. It is at its lowest level since 2011. If we don't act now, this trend will only accelerate. As we know, if enough people ditch their cover, it could put the viability of the whole industry at risk. As the AMA's former president, Dr Michael Gannon, said earlier this month, the industry is fast approaching a tipping point. In fact, this is about more than just the private health insurance industry; it's about our health system as a whole. As the AMA's latest private health insurance report card stated: Private health insurance premiums continue to rise year on year—far beyond the consumer price and wage price indices. If affordability is not addressed, membership rates will continue to fall, threatening the viability of the entire health system. Last year, the Member's Health Fund, then called hirmaa, used similar language when it warned the Senate Community Affairs Committee about an imminent 'death spiral' in private health insurance. It told the committee: If younger people continue to leave the system, private health insurance will become more expensive, thus exacerbating affordability further and potentially driving even more people out. This potential death spiral will drive many people into the public health system and onto already overstretched public hospital waiting lists. We agree. An industry collapse would be in no-one's interest and will have significant knock-on effects for our public health system. We believe private health insurance plays an important role in Australia's world-class health system. Contrary to the scaremongering of the government, we're not looking to dismantle it. Labor is not considering any changes to the private health insurance rebate, other than those we have already announced. We want to maintain private health insurance coverage and the unique balance between our public and private systems. But there is no doubt that meaningful intervention is required. In contrast to Labor's plan, which I'll come to later, the package announced by the minister in October was not meaningful intervention. In fact, it was thoroughly underwhelming. After two years of talking, the best the government could come up with was a range of mostly minor changes. They're tinkering at the edges. But perhaps that's not surprising given how closely the government has collaborated with the private health insurers in devising this package. The fact the big insurers welcome this package with open arms tells you everything you need to know. They know that under this government they themselves won't face any major changes. They'll get everything they asked for and their profits will be totally untouched. Turning to the details, the principal bill in the package is the Private Health Legislation Amendment Bill 2018. This makes eight changes, four of which I want to flag that we have some concerns about. First, the bills allow insurers to offer maximum excesses of $750 for singles and $1,500 for families. This is up from $500 and $1,000 presently. The government is trading higher excesses for lower premiums, but we're concerned that in the short term consumers will opt for higher excesses that they will not be able to afford to pay when they need care, forcing them into the public system and further eroding the value of private health insurance. We know that many consumers are doing that now: not being able to pay the excesses, they are not using their private health insurance at all and opting into the public system. The excesses proposed by the government, of $750 and $1,500, also seem to be higher than the excesses that go with other types of insurance products—house or motor car insurance, for example. They appear to be at the very high end. The impact of this measure, we believe, needs to be examined more thoroughly as part of a Senate inquiry, and we will be referring the bill to that. The bill also allows insurers to offer age based discounts to young people, requiring amendments to the Age Discrimination Act. Insurers will be able to discount hospital-cover premiums by two per cent for each year a person is aged under 30, for a maximum of 10 per cent. Any discounts can be maintained until a person turns 40, when they will be phased out by two per cent a year. Labor supports the idea of encouraging more young people to take up private health insurance, but we fear the government's plan will offer an insufficient incentive for individuals to take out insurance but prove expensive for insurers, possibly increasing premiums to other members. Insurers estimate they will need tens of thousands of new young members in order to avoid a premium increase for older policyholders. But, under these changes, a young person signing up to an average $1,800 policy will save only around 70c a week, not even enough to buy a coffee a month—hardly an irresistible incentive. This change also undermines the important principle of community rating, under which policyholders are supposed to pay the same premium for each product, regardless of their age, their health status or other characteristics. As with so many things the government does, this change hints at an Americanised model of health care that would not be welcome here in Australia. So this, too, must be part of any Senate inquiry. The bills also allow insurers to terminate products and transfer all people covered by those products onto new policies. At present, they can only close products to new policyholders. The government tells us that insurers will have to inform policyholders of any changes and that customer entitlements will not be affected, but the government has conceded that this may limit choice in access to health services for people who hold a terminating product and do not wish to transfer to a new product. The government has released disturbingly little detail about how this change will work in practice, and we are yet to see the regulations from the government as to how this will be done, which is why this, too, needs to be a key focus of any Senate inquiry. The government claims that, of the 75,000 products, there is a smaller number that have only one or two members and that, in order to introduce its new categories of gold, silver, bronze and basic, some of these products may not comply. My concern is around the rights of consumers to be offered an equivalent product at the same cost to their existing product, and what value they will be offered. It is unclear that putting this power into the hands of insurers will actually benefit consumers. Finally, these bills respond to recent revelations that insurers continue to offer products with benefit limitation periods, notwithstanding the efforts to end them in the Private Health Insurance Act 2007. These benefit limitation periods restrict benefits to minimum levels for the first 12, 24 or 36 months of a policy before allowing the full benefits that would otherwise be paid under the policy. The bill will clarify that policies with these limitation periods are not compliant PHI products for the purpose of the private health insurance rebate, Medicare levy surcharge or lifetime health cover. It will also protect consumers who have unknowingly held non-compliant policies, by ensuring that they do not need to repay the rebate and are not retrospectively liable for tax penalties. These limitation periods are another example of exploitative behaviour by the private health insurance industry. This loophole is an important one to close, but it did seem strange that people had to find out about their potential tax liability from the front page of a newspaper, not from the government or directly from insurers. Again, I would be concerned for policyholders who have taken out these policies; they should be offered new policies that continue to offer them value. There are other measures here that the opposition has welcomed. We've welcomed the elements of the bill that strengthen the powers of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman, allowing it to conduct inspections and audits at the premises of health insurers and brokers. We also welcome changes that allow insurers to cover travel and accommodation costs, and to cover hospital treatment products to help people in rural and remote Australia access care. Previously, travel and accommodation have only been covered under general treatment products or extras. The bills also replace the current standard information statement with a new private health information statement. The new statement will be in a more flexible form than the current mail-out, allowing data on private health insurance products to be accessed more easily, including through sortable websites. That, again, is a welcome change. The bill also reassigns responsibility for second-tier default benefit arrangements from an industry committee to the Minister for Health. These arrangements ensure that hospitals—mostly small rural and regional hospitals that do not have contracts with private health insurers—are paid no less than 85 per cent of average prices. There is a minor change—although, again, it is a little unclear why the minister wants to assume responsibility. I would like to ask the minister, in his response and summation, to indicate whether the government is in fact signalling a future change of second-tier benefits. It's something that would have a significant consequence for small rural hospitals, but it is something that the private health insurance industry has been significantly asking for. The government package also includes a number of changes not reflected in this bill, most of which Labor supports. These include, as I said, the new gold, silver and bronze categories that aim to make it easier for people to select and understand their policies and, in particular, to make it clear what is and what isn't covered by these policies. While we support this change in principle, it has been some time since it's been announced and we are yet to see the details. I note the government has now ditched its promise, its policy, to abolish entirely so-called junk policies. These bills also include upgrading the privatehealth.gov.au website to make it easier to compare insurance products. For anyone listening to this debate, this is the government-based website: it does not accept fees; it does not have products that are not included. Every single insurer and every single product is included on that website. Making that more usable for consumers is something very important for the government to do, so promoting it far more than some of the commercially-based websites that only have products where there is a fee or an arrangement with the private health insurer and not all products are listed. We also support increasing the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman's resources to ensure consumer complaints are dealt with more quickly. We also support requiring insurers to allow people with hospital insurance that does not offer full cover of mental health treatment to upgrade their cover and access mental health services without a waiting period on a once-off basis. There is much more to do to ensure that mental health services are more broadly covered under private health insurance, but this is a start. Preventing insurers from offering benefits for a range of natural therapies is also something that we have supported and we are very pleased that government has now, after some initial reluctance, actually agreed with Labor that not offering the rebate, which is Labor's policy—the government is saying that policies can't actually have these products in them. We'll see how that works with the private health insurers, but that's what they're suggesting. I note that the government has included 16 therapies, some of which the NHMRC has found there is some evidence for, and yoga is one of those that I particularly highlight. All of those are fine initiatives, and supported by Labor, but, ultimately, we do not believe that the government's package will deliver significant savings to Australian consumers. That's not just us saying it; that is the AMA. Even some of the health funds themselves have said the same thing. Labor, on the other hand, actually does have a plan to deal with soaring costs. We will cap private health insurance premiums at two per cent for two years, effectively tying them to general inflation. We would deliver real relief to 13 million Australian consumers struggling with the cost of living. This unprecedented policy will save an average of $340 for Australian families. We think that it is only fair. We want to shift the balance away from the interests of the highly profitable private health insurers and back to ordinary consumers. This is a policy that would deliver the smallest price rise in decades. But, more than that, our plan will deliver much-needed certainty. Australians could plan their household budgets around these more modest increases. No more February surprises when the insurers say, 'Your premiums will rise by four, five or six per cent on 1 April.' People would be able to calculate well ahead of time exactly how much their premiums would increase by. We think that the two-year cap will be a very important circuit-breaker in the private health insurance affordability crisis. We fully accept that this policy is no silver bullet. It is a short-term measure designed to give Australians immediate relief, while we do the hard work of finding some long-term solutions. That's why we didn't announce our premium cap in isolation. We announced it alongside a sweeping Productivity Commission review of the entire private health insurance industry. We're working on the terms of reference of the review, which will begin as soon as possible after a Labor government's election. We're happy to involve the industry and other stakeholders in the drafting of those terms of reference. But, make no mistake, it will be a major root-and-branch review of private health insurance. The reality is that under recent reviews, including by the government, they have barely scratched the surface of this increasingly complex system. In contrast, the last major review, conducted by the then Industry Commission, almost 20 years ago, led to the modern private health insurance system. Within a few short years of that review, we saw the introduction of important measures like the private health insurance rebate and the Lifetime Health Cover loading. This new review will give us ideas on how to bring down costs and improve quality and value over the longer term. Importantly, the review will actually go beyond the private health insurance industry and consider the whole private health system. We envisage that the commission will consider issues including the underlying cost drivers that insurers face, the range of carrots and sticks that encourage insurance coverage, and the balance between the private system and Medicare—Australia's universal, public health insurance system. Labor has also launched a national survey to give every Australian the opportunity to have their say on this issue. The People Not Profits survey is the first stage of Labor's consultation process on private health insurance costs. It is fair to say that big insurers don't like one part of our policy. That's to be expected. We are, after all, proposing that they limit their revenue for two years in order to deliver relief for their consumers. For some funds, it will mean lower margins. For others, it may affect capital stock that is held above and beyond prudential requirements. But let's put that doom-and-gloom claim into perspective. As the Public Health Association of Australia said: scare tactics by the industry should surprise absolutely no-one. Those tactics should be rejected out of hand. The focus of this industry, as the PHAA has said, is on profits and return to shareholders rather than the health of all Australians. The Consumers Health Forum, the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, and the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association have also welcomed our policies in no uncertain terms. Our plan has been welcomed, too, by Choice, which says that our review will 'apply more scrutiny' to what is a 'highly subsidised and highly profitable industry'—and highly profitable these insurers are. The latest official data from the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority show insurers profits are up yet again to $1.38 billion in the 12 months to March. That is up from $1.35 billion in the previous period. What is even more instructive is that they are raising $3.7 billion more in revenue than they are actually paying out in benefits to consumers. Of the $23.8 billion they raised from private health insurance premiums, they spent $20.1 billion on the medical needs of their customers. Premiums rose around four per cent while total benefits increased by only three per cent, increasing the insurers' gross margin from 13.6 per cent to 14.4 per cent. It means that each of the country's 13 million private health insurers' customers spent around $285 last year propping up the insurers' bottom lines rather than for hospitals, nurses, doctors and medicines. This is an industry that gets $6 billion in taxpayer subsidies every year. Australians are entitled to demand a much better deal than this. As respected economics commentator Michael Pascoe wrote in recent weeks: This is an industry that enjoys the federal government acting as its enforcer, pushing customers through its doors, using the cattle prod of tax penalties. It then blows 14.4 per cent of the money customers pay on things other than health care. These latest APRA figures show why Labor's proposed intervention is not only justified but necessary. It's also important to note that, while insurer profits are up, complaints are also soaring. In March we saw complaints to the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman had risen by 30 per cent. The bigger insurers were, as always, proportionally overrepresented in these complaints. This shows that consumers are far from happy with the services provided by their insurers. The latest Roy Morgan private health insurance net trust score report has found Australians now rate the private health insurance industry at the same level as gambling and real estate. Bupa rated particularly poorly in this survey. That surely wasn't helped by Bupa's decision to downgrade 7,000 policies and to restrict gap cover—that's a third of Bupa's Australian customers who were told their cover for a range of procedures would change from a minimal benefit to a total exclusion. Under the changes as they were first envisaged, patients would only qualify for gap cover if treated in Bupa-approved facilities. The AMA described these changes as a move towards US-style managed care. So we are pleased that the minister subsequently ordered the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman to examine the legality of these changes. But it shows, once again, the big private health insurers are putting profits before patients. In talking about the profits of the big insurers, I also want to make this point. Labor understands there are effectively two private health insurance industries in this country. One is dominated by large for-profits—three big companies in particular. The other is made up of two dozen smaller funds that are not-for-profit, member owned and community based. These funds return a greater share of their premium revenue to policyholders. They have lower complaints, higher retention and higher surveyed satisfaction. These funds are growing even while the industry itself is shrinking. Among those rising number of complaints I mentioned, Member's Health Fund Alliance insurers were on the whole underrepresented. These smaller funds are critical to competition and choice in the private health insurance market, and these are the funds we want to continue to encourage. That's why we're committed to working with these funds to manage the implementation of our two per cent cap. The government's health insurance reforms, which are largely designed by the industry itself and still resulted in another double-inflation price rise earlier this year, will not deliver the sort of relief that Labor's plan will. Having said all of that, we believe Australians need and deserve every bit of price relief that they can get. That's why we will not oppose these bills in the House of Representatives. But, as I have made clear, we want a full Senate inquiry before we agree to support their final passage through the parliament. We hope the Senate inquiry will come up with ways to improve what are at the moment inadequate bills. The government trumpeted this year's four per cent premium price rise as a big win because it was lower than it had been in previous years. It is as if the Australian people should thank the government or the insurers for taking only an extra $200 out of their pocket. These are people struggling with the costs of living; these are people already making sacrifices, already making hard choices. I talked about that at the start of this speech. Are they supposed to be grateful somehow for this price rise that is double the inflation rate? It shows how out of touch the government is. It's clear that under the government private health insurance isn't about giving Australians choice and control over their health care. It's about giving big business another way to profit off ordinary Australians. Labor will shift the balance away from company executives and back to ordinary consumers. Therefore, I move the second reading amendment which has been circulated in my name: That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House expresses its concern that this bill may allow insurers to cancel cover unilaterally, and that higher excesses may make it even harder for Australians to afford care”. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Is the amendment seconded? Ms Rishworth HWA I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Ballarat has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form that the amendment be agreed to. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to. 10:15 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I rise to speak on the Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018. Australia's healthcare system is a unique and effective balance of the public and private systems. A report last year by the New York based The Commonwealth Fund found that our system was the second-best in the world and delivered both the best administrative efficiency and best health outcomes. Its performance is built on combining the universal coverage of Medicare with a genuinely robust private health system. By properly supporting, integrating and incentivising Australians into private health cover we reduce demand on our universal public system and avoid the worst excesses of cost and waiting times faced elsewhere. The importance of the private health system in Australia is hard to overstate. In 2017, private health insurance paid for 11.9 million days of treatment in hospitals. That's $14.8 billion worth of treatment paid for by the private sector and by Australians who are better able to afford it. It's $14.8 billion worth of government revenue that can best be spent, instead, on supporting our most vulnerable. Private health insurance pays for almost two-thirds of non-emergency surgery, 70 per cent of joint replacements and 88 per cent of retinal procedures. Private health does not just improve lives, though, it saves them, paying for 60 per cent of chemotherapy treatment. Of particular interest to me, and I know to the Minister for Health, private health also funds 90 per cent of day admissions for mental health and 50 per cent of all mental health admissions in total. Without private health insurance, there would have been an additional 4.6 million episodes of hospital treatment for our governments to pay for in 2017 alone. That's 4.6 million reasons every year to get the policy settings right on private health. Unfortunately, the proportion of people choosing to take out private health care is falling. Since 2014, the percentage of Australians with hospital cover fell by more than one percentage point from 47.2 per cent to 46.1 per cent. Coverage has in fact fallen in nine consecutive quarters. Very few indicators in public life show such a consistent performance, and this is a trend that is imperative we reverse. Unfortunately, despite the lifetime health cover loading, some of the largest declines have been among the 20 to 24 and 25 to 29 age groups. The system relies on these younger participants, who don't need to use the health services as frequently, to help pay for the higher risk, often older participants. On its own, of course, this will increase costs to the taxpayer by requiring ever more treatments to be undertaken in the public system. However, without action to check this decline we're also in real danger of reaching a point of no return. As more people drop out, the premium costs for those remaining in schemes will increase faster and drive more people toward cancelling their insurance. Eventually, without action, the system would become unable to sustain itself. Declines this serious require a substantial policy response. The last time the nation saw a decline in private health coverage this large, under the Hawke and Keating Labor governments, the newly elected Howard government responded immediately by introducing three groundbreaking reforms, which are still cornerstones of our current healthcare system: the Medicare levy surcharge, the 30-per-cent premium rebate and lifetime health cover. This swift, comprehensive and decisive action was what was required, and it is what the coalition delivered. In just four years, coverage rose from 30.5 per cent to more than 45 per cent. Though we are not yet at a rate of decline which calls for such radical steps, we do need comprehensive reform to reverse the trend and prevent increasing pressure on the public health system. In 2015-16 we held an extensive consultation to ascertain what needed to be done: 40,000 online consumer survey responses, roundtable discussions with more than 100 stakeholder organisations and a host of community consultations showed that we need to improve value for money, improve transparency and increase the efficiency of competition. That is exactly what the government's wide-ranging reforms, its package of reforms announced in October 2017 and encapsulated in part in these bills, will do. The bills before us will improve value for money both by reducing costs for consumers and by improving the quality of services which can be offered by private insurers. In terms of reducing costs, the bills will allow private insurers to offer lower cost premiums to those younger consumers who are least likely to need treatment. In particular, it will allow insurers to offer discounts on standard premiums for customers who are aged 18 to 29, including discounts of up to 10 per cent for under 25s. These discounts will then be ongoing for those consumers, beginning phase out from the age of 41. Though the existing measures, which prohibit the modification of premiums based on age, were well-intentioned, they are now proving to be a critical barrier to young people taking up much-needed policies. The time has come to allow a degree of flexibility. The bills will also reduce costs for consumers by increasing the maximum excess levels that are allowed to be offered for insurance products which qualify for the Medicare levy surcharge exemption. Many consumers, especially those who are younger and less frequent users of healthcare services, want health insurance but find the premiums prohibitive, given the diminished likelihood that they'll frequently need to use the cover provided. Many in this group would be willing to pay a larger excess on those occasions if it meant that they would afford their monthly premiums. These bills give them that option, increasing take-up and reducing costs for everyone. The bills also improve value for money by improving the range of services that can be provided. Although the Sunshine Coast is now very well served for healthcare services, that was not always the case. For decades, people living on the coast had to travel to Brisbane for a wide variety of procedures and treatments. In many regional areas, that is still necessary. These bills increase value for money by allowing insurers to offer these regional consumers travel and accommodation benefits as part of their hospital cover. The bills before us will increase transparency by prohibiting the use of benefit limitation periods, which consumers have told us are confusing. They'll also strengthen the powers of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman, allowing it to conduct inspections and audits at the premises of health insurers in order to follow-up complaints or ensure compliance. Finally, the bills will improve the information available to consumers by introducing private health insurance statements in place of the existing standard information statement. These new statements will give more useful information and will be available to consumers in a wider range of formats. Finally, the bills will improve the efficiency of health insurance companies by allowing them to discontinue older products which are no longer appropriate. Maintaining these policies, sometimes with small numbers of participants, can be an expensive drag on the efficiency of insurers. This drives up premiums for everyone. Frankly, in total, the bills before us show us the stark contrast that will face the Australian people at the next election when it comes to health. On our side the coalition and our excellent Minister for Health, who has joined us here now, are addressing the real challenge of an ageing population and growing demand on our health services by working all of the levers available to a government. We are providing record funding to our public hospitals and record funding to Medicare to do what we can to ensure that the public system has the expanded capacity that it needs. That has delivered the highest bulk-billing rates ever recorded, ensuring that more Australians than ever are able to visit their GP without paying, and keeping as many as possible away from the hospital system. Alongside that action to increase capacity we're also working to reduce demand, through this bill and its associated reform package. Already our reforms have seen the lowest private health premiums increase in 17 years. Whilst Labor talk about it, we do it. However, this government never rests on its laurels. Now is the time to capitalise on that achievement and go further. By making private health insurance more affordable for younger Australians, by increasing the attractiveness and flexibility of the services offered and by allowing insurers to be more efficient, we're helping to reverse the decline in private health insurance membership and thus reducing the demand on our public hospitals. What in contrast is Labor's approach to solving the ballooning demand on our health services caused by our ageing population? Empty promises, budget black holes and bald lies. When it comes to private health insurance they want to increase the cost of premiums by 16 per cent, by banning the most affordable policies. They have failed to rule out cutting the rebate, as they did by $4 billion when they were last in government. Just this week we saw more of this in my electorate of Fisher. As members will know, the Sunshine Coast is a growing healthcare hub and at its heart is our new multibillion dollar Sunshine Coast University Hospital. This is a fantastic facility, filled with dedicated and hardworking healthcare professionals, including my own daughter. However, just 14 months after opening, despite increasing Commonwealth government funding, my LNP state colleague Mark McArdle, the member for Caloundra, has ascertained that ramping is on the increase, that ambulances are facing longer waits for their patients to be admitted, and that local patients are being forced to divert to the older Nambour facility. I am sad to say that it would appear that our hospital is becoming a victim of the state Labor government's total incompetence and mismanagement. State Labor health minister Steven Miles's response was as predictable as it was useless. He said, 'Everything is fine; nothing to see,' despite the evidence to the contrary, and, 'In any case, it is the fault of the Turnbull government for cutting hospital funding and Medicare.' Commonwealth hospital funding in our state is at record levels, growing from $2.7 billion in 2012-13 to $3.9 billion in 2016-17. That's an increase provided by the Turnbull government of 46 per cent in just four years. In contrast, Minister Miles's Queensland Labor government reduced health services funding in 2017 by $63.8 million. These are straightforward lies in place of any plan to fix the problem. I'm pleased to say that the people of Australia have seen through this Labor Party and their dishonest 'Mediscare' campaign orchestrated by the leader of the lamentables, the patriarch of the pitiful, the master of the miserable and the commander of the calamitous—that is, the Leader of the Opposition. The people of Australia are onto this bloke. They know that a fantasy funding promise and a fake Medicare card covered in lies won't get you very far when you're ill and in need of treatment. They know that a torrent of dodgy and baseless complaints about imaginary cuts is no substitute for the Turnbull government's pragmatic and comprehensive policymaking. The people of my electorate of Fisher and all Australians want to see a public hospital system that works. To do that, we need the extra investment that the Turnbull government is already providing and we also need to reduce demand through increasing the take-up of private health insurance. That is what this legislation will achieve. For that reason, I commend this bill to the House. 10:30 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I take the opportunity today to sum up on the bill before the House, the Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018, and on the A New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018 and the Medicare Levy Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018. Private health insurance is a fundamental element of the Australian health system. It is supported by the government, and more than 50 per cent of Australians have some form of private health insurance. The package of reforms I announced last October will help strengthen the viability of the private health system by addressing concerns about the affordability, complexity and lack of transparency of private health insurance. In addition to the investment of over $6 billion for the private health insurance rebate, this government continues to take pressure off private health insurance premiums, with the introduction of these reforms delivering the lowest annual premium change in almost two decades. The Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 will amend the Private Health Insurance Act 2007 and associated legislation to support a number of the reforms I announced last year. The Private Health Insurance Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 will increase maximum excess levels for products providing an exemption from the Medicare levy surcharge. This will improve affordability for consumers and will be the first time excesses have been increased since 2001. It will do so on an opt-in basis, which will allow consumers and premium-holders to choose whether or not they wish to take that option. The bill will allow for age based premium discounts for hospital cover. This reform will improve the affordability of private health insurance for young Australians and provide them with the benefit of their choice of doctor, timing of treatment and shorter waiting times. Amendments in the bill will strengthen the powers of the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman to protect consumers' interests. The Private Health Insurance Ombudsman will be able to conduct inspections or audits at insurers' premises to verify accuracy of information. Private health insurers will be able to cover travel and accommodation costs as a part of a hospital product for people in regional and rural Australia attending health services often a long distance from their home. Patients and their carers are likely to see increased value from their product due to this change. Private health insurance can be complex and confusing. Certainly this is what we heard from consumers in the online survey which had over 40,000 respondents. We want to make information simpler and more transparent for consumers. The first step in this process is the introduction of a new private health insurance statement which will replace the current standard information statement insurers are required to provide. The private health insurance statement will offer more flexibility for insurers to provide information that is relevant and personalised for their consumers. Reforms will be made to the administration of second-tier default benefit arrangements for hospitals. These changes will reduce the administrative burden on both private hospitals and health insurers. This bill will facilitate the termination of closed products and migration of people to new products. This change will make it easier for people to compare products and will generate considerable efficiencies in the system. The revised explanatory memorandum to the bill makes it clear that private health insurers have consistently provided access to the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman's investigating officers to verify the accuracy of information, and this is expected to continue. It is expected that the PHIO would continue to provide private health insurers with at least 24 hours knowledge of access to best assist with investigations. The purpose of entry in these circumstances is not to obtain evidence to support a criminal or civil prosecution; the intention is to confirm information provided by a consumer and to enable the PHIO to make non-binding recommendations, having received comprehensive information from both parties. The government recognises that benefit limitation periods can be an area of confusion for some private health insurance members, and it has now decided that all benefit limitation periods should be removed to make private health insurance products easier to understand for consumers. Although benefit limitation periods have been applied under the Private Health Insurance Act since 2007, the act prohibits benefit limitation periods longer than specified maximum waiting periods. Consequently, many health insurance policies may have not met the requirements of the act since it was introduced in 2007. Changes to the act will ensure people who may have purchased noncompliant private health insurance policies, and insurers who may have sold those products over the last decade, are essentially placed in the same legal position they would have been in if the products had complied with the act. To this effect it will appropriately protect both consumers of private health insurance and private health insurers. The two tax bills—the Medicare Levy Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill and A New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018—deal with taxation related aspects of the reform. These changes ensure individuals purchasing appropriate complying health insurance products for private hospital cover with increased excess levels will be able to claim the Medicare levy surcharge exemption. While the legislation brings into effect a number of important reforms, a lot of the detail will be provided in the private health insurance rules, and the government will also be consulting on the details of the rules. I thank all of those within the industry, the broader health sector, the department and my office for their work in helping to progress this, in particular my principal advisor, Alex Caroly. I thank members for their contribution to the debate on these bills, and I commend the bills to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG Order! The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Ballarat has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment moved by the member for Ballarat be agreed to.

The House divided. [10:40]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 61 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Zappia, A 70 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McGowan, C McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Bill read a second time

 Third Reading 12 10:45 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. BUSINESS 12 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 12 10:46 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House:    (1) notes:       (a) the Minister for Agriculture claimed in his second reading speech on the Export Legislation Amendment (Live-stock) Bill that it was "another important part of the Government’s plan to address animal welfare concerns with livestock exports"; and       (b) this morning without notice and with debate scheduled to run all day on this bill, the Government has today sought to delay its passage and silence debate; and    (2) therefore, condemns this Government for delaying increased penalties in the livestock trade and silencing debate on the Member for Hunter’s amendments to phase out the live sheep export trade. Leave is not granted. Mr BURKE DYW I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business moving the following motion— That the House:    (1) notes:       (a) the Minister for Agriculture claimed in his second reading speech on the Export Legislation Amendment (Live-stock) Bill that it was "another important part of the Government’s plan to address animal welfare concerns with livestock exports"; and       (b) this morning without notice and with debate scheduled to run all day on this bill, the Government has today sought to delay its passage and silence debate; and    (2) therefore, condemns this Government for delaying increased penalties in the livestock trade and silencing debate on the Member for Hunter’s amendments to phase out the live sheep export trade. The government are terrified of their own members crossing the floor. They know that when we get to the amendments on this bill, the entire private member's bill will be moved as an amendment— 10:48 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I move: That the member no longer be heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Manager of Opposition be no further heard.

The House divided. [10:52]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 70 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 63 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 10:56 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 10:56 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter Seconded, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has lost his party room. Not only that, this government has— 10:56 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I move: That the member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member for Hunter be no further heard.

The House divided. [10:57]
The Speaker—(Hon. Tony Smith)

 70 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 63 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 10:58 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the Manager of Opposition Business be agreed to. 10:58 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin Only a week ago, in a radio interview, the minister claimed that this matter needed to be sorted out and that it needed to be sorted out quickly. 10:59 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I move: That the motion be put. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the motion be put.

The House divided. [11:00]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 70 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 63 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 11:01 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the Manager of Opposition Business be agreed to.

The House divided. [11:02]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Zappia, A 70 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

The requirements for an absolute majority not having been satisfied, the motion was not carried.

 BILLS 18 BILLS Medicare Levy Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018 18

Medicare Levy Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018

Second Reading 18 Third Reading 18 11:09 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. A New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018 18

A New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Amendment (Excess Levels for Private Health Insurance Policies) Bill 2018

Second Reading 18 Third Reading 18 11:10 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018 18

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018

Second Reading 18 11:11 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I am pleased to rise and speak on the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018. This bill contains several measures which will seek to improve the outcomes of those who have served in the Australian Defence Force and their loved ones. When an individual undertakes to serve their country, we in turn as a country make a commitment to them and their loved ones that we will support them post their time in the ADF. Labor will support the measures in this bill because it is a step towards recognising the obligation to care for those who have served our country. In particular, Labor will support schedule 1, which recognises the importance of education and retraining post service, particularly for those whose service has had a greater impact on them. These changes will provide financial security to those who are on incapacity payments and are undertaking further study as part of their rehabilitation plan with the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Currently, payments reduce to 75 per cent after 45 weeks. This measure will maintain these payments at 100 per cent while a veteran is undertaking approved full-time study. This support will mean that these individuals can focus on their education, without worrying about finance. This is particularly important, I believe, when we consider that the veterans which this measure is likely to help are veterans who have had no choice but to leave the ADF due to illness or injury. Veterans tell me that the process of transition can be very jarring, and this is even more acute for those who have been medically discharged. This support will make a difference for those individuals and assist them to retrain and find meaningful employment post service. I have to emphasise that finding and maintaining employment after a veteran leaves the ADF is important for so many reasons. Employment is not just about providing financial security; it is also about providing structure, a sense of purpose and belonging—all things that are very strong for serving members in the ADF but can disappear once a member is forced to leave. However, a number of veterans have told me that they don't immediately find a meaningful career post their time in the ADF. Best estimates cite that the total unemployment rate for veterans is approximately 30 per cent. It means that, of the 5,500 veterans who leave each year, 1,600 are without employment. In addition, another 19 per cent of veterans are underemployed in jobs beneath their capabilities and those who are employed experience an average drop of 30 per cent of their salaries. Veterans do bring a huge range of skills and experience, but these figures show that these skills and experience are not always valued by civil society. Indeed, they are lost in translation. It is for this reason that Labor has committed to a $121 million veterans employment program if we are to be elected, a plan that has real money on the table to assist those coming out of the ADF move into meaningful civilian employment. This is not about charity. It is about ensuring that the wealth of skills and experience that a veteran has is not lost in translation into civilian life. There are four elements of our employment program which will bring about changes that will help veterans move into meaningful employment. Firstly, we will provide eligible businesses with a training grant of up to $5,000 in order to help veterans gain the unique skills and experience they might need to fill a civilian post. While businesses say they're open to employing veterans, there can be a specific short-term skills gap or lack of specific civilian experience which can act as a barrier to employment for an otherwise suitable veteran applicant. For example, a veteran may be one unit shy of a certificate or fail to meet the minimum two years prior experience, meaning they won't get through the job and person tick and flick process and will be immediately discounted before going to interview. These $5,000 grants are designed to overcome this barrier. In addition, Labor will work with the industry advisory committee to develop and provide proper resources to a national campaign that will highlight the many benefits and transferrable skills of those leaving the ADF and encourage businesses to employ a veteran. This will be real resources and real money that will support the industry advisory committee to do this. Secondly, we will establish an employment and transition service, which will provide greater individualised and tailored support to transitioning veterans over a longer period of time. This support will provide one-on-one support and advice to transitioning ADF personnel, including a comprehensive skills audit of skills obtained during their service, that will ensure appropriate civilian recognition is obtained. It will also address other barriers to successful transition and employment, such as secure housing and psychosocial support. Importantly, this service will continue to be available to those leaving the ADF for a period of five years. Speaking with veterans, I know that oftentimes individuals leave the ADF with a clear career plan or goal in mind, but it may not always work out. Therefore, we are proposing that the service provide proactive contact and support for the first 12 months and continues to be available over five years. Thirdly, our plan will reduce the length of service required to access the higher levels of support in the career training assistance scheme. Our plan brings the qualifying period for extra education and training assistance down from the current requirement of 12 years of service to five years, and the top level of assistance down from 18 years to 15 years. In addition, we plan to increase the amount of funding available to individuals to allow greater flexibility in the way transitioning members use the funding, such as obtaining multiple qualifications to achieve their career goal. Lastly, we will work with states and territories and peak industry bodies to identify opportunities for greater automatic recognition for many skills. For example, in Queensland the Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre will recognise rank and length of service and automatically translate this into a university entrance rank, enabling a smoother process to access university for those leaving the ADF. This program enables those who perhaps hadn't considered further study before joining the forces, or entered the forces straight from school, an opportunity to engage in further study. We believe the policy we are offering is very significant and certainly aligns itself with the change in schedule 1, which would provide greater financial security for those who may be undertaking study as part of their rehabilitation plan. But I must say that the policy that we've put on the table won't just be for those undertaking a rehabilitation plan; our employment policy will be open to every transitioning member of the ADF, and we believe this is a critically important piece of the puzzle. In terms of the schedule 1, which is in front of us today, I understand it is the intention that it will be available to those who are currently undertaking study as part of the rehabilitation plan, and it is expected to benefit approximately 150 people a year, providing them and their loved ones important financial security while they complete their study. Schedule 2 of this bill will create a new suicide prevention pilot which will provide greater support to those who have been hospitalised after attempted suicide, have suicidal ideation or those that may have an increased risk of suicide because of mental health factors. I think the Senate inquiry that looked into this issue last year clearly identified that we must do more to assist those suffering poor mental health post their time in the ADF and those who have suicidal ideation. We must work to prevent suicide. We must work to prevent poor mental health. We must work to improve mental wellbeing in our ADF members. We know from the recent Mental health prevalence and pathways to care report, which forms part of the Transition and Wellbeing Research Program, that just over 20 per cent of transitioning ADF members have experienced suicidal ideation, plans or attempts in the last 12 months. In addition, 28.9 per cent of those who had transitioned felt that their life was not worth living and 21.2 per cent had considered taking their own life. We view this in conjunction with the report by the Australia Institute of Health and Welfare which looked at the incidence of suicide in serving and ex-serving Australian Defence Force members. This report did find that ex-serving men, in particular—because that was the biggest sample size—have higher suicide rates than the general population. Of particular concern, the report identified that men who were no longer serving and were aged between 18 and 24 were twice as likely to die by suicide than men of the same age in the general population. In addition, men who were discharged involuntarily from the ADF were 2.4 times more likely to die than those who were discharged voluntarily. Those who were discharged for medical reasons were 3.6 times more likely to die by suicide than those who were discharged voluntarily. These statistics are deeply concerning. We need to do more to prevent these tragedies from occurring. As a consequence, the government is undertaking a number of suicide prevention trials across Australia, and these have Labor's support. Two of these trials are being conducted by DVA and are a direct result of the recent Senate inquiry into suicide by veterans and ex-service personnel and a review of services available to veterans and members of the Australian Defence Force conducted by the Mental Health Commission. Labor is pleased to see the government implementing these recommendations from these important reports. The Senate inquiry, which Labor supported to establish, was particularly important in the process of enabling members of the ex-service community, veterans and their loved ones the opportunity to highlight issues they've experienced since leaving the ADF and how these have impacted on their health. The report made 24 recommendations in August. Since this time, Labor has been actively pursuing these recommendations with the government to ensure that they are implemented as soon as practical. We are pleased to see the latest suicide prevention pilot and encourage the government to maintain momentum to bring about the remaining reforms. The Mental Health Commission also made a number of comments and recommendations in their review of services available to veterans and members of the Australian Defence Force. One of these involved implementing a better range of step-down services and support for veterans and current serving Defence personnel. The suicide prevention pilot aims to address this by providing services which take into account factors that may lead to suicide such as primary health, financial stress, housing and employment. It will provide intensive and assertive management services to support veterans after they've been discharged from hospital, which includes support to access other relevant government and non-government treatment services aiming to reduce the risk and improve outcomes of those involved. Labor is supportive of measures which seek to provide greater assistance to veterans, particularly those who are struggling post their time in the ADF. As such, we offer our full support to this measure. Schedule 3 seeks to assist those who are recently widowed by providing them with additional time to make decisions about how they would like to receive compensation. It can be an extremely difficult and complicated time for individuals while they make a decision about their future after the death of a loved one. Currently, partners are given six months, and these changes will give them up to two years to make a decision on whether to receive compensation weekly or as a lump sum. We understand it was possible to extend the six-month deadline by applying to the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission; however, that can be difficult, especially in a time of grief, and an extracomplicated process didn't seem necessary. This schedule will automatically set the decision period as two years. Should more time be required following this, there will still be the ability to apply to the commission. This issue has been raised by members of the ex-service community, and we are pleased to offer our support to this amendment. Schedule 4 extends the eligibility of the Long Tan Bursary to grandchildren of Vietnam veterans. The Long Tan Bursary was established to help eligible children of Vietnam veterans meet the cost of post-secondary education. Named in honour of the Battle of Long Tan, arguably the best-known battle fought by Australians during the Vietnam War, the bursary provides 37 recipients with $12,000 per year over three years to assist them to cover costs such as enrolment, course fees and textbooks. There is no doubt that these bursaries provide valued assistance to those recipients, and this change will enable a wider group of individuals to access assistance. Previous recipients have expressed how much the bursary has meant to them, including a recent recipient who talked about how the assistance went beyond financial, saying: This bursary meant a lot to me. It wasn't just the financial assistance but knowing someone cared and was sharing the journey. While eligibility will be extended to grandchildren, children of Vietnam veterans continue to be prioritised. All other eligibility criteria still apply. Labor supports this measure, which recognises the sacrifice of our brave men in Vietnam and, importantly, that the effects of war are passed down through the generations. Regular research shows that children, grandchildren and partners of Vietnam veterans have also been affected by their service. This is an important acknowledgement that war affects not only veterans but also their children and grandchildren. Schedule 5 makes a provision to ensure that a submariner who has served in a special submarine operation between 1 January 1978 and 31 December 1992 is deemed to have operational service for time served on a submarine during this period. This will simplify the support available to these individuals who served during the period and have a claim with the Department of Veterans' Affairs. We are supportive of this measure, which will formally recognise the service that these individuals undertook. Schedule 6 is designed to simplify the process for veterans applying for compensation under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act. Under this act a claim for compensation is distinct from a claim for liability. While it is claimed concurrently in many cases, sometimes a member will make a liability claim without seeking compensation. During the liability process a client undertakes a needs assessment. Sometimes during this process veterans will indicate that they are seeking compensation as well. Under these changes the statement will automatically be viewed as an application. I'm supportive of any process which improves the experience of veterans and saves them additional paperwork; however, I would like it noted publicly that I have raised some concerns about the needs assessment and have given feedback to the department directly from advocates and veterans who feel the needs assessment currently undertaken is not adequately understood by veterans and will affect their rehabilitation and potentially their compensation process. Advocates have told me they've experienced circumstances where a veteran is filling out the needs assessment on the Department of Veterans' Affairs website and hasn't understood that this is directly linked to their claim. Many of our veterans, very proud people who have pushed through despite their injuries, haven't understood that, if they say—this is one of the examples I've been given—they're able to mow the lawn, that could affect how their injury rehabilitation is viewed and what support they will get. Of course, that veteran who can mow the lawn doesn't mention on the needs assessment that when they do it they then end up in bed for the next two days because of the pain they actually experience. I have raised the deep concerns that advocates have raised around the veterans' understanding of that lifestyle assessment, which is up front and one of the first things that they do. It needs to be clearly identified that this is part of the rehabilitation process and that what they say could well affect their claim down the track, the ability to have the department seen as liable, and the support and services that they get. This is really important because advocates have told me that, often when they go through a second time on that needs assessment and actually question the veteran, they find out that their needs are much higher than what were immediately identified. The advocates tell me that the trouble is that they can't go back and amend it, and then it becomes incredibly adversarial with them saying, 'They did say that they could mow the lawn, but they end up in significant pain and actually do need assistance in the long term.' I'm pleased that I've had an undertaking by the Department of Veterans' Affairs that they will look into this and seriously consider better identifying the context in which the needs assessment is made, ensuring that the veteran understands that this is part of their claims process and it is important that they properly reflect their limitations so that they can get the best support necessary. I really think this is critically important. In saying this, my concerns around the lifestyle assessment and the needs assessment will not stop Labor supporting this schedule, because we need to make sure that people understand that they can make a compensation claim at any time. The issues with the claims process in the Department of Veterans' Affairs have been canvassed significantly through the Senate inquiry and, indeed, in the forums that I've been holding around Australia. Overwhelmingly, the feedback I've received is that the process for putting in claims can be lengthy and overly complicated. I do acknowledge that the Department of Veterans' Affairs is working to try to minimise that, but there is a long way to go. As such, Labor is supportive of this schedule, which will be a small step in improving the ability of the veteran to claim in an expeditious manner. Finally, in conclusion, I think this bill is a step in the right direction to provide greater assistance for veterans and to smooth the process. For this reason, Labor do offer our support. As I said at the beginning, we as policymakers have an obligation to ensure that the policies and processes of government continue to support an individual, particularly one who has served our country. Therefore, I commend the bill to the House. 11:33 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax The debt Australia owes our military past, present and future is immeasurable. It is a debt we owe for our basic freedoms and our way of life. As capable and increasingly well-equipped as our Defence Force personnel most certainly are—drawn from a country of just 25 million people—the ADF cannot hope to comprehensively protect our freedoms or defend our democracy and interests all by themselves. Our commitment to play a role in foreign conflicts over the 117 year since Federation has generally been on the basis of carrying as large a share of those conflicts as we have been able to bear and often in alliance and concert with larger like-minded democracies. Our contribution, the contribution of our military, in that context, by any comparison, has been quite extraordinary. In World War I, from a population of just under five million, fewer people than now live in Sydney, 416,809— (Quorum formed)Can I say how unfortunate it is that the Labor Party has decided to interrupt a discussion where in fact we have a unity ticket, talking about the importance of those who have served this country. Indeed, the Department of Veterans' Affairs has around 300,000 former soldiers, sailors and Air Force personnel on its books. Over 1,700 of these former servicemen and servicewomen live in my electorate of Fairfax on the Sunshine Coast, and I can't tell you how proud I am to represent them here in this House. The numbers alone of those who have served tell us that there are few families in this country that do not have some form of connection with the enormity of the sacrifice of those who have served and especially those who saw conflict. Every serviceman or servicewoman from the Sudan all the way through has left family and friends at home. They've had parents or a partner, possibly brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins, and, of course, many of these people who have served had wives, or husbands, and children when they left for foreign lands with their mates to put themselves in harm's way and confront the reality of war. Millions of today's Australians, therefore, necessarily have a deep, close, organic connection with someone who committed themselves to military service on our behalf. Even for those who don't have such stark links, there is a strong recognition of service which simply underscores and highlights the obligation we have, as a community as well as a government, to all those who have served and will serve in the future. The bill now before the House, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018, represents the latest refinement in what is, and no doubt will continue to be, an ongoing and essentially bipartisan effort to ensure that our federal government keeps up with its responsibilities and also with community expectations. The first reform contained in this bill enables an injured veteran who is studying full-time as part of an approved return-to-work rehabilitation program to be paid incapacity payments at 100 per cent of their normal weekly earnings over and above the current limit of 45 weeks. Under the existing scheme, these payments come back to 75 per cent of earnings after 45 weeks. This reform reflects a commitment to giving our veterans and their families more help in achieving a brighter future through study and the acquisition of new or improved skills. The second element of this bill is a veteran suicide prevention pilot, a pilot that accounts for evidence that suicides are considerably more common among military service veterans than is the case for the general public, especially for younger veterans—those in the 18-to-24 age cohort—where suicides are virtually double the general rate. There will be stronger emphasis on a coordinated approach to helping veterans at risk of suicide, with an emphasis on effective support in areas of primary health, financial stress, housing and employment issues, which are key factors in elevating that risk. The third change to current provisions extends the amount of time that a partner of a deceased veteran has in which to decide whether to receive the compensation payout to them as a weekly payment or as a lump sum. Currently set at six months, that period will be extended to two years, reflecting the fact that, for many partners, traumatised by their loss, six months to make that decision can be too short a time frame. They need more time, and a full two years provides just that. The fourth element of this bill extends access to support for post-secondary education for Vietnam vets via the Long Tan Bursary, from the children of veterans with operational service in Vietnam to, now, their grandchildren as well. This is also a very welcome move. The fifth reform in this bill is a very informative one, in that it illustrates very clearly that serving in what we may consider relatively peaceful times can be as hazardous as in those times which have confronted past generations during other conflicts. From the 1970s and at least until 1992, Australian submariners conducted, in some secrecy, intelligence-gathering patrols to our north and west on a regular basis, in places and in circumstances that meant that, if they were identified, there was a risk of confrontation. Submariners who served on those patrols are now recognised by this bill as having undertaken operational service. This recognition will expand their access to veteran entitlements and at levels above what has been available to date. The sixth aspect of this bill simplifies claims for compensation, allowing claims by veterans to be made orally as well as in writing. These are welcome and worthy reforms to the treatment of our veterans, whether they are veterans of conflict or veterans of peacetime service. The debt we owe these great and unassuming Australians, both of this generation and of generations past, is beyond measure. In our folklore, in relation to military service, we have tended to isolate iconic moments for special recognition: Gallipoli, the Somme, Kokoda, Tobruk, Long Tan. They all involved unspeakable suffering, with displays of enormous courage and self-sacrifice. Such commitment to duty, service and country holds them worthy of the awe we have attributed to them as definitive campaigns. However, we also must comprehensively recognise what our wider family of service personal means to us and acknowledge their roles, many now largely forgotten by the well-thumbed pages of history, in guarding and defending our nation. All those who offer themselves for service in our military, whether the past, the present or the future, are automatically worthy of our admiration and ongoing life-time support, because, as I have sought to highlight, their decisions to serve are taken in the full knowledge that they could be called upon at any time in our uncertain world to endure the crucible of war and risk their very lives for us, for our values, for our freedoms and for our way of life. They deserve and they have earned all the support and understanding that we can give them. For that reason, I'm happy to commend this bill to the House. 11:47 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra I welcome the opportunity to speak on the measures contained in the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-Centric Reforms No. 2) Bill. These measures are designed to improve outcomes for those who have proudly served our country, and their loved ones, who have supported them in their service, and to whom we all owe a debt as a nation. The bill builds on the great work that's been done by our shadow minister for veterans' affairs, the member for Kingston, and particularly on the work she has done on the veterans' employment policy, which she was, in part, instrumental in developing just recently. This is Labor's veterans' employment policy. It's a policy that has been developed in close consultation with the veterans' community. Again, I commend the shadow minister for the work she's done in developing this policy, because it does meet a great need in the market—a significant need—because if the national unemployment rate was 30 per cent it would be a scandal. Yet that's the situation for our veterans. For veterans who leave for non-medical reasons, the unemployment rate is still double the national rate, at 11.2 per cent. Of those who are successful in finding employment, many will find themselves in a job that's beneath their capability and will be earning 30 per cent less than they did as a member of the ADF. The change proposed in schedule 1 addresses these alarming statistics. Fabulous work has been done by the shadow minister for veterans' affairs. This bill addresses some of the issues that are outstanding in the community, particularly with a range of veterans issues, in terms of mental health and others. Earlier this year, in March, I joined the shadow minister for veterans' affairs, the shadow minister for defence personnel and the shadow assistant minister for defence industry and support to launch Labor's $121 million comprehensive veterans employment policy. It is a very comprehensive document and I encourage all Australians to take the time to have a look at it. Should Labor be elected at the next election, this policy will be very much front of mind for our, hopefully, Minister for Veterans' Affairs as we address the shocking statistic that we have a national unemployment rate of 30 per cent. Our veterans, who have served our country so well, are returning to the community. They're returning, often from overseas and from conflict or challenging environments, and they're faced with this shocking unemployment rate. There is the fact that they're in jobs that are beneath their capability and also the fact that they're earning 30 per cent less than they did as a member of the ADF. It's simply unacceptable. There are a number of schedules in this bill that I want to focus on today. First up is schedule 1. We're pleased to see the change for former members of the ADF proposed in schedule 1. The change proposes incapacity payments for former members of the ADF at 100 per cent of their normal weekly earnings, where they are studying full-time time as part of their approved DVA rehabilitation plan. This is an improvement, because the current arrangements step down to 75 per cent or higher, depending on weekly hours worked for normal earnings. This change will provide financial security to veterans and their families while they're studying. It means that they can focus on their study without worrying about financial matters. Given the fact that these proud men and women have served our nation, it's the least we can do. I also want to speak about schedule 4, the Long Tan Bursary. I am the daughter-in-law of a late Vietnam veteran, and so I'm pleased to see the proposal in schedule 4 to extend the eligibility of the Long Tan Bursary, which is a $12,000 scholarship over three years to help with post-secondary-school education and training for the grandchildren of Vietnam veterans. This means that more young people will be able to access support to help continue with their study. There's been a lot of discussion about the intergenerational stress that has come from the Vietnam War. As I said, I am the daughter-in-law of a late Vietnam veteran. My late mother-in-law always said that she got a different man back from the one that was sent to the war. This has an impact not just in terms of the partner of those who served but also on the children of those served, and that impact can be felt throughout the generations. I think that the fact that this bursary will continue throughout the generations is a welcome acknowledgement of the contribution that families have made, not just for the first generation of children of Vietnam vets or for the partners of Vietnam veterans but also for the grandchildren. The impact of war can be felt from one generation to another and I think that this bursary, being open to those grandchildren, is an acknowledgement of that—that the tragedy of war can continue throughout the decades and throughout the generations. Today is the anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging, which ended the Second Anglo-Boer War. At the time, Australia was six self-governing Crown colonies in the last stages of forming a federation. It was a time when Australians were serving alongside British, Canadians and New Zealanders as part of an imperial force which included the first servicewomen to fight overseas. I know that in terms of memorialising the Boer War, there are those who have been involved and have fought the fight for a very long time to get an acknowledgement of the contribution Australians made to that war. So I wanted to mention the fact that today is that significant anniversary of the Boer War and to acknowledge the contribution that was made by veterans. Yes, we were not a nation as such, but we sent people from our six colonies. We sent thousands—23,000 Australians served in the Boer War—to a fight often forgotten, with 520 losing their lives and 1,400 sustaining serious injury. I think people tend to forget that contribution that we made, which is why I wanted to acknowledge today's date—a significant date for those who are involved in the memorialisation of the Boer War. On Sunday I attended a commemoration ceremony that is held every year by the National Boer War Association and others in the Canberra community down at St John's Reid. It's a beautiful ceremony. I usually speak at the event. The commemoration honours and continues to remember our commitment and our service and the service of those 23,000 Australians. It acknowledges those who made the ultimate sacrifice and also those 1,400 who sustained serious injury. It continues to remember those Australian and it remembers those brave men and women. What I find most touching about the service is it remembers two Canberrans, one of whom is buried at St John's in Reid and another who is memorialised in a plaque. I just want to go back to the Boer War, given the significance of today in terms of the Boer War commemoration. As I said, this has been a war where many who have tried to memorialise it have been derided for doing that because it was before Australia actually became a nation and we were federated. The thing is that even though we weren't a nation, as such, it was noted by British commanders that Australians significantly valued for their horsemanship, their bush skills and their initiative. This formed a special type of Australian mounted infantry, which was to become the Australian Light Horse of the First World War. It was also the first time Australians and New Zealanders fought together, as we have our nations continued to do to this day. At this event on Sunday, which as I said is one that I attend each year, we remembered those 23,000 Australians, those 520 who lost their lives and those 1,400 who sustained serious injury. We remembered the soldiers. Sixty of those who served in the Boer War were Australian women, including Sister Frances Emma 'Fanny' Hines, who was the first Australian woman to have lost her life in overseas service. She was said to have died of pneumonia at Bulawayo in August 1900, but eventually it was determined that her death was as a result of exhaustion. A memorial inside St John's in Reid acknowledges William Bradshaw Galliard Smith, who was born in Canberra and died in the Battle of Bakenlaagte as a member of the 2nd Scottish Horse. He was the son of the Reverend Pierce Galliard Smith. Outside the church is the grave of Private William Frederick Young, who served with the 1st Regiment NSW Mounted Rifles. While serving, he contracted enteric fever and died as a result of the illness in Sydney on 4 October 1900. He, too, was bon in Canberra, the son and grandson of a prominent pioneer family. Last Sunday, we acknowledged the service of William Smith, and we also acknowledged and placed a wreath on the grave of Private Young. I think that a lot of Australians don't consider Canberra to be a very new city. We are in fact more than 100 years old, in terms of the national capital and the naming of that. Canberra was a farming community and a very prosperous farming community, from what I can gather, before the whole nation's capital notion was brought about. It was a community that made its contribution to every war, including the Boer War. Just in closing, I have spoken about the Boer War and spoken about the Vietnam War and honoured those veterans who served in both of those wars; but I do want to talk about a memorial and a remembrance that has captured my heart in many ways and that I encourage Australians to support. Pozieres is a small village in the Somme valley in France, and it was the scene of bitter and costly fighting for the 1st, 2nd and 4th Australian Divisions in mid-1916. The village was captured initially by the 1st Division on 23 July 1916, and the division clung to its gains despite almost continuous artillery fire and repeated German counterattacks, but it suffered heavily—very, very heavily. By the time it was relieved on 27 July, it had suffered 5,285 casualties. The 2nd Division took over from the 1st and mounted two further attacks. The first, on 29 July, was a costly failure. The second, on 2 August, resulted in the seizure of further German positions beyond the village. Again the Australians suffered heavily from bombardments, and they were relieved on 6 August having suffered 6,848 casualties. The 4th Division was next in line at Pozieres, and it too endured a massive artillery bombardment and defeated a German counterattack on 7 August. This was the last attempt by the Germans to retake Pozieres. Given the number of Australians who made the ultimate sacrifice at Pozieres—the largest number of Australian casualties ever in a single day, I understand—I am disappointed that there is no proper memorial, in my view, at Pozieres. There's the windmill there, and when I was last there two years ago there was also a memorial to the animals that had been killed in war. But given the sacrifice of so many lives in such a hideous battle—and it was a hideous battle—I do believe that we need to better memorialise those who served and made the ultimate sacrifice, which is why I've been behind an initiative that's been driven with tireless commitment by Barry Gracey and Yvonne Gracey-Hall, who have been acknowledged for their service to that part of the world by the French with the Legion of Honour. They have got a scheme going to raise funds for a Pozieres Memorial Park under the Pozieres Remembered scheme. So I encourage Australians: if you do want to acknowledge the significant sacrifice that was made at Pozieres by all those thousands of Australians under horrendous conditions, please support Pozieres Remembered. 12:02 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher As we consider the bill before us today, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018, and in particular its first two schedules, we should be reminded of the challenge which these important measures aim to address. My electorate of Fisher is fortunate enough to be home to a great many ex-service men and women. Our healthy lifestyle and environment, our welcoming and friendly community and our vibrant RSL clubs make the coast a perfect place to enjoy civilian life. Estimates of the number of veterans on the Sunshine Coast vary, but in 2016 RSL Queensland assessed the figure at more than 15,000. Sadly, however, even on the Sunshine Coast, life after service for those who have risked their lives in the defence of our nation can be extremely challenging. For anyone, such a dramatic change of circumstances, from the rigours of a highly structured military life to the casual independence of the civilian world, would be difficult to assimilate. I recognise the service you've given this country, Mr Deputy Speaker Hastie, and I'm sure that the debate that you'll hear this afternoon will ring true for you. For all of us, any life transition of that magnitude, from leaving home to changing state, can lead to an increased risk of poor mental health. For many service men and women, however, this transition is made all the more difficult by their experiences in the ADF. For those who have served this country in uniform, who've spent long and worrying periods away from their families or who've seen the painful impacts that conflict can have on innocent civilians, the effects can be devastating. The Turnbull government has been exceptionally alive to the issue of veterans' mental health and has commissioned a series of reports which have demonstrated the true scale of the challenge. The government's Transition and Wellbeing Research Program study Mental health prevalence, released this year, showed how widespread poor mental health is among our veterans. Forty-six point four per cent of transitioned ADF members were estimated to have experienced a mental disorder in the past 12 months alone. Of those, more than a third had experienced an anxiety disorder, with nearly one in five suffering from PTSD. Others suffered from depression and substance dependency. Almost three-quarters were estimated in the report to have suffered from a mental disorder at some point in their life. This accords with previous government research which showed that in 2013, of the 148,000 veterans with service related disabilities being supported by the Department of Veterans' Affairs, 46,400—almost a third—were living with an accepted mental health disorder. The Mental health prevalence report also showed the stark contrast between veterans and the wider population. Reporting of high or very high psychological distress among transition members of the ADF, at 33.1 per cent, is nearly three times higher than in the wider Australian community. Sadly, in just past the 12 months, 28.9 per cent of transitioned ADF—more than a quarter—had felt that their life was not worth living. The government's second report this year, Incidence of suicide in serving and ex-serving Australian Defence Force personnel, has found that, in far too many cases, this feeling has the worst possible consequences. The report found that in the 14 years between 2001 to 2015 there were 325 deaths by suicide among people who'd served in the ADF for at least one day since 2001. It should—and will be—a distressing statistic for all of our constituents: 325 men and women who volunteered to serve and to protect us all have since come to feel that they have no option but to take their own lives. Unfortunately, in reality, there were no doubt more, as data is not available for those who served before 2001. When explored in more detailed, the statistics reveal once again that the transition to civilian life is where we can make the biggest difference. Men currently serving in the ADF or in the Reserves have a significantly lower suicide rate than men in the general population—I say 'men' because this study only dealt with men, because there were no actual statistics of women having committed suicide. Benefitting from the company of their fellow servicemen and servicewomen, and with the excellent work the ADF undertakes to support its soldiers through unimaginably stressful experiences, current personnel are 53 per cent less likely to die by suicide than their peers. However, among male veterans, the suicide rate was 14 per cent higher than for the equivalent general population. As I've said before, the day that a man leaves the armed forces his likelihood of death by suicide rises from 53 per cent lower than others his age to 14 per cent higher. If he is aged 18-24, he becomes twice as likely as his peers to die by his own hand after he discharges. These figures have stayed stable since 2007, but the Mental health prevalence report shows that there are many more veterans potentially at risk. In the past 12 months, 21.2 per cent of transitioned members of the ADF had considered taking their own lives, and eight per cent had even made a specific plan to do so. It is this vital challenge that the first two schedules of this bill will help to address. The positive impact of the measures included in schedule 2 are clear. The Veteran Suicide Prevention Pilot will aim to support 100 ex-servicemen and ex-servicewomen over the next two years. They pilot will work, in particular, with ex-ADF personnel who've been hospitalised following a suicide attempt, have considered suicide, or who are at increased risk of suicide as a result of ongoing mental health disorders. I'm particularly pleased to see that this pilot will take place in nine hospitals in Brisbane. I'm hopeful that, if these pilots are successful, we may see similar projects rolled out throughout South-East Queensland and in my own region of the Sunshine Coast in particular. The impact of schedule 1 will be less direct but, I believe, just as effective. In the ADF servicemen and women have a mission; they have a sense of purpose and a rightful position of respect in our community. For too many when they leave the ADF, overnight these life-affirming— (Quorum formed) It is extremely disturbing that the Labor Party want to play petty party political games on an issue that is so important to this country and so important in relation to veterans. Very disappointing. Anyway, as I was saying, for too many when they leave the ADF, overnight these life-affirming benefits depart with the uniform. One day a young man or woman might be flying, driving or sailing multimillion-dollar or, in fact, multibillion-dollar equipment; however, upon discharge many struggle to get meaningful work. This contrast is one of the biggest factors leading to poor mental health among recently transitioned personnel. The Turnbull government is already doing a great deal to make this transition more successful. I spoke about many of these measures at length during debate on the first veteran-centric reforms bill in February, so I'll not repeat the full list. Most recently, we've sought to change regulations so that the Department of Defence can inform the DVA directly and immediately when a serving member has become a veteran, and ensure that every service man and woman will be guaranteed access to the personal documentation that they need in civilian life before they are discharged. We have also invested $2.7 million in the Prime Minister's Veterans' Employment Program to help businesses understand the unique skills and attitudes ADF members have developed during their service. I look forward to seeing this currently modest initiative expand and develop in the not too distant future. However, if we want to make a dramatic difference to the mental health of our former service men and women, I believe that education, and in particular tertiary education, is the answer. For those who are not leaving the ADF for a job or to start a business, entry into a degree or a vocational education course immediately gives veterans a new mission to accomplish and an organised path to tread. Once they reach that new goal and graduate, they will have significantly improved employment prospects. And, as we all know, the best form of welfare is a job. As I've discussed in very positive meetings with the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, ultimately I believe we should work towards what I call an assisted tertiary education for ADF veterans program, an ATEV. ATEV would support all eligible veterans to undertake a four-year university degree or vocational education course paid for by the Commonwealth. It would be Australia's equivalent of the famous US GI bill, which, for more than 50 years, has been paying for American veterans to go to university and which has seen 453,000 degrees earned since 9/11. Eventually, not only would such a program be a meaningful reward for service and a powerful recruiting tool; it could also dramatically improve mental health outcomes and reduce the need for more government support. I'll continue to advocate for an ATEV in the future. However, in the immediate term, there are actually already veterans who are benefitting from this kind of support, and schedule 1 of this bill will ensure that those veterans can make the most of the opportunity. Currently, if a veteran is unable to work or has a reduced capacity to work as a result of an injury or illness which is related to their service, they are eligible to receive incapacity payments from the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Where relevant, these individuals are placed into a rehabilitation plan to help them to increase their capability to return to paid employment. For some, this rehabilitation plan includes payment from the DVA to complete— (Time expired) Mr WALLACE 265967 Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek leave to continue my remarks. Leave not granted. 12:17 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That, under standing order 1, Mr Wallace be granted an extension of time for seven and a half minutes. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member for Fisher be given an extension of time for 7½ minutes.

The House divided. [12:22]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 71 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML (teller) Laundy, C Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McGowan, C McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 12:29 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher It is extremely unfortunate that those opposite continue to play petty party political games on an issue that is so important to Australia, and that is the care of our veterans. Shame on you! Shame on you! I thank this side of the House for encouraging and supporting me in an extension of time to talk on this important issue. As I was saying, currently, if a veteran is unable to work or has a reduced capacity to work as a result of an injury or illness which is related to their service, they are eligible to receive incapacity payments from the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Where relevant, these individuals are placed into a rehabilitation plan to help them to increase their capability to return to paid employment. For some, this rehabilitation plan includes payment from the DVA to complete a tertiary education course to help with their transition to a new, now more suitable career. However, at present, veterans' incapacity payments step down to 75 per cent of their normal earnings after a period of 45 weeks in receipt of the payment. Tertiary education courses, Mr Deputy Speaker, as you well know, often take substantially longer than 45 weeks to complete. As such, some veterans who are studying full time can face a large decrease in their income while their courses are still ongoing. This can be stressful in itself, especially where veterans have a family to support, but it also risks a higher rate of non-completion of these Commonwealth-supported courses. Schedule 2 changes this incapacity payments regime such that eligible veterans participating in a DVA rehabilitation plan and studying full time as part of their plan will receive incapacity payments at 100 per cent of their normal earnings without the step-down at 45 weeks. This will directly benefit around 150 veterans per year, but the flow-on effects in completed courses, improved employment prospects and mental health outcomes will be significant. I look forward to finding out what lies ahead for the veterans who complete courses under this bill when enacted. I'm also excited to see what possibilities their successors will suggest for broadened access to Commonwealth-supported tertiary education for veterans. As a nation, we owe it to our veterans to see them not as broken men and women but as remarkable, highly skilled individuals who have served our nation with distinction and who can offer private industry and public life a great deal. That is what I saw when I visited the ADF in Afghanistan last year with the ADF Parliamentary Program, and it is what I have seen with the young veteran Justin Sehmish, who has been working in my own office. It is what will inspire me to continue to work with the minister to find ways to improve veterans' prospects in civilian life throughout my time as a parliamentarian. This bill before us is an important step in the right direction, and I commend it to the House. 12:33 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay Mateship, a fair go, courage and sacrifice are the hallmark traits of the members of the Australian Defence Force, who day after day dedicate their lives to service and to the care and defence of our country. I saw this firsthand in my deployment last year to the Middle East. The men and women who have stood on the front line to defend our nation have seen sacrifice and, in some cases, made the ultimate sacrifice. Like most people in this place, I'm grateful and thankful for the work they do. However, we need to do more to ensure that, as they return to their families, their communities and their homes, we deliver the best possible service and care. We owe it to our veterans to provide the best possible support. Returning and settling back in at home, for some veterans, can be more confronting than the war itself. We know that when they return home unemployment is a serious issue, with our best estimates citing that about 30 per cent of those who leave the ADF find it difficult to get employment. This means that, of the approximately 5,500 veterans who leave each year, roughly 1,600 individuals fail to find and move into employment. Of those who do, about 19 per cent are underemployed or employed in jobs that are beneath their capabilities. On average, those who are employed experience an average drop of about 30 per cent in their income. This bill contains several measures which seek to improve the outcomes for those who have served our country and for their loved ones. We're supportive of this bill. We always look for ways that we can improve outcomes for veterans and smooth transition processes for when they do return home. Education and reskilling can be a vital aspect of the transition period for those who are leaving the ADF. The proposed changes ensure that those who are on incapacity payments and who are undertaking full-time study will have their payments maintained and have the ability to focus on their future without worrying about whether or not at the end of the day they will have money left over to survive on. Currently, the majority of these payments reduce to 75 per cent of their normal earnings after a period of 45 weeks. This change will provide financial security, which we all know is important, to veterans and their families while they undertake study. Education and reskilling are vital tools for anybody. However, when you're reorientating after a war or service, or an injury or illness, it can be even more important. Labor is supportive of this measure, which is anticipated to benefit approximately 150 per year and cost $10.8 million over the forward estimates. For some, their service may have had a greater impact on them and their circumstances. We have a duty of care to ensure that they and their families receive the necessary supports they need to live full and productive lives. The National Mental Health Commission presented its findings from the review into suicide and self-harm prevention services to the inquiry undertaken by the Senate. Some respondents to the review said it was positive regarding their experience. However, the commission stated: However, qualitatively, we also heard a broad range of poor experiences of services and general feelings of cynicism, distrust, frustration, abandonment and loss. For many, these are the realities of what being in the military brings and the sacrifice that is asked of them and their families in service of their country. When we send men and the women into war, we don't want them coming back feeling a sense of cynicism, distrust, frustration, abandonment and loss. We owe it to all of them to do all we can to ensure that these are not their experiences. The commission also stated: Concerted and continued attention is needed to ensure efforts are effective in preventing suicide and self-harm amongst Australia’s current and former serving personnel and their families. Data shows that suicide rates are lower among current serving ADF members than in the general population but higher for former serving ADF members, particularly those below 30 years of age. On this side of the House, we believe—and I think, generally, on the other side as well—that one suicide is one too many. Currently, just under 60,000 Australians are serving in our Defence Force as at July 2015. The estimated number of living veterans is 316,000—not a huge number in comparison with the size of our country—and, currently, the Department of Veterans' Affairs supports approximately 221,000. In my electorate of Lindsay there are just under a thousand veterans receiving assistance through the department, administered by the RSL in Penrith and also in St Marys. They do a wonderful job supporting our veterans. Five hundred and two veterans are receiving a disability pension out of those 916 in my electorate, and there are 306 war widow pensioners in my community. My community has spoken about this, and those who have served and their families. They want that support in the difficult transition period when they return. This was also my experience when I was in the Middle East last year. Our current serving members were asking me to ask the government to ensure that when they arrived back home they were supported and given the help they needed. We're committed to supporting our current and ex-service personnel and their families. We're committed to this because we don't want to see members of the ADF who have sacrificed so much already falling through the cracks. We should be doing everything we can to support our veterans and those who are vulnerable in our communities, not giving an $80 billion tax break to big businesses. Our veterans have been through enough already and this is just a slap in the face. They have done everything that we have asked of them, and more in most cases. I have seen firsthand the difficult and stressful work of defence personnel, and that is why it is the responsibility of all of us here to develop and support infrastructure and networks that will help veterans in the difficult transition period when they arrive home. I had the opportunity to spend a long time with the troops, visiting four bases during my trip to Afghanistan last year as part of the ADFPP. It was a time that, when I look back on it, caused me great anxiety, a little bit of stress, sleeplessness and some involuntary reactions while I was away. I can only imagine what that's like to endure through six and nine-month deployments at a time. When I was there, the men and women who were serving wanted to know that their contribution was valued and also what the support services looked like post deployment. Most of them are grateful to be there and serving their country. They are honoured. They feel it is a privilege. Across all four bases that I visited, there is a heightened sense of anxiety around the uncertainty of what it will mean for each of them when they return home. It's not a concern that any of us should take lightly. The difficulties veterans face when they return home and the scars they carry from the trauma they have experienced are not to be underestimated. We know that this trauma can lead to suicide. Veterans often suffer from mental ill-health once they return home. Between 2001 and 2015, 325 veterans took their own lives. The Senate report entitled The constant battle: suicide by veterans made 24 recommendations. The report tells the story of veteran Jesse, who had been diagnosed with PTSD and other mental health conditions. Jesse had been endeavouring to seek assistance from the Department of Veterans' Affairs for 18 months and did not receive any support from the DVA or Centrelink. This financial and emotional strain, coupled with the false hope that his voice would be heard, was described by Jesse's former partner, Connie, as absolutely crippling. Tragically, Jesse took his own life. There are so many veterans like Jesse, who return home to their families with a range of different mental illnesses and/or injuries. They return home with the hope of being supported by their government but, ultimately, they are not. Labor have offered our support to the government to ensure that the recommendations made by the Senate committee report do not gather dust on a shelf, as we so often see with these reports. We believe in greater support for all veterans and their families, especially those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice. It dismays me to know that men and women who have served our nation and who have suffered such deep mental and emotional trauma are without support from government and go on to take their own lives. We need to act know. Veterans need real and meaningful change. Schedule 2 of this bill will create a new suicide prevention pilot, which we welcome. It will provide greater support to those who have been hospitalised after an attempted suicide, those who experience suicide ideation or those who may be at increased risk of suicide because of their mental health or other factors. This is one of three current suicide prevention trials aimed at providing targeted support for our veterans. The first trial will be based in Townsville and delivered by the North Queensland Primary Healthcare Network.. The second trial is a Coordinated Veterans' Care model, which is aimed at mental health support for veterans in rural and regional areas. The two suicide prevention trials are being coordinated by the Department of Veterans' Affairs and are a result of both the National Mental Health Commission's review of services available to veterans and members of the ADF and recommendations made during the Senate inquiry into suicide by veterans and ex-service personnel, which was completed last year. I thank all the members in the Senate who were part of that committee. Labor supported the establishment of the Senate inquiry, and we are pleased to see these recommendations being progressively implemented. We implore the government to maintain the same momentum. The third trial will use this coordinated approach and place the GP at the hub of working with veterans and facilities. The pilot will provide coordinated support to ensure veterans are accessing treatment and social support to reduce the risk of suicide and enhance the quality of life for the participants. Labor offers its full support to the establishment of the trial and looks forward to seeing the results of this trial and the others that are currently underway. Schedule 3 of this bill will amend the amount of time from six months to two years for wholly-dependent partners to make a decision about whether to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or convert it wholly or partly into a lump sum payment. This is a logical and compassionate change, and we offer our full support for it. Schedule 4 amends the Veterans' Entitlements Act in order to extend the eligibility of the Long Tan Bursary to grandchildren of Vietnam veterans. We are supportive of this measure, which ensures that more young people are able to access this support. Schedule 5 amends the VEA to create a deeming provision to ensure that a submariner who served on a special submarine operation between 1 January 1978 and 31 December 1992 is deemed to have operational service for any period they served on a submarine during this period. Labor is supportive of this measure which recognises the service that these individuals undertook. The final schedule simplifies the process for veterans applying for compensation under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, or MRCA, during a needs assessment. Currently, this requires the individual to put in a separate application. Under these changes, a verbal indication by a veteran that they are seeking compensation under the act will be considered an application. Labor is supportive of measures which make the claim process easier for veterans, as long as they don't disadvantage veterans. In my electorate, I have a special service group dedicated to simply helping people and veterans access DVA. These are volunteers who have been through and seen war-like service themselves, volunteering to ensure that their mates get the help that they require. Better support for veterans and their families is just one small step to help ease the trauma that they experienced. The local organisations in my electorate that work hard to represent veterans and serving personnel advocate tirelessly for the support of veterans. I'd like to make mention of the National Servicemen's Association, in particular the Penrith City Nasho's, of whom I am a patron: Patron Jim Aitken, Patron Ross Sinclair, President John Taylor, and Honorary Treasurer Reverend Harry May, who is also a volunteer at many other of my community organisations. I'd like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank the Nasho's for all for the work that they do in our community. In thanking that group, I'd also like to add my thanks to the City of Penrith RSL sub-Branch: President Mick McConnell; Vice-President Brian Cartwright, who is a newly elected Penrith City councillor; Honorary Treasurer Gary Scott; and Honorary Secretary Mick Visinko. I also thank the St Mary's RSL sub-Branch: President Ron Blakely and Secretary Tony Fryer. These local organisations and services in Lindsay provide critical support and assistance to our Defence personnel, veterans and their families—both current and former. They spend a lot of time in our electorate making sure that veterans and all current and past serving members are remembered through services like Anzac Day and Remembrance Day. I stand with all veterans and servicemen and servicewomen in this country, and I am proud to stand with all of the support organisations in my community in their advocacy for our veterans, and will continue to do so every day that I hold office. 12:46 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest I acknowledge the service of all of our veterans and Defence Force members and those who are serving today. I make it a priority to go along to the Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program as often as I can. I acknowledge the crew of HMAS Warramunga, who are currently serving in the gulf. The crew have seized over $1 billion worth of illegal drugs since deploying to the western Indian Ocean, and I acknowledge this work. I was there only last year with the ship's crew prior to their deployment. Over 1.5 million Australians have served Australia in wartime, and 102,000 men and women paid the ultimate price. One of those was my mother's husband, Jack Leonard. Mum was a war widow from World War II, and I know firsthand just what that meant to my mother and my two sisters. It was George Washington who said: The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation. We know that Australia has one of the most comprehensive systems of veterans care in the world, and it's a system that has adapted. In 1916, when the RSL came into being, the world was still in the grip of World War I. Australia had seen 416,809 Australians take part. We lost over 60,000. Again, following World War II, there was an influx of a different generation of veterans and there were new ways needed to assist them on their return. Today, our modern veterans from very modern conflicts have different requirements and different needs for assistance compared to the veterans from either of the two world wars. This is very important to the government, and this bill goes a long way to placing the veterans and their needs at the centre of the support. This is critical to the Turnbull government. I commend the minister for all of the work in this space. We're introducing new initiatives to deliver a range of services to veterans and their families to put them first in the services and supports they're receiving. This continues from the 2016 budget and the eight measures we introduced under the veterans' affairs legislation and Veteran Centric Reform. We know that the best type of support for our ex-servicemen and women is the economic independence that comes with having a job, which is why we continue to promote employment for veterans by ensuring that the business community actually understands, recognises and values the benefits of employing a veteran. The member for Canning would understand this very well—the qualities that he can bring to so many different roles, including this one in the parliament, and I thank him for his service. Veterans bring skills of leadership, of discipline, of team work and of patriotism and that would benefit any business in Australia and overseas. We want to encourage and support our veterans to get back into the workforce and assist them financially while they're studying, so that they can concentrate on reskilling and re-educating themselves into a different role. For veterans participating in a rehabilitation plan and in approved full-time study, their incapacity payment won't be reduced after the 45 weeks. More than 5,000 men and women leave the services each year and this measure will make a real difference to how they actually manage the transition back into civilian life and work, particularly through, perhaps, a full-time study approach. One of the tragic aspects of dealing with veterans issues is, of course, the high level of suicide rates. I have heard, especially when I do the Defence Force programs, many accounts from our recent veterans—those within my own electorate and elsewhere—about recent veterans or mates who have taken their own lives. In this bill, we will provide a new veteran suicide prevention pilot, and it is a pilot. Reducing suicide, particularly amongst veterans, is a key priority for the government. This pilot will provide mental health support for veterans who have been hospitalised after attempted suicide or who may be at increased risk because of their mental health or other factors. The government is determined to provide intensive services to ensure that veterans are accessing the treatment they so badly need. The pilot will provide intensive support for up to 100 veterans who have complex mental health challenges, and many of them are complex. The evaluation will be important and will provide a key platform for future policy directions. That could well lead to greater improved support and mental health services, which is what we want to see. It will literally save the lives of veterans suffering from mental health issues. The bill will also make it easier for the partners of veterans who have lost their lives, those who have made that ultimate sacrifice. Changes to the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 will actually give partners more time to choose whether to receive the compensation payable for their partner's death as a weekly payment, or a lump sum or a combination of both—whatever works best for them. The proposed amendments will give partners, during what is the worst time for them, two years rather than the current six months to decide how they would like to receive their compensation. Speaking of my mum, all those years ago, back in 1943, what did she receive? I talk about the evolution of our support. Well, she received, per fortnight, 122 shillings in a war widow's pension, 35 shillings for my sister Pam and 25 shillings for my sister Judy. Legacy, that wonderful Australian voluntary organisation established in 1923 by ex-servicemen, which cares for the dependents of deceased Australian servicemen, sent my sisters Pam and Judy birthday and Christmas cards and gifts each year until they were 16. You can imagine in those years just how much this meant. When we talk about sacrifice, my mother's husband left on my sister Pam's third birthday. My sister Judy was only a tiny little tot and she actually couldn't even remember her dad at all. So, when we talk about the practical support and services that we offer to veterans' families, I can only say that nothing is too much. I know what my own family has been through. Another of the measures in this bill would extend the Long Tan Bursary to the grandchildren of Australian veterans who have seen operational service in Vietnam. It's part of the Veterans' Children Education Scheme. Many years ago, DVA decided to support both veterans of the Vietnam conflict and also their families. Currently, the Long Tan Bursary scheme is limited to eligible children of an Australian Vietnam vet. We're proposing to extend that eligibility so that eligible grandchildren of an Australian Vietnam vet who has seen operational service may apply. Children will remain eligible and bursaries will be given first priority during that assessment process. The intent of it is to honour the original intent of the scheme. The Long Tan Bursary enables successful applicants to undertake post-secondary education. We, as members of parliament, go into schools and we see these Long Tan bursaries often awarded. During the Cold War, Australian submariners would undertake long patrols. One of the other changes we're making in this bill is about this service. This service often meant months at sea and no ability to discuss their operations. The level of secrecy in these patrols was absolutely intense. This bill will deem submariner service on a submarine between 1 January 1978 and December 1992 as operational service where they served on a special operation during that period. The deeming provision will enable all submarine service during this period by persons who have served on a submarine on special operations to be treated as operational service. That will ensure the classified nature of information about special operations does not hinder or stop access by these personnel to the benefits and entitlements available to those within operational service. I know that one of my predecessors in the role of chief whip, Alex Somlyay, pursued recognition of this type of service as operational service in his time in this House and pursued access to benefits for submarine veterans. I acknowledge Alex and his historic service to this House. This measure will provide the benefits that Alex Somlyay so strongly fought for. One of the common complaints from veterans is often the complexity of dealing with the processes of DVA. It is something we, as members of parliament, hear about. It can take time and be frustrating. But we've listened and acted. Measures in this bill will enable veterans with coverage under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 to lodge a claim for compensation orally. Those who wish to do so will continue to be able to make a written claim. But these measures mean that a client will be asked, during a needs assessment telephone call, whether they want to make a claim for compensation, and their oral statement will be treated as a valid claim under the act. This is really demonstrating that the government has listened to the concerns and the frustrations of veterans and their families and is absolutely committed to putting them first. These measures follow on to so many of our previous measures. I really want to go back to what families actually have to go through. I've spoken in this place previously and I've looked at what my mother and sisters went through all those years ago, and I can only say that the measures in this bill can't change what's happened but can help to make the situation easier to manage. I know, from reading my mum's diary, that when she got notification of her husband's death it was a very hot day in Brunswick, a little community. She was out on the family dairy farm. She said the girl from the post office rode her bike out in that hot sun, because the way you were told was by telegram. She received that telegram. She said that message was really quite anticipated, but she didn't want it. It still came. It was very difficult for her and for those two little girls, my sisters, but she got on the train. She didn't want Jack's mum to hear in the same way she had, by way of a telegram, so she went to tell her personally. I want to acknowledge the widows and widowers in what they've had to go through and the way they've had to deal with so many practical issues when they've lost a loved one in a conflict zone. It took my mother until she was 75, when she went to a 2nd/28th reunion and actually met the men who'd served with Jack and knew how he'd spent his last days and how he'd died and where he was buried. And I can only say in this place: that was the first time that she'd received any closure. So many of our Defence Force men and women end their lives away from here, on a different shore. And what they do, in providing service not just to our nation but to those in so many other countries, is extraordinary. I met the Menin Gate buglers. I said to one, 'It's an extraordinary contribution you make, voluntarily playing our last post 30,000 times,' and he said: 'You listen to me. In this country, what we know is everything we are and everything we have is because of your Australians' blood on our soil.' He said, 'The least we can do is play your last post.' That says it all. I acknowledge the extraordinary bravery and courage of all of our Defence Force men and women. 13:00 Mr HART 263070 Bass I thank the member for Forrest for her deeply personal reflections upon this legislation. It's very important that we note the personal sacrifice and how it affects families when we consider legislation like this. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this legislation. This bill, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018, will be fully supported by Labor. We have a continuing responsibility to those who have served and to their families, as we've heard. That responsibility arises from the fact that our Australian Defence Force personnel are required, as part of serving our country, to take risks, make sacrifices and commit their lives—indeed, their very wellbeing—to the Defence Force. Those service men and women put their lives on hold to undertake service for this country. The measures contained in this legislation are further acknowledgement of our obligations to our ex-service personnel. These measures—in particular, the measures which are aimed at providing increased support for those for whom service has had a greater impact upon them—seek to further ensure that we recognise our continuing obligation. And I emphasise the words 'continuing obligation'. The bill comprises six schedules. It puts into legislative effect announcements made in both the 2017-18 and 2018-19 budgets. Schedule 1 addresses former ADF members who are currently receiving incapacity payments at 100 per cent of their normal weekly earnings. The payments that they receive are compensation paid for a loss of normal earnings suffered as a result of a service-related physical and/or mental health condition. Currently, incapacity payments step down to 75 per cent or higher, depending upon weekly hours worked, of normal earnings after a period of 45 weeks. This is a standard workers compensation provision. This amendment will benefit those who are participating in a DVA-funded rehabilitation plan who are undertaking either vocational or tertiary study, thereby providing much-needed financial security to the veteran and their family while they are studying. It will ensure that they may focus on their study and not be concerned about financial matters. This is a good measure. It encourages rehabilitation and re-engagement with study. The intention is that a person who has commenced a rehabilitation plan or their full-time studies as part of an approved rehabilitation plan before the amendments commenced will be entitled to have their incapacity payments paid at 100 per cent from the commencement of these amendments until 1 July 2022. There'll also be an instrument-making power which will enable the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to determine the circumstances in which a person is undertaking full-time study. This is designed to ensure that breaks such as semester breaks don't result in a step-down of payments, and that other analogous issues are addressed. For example, this will include when a person is undertaking the equivalent of full-time study, which will be 75 per cent of a full-time study load, or, as I've said previously, when they are on a semester break. The measure will assist, as we've heard previously, approximately 150 people per year and will cost $10.8 million over the forward estimates. Further education and training, of course, are both important, particularly where the individual has had no choice but to leave the Australian Defence Force and thereby needs to focus on civilian life, which is, of course, in itself a very significant life change. Labor believes that providing this support will ensure greater outcomes for veterans and their families and will assist in moving veterans into meaningful employment post service. I've spoken in this place previously about programs, including locally developed programs within my electorate of Bass which focus upon the reintegration of veterans in our communities. Veterans' unemployment is and remains a serious issue, an issue which must be addressed through investment in people. Best estimates cite that 30.2 per cent of those who leave the ADF fail to find employment. This means that, of the approximately 5,500 veterans who leave each year, roughly 1,600 individuals failed to move into employment. Of those who do find employment, 19 per cent are underemployed or in jobs which are beneath their capabilities. On average, those who are employed experience an average 30 per cent drop in income from their ADF wages. This means that education is an imperative, not just an aspiration. It is for this reason that Labor is committed to a $121 million Veterans' Employment Program which seeks to ensure that veterans are best prepared to move into meaningful employment and employers are able to gain the many advantages of hiring these highly skilled and highly dedicated individuals. Education and reskilling is important for all who leave the ADF but, for those who've left due to injury and/or illness, reintegration and reorientation of their lives is even more important. This amendment will ensure that those who are on an incapacity payment can focus on their future without worrying about finances. Schedule 2 creates a suicide prevention pilot. I've spoken previously in this place on a number of occasions about the high rate of suicide among our ex-ADF personnel. More must be done to address the feelings of dislocation, disorientation and loss which result from losing connection with the ADF. It is shameful that so many of our ex-ADF servicemen and servicewomen are in a position where suicide is, to them, the only viable option. We quite appropriately recognise the service of those who have been killed overseas. We mourn their loss and commemorate them and their sacrifice. But there are many more who have been lost to suicide, and we are only now just seeking to pick up our response to this issue. The suicide prevention pilot will private greater support for those who've been hospitalised after attempted suicide or suicidal ideation or those who've been assessed at increased risk of suicide because of their mental health or other factors. The first of these trials as part of the Department of Health initiative is based in Townsville working with the Northern Queensland Primary Health Network. The legislative basis for the second trial passed the parliament earlier this year and created a coordinated veterans' care model which is aimed at mental health support for veterans in rural and regional areas. The third trial again uses the coordinated approach and places the GP at the hub, working with veterans and facilities. In my electorate of Bass, the ADF welfare team run by the Launceston RSL is an example of what can be done at a practical level in providing non-clinical support for veterans at risk. Nevertheless, clinical responses are essential to ensure that people remain safe and well. The pilot will provide a coordinated support to ensure veterans are accessing treatment and social support to reduce the risk of suicide and enhance the quality of life for participants. The trial will provide intensive and assertive management services to support a veteran after they have been discharged from hospital, including support to access other relevant government and non-governmental treatment and services, aiming to reduce the risk and improve outcomes for those involved. The National Mental Health Commission recommended step-down services which take into account factors that may lead to suicide, such as primary health, financial stress, housing and employment. Labor supports the trial. Labor is pleased to see the recommendations of the Senate inquiry being progressively implemented. I urge government to maintain the momentum to address this real and present issue. Schedule 3 provides for compensation for a member's death. The amendments proposed would extend the time in which wholly dependent partners have to make a decision about whether to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or for their compensation to be wholly or partly converted into a lump sum payment from six months to two years. Currently, partners have six months to decide whether they would like to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or convert the whole or part of the payment into a lump sum. Where the commissioner is satisfied that there are special circumstances to justify an extension of time in which to make a choice, a longer period than six months may be granted. However, it does require them to write to the commission to request that. These changes will ensure that partners in a very difficult period—some would say the most difficult period—have sufficient time to make a decision about whether to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or to convert it. Again, this is a case of this parliament recognising that more needs to be done to focus upon veterans and, of course, their families, rather than insisting upon bureaucratic processes. There is more that can and should be done to improve the processes that our veterans and their families deal with in either compensation or pension claims. This is a case of the issue being raised at the department's legislation workshop, but it has also arisen in other consultations with the ex-service community. Schedule 4, as we have heard previously, amends the Veterans' Entitlements Act in order to extend the eligibility of the Long Tan Bursary scheme to grandchildren of Vietnam veterans. This bursary offers 37 scholarships of up to $12,000 over three years to children of Vietnam veterans to assist with post-secondary school education and training. Whilst criteria for these applications will not change, this amendment will enable more individuals to apply for support to help students continuing their study. Priority will still be given to supporting those children of Vietnam veterans. Labor supports the measure, which ensures that more young people are able to access appropriate supports. Schedule 5 creates a deeming provision with respect to the service of certain submariners. This ensures that a submariner who has served on a submarine on a special submarine operation between 1 January 1978 to 31 December 1992 is deemed to have operational service. This simplifies the support available to those individuals who have served during this period who may have a claim with the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Labor supports the measure which recognises the service that these individuals have undertaken. The final schedule simplifies the procedure for veterans to apply for compensation under the MRCA during a needs assessment. This will enable a claim for compensation to be made during a needs assessment, notwithstanding that it is undertaken verbally over the telephone. Veterans will still be entitled to make a claim in writing should they wish to do so. Labor is very supportive of measures which make the claim process easier for veterans, as long as no-one is being disadvantaged. There have been some concerns expressed about information provided by an applicant during a needs assessment subsequently being used to determine compensation claims. There is concern within the veteran community that information provided during what is now going to be an informal process might be used to decline the severity of claims further down the track. Labor has raised this issue based upon feedback from the veteran community and have requested that the government will ensure it was clear to those applying what their answers would be utilised for. Subsequently, the government has advised that needs assessments are not to be used by the Department of Veterans' Affairs to determine compensation but instead are to be used to identify forms of support and assistance the veteran might be eligible for. That is for all who would benefit from this provision. Pleasingly, the government, to its credit, has taken this feedback onboard and will be providing further clarification to veterans applying online. This assessment will not be used to calculate compensation rates. These assurances provided by the government enabled Labor to support this measure which assists in making the complicated claims process easier for veterans and their families. In closing, I will just reaffirm that there is very much a consensus in this place, across the parliament, as to how we should be looking after our veteran community. It is, as I have said previously, to the credit of the government that it's able to listen to concerns that are raised by Labor and its shadow minister where those concerns appear to interact with the effectiveness of the proposed amendments. As I said earlier, the issue of veterans' suicide is a real and present concern, so it's very pleasing to see the third suicide prevention trial rolling out. It is vitally important that we not just stand still but that we continue moving to implement the recommendations of the Senate committee that's investigated veteran suicide in particular. We owe an ongoing obligation to the people who have served on behalf of the Australian Defence Force. That obligation is not discharged by people standing in this place and simply offering reassurances. We will be tested by what we actually do and by what we actually provide on the ground. With that, I'll close my contribution. 13:15 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray It is great that we're now able to stand in this parliament as one and look for future ways that we can improve the lot of our veterans, and make sure that we have a greater affinity with the issues and problems that are faced by our returned servicemen. This bill, the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018, has six schedules, which I will get to shortly. What each of these schedules do is to highlight their plight and that we need to be doing as much we possibly can to look after our returned servicemen. The seat of Murray has some 903 veterans who live and prosper there, to varying degrees of success. As I've said before, many of our returned servicemen have returned in fantastic condition and are not affected at all by their service. But at the other end we have people who have struggled to resume civilian life and there's everybody in-between as well—those who have some good days and some bad days. We need to be able to cater for the whole spectrum of our returned servicemen. I've had a great opportunity to work with Bob Wilkie from the RSL in Shepparton, and I commend him for the work that he does, and also Peter and Margaret Martin for the work that they do in helping the veterans around the Echuca-Moama region. And I want to thank the former Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Dan Tehan, for the just under $7,000 that he provided for the Echuca-Moama Veterans Support Centre with the Building Excellence in Support and Training grant they received around July last year. It certainly made a big difference. I would also like to acknowledge Ken Jones from the Vietnam Veterans' Association's Echuca branch and the work that they're doing in trying to eliminate the many suicides that we have been witnessing with our returned servicemen. As the former Minister for Veterans' Affairs in Victoria, I got the opportunity to have firsthand experience with the RSL and the cohort that we're talking about today, our returned servicemen. In that instance, we put together a range of programs. One that comes to mind was a five-unit facility in Richmond, where we invested a couple of million dollars, along with the RSL. We listened to the RSL about where the need was. We asked where the demand was that wasn't being met by government, or where the demand was that the RSL were unable to meet. At that stage, they were saying it was in medium- to short-term accommodation. This could be for individuals who were struggling to get on with their family or who were struggling to get on with their living experience, maybe taking them out of that experience for a little while and putting them into a unit in Richmond where they had a whole raft of services available to them. But it was also to have some accommodation services there for small families, so that a veteran needing the support of his wife and children could have that while also getting the additional services that he needed to cope with some of the issues he was going through. We were able to build that facility, which today is making and will continue to make a significant difference for those servicemen suffering from the pressures of fitting in with civilian life. We also need to be cognisant that it is not just about the returned servicemen supposedly affected by PTSD or suffering all forms of trauma. We can be in the company of returned servicemen that have come back totally normal, unaffected by the conflicts they've been involved in overseas, but we have to understand that they have spent the last maybe 10 to 15 years in a very structured and strict, command and control environment, dislocated from their family in many instances. When that comes to an end, and all of a sudden these people are put into less formal workplaces where the language around who's doing what and who's responsible for certain jobs is very casual, it becomes tough, because they have been used to a totally different dynamic within their work environment. We need to offer these people support, and that's why schedule 1 is critical, because of its ability to assist with the training. Training is such an important part of it, and I'm so glad that it has been put into this bill. We need to offer these skills to these people in the most affordable and diligent way we possibly can. In this role as a member of federal parliament I've also had the opportunity to meet a chap by the name of Barry Gracey, who is doing a whole raft of work commemorating the sacrifice at Pozieres. Whilst it is not affected by this bill, I acknowledge this recognition of the sacrifice our returned servicemen made and have been making ever since the First World War. Pozieres sometimes tends to be forgotten, because it wasn't a glamorous, fantastic win for this nation. We lost over 7,000 men at Pozieres, and over half of them are still lying in the battlefields where they fell, because by the time we had the opportunity to retrieve their bodies, effectively there was nothing left. I would like to acknowledge that on the other side of the world right now Barry Gracey is trying to build a rose garden to commemorate the great sacrifice of the our First World War veterans in the Somme region. We can now look back at those stories that we grew up with about people like Uncle Sam—who sat on the veranda when he came back, because he was suffering from shell shock; we weren't quite sure what the problem with him was, but he turned to the bottle—and know they were suffering from PTSD. They were suffering all kinds of things but at the time were more or less shunned and pushed aside. We looked after them, but we didn't really know what was going on. Now we have such a better understanding, we need to put in place the services to match our much clearer understanding of what these people are going through. This leads me to Kristy Jefferis and her husband, Shane, friends of ours from our time living in Bendigo. Kristy is very direct and would often—sometimes on the phone; sometimes coming to see me directly—say: 'My husband and I are sick of catching up with our friends at funerals. There are just too many. We have another funeral to go to next week. We went to one two weeks ago.' Shane had seven years in the 5RAR in Darwin. As a government we have to do more. I acknowledge Kristy, Shane and their group, because they're living this every day. The difficulty faced by many of our veterans is something this bill is trying to work its way through. Schedule 1 deals with the capacity of a veteran whose payments step down to 75 per cent after 45 weeks in receipt of incapacity payment. That's going to change now. While they are studying full time, they will receive 100 per cent of their normal earnings. These payments will not be reduced after 45 weeks, provided that they are studying full time. This is something that we think is going to create further incentive for our returned soldiers to continue to study, to continue to retrain and to ensure that they are better equipped to move into full-time, meaningful employment that's going to give them the excitement that they need to face the challenges into the future. Schedule 2 deals very clearly with the Mental Health Clinical Management veteran suicide prevention pilot, which is going to be held in the Brisbane region. Nine hospitals, both public and private, are going to run this pilot. It's expected to support over 100 ex-serving ADF members over two years. This is going to give us, hopefully, the data that we need so that we can make sure that we can reduce suicide among the veterans. Certainly the budget allocation in the 2017-18 budget is going to provide funding for this pilot program to support these vulnerable veterans, and this is something that we think is absolutely critical. Whilst this is going to happen in the metropolitan area of Brisbane, we are hoping that the data that we receive from this pilot will enable this program and like programs to be rolled out right across Australia. Schedule 3 is for compensation for members' death for wholly dependent partners. At the moment, wholly dependent partners have to make a decision as to what they're going to do with their supposed pension within a six-month period. As we can well imagine, for people going through the trauma of losing a partner who himself or herself may have had a whole raft of issues in relation to their service, we need to give these fully dependent partners the opportunity to get on with their lives in the best and most supportive way possible and give them the time that they need to work out what's best for them financially, whether that is to continue to receive the full pension, to take a part pension and a part lump sum, or to take the full lump sum and do away with the pension. This is something that can only be achieved over a period of time. At present, we're expecting dependents to make this decision within six months. What we're doing with schedule 3 is rolling that out to a two-year time frame. Hopefully that will assist with that work as well. Schedule 4 has to do with the Long Tan Bursary, which is 37 positions that were made available for the children of Vietnam veterans. Obviously we're in a situation now where most of our Vietnam veterans are in their 70s or older. Their children are well and truly past university stage. This bill will not increase the amount of bursaries but will simply enable eligibility for those bursaries to proceed down the chain to grandchildren. Again, it's a commonsense approach to what we best do with the Long Tan Bursary, and that is something that I think will be well received by a raft of grandchildren. They'll be very appreciative of the opportunity to take up these bursaries. That will come into effect by 1 August 2019. As also mentioned, schedule 5 will bring into line those people that served on submarine special operations between 1 January 1978 and 31 December 1992. There are around 900 submariners that will benefit from this change, and they will also become eligible for the support that is available under this bill. Again, this will take effect from the day after royal assent. The final area here is claims for compensation. Currently, the legislation requires that these claims be put in in writing, whereas the bill will enable these claims to be done both orally and in writing. Again, it is predominantly allowing people to lodge these claims over the phone, something that again is commonsensical and will make it easier for veterans in isolated areas or people who may not be au fait with technology. It will give them the opportunity to simply make the phone call, lodge their claim and— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I thank the member. The debate is to be interrupted now in accordance with standing order 43. You have a little bit of time left on the clock, so the debate will resume at a later hour and you'll be given leave to continue to speak when the debate is resumed. If you'd like to reclaim your 45 seconds then, Member for Murray, you're welcome to. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 37 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mental Health 37 13:30 Ms O'TOOLE 249908 Herbert I rise in this place today to speak about a very serious matter—that is, police suicide. Police officers are pillars of our community, and when we need help we call them. But far too often when police men and women need help, they have limited places to turn. Before being elected to parliament, I was the CEO of a mental health community organisation. I have taken my passion for mental health into my work as the member for Herbert. I will be a strong advocate for more funding to raise awareness and to reduce stigma. As a strong advocate, I stand here with the Isles family. In 2009 senior police Sergeant Mick Isles left his home, never to return again. A coroner's report later determined that he had lost his life to suicide. There is nothing more devastating than losing a loved one. Unfortunately, the pain continues for the Isles family, who have been calling for all police who take their lives from PTSD to be recognised on the National Police Memorial. Steven Isles, Mick's son, has been a strong advocate, leading the charge for those officers who are no longer with us. More than 31 police officers—that we know of—have taken their lives, and this should not reflect negatively on their service, dedication or hard work. If you are a police officer and you have spent your life saving the lives of others, you deserve our recognition and our gratitude. Currently, Mick Isles cannot be recognised for his years of service, but in this place today I want to acknowledge his service to the state of Queensland. Bowman Electorate: Education, Bowman Electorate: Health Services 37 13:32 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman This is the Redland City roll of honour for primary schools in my electorate: Macleay Island, Russell Island, Thornlands, Vienna Woods, Birkdale State School, Ormiston College, Mount Cotton, Victoria Point, Hilliard and Bay View. These were the top gains primary schools in the 2017 NAPLAN, and in 2018 it was NAPLAN online. Eighty-three brave schools stood up to Queensland Labor and proceeded with a trial that went seamlessly. We hear plenty of intellectual puffery from members over there. Ms Ryan 249224 You don’t even know what you're talking about! Mr LAMING E0H That one over there, who worked in a school, never saw a morale she couldn't crush in a school. We are determined to make sure that, nationwide, cohort benchmarking is available to this great school system and it is not shut down by unions. I'll take any unionist on—there's one standing up, about to walk away—any place, any time, to debate the role of online NAPLAN in standards, in quality and in inspiring great schools to pay teachers properly and have great school outcomes. The number of private patients being slipped into public hospitals and done for profit has increased 747 per cent since 2008. That's right: in Queensland for every six patients that are publicly operated on one private patient is sneaked in to make some money. And they make the public patients wait. This is absolutely unacceptable—profit before patients. This is shocking stuff. There are septoplasty delays. For knee replacements patients wait 211 days, but they slip the private guy through in about two months to make some extra money. Forget all the ideological rubbish over here. It's the Labor state hospitals that don't look after their patients. (Time expired) Workplace Relations 38 13:33 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Parliament may be alarmed to learn that the security officers in charge of security at Defence sites in Victoria are on strike today. They're on strike because this government is again trying to, through the contractor, cut penalty rates of some of our hardest-working yet lowest-paid Defence employees. Guards working at 14 Australian Army, Navy and Air Force sites commenced industrial action today against their multinational employer, Wilson Security, and its bid to reduce their job security and cut their pay by cutting penalty rates by thousands of dollars a year. They've cited the government's push to see these guards on award wages as one of the reasons. This includes the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation, which is actually in my electorate. I know these security officers; they've level 6 clearance. They have one of the highest clearances that you can get in this country, yet this government and their employer want to see them paid the minimum wage, award wages. It's not good enough. For over a year, their company, Wilson Security, has tried to push the guards back to the minimum award, cutting shift penalty rates and public holiday rates. The guards did not take this decision lightly. I call on the government to sit down with the contractor, sit down with the guards and end this dispute. Reeve, Mr Cliff 38 13:35 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest Congratulations to the voice of the South West, Cliff Reeve who today celebrates 25 years on Triple M Southwest. Cliff knew he wanted to be a broadcaster at the age of 14. He started his dream in Bridgetown at 17, and he's never looked back. He got his first full-time gig in Katanning a little while later. After a stint in Kalgoorlie and Queensland, Cliff arrived in Bunbury in 1993 and has called this city home ever since. He has gone on to win several ACRAs, the Logies of Australian radio. He's done breakfast and worked for sister station Hit FM when it was called Hot FM. After so many years and early mornings, he put the alarm clock forward when his breakfast show with co-host Doug Terry finished at the end of 2015 and he switched to the way home drive slot in 2016. On his 40th radio anniversary in 2016, the station named their green room after him. His most memorable interview was with actor Kirk Douglas, which took him six months to get. His hardest interview was with Walter Mikac, who lost his wife and children in the Port Arthur massacre. The Australian radio landscape has changed significantly in the last decade. Twenty-five years at one station and 42 consecutive years on radio is extraordinary. Congratulations and thanks to the amazing, passionate voice of the South West, Cliff Reeve. Darwin 38 13:36 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I cannot wait to get back to Darwin tonight because the dry season has arrived and there's so much on that you just don't know what to do with yourself half the time. Tomorrow I'll be going to about 13 events I reckon. The Laneway Series is back on at Austin Lane in the middle of the Darwin CBD. It just comes alive with music, dance and couple of beers. The Indian community will be putting on their annual India@Mindal celebrations on 23 June. The WHY NOT dance festival is on 2 June. That's right, I will be going boogieing away tomorrow! That's down at the George Brown Botanical Gardens, so don't let it be said we're not cultured; we dance at the botanic gardens. The North Queensland Cowboys will be visiting the capital of northern Australia when they play the Parramatta Eels in Darwin on 8 June. The Summer Session music festival is on 9 June. The V8 Supercars' CrownBet Darwin Triple Crown is on 15 to 17 June. I won't forget that the Greek GleNTi is on, which Mr Georganas has been to in the past. It's a fantastic event. The NT Orchid Spectacular is on at the Darwin Showgrounds on the 16 to 17 June. There is plenty to do up in the Top End. I invite all honourable members to attend. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 It sounds very busy, member for Solomon. Rookwood Weir 38 13:38 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Today seems like a perfect opportunity to update the House on the progress, or lack thereof, of the nation's most important water infrastructure project: the Rookwood Weir. Rookwood Weir is an exciting project that promises to deliver on the federal government's jobs and growth agenda and provide water security to Rockhampton, Gladstone and the Capricorn Coast. Rookwood will employ between 200 and 400 people through its two-year construction and will create over 2,000 jobs through the economic development of the region that is made possible by having more water for various industries, especially agriculture. This is such a vital project for my electorate of Capricornia and for the electorate of Flynn. While we at a federal level have lobbied and delivered for Central Queensland, the Labor state government continues to drag the chain. It is now more than eight weeks since the Prime Minster and Deputy Prime Minister visited Rockhampton to announce the federal government's increase of capital funding to $176 million. This means all funds required to build Rookwood are now on the table. You might ask: why has construction not started? Well, it is a question I'd like answers to as well. The time has come for the Palaszczuk government to stop hiding behind an operating cost cash grab and start building what they promised to. Surely a government that can throw billions at the Cross River Rail in Brisbane can start construction on a $352 million project that they have already committed to. It's time for the Queensland Labor government to get on with the job and deliver what we have all committed to. (Time expired) Defence Facilities: Chemical Contamination 39 13:39 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I welcome the establishment of the parliamentary inquiry into the government's management of PFAS contamination in and around Australia's defence bases. I'm pleased to say that I will serve on this inquiry, which will fully investigate the federal government's disgraceful response to the terrible situations facing communities contaminated by these highly toxic chemicals. The government could have agreed to this inquiry months ago, but I'm glad we have finally got there. PFAS contamination deeply impacts so many people in the Newcastle and Hunter region, as we've been one of the worst-affected sites in the country and we're only 25 minutes away from the Newcastle CBD in Williamtown. We were first alerted to the contamination back in 2015, but three years later people continue to hurt, with an enormous number of issues remaining around health, property values, loss of income and livelihood. Three years is way too long to be left in limbo, not knowing either the long- or short-term health implications and not knowing how much longer your family has to withstand the financial hardship that has been imposed on you and your business. This is a national investigation, but I will be doing all I can to ensure that the committee comes to Williamtown and hears our community's stories firsthand. I know that my colleague the member for Paterson has done much in this space previously. I hope this inquiry builds on that important work. Farrer Electorate: Nimmie Caira 39 13:41 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I rise to highlight an exciting announcement this week in my electorate of Farrer. The area of Nimmie Caira is 85,000 hectares of internationally and historically significant wetlands on the Murrumbidgee flood plain. When I visited it last year, Nimmie Caira was turning into a dust bowl, becoming run down and overrun by vermin, including wild pigs. The very existence and survival of this area demanded consensus and agreement through multiple partnerships and three levels of government—no easy task. On Tuesday, the federal agricultural minister reminded us of federal funding of $180 million as part of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan to help rebalance this 50,000-year-old ecosystem. This will allow the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries to reopen publicly-owned land managed by the group, Nature Conservancy, which will coordinate works by the private sector, philanthropists and expert groups. Local councils in Hay, Balranald and Murray River will benefit from improved and rateable land, increased visitor numbers and tourism opportunities. It ticks boxes in Indigenous engagement. And, just as important, 173 gigalitres of water entitlements will be returned to the environment and will secure the future of irrigated agriculture upstream. This is so important for my electorate. As the minister noted on Tuesday, Nimmie Caira presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create new sustainably managed and financed conservation property for the benefit of people and nature. Melbourne Electorate: Ramadan 39 13:42 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne Right now, it's a special time for Muslim communities around the world, including in my electorate of Melbourne. I would like to take this opportunity in the Parliament of Australia to wish my Muslim constituents and Muslim communities across the country Ramadan Kareem. Ramadan is a month of fasting and charity in which communities come together. I have never felt a warmer welcome than that that given to me when I spend time with Melbourne's Muslim communities. In particular, the breaking of the fast at sunset each day is a time when families and communities gather together for iftar to share a meal. Many mosques open their doors to share meals with the community, including in my electorate the Australian Muslim Social Services Agency, AMSSA, the Albanian Australian Islamic Society and the Islamic Council of Victoria city mosque. Community organisations welcome all members of the community to share a meal. In Melbourne, these include the Somali Community of Victoria; the Oromo community; the Eritrean community; Rabita; the Eritrean Jeberti community; the Islamic Council of Victoria, which has hosted interfaith iftars and a First Nations iftar; the Board of Imams; Community Care Network; and the African-Australian Multicultural Employment and Youth Services. I look forward to once more hosting a community iftar for local residents and leaders this Friday, in Kensington. None of these events would be possible without grassroots support and the hard work of volunteers. To everyone who is doing that work, I say 'Thank you'. Muslim communities are building bridges and doing the work of building multiculturalism and social cohesion. This time of sharing and open doors is Australia at its best. Ramadan Mubarak. Tangney Electorate: Safer Communities Fund 40 13:44 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney Great news in Tangney, particularly at the Bullcreek Leeming Junior Football Club and the Bullcreek Tennis Club. These local sporting clubs will receive federal government grants for CCTV cameras and security lighting as part of the Safer Communities Fund. This is the Turnbull government's crime prevention program. It provides grants up to $1 million to community groups and local governments for local crime prevention and security projects. This includes CCTV, security lighting and bollards. The Bullcreek Leeming Junior Football Club will install CCTV cameras around its clubrooms and car park at the Beasley Reserve to increase the safety and security of its players and volunteers. The Bullcreek Tennis Club will upgrade security lighting and install CCTV cameras to improve the safety of its club members and the public, who regularly use the many courts and club facilities. The football club and the tennis club are run by hardworking parents and volunteers. This Safer Communities funding is making sure these clubs remain safe places for the members and their guests to play sport and attend social functions, day and night. Round 3 of the Safer Communities funding was announced in the budget. Applications will open in the second half of 2018. I encourage every community group in Tangney to put in an application for this funding round. My office is available to assist, where we can. Chifley Electorate: Broadband 40 13:46 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley The Prime Minister is a very smart man—you just have to ask him. But there are two questions he can't answer. Why did he stuff up the NBN and why can't he fix it? He's got no idea and, of course, he doesn't really care, because he's enjoying 100 megabits per second download speeds over in Point Piper. Happy days! The problem is that in my part of Western Sydney people have been expecting the HFC rollout to reach them. It was supposed to happen by June in parts of Chifley, including Glendenning, but now they've been told, 'No, that's not happening but we'll get there as soon as we can in 2020.' 2020! They have to put up with appalling speeds until that time. Kids can't do their homework or do any of the research they want, and home based small businesses can't do their work—so much for jobs and growth. I have received similar complaints from people in Marayong. They have been told the same thing by NBN: 'A build is planned in your area,' but when they ask their service providers there is no information as to when that is happening. Mark from Marsden Park, who works part time from home and relies on the internet, has download speeds—get this—of 0.150 megabits per second. You can imagine how frustrated he is. These are just a few of the examples of the countless complaints I am receiving. It's time the government gave residents the NBN they deserve. Sunshine Coast Arts and Culture 40 13:47 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax The arts and cultural sectors on the Sunshine Coast are alive and well, both new organisations and also those that are well established. Only last Saturday night I saw a fantastic play. It was a performance by the Sunshine Coast Theatre Company, which is a new start-up. It was not just a fantastic performance but it was also a very slick operation. It gave me enormous confidence in what this organisation is going to contribute to the Sunshine Coast in the years ahead. There are also well-established groups, in particular the Queensland Conference and Camping Centre, which has established a new program called Triballink. We're talking here about Jinibara country, which is on the mountain top of Mapleton—55 acres worth. They have established this program that gives all visitors, whether they be Australians or foreign visitors, a hands-on experience of what life was like for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In doing so, they're working collectively. It's not just the Jinibara people but also the Gubbi Gubbi people and the Wakka Wakka people, joining as one and delivering on this. As much as we have talked of legislation and infrastructure in particular in last few weeks, let's not forget the importance of our local communities and their arts and cultural sectors. Public Service Employment 41 13:48 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra The Turnbull government has made a hobby out of cutting jobs in Canberra. First we had the member for New England's porkbarrelling, which was the relocation of the APVMA to Armidale. It was said at the time that this all-cost and no-benefit, blatant, shameless porkbarrelling was just the thin end of the wedge. Since then the budget has been released, and what do we hear about? More jobs are going from Canberra—98 jobs from six government agencies will be relocated, but not to regional areas. Eighty-two of these jobs will be relocated to a capital city. So, what message is the government sending here on decentralisation, particularly when 38 per cent of the public service is actually outside of Canberra. Sixty-three per cent of these jobs will be taken out of Canberra. The cuts to Canberra don't stop there. Plastered across the front page of yesterday's Canberra Times is an article that says that up to 50 people with disabilities will lose their jobs at the Department of Human Services when two mail-sorting facilities close on 30 June. These are people with disability who have jobs. The government is cutting jobs for people with disability. There are people with disability who describe their jobs as their contribution to the world. As one mother said in the article, her daughter's job with the department is the reason she gets out of the bed in the morning. The government has decided they are easy targets. It's an absolute disgrace. I'm begging, for the sake of my community: hands off Canberra, hands off Public Service job cuts and hands off cuts to— (Time expired) Wide Bay Electorate: Roads 41 13:50 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay I'm pleased to confirm the coalition government's $800 million commitment to the Bruce Highway Cooroy to Curra section D project is rock solid. As Deputy Prime Minister McCormack has confirmed, our funding to start construction on section D is available to the Queensland government now and it's ready to go. This is a project that will save lives by transforming one of the deadliest sections of the highway into one of the safest. The project is being managed by the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. The sooner the Queensland government negotiates milestones and lets TMR start the tender process, the sooner the construction will be begin. TMR has advised it will take approximately three years to complete construction. The Queensland government hasn't said yet when it wants construction to start, but I hope they are as impatient as I am. I want section D started and finished as soon as possible. The state budget will be brought down soon and Queensland Labor must deliver on their election commitment to supply 20 per cent of the funding to get this life-saving project up and going. The Queensland government must ensure that local suppliers and contractors are used wherever possible to ensure the economic and employment benefits of this billion-dollar investment stay within the seat of Wide Bay. Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry 41 13:51 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt The misconduct of the nation's biggest banks that we have witnessed in the latest rounds of the banking royal commission is inexcusable. People have lost their homes, businesses and life savings. Customers have been charged fees for nothing, even after they died. Last night in Senate estimates we heard that more than 300,000 victims are owed $220 million and that ASIC expects that number only to grow. This is completely inexcusable. We also heard last night of APRA's view of the Commonwealth Bank—that the culture of the bank is one of arrogance and their risk management strategy is seriously deficient. Last night ASIC admitted they only became aware of the CBA charging dead customers fees and inappropriately activating children's bank accounts through the conduct of this royal commission—a royal commission that the government tried to stop happening, a royal commission that is only occurring because of Labor's pressure on this government. The government's response to all of this though is to continue with its bank protection racket by reducing funding to ASIC and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, failing to guarantee funding for the Serious Financial Crime Taskforce beyond next financial year and continuing to obfuscate on bigger penalties for banking misconduct. On top of that, we are also seeing this government reward the big banks with a $17 billion tax cut. Only Labor will continue the work to ensure that this royal commission delivers justice for those that have suffered at the misconduct of banks— (Time expired) Budget 41 13:53 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Our Treasurer handed down a fair and responsible budget on 8 May. He tackled lower corporate and personal tax rates. When Keating and Costello did the same thing, the economy thrived. Australian companies, like Qantas, are global players and must be competitive with the world. Under the budget, there is increased global spending on health and on schools. There are 20 per cent instant cash write-offs. The Building Better Regions Fund will continue, as will the Stronger Communities Program. The budget will be back to surplus by 2021, one year earlier than expected. The government has delivered an extra one million jobs in five years. It has cut red tape, with $5.9 billion having been saved since 2013. There are incentives for business. Dr Chalmers interjecting— Mr O'DOWD 139441 You wouldn't know, mate. The government is guaranteeing essential services. It is living within its means. Now we must pass these tax bills in full and watch the Australian economy bound ahead. Let's make Australia great again, Jim. Child Care 42 13:54 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston Yesterday there were some deeply concerning figures that came from the Minister for Education and Training—that is, just under 50 per cent of families have not registered for the new childcare subsidy, with only five weeks to go. What will happen to these families? They will lose important support for child care. Instead of actually taking responsibility, what we heard from the minister yesterday was that it was families' fault. It was families' fault that the system was changed. It was families' fault that they hadn't registered. It was families' fault that they hadn't communicated properly with the department. It is time this government stops making excuses, stops blaming families and gets on with the job. We already know one in four families will be worse off as a result of this government's changes, and no amount of squirming or fudging the facts is going to change that. We now know that so many more families will have out-of-pocket costs because this government has botched the transition. They've botched it, and, as a result, families will be worse off. Why doesn't the government start working with centres that are at the coalface? Why don't they work with families? Instead they've paid for a slick advertising campaign that has not done the job. It's time this government doesn't keep blaming families for all its failures. On this side of the House we stand up for families, and it's time the government does the same. Wine Exports 42 13:56 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker South Australia produces some of this country's best wine, the majority of which comes from my electorate. Barker includes world-renowned wine regions: the Barossa, the Coonawarra and the Riverland. It's no wonder I'm sometimes referred to in this place as the member for wine, not because of the amount I consume but because of how much of the industry I represent. As such, I'm thrilled that Australian wine continues to be in such high demand worldwide. The latest figures show that in the 12 months to March exports increased by 16 per cent, reaching $2.65 billion. Volumes have also increased by 10 per cent to a whopping 884 million litres. Our wine exports to China have set a new record, increasing 51 per cent in the 12 months to March—a little over $1 billion. While we produce highly sought-after quality product, this government's free trade agreement and agenda has paved the way for increased access into these markets. It's no coincidence that wine exports into China have grown at record rates as wine tariffs drop in line with the ChAFTA. These tariffs will be completely removed by January 2019. As a result, Australian wine producers will be in pole position in front of their French, Italian and Spanish counterparts. Like the perfect storm, the 2019 vintage is also looking like an exceptional one. Through our ambitious trade agenda, this government is supporting our wine producers and the 170,000 Australians they employ. Banking and Financial Services 42 13:57 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon Government incompetence and negligence comes at a cost, and sometimes it comes at a real human cost. This government's complete inaction on payday lending has a human cost. The government commissioned a review in August 2015 of small-amount credit contracts, and in October 2017 we saw draft legislation. Since then we have seen absolutely nothing. We've seen the portfolio handed from minister to minister, and it is now in the hands of the member for Deakin. He has not shown up. He has done nothing about rorts in payday lending. As the government fails to do its job, the Labor Party has been taking action. The former member for Perth moved a private members' bill which was word for word what was in the government's legislation. Not only did they not vote for it but they didn't turn up. Labor members—the members for Oxley, Solomon, Rankin and Lalor—have all been leading on this debate as the government just lets the payday lending rorts continue. This comes at a human cost. Sally from Burnie is an example. She's a single parent, with three dependants, earning over $1,700 a fortnight. She has payday loan repayments to three separate providers which take up 45 per cent of her fortnightly income. This government sits on its hands and says that's okay. It's time for this negligence to stop. National Federation of Independent Business 43 13:59 Mr ANDREWS HK5 Menzies It's part of the duty of a member of parliament to make representations on behalf of constituents to various governmental and other official bodies. Like others in this place, I make these representations based on the information provided to me by my constituents. In doing so, I'm not making a judgement about the veracity of the information and claims of my constituents. That judgement is a matter for the agency or body to which the representations are made. While I'll continue to fulfil this important role on behalf of my constituents, I wish to stress that such representations should not be used by other individuals or organisations to imply support for their activities. As both you, Mr Speaker, and I experienced recently, the fact that we made representations on behalf of a constituent was used inappropriately by the National Federation of Independent Business to imply our support for the activities of the federation and to attract membership. The federation is entitled to seek membership from individuals and businesses, but it should not use the fact that you and I have made representations on behalf of a constituent as a vehicle to attract members. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 43 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Goods and Services Tax 43 14:00 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Prime Minister. Last night in the parliament, the member for Fadden said the government should make it cheaper to rent $100 million superyachts by cutting the GST. Is the reason the Prime Minister has refused to support Labor's policy to axe the GST on tampons that he, just like the member for Fadden, would prefer to abolish the GST on superyachts? Is this Prime Minister and this government so out of touch that they consider tampons a luxury and superyachts a necessity? 14:01 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the Prime Minister. Once again, the member for Sydney has demonstrated she doesn't know how to tell the truth. These are the simple facts. GST is applied to those vessels if you buy them, if you lease them—it's at 10 per cent. They're the facts. Stop telling untruths. Economy, National Security 43 14:01 Mr IRONS HYM Swan My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister update the House on how the government is delivering on its commitments, growing the economy and guaranteeing essential services, including in my electorate of Swan? 14:01 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his question. The government is delivering on its promises and building a stronger economy for all Australians which enables us to guarantee the essential services Australians depend on, and we are ensuring that the survivors, the victims, of child sexual abuse receive the support they need and deserve in the wake of these horrific events perpetrated over many decades. The royal commission not only heard, recorded and respected the testimony of shocking sexual abuse suffered by children across the nation; it enabled the survivors to be heard and, most importantly, to be believed—many of them, heard and believed for the first time in their lives. This week, as a nation, we've taken several important steps in the journey of healing. All states and territories now, with the exception of Western Australia, have signed up to the national redress scheme. We now have five major non-government institutions who have opted in: the Catholic Church, the Anglican church, the Salvation Army, the Scouts and the YMCA. That means that roughly 48,000 people—that's about 80 per cent—of the 60,000 survivors should now be covered by the national redress scheme. The House has passed the national redress bill, and it's now up to the Senate to pass the bill to ensure that we can begin delivering this redress to survivors from 1 July. Just this week, the Attorney-General has announced the government will undertake the most significant review of Australian intelligence laws in 40 years. The first priority of our government is keeping Australians safe, securing our nation's borders and frustrating and preventing the ever-present terrorist threat. It's why we've ensured our law enforcement and intelligence agencies have the resources and the powers they need to keep us and every Australian safe. That includes properly funding and supporting the Australian Border Force with policies that discourage the people smugglers and the criminals who, when Labor was in government, had the immigration policy of Australia outsourced to them. We have a strong economy, and we have the resources, but above all the character and the determination, to do justice to Australians who have been wronged and to keep Australians safe and our borders secure. Minister for Health 44 14:04 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to reports the health minister unleashed a torrent of expletives and physically intimidated a 71-year-old grandmother. Why did the Prime Minister and his office ignore this behaviour for over six months, given the high standards expected of ministers under his ministerial standards? Is the PM so arrogant and so out of touch that he chose to ignore this shocking behaviour until it was raised by the media? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Barker and the member for North Sydney will cease interjecting. 14:05 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question. My office did not ignore the correspondence from the mayor of Katherine—quite the contrary. The minister has apologised. That was what the mayor of Katherine sought from him, and that apology was appropriate. Taxation 44 14:06 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on how the government's plan to reduce taxes will grow the economy and create more jobs for Australians, and is the Treasurer aware of any other proposals? 14:06 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Goldstein for his question. He knows that our budget is a plan for a stronger economy. Under the coalition government of the Liberal and National Parties, that's what we have: a stronger economy, where more than a million jobs have been created since we were first elected in 2013, and some 415,000 in the record year of jobs at more than a thousand jobs every single day on average. A key component of our plan for a stronger economy is to ensure that we keep taxes under control, that taxes do not choke growth, take away jobs from the economy, prevent wage increases and stymie investment. We have a plan to keep a clear control on those taxes in our fiscal strategy. On top of that we have delivered into this place two important tax plans. The first one, the personal tax plan, which provides $140 billion worth of tax relief to all working Australians, the Labor Party came in here and tried to chop in half. That's our personal tax plan dealing with bracket creep and ensuring that 94 per cent of Australians don't pay more than 32½ cents in the dollar. We have a personal tax plan that works for all Australians. It's why we've had an enterprise tax plan that keeps our businesses competitive by ensuring they have competitive tax rates. We do not think Australian businesses should pay the highest corporate tax rates in the world. We know that if businesses are forced to pay the government more tax then they are not in a position to invest in their employees, to grow their businesses, to access new markets—to do all of those things. The Labor Party thinks the best thing business can do is to give money to the government; we think the best thing business can do is to create jobs. That's why our competitive tax plan is there: to create jobs. It's also about what we're not doing. I'll tell you what we're not doing: we're not going to put a $220 billion tax burden— Ms Kearney interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L Yes, it is a burden, Member for Batman, a tax burden on the Australian economy with their ramping up of taxes in to the stratosphere. Let's not forget the biggest tax they will put on the Australian economy in their first budget if they were to become a government—on retirees: 3½ thousand of them in Braddon, 7,600 of them in Mayo, 4,300 of them in Longman. All would be hit by Labor's retiree tax, which rips off the tax refunds from Australians who have committed the great sin of investing in an Australian company. They want to rip those tax refunds away for no other reason than that they cannot control their appetite for tax, because they cannot control their spending when they're in government. Minister for Health 44 14:09 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Prime Minister. It's reported the Prime Minister's office dismissed the health minister's reported torrent of expletives and physical intimidation of a 71-year-old grandmother as a 'private matter'. Is this Prime Minister really so arrogant that he's willing to dismiss his minister's reported torrent of expletives and physical intimidation of a grandmother as a purely private matter? How could it possibly be private when he met a mayor about a community health matter on a sitting day in Canberra? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Just before I call the Prime Minister, the member for Goldstein is warned—as he was yesterday—as is the member for La Trobe. I only just managed to hear that question. The Prime Minister has the call. 14:10 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The report the honourable member refers to is untrue. The Minister for Health, however, wishes to complete the answer to the question. 14:10 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I want to make two statements. Firstly, in December I did meet with a delegation from Katherine. I believe there were three members in that delegation; there were two members of my office, including myself. During the course of the conversation I used strong language. I have apologised to the mayor of Katherine, and today I want to repeat that apology publicly and sincerely and absolutely. It was my fault and my responsibility, and I accept that. Mr Snowdon interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Lingiari is warned. Mr HUNT 00AMV I think it's important for me to repeat that I have apologised to the mayor, and to repeat that apology publicly: my fault; my responsibility. The matter was raised, I believe, at the time that the Prime Minister's office received material. They acted immediately. I took too long. My fault; my responsibility. Education 45 14:11 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi Mr Speaker— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Indi will just pause for a second. If members on my left could cease interjecting, the member for Indi could ask her question and I'd be able to hear it. Ms McGOWAN 123674 My question is to the Prime Minister and it's about regional education. Prime Minister, in my electorate of Indi 6.2 per cent of residents have tertiary qualifications compared to the state average of 17.8 per cent. This week the government agreed to all of the recommendations in the independent review into regional, rural and remote education by Professor Halsey. The review called for the establishment of a national regional education strategy and task force to deliver these recommendations. Prime Minister, will you commit to establishing the task force, developing a national regional education strategy to improve the education outcomes of all regional Australians? 14:12 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question, and I commend her for her strong commitment to supporting regional students, regional universities and regional economic growth. My government is committed to bridging the divide between education outcomes in the city and in the bush. We recognise, as the member does, that thriving regional and rural communities are a key to Australia's success and that they need a high-performing education system, and that no matter where you go to school you deserve the opportunity to pursue your passions and receive a quality education. That's why we undertook the review, led by Professor Halsey, that the honourable member has referred to. Yesterday, the government released its response to the review, and that announcement showed its commitment to delivering better outcomes and more opportunities for regional, rural and remote students. It showed our commitment to taking a whole-of-government approach to this issue, with the Deputy Prime Minister and the ministers responsible for education, regional communications, regional development, local government and social services joining together for the announcement. The government's accepted all 11 recommendations of the review. In doing so, we're putting the education needs of the almost 400,000 students from regional, rural and remote communities front and centre. Recommendation 11 is one that will be of particular interest to the member for Indi. It's to establish a national focus for regional, rural and remote education to enhance access, outcomes and opportunities in regions. The government acknowledges that a one-size-fits-all approach to regional policy does not work, and I know the honourable member agrees with that, so we're investing in partnerships with communities to ensure that national policies are informed by local people living in the regions. The government will undertake an annual assessment of the adequacy of the support universities offer students in regional, rural and remote areas on transitioning to higher education, including student accommodation—a key issue—and that information will be included on the national admissions information platform. In the recent budget, we provided $28.2 million to expand accessibility to sub-bachelor programs in regional areas and $14 million to expand accessibility for bachelor students at regional study hubs. We're creating 500 new commencing sub-bachelor places at Australian universities, an additional 500 Commonwealth supported bachelor places for students— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat for a second. The member for Indi on a point of order? Ms McGowan 123674 Yes, a point of order: a question of relevance. I actually asked about a national strategy. Mr TURNBULL 885 I've been outlining what the government's strategy is. I'll just complete briefly in the short time left. This is a matter of enormous interest to the government and to the honourable member. There's a lot more to be said and a lot more work to be done, and I look forward to working with her on it. Budget 46 14:15 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer please update the House on recent assessments of the Australian economy. How does the government plan to support a stronger economy over the next decade and how does this compare to previous plans? 14:16 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank again the member for Petrie for his question on the budget. Our budget is a plan for a stronger economy. And I'm pleased that the budget has been so well received as a credible plan, so much so that the opposition has given up asking questions about it. They put up the white flag on the budget some weeks ago. Mr Keogh interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Burt is now warned! Mr MORRISON E3L Our economy is stronger under the Liberal and National parties. As I just said, more than a million jobs have been created since we came to government. In our record year of job growth, more than 1,000 jobs were created every day and 75 per cent of those were full-time jobs. We see today that the non-mining capex figures are up 8.4 per cent for the year. But, importantly, it's another positive quarter of growth in non-mining capital expenditure, and that is the first time we've seen six quarters of consecutive growth in more than 20 years. We have a plan for a stronger economy, and that is driving investment in this economy, which is driving jobs. Australians are confident in the economic plans of the Liberal and National parties, under the Turnbull government, because they are seeing those results. But there is more to come and there is more work to be done, because we want to ensure that those economic benefits stretch right across the whole economy. That's why we must stick to that plan. Today the OECD has released a report which confirms the strength of the Australian economy. It endorses the forecast that was set out in the budget, referring specifically to the economy growing at a 'robust pace'. It refers to rising household incomes, falling unemployment. It points to 'wage growth picking up'. It also makes reference to the fact that public debt will be falling. It finds that a strong economy, expenditure control and revenue integrity measures are helping to deliver the commitment for deficit reduction. That is a pretty strong endorsement from the OECD about the strong economic management of the Turnbull government and the strong performance of the Australian economy. But it wasn't always that way, because when we came to government we had to deal with the economic and fiscal catastrophe that was left to us by those who sit on that side of the House now. For the sake of the Australian economy they need to stay on that side of the House, because when we came to government we had to wrestle debt growth running at 30 per cent. There was a gorilla of debt running under them, and we had to wrestle that gorilla to the ground, which is what we've done, because under this budget debt falls by $30 billion over the next four years and it falls by $230 billion over the next 10 years. This government has turned that around. We've ensured that we've put Australia on a firm fiscal footing, confirmed by the OECD today. The Labor Party cannot live within their means. That's why they cannot be trusted to achieve these outcomes for the Australian economy, which have been recognised. (Time expired) Minister for Health 46 14:19 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer. Is the Prime Minister or his office aware of any other incidents or complaints involving the health minister's language or behaviour towards stakeholders, public servants or staff? 14:19 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question. All ministers are expected to treat the people with whom they deal, whether they are third parties, stakeholders, constituents, colleagues or public servants, with respect. Sometimes ministers fall short. The Minister for Health has acknowledged that he did fall short and he has apologised for it, as he should. Ms Catherine King 00AMR Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister has concluded his answer. The member for Ballarat will resume her seat. Infrastructure 46 14:20 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. Will the Deputy Prime Minister update the House on how the government's 10-year infrastructure investment pipeline is connecting local communities and creating local jobs in South Australia? Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware of any risks to this plan? 14:20 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina It's good to get a question about the economy. It's good to get a question from the member for Boothby. She's a true local fighter and a voice for the people. You need look no further than the member for Boothby when it comes to a good local champion and a good fighter for a local community and the economy. Like all members on this side of the chamber, she's passionate about delivering the infrastructure and jobs for her local community, for South Australia and for the nation. Our $75 billion job-creating, economy-building 10-year investment pipeline of infrastructure will continue to strengthen our economy by connecting local communities, increasing local productivity and creating local jobs—jobs and more jobs. We've helped small and medium enterprises create one million jobs in five years—in five months less than five years, in fact. We are delivering, adding to the more than one million jobs we've created. It's all about a strong economic blueprint. Our plan is to take the pressure off household bills, off tax liabilities for workers and off small and medium family enterprises; to not rip pensioners off; to put downward pressure on the cost of living; to make it easier to grow, invest and create more jobs; and to make sure that the right infrastructure is in place. In South Australia the Liberal and National federal government is delivering up to $1.39 billion for the north-south corridor, adding to the $1.6 billion already invested in the project. I'll tell you who's delighted about it—not just the member for Boothby but the Premier of South Australia. Steven Marshall is a good man. I had a meeting with him last night. He's delighted by the investment we're making in South Australia—electrifying the Gawler rail line to cater for increased passenger numbers and duplicating the Joy Baluch Bridge in the member for Grey's electorate. There's so much more. We're rolling out $94 million for the Oaklands crossing, more than $42 million for the Flinders link and more than $1.55 million for local community infrastructure projects in the member for Boothby's electorate. There is $18½ million for the Lobethal freight access and South Eastern Freeway upgrades in Mayo, where we've also seen a new bridge for Blewitt Springs Road, $3¾ million for the Mount Barker regional football centre, $½ million for the Victor Harbor community facility and more than $471,000 for local community infrastructure projects to date through the Building Better Regions Fund. We're getting on with building a better South Australia and a better future, but I'm asked about the risks. Those opposite are looking at me. Opposition members interjecting— Mr McCORMACK 219646 They're doing a bit of yelling, but they are a risk to jobs. They are a risk for higher taxes and lower wages. That's what they are. They're all sitting opposite beholden to the union movement and beholden to the— (Time expired) Minister for Health 47 14:24 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answers and I again ask: is the Prime Minister or his office aware of any other incidents or complaints involving the health minister's language or behaviour towards stakeholders, public servants or staff—yes or no? 14:24 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The minister is doing an outstanding job. The minister is overseeing record levels of funding and support in every field of health. The minister is rectifying the failings of the Labor Party in government. The minister is listing one life-saving drug after another on the PBS, in a manner that the Labor Party was not able to afford to do. The minister's management of the Health portfolio is saving lives. Ms Madeleine King 102376 I have a point of order on direct relevance. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister has concluded his answer. National Security 47 14:25 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Could the minister update the House on the importance of strong border protection policies? Are there risks with alternative approaches? Mr Albanese interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Grayndler will cease interjecting. 14:25 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. The government certainly sees as a top priority the effort to keep our borders secure, because if we keep our borders secure we can keep our country safe. The government inherited an enormous mess when it came to border protection. The fact is some 50,000 people came on 800 boats, and, tragically, 1,200 people drowned at sea. We were able to implement Operation Sovereign Borders and make a number of changes. We have seen a stop to those boats, even though the people smugglers are still there, probably waiting for a Labor government at some point into the future—they would believe, rightly, that they'd be back in business. There was a debate last weekend in Victoria and there was a proposal, given the civil war that's taking place on border protection within the Labor Party at the moment, for their policy to be debated at the conference in Victoria. But, as we now know, the debate never proceeded because the CFMMEU moved its block of votes in support of the Leader of the Opposition to close the debate down. So riven with division is the opposition they don't even want to air the for and against on border protection policy. Why is this unholy alliance continuing between the CFMMEU and the Leader of the Opposition? There is a long and sordid history when it comes to the CFMMEU and the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition is personal friends with many within the CFMMEU. The fact is that millions and millions of dollars have been donated by the CFMMEU to the Labor Party, and we know now that over 70 CFMMEU officials have been charged with offences. It is the most lawless union in the country. I note again that this Leader of the Opposition refuses to rule out taking money from the CFMMEU. Whereas Bob Hawke disassociated himself with those unions that had gone rogue, this Leader of the Opposition clearly does not have the character. I noticed in The Courier-Mail this week that a CFMMEU official, Mr Dave Hanna, has been charged with rape. Ms Husar interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister will resume his seat. The member for Lindsay is warned. At this point I'm asking the Minister to resume his seat, because I just want to make it very clear to the House that I'm concerned we're about to get into territory that is sub judice. Mr Dutton interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I'm going to address the matter without the minister giving a running commentary, otherwise I'll solve the problem in another way, frankly. I'm entitled to address the House on what I consider to be an important matter. The minister may well find that, if he's looked at Practice, there are general principles with respect to the sub judice rule. One of those key principles is: As a general rule, matters before the criminal courts should not be referred to from the time a person is charged until a sentence, if any, has been announced; and the restrictions should again apply if an appeal is lodged and remain until the appeal is decided. What the minister has done so far is on the right side of the line; he's merely referring to a public fact. But I've taken the decision to sit him down to warn in advance that matters that could be sub judice need to be avoided, and I'm making that clear in advance. Mr Burke interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG That's a very good point, and the minister knows the rules on props. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Mr Speaker, to your point, I had no intention to go beyond that. The SPEAKER 00APG That's okay. Mr DUTTON 00AKI It's a publicly reported matter. I don't go to any other matters in relation to the matter. The SPEAKER 00APG I just say to the minister he doesn't need to have a commentary on it. I'm entitled to give reasons— Mr DUTTON 00AKI But I wanted to give you that assurance, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 00APG That's fine. Mr DUTTON 00AKI The point that I go to is the fact that the CFMMEU are the most lawless union in the country, and yet they are best mates with this Leader of the Opposition. People of questionable character donate millions of dollars to the Labor Party, and this Leader of the Opposition doesn't have the strength of character to stand up to people of this ilk. Taxation 48 14:30 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon My question is to the Prime Minister. This morning, One Nation Senator Brian Burston confirmed that the Prime Minister did a secret deal with Senator Pauline Hanson's One Nation party on his $80 billion corporate tax cut, and I quote: After the hour meeting, we shook hands with Mathias Cormann. We agreed to the deal, signed off by the Prime Minister. Why won't this arrogant and out-of-touch Prime Minister share the details of that deal with the Australian people? 14:31 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth We're committed to doing everything we can to secure the votes of the senators to pass our budget measures. We are determined to deliver on our commitment to the Australian people to deliver jobs and growth. We've come a long way—record jobs growth last year, 415,000 jobs—and we're managing the budget in a way that is bringing it back into balance a year early. We're guaranteeing the essential services that Australians depend on, including health services, as I mentioned in my earlier answer. There is record funding for schools, and our reform of personal income tax is going to see the biggest comprehensive reform of personal income tax in more than a generation. These are big reforms, and they are driving investment, productivity, more jobs and better jobs. The Labor Party should be supporting it, and they should be supporting our cuts to company tax for all the reasons so eloquently put by the Leader of the Opposition when he was taking a previous position—he has had so many on this issue. He said, 'Every student of economic history knows that lower company tax results in more investment, higher productivity, more jobs and higher wages.' For the Labor Party, it's not too late to return to the rationality of years past and back Australian jobs. That's what we're doing. We're backing jobs. We're backing investment. We're backing enterprise. It's about time the Labor Party did too. Superannuation 49 14:32 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt My question is to the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services. Will the minister update the House on how the government is safeguarding the retirement savings of all Australians, including those in my electorate of Leichhardt? Is the minister aware of any different ideas that would put these retirement savings at risk? 14:33 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins I thank the member for Leichhardt for his question and for his very strong and passionate advocacy on behalf of his constituents. Particularly, he is very, very concerned about their savings and in particular their retirement savings. I want to assure him that the government is doing everything within our power to protect those retirement savings. We know that superannuation savings are the second biggest asset for most Australians. Unfortunately, though, for those Australians who are younger and on lower incomes, they have been particularly dudded by the changes made by the Leader of the Opposition in uncapping fees and forcing them into high insurance premiums that they do not want, do not need and, in many cases, cannot even claim on. But the government is doing something about this. We are making sure that we are safeguarding people's savings and their nest eggs. We are going to reunite Australians with their hard-earned money, with their lost superannuation or their inactive superannuation accounts, and we are doing that proactively and automatically through the Australian Taxation Office. This will mean that, nationally, we will reunite people with around $6 billion of their own money. That is around $1.3 billion that will go to the people in Queensland. That is something that I know the member for Leichhardt is very keen on, and also the candidate for Longman, Trevor Ruthenberg. I know that he is very, very passionate about protecting Australian retirement accounts. We are also banning exit fees. We are making sure that there is no barrier for people to go and find another account, one that might be better for them, which currently they are not able to do under the existing rules that prohibit those people who have an enterprise bargaining agreement from choosing their own fund. Now, who is standing in the way of this? Well, I'm sad to say that the Leader of the Opposition is standing in the way of this. The members opposite are standing in the way of this. And the question is, really, why? Why is it that they are doing this? Well, it might be because they have got another plan. Their plan, instead, is to propose even more regressive charges, fees and taxes on retirees. They have got a tax, a $55 billion tax, on the pockets of hundreds of thousands of Australians, including those 165,000 Queenslanders. This opposition cannot be trusted in government. This shifty Leader of the Opposition cannot be trusted to protect the retirement savings of Australians. Do not give him the chance. Health Care 49 14:36 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. The government has granted just four Medicare MRI licences in almost five years, meaning that access to MRIs covered by Medicare has become a lottery of location. Why won't this arrogant and out-of-touch Prime Minister join Labor's $80 million commitment for 20 new Medicare MRI licences instead of making secret deals with Pauline Hanson to give an $80 billion handout to his friends in big business? 14:37 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I am delighted to answer this question, because in last year's budget we made a $2 billion-dollar, 10-year commitment to diagnostic imaging. Let me repeat that: a $2 billion-dollar, 10-year commitment to diagnostic imaging. That was about ensuring two critical things: firstly, that we would retain the bulk-billing incentive for diagnostic imaging—a very important step which happened on our watch, in our time. We made that decision as part of the first budget in health in which I was privileged to be a part. Secondly, and very significantly, we indicated that we would become the first government in almost two decades to index a series of diagnostic imaging items: mammography, fluoroscopy, CT and interventional. None—let me repeat!—not one of those was indexed at any time under Labor's period in government. Not one! Not mammography, not fluoroscopy, not CT and not interventional items, yet each of those will be indexed under us. So a $2 billion-dollar commitment is exactly what we've done. Actually, in relation to MRIs: only a couple of weeks ago I visited Frankston Hospital, with its new MRI licence, with the Treasurer and the member for Dunkley. What you see there— An opposition member interjecting— Mr HUNT 00AMV You want to talk about pies? Honourable members interjecting— Mr HUNT 00AMV We can talk pies if you want! But what we see is that whether it's Frankston, whether it's $2 billion of MRI funding or whether it's record Medicare funding across the diagnostic sector, we are doing things that Labor never did. And that will make a real difference to funding in the sector and a real difference to the ability of Australians to seek diagnostic imaging. But remember one thing: despite six years in government, Labor did not touch mammography, fluoroscopy, CT or interventional, and we will be indexing all of them. Energy 50 14:39 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. Will the minister update the House on how government policies are putting downward pressure on power prices and how this is leading to more affordable and reliable energy for Australian businesses and families? How does this compare to other plans? 14:40 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Mackellar for his question. He knows there's a clear difference between the Labor Party and the coalition on energy. The Labor Party want to put your prices up and the coalition want to drive them down. Under the coalition, you will always pay less for your power bill than you will under the Labor Party. Let's look at the Labor Party's record. When the Labor Party were last in office, power prices doubled. We got the dreaded $15 billion carbon tax. They ignored the warnings on gas. They didn't do anything to stop the gold plating of the networks and they let the retail market get out of control. In contrast, the coalition have a plan, and our plan was to abolish the carbon tax, which saw the single biggest drop in electricity prices ever recorded; to stop the networks gaming the system; to get a better deal for thousands of Australian families from their retailers; to secure more gas before it's exported overseas; to build the infrastructure of the 21st century with Snowy 2.0; and to integrate energy and climate policies for the first time with the National Energy Guarantee, which will lower people's power bills. And the good news for families and businesses across Australia is that from the start of this year wholesale power prices are down some 30 per cent of what they were last year. This is good news for the nearly 9,000 small businesses in Braddon, the nearly 12,000 small businesses in Longman, the 19,000 small businesses in Mayo. These are businesses such as Harvest Moon in Forth, in Braddon, which exports around the world cabbage, carrots, cauliflower—no hot pies, but plenty of beans, plenty of beetroot and plenty of broccoli. They want to employ more forklift drivers, more field hands, more packers, and they can do that with lower power bills. These are businesses such as that owned by John Cranwell in Mayo, who's a third generation brussels sprout grower in Nairne, and Delta Hydraulics in Braddon, in Devonport, with 110 people that it wants to continue to employ. Labor cannot be trusted on energy. They have reckless renewable targets. They want to bring back the electricity tax and they want to push up your power bills. Only the coalition can deliver a more affordable and reliable power system for Australian families and businesses. Age Pension 50 14:43 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga My question is to the Prime Minister. This Prime Minister is forcing Australians to wait until they're 70 for the age pension. Does this arrogant and out-of-touch former investment banker of a Prime Minister seriously expect a nurse or a bricklayer to work until they're 70, at the same time that he's working with One Nation to give an $80 billion handout to big business? 14:43 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for her question and I imagine, if there'd been more time allotted to the question, she could have run through my entire career and characterised it so favourably. Ms Macklin interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 Oh, she's leaping up to do that! Good on you—that's terrific, thank you. The reality is this: we have a stronger economy. We have ensured we have that. It was in fact the honourable member for Jagajaga that once almost echoed John Howard in saying that the best form of welfare is a job. The objective, of course, is to get people into employment. We not only have record jobs growth— Ms Macklin interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 The honourable member is shaking her head—surely you want to have more people in work. We have record jobs growth and the lowest percentage of Australians of working age on welfare in 25 years. That's a matter to be celebrated. That's one of the reasons the budget is in better shape. That's what a stronger economy gives you. Here we have the Labor Party, which is only promising higher taxes. Higher taxes on business; what's that going to lead to? Less investment, fewer jobs, lower wages. Higher taxes on investment, on property; what's that going to lead to? Again, less investment, fewer jobs, lower wages. Then, most shameful of all—I don't know how the honourable member can live with that policy; I imagine she was shocked by it—raiding the savings of retirees. Honourable members opposite always tell us how they are dripping with empathy, but what about people in their 80s who are going to lose 30 per cent of their income? What about them? Mr Sukkar interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Deakin is warned. The member for Jagajaga on a point of order. Ms Macklin PG6 It is on relevance. What about this Prime Minister— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Jagajaga will resume her seat. The member for Jagajaga will resume her seat. I'm just going to make two points. I asked the member for Jagajaga to resume her seat on a number of occasions. I'm going to rule on that point of order: no way, not with the amount of character assessment in that question and the breadth of policy—I don't know what you missed in it! Mr TURNBULL 885 The honourable member and her leader can accuse me of being a friend of big business as much as they like. Honourable members interjecting— Mr TURNBULL 885 No, they can. But you know something? I've never sold out people I represent. I've never sold out workers. I've never sold out the people who work for their penalty rates, unlike the Leader of the Opposition. Who did he sell them out to? He sold them out to big business. There has never been a better friend of big business, never a bigger sycophant, never a bigger suck-up, than the Leader of the Opposition. Big business in Melbourne know him for what he is. A grovelling— (Time expired) Taxation 51 14:48 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher My question is to the Minister for Small and Family Business, the Workplace and Deregulation. Will the minister update the House on how small businesses are responding to the government's enterprise tax plan? Did the practices of the past produce the same results, Minister? 14:48 Mr LAUNDY 247130 Reid I thank the member for Fisher for his question. I note that while we have many barristers in this place—I would argue far too many—I don't think we have another barrister who is also a builder. I note the member for Fisher's background in the building industry. I thank him for his question and his passion for small and family business. There are some 3.3 million small and family businesses as we speak enjoying tax relief via our enterprise tax plan—437,000 of those are in Queensland. There has been a net increase in the number of small and family businesses in Queensland; 12,031 more have opened than there were last financial year. How does that compare to the last time the opposition were in power? In their last financial year there was a decrease of 14,178 small and family businesses, 10,000 of those in Queensland alone. In Longman there are 12,201 SMEs enjoying tax relief from the Enterprise Tax Plan. In the last financial year 532 new businesses have opened up in Longman alone. As Longman voters Daniel Carter and Tegan Austin told The Australian last week: Running our own business, we find you can get to a certain mark before you are screwed over by the tax man. I'm asked what is the threat. I mentioned yesterday the secret deal the Leader of the Opposition has done with John Setka, his great mate, and the CFMEU. I gave a helicopter view of John Setka's civil-rights-crusading 59 criminal offences. I thought it would be good to drill down to see the character of this civil rights activist and I found a few of his threatening and intimidation charges. The quotes in them are quite interesting. This is the guy the Leader of the Opposition has done a secret deal with—that we don't know what's in—and if he's elected this will be inflicted upon us Australia wide. He said, 'You just watch, I'll get you. I've got a 12-year-old son and I swear on his life, I swear on my son's life, you watch: I will fix you up.' To another worker, he was found guilty of saying, 'I'll quit my job and get you.' When asked if he was making a threat, Mr Setka replied, 'I'm not threatening. I promise you I will get you.' To a whole group of workers just trying to gain entry to a site, he said, 'You will die. You're gonna cop it. I'm gonna kill your family.' This is the quality of the bloke, John Setka, that the Leader of the Opposition has done a secret deal with. We don't know what's in it. His own front bench doesn't know what's in it. We will have it inflicted upon us if he is elected at the next election. We cannot, for the sake of those small businesses, whether it be in Longman or anywhere else, allow that to happen. Financial Services Industry 52 14:51 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the government's new Banking Executive Accountability legislation. What sanctions would the chairman of an investment bank such as Goldman Sachs be subject to under these new measures when he dishonestly breaches the Corporations Act in advising on the sale of an insurance company, when that sale then contributes to the greatest corporate collapse in Australian history? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left. The Treasurer has the call. 14:52 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to talk about the Banking Executive Accountability Regime. This is a very good example of how the Turnbull government has been taking action to deal with misconduct in the banking and financial system. It follows the work that was done following the Financial System Inquiry, which was initiated by the coalition government when we came to office, which I note the previous government refused to undertake. They refused to undertake the Financial System Inquiry. They refused, frankly, to do anything in relation to banking executive accountability when they were in office, despite the fact they dealt with Opes Prime, despite the fact there was Storm Financial, despite the fact there was the takeover of Bankwest by the Commonwealth Bank, despite the ANZ Landmark transaction. When all of this was going on, where was the Leader of the Opposition then? Where was the shadow Treasurer then, when they were in government? Well, I know what the shadow Treasurer was doing: he was the immigration minister, completely stuffing up our borders But when it came to those who wanted to talk about these issues, they presided over all of these things and did absolutely nothing. As the minister reminded us yesterday, they turned a 000 phone number into a policy when it came to what they did to deal with misconduct in the banking and financial system. What we have done is put in place the toughest set of accountability rules for banking executives that has ever existed in this country. It is changing the conduct, and will change the conduct, in our banking and financial system, because of the penalties, because of the sanctions. What will happen under this regime is that bankers who do the wrong thing will no longer be able to slip out the side and go and work in another bank somewhere else. They won't be able to work in a bank ever again. That is what our rules are doing. That's the action we're taking. We've doubled the penalties for jail terms from five years to 10 years. That's what we're doing as a result of the enforcement taskforce that we put together to look at the penalties that came out of the review of the Financial System Inquiry. We're taking action with tougher penalties. They can face penalties of up to $1 million—just under that—personally, and for individual institutions some $200 million in penalties apply as a result of the tough rules that we are putting in place. What the Labor Party did for the victims of misconduct in the banking and financial system was zip, zero and nothing, and they should be ashamed of their misconduct in overseeing that system. Aged Care 52 14:55 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page My question is to the Minister for Aged Care. Will the minister update the House on how the government is increasing support to older Australians, especially those living in regional, rural and remote Australia, including in my electorate of Page? How do different courses of action threaten the wellbeing of older Australians? 14:55 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I thank the member for Page for his question, for his continued and ongoing interest in looking after older Australians in regional, rural and remote Australia, and for his contribution to the budget. Every year the coalition is going to increase funding, so funding is up, home care packages are up and residential places are up. There are 20,000 additional high-level home care packages now in play, $40 million to support aged-care providers in regional and rural Australia, 14,000 residential beds and short-term restorative care places to be made available, $105 million for Indigenous communities, 60 million for capital investment, and investment in additional viability supplements for regional areas of Australia. The greatest risk for older Australians would be a Labor government. In September last year, the Leader of the Opposition was in Townsville saying that Australians don't want or need another tax. Now he wants to tax retirees. He wants to rip into the pockets of retirees, who've worked hard all their lives, and take 10.6 million out of their pockets. To the 3,534 people of Braddon: we won't do that to you. To the people of Longman, the self-funded retirees, the 4,356 of you: we will not do that to you. To the 7,643 in Mayo: we will not do that to you. Our older Australians who built this nation—and we enjoy the benefits of their hard work—deserve to keep their hard earned-money in their own pockets to spend. Unlike the opposition, who ripped money out of aged care to prop up their budget bottom line, the government is making record investments in aged care. It's a record $5 billion. I also want to say to the people in Braddon, Longman and Mayo who are over 65: those services are there for you. We will make sure that we deliver on the aged-care needs of people in this country. This government has a real plan for Australians. On my recent visit to Page, with the great local member the member for Page, we enjoyed a visit to Grafton where we saw older Australians enjoying the benefits of living with certainty, knowing that the quality of care is better, their ageing opportunities are better, and their access to aged-care services is better. The other element to this is that the Turnbull government has the best interests of older Australians in mind and will continue to work for them, unlike the opposition who wants to tax them, scare them and intentionally set out to deceive them. This government will continue to focus on the needs of our self-funded retirees and senior Australians, who deserve better than what they get.(Time expired) Taxation 53 14:58 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton My question is to the Prime Minister. Why is the Prime Minister standing in the way of Labor's plan to give a labourer in Longman earning $50,000 a tax cut of $928 a year—almost double the tax cut they'll get from the government? Why does this arrogant and out-of-touch Prime Minister want 10 million Australians, including labourers, teachers, nurses, electricians and mechanics, to pay more tax and big business to pay less tax? 14:59 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his question, and the honourable member no doubt has paid careful attention to the reports that demonstrate that under Labor's tax proposals that he was referring to a public school teacher, for example, would pay between $800 and $1,200 more tax every year. A crane operator would pay between $900 and $1,600 more tax every year. A primary school principal would pay between $5,000 and $7,000 more tax every year. The difference between the government's personal income tax reform and what Labor has proposed is that we have a comprehensive plan for reform. There is a $530 tax refund next year, but then the plan goes on to reach the point where 94 per cent of all Australian taxpayers will not face a marginal rate of more than 32½c in the dollar. Labor is saying that they oppose that plan. They say it's unfair. And yet one example after another can be shown—I've read out a couple—of hardworking Australians on middle incomes, in jobs— Mr Conroy 249127 Not middle— Mr TURNBULL 885 'Not middle'—well, one of the honourable members opposite believes that crane operators, forklift drivers and primary school principals are members of the undeserving rich that need to be soaked! Is that right? Really! The Labor Party talks about being out of touch! The Labor Party fails to recognise that those dollars are hard earned, and Australians are entitled to keep more of them. We are delivering personal income tax reform that respects them, respects their hard work and will ensure they can keep more of the money they've earned. It's their money, not the government's. They've earned it. They can keep more of it to advance their dreams and their aspirations and those of their families. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon? Mr Bowen DZS The Prime Minister was comprehensively reading from a document. I ask him to table it. The SPEAKER 00APG Was the Prime Minister quoting from a confidential document? The member for Brisbane has the call. Infrastructure 53 15:02 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane My question is to the Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities. Will the minister update the House on how the government is delivering on its record $75 billion investment in transport infrastructure? How will this infrastructure pipeline support economic growth, including in my electorate of Brisbane? Is the minister aware of any dangers to this growth or the creation of jobs? 15:02 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I thank the member for Brisbane, who is delivering for his constituents. He has been instrumental in the Turnbull government making a commitment to invest $300 million in the Brisbane Metro, along with a commitment of over $600 million from the Brisbane City Council—an organisation of course led by the LNP, with a very capable track record of delivery. What the member for Brisbane is going to deliver to his constituents is a high frequency metro network, some 21 kilometres of existing busway, links between Eight Mile Plains and Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, between the University of Queensland lakes and the Brisbane CBD. This will address congestion on the Victoria Bridge. It will improve travel times, reliability and convenience for Brisbane commuters. I'm asked by the member for Brisbane, presciently, if there are any dangers to the implementation of the government's $75 billion infrastructure program. The principal danger I need to inform the member for Brisbane of would be if this hopeless rabble on the other side of the House were ever to form government! We need to be clear. Their record of rank incompetence is by no means limited to transport and infrastructure. You can look at the NBN where, in six years, they spent $6 billion— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Mr FLETCHER L6B and barely 50,000 premises were able to connect to the fixed network after six years. The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will just pause for a second. The member for Burt has been warned, amongst others. He will leave under 94(a). The member for Burt then left the chamber. Mr FLETCHER L6B Thank you, Mr Speaker. I was going through a brief list of some of Labor's most comprehensive and egregious implementation stuff-ups. There was the chaos of the pink batts and, my personal favourite, the member for Adelaide's contribution with the double drop off. Who remembers the double drop off? A 2007 promise, they were going to build 260 early childcare centres in schools all around the country. How many had they delivered when they finally slunk away from that program in 2010? The historical record shows that it was 38. So Labor cannot deliver; their implementation is hopeless. What about the 12 rail lines that state Labor promised in New South Wales? They delivered not one of them. What about the Gawler line electrification? That was a comprehensive stuff-up by the Weatherill Labor government that has taken the coalition to fix. We're committing funding for the Gawler line electrification. Labor's track record of implementation in transport and in every other portfolio is egregious and hopeless, and that is a huge danger to the Australian people. Minister for Health 54 15:06 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Minister for Health. Can the minister assure the House that he has not been involved in any other instances of the kind we have seen described here in the papers, involving inappropriate language or behaviour towards stakeholders, public servants or staff? 15:06 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I again sincerely reiterate my apology to the mayor of Katherine. I was asked some questions along similar lines before question time today by the same newsagency that had today's story. They wanted to know whether or not in my time in parliament there had been any complaints by staff to the Department of Finance or parliamentary services. To the best of my knowledge, to the best of our records, the answer is no. I'm happy to continue to check on that, but to the best of my knowledge and the best of my records there hasn't been. In addition to that, I was also asked whether there were any cases of complaints by staff to my chief of staff or my office manager. Again, to the best of my knowledge and the best of my records, the answer is no. A government member: In 17 years. Mr HUNT 00AMV In 17 years. In addition to that, I was asked whether there had been any mediations or settlements with staff. For absolute clarity, based on everything I know, the answer is no. There have certainly never been such things. I was also asked whether or not there had been any issues in relation to public servants. There is one case. I want to be absolutely upfront: there is one case that was raised with me about a former secretary of health. The Prime Minister himself raised it and asked that I speak with the secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet. I think as soon as the Prime Minister was made aware of it, he asked me to deal with it. This was in relation to issues around the progress of the National Cancer Screening Register for cervical cancer. There was a risk, not long after I came in, that that program would not commence and women would be left without screening, which was literally one of the few things in this place that was a life and death issue. As ministers are prone to do from time to time, I had a strong discussion with the then secretary, and that was raised with me by the secretary of Prime Minister and Cabinet after the Prime Minister asked if I would do that. He acted immediately. Again I take full responsibility for that, but this was a matter of life and death—literally—and I think in that situation, while it was a strong discussion, it resulted in the right outcome. The program was able to be continued. I have utmost respect for the public servant involved. So I say this to the best of my knowledge, and for full clarity of the situation. National Redress Scheme 55 15:09 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay My question is to the Minister for Social Services. Will the minister update the House on what the government is doing to ensure that survivors of institutional child sexual abuse are going to receive reparation through the National Redress Scheme? 15:09 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I'd like to thank the member for his question on what is a very important issue. As all members know, this week the House passed legislation to establish a national redress scheme. When we passed that legislation we did so in the knowledge that all states and territories, except for Western Australia, had opted in to the scheme. I'm confident that Western Australia will opt in in the near future. We found out yesterday that the Catholic Church will also opt in to the scheme. Today the Anglican Church, the Salvation Army, the Scouts and the YMCA said that they also will be part of this national scheme. I say to all members in this House: you all deserve credit for putting the interests of survivors first when it comes to this issue. I commend former Prime Minister Julia Gillard for, over seven years ago, having established this royal commission. I commend my shadow for the personal interest that she has taken in this issue. The way she spoke on that bill during the week would have touched every member of this House. I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership on this issue and for hosting survivor groups at Kirribilli, showing them the upmost dignity that they deserve. I thank my predecessor, the now Attorney-General, for the way he handled this issue when he was in the office that I now have the honour to hold. Delivering justice for the survivors of child sexual abuse is something that all of us in this place want to see and can now make happen by 1 July. It will not deal with all the crimes and all the sins that were committed on those young innocent people, but it will go a long way to help. It will mean that they can get payments of up to $150,000, with an average payment of around $76,000; access to psychological counselling; and, as importantly, an apology from those institutions, whether they were government or non-government institutions, who committed these heinous crimes on these people. 15:12 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga Just briefly, on indulgence, I'd like to associate the opposition with the remarks of the minister and extend our thanks to him for his excellent work in getting the redress scheme to this point. It has been a very long time, particularly for the survivors of child sexual abuse, and 1 July will be a very significant moment for them particularly but also for our nation. Mr Turnbull 885 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER 55 QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER Question Time 55 15:13 Mr BURKE DYW Watson In question time today we had a situation where the Minister for Health provided information that had been specifically asked for from the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister had twice refused to provide the parliament with those facts. I simply ask you whether there is any recourse that the House has available to it when we have a clear answer from the executive to a question asked twice that has been refused to be answered under the Westminster code that this place is meant to operate under. 15:13 The SPEAKER 00APG I simply refer the Manager of Opposition Business to the practice with respect to questions and answers. How ministers answer questions is entirely a matter for them; it's not for me to make a judgement on it. DOCUMENTS 55 DOCUMENTS Presentation 55 15:13 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt A document is tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 56 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Australian Broadcasting Corporation 56 15:14 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a letter from the honourable Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government cutting $83 million from the ABC. I call upon all those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:14 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong A cut in funding to the ABC may not determine the outcome of the next election, but it does determine the sort of country we are and the sort of direction this nation is taking. This government has neither an agenda nor any real authority, but it does do good vendetta. It speaks every day against the unions or against better conditions for workers. It speaks against properly funding our schools, our hospitals, our TAFEs and our universities. But it also, in the last budget, has cut the national broadcaster and the capacity of the national broadcaster to fulfil its charter. In the budget barely two weeks ago, $83.7 million was cut from the ABC in the form of an indexation freeze over the next three years. This cut is on top of the $254 million cut in 2014 and another $28 million in 2016. I think many Australians, as they listen to the parliamentary debate, have noticed this notorious cut to the ABC but wondered why on earth there is not more debate about it. So today my colleagues and I speak up to defend the ABC and to defend a deeper principle—the fundamental principle of Australia possessing a quality, well-funded, independent public broadcaster. Labor stand up for the ABC and the coalition attack it—and do they complain about the ABC. I have the latest example. On 6 May this year, ABC News ran a story analysing the government's innovation agenda. On the next day, which happened to be the day before the budget, when you'd think the Prime Minister might have had something more to do with his time, he sent through a list of 11 complaints about the story. He couldn't even cut it down to a modest 10. You could just imagine it. The first thing Monday morning, poor old PMO staff are called into His Lordship's office and told: 'Take a letter to the ABC: Dear Sir,/Madam, here are 11 things wrong with last night's segment. Signed, Bitterly Disappointed, Point Piper.' And how many of his complaints prompted a correction? Was it 11? No. Was it 10? No. Was it five? No. It was just one. Did the Prime Minister, then, having scored a manifest victory to get one correction off the ABC, leave it there, flush with the glow of another success of the Turnbull government? Not at all! He rang up Senator Fifield and he said, 'Lodge a separate complaint.' When it comes to the ABC, Senator Fifield is something of a vexatious litigant—the sort of chap who would take you to court for putting your recycling in his bin on bin night. This year he is averaging one complaint a month. In January he complained about Triple J moving the date of the Hottest 100 in response to a voluntary national survey. How dare they! He then complained about an Emma Alberici article on corporate tax. He complained about a Tonightly sketch insulting John Batman. He complained, because nothing escapes his stellar gaze, of a sketch on black comedy on the ABC Indigenous Facebook page. Then, of course, it was Emma Alberici again, and the Prime Minister's blockbuster, 'Eleven Things I Hate About The ABC'. I have to say, we do question his priorities as Minister for Communications, but you can't fault his commitment to letter writing and keeping Australia Post in business. To the best of anyone's knowledge, the last time a communications minister referred a complaint about the ABC to the regulator was in 2003, when Senator Richard Alston complained about their coverage of the weapons of mass destruction in the Iraq war. I do say though, more seriously, if Senator Fifield wants to talk about complaints, why don't you focus on the 204 per cent increase in complaints on the NBN? These complaints though, as amusing as they are, are not just a harmless obsession; they come with real consequences. Cuts to the ABC have become a fact of life under conservative governments: the efficiency reviews, the faux competitive neutrality inquiries, the deals with One Nation to change the charter. The poor old National Party, once upon a time, under Minister Nixon, knew enough about the bush to understand that you had to back the ABC, but that doesn't even happen anymore. To be fair, in the past the Liberals under Howard or under Fraser would at least offer a reason to cut back the ABC, but now they don't even bother. It has become an accepted part of the conservative political landscape in Australia to be into reducing and bashing the ABC. There is no doubt that the ABC in the last 20 years has been harmed by the ironically named 'culture wars' led by the right wing in Australian politics, but when you look at any genuinely independent survey, despite all the commercial and ideological attacks, the ABC still retains a level of credibility and trust unmatched by any other media organisation and indeed most institutions in Australian life. This is what the out-of-touch Prime Minister always gets wrong. He wanted to protect the banks from the scrutiny of a royal commission, and stubbornly refuses to support a national integrity commission, a federal ICAC to restore some faith in our system, but he still finds the time to attack the most trusted institution in our country. The ABC is part of the fabric of our country. Every week 17 million of our fellow Australians consume some form of ABC content: the cricket and the footy on the radio, the brilliant drama made on shoestring budgets, AM, Radio National, Triple J, Play School, Behind the News, catching up on the latest or revisiting an old favourite on iView. The ABC is company on the long drives in the bush, and calm and comfort for older Australians in the late evenings. Our nation has grown up with the ABC. The first radio and TV services heard in the bush were courtesy of the ABC. In the Second World War, Australians learnt that we were at war listening to Prime Minister Menzies on the ABC. For many Australians the great news of VE Day, celebrated in Martin Place, was broadcast on the ABC. We have all grown up with the ABC. I remember as a child knowing that when you could hear that majestic fanfare theme song of the news coming on, it was time to start to preparing for bed. Even if we don't always listen to the ABC, at different times in the cycle of life's patterns we come back to it. It has a far greater responsibility to cover in our far-flung nation, urban and regional, than any other media organisation, and it does cost money. I am deeply concerned that this government is perpetuating a malaise and a disillusionment within the ABC about the future of the ABC. It is fundamental to the health of our democracy. I acknowledge the importance of commercial media operations, the commercial mastheads of print and the role of active journalism in our daily lives, but nothing can replace the central role in our democracy of an independent, not-for-profit, well-funded public broadcaster. Any politician who says that they've never been frustrated with the ABC has never been in politics, but if you can't put the personal aside and put the nation's interest first then you shouldn't be in politics. I believe in the ABC's role in our democracy. In the words of the first ABC TV news broadcast 71 years ago: This is the news that you don't have to fetch and carry. … The view you can get without having to go to your window. The Labor opposition with me as leader will defend the independence of the ABC, and a Labor government with me as Prime Minister will defend the independence of the ABC. We've always ensured the ABC has the resources and freedom to do its job. We start by saying loud and clear to this government: this $83 million cut should not go ahead. When it comes to the next election, the Australian people will have a very clear choice. They can vote for the conservatives and the continued diminution of the ABC. If at the next election the ABC is viewed by the conservatives just through the prism of some sort of free-market obsession, I promise you, Government: you do not understand how Australians think. The ABC is an 85-year-old institution. It's a friend that Australians can count on through good times and in bad times. We say to all of those Australians who care about the ABC, who hold the ABC as an important and valuable part of their lives and our society: the Labor Party will stand alongside the ABC, win this argument and stop these cuts. 15:24 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I feel I've just been caught in a bad episode of Seinfeld where the opposition leader has become the George Costanza of parliament—that episode of Seinfeld where George says to Jerry: 'Jerry, just remember. It's not a lie if you believe it.' I really think the Leader of the Opposition is starting to believe his own lies. Seriously, the opposition leader is really starting to believe Labor's lies. If they say it enough, if Labor lie enough, they think that actually people start believing them. He thinks if he keeps repeating this claim of a cut when there is no cut whatsoever— Ms Plibersek interjecting— Mr CHESTER IPZ I welcome the deputy opposition leader's interjection as well, because the ABC will receive more than $1 billion per year in this budget. There is no cut in this budget. She knows it, and the Leader of the Opposition knows it as well. The only thing that lets down Labor's lies in relation to the ABC, Labor's lies in relation to Medicare, Labor's lies in relation to health funding and Labor's lies in relation to education funding is the facts. The facts are very difficult for Labor to dispute, because education funding goes up year on year and health funding goes up year on year. The ABC has not had a funding cut—that's a fact. The ABC has greater funding certainty than any other media organisation in the nation, and that's a fact. The ABC will receive $3.2 billion in base funding from taxpayers—remember, it's taxpayers' money. So the ABC will receive $3.2 billion in taxpayers' money for its base funding from 2019-20 to 2021-22. That's a fact as well. The ABC will have a pause in indexation—that's a fact—and that pause doesn't apply until 2019, which gives the ABC executive more than 12 months to plan for that circumstance. This government has taken a responsible approach to fixing the mess left behind by the Labor Party. We have an economic plan which is focused on delivering jobs, on record infrastructure expenditure right around the nation and on making sure we can guarantee the critical services that Australians want. There are a couple of points that the Leader of the Opposition made that I agree with. The ABC does play a very important role in our nation: in our cities, in our regional centres, and in our small rural country towns and remote areas. I notice some regional members here, including the member for Dawson. The ABC is a critical part of our regional communities in times of emergency. In the member for Dawson's own electorate, they rely very heavily in times of cyclones or floods on the emergency broadcaster, on the ABC. In my own electorate of Gippsland during times of fires and floods, we've received emergency warnings through the ABC, which is a critical part of keeping my community safe. I'm pleased to see that there have been increases in regional services in recent times. As a member based in a regional electorate, I've been critical of the ABC in the past for being too metro-centric. Too much of its focus has been on Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Brisbane when there are great stories and great personalities in our regional areas which deserve to be heard. The voices of regional areas deserve to be heard. The ABC, as recently as March last year, announced its biggest ever single investment in regional and remote Australia, during this government's term in office. This is the press release from the ABC itself on 7 March 2017, 'Building the ABC’s services in regional and remote Australia': Up to 80 new jobs, delivering regional news and information, will be recruited within 18 months as part of a broader content fund announced by the ABC's Managing Director … "We want to ensure that the stories, issues and interests of the one-third of Australians who live outside the capital cities are well-represented across the gamut of ABC services and have a stronger voice in national conversations," she said. 'Hear, hear,' I say to the ABC. Investing in regional services in the member for Dawson's electorate, the member for Durack's electorate and the member for Page's electorate is what the ABC should be doing, making sure more regional voices can be heard. That's occurred under this government. Those opposite might want to reinvent their stories, but that's happened under this government. The ABC itself, according to its own press release, is investing in regional communities. More than a billion dollars a year of taxpayers' money is going to the ABC. So the facts simply don't match the rhetoric of the Leader of the Opposition. We're seeing greater investment in video and digital recording and increased coverage of local events and breaking news on weekends, and the ABC itself says: The new jobs will … enable reporters and program makers to spend more time in remote areas of the country. Surely the member for Lingiari would appreciate that. Under this government and investment by the ABC: The new jobs will boost video and digital reporting, increase coverage of local events and breaking news on weekends and enable reporters and program makers to spend more time in remote areas of the country. Surely, the member for Lingiari supports that, under this government? Surely you support that, member for Lingiari? The ABC's commitment to regional Australia is something that we all respect on this side of the House. I'm surprised that the member for Lingiari isn't cheering me on in that regard. There are great stories, there are great personalities and there are regional voices which need to be heard, and under that investment by the ABC announced during this term of government we're seeing more investment in our regional communities. The ABC does have obligations; it has obligations to all Australians. And I think that all members on this side of the House would agree with those obligations. There are obligations to be fair and balanced, and to be accurate and impartial according to the recognised standards of objective journalism. Mr Champion HW9 I tuned out! Mr CHESTER IPZ Oh, yes, member for Wakefield—I'm here for a bit longer! We'll talk about our new arrangements later on. I'm glad the member for Wakefield has woken up again! It's important, though, that he listens a little bit and perhaps learns a fraction more about the importance of the ABC in our regional communities and the extra investment we've seen by the ABC—perhaps the fact that his own leader would like to claim that there have been cuts when there have been no cuts may come to his attention. More than a billion dollars a year is going to the ABC under the current funding agreement. I would have to say that in terms of accurate and impartial reporting according to recognised standards of objective journalism, the ABC largely meets those standards in our regional communities. I would say that in our regional communities they do meet that standard. I have the opportunity to spend a lot of time being interviewed by members of the ABC, whether it be in their current affairs programs or in their news programs, and I have to say that the journalists I've dealt with in those regional communities largely meet that standard. I would have to say as well that in this place, within the gallery, the vast majority of ABC journalists meet that standard as well. The ABC's content extends beyond news and current affairs. During the term of the coalition government we have seen the investment in important regional programs like Back Roads. I'm sure the member for Wakefield is a fan of Back Roads. Probably not quite as big a fan of Back Roads as I am— Mr Champion HW9 You were in cabinet once, weren't you? Mr CHESTER IPZ I'm glad the member for Wakefield is endorsing me in that regard! We all like Back Roads. The investment in Back Roads actually occurred during this coalition government. If the ABC has been so badly impacted by the coalition government it's hard to believe that they have the money to invest in great programs like Back Roads. It's a program that is beautifully shot and shows many aspects of regional life, but it also provides a more positive view of regional Australia. It's something that I think the media and regional Australia deserve—some more positive stories about our communities. The vast majority of metropolitan journalists seem only to come to regional areas when there are issues of fire, flood and pestilence, but there are actually so many great stories to be told about regional Australia, and the ABC tells them. It tells them on a weekly basis through programs like Back Roads. And, with more than a billion dollars of taxpayers' funding, I'm glad they're spending some of that in telling those stories in regional areas. So we're proud of some of the improvements we've seen in the ABC under the Turnbull-McCormack government. The Turnbull-McCormack government has seen significant improvements to the ABC. Mr Champion HW9 That's a mouthful! Mr CHESTER IPZ I'm appreciating the free advice from those opposite! The encouragement is something that I greatly appreciate! In the context of today's debate, let's just simply reflect on the facts. There is $3.2 billion of base funding for the ABC. The ABC has 12 months to plan for the pause of indexation. There is no cut to ABC funding and there's no reason for any cuts in ABC services. It is actually insulting for those opposite—and for some within the ABC—to be out there scaring viewers and scaring listeners, suggesting that there is going to be a reduction in content. The ABC can continue to provide quality journalism, quality current affairs and quality programs like Back Roads for all Australians, because it's receiving more than $1 billion a year of Australian taxpayers' money. The Australian government is providing an economic plan for the future where we have to secure the jobs for our nation's future, invest in critical infrastructure and make sure that essential services are still provided. The ABC will receive more than a billion dollars per year to continue its service to the Australian people. 15:34 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney The previous speaker, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, is a country member, and he knows how very important the ABC is in country areas. He should know better than to come in here and justify and defend $83.7 million of cuts to the ABC, because it's regional communities that are particularly hard hit by these cuts. The Leader of the Opposition was being a little bit nostalgic about the wonders of the ABC, and it caused me to be a little bit nostalgic as well. I was remembering my childhood, watching Countdown, watching Doctor Who, watching The Goodies. I remember my dad would come home from work and he'd be there in his overalls; he'd sit down in his chair, exhausted, to watch the ABC news, and I'd climb onto his lap, and I'd fall asleep, safe in my father's arms, listening to the ABC news music come up at the beginning of the program. So there's a lot of nostalgia for a lot of us over here, I think, when we think about the ABC—and no more nostalgic memory than that of leather-jacket-wearing Malcolm Turnbull on Q&A! Do you remember the days when Malcolm Turnbull actually believed in the ABC and said he'd support and defend the ABC, back in the good old days when we thought Malcolm Turnbull had a spine, had some principles, had some guts, and was committed to having a public broadcaster that held the government, and the opposition, to account? Well, gone are those days. The now Prime Minister, when he was communications minister, cut $254 million over five years, in that horror 2014 budget, then cut a further $28 million from the enhanced news-gathering service that Labor had set up in 2016. Now we see a further $83.7 million cut in this most recent budget, under the stewardship of the Prime Minister, who, once upon a time, used to be a defender of the ABC. What are the effects of these cuts? Since 2014, we've seen about a thousand ABC staff lose their jobs. The Australia Network—such an important and powerful projection of Australian soft power; such an important projection about Australian democratic values and our way of life into our region—has been cut. Short-wave radio—as the member for Lingiari was pointing out—has been cut. The number of hours of ABC factual programming has dropped by 60 per cent, and drama by 20 per cent. Documentaries have dropped by 13.5 per cent. Managing Director of the ABC Michelle Guthrie has said that the budget cuts just announced will mean more job losses, diminished content and reduced services. How can it be that the once-upon-a-time leather-jacket-wearing Malcolm Turnbull, member for Wentworth, would put up with this? The only possible explanation for this change of heart is that this Prime Minister knows that the biggest threat to his Prime Ministership is a news organisation that does its job and holds this government to account. That's why we've seen the pattern of frequent complaints from this government to the ABC, with the Prime Minister, in particular, complaining about reporting on the big business tax cuts—the big business tax cuts that only the government and the Business Council of Australia, whose own members will stand to benefit most from the tax cuts, think are a good idea! Everybody else has picked the lie of trickle-down economics that this government is trying to peddle when it comes to those tax cuts. But it's not just the tax cuts. We've had complaints about the Hottest 100 being moved. We've had the tax cut complaints in February. In March, there was the Tonightly show comedy sketch complaint. In April, another comedy sketch copped it—Black Comedy, broadcast on Facebook—and in May it was poor old Emma Alberici again. This government is doing what governments around the world try to do when they are seeking to shut down scrutiny of their own decision-making, which is: undermine the most trusted news organisation in Australia. I've got to say I don't always like what the ABC says about me. I'm not always happy with the way they report about me or my ideas or the proposals I'm putting forward. I tell you what I'm always happy about. What I'm always happy about is having a news organisation in this country that will speak truth to power—that will stand up against the bullying. And the reason this government is cutting it, again, is because they don't want that. They don't want democracy and they don't want debate. 15:39 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell Well, we do have a list of vexatious litigants in the vein that the Leader of the Opposition was talking about. There are members of this House, I'm happy to report, who are very concerned about the accuracy and the bias in the ABC. There are a number of members in this House, and I want to go to them. I have a list of them, as provided in Senate estimates. The member for Ballarat, on 3 April 2017, was concerned about a constituent and the accuracy of an article that was provided by the ABC about The Doctor Blake Mysteries. Senator Kim Carr, a member of the other chamber, complained about an inaccurate article about the weather—weather graphics. If we're speaking of vexatious litigants, I have three complaints from the member for Lyons about bias at the ABC. So if the Leader of the Opposition is looking for vexatious litigants, he could go no further than the member for Lyons, who was not concerned not about a weighty matter of national significance; he was concerned that an article on salmon farming was biased—not a grave political issue of the day, but salmon farming. Mr Champion HW9 It's actually pretty important to the electorate. Mr HAWKE HWO I'll take the member for Wakefield's interjection—yes, it's an important matter for constituents. The second complaint from the member for Lyons—come right in; I'll reel you in like a salmon on the hook!—was the complaint about the quality of spelling in an online news story—spelling! Mr Champion HW9 That's also important. Are you saying spelling is not important? Mr HAWKE HWO Spelling is not important? So, all of a sudden, the Labor Party is on a crusade against the ABC. This is your MPI, member for Wakefield. Mr Champion interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Wakefield! Mr HAWKE HWO You're saying that the ABC is a model of virtue, but now you're saying that what you should really be worried about with the ABC's billion dollars a year is that they don't spell right. Is that what you're telling us: 'Don't cut any money out of the ABC, but they don't spell good over there in the ABC'? Mr Champion interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Wakefield is warned. Mr HAWKE HWO That was the second complaint from the member for Lyons, but he wasn't finished. Ms Swanson interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Paterson is outside her correct seat and will be quiet as well. Mr HAWKE HWO The member for Lyons was then concerned that a complaint about the elements of an online story about Michaelia Cash was based on supposition rather than journalistic fact. So, when we look at who is complaining—and I haven't gone into all of the Labor Party complaints about bias in the ABC—and who the vexatious litigants are in this House, it is the Labor Party. What you didn't hear from the Leader of the Opposition and what you didn't hear from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was any explanation of why the Labor Party, when they were last in office, protected the ABC from the efficiency dividend that they set for the federal government. They excluded the ABC from the efficiency dividend. They said, 'Only the ABC in the entire federal government is efficient.' Does anyone in this House believe that there are no efficiencies to be found in a billion-dollar organisation? Can any one of you look us in the eye and say that our defence department, which protects our country and serves our nation, should find an efficiency but the ABC should not? 'Yes!' the members opposite say. So our soldiers should be more efficient, but the state funded journalists should not be more efficient. It is a completely nonsensical argument for a well-funded organisation like the ABC. This government brings to this parliament and to the community the right approach to government—which is that all departments should find efficiencies, where those efficiencies exist; that we should live within our means; and that we should reduce our spending. We set an efficiency dividend for the ABC. We said, 'We're going to pause your indexation,' which is the basis of the claims that the ABC funding is being cut. It's not a real cut, but a pause in indexation. That's what's going on. What does the ABC say to that? Well, no, again, they are a paragon of government virtue: there are no efficiencies to be found within the ABC. Only the ABC. You couldn't find a dollar. You couldn't find a dime. You couldn't make anything better or improved or more efficient or get better value for money. That is the opposition's approach to government. That is why, when they're in government, they fail—because they are spending your money. They are spending the money of the Australian people. For the Labor Party to come in here—for Bill Shorten, the Leader of the Opposition, and for the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to come in here—and go all nostalgic on us and say, 'When I was a kid I used to love this organisation, and therefore I'm going to spare them from any efficiency dividends, when our soldiers have to find efficiencies.' is false, is wrong, and the Labor Party have no shame. 15:44 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway To get back to the real world, it is abundantly clear that this government would like us to think that somehow there have been no cuts to the ABC in this budget. They would be the only ones, and they would be denying what is actually in their own MYEFO and on page 79 of budget paper No. 2. But if they wish to deny that these are cuts, we are very happy for them to go out and keep telling the Australian public that there are no cuts to the ABC. Australians know full well that in 2013, just before this government was elected, we had then Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott look down the barrel of a camera, the night before the federal election, and explicitly promise no cuts to the ABC. And we know that it was the now Prime Minister, when he was communications minister, who presided over a quarter of a billion dollars in cuts in this government's very first budget in 2014. So if those opposite want to deny that this happened, if they want to deny their own MYEFO, if they want to deny that somehow they had their own cuts, then, please, be my guest. Not only are they treating the Australian public like mugs on their policy for the ABC and denying how important the ABC is, they're treating the Australian people like mugs for denying that a pause in indexation is actually a cut. It is actually a cut. So what are they saying? Are they saying that Michelle Guthrie is wrong? Are they saying that Justin Milne is wrong? Mr Hawke HWO Yes. Ms ROWLAND 159771 They're saying yes! So clearly they know more than those who are running the ABC. Mr Hawke HWO Absolutely. Ms ROWLAND 159771 Absolutely he says! Clearly they know more. It does take some gall to deny that there are cuts, but this is really in the same vein as the current communications minister. This budget was about cutting, amongst other things, the ABC. He put out a release on budget night, and the media release was called 'Strengthening Australia's connectivity, creativity and cultural heritage'. So that's how you do it, that's how you strengthen Australia's connectivity, creativity and cultural heritage—by making cuts to the ABC. It's right up there with the media release the NBN put out the day they announced the HFC was being paused. They put out a media release saying, 'Taking the customer experience to new heights, to new levels of customer experience'. But that's okay; we're very happy to acknowledge the Orwellian doublespeak of this government. The reality is that those cuts do have consequences: the hundreds of staff jobs that have been lost; short-wave radio being shut down; the drop in drama and the drop in documentaries. But, more than anything, the attitude of this government when it comes to the ABC will come back to bite them. They are so out of touch. They think that somehow it's only Labor people, Labor voters, who support the ABC. I can tell them this: this is an issue that goes across demographics, it goes across geography and it goes across political parties. So if this government wants to not only deny that there have been cuts but also justify these cuts to the ABC, then be our guest. The reality is that the ABC is a trusted brand right across Australia. Eighty-three per cent of Australians value their ABC. And if you want to talk about these cuts, have a look at some of the polling that has been done specifically about these cuts in the budget. The Australia Institute found that 58 per cent oppose cuts to the ABC—58 per cent! Essential polling went through a number of line items. One of them was 'Cutting spending on the ABC'. The total number opposed was 45 per cent. It's not as those these numbers are somehow an aberration; they are real. I will end on this point: if those opposite somehow think that the Australian people are going to fall for what they have pedalled in terms of saying 'no cuts to the ABC' and carrying on with their lies, they'll find the Australian people won't wear it. This reminds me exactly of the movement, the grassroots movement, when those opposite wanted to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act. We had a grassroots movement that stood up to them. We won then, and we'll win again. 15:49 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden Apparently today the matter of public importance, the most public issue that this parliament needs to address— Mr Champion interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 It's the member for Wakefield's final warning. Mr Robert HWT is a pause in the indexation of the ABC's funding, not a movement towards perhaps a peace treaty on the North Korean Peninsula, President Trump and what's happening with Kim Jong-un, a billion jobs being created, what's happening in Italy and the effect on bond markets, or what's happening in Europe. Ms Swanson interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Paterson is in the wrong seat and will remain quiet. Mr ROBERT HWT No. None of those issues seems to have resonance today. What has resonance is a pause in an increase of a billion-dollar budget for a national broadcaster. Ms Swanson interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Paterson will remove herself under 94(a). The member for Paterson then left the chamber. Mr ROBERT HWT I look at Minister Hawke, who has been here with me for a decade. We were here in the days of real cuts by those opposite. I was here when those opposite cut Defence as a proportion of GDP to 1938 levels. I was here when billions were cut from defence programs, when 40 per cent of all defence acquisitions were scrapped. I was here when those opposite didn't order a single ship for six years—and they want to speak about cuts! Apparently, out of all of that, they could cut our defence force while we were on combat operations in Afghanistan. Those opposite would cut defence spending, but apparently the ABC was sacrosanct. Australians at war were able to have cuts to what they were doing but journalists writing in Australia, out of Ultimo, couldn't. Now, if that's not the height of hypocrisy, I don't know what is. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition would have us believe that this is being done because—and I quote—'We on this side hate democracy.' I am not too sure whether that's hyperbole or stupidity, or both. This is what the matter of public of importance is about: should we pause the indexation of the ABC? Hint to those opposite: I know they have never, ever run a business in their life. They have certainly made large ones small. If you're running a billion-dollar organisation, if you can't find at least five per cent in savings, you aren't even trying. We're talking about a pause of 1.9 per cent, and suddenly it is catastrophic. Suddenly, it is the most important issue which this parliament must devote time to actually debate it. Those opposite would tell us that the ABC is the most trusted media organisation and is beloved like a small child's teddy bear. The problem with the 'beloved' argument peddled by my esteemed colleagues on the opposition benches is that the data does not support you. If I read the latest 2017 annual report, ABC's television metro daytime share has decreased right across the board, except in Perth. ABC's regional daytime share has decreased right across the board and, in some cases, markedly. ABC's metropolitan prime time has decreased right across the board. It's regional prime time share has decreased right across the board. ABC average weekly metropolitan reach has decreased right across the board. ABC television average weekly regional reach has decreased right across the board. In fact, by every single measure in their own report, bar one little bar, which is ABC television metropolitan daytime in Perth, fewer Australians are watching them. Where is the beloved, trusted argument gone? The data calls that hypocrisy. This government is simply saying to the ABC, as it has said to every other government department and as has been said since time immemorial or at least for the last decade or two, that government can expect an efficiency dividend—that is, a return on investment to the taxpayer—from increased management practice, increased technology and better leadership. That's reasonable. Every corporation on the planet is providing that sort of efficiency dividend—everyone, except the ABC. All the companies in this nation, all of the public sector departments and the public service departments are expected to provide a return to the taxpayer, except, apparently, the ABC. Why don't we just call this out for what it is? It's blatant hypocrisy and it's about time the ABC caught up and acted like every other public organisation. 15:55 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari As a result of the contributions of the last two members of the government, the member for Mitchell and the member for Fadden, we know that at least there's a conflict of views amongst them, because one says there's not a cut and the other says there is a cut. I'm not sure how you balance that up, but the member for Fadden made it very clear that he regarded this as a cut and that we should be grateful for it. We should be grateful that the ABC's had a cut, because after all they're a superefficient organisation who deserve a cut! Let me make it very clear: I live in a regional part of this country, and we rely absolutely on the services of the ABC. We rely absolutely on a quality, independent, publicly funded broadcaster as committed to by the Leader of the Opposition but not committed to by the government. We know that the leader of the government has said various things on various occasions depending on what his mood was. He said in 2013, 'There is no more committed defender of public broadcasting than me.' Well, what do we say to that? That's a bit of a fib. 'I haven't kept that up.' You could call it a lie if you wanted to: 'The fact is I, as the minister responsible, oversaw cuts of a quarter of a billion dollars out of the ABC budget, but I'm a believer in the ABC. What do you think I'd do if I didn't believe in the ABC?' Here's a bloke who in 2016 oversaw a further $28 million cut in the ABC and this year an $83 million cut out of the ABC. Where does that impact most? You might think from the schizophrenic behaviour of the government that it doesn't impact anywhere. The fact is it impacts across the country, but most particularly in remote communities. In December of 2016, we saw the ABC make a decision, based on the budget decisions of that year, that they had to find efficiencies in the way in which they were delivering services and cut some services. So what did they do? They thought they got the low-hanging fruit. The low-hanging fruit in this case was to abolish short-wave broadcasts in this country. Who did this directly impact? People who live in remote parts of this country who have no alternative means to get ABC services. The ABC, through its CEO, Ms Guthrie, said, 'We don't think this is required.' The fact is the ABC last consulted with Aboriginal communities who are beneficiaries of this short-wave service in my parts in 2007. That was the last time the ABC went out and talked to any person in regional Australia about these sorts of services, and they made this decision in 2016. It impacted upon travellers in the Northern Territory, pastoralists in the Northern Territory and the transport industry in the Northern Territory. It impacted broadly across the Northern Territory community, yet this government just said, 'Nothing to do with us—it's all about the ABC.' Well, it is to do with you, because you're the people who cut the budget in 2016 by $28 million on top of the $254 million you cut in 2014. I remember the 2014 budget, because there was not only the $254 million you cut out of the ABC but the half a billion dollars that you cut of services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. I remember that budget only too well. Mr Abbott—fancy!—said prior to the 2013 election, 'No cuts to the ABC.' They cannot be believed. They don't understand. They don't want to know what the desires of ordinary Australians are, because they've got no relationship with them. We saw the Prime Minister today admit that he's here defending the interests of those people who support him. 'I'll defend those people who I represent,' he said. Well, they're not the people who listen to the ABC. They're not the people in my electorate. They are the people in the top end of town. They're the people he looks after. If you happen to live in Point Piper or anywhere in those parts of Sydney, you're okay with the Prime Minister; he's a good dude. But if you live in my part of the country, or if you live in any part of regional Australia, you've been dealt a great disservice by this Prime Minister, who doesn't know and doesn't care. Not only does he not know or care but his government don't know and they don't care. They've made it very clear time after time. We've seen it in regional Australia—please. Mrs Miller, the Mayor of Katherine, who's a person I know well, didn't deserve to be treated in a misogynistic way by the health minister, yet the Prime Minister defended him. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The assistant minister on a point of order. Mr Coleman 241067 Mr Deputy Speaker, he should withdraw that reflection on a member. Mr Snowdon IJ4 I don't intend to. It is not a reflection. It is a matter of fact— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The assistant minister will resume his seat. I call the member for Dawson. Is the member for Lingiari going to withdraw the comment? Mr Snowdon IJ4 No. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I call the member for Dawson. 16:00 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson It's not surprising we have this MPI, this glorified schoolkids' debate, over the ABC and apparent funding cuts. These guys over there are always dancing with the one that brung-em, and the ABC brung-em. The systemic bias in the ABC has to be noted in this debate. The other day I saw the managing director of the ABC, Michelle Guthrie, apparently complaining to her staff that the freeze in funding was going to 'make it very difficult for the ABC to meet its charter requirements and audience expectations'. I thought that if the organisation or the managing director can't do their job with more than a billion dollars every single year, then either it is time to get a new organisation or time to get a new managing director. A billion dollars and you cannot meet your charter—it is ridiculous! I, too, used to grow up watching Dr Who and The Goodies—I still do. We can reminisce about all that, but times have changed. You can get that stuff on YouTube, on other free-to-air channels and on DVD. Most people do. As the good member for Fadden said before, the ABC's ratings are going down because we're living in different times. If another organisation were there and they followed their charter they probably wouldn't waste taxpayers' dollars producing some current affair show that aired left-wing bias and bashed up regional Australia at every chance it got, like they do on Four Corners. I could talk about the Four Corners show last year digging into Adani, which presented every green activist masquerading as an independent critic or independent analyst. Or I could talk about the recent story they did on a sugar tax, which was just lining up person after person to attack the sugar industry. Or I could talk about their attacks on the live trade. There is a consistent pattern here with shows like Four Corners. They often attack the productive end of Australia. They are often attacking regional Australia. We do have regionally based journalists on the ABC who do a very good job. But most of the funding the ABC gets from the government ends up being channelled into Ultimo, into the capital cities, leaving those guys less-resourced. Yes, there was some shift in funding a few years ago under our watch, but there should be more and the ABC should direct it more into the regional areas, principally to make up for the anti-regional bias on their main flagship shows, like Four Corners. A few years ago the Lewis efficiency study report came out—the ABC's own finance executives were involved in it—which talked about where savings could be achieved in the ABC. The report suggested many different things: a lot of inefficiencies in their back office functions; that they could rationalise technology; remove duplication; standardise solutions; retire old assets; centralise procurement; reduce managers and administrative support staff; outsource the payroll function; and work in conjunction with other taxpayer funded broadcasters such as the SBS. Yet, in 2014 we saw the ludicrous situation where the ABC went and outbid its fellow national broadcaster—a taxpayer-funded organisation, the SBS—for the Asian Cup football tournament. Why would you do that? That is just nonsense! It is the sort of stuff we see from the ABC. The ABC threw $1.5 million of taxpayers' money down the drain with that. There's a litany of these sort of sins that the ABC has committed. Why would they waste taxpayers' money on establishing Fact Check when we have PolitiFact—an independent private one that is doing it. Were they worried that they were somehow not going to be skewed left enough for them? What about the fortune they spent on Vote Compass, which can only be seen as this manual on how to cast your vote? It's ridiculous stuff. Why do we have this comedy channel that's really just this left-wing panel masquerading as humour, which is as funny as a 'Life. Be In It' T-shirt at a funeral? This is the sort of stuff we get. Double J: a channel for people to listen to music—the same sort of rubbish that we didn't listen to 10 years ago. This is the stuff they spend their money on, and they can't find an efficiency dividend? I'm sorry, the ABC can find some savings and they can do it without affecting regional Australia. They should do it without affecting regional Australia and they should clean up their problem of bias as well. 16:05 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I can see why this government and the member for Dawson wouldn't want a fact check facility at the ABC or elsewhere, with the rubbish they spin out all the time. Who could have guessed that when the Turnbull government handed down their budget earlier this month there would have been some surprises for the ABC? Yes, the Treasurer, happily stuffing the stockings of the big banks and his big business mates, has delivered a big lump of coal to our national broadcaster. In freezing the indexation applied to ABC funding, this Turnbull-Joyce-McCormack government has delivered an $83 million cut which forms part of an overall eye-watering cut of $254 million these Liberal-National governments have wrought upon on our ABC. When it comes to the ABC, you cannot trust any Liberal government. I ask members: what does this government have against the ABC? Why does it hate the ABC? Maybe it's something to do with the ABC being the most trusted source of news for Australians. Maybe it's something to do with the ABC being among the most trusted institutions in this country. Is it simple jealousy? All this mean and tricky, untrustworthy, malfunctioning government can do is to petulantly take away funding from the most trusted body in this country. What an immature and vapid bunch of nothings those opposite are. Before this Prime Minister finally, with what stands for courage in the Liberal Party, stood up to knock over the empty chair in the Liberal Party party room, the member for Warringah promised the Australian people that there would be no cuts to the ABC and to SBS. As sure as night follows day, Mr Rabbit proceeded to cut the ABC and SBS. That was 4½ years ago, and this Prime Minister is no different at all. Seriously, the empty chair would do a better job than this banker. He has thrown his #qanda leather jacket in the back of the cupboard and reached for his top hat from the top shelf and joined a cavalcade of conservatives lining up to give the ABC a bit of a kick. Well, I've got news for those opposite. People like the ABC. They like the national broadcaster more than they like you, and they trust the ABC more than they trust you. Here's another newsflash: people don't think the same as you over there. Just because you and Uncle Rupert don't like the ABC doesn't mean the rest of the country feels the same way. It's not the fault of the ABC that people aren't buying The Australian or watching Sky. That's no-one's fault but their own. If I could reflect on Western Australia and what the cuts have meant to the ABC in WA: under the Liberals and Nationals, the ABC staff numbers in Western Australia have plummeted due to jobs and services being centralised on the east coast. It's not because technology has made these jobs redundant. It's because they're cost cutting at the expense of local services. There's no reception, there's no HR manager, there are no finance staff and there's no outside broadcast van in Perth or in Western Australia. And, for rural WA—that's a third of the continent—as the Labor candidate for Fremantle, Josh Wilson, has pointed out often, there is no WA reporter for Landline. Someone is flown in from Sydney to report on Landline issues for Western Australia. I wonder what those agrarian socialists, the WA Nationals, think of that. I wonder if they know. Do the members for Durack and O'Connor and Forrest realise that a journalist from Sydney has to fly to rural WA to undertake WA stories for ABC's Landline? Because of this government's cuts to the ABC, the nation's pre-eminent rural and regional TV program, covering stories and issues concerning regional communities, does not have a Western Australian based reporter. Another bit of news for those opposite: there are fairly substantial agricultural and regional interests in WA. So I ask: why do you seek to constrain the national broadcaster with your cumulative $254 million of cuts to the ABC? Do you realise that the cuts mean that the issues important to those in WA cannot be canvassed on television in the cities and towns? Are you even able to see the connection? With this government and its cuts to the ABC: well, they have consequences. It's those in the regions and remote areas—they're the ones who miss out on their stories being told around the country. In addition to that, as the member for Lingiari pointed out, they have also lost short-wave radio in the far north—as did the Pacific, a place where we used to project reliable, independent news. But, no, no more. This vapid government has simply left the scene and left our broadcasting interests out of the Pacific. These $83 million cuts are shortsighted. To the millions of friends of the ABC, rest assured that the Labor Party will continue to stand alongside the ABC. (Time expired) 16:10 Mr CREWTHER 248969 Dunkley Today's MPI, about the government cutting $83 million from the ABC, is Labor back to their usual tricks. Last week they tried to make out that there are cuts to health care and hospitals, and they failed—particularly when the increase in healthcare funding is more than $10 billion higher than the approximate $13 billion when Labor last left government. So this week it's the ABC. The Australian Labor Party, as I said last week, are the real party of cuts. Where they can't cut, they create cuts. They pretend. They exaggerate. So what is the Labor Party proposing to do? Cuts to your standard of living through higher taxes. Cuts to retirees' savings. Cuts to your investments. Cuts to your housing. This will all come back to cost-of-living pressures and make it harder for everyday working families to get by. As usual, those opposite are showing absolutely no respect for Australians and are completely disregarding my constituents' intelligence. We are here to stand up to their lies, and the fact that they are lying to the Australian public shows that they are completely unfit to govern—spinning falsehoods and running any scare campaign that their tacticians can come up with. We on this side of the House are blessed with a great balance between private and public organisations, media and other avenues that ensure our community is provided with a variety of subjects, viewpoints and depth. ABC and SBS provide the vast majority of cultural and educational programs. But, as usual, the focus of those opposite is all about the dollar figure. They think that if the funding isn't increasing, how could the situation be improving? Again, they claim that by not increasing funding, it is a cut. In contrast, the coalition government is looking at the content, the management and the compliance with the ABC's charter. Also, it is vitally important that the ABC can maintain its independence without being fed more and more money to propagate the views of the big-spending, big-taxing Labor Party. In 2018 and 2019, the ABC will be provided with over $1 billion in annual funding. Over the three years from 2019-20 to 2021-22, the ABC will receive nearly $3.2 billion in base funding. The key point is that there are no cuts to the ABC. The Labor Party, who announced a one-, two-, three-, three-, four-, five-point budget plan, have shown yet again that they are fiscally illiterate, clearly not understanding the difference between cuts and an operational indexation pause. The operational indexation pause is equivalent to around only 2.6 cents in every dollar of funding that the ABC will receive. The ABC has greater funding certainty than any other media organisation in the nation—a great luxury, of which I know the ABC's management will be appreciative. How many other organisations, businesses or other bodies can know down to the dollar what their funding will be? They are dependent on investment performance and the reception of their message, amongst many other factors. But I am confident that the ABC can manage this short period effectively without reductions in content and services. The indexation pause does not even take effect until more than a year away. Furthermore, the ABC will continue to be exempt from the government-wide efficiency dividend. I also note that we are a government that is focusing on responsibility, as well as the ability to govern by bringing the country into strong economic management. We are currently a country that is in debt, and we are completely committed to returning to responsible governance as entrusted to us by the Australian public. This year's federal budget shows we have gone a long way to rectifying this, reducing the debt that originally arose from the six years of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments. We are now planning to bring it to surplus in 2019-20. This is the difference between this side of the House and those opposite. This means, by being fiscally responsible with ABC funding and funding to other organisations and by reducing our debt and increasing the revenue coming to the government through strong economic management, we can spend more on essential services. No more, for example, does the ABC need to report on those with spinal muscular atrophy suffering from the implications of not having access to Spinraza, because we are funding Spinraza in this year's budget. We are doing many other things on essential services through strong economic management, and I look forward to speaking further on this. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The discussion has concluded. BILLS 66 BILLS Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018 66

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No. 2) Bill 2018

Second Reading 66 16:16 Ms O'TOOLE 249908 Herbert It is no secret in this place that I am immensely proud to represent the largest garrison city in the country. Our men and women have fought hard to protect our country, and I have always ensured, and will continue to ensure, that I fight hard for them in this place, because they deserve no less. What has been most important to me is that I demonstrate my support and that I work with the veterans and the ex-serving personnel community in my electorate. In order to ensure that I do this, I started out working in a collaborative manner and formed the Townsville Defence Community Reference Group within the first month after being elected. The reference group comprises all of the ESOs; current serving ADF members, including RAAF members; family representatives; and other relevant stakeholders. The reference group has been integral in ensuring that our veterans get a strong and committed voice in this place to ensure that their voice is heard. I have spoken in this place on all veterans bills and spoken about the necessary changes that our current serving members, veterans and ex-serving personnel and their families require. What has been most important about the work undertaken by the reference group is the fact that a trusting and collaborative environment has been created in less than two years. As a result, the support for the Townsville Defence community has gone full steam ahead. Together we fought for the suicide prevention trials to be led and developed from the ground up in my electorate of Herbert. That is why Townsville's suicide prevention trial is leading the nation. We drafted the terms of reference, we drafted the job description, we appointed and recommended the steering committee and the chair, and the reference group continues to feed into the development of the trial and the establishment of a veterans' hub. Before being elected to parliament, I worked in the mental health community sector for 15 years. In that time I have given evidence to a Defence mental health Senate inquiry. I have met with veterans whose wounds from war are a lot deeper than those that can be physically seen. In my previous employment, I have stood up on a state and national stage to advocate for the voices of the so many people who are in the shadows and suffering alone in silence. This is my passion, and I bring these years of experience and advocacy into this place for our veterans. The suicide prevention trial, now known in Townsville as Operation Compass, has been just one of the many channels where advocacy was needed in this place. I want to particularly recognise the hard work and commitment of retired Lieutenant General John Caligari, Ray Martin, Floss Foster and Padre Stephen Brooks for their strong leadership in the reference group. Aside from mental health, the No. 1 issue raised with me by the Defence community is transitioning from Defence to civilian life. Townsville is a garrison city, and when I visit schools and speak with students there are many who aspire to be just like their mums and dads and join Defence after they leave school. It is their dream job, and there is no thought given to any other career prospects. When I speak with personnel who have transitioned, they reflect on the moments like these that they had when they were children. For these young people, there is no other career path, and when they come of age they join the Army or the RAAF. What they weren't foreseeing were the possibilities of injuries and that they could leave their dream job earlier than expected or planned. It is difficult to cope with the loss of your dream job, especially if it is due to an injury. People struggle to cope, and often they are also hit by huge financial impacts. There is the loss of benefits such as rental assistance, super and health care—from the security of a fortnightly pay cheque to, often, the insecurity of unemployment. This is particularly stressful on partners, who may be in a situation where their wages or salary are unable to make up the difference. These stresses grow and often lead to mental health issues. Employment is the No. 1 issue that many ex-serving members and veterans face upon leaving the Defence Force. Further education and training is important, particularly when the individual has had no choice but to leave the ADF and needs to reorient his or her life. Unemployment is a serious issue for veterans, with best estimates citing that 30.2 per cent of those who leave the ADF fail to find employment. This means that, of the approximately 5,500 individual veterans who leave each year, roughly 1,600 fail to move into employment. Of those who do, 19 per cent are underemployed in jobs beneath their capabilities, and those who are employed experience a 30 per cent drop in average income from their ADF wages. It is for this reason that Labor has committed $121 million to a veterans' employment program, which seeks to ensure that veterans are best prepared to move into meaningful employment and that employers are able to gain the many advantages of hiring these men and women with highly-developed skills. This has been welcomed by people in the Defence community of my electorate of Herbert. Part of our plan involves working with states and territories to expand the Queensland tertiary admissions scheme, which takes rank and length of service and translates it into an automatic entrance rank, allowing easier access to university. Education and reskilling can be an important part of the transition for those leaving the ADF, but for those who have left due to illness or injury, reorienting their lives is even more important. That is why this bill is important. Schedule 1 recognises the importance of education and retraining for those whose service has had a greater impact on them. Under the changes proposed in schedule 1, individuals in receipt of an incapacity payment who are undertaking full-time study via a DVA approved rehabilitation plan will have their incapacity payments maintained at 100 per cent during their study. Currently the majority of these payments reduce to 75 per cent of their normal earnings after a period of 45 weeks. This change will provide financial security to both the veteran and their family while they are undertaking their study. Providing this support will ensure better outcomes for veterans and their families and assist veterans to move into meaningful employment post service. In addition, this measure will assist those who are currently undertaking full-time study as part of a DVA rehabilitation plan. They will also be entitled to have their payment paid at 100 per cent from the commencement of these amendments. It is anticipated that these changes will assist approximately 150 people per year. I fully support this amendment, as it will ensure that those who are on an incapacity payment can focus on their future without the stress and worry of how they will manage financially. Schedule 2 will create a new suicide prevention pilot, which will provide greater support to those who have been hospitalised after an attempted suicide or those who may be at an increased risk of suicide because of their suicidal ideation, mental health or other factors. This is one of three current suicide prevention trials aimed at providing target support for veterans. The first of these, as I mentioned before, is Operation Compass, a Department of Health initiative based in my electorate, working in collaboration with the Northern Queensland Primary Health Network. The legislative basis for the second trial passed the parliament earlier this year and created the Coordinated Veterans' Care Program, which is aimed at mental health support for veterans in rural and regional areas. The third trial uses this coordinated approach and places the GP at the hub, working with veterans and their families. The pilot will provide coordinated support to ensure veterans are accessing treatment and social support to reduce the risk of suicide and enhance the quality of life of the participants. It will provide intensive and assertive management services to support a veteran after they have been discharged from hospital, which includes support to access other relevant government and nongovernment treatment and services, aiming to reduce risks and improve outcomes for those involved. The changes in schedule 3 are logical, as they will provide greater support to those recently widowed. Schedule 3 will amend the amount of time wholly-dependent partners have to make a decision about whether to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or convert it wholly or partly to a lump sum, from six months to two years. Partners of deceased members who have been granted compensation following a member's death under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act are eligible to receive weekly payments for life, or may convert 25 per cent, 50 per cent, 75 per cent or 100 per cent of this weekly amount to its lifetime equivalent as a lump sum. Currently, as I've said, partners have six months to decide whether they would like to receive their compensation as a weekly payment or to convert the whole or part of that payment to a lump sum. While there is the ability for the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to make an extension of time, this requires an application in writing to seek that additional time. This amendment will ensure that those individuals in these difficult circumstances have sufficient time to make this very important decision. The commission will also be able to extend this beyond two years, where they deem it appropriate, subject to an application. This might be appropriate in circumstances where there are complicated family law issues to be resolved. Schedule 4 amends the Veterans' Entitlements Act in order to extend eligibility for the Long Tan Bursary to grandchildren of Vietnam veterans. The Long Tan Bursary offers 37 scholarships of up to $12,000 over three years to children of Vietnam veterans, to assist with post-secondary education and training. I have many proud Vietnam veterans in my community, and I am sure that they, along with their families, will be very happy about and supportive of this amendment. In speaking with ESOs and veterans' advocates, the complexity of the processes and the issues around the information provided during the needs assessment have been raised regularly. Veterans have raised concerns about the needs assessment being used to determine compensation claims. According to these veterans, in their experience, information provided during this assessment has been used to decline claims as to severity further down the track. This is, in part, due to the questions, and the answers provided by the veterans. For example, the assessment will ask if a veteran can still do yard work. The veteran may reply that he or she can—without detailing that, following this activity, they experience several days of restricted or no movement. According to advocates, this admission is then referred to, down the track, as the veteran being able to undertake the activity, which is simply not the case. Labor has led the charge regarding this issue. Labor has raised this issue with the government and requested that they ensure it was clear to those applying that the impact of their answers may be taken into account. After this push by Labor, the government advised that the needs assessments are not used by DVA to determine compensation, but are, instead, used to identify forms of support and assistance that the veteran may be eligible for or benefit from. Examples of this may be household assistance or rehabilitation. The government have taken this feedback on board and will be providing further clarification to veterans applying online that this assessment will not be used to calculate compensation rates. These assurances enable me to support this measure, which seeks to make the complicated claims process easier for veterans and their loved ones. The final schedule simplifies the processes for veterans applying for compensation under the MRCA during a needs assessment. Under the MRCA, a claim for composition is distinct from a claim for liability. In many cases, compensation is claimed concurrently with liability by a member or former member, indicating on the liability claim form that they are seeking compensation. However, in some cases, a claim for liability will be made without an application for compensation. During this process, a needs assessment will be carried out. These are often conducted over the phone and, during this call, a member or former member will sometimes state that they would like to seek some form of compensation under the MRCA. Currently, this requires the individual to put a separate application in. Under these changes, indicating verbally that the veteran is seeking compensation under the act is considered an application. I fully support these measures, which make the claims process easier for veterans, as long as they don't disadvantage veterans. I will support the measures that seek to improve the lives of our veterans and their families, because they deserve nothing less. Veterans have fought to protect our country, to give us the freedoms that we enjoy, and I will fight for them every day in this place. ADJOURNMENT 68 ADJOURNMENT Budget 68 16:30 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur Today, I want to raise the many difficulties faced by young people and the lack of attention to the plight of young people in this government's policies. For far too long, the scales have been tipped against young people in our society, and my generation is the one taking, often without thinking, all the benefits. For too long, it's been easy to ignore our youth. But I strongly believe we cannot do this any longer. It appears that our young people are going to be worse off than their parents, and this is something we should be ashamed of and try to change, not ignore. These days, when a young person finishes high school and has to make a decision about future training and career paths, there are many very complex scenarios that have to be faced. For example, do they choose a university with high HECS fees, no job security and very competitive placements? Do they choose vocational education, again, often with high fees, poor apprenticeship wages and unscrupulous providers, who have in the past really damaged the system almost irreparably? There is very poor post-school support for those who struggle with learning and other disabilities. For those who may take time to enter the jobs market, social security payments, for example, Newstart, are at all-time lows and below what I would see as being subsistence level. In this day and age, it is virtually impossible in any of the major cities for a young person to live off Newstart, without extensive support from friends and family, even just to cover their housing costs. Australia's population increased by almost two million people between 2011 and 2016—that's a rate of almost 10 per cent—and about half of those are under 40. The median age of the Australian population is now 37, so we have a lot of young people. We hear a lot about our ageing population, but, in fact, over half of our population are under 40 and need us to be cognizant of their difficulties. There are many, many difficulties faced by young people with things like housing. For example, 20 years ago, over 60 per cent of people under 35 were buying their own home. That has now been reduced to 41 per cent. I have been to auction after auction with my children to see them outbid many, many times by investors, who have enormous tax advantages in buying housing. How can this be fair? Do we want our younger generation to be renters for the rest of their lives? That's what we're looking at. With housing, it's important to remember that it is one of the most important social determinants of progress. For children to have a stable home, without having to change school all the time, is the most important factor in their education. For people in work, having a stable home is very important in maintaining their job prospects and improving their job mobility. In education, work, health and housing and social welfare, young people are discriminated against all the time. We have a system that's weighted against them, and there is very little impetus on behalf of this government to make things better. With private health insurance, the premiums are now at a level that young people just can't afford them, yet very little has been done to make private health insurance more affordable. We're seeing young people, in particular, dropping out of private health insurance every week that goes by. Our children, our young people, are our future. Unless we do something to help them, our future looks very bleak. It is important that we make changes, and those changes need to happen very quickly. My belief is that we should have a minister for young people, specifically tasked with improving the situation for our youth. We should also be trying to look at ways that make housing more affordable, such as the negative gearing policies developed by the shadow Treasurer. In every talk we have about the dividend imputation removal of cash refunds promoted by our financial team, we need to be cognisant of the fact that our young people are the ones that are being damaged. (Time expired) Budget 69 16:35 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I'm pleased to stand in this House in this adjournment debate and talk about the budget that was delivered by this government earlier this month. I'm very pleased to share with the House that it's been very well received by the constituents and businesses in my electorate of Forde. Interestingly, the only ones that are actually complaining are those ones wearing red shirts and campaigning for the Labor candidate, but that's fine—they can complain all they like, because that's actually all they do. As far as the residents are concerned, the budget delivers. This government is delivering on its commitment to live within its means, to create a stronger economy for more jobs, to keep our borders safe, to guarantee essential services and to encourage and reward hardworking Australians. When Australians live in a stronger economy, it provides them with choices and the opportunities for the future that they not only want but deserve through their hard work and effort. I have assured my constituents that this budget includes tax relief measures for so many working Australians so that they can keep more of their hard-earned money in their pockets. At the end of the day, the money we receive as governments through taxes is not our money; it is the money of hardworking Australians who go out every single day to earn a living, build wealth and build this country for the future, not only for current generations but for generations to come. That is why it's so important that this government is seeking to move the budget back towards balance and surplus. In my electorate of Forde, in South-East Queensland, we have a diverse range of small businesses, service industries and hardworking families. Some 74,000 taxpayers in my electorate of Forde will stand to benefit from the low- and middle-income tax relief announced in the budget. This means that a high school teacher on $75,000 in the electorate of Forde will have an extra $530 in their pocket as a result of this year's budget and an extra $3,740 in their pocket over the first seven years of this tax plan. A workshop manager on $88,000 will have an extra $575 in their pocket, an accountant on $87,000 will have an extra $530 and a fast-food operator on $42,000 will be $350 better off. But, importantly, whilst we're ensuring that Australians pay lower taxes and fairer taxes, this budget also guarantees the essential services that the families in my electorate of Forde rely on. We are doing this by increasing total health and hospital funding by some 30 per cent. With schools we are delivering 50 per cent on average increase per student in school funding. Every school in my electorate of Forde will be better off, with more fair, needs based funding for every student and school. Interestingly, those opposite have got nothing positive to add and continue to tell a litany of mistruths in this space of health and education funding. In the past year, residents and businesses alike across my electorate have noticed that our economic plan is working. In 2017 we saw a record 415,000 jobs created across the country. As part of that we have seen 140,000 people transition from welfare to work. It's been said many times in this House that the best form of welfare is a job. The reason for that is that it gives people self-confidence, it builds their skills, and it gives them the opportunity to create wealth and stability for their families. That is why a strong economy that creates opportunities for people to work is so very important. One of the big drivers of that is the small to medium businesses in our economy. They benefit in this budget and previous budgets through tax cuts for small to medium businesses up to $50 million and also the extension of the instant asset write-off, which benefits some 15,500 local businesses. Centennial and Moore Parks: Parkrun 70 16:40 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith parkrun organises free, weekly, timed five-kilometre runs in local parks throughout the world. It's part of a global health and fitness movement that's seen over 4½ million registered park runners in 22 different countries using a thousand parks worldwide. Australia now has the second largest number of park runners in the world. The first parkrun event in Australia took place in April 2011 on the Gold Coast. It's grown to 304 parkruns across the country, with nearly half a million runners covering over 25 million kilometres. I am proud that one of those parkruns is held in my electorate of Kingsford Smith, the Kamay parkrun, on the picturesque shores of the Botany Bay, at Yarra Bay. I'm a regular participant in the Kamay parkrun, and it's inspiring to see large numbers of locals out running each weekend. Parkrun's greatest attribute is its accessibility. It's run by local volunteers and it's free with a simple registration. You turn up and run. It's for all ages and abilities—children, the elderly, and those with disabilities. You can walk it, take your dog or push your wheelchair. Parkrun's signature characteristic is that it's free and accessible to all. It encourages people to get out, to exercise and enjoy the outdoors and to have a go. I was recently contacted by a number of constituents who wanted to start a parkrun in Centennial Parklands in Sydney. Centennial Park, as Sydney's premiere parkland, regularly hosts numerous sporting events and physical activities. It's the perfect venue for parkrun, as the park services a large and growing population around Sydney and a number of communities around the park. But locals were shocked to learn that Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust would not allow parkrun to have their weekly run in their park, unless they paid a fee. This is the complete antithesis of everything that parkrun stands for. Parkrun is about accessibility and building camaraderie around exercise. Charging a fee undermines that mission. There are millions of park runners throughout the world who don't pay a fee and Australian park runners should not do so, as well. Parkrun should not be charged a fee by Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust for locals simply getting together on a Saturday morning to go for a run. Charging a fee is the complete opposite of everything that parkrun stand for: the open and accessible use of public parklands for recreation and fitness for all, not for a fee. It's why the nation prides itself on our public parks. It's also why we pay taxes—to ensure that public parklands are available for all for free. At a time when preventable diseases like obesity, diabetes and heart disease, related to a lack of physical activity, are on the increase in Australia, our governments and government appointed bodies should be doing more to encourage people to get out and exercise. Decisions such as that of Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust regarding parkrun undermine that goal. It's also part of an alarming trend with respect to the management of Centennial Park. Over recent years I have been contacted by a number of local school principals and parents outraged by the steep increase in fees the park's trust has charged schools for the use of the playing fields for regular school sport. Last Australia Day, when I was at Centennial Park with my family for a game of cricket and a barbecue, I was horrified to see that a large portion of the park was actually closed off, with large fences and parking restricted, because there was a rock concert on there in a couple of days. People weren't able to access that part of the park. If the management of Centennial Park continues in this fashion, they may as well change the sign on the gates to the parklands to Centennial Parklands Pty Ltd. The people of Sydney don't like this increasing corporatisation of Centennial and Moore Parks. In the wake of the meeting with the constituents who want to establish a parkrun event in Centennial Park, I have written to the CEO of Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust, Kim Ellis and asked Centennial Parklands to reconsider their decision to charge a fee to parkrun. I call on the trust members to reverse this appalling decision and allow parkrunners to come together and exercise in Sydney's premiere parklands for free. I have also established a petition on change.org, and I'm calling on members of the public to get behind this proposal and get behind the notion of parkrun being available to all in Centennial Park. Small Business 71 16:45 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner It's Queensland Small Business Week. I enjoy celebrating the achievements of small businesses in Bonner. Coming from a small business background myself, I also enjoy helping local small businesses grow and stay competitive. Today, I want to talk about how this government is delivering for small business. I'd also like to shine a spotlight on the local small businesses and small business groups that I've been working with this year. I thank the government for extending the $20,000 instant write-off again. Over 3,200 small businesses in Bonner have benefitted from this measure since it was first introduced. Small-business owners have told me how helpful the instant asset write-off has been for them to purchase much-needed equipment. We're also continuing to cut red tape for small businesses and individuals—to the tune of $5.9 billion since 2013. The latest Annual regulatory reform report shows the regulatory burden on business was reduced by over $800 million from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2017. I have been pleased to share this great news with small businesses all over Bonner. The 2018 Brisbane Small Business Expo recently rolled through Mount Gravatt. There were over 230 trade tables showcasing small businesses from across Brisbane, the Gold Coast and Logan regions. It was great to have the small-business minister there. We chatted with hardworking small-business owners who told us how the measures had helped them. I'm proud to have helped bring the expo to Brisbane for the first time in its seven-year history. It was great to have an event like this in Bonner that recognises the outstanding contribution small businesses make to our community and gives them the opportunity to network and learn other ways to bolster their business. Thanks to expo organiser Paula Brand for her hardworking attitude and for making this event happen. I have also shared the good budget news with the local small businesses all over Bonner. In the last few months, I have been on almost 10 small-business walks. These walks are some of my favourite ways to engage with local business communities. I've been everywhere from the Wynnum CBD and Mayfair Village to the strips and plazas along Logan Road in Mount Gravatt, going from shop to shop chatting with small-business owners about what matters to them most. It's been great chatting with the hardworking people at Stavlos Barn Deli Café in Belmont, at Rod's Meatery at the Gumdale shops on New Cleveland Road, at the Move Podiatry Clinic in Manly, at the Flour Monkey Bakery in Carina, at Gilmour's Comfort Shoes at Palmdale Shopping Centre in Upper Mount Gravatt, and so many more. I'm proud to be part of a government that is backing these small businesses. The coalition will always support small business to grow and create more jobs. We understand that, when small businesses are given room to grow and to employ more people and pay them better wages, we will all benefit. I look forward to delivering more for the small businesses of Bonner. I'm looking forward to returning home and hitting the pavement again to talk to more small business owners about what this government can do for them. Vocational Education and Training 71 16:48 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan The member for Macarthur spoke rather eloquently, I might say, at the beginning of this adjournment debate regarding issues for youth and issues for young people. He spoke about housing and access to housing as social determinant for the quality of life and for health. A dedicated and well-respected health professional, I know that the member for Macarthur knows what he's talking about when he talks about social determinants. I would also add that a social determinant for health and quality of life is access to training and education, not just for young people but also for women and for people who, later in life, are perhaps looking to retrain and return to work. It's on that topic that I'd like to speak today, because while I was out doorknocking during the 2016 election, I met a single mother and her son. He desperately wanted to get into TAFE and to study at TAFE. But he couldn't, because his mother couldn't afford the up-front fees that were required. It took me back to my days teaching at TAFE—which was many, many years ago, I might add. I coordinated a pathways program which was designed to help migrants who had completed their Adult Migrant English Program entitlements—most of them women—to successfully attain a Certificate III in Aged Care. I resolved to help this mother and her son. I accompanied them to TAFE, helped him to enrol in TAFE and to find the course that he wanted to do. But since then I have met many parents and their children who also face challenges enrolling in the TAFE course of their choice, either because they couldn't afford the up-front fees or because the courses that they wanted simply weren't available. I've also talked to various stakeholders about the state of TAFE in Western Australia, and I have come to the conclusion that our once first-class training system has been decimated. In the last five years, in fact, more than $3 billion has been cut from TAFE and training, and Australia has about 140,000 fewer apprenticeships today than it did when this government was first elected. TAFE courses have been cut, TAFE campuses have been closed and TAFE teachers have lost their jobs. This is a sad indictment on our once world-class training system. In Western Australia, there are 9,615 fewer apprentices and trainees in training since 2013. That's a drop of 25 per cent. In my electorate of Cowan, there are 702 fewer apprentices and trainees, a drop of 25 per cent, and this is not attributable to natural attrition. It is not because fewer people want to go to TAFE. In fact, most people in Cowan are employed in construction, retail, manufacturing, health care and social assistance. These are the kinds of professions catered for by the TAFE system, so the decline in apprentices and trainees in Cowan is not reflected in the employment profile of my community. It is a direct result of this government's progressive decimation of the TAFE system. Labor recognises the importance of a strong TAFE system to provide employment opportunities for middle- and working-class people, for women, for young people and for workers retraining in later life. We recognise that a strong TAFE system is needed to meet demand in growing occupations in the disability, aged-care and technology focused sectors. We know that good quality training and a well-funded public-training system is necessary to develop a quality workforce for future jobs. And that's why we're committed to scrapping up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE students. That's why we're committed to ensuring that trades like carpentry and bricklaying, and skills like aged care, are not going to face skills shortages because people who want to learn and who want to work can't access the courses they need. In addition to our commitment to waiving fees we're also going to invest $100 million in modernising TAFE facilities around the country, guarantee that at least two out of three Commonwealth training dollars goes to TAFE, ensure that one in every 10 jobs on Commonwealth priority projects are filled by Australian apprentices and provide 10,000 pre-apprentice programs for young people and 20,000 adult apprentice programs for older workers. Only a Labor government can be relied on to deliver the training needs for a future workforce. (Time expired) Fisher Electorate 72 16:53 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher As I approach the end of my second year as a member of parliament, I want to take this opportunity to give the people of Fisher an update on what I have and the Turnbull government have delivered for our community. I have spoken many times in this place about the transformative and unprecedented package of federal funding we have delivered for the Sunshine Coast's long-neglected transport infrastructure. In short, since my election the Turnbull government has allocated $3.2 billion to upgrade the Bruce Highway between the Sunshine Coast and Brisbane, and it has committed $390 million to duplicate the North Coast railway line. I appreciate that that pales into insignificance against the money that the federal government has put into Groom, but I'm very, very pleased and very proud to have delivered on such incredible funding for the seat of Fisher. We have also supplied millions to produce a detailed business case for high-speed rail between Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast. These investments are going to get local residents home sooner and safer and provide a massive boost to our local economy. However, we've gone far beyond this unprecedented infrastructure spend, delivering for every part of our community. In education, we've delivered $266 million in extra funding for our 39 local schools, meaning that every school will see an increase in per-pupil funding over the coming four years. For younger students, we've delivered increases in childcare support for 5,795 families in my electorate, in addition to an extra $200,000 we've allocated for three local childcare centres through the Community Child Care Fund. Fisher's young people will also benefit from the $5 million we have invested in a new Sunshine Coast community sporting hub in Kawana that will provide both amateur and professional facilities for our sports men and women. We've delivered the Commonwealth-supported medical places needed for a full medical school at the new Sunshine Coast University Hospital. When all those nay-sayers said that it couldn't be done, we delivered. And we allocated $69 million extra for the University of the Sunshine Coast. That hospital, the University of the Sunshine Coast hospital, has become part of an emerging Sunshine Coast healthcare hub, following the Turnbull government's investment of $5 million in mental health treatment and research programs at the mind and neuroscience research centre otherwise known as the Thompson Institute. I was heavily involved in advocating for funding for the Thompson Institute, and I will continue to do so, to support the work this great organisation does. We've also allocated $487,000 for a new program to help 700 young people with autism on the Sunshine Coast, and $1 million to support Fisher's homeless students. Our record investment in Medicare has led to the highest-ever bulk-billing rates in my community. Between July 2017 and March 2018, 88.3 per cent of all GP appointments were bulk billed. People in Fisher saw their GP 135,000 more times without paying this year than in the last year under Labor. In employment, more than 20,000 local businesses have benefited from job-creating tax cuts and our instant asset write-off, leading to unemployment of only 5.1 per cent. It's the first time, to my recollection, in my memory, that we've been lower than the national average. I'm very proud of that. I'm further supporting local jobs by helping to diversify our economy through the Fisher defence industry initiative. This scheme has seen millions of dollars of defence contracts flowing into business in Fisher, including a $1 million grant to local business HeliMods to commercialise their groundbreaking power-assisted stretcher loader technology, and I'm very hopeful of making another announcement in the defence industry space in the next couple of weeks. For employees, we are in the process of delivering tax cuts for 60,697 low- and middle-income earners in Fisher. This will put up to $1,060 back in the pockets of local families. We've delivered funding for three mobile phone blackspot towers in Beerwah, Glass House and near Peachester. They'll dramatically improve mobile reception for small businesses and consumers alike. We've delivered a $140,000 grant for CCTV cameras, and $205,000 for wildlife conservation—on top of another $250,000, so it's about $500,000 for conservation— (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG The House stands adjourned. House adjourned at 16:58   The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Vamvakinou ) took the chair at 10:00.

Thursday, 31 May 2018

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Vamvakinou ) took the chair at 10:00.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 74 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Tasmania 74 10:00 Mr HART 263070 Bass Tasmanians, including those in Braddon and Bass, will always be better off under a federal Labor government. I make this statement on some very simple economic foundations. Under a Shorten Labor government the vast majority of Tasmanians will pay less income tax. Under Labor's better, fairer tax plan, Tasmanian workers with incomes between $48,000 and $90,000 will be $900 better off, which is undeniably better than the tax cuts offered by the Turnbull government. The government's second round of tax cuts to high-income earners won't help Tasmanian businesses because the majority of Tasmanians won't get it and, therefore, won't be able to spend it on Tasmanian businesses. Tasmanians have earned less than taxpayers in other states; annual average earnings are slightly more than $53,000, and the median annual income is less than $30,000. Under Labor, larger tax cuts for lower- and middle-income earners mean more disposal income for Tasmanians to spend in their local Tasmanian businesses. More than 13,000 Tasmanian businesses will see no benefit from the $80 billion handout to big business. Of more than 2,800 businesses in Bass, just nine businesses will see any of it. Under a Labor government, Tasmanian schools and hospitals will be better off. Labor will invest in Tasmanians' health and education as a priority, instead of handing out over $80 billion to big business and the banks. My electorate of Bass shares the northern coastline with the electorate of Braddon, where my friend and colleague Justine Keay is working hard to be re-elected because she knows that Braddon will be better off under Labor. Tasmanians remember all too well the Liberal promise that there would be no cuts to hospitals in 2013. What they do not know is that Liberals tore up the intergovernmental agreement which bound the Commonwealth to bear 50 per cent of the increased cost in health. What have we had since? Four years of cuts and neglect from not one but two prime ministers, and now Tasmania's public hospitals are in crisis as federal funding fails to keep up with increased health costs. Under the Liberals the cuts to our hospitals are putting workers at the LGH and North West Regional Hospital under pressure, and the lives of northern Tasmanians are at risk. The Prime Minister and his Liberal government are cutting $715 million from 2017 to 2020, including $1.9 million from the LGH in my electorate and $730,000 from the North West Regional Hospital in Braddon. This is a disaster for northern Tasmanians. Justine Keay, as Labor candidate for Braddon, will fight for our public health system in Tasmania. I will not rest in ensuring that health, education and, of course, the lives of ordinary Australians are supported in Bass. Nicholson, Mr Roger Bailie, OAM 74 10:03 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins Roger Bailie Nicholson was a remarkable Australian. Roger, who sadly passed away this month, made a vast contribution to our community. Roger enjoyed a successful career, with roles including government relations manager at Shell and executive director of the Australian Institute of Petroleum. His voluntary activities were many and varied. He was heavily involved with the Lord Somers Camp and Power House, the Citizen Military Forces, Melbourne Rotary Club and Melbourne Probus Club. Perhaps the most defining aspect of Roger's legacy is the significant role he played in establishing Very Special Kids, or VSK. VSK is an extraordinary charity based in Higgins, first established in 1985. VSK became the first support organisation in Victoria designed to offer assistance to families of children with life-threatening conditions. Roger negotiated premises, obtained and organised finance and supervised the building program. In recognition of the crucial role he played, VSK made Roger a life governor. Roger's achievement was honoured in 2007 when he received an Order of Australia for service to the community, particularly through support for youth organisations, including Very Special Kids. More than 200 people packed St George's Anglican Church to say goodbye, demonstrating just how much our community respected Roger. Our thoughts are with his wife, Fay; children, Robert, Diana and Fiona; and his remarkable grandchildren, Sarah, Emma, Lucy, Harry, William, Laura and Allison. It was fitting, then, that on the day after Roger's funeral VSK hosted its annual 24-hour treadmill challenge fundraiser. The support shown by our community was incredible, with the event beating its target, raising an impressive $910,000. I congratulate the VSK team, including its incredible patron and founder, Sister Margaret Noone; CEO, Michael Wasley; chairman, Peter Polson; and the fantastic staff and volunteers, as well as the wider community, for this phenomenal effort. It costs more than $7.5 million per year to operate and run VSK, so every single dollar counts. VSK helps more than 950 families across Victoria. I was delighted that the federal government could play a small part in securing their future with the purchase of their grounds in Malvern with a federal grant of $4 million. VSK no longer has to pay rent, meaning it can instead focus its funds towards delivering more support. When we first announced federal funding we said that VSK does the work of angels. Those words are so true, and they hold true today. Long may its important work continue in delivering support, advice and help to families that most need it. Chifley Electorate 75 10:06 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley As many of us know, particularly on this side, a good education is a powerful start to any child's life, and so getting better support and funding for our schools is always a top priority of mine. There are many factors contributing to our children's journeys, but one of the most important is having dedicated teachers and educational leaders to guide them. One of those role models for me is Fiona Jackson. Over 39 years in education she made exceptional contributions to many Chifley schools, from appointments as a teacher at William Dean Public School to that as principal at Ropes Crossing Public School. She was a passionate, educational leader working to improve the learning outcomes of students, which was evident and shone through in proud students accepting awards for outstanding achievements at the end-of-year presentation ceremonies, many of which I was pleased to attend. Fiona, best wishes for your retirement and thanks for your invaluable service. Another Chifley champion who recently retired is Jenny Gibbons. An educator for 28 years, most recently as principal in at Mountain View Adventist College in Doonside, Jenny made a permanent mark on the college. When she started at the school, 15 years ago, there were roughly 100 students. Today it educates nearly 700. She established the middle school, started a gateway class, opened a new admin building and school halls and expanded the campus with a prep centre, which I had the privilege of attending the opening of last October. Jenny finished up with Mountain View last year, officially retiring this year, and on behalf of a grateful community, thanks, Jenny, for your care and guidance. Another priority of mine is getting better and affordable health care for Mount Druitt residents. I've been fighting for an MRI facility at Mount Druitt Hospital for years. After a long community campaign the funding for the MRI was finally delivered by federal Labor in 2013, only to be ripped away by the federal coalition later the same year. After the New South Wales coalition miraculously installed the MRI, Malcolm Turnbull refused to grant a Medicare licence for this machine. That licence would allow locals to have affordable access to technology to help Mount Druitt residents fight terrible diseases like cancer. The hospital wrote recently to the federal Minister for Health, Greg Hunt, asking for a licence. He knocked them back again. This means you can only get an outpatient MRI if you spend hundreds of dollars for it. The average weekly income in Mount Druitt is lower than the national average. A $250 scan is one-fifth of that household's weekly income. That there are people in need of this service and unable to pay for scans while, at the same time, the MRI machine is sitting in the hospital being underutilised is an utter disgrace. If he's got the guts, let's see the health minister visit Mount Druitt and tell locals why they have to fork out hundreds in MRI costs while he can throw money for licences in better-off Liberal electorates like that of the member over there. Calare Electorate: Volunteers 75 10:09 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Last week we marked National Volunteer Week, and I am proud to say there are over 27,000 volunteers in the Calare electorate. Volunteers are absolutely vital in country communities, and without them country communities would grind to a halt. I wanted to recognise some of the wonderful volunteers in the Rylstone and Kandos communities in the House today. Firstly, Kandos Rylstone Community Radio 98.7 has over 50 volunteers, 30 of whom are announcers. The committee was formed in 1993, and the station went to air in 1994. After starting out at the local high school, they set up a permanent office in the main street of Kandos in 1998, and they have been a 24-hour broadcaster since 2001. I would like to make special mention of the committee, including President Brent Barlow, Vice-President Brian Neaves, Secretary Karen Riley, Treasurer Pat Spithill and members Ron Spithill, Faith Cauchi and Peter Hay. Congratulations to everyone at Kandos Rylstone Community Radio 98.7 and thank you for your wonderful work. The CWA is well known to many country communities. Theydo absolutely vital work. The Kandos and Rylstone area is no exception. In fact, recently the CWA Kandos Gardens Fair was held. This is the main event organised by the Kandos CWA and it is highly successful. I would like to congratulate members of the Kandos CWA: President Mary Kavanagh, Vice-President Margot Palk, Treasurer Jenny More and Secretary Gemma Brading. The CWA organises the CWA Kandos Gardens Fair in conjunction with local gardeners and it is a must-see for people who love their gardens. The gardens are greatly varied with country properties and town properties, and it is a real highlight of the country calendar into that area—in fact, around the region. I'd also like to thank the Rylstone CWA for their wonderful work in the community. They actually also helped with the CWA Kandos Gardens Fair by organising the catering. I would like to recognise Secretary and Treasurer Margaret Baxter, President Robin Johnston, Debbie Bush, Susan Dabanon, Bev Duss, Jenni Farrell, Nola Fraser, Monica Hawkins, Helen Marsonet, Elizabeth McKay, Carol Norris, Diane Page, Wendy Rodda, Margaret Skropeta and life member Shirley McQuiggin. As I said, they organised and catered for the morning tea, lunch and afternoon tea at the garden fair and did a wonderful job. The CWA have been wonderful advocates for country people over many generations and decades. They have worked with me on many campaigns, including the campaign for a 24-hour rescue helicopter. We appreciate all of our volunteers around the region, including the Rylstone-Kandos area. (Time expired) Fowler Electorate 76 10:12 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler Recently the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas data drawn from the 2016 census was released. It found that my electorate of Fowler is the most disadvantaged area across the nation. Fowler has been ranked first among the 150 federal electorates in terms of the socioeconomic index of disadvantage, with more than 50 per cent of my electorate falling within the bottom 10 per cent of the rankings. By comparison, electorates such as Wentworth, Kooyong and Menzies had no area in the bottom 10 per cent of the rankings. To add some context to this: a range of factors are utilised by the ABS in calculating the index for socioeconomic disadvantage. These include education level, type of work, rent, levels of English, disabilities and family status. While there are a number of reasons why Fowler has ranked as the most disadvantaged electorate, it is important to consider the significant role that my community plays with regard to the settlement of a disproportionate number of migrants and refugees. The ABS finding demonstrates that there is clearly a broader issue in respect of fairness and equity concerning this government and the measures that have been introduced under its watch. The 2018 budget only re-enforces the Liberal government's misplaced priorities, with the government playing a hoax with the electorate, particularly in relation to the Personal Income Tax Plan. While we are talking about a plan that is estimated to climb to more than $18 billion a year, they are delivering the biggest gains under this budget to the wealthiest people in the country. The Turnbull government must stop favouring the big end of town and certainly must look at the dire inequity it's creating, particularly in relation to families across our nation and families that live in my electorate. If the government is serious about helping Australians, they would dump their cuts to Medicare and hospitals, reverse their cuts to schools, give up their cuts to families and pensioners and scrap their $80 billion tax handout to the big end of town. This is a government which favours millionaires and multinationals over middle-class Australia. We have a housing affordability crisis, we have household debt at record levels, we have underemployment at a record level, together with job insecurity, and this government is pinning the future of our nation on trickle-down economics. Budget 76 10:15 Mr CREWTHER 248969 Dunkley The Australian coalition government are delivering a stronger economy to create jobs and to guarantee essential services that Australians rely on like health and education. We are providing responsible tax relief started in the budget year for low- and middle-income earners so Australians keep more of their hard-earned income. We also are giving more Australians a lower tax bracket over time to ensure that wages don't get eaten up by higher taxes, with 94 per cent of taxpayers soon to be on no more than a 32½ per cent tax rate. In Dunkley, 63,856 taxpayers stand to benefit from the low- and middle-income tax relief in the upcoming 2018-19 financial year and beyond. That is 63,856 people better off under our plan than under Labor's higher tax plan. For example, a high school teacher in Frankston on $75,000 will have an extra $530 in their pocket from the budget year onwards with an extra $3,740 in their pockets over the first seven years of the tax plan. For a working family in a similar situation, that would be at least $1,060 more in their pockets. A shop assistant on $45,000 in Carrum Downs will have an extra $444 in their pocket from the budget year onwards with an extra $3,380 in their pocket over time. A hairdresser on $50,000 in Langwarrin will have an extra $530 in their pocket from the budget year onwards with an extra $3,740 in their pocket over time. A take-away fast food operator on $42,000 in Seaford will have an extra $350 in their pocket from the budget year onwards, with an extra $3,020 in their pocket over time. In stark contrast to the coalition's plan to lower taxes to Australians and allow them to keep more of their hard-earned income, under Labor, in 2024-25 ,a school teacher, comparatively, in Skye will pay $806 more in income tax, a crane operator from Frankston North would pay $940 more, a nurse from Langwarrin South or a school psychologist from Mt Eliza would pay $2,840 more. A forklift driver from Frankston South would pay $3,885 more in income tax under Labor. It is clear that we have a plan to give tax relief for hardworking Australians and a stronger economy to deliver essential services through increased revenue. Labor, in comparison, want to cut the everyday battlers' take-home pay and standard of living. They are cutting retiree savings. They are cutting your investment savings. They are cutting your housing savings. Labor are just the party of cuts. Migration 77 10:18 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin The mark of a good society for me and for all of us in Labor is how it treats its most vulnerable members and, at the moment, we couldn't be well judged in Australia. The drift we have been experiencing towards inequality is no longer a drift; it is accelerating by reason of decisions made by the Turnbull and Abbott governments. We know that wage growth is not keeping up with the cost of living and is being dwarfed by company profits. We know the proliferation of insecure work is putting enormous pressure on families. We are also increasingly seeing the real effects of the shrinking of the safety net, the dismantling of the social compact in Australia under this conservative government and we are seeing this particularly impact migrant communities. These effects are not always clear to those who are not directly affected so I rise in the parliament to highlight the effects of particular decisions on a particular group in the community, which is facing extraordinary challenges, not to live well but simply to survive. These are people who are living lives characterised by terrible uncertainty, being asylum seekers awaiting process, and this has been compounded by some gross inequities. I think of a young woman who spoke to me recently about her sense that she was only a spectator in her own life and I want to tell this place about how this uncertainty has been compounded by her being cut off from any meaningful income support with changes to the Status Resolution Support Service—a program which presently is supporting about 1,000 people in Melbourne's northern suburbs as they wait for the processing of these claims. This is not the only decision of this government that impacts on these vulnerable people. Of course, we've seen the social services legislation amendment encouraging self-sufficiency for newly arrived migrants, which would also have a terrible impact on vulnerable new migrants and people seeking asylum—in particular, single parents and their children, women at risk of family violence, children whose parents unexpectedly lose their jobs, young migrants and newly graduated students. These SRSS changes are particularly concerning. Lots of community organisations in my electorate have been speaking to me about their concern that those cut off from the SRSS will no longer have casework support. Access to jobs is really difficult and compounded by $68 million of cuts in this budget to jobactive services. Next week, representatives from many local support organisations and community groups will be meeting to discuss these changes and will attempt to coordinate a response to the huge impact these changes will have: throwing people on the street. I rise in this place to show my support for these activists and these vulnerable members of the communities of Melbourne's north and to make this point in this place: I believe that Australians are generous and big-hearted people and I know that they deserve a government that shares these qualities. Child Care 77 10:21 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I rise today with a simple message: the government's new childcare package is coming soon and Central Queensland parents need to sign on to continue receiving support. This coalition government is committed to funding the opportunities our children need to advance and succeed. This means backing real needs based funding for our schools and increasing funding for our childcare network. While our delivery of Gonski 2.0 has seen a record investment in our schools right across the country, on a purely means based model, supported by David Gonski himself, we are extending this investment by delivering increased support to our vitally important childcare sector. Minister Birmingham recently announced the Australian government's new childcare package was aimed at providing more support to those who need it while sensibly managing the areas that may be wasting money. Soon families will be able to benefit from this new system, including the additional $2.5 billion we're injecting over the next four years to provide more support for more families and greater support to the families who need it most. We will provide the greatest subsidy and financial support to the families who earn the least. We're increasing the subsidy from around 72 per cent to 85 per cent for more than 370,000 families earning less than $66,958 a year. This essentially means that a family on $60,000 a year whose childcare centre charges $100 per day will pay around $15 a day for their child care. This new childcare package targets support to families who most depend on child care in order to work or work more. We want families to choose their child care around their work rather than limit their work hours to suit their child care. It is estimated that the package will encourage more than 230,000 families to increase their workforce participation and, in turn, deliver more job opportunities for those working in the sector. Implementation of the package is well and truly underway. The most important thing CQ families need to do right now is log onto their myGov account and transition to the new IT system. Families can access the transition portal directly through myGov or via www.education.gov.au/childcare, where they can also explore some additional information about the package. Families must complete this online form in order to continue receiving subsidies from 2 July, so I say to the families of Central Queensland: please log on and access the transition portal. It won't take you long and it is the only way to ensure you benefit from this new and exciting package. Hindmarsh Electorate: Clubs 78 10:23 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Hindmarsh I often have the opportunity to drop in and see many clubs in my electorate, as everyone else does in this place. I'm very blessed to have some fantastic volunteers and community groups that offer so much. One of those is the Novar Gardens Bowling Club, who are known for their friendly atmosphere and welcoming environment. Tony Spruzen, the president of the club, is one of those people who stands out in the crowd and is always willing to assist and take that extra step to make people feel welcome. Whether you're new to lawn bowls or an experienced player looking for somewhere new, you'll find a home at Novar Gardens Bowling Club. Deputy Speaker, I'm proud to tell you that through the recent allocation of the Stronger Communities Program I was able to present the club with a cheque for $15,000 to go towards a new shade shelter alongside the bowling green. I also attended the Grange Uniting Netball Club during a weekend competition day. It was great to see so many of my local community in attendance, together with their families and the children competing. I know that Jim Davis, the past president, together with the current president, Lisa Lambert, and their team have been instrumental in driving the fantastic progress at this club. On Saturday, 12 May, when I first arrived at Grange Uniting Netball Club, I couldn't help but notice the fantastic new surface on two of the netball courts—which, I might add, also double up as tennis courts. Jim, Lisa and the team have, through their determination and ongoing fundraising, been able to arrange for this to happen. I had no hesitation in endorsing their application and subsequent $12,000 grant towards this excellent project. I congratulate the Grange Uniting Netball Club for their ongoing contribution towards our local community. Additionally, I also have two fantastic multicultural clubs in my electorate—many more, of course, but two that I visited recently. The Pan Rhodian Society and the Panarcadian Association are both passionate clubs of our multicultural Greek-Australian community based in Mile End in the heart of my electorate. I've attended many of their cultural and community based events held at both of these community halls, where they put on some fantastic lunches. They have pensioner groups and really service the Greek-Australian community in my electorate. Both the Pan Rhodian and Panarcadian communities established themselves in the 1950s and have over the years contributed to promote their Greek-Australian culture and service to the community. Recently, I presented Mr Con Fragos, the president of the Panarcadian Association, with a cheque for $11,588, which has gone towards the upgrade of tables and chairs. I also presented to Mr John Giorgatzis, the president of the Pan Rhodian Society, a cheque for $15,000 towards the refurbishment of their hall, including painting and resurfacing their floor. This money is just a small contribution that goes towards assisting the valuable work that clubs, such as the Pan Rhodian and Panarcadian clubs and many hundreds of other organisations in my electorate of Hindmarsh, contribute towards— (Time expired) Banks Electorate: Community Groups 78 10:27 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks On 2 May I attended the East Hills PSSA district cross country competition at Padstow North Public School. It was a fantastic day. I really want to commend the kids on their efforts. The East Hills PSSA brings together schools from Revesby, Padstow, Panania, East Hills and Picnic Point. The athletic endeavours of these kids are quite amazing. The cross country races are quite long and they are not easy. For kids who are as young as eight or nine to be involved in these races is really impressive. I want to thank the cross country convenors: Fiona Gaston, from Padstow North Public School; and Ros Rowland, from Panania Public School, who has been involved in this event for many, many years. It is a great testament to the schools in the East Hills district—all of the principals and all of the sports coordinators who organise this event, and especially the kids, who did themselves so proud on the day. On 19 May, I attended the Georges River Country Women's Association branch meeting at Mortdale RSL. The CWA, of course, is the largest women's association in Australia, bringing together women and families from all backgrounds as part of a network of support. I would like to thank the president, Cath Sloane, for inviting me along on the day and the CWA for all of their efforts in the community. We had a really good discussion during the meeting about issues such as the excessive use of jet skis on the Georges River. My view is that jet skis should be banned on the Georges River. We continue to wait to get that outcome from the state government. It was good to discuss that issue and also some important issues about excessive development proposals in the Banks area, particularly in the Canterbury-Bankstown region, where the council has some extremely excessive proposals. Thanks again to the CWA for having me along on the day. The Lions Club of Lugarno is one of the bedrocks of the community in Banks. In fact, they are one of the great Lions Clubs of Australia. They are extremely active and have lots of members. They raise over $100,000 every year for charities in our community. Just last month I attended the annual sports breakfast at Hurstville Oval. There are a lot of entertaining speeches given on the day, and it is a long tradition. Thanks to President Doug Smith, First Vice President John Clarke, Second Vice President Geoff Meehan and all of the gentlemen from the Lugarno Lions. It is a really special organisation, with such a big reach and impact in our community. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT I thank the member. In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 79 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 79

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019

Consideration in Detail 79 10:30 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina It's a great pleasure to speak on the appropriations bills which form this year's budget, a budget which is delivering the vital infrastructure Australians need, want, demand, expect and deserve; a budget building the road and rail required to get families home sooner and safer; a budget investing in congestion-busting projects and productivity improvements which boost local economies and create local jobs. For the information of the House, I propose that during the debate today ministers will hear a number of questions from members on both sides of the chamber before responding to questions, to ensure that interested members can participate in the debate. I also acknowledge my colleagues, the Minister for Regional Development, the Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities, and the Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister, and the fine job they are doing in delivering the government's infrastructure agenda. First, I want to outline how our budget backs the long-term infrastructure needs and priorities of communities around Australia through our decade-long infrastructure pipeline of investment. The Liberals and Nationals have, again, demonstrated that our government has a long-term plan for land transport infrastructure, evidenced by our record investment. We're getting on with the job of delivering the major infrastructure needed to bust congestion, drive productivity, remain globally competitive across all sectors, and help create jobs and economic growth in urban and regional areas to sustain Australia's strong economic position. In the 2018-19 budget, the government has committed $75 billion over 10 years to upgrade and build infrastructure across the nation, building our future. To address a common misconception, let me be quite clear: infrastructure investment is not falling over the forward estimates. In fact, we're investing more than $8 billion every year within the budget forward estimates. Where it is appropriate, we're delivering a proportion of our infrastructure commitment through financing and equity mechanisms, which helps ensure the taxpayer gets a better deal. Grant funding is not the only or always the best way to support the delivery of major infrastructure. Our $5.3 billion equity injection towards the new Western Sydney Airport and our $9 billion equity injection to deliver the inland rail clearly demonstrates they are equally valid alternatives to grant funding. We know Australians just want us to get on with the job and build the infrastructure Australia needs. Our 10-year commitment will bust congestion in metropolitan areas, move freight efficiently to our ports and markets, better connect our regions to vital services and create more jobs across the country, getting that produce from farm gate to port to markets. At its heart is a pipeline which will benefit each and every state and territory with funding for more than 40 priority projects and three new major initiatives. Through the pipeline, the government has also demonstrated its leadership in the identification of infrastructure priorities. We will actively engage with state and territory governments and the private sector to determine the optimal timing, delivery models and funding structures to achieve value for money for taxpayers and a proper sequencing of delivery, which is possible thanks to our longer-term pipeline approach. I'm delighted that the Victorian and New South Wales governments have already come on board and signed intergovernmental agreements for the inland rail. It's critical to ensure the market does not overheat and drive up delivery costs and, where projects can start earlier, of course, we will realign our funding. We want those projects delivered as soon as possible. As we're all aware, major infrastructure projects require detailed planning and development, and must include broad consultation with communities being affected. They need careful consideration of environmental and heritage issues—so you can't just announce a project one day and put shovels in the ground the next. The pipeline will see substantial investment in urban and regional road projects and deliver vital investments in strategic freight corridors across regional and country and coastal Australia. It will also include investment in urban rail initiatives which will transform the way people commute across their cities for work and leisure. These projects have been prioritised based on their capacity to drive Australia's economic growth and unlock the potential of our cities and indeed our regions. Key projects include the $5 billion Melbourne Airport rail link; Metronet in Perth; the Beerburrum to Nambour rail upgrade in south-east Queensland, with $390 million going towards that vital project; the Coffs Harbour bypass on the Pacific Highway, with $971 million for that project; and the North-South Corridor in Adelaide. A key budget announcement is the $3½ billion Roads of Strategic Importance initiative to support the regional freight industry, improve safety and grow the visitor economy. It was a budget for infrastructure—a very good budget indeed. 10:35 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Unfortunately for the latest infrastructure minister in the rolling maul that is the appointment of infrastructure ministers under this government there is a huge gap between the rhetoric and reality. Unfortunately for this minister budget papers actually have figures in them. Those figures show what the investment is. The figures show that in 2017-18 the government promised expenditure of $8 billion on infrastructure but delivered $7.2 billion. Next year, in 2018-19, that will fall to $6.3 billion. In the year after that it will fall to $5.6 billion. In the year after that it will fall to $5 billion. And in the year after that, 2021-22, it will fall to $4.5 billion. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:36 to 11:11 Mr ALBANESE R36 This reduction in investment comes off the back of a reduction across the board that we've seen over the time of this government. Average annual investment in the nation's transport, energy, telecommunications and water infrastructure doubled under the former federal Labor government, from $29.1 billion per year to $57.7 billion per year. That's across the board. Investment in infrastructure has fallen by 17 per cent, to $48 billion, under the Abbott and Turnbull governments. In the case of transport infrastructure the decline has been even greater, at 22 per cent. When we were in office, we went from being ranked 20th among OECD countries when it came to investment in public infrastructure as a proportion of national income to being ranked No. 1 when we left office in 2013. According to the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index, Australia has slipped from 18th of 148 countries in 2014 to 28th under this government. Australia is going backwards. Of course you don't have to regard just Labor's view. Infrastructure Partnerships Australia said: It’s concerning to see that the Federal Budget has cut real infrastructure funding by $2 billion over the forward estimates. …   …   … At a time when our population is growing and our cities are more congested than ever, we need to see infrastructure dollars trending up not down. The chief executive of the Australian Automobile Association said: This budget fails to appropriately reinvest the taxes paid by Australian motorists … He continued: … land transport infrastructure commitments over the forward estimates have declined since last year’s budget … This government has the an approach: 'We'll talk about what is happening in 10 years time,' rather than talk about what is happening across the forward estimates. Take, for example, the Coffs Harbour bypass: one per cent of the funding is available in 2018-19 and over three-quarters of the investment is pushed out beyond 2022-23. That's the case across the board. The minister raised a so-called $5 billion for the Melbourne Airport rail link, but it's not in the budget. There's no $5 billion in the budget. What we have is a commitment to equity funding, which I'll talk about in my next contribution, but it's not real. The problem with this government also is that it hasn't invested the money that it said it would in each budget. In its first four budgets—2014-15 to 2017-18—it said it would invest $29.6 billion. That is what it said it would invest in those years. The actual expenditure is $24.9 billion. That is a $4.7 billion cut in what was actually invested, and means a 20 per cent underspend in major road projects like the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan, black spots, bridges renewal and the heavy vehicle safety program. Now, from time to time, things will be put off because of weather or because of changed circumstances but, across the board in every program every year, this government hasn't delivered what it said it would do. It is no wonder that the Parliamentary Budget Office found last year that, over the next decade, Australia's investment in rail and road will halve from 0.4 of GDP to 0.2. That is precisely the opposite of what the government needs if we are going to truly have economic growth into the future. (Time expired) 11:15 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper I am pleased to speak on this budget in greater detail and to reflect on the important budget announcement that was made to the benefit of the people of Cowper—that is, the $971 million commitment by this National-Liberal coalition government to build the Coffs Harbour bypass. I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport for his strong support in bringing this project to fruition, an absolutely vital project. We have been waiting for this project for a long time. The federal government has been committed to the upgrade of the Pacific Highway, with $5.64 billion to complete the duplication, and now, the icing on the cake, the missing link—the construction of the Coffs Harbour bypass—will become a reality because of this government working with the state government to provide dual carriageway, get rid of the traffic lights, get the trucks out of the main street and make our roads safer. It is a great outcome for the people of Cowper. I would say that there has never been a budget announcement in my time in this place that has been as positively received as the funding for the Coffs Harbour bypass. There has been discussion over many years as to the priority that the government has placed in completing the upgrade works and we have, I think, rightly taken the view that the No. 1 priority was to save lives, and saving lives is done by eliminating the two-lane sections of the highway where terrible accidents were occurring. The second, but still important, priority was getting those trucks out of the main street and freeing up our local towns from the incredible impost of the through-traffic that was occurring on the Pacific Highway. We have seen recently tragic accidents still occurring on these small amounts of unduplicated highway still to be upgraded such as at Warrell Creek, a five-kilometre section that still has accidents happening. North of Glenugie, a fatality occurred there tragically whilst the duplication process is proceeding. So it just reinforces the fact that decisions the government has made have been the right ones and now we can move on to the Coffs Harbour bypass. The Mayor of Coffs Harbour, Councillor Denise Knight, said she was thrilled with the announcement. She said, 'We have waited a long time for this and it shows what we can do when all levels of government work together.' This bypass will be great, not only from the point of view of through traffic but this bypass will form an important part of the local road infrastructure, meaning that local people will be able to choose where to come on and off the bypass and, in doing so, take even more pressure off the existing highway alignment, which is absolutely choked at peak times, absolutely choked at holiday times. It is certainly a very welcome development. This is part of this government's absolute commitment to building the infrastructure that Australia needs and, particularly, building the infrastructure that regional Australia needs. Greater connectivity through these Pacific Highway upgrades means that our businesses have a greater competitive advantage. This is a fantastic announcement for the people of Cowper. It is a fantastic announcement for the people of broader Australia because many people from Sydney, for example, travel the highway on a regular basis. It will make their holiday travel and business travel far easier. We wouldn't want to have invested $5.64 billion in the Pacific Highway only to have that investment effectively downgraded by the massive congestion which we know would be coming in Coffs Harbour if this work wasn't complete. So I would like to ask the minister to update the House on what the likely impact of this project will be on road infrastructure, and the benefit such a project and others like it would bring the community. I would also like to ask the minister could he advise the House on the latest estimates for the completion of the project. 11:19 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler If you look at Budget Paper No. 2, there are some very interesting tables that tell the story of this budget, from page 137. 'Infrastructure Investment Programme—Australian Capital Territory infrastructure investments'—the figures there are 0, 0, 0, 0 and 0. For 'Major Project Business Case Fund': 0, 0, 0, 0 and 0. 'Infrastructure Investment Programme—New South Wales infrastructure investments', again: 0. 0, 0, 0 and 0. 'Northern Territory infrastructure investments', 'Outback Way', 'Queensland infrastructure investments', 'Roads of Strategic Importance', 'South Australian infrastructure investments', 'Tasmanian infrastructure investments', 'Urban Congestion Fund', 'Victorian infrastructure investments'—you have the same pattern; the same figures. Guess what they are? Let's see if the minister can indicate. I'll give him a big hint: they're all the same, mate. It's just a dash. Not a single dollar of new investment in this budget for any of those programs—not one. All we've seen in this budget is an allocation of funds that have already been appropriated—allocated to some specific projects—but they're way off into the never-never. So you have these grand announcements with big figures, like $5 billion, but there's nothing there. Again, for the north-south rail in New South Wales, there's nothing actually in the budget. For projects in Tasmania, there's nothing actually happening. With regard to New South Wales, there's nothing actually happening. There is no reason why you would have so little investment in the Coffs Harbour Bypass—why you would defer that for four years before there is any actual investment, at least outside the forward estimates. That's the story of this budget. The other story is the so-called 'innovative financing'—a ticking time bomb for this government; a fiscal time bomb. The fact is that you can't fund public transport like Melbourne airport rail off-budget, because, to fund something with equity funding off-budget, you need to achieve two primary things: firstly, the revenue for that particular piece of infrastructure has to be higher than the ongoing maintenance and operating costs; secondly, you have to have a return on capital. No public transport project in Australia currently has income—fares paid—that is more than the operating cost. The average is around 20 to 25 per cent. That's why this is fake funding of a project, just like the north-south rail link through Badgerys Creek airport is fake funding. This is what Infrastructure Partnerships Australia's CEO, Adrian Dwyer, said: Ultimately there are only two ways to pay for infrastructure—tickets and taxes ... We can’t finance our way out of a funding problem. Marion Terrill from the Grattan Institute said: ... there’s a real risk that these equity investments will end up not even making a positive rate of return, never mind a commercial rate. …   …   … If infrastructure projects are never going to make a commercial return, the government should stop pretending they will. Steven Anthony from Industry Super Australia said: We’re opening up the potential for more unfunded liabilities but we don’t need more time bombs. Garry Bowditch from the University of Sydney said: Prospects of commerciality and off-budget financing delivering good long-term outcomes do seem fanciful. Over and over again—any expert. The tragedy here is that Mathias Cormann, the finance minister, knows that. That is why he opposed it. That's why he won't defend these projects being regarded as off-budget. It's simply a con. A future government will have to deal with this, just like it'll have to deal with the real economics of the Inland Rail project and whether, as John Anderson said in a report to the government, it will not produce a return on capital in 50 years. Budgets should be about real investment and real expenditure and real commitments and real rail lines and real roads. This budget is anything but that. 11:25 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I believe in the future of regional Australia. I want to see it thrive and prosper so that it continues to provide an unbeatable lifestyle for generations to come—and I know that the Deputy Prime Minister does as well. The budget this year made a huge contribution to regional Australia with the announcement of the Murray Darling Medical Schools Network, in which the Deputy Prime Minister has played a major role. The doctor shortage in country Australia and country New South Wales is well known. In some country communities you have to wait weeks or months just to see a GP, let alone a specialist. When GPs leave a community, when they retire or move towns, it is sometimes very difficult to replace them. Infrastructure was a major part of that announcement of $95 million. There will be bricks and mortar built in our country communities to train doctors in the bush for practice in the bush. I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his work in that regard— Mr Albanese interjecting— Mr GEE 261393 Mr Deputy Speaker, I ask that you restore order to the House. Mr Albanese interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Order! Mr GEE 261393 Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. This will make a real difference to the lives of people in country communities. We also had in the budget the extension of the Building Better Regions Fund. That was another major victory for folks in country Australia. In the electorate of Calare, the fund recently delivered a major investment in the form of funding for the second race track at Mount Panorama. The Deputy Prime Minister, as a keen motor-racing fan, will be delighted to know work is progressing and that project is underway. As well, we have $588,000 for the new domestic violence centre and refuge in Orange, which is very welcome. At the moment, when families need refuge from domestic violence they have to leave town and go to neighbouring communities. When you have children, that is very difficult. So the Building Better Regions Fund has made a real difference to the lives of people in country communities. Another major announcement I am extremely happy with is Roads of Strategic Importance. Roads are very dear to the hearts of country people. The tyranny of distance is the scourge of so many country communities. If we can connect our communities by building better roads we can make a real difference to the lives of country people. As I mentioned to the House yesterday, one of the key projects I am working on at the moment is a new crossing at Dixons Long Point over the Macquarie River between Orange and Mudgee. Folks have been trying to get this project up and running for 100 years and no-one has been able to do it. I am in the process of bringing all of the parties together. We have the reports done. If all governments work together we can make this happen. Roads of Strategic Importance offers communities in our area the opportunity to access greater funding for these key strategic road projects. Another strategic road project I am interested in pursuing is the continuing upgrade of the Bells Line of Road over the Blue Mountains into Lithgow, which is the gateway to the golden west. There has been some good work carried out on the Bells Line of Road, but we need to be getting people into the central-west of New South Wales and one of the best ways of doing that is by improving our road infrastructure. So that is another important project I'm currently working on. The Liberal-National government has been very successful in the Bridges Renewal Program in recent years. There have been a number of key infrastructure improvements in that regard in my area and I am very pleased to see that that will be continuing. The budget sees the Liberals and Nationals extending funding through the popular Roads to Recovery Program, another fund helping local government to maintain and upgrade roads. We also have the black spot funding program, which, again, has made a real difference to the lives of so many people in country Australia. Deputy Prime Minister, could you please tell us how the Roads of Strategic Importance initiative has come about and the ways in which you envisage that regional communities, like those in Calare, will benefit from new road infrastructure? 11:30 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I rise to make a contribution about City Deals and urban policy. In Senate estimates this week, the cities division was unable to confirm when Darwin, Hobart and Perth would finalise their city deals, but was explicit that Geelong would receive its city deal in September/October this year—coincidentally, just ahead of the Victorian state election which is being held in November. This follows the finalisation of the Hobart City Deal, just prior to the Tasmanian state election, and it follows the Townsville and Launceston city deals, which were more just matching promises that Labor had previously made prior to the 2016 federal election. We know that city deals should take a bottom-up approach. I know, from discussions with the Western Sydney mayors, that there's a great deal of concern that, indeed, they're not really partnerships; they're more impositions from the top down. If City Deals are going to be successful, they do need to be from the bottom up and they do need to have proper funding mechanisms. If that is done properly, there's no doubt that they can achieve a substantial amount. Similar to the government's announcement of the creation of the Infrastructure Financing Unit in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet last year, I'd be interested to know of the minister why that was transferred from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet into the minister's department? What projects have been approved for private sector infrastructure investment as a result of that? It's pretty clear that this body, a bit like some other more fanciful off-budget financing, was an attempt by the government to look like it was doing something when nothing was actually happening. What is actually happening on the ground, of course, is that we're seeing underinvestment in infrastructure. The budget shows that Victoria is still being short-changed. They're receiving eight per cent of infrastructure investment in this financial year, despite being 25 per cent of the Australian population. We're seeing that South Australian investment will fall from $832 million in the current financial year down to $236 million across the forwards in 2021-22. We'll see funding in New South Wales fall from $2.67 billion in the current financial year to $825 million in 2021-22. In Queensland, we see many of the promised announcements being put off on the never never—projects like Cooroy to Curra and the M1 upgrade—with the overwhelming majority of the funding being outside of the forward estimates. In Tasmania, the same thing is happening, with three out of every four dollars in the budget not being there in terms of the forward estimates—being outside of that. Even in Western Australia we're seeing funding fall from $1.16 billion this year to $411 million in 2021-22. In the Northern Territory, it falls from $222 million down to $61 million in 2021-22. In the ACT—essentially, the ACT is being ignored. The last major project in the ACT supported by the Commonwealth government was, of course, Majura Parkway, which, like other projects funded by the federal Labor government, they were happy to go to the opening of even though they opposed the infrastructure investment at the time. This is a government that has not matched its rhetoric with real funding, with real dollars, with the real approach for urban policy that's required or with the real approach for regional economic development that is required. 11:35 Dr McVEIGH 125865 Groom The 2018-19 budget promotes new jobs, a stronger economy and stronger regional communities across all local government areas and, of course, Australia's territories. Some of the key regional development announcements in the 2018-19 budget, of course, were the next important steps in the coalition government's decentralisation agenda. Regional Australians deserve the benefits that flow from Public Service jobs just as much as those who live in Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra. We are following a measured and methodical process to investigate and deliver on this agenda. This measured and methodical process, this important step, is another example of the coalition delivering more and better paying jobs across Australia's regions, be it in Darwin, Shepparton, Wodonga, Toowoomba or Dubbo, for example. With this step, nearly 100 jobs will be moving from the Public Service strongholds of inner-city Sydney, inner-city Melbourne and Canberra, which will make a marked difference in the communities in which they will transition. This means new families moving into towns, investing and spending more, bringing more children to local schools or the local football club, in turn requiring more expertise and skill in regional communities. This is a positive decentralisation plan in action and I can confirm, as minister, that there is plenty more to come. This budget includes an exciting commitment of $200 million to deliver a third round of the Building Better Regions Fund, bringing our total commitment in this program to $641.6 million from 2017-18 to 2021-22. The program is about supporting rural, regional and remote communities to partner with governments and other stakeholders and to take advantage of the immense opportunities available in regional Australia. A key priority for the third round will be to help stimulate local economies, particularly by investing in the tourism sector. Forty-three cents of every tourism dollar is spent in regional Australia, and the number of domestic international tourists visiting our regions grows every year. The government wants to help regions unlock their tourism potential and has therefore earmarked $45 million from the third round of the BBRF for tourism related infrastructure projects that will help grow that regional tourism. Round 1 of the fund resulted in 257 projects delivering over 20,000 jobs. Round 2 is close to completion, and successful applications will be announced mid this year. This builds on the announcement of over $272 million in the last budget for major transformational projects for the Regional Growth Fund. The response from regional Australia was enormous, and initial applications are currently under assessment. The Building Better Regions Fund and the Regional Growth Fund are clear examples of our government's commitment to regional development. So too is the Stronger Communities Program, which all members of this House would be familiar with. There is an extra $22.5 million for 2018-19 for round 4 of this highly successful program that means so much to all of our local communities right across the country. Earlier this month, I visited the Mount Major walking track with the member for Murray, for example, through this program. There is great news for Dookie and the broader Goulburn Valley in that particular example. It was even great news for the member for Whitlam, who is here in the chamber, in his electorate—12 projects, including $10,000 for upgrades and new equipment for Albion Park Little Athletics, which I'm sure celebrates alongside his community. Whether it's our regional funding programs, whether it's our decentralisation program— Mr Stephen Jones interjecting— Dr McVEIGH 125865 I acknowledge those opposite don't want decentralisation, they're not interested, they want to just focus on inner city public-servant jobs. Companies such as Adaptapack and the Cottee family—that we've assisted through programs to relocate out of Sydney into Nowra and Lismore, for example—are all about our government delivering in spades for regional Australia. We have a plan, we're delivering on that plan, and it's a pity those opposite are not interested in regional development whatsoever. 11:40 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I thank the minister for his contribution, and particularly for the fact that he's focused so much on the controversial and, many argue, completely failed and botched decentralisation program, and I'd like to ask some questions about that. On 19 April last year, the then Minister for Regional Development—they have had two since then, but the then Minister for Regional Development—the then Senator Nash, said that government had embarked on a massive decentralisation program. The program was referred to in Budget Paper No. 4, but no funding has been attached to it and, according to the 2017 budget paper, business cases for entities being considered for relocation are expected to be completed by December 2017. You don't need to be a maths genius to know that that was five months ago. We could have reasonably expected there would be some big announcements in this budget—and indeed, we were encouraged to expect big announcements in the budget. Sadly, no such thing has been the case. On budget night, we found out what was being planned: 98 jobs earmarked for decentralisation and, if you look at the details, 82 of the 98 jobs are moving public sector workers from one capital city to another capital city. Some of my favourites include the 40 jobs that are going to be relocated from Canberra to Adelaide, and the 25 jobs—and this is a cracker—that are going to move a massive 20 kilometres, from the CBD of Sydney— Government members interjecting— Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B They're making a lot of noise because they're dreadfully embarrassed by this, Mr Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 I'm reluctant to intervene, given— Government members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 Order! Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Twenty kilometres, from Sydney to Parramatta— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 Member for Whitlam, I will just stop you there. Could we have some order in the chamber please. Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Some decorum would be very good, I thank you for your protection, Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 Well, what's good for the goose needs to be good for the gander. Please proceed. Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B I ask these questions of the minister: has the National Party established a new branch in Parramatta? At what point in time did Parramatta become classified as a regional or rural city? I welcome the minister's answers to those questions. Ten jobs are being relocated from Canberra to Darwin, and I do congratulate the government for doing that. Clearly, Darwin is a regional area. But I have to say, 82 of the 98 jobs moving from one capital city to another hardly constitutes decentralisation. If we look at the total number of Australian public servants—and Hansard will have to be very careful to get the decimal points in the right place—approximately 0.0005 per cent of the entire Australian Public Service is being decentralised in this massive announcement. If you look at what's on the other side of the ledger, this is where it gets really interesting, and I'm going to ask the minister to directly answer this question. There are 1,280 jobs being cut from the Department of Human Services. Anybody who knows anything about the Australian Public Service will tell you that the most decentralised agency in the Australian Public Service is the Department of Human Services. They're the people who employ Centrelink and Medicare workers, run child support agencies et cetera. Can the minister guarantee, as a part of their great decentralisation agenda, that none of those 1,280 jobs that are earmarked to be cut from DHS over the next 12 months are going to be cut from a regional or rural location? You can't be moving 100 jobs, mostly to capital cities from one capital city to another, and then slashing over 1,280 jobs and be saying 'We've done a great job here,' because you simply have not. The net result is ripping jobs out of regional Australia. I ask the minister: does he agree with the former Deputy Prime Minister that your decentralisation program is BS? Isn't it true that your plan for decentralisation has been nothing more than a ruse to provide cover for the former Deputy Prime Minister in his disastrous plan and initiative to move the APVMA out of Canberra into his electorate as part of a pork-barrelling election commitment? Do you agree that this has been a complete fizzer— (Time expired) 11:45 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I'm pleased to have the chance to address the chamber on the extraordinary and extensive infrastructure program that the Turnbull-McCormack government has committed to, a $75 billion infrastructure program over the next 10 years. Before I turn to highlight some of the strengths of that program, it is necessary to just correct a few of the usual egregious range of completely misleading and inaccurate statements made by the shadow minister. Shiftiness seems to be a characteristic not confined to the Leader of the Opposition, I regret to say. For example, the shadow minister said that the city deal for Geelong had been politicised because it was proposed that the date by which it would be finalised falls before the date of the Victorian election. If the Labor shadow minister has a concern about that point, I invite him to take it up with the Labor government of Victoria, because a city deal is a deal between multiple levels of government, and as it happens, in this case, the Geelong city deal involves a state government which is of one political persuasion and a federal government which is of another. But the Turnbull government is not interested in this kind of narrow, short-term political thinking. We want to deliver outcomes for the people of Australia and the people of Geelong. An insight into the shiftiness of the shadow minister was provided by his very next point. After bagging the government for, in his view, trying to inappropriately conclude the city deal for Geelong with some alacrity, in his very next breath he complained that Victoria was being short-changed when it came to infrastructure spending. There is a yawning logical inconsistency here. Argument No. 1: you're going too quickly on Geelong—which is of course in Victoria, I highlight. Argument No. 2: you're not giving enough to Victoria. I don't have the time to point out how completely inaccurate his claims about Victorian infrastructure spending are, but when you just look at the impressive array of projects we've committed to—$5 billion for the Melbourne airport rail link and $1.75 billion for the North East Link, that vital missing link in the Melbourne motorway network—it makes the point very powerfully that this tired claim that the shadow minister trots out repeatedly is as threadbare and as inaccurate as just about everything else that he says on the topic of infrastructure policy. Let me turn to another example: the question of what the shadow minister really thinks about equity investment in public transport. If you look at a document issued some time ago—in fact in 2009, when the Commonwealth minister for infrastructure was the very man who now occupies the position of shadow minister—it contains this interesting statement. I'm reading from a document headed 'Nation Building Plan for the Future—Building Australia Fund—investing in port and rail projects'. This is from Budget Paper No. 2, page 415, in the 2009 budget. It says: The Government has made provision for a possible equity contribution of $365.0 million in 2009-10 in relation to the Gold Coast Light Rail project. Well, this is confusing. This is very confusing. The shadow minister, normally expected to be a beacon and paradigm of consistency in his logic, it turns out, on this occasion, was saying one thing in government and now in opposition is saying absolutely, diametrically, completely the opposite. Can you trust a word this man says? I could talk about the Oakajee Port common user facility, where there was also a commitment for a possible equity contribution in 2009 by the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government in which the present shadow minister was then the Minister for Infrastructure. What about his equity contribution to the Moorebank Intermodal Terminal in Sydney? We could go on but, sadly, time does not allow us the sufficient opportunity to fully and comprehensively detail the shadow minister's egregious and consistent inaccuracies, but it is a troubling behavioural pattern. Happily, we're ignoring that and we're getting on with delivering $75 billion of infrastructure all around the country because what we care about is delivering outcomes for Australians. 11:50 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I'd like to ask the minister some more questions regarding the government's failed decentralisation agenda and I'd also like the government to respond to some of the confusion that they've created throughout regional Australia. You may be aware that, over the last 12 months, the then leader of the National Party and the Deputy Prime Minister, the member for New England, had been running around the country, as his deputy had as well, encouraging regional councils to make bids to the Commonwealth and suggestions to the Commonwealth about relocation of Commonwealth agencies and employees into regional Australia. I sit on the Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation, which has received many submissions from regional councils and regional bodies who are excited about these prospects. Over 200 submissions have been received—submissions such as that from the Rockhampton Regional Council that said: Relocating Commonwealth entities in regional centres such as Rockhampton would be extremely positive and welcomed. This week the Rockhampton council are again calling on the government to bring jobs to Rockhampton. Labor has always been very sceptical about the government's agenda and its commitment to deliver on this decentralisation plan. There is a reason for that and, particularly when you look at a place like Rockhampton, you can understand why. Since 2014, Rockhampton has lost a total of 50 public sector jobs. These were people employed by the Commonwealth. On this government's watch, 50 jobs have been taken out of Rockhampton. We can understand why the people of Rockhampton are very, very sceptical when the government says to them 'We're going to relocate some Commonwealth jobs out of Canberra into Rockhampton.' The people of Rockhampton are saying 'We'd like the 50 jobs back that you've already cut out of our region; that would be a damn good start!' They're very sceptical of comments by the local member, who says she supports decentralisation when, on her watch, we have seen 50 jobs already lost from that region. We ask: can the minister guarantee that when the government prosecutes its agenda to cut 1,240 jobs out of DHS—that is, the agency which employs staff in Centrelink, the Child Support Agency and Medicare—that not one of those jobs will come from the region of Rockhampton? Because if they cannot guarantee that not one of those jobs will come from the region of Rockhampton, they have misled the people of Capricornia and the region of Rockhampton, because they have not delivered any new jobs but those people in Rockhampton stand a very good risk of losing the existing jobs in that region. I'd also like to ask the minister some questions about the Regional Growth Fund, the Building Better Regions Fund and the Regional Jobs and Investment Packages. These were announced with great fanfare during the election and during the 2017 budget. But what we have seen is persistent delaying from the Minister for Regional Development—twice removed. There have been three ministers for regional development since November last year so it's not necessarily the fault of this minister. Can the minister guarantee that there'll be no further delay in announcing the guidelines and assessing the applications under the Regional Growth Fund, round 3 the Building Better Regions Fund, the $260 million that was announced in the most recent budget? Can the minister guarantee that guidelines will be issued for this fund, that applications will be available for applicants to make well prior to the next election and that this will be a free, open and transparent process? There's a lot of interest about this in regional Australia. We don't need further delay. A great fanfare has been made about the announcement of these funds. We need a guarantee that funds are going to be flowing and that it will be done on the merits of the program, not just more pork-barrelling to shore up the political concerns of National Party MPs. This is a fund for all Australia, not National Party MPs, and we want to see guidelines issued and grants flowing. This should not be run over by the forthcoming election. (Time expired) 11:56 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay I really do appreciate the opportunity to speak about some of the key achievements of the 2018 coalition budget for the seat of Wide Bay. I also congratulate the minister, Deputy Prime Minister McCormack, for those achievements, not just in my area but also in all of regional Australia, because he is a champion of regional Australia, as is Minister McVeigh, the minister for regional development. Both are not only from the regions as MPs, but from the regions in terms of life experience and what they've achieved before they came to this place. To the Deputy Prime Minister, I welcome the coalition government's commitment to fund the Bruce Highway Cooroy to Curra section D project, which was made in this year's budget. This is a project that will save lives by transforming one of the deadliest sections of the National Highway into one of the safest. Section D realigns the highway around Gympie along a new 26-kilometre four-lane divided corridor. This major project enables faster and safer travel between Maryborough and Brisbane, eases traffic congestion through Gympie, keeps this section of highway open in times of flood, improves access to the Cooloola coast, eliminates eight sets of traffic lights for people travelling between Maryborough and Cooroy and ensures the efficient movement of freight. This is a project whose time has well and truly come. Too many lives have been lost along this treacherous stretch of highway. Minister, I identified the need for funding for construction of section D in my maiden speech, and I've been campaigning hard ever since. In fact, the tragedy that this highway has wreaked upon Wide Bay communities is one of the main reasons I entered politics. I wanted to raise awareness of the need to build safer roads and be part of a team that delivers these vital life-saving projects, which we've done in this year's budget. I congratulate you and the coalition government for listening to the people of Wide Bay, for coming to Gympie to see for yourself how the existing highway has passed its use-by date and for committing federal funding to start and finish the final Cooroy to Curra project. But as the project is being managed by the Queensland Labor government I do have serious concerns. With the exception of their election announcement, I've not seen any firm commitment from the Queensland government that they want to start the project as soon as possible. I welcomed their announcement at the time, but I've not heard anything about when their share of the funding will be available or when they'll negotiate milestones, call tenders and get on with the project. I want construction to start this year, but I've not heard whether the Queensland government share my impatience to get section D started and finished as soon as possible. Minister, can you please confirm how much funding is available for section D? When can construction start on it? When does the federal government expect it to be completed? While the coalition government is fully committed to the construction of section D, can the minister advise whether there are any threats to the timing of the completion of this project? 11:59 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Given the fact that this debate has about one minute remaining, I would just like to thank all members who have contributed to this consideration in detail. To the member for Cowper, I congratulate him on his advocacy for the Coffs Harbour bypass and the Pacific Highway. The member for Calare asked me about the Roads of Strategic Importance. There's certainly a $3½ billion commitment by this government to make sure that those secondary byways are looked after. The member for Wide Bay has just asked me about the Bruce Highway, and I congratulate him for his passionate advocacy to see that section D duplicated. I know that Labor has accused the government in this particular debate of cutting infrastructure spending. Nothing is further from the truth. In fact, spending has increased to record levels of investment in infrastructure and the government is investing, on average, $2 billion more than Labor did when it was in government. I will take the questions on notice and will write to members about the particular queries that they have raised in this consideration in detail. I thank all members and ministers for their contributions. Expenditure agreed to. Consideration in Detail 88 12:01 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield The Turnbull government's 2018-19 budget contains some very impressive outcomes for the Communications and the Arts portfolio for Australian families and for building a stronger and more prosperous Australia while continuing to preserve our cultural heritage. Important new initiatives will be introduced to keep Australians safe online by countering cyberbullying and image based abuse, to attract international investment to sustain Australian jobs in the film production and related industries, to commemorate the 250th anniversary of Captain James Cook's first pacific voyage, to ensure important capital works upgrades occur at the National Gallery of Australia, and to reinstate funding to SBS that was previously removed in anticipation of legislative changes that would have provided advertising flexibility had they be enacted. The government will provide the portfolio with $10.1 billion to deliver its priorities through the 2018-19 appropriation bills, including prior-year appropriations carried forward for the NBN rollout. In 2018-19, this funding will enable a loan drawdown of $7.6 billion towards the completion of National Broadband Network. Currently, more than 90 per cent of all homes and businesses outside major urban areas can either order NBN based services or have new network construction underway. Overall, more than 6.6 million homes and businesses across Australia can connect to the NBN and there are close to four million active services. This compares to just 51,000 connections in the six years of the previous, Labor government. What a hopeless track record, and we are fixing their mess. In addition, this government will provide $1.3 billion to the national broadcasters, the ABC and SBS. The Department of Communications and the Arts and the Australian Communications and Media Authority will receive $634.7 million to deliver their outcomes and a further $495 million will support the cultural and collecting entities. The government acknowledges community concerns regarding online harms, such as cyberbullying and image based abuse, and seeks to ensure that all Australians can confidently take advantage of the internet. The government will provide an additional $14.2 million over four years to support the Office of the eSafety Commissioner in delivering important online safety initiatives. These include delivery of the core function to enforce a civil penalty regime targeting perpetrators and content hosts who share intimate images without consent. I'll conclude my opening remarks there. There will be much more to say about the extraordinarily good work being done across this portfolio. 12:05 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Communications. In December 2017 a constituent in my electorate of Greenway wrote to me expressing concerns about the internet speed she was receiving over her fibre-to-the node connection. It's an issue that I am sure many members of this place are familiar with. My constituent contacted her service provider and NBN Co, but did not receive any clarification as to why she is paying for a 25-megabits-per-second service but only receiving a 17-megabits-per-second service. I raised this formally with the Minister for Communications, who in turn sought advice from NBN Co. I was subsequently advised in May this year that the copper connection to my constituent's premises could be impacted by coexistence arrangements. So I would like to ask the minister: could he please explain what the government's policy is when a coexistence period has expired and a copper connection is still not receiving a minimum speed of 25 megabits per second? 12:06 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner The NBN, as we know, is one of the single largest infrastructure rollouts seen in our nation's history. A rollout of the scale understandably takes time, and the Turnbull government is delivering better broadband across Australia in the fastest and most affordable way, on time, as promised and under budget. The coalition is working hard to make sure this happens for all Australians. In December last year, the coalition announced a range of consumer protections that are now being introduced. They include new rules to be enforced by ACMA to stop complaints handballing; giving the TIO better tools to resolve complaints; mandating line tests to confirm working connection and installation; and mandating explanations to customers about how speed tiers will affect them, their families and their businesses. In Bonner, more than 56 per cent of the NBN rollout is already completed, and more than 17,500 households have taken up an NBN service. Let me tell you, I have had nowhere near as many complaints as we all are led to believe happen if we are to listen to those opposite. I have proudly taken ownership over the NBN in my electorate of Bonner, teaming up with my NBN reps and technicians to educate locals as well as advocate for the best possible outcomes for constituents, including the extension of the newly introduced fibre-to-the-curb technology. In the last year I've held a number of NBN forums with representatives from NBN and telecommunication providers, seniors' specific forums and mobile offices around Bonner. I am in regular contact with the minister's office, and as soon as I am made aware of an area that is about to become NBN-ready, my team and I letterbox drop and host mobile offices to make sure that locals know about the service and what they need to do to make the switch. In the next month I'll be hosting two more: one at Gumdale on 5 June and one on the 14th in Mount Gravatt. I'm not going to say to that I've had no complaints, but I will proudly stand here and say that on the complaints that I have received I have worked with the minister's office, NBN and the telecommunications providers to ensure that issues are dealt with, and my constituents are thankful for that. Cameron Day from Holland Park West contacted me last year and said: My nbn was connected this week, thank you so much for your help!! It's good to know that there are people like yourself who get things done. I'll remember that. Politics isn't something I've care for much, however you have certainly changed that. Eight Mile Plains resident Mr Sum recently reached out to tell me about the social and economic benefits that he and his work have received thanks to the introduction of the NBN in Bonner. Mr Sum said: I've lived here for a decade and NBN is one of the best things to happen here. ADSL was slow and the other options were terrible and super expensive. Now that I'm connected to NBN I'm able to work from home, live stream on two HD devices. I've had my service for 6 months now and never had an issue in fact; it has put extra money back into my pocket. With that, I would like to ask the positive impacts others have felt as a result of the NBN. Last year NBN Co commissioned data analytics and economics firm AlphaBeta to investigate the social and economic impacts of the National Broadband Network. Can the minister outline the status of the NBN rollout in Queensland and some of the key findings from the Connecting Australia research report? 12:10 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I am pleased, first of all, to make the point that the Turnbull government's expectation—indeed, it's requirement and standard—is that all lines on the fixed line network must have the capacity to deliver a speed of 25 megabits per second. If they don't deliver that, there is a requirement that they be remediated. In the case of the specific instance the member has raised, I am confident that the minister's office will get the details from you and identify whether there is a need for remediation. Let me turn next to the question of the impact of the NBN rollout in Queensland and indeed nationally. The member for Bonner has just referred to an important report that came from data analytics and economics firm AlphaBeta about the social and economic impacts of the National Broadband Network. As the member for Bonner has outlined, in his own electorate more than 51,000 premises are ready for service and some 17,500 are connected. The contrast with the status when we came to government in 2013, inheriting six years of chaotic and incompetent mismanagement of this project by Labor, is very instructive. The number connected in 2013 was not 1,750, which would be 10 per cent of that number, and it wasn't even 175, which would be one per cent of that number. The number was 68. A mighty 68 premises in the entire electorate of Bonner was all Labor had managed to achieve in six years of rank incompetence in their attempt to deliver on this project! By contrast, since we have come to government we have turned this project around. In Queensland, only 12 per cent of premises are still waiting for NBN construction to start. When the Labor Party left office fewer than 8,000 premises in the entire state were connected to the NBN whereas today under the coalition over 1.5 million premises in Queensland are able to connect to the NBN. The coalition's faster rollout means Australians are being connected years earlier than would have been the case under Labor's plan, and by directing NBN strategy away from Labor's gold-plated plan we have avoided home internet bills increasing by around $500 a year. The member for Bonner, who takes a great interest in these matters, raised the issue of the report done by data analytics firm AlphaBeta. That report shows some very interesting findings about the social and economic impacts of better broadband. What it finds is that business growth rates in NBN areas have been more than five times the pace of those regions without access to the NBN. In 2017 the NBN generated an estimated $1.2 billion in additional economic activity and this is expected to multiply to $10.4 billion a year by the end of the rollout. And the evidence has found—and this is very interesting—that more women are becoming their own bosses when they have access to the NBN. The annual growth rate of self-employed women in NBN connected areas is 2.3 per cent, compared to 0.1 per cent in non-NBN connected areas. It is easy to see how. With the improved capacity to operate a business from home, with the improved capacity to send and receive large files—so important in a whole range of businesses, whether you are an architect or a graphic designer—all kinds of businesses benefit from improved internet connectivity. But it is very exciting to see the social and economic benefits being found, according to independent data analytics firm AlphaBeta, thanks to the coalition's accelerated rollout of the NBN. Again it is constructive to compare that to the hopeless delivery record of Labor, where great swathes of the country saw no benefit from the NBN. We have turned that around under the coalition. 12:15 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I didn't really get an answer to my question from the minister. This is an issue that's been raised by a number of my constituents. He made reference to the minister. The response I have has actually come from the minister and, apart from other things, notes that the department has contacted NBN regarding the matters that have been raised and that the service of my constituent over the network might be impacted by coexistence arrangements. So my specific question is about what the policy is when the coexistence policy has expired and you've still got a copper connection not able to receive speeds of 25 megabits per second. In the same vein, can the minister confirm whether or not NBN Co will accept and investigate speed faults when a consumer on the copper NBN is receiving speeds less than 25 megabits per second. Can the minister explain what steps NBN Co will take to deliver that minimum speed of 25 megabits per second if that specific copper line is found to be incapable of delivering that speed at the end of the coexistence period? 12:16 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield The shadow minister said that she did not get an answer to her question. Again I repeat that the principle is, coexistence period or no, a line must be capable of delivering 25 megabits per second. If it doesn't, that line will need to be remediated so it can deliver that speed. Of course, there is a range of ways in which that could happen. Where you've got a long copper run, an obvious way to do that is to move the equipment closer to the customer's premises so that the length of the copper run is reduced. Of course, the network is being optimised continually and, where individual lines or connections don't meet that standard, the remediation will be put in place. Again I invite the shadow minister to raise specific instances with the minister's office, and I'm sure they will be dealt with as soon as is conveniently possible. The shadow minister complained that she didn't get an answer. What is interesting is to look at the number of times the shadow minister has been asked, 'What is Labor's plan for the NBN?' She's been repeatedly asked that question and she never, ever gives a clear answer. On Lateline she was asked by Emma Alberici: Alberici: So, if Labor wins the next election, what is your intention? Do you go back to an all fibre network? Rowland: It's always been our preference for fibre, and to have fibre as deep as possible into the network, Emma. Alberici: But is that going to be your policy? Rowland: Our policy is going to be informed by the needs of consumers and putting them at the centre. Alberici: Well, you've just finished saying that the mish-mash of technologies, as you put it— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 12:18 to 12:34 Mr FLETCHER L6B Before we were interrupted, we were addressing the question of when you get answers and when you don't get answers on important matters of communications policy. I was reminding the House that the shadow minister does not seem able to articulate what Labor's plan for the NBN would be if they were to come to government. As I indicated, she was unable to give a clear and convincing explanation to Emma Alberici on Lateline. But she hasn't focused her attention solely on the ABC. She's similarly obfuscated Labor's position on Sky News when she was asked a straightforward question by a Sky News journalist: is it still your intention to roll out the NBN to each and every home, not just the node, not just to the end of the driveway? Is it your intention to do that? The shadow minister's answer was: we've always favoured fibre over copper and we want to see it as deep as possible into the network. Bill Shorten made it clear some time ago it is not our intention, if we are elected at the next election, to go out and start ripping up the copper. We would need to be informed by the realities on the ground and the stage at which the NBN is at, and the Prime Minister tells us the NBN will be finished at the end of this term. It is difficult to get a clear answer from the Labor Party as to what their plan is and I tell you why: they don't have a plan. Labor have no plan as to what to do about the NBN other than to engage in continued sniping and criticism and trying to disguise from the reality, which is there on the record for all Australians to see—six years of rank and hopeless incompetence. I want to make the point, because I think it's important: it's not just on the question of the NBN that is extremely difficult to work out what Labor's policy is, because we similarly see a lack of explanation of what Labor stands for when it comes to the ABC. The shadow minister was recently asked on radio in Tasmania, on 91.7 ABC Mornings by Leon Compton: '… but my question to you specifically is do you have a policy on funding the ABC that people can easily find?' And the shadow minister said: We'll have a very clear and distinct choice for the electorate going into the next election. I can make that very clear. Mr Compton asked: But you don't, at the moment, have a policy beyond criticising and suggesting you'll be different to what the government are doing? And the shadow minister said: Look, I don't accept that. We are completely different in terms of being very committed to ensuring that we have a strong ABC. We also are very committed to fighting these cuts as they stand. The shadow minister can't tell us what Labor's policy is on the ABC. The shadow minister can't tell us what Labor's policy is on the NBN. The reality is, Australians have had the chance to see how Labor actually managed the NBN and it was a dismal litany of failure. Australians are not mugs. There's a lot of talk from this side but look at their track record; it was hopeless. 12:37 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey Minister, you'd be well aware that the government has spent $220 million on the Mobile Black Spot Program and that has resulted in 867 facilities in all being built throughout Australia, a mammoth build. In 2016, I chaired the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Industry's inquiry into Agricultural innovation and I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker Howarth, that the world is full of wonderful opportunities out there for our agricultural sector. But one of the biggest issues that keeps coming back to us from that sector is the substandard telecommunications. The NBN is a very big part of that story and I'm very pleased to report that, in fact, more than 95 per cent of my electorate of Grey is now enabled. I actually think it's 98 per cent. People are hooking on every day. But there is an agricultural revolution happening out there and Australia is likely to be the first country using autonomous tractors on a broad scale, advanced crop electronic monitoring and stock management systems thereby removing the all too scarce component of labour from many of the regional and outback properties. The biggest priority issue raised throughout the inquiry was the lack of or unreliability of the mobile phone network. It's worth reflecting on the coalition commitment, the $220 million that we've already put in, and compare it with our Labor predecessors, who for six years put nothing into mobile phone black spots or mobile phones at all. In fact, it was much worse than that. When Labor came to power, there was $2 billion in a rural telecommunication future fund that was put there after the sale of Telstra 3 and that, unfortunately, got hoovered up by Labor on its first attempt on the NBN. The minister was just referring to the NBN and the litany of failures. Remember that one? That was the $4.5 billion NBN network they were going to build and that was all done and busted, not a problem. In that, they hoovered up the $2 billion that was there to pay for the mobile phones, to pay for the upgrade of telecommunications in the bush in the future. So the coalition reinvented the Mobile Black Spot Program, the first iteration of which came from the Howard government. Quite simply, it has been only the coalition that has recognised the value of this technology in regional areas for what we can do to enable that rural sector to power the Australian economy. In Grey, the Mobile Black Spot Program has been partnered in building 15 base stations and eight small cells, 23 in all. I'm grateful. However, Grey is 92 per cent of South Australia, and we need a whole lot more, Mr Minister. I understand why South Australia did worse than the other states in the Mobile Black Spot Program. The previous government, the Labor government, through three rounds put in just a paltry $1½ million: nothing in round 1, $1½ million in round 2 and nothing again in round 3. The other states, by comparison, went hard. They poured in a serious amount of money to partner up with the Commonwealth, to partner up with the telecommunications giants to build hundreds of towers. We need that kind of performance in South Australia. I'm very pleased to report that we have a new government in South Australia, the first Liberal government in 16 years. One of the first things they are prepared to do is put $10 million on the table to partner with anyone to fix mobile phone blackspots. They recognise the value that a better mobile phone network in the country will have to unlock the economic potential of their state. But they are wondering what to do with their $10 million at the moment, Mr Minister. I am telling them that they need to partner with us, but at this stage we don't have another round of the mobile phone blackspot program. But I'm well aware that we now have a committee chaired by former senator Sean Edwards that is looking at what the next step should be in enhancing our mobile phone network throughout Australia. I'm urging my constituents to contact that committee and tell it where they think the mobile phone network needs to go. I'm very hopeful that that committee will recommend an ongoing contribution from the Commonwealth to that program, and certainly it will have my support and I will be lobbying to do that. My question to you, Minister, as I draw to a close that very long preamble, is: what can we expect from the future mobile phone blackspot program, and is this government still up to backing rural Australia? 12:42 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I thank the member for Grey for ripping the bandaid off the sore. I really am quite surprised that there is a member of the coalition willing to stand up here in the context of the budget estimates in this portfolio and raise the Mobile Black Spot Program. That is extraordinary. He deserves an Iron Cross for his courage and bravery in the context of this. I've got to say that, in his entire contribution, he didn't mention for one moment the bombshell that was dropped by Bill Morrow, the CEO of the NBN Co, in Senate estimates last week, where it was announced that, because of the inaction of this government, they were ditching the plan to roll out 100-gigabits-per-second wireless services to electorates like his own. There was not a word on that! The courage of this guy is extraordinary! I would like to say something about the mobile phone blackspot program. Just to upgrade the member for Grey on a little bit of history: Labor invested $250 million in a Regional Backbone Blackspots Program. Let me explain to the minister and the member for Grey why this is important. Unless you have backhaul, all you have is a pole in a paddock. It's a pole in a paddock unless that pole is connected to the network. So Labor's record $250 million into the Regional Backbone Blackspots Program is absolutely critical to what the government is now championing as its mobile phone blackspot program. An honourable member interjecting— Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B No, I do want to address that. Although everybody is universally saying that there is not a cent in this budget for the continuation of the mobile phone blackspot program, we have a minister who bears the title but doesn't do the work of a regional communications minister. She is seen missing, position vacant, but bears the title of Minister for Regional Communications. She said on 23 May this year—the date is important—a couple of weeks after the budget: 'In September I'll have a new wave of investment ready to go.' So my question to the minister is this: Where is the money? Is the money in the budget? Is the money somewhere hidden in the communication portfolio? Is it included somewhere in the decisions made but not yet announced? Is it a secret that they're not willing to share with the member for Grey or any of the other regional members around the country? Is it somewhere hidden in the contingency fund? The people of Australia deserve to know. The people of regional Australia deserve to know. If the minister is right in saying, 'In September there'll be a new wave of investment ready to go,' where's the money? Where's the money, Minister? The people of Australia deserve to know. Whilst I'm interrogating comments—helpful or otherwise—that have been made by senior members of the executive, I'd like the minister to tell us whether he agrees with comments that were made by the member for Maranoa and cabinet minister, Mr Littleproud, who said that the reason that there is no extension of the mobile phone blackspot program—they don't seem to be able to agree with each other, one cabinet minister with another, on this issue—is that the mobile network operators weren't going to play ball. So the fault is all that of the mobile network operators. Does the minister agree with the other minister, his cabinet colleague, that the reason that there is no money in the budget is that the mobile phone companies won't play ball with your government? Is that a correct statement? Is that a statement of government policy? Or is it the truth that on this issue you are as confused about their policy as the member for Grey is confused about the history of this program, and that you don't have a policy? It matters, Mr Deputy Speaker Howarth. You may be aware that there's a by-election going on at the moment, and in an electorate like Braddon, which has 110 mobile phone blackspots registered on the government's own database, they've built nine. So there are 101-odd to go, yet these guys are saying, 'Job done.' In Longman there are 29 blackspots and five built. (Time expired) 12:47 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher As many of us in this place well know, bullying is no longer restricted to name calling, social exclusion and acts of verbal and physical abuse. These are all very serious and harmful, but bullying in our community today goes much wider than that. The national definition of bullying for Australia's schools says: Bullying is an ongoing misuse of power in relationships through repeated verbal, physical and/or social behaviour that causes physical and/or psychological harm. That definition has long served to capture the essence of the problem. Over the past decade, however, a new avenue of bullying has emerged and has grown explosively: abuse, harassment, intimidation, threats and social exclusion via the internet. It happens in chat rooms, online games, emails, message boards and, most prominently, over social media. Though the vast majority of interactions over the internet are positive, for anyone struggling with bullying, depression and social isolation the online world can leave them no respite from their suffering. Today the internet has no off button, and it forms a central part of the social lives of most younger people. Mobile phones and constant connectivity can mean that the bullying never stops. Comments can be anonymous and brutal, the isolation unrelenting. At its worst, vulnerable people, who are already worrying that they might be a burden on their loved ones, can end up being encouraged to take their own lives. Faced with this growing societal problem, the Turnbull government, I am proud to say, has taken action to introduce a range of programs and initiatives to ensure the safety of Australians online. The eSafety Commissioner was established in July 2015, under the Enhancing Online Safety Act 2015, to provide online safety information and support. A key function of the commissioner under the online safety act is to administer a two-tiered scheme for the rapid removal of cyberbullying material from large social media sites. A second function is to assist victims of the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, otherwise known as revenge porn. Minister, section 107 of the Enhancing Online Safety Act 2015 requires a review of the act. When will this review be conducted and who will it be conducted by? Having established a strong personal interest and a high level of concern in this space, I invited the commissioner, Ms Julie Inman Grant, to the electorate of Fisher in February this year to promote the work of the commission and help educate the community on how they can be safer online. Julie was able to talk about the range of programs that are aimed at providing education to children and adults on online safety issues, including cyberbullying—the Young & eSafe youth platform and the introduction of lesson plans and virtual classrooms to help equip young people with the skills of resilience and respect when engaging in the online world—and advice on how they can report cyberbullying. Minister, how many community engagements have been done by the Office of the eSafety Commissioner and by what KPI is the office assessing that success? To date, the eSafety office has successfully resolved some 680 complaints in relation to cyberbullying material, demonstrating a very real need for further investment in this program. Building on this progress, the Turnbull government has now introduced the Enhancing Online Safety (Non-consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2018. This landmark legislation looks to prevent the sharing of intimate images online without consent. I'm proud to be part of a government that has listened to victims and is delivering policy that will implement the effective and timely removal of non-consensually shared images. Minister, how many reports of image-based abuse have been reported to the office of eSafety? How successful has the Commissioner been in having image-based abuse removed from the internet? This bill will introduce a federal civil penalty regime targeted at perpetrators and content hosts who share intimate images without consent. Penalties of up to $105,000 for individuals and up to $525,000 for corporations can be applied for breaches of the prohibition. Civil penalties will allow the eSafety office to take action within hours to quickly remove intimate images and prevent these images from being shared. Could the minister please outline what other important policy measures are being introduced as part of the enhancing online safety bill? 12:52 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway In 2014, the then Minister for Communications announced that he would be booting community TV off air to an online-only delivery model. Since then, the government has granted some extensions to the deadline, but right now the community TV sector is facing a 30 June deadline—only 30 days from now. Community TV stations have been making progress in creating new revenue streams through online delivery, but would benefit from a period of certainty on the free-to-air broadcast platform to support this. The sector has heard from the department and minister's office that they are working on what they have described as 'a range of options', which suggests there will be a further extension of the apparatus licence possible or likely, but with conditions. The community TV sector needs a period of stability so that they can make the transition from a position of financial strength, as opposed to a fight for survival resulting from the cycle of short-term extensions. Certainly, certainty for the sector is a very important thing. Will the government extend community TV licences beyond 30 June 2018? When will the stations be updated on the outcome, given the looming 30 June deadline? What options is the government working on to support community TV? What alternative use will the spectrum be put to if community TV is forced to vacate the spectrum? I have a further note in relation to criminalising the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, which the member also referred to, formally known as revenge porn. I note that Labor introduced a private member's bill in 2015 to criminalise non-consensual sharing of intimate images and have committed to implement this policy within the first 100 days of government. This bill has lapsed. In 2017 the government introduced a bill to introduced a civil penalty scheme for the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. The opposition supports the bill, but our position—and we have stated this on the record—is that it doesn't go far enough and that image based abuse of this nature should be criminalised. I note that the government's bill was amended in the Senate to criminalise image based abuse and is now before the House. The bill is expected to pass, but what is unclear at this stage is whether this will be a civil scheme or a civil and criminal scheme. In the 2018-19 budget, the government has provided additional funding for the eSafety Commissioner to administer a new civil penalties regime to combat the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. And I note that in 2015 the government committed $10 million to support victims of image based abuse in a number of areas. I also note that the pilot of the image based abuse portal was announced in December 2017 and that the pilot phase of the portal is intended to evaluate the volume and complexity of the reports received, before a formal launch of the portal in 2018. Minister, could you please provide an update on the progress of the bill to outlaw the non-consensual sharing of intimate images. When do you anticipate the bill will be listed for debate in the House of Representatives? Given that the budget allocates resources for the functions I have described, can we take it that the bill will soon be on its way? Of the $11.7 million in additional funding for the eSafety office announced in the budget, how much will be allocated to administering the new civil penalties regime to address non-consensual sharing of intimate images and providing guidance and support to Australians of all ages who experience online abuse? Of the $11.7 million in additional funding for the eSafety office announced in the budget, how much will be used to implement the civil penalties regime and to implement the criminalisation of non-consensual sharing of intimate images, if this were to come into effect? On funding for the image based abuse portal, how much funding has been received to date? On what, when and where has this money been spent? What enhancements have been made to the portal since its launch? How frequently is the portal used and how is it measured? How many complaints have been made to the portal? How many complaints have been resolved and how has the resolution of complaints been measured? 12:58 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield Let me first respond to some of the observations made by the shadow minister for regional communications. Parenthetically, is there a more useless and empty title than 'Shadow Minister for regional communications' from a party which has a track record of doing zero for regional communications? Over six years of government, what did they deliver in funding for mobile black spots? They delivered zero—no new base stations, no new coverage, no expenditure. It is not a very busy job being the shadow minister for regional communications. You open the window for business at the start of the day and say 'no money' and slam the window down and you are done for the day. It is not very demanding. By contrast, as the member for Grey pointed out, we are getting on with delivering mobile base stations all around the country under the $220 million investment that we have made under three stages. Already, 523 mobile base stations have been switched on and, under the three stage mobile black spots program, we are committed to delivering 867 locations around Australia. We also have the regional telecommunications inquiry presently underway, chaired by former senator Sean Edwards, a man from regional South Australia, who is going to bring an excellent perspective, along with his other panel members, to look at questions of regional communications and what additionally needs to be done. Let me make it very clear to the House: if you look at the track record of the coalition and you compare it to Labor's when delivering on the needs of regional Australians and meeting their communications needs, it is chalk and cheese. We are the friends of regional and rural Australians when it comes to delivering upgrades in communications networks. Now I come to the important question of the eSafety Commissioner, and the member for Fisher has asked a series of important questions about the eSafety Commissioner. I want to acknowledge the member for Fisher's strong interest in keeping Australians safe online. I'm pleased to cast some more light on what's been achieved and the work that's presently under way. A review of the Enhancing Online Safety Act is required to be commenced prior to 1 July 2018. I'm advised that the Minister for Communications will have more to say on this in coming weeks, but be assured we are well under way in our preparation for that review. The commencement date is three years after the commencement of section 107 of the act. The review will generate a report for tabling in parliament within 15 sitting days after the completion of the report, and the report will assess whether the Enhancing Online Safety Act remains fit for purpose. Community engagement is an important priority. I'm pleased that a number of members of parliament have been able to host the eSafety Commissioner and members of her organisation in numerous community forums in recent months. With regard to the question of image-based abuse material, I am advised that as at 30 May this year the Office of the eSafety Commissioner had received over 230 reports of image-based abuse, concerning 360 separate sites where that image-based abuse material was available. I'm also pleased to report that the commission has been successful in having image-based abuse material removed in 80 per cent of cases, despite the fact that most of those sites are hosted overseas. On average, action is taken within around nine hours—and that is extremely important—providing those who make a complaint with advice on available counselling and legal support, with links to communicate with social media services and websites, and options to contact police. On average, requests to remove intimate material are completed within five days of a request being made. The Enhancing Online Safety (Non-consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill is an example of where the Turnbull government has listened and is providing what the victims have been asking for, which is effective and timely removal of non-consensually shared images. We're certainly keeping under review other options beyond the civil penalties, but this is an important area where the government— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 I thank the minister. 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. The minister will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. ADJOURNMENT 95 ADJOURNMENT National Future Work Summit 95 13:03 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley I wanted to record here in parliament my congratulations to the organisers of the first National Future Work Summit held in Melbourne yesterday, an event that dealt with an issue of crucial importance to the nation: the impact of technology on the way we work and the jobs we have. I joined with 400 other attendees drawn from across government, industry and academia and, appropriately, given the downstream impact on jobs, a lot of secondary students also attended. The event reinforced in my mind something I've known for quite some time—that is, that there's not only a large degree of curiosity about what's approaching; it's been twinned with a degree of concern about whether the nation is prepared for that change. Some great speakers also lent their insights—Sally-Ann Williams from Google, Tim Reed from MYOB, Sarah Moran from Girl Geek Academy, Yohan Ramasundara from ACS, the Wade Institute's Georgia McDonald, and the one and only Michelle Mannering. Another event is planned for Sydney and, because it's in New South Wales, it'll obviously be bigger and better! I'm looking forward to that and the 2019 events as well. These events are vital because, while change is a constant, preparation isn't. These events play a part in that preparation. Well done to everyone involved. A recent decision by the Turnbull government has the local tech community talking. It relates to how they've chopped and changed their approach to the way government data is managed—specifically, who will manage protected cloud services for the Australian government and how? For some time, Australia has been able to proudly rely upon local cloud service providers supplying those services to government. The framework has been set in stone for a while, even in the face of repeated questioning by local providers wanting to check that they wouldn't be caught off-guard by sudden policy shifts. Let's face it: that's a constant threat when dealing with this government. A few months ago, I was interested to see Microsoft invest $100 million in setting up a cloud service presence in Canberra. On the face of it, it's great to see, but, in the absence of major contracts, it seemed like a big investment to make. Then, a few weeks later, it became clear. The Turnbull government decided to award Microsoft permission to house data in newly classified protected services, or so it seems. It would be fair to say this has caused some shock but not because of Microsoft. They're a great company and I've supported their work around things like skills development. But I'm interested in the Turnbull government shifting the goalposts and impacting local companies. The same Turnbull government that once yammered on about driving local innovation only gives it lip-service when it comes to the crunch. There is a stack of serious questions the Turnbull government has to answer about this seismic policy shift—specifically: is Microsoft providing a public cloud to government or protected cloud services? What was the standard by which contracted cloud providers had to adhere prior to Microsoft obtaining the green light to provide its cloud offering. And why were these standards changed without notice or involvement of Australian firms? Who in the Australian Signals Directorate signed all the certifications for the first four protected cloud services? And did the same person sign off the most recent protected certification? At the time of the last certification, was the person who signed the first four still in the same role? Does the ASD take the view that a public cloud cannot be classified as a protected cloud? Last week, the government's cybersecurity guru, Alastair MacGibbon, told estimates that Microsoft staff have access to the cloud system that holds protected data if they have Australian government security vetting agency clearances. So how many clearances have been issued to Microsoft staff who are not Australian citizens or are not based in Australia? Is it true that Microsoft's global head of sales and marketing specifically flew to Canberra—on a private jet, mind you—to lobby senior members of the government for the ability of Microsoft to provide its services? Mr MacGibbon stated, on behalf of the Australian government, that the data in Microsoft's cloud is covered under Australian law, yet isn't it the case that the US CLOUD Act shifts the jurisdiction to the US? What assessments were made by the ASD regarding legal sovereignty of the data housed in foreign clouds? Is a non-Australian based cloud provider subject to foreign laws around data access? And did our legal advice take into account what might happen to storage and accessing of protected data as a result of changes to law by foreign governments? These are just a few of the questions. The Australian public deserves to know how the government is protecting and managing the data of ordinary citizens. It would also be good to know why the government has decided to treat local firms so shabbily: one day forcing those firms to spend up big to meet a big standard that is then chopped and changed to suit a multinational without regard to the impact on locals. The issue will not go away. It deserves a proper response from government and it certainly deserves to see local cloud services providers treated better than we have seen to date. Robertson Electorate: Green Point Christian College 96 13:08 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson In my electorate of Robertson on the Central Coast, we've got 43 fantastic schools. I've had the opportunity to meet many of the students and teachers at those schools in my electorate as well as here in the parliament. I'm always so pleased to see the passion that our students have for our community as well as their interest in issues that affect our nation. Recently, I visited year 6 students at Green Point Christian College ahead of their excursion to Canberra. They had quite a few insights, in terms of their questions, and they took the time to write me some passionate letters following my visit to tell me what matters to them and what they would do if they were Prime Minister for day. I'd like to take this opportunity to share some of the students' responses. Porscha Altivilla, Carol Solimon, Hamish Woodhouse, Jonah Clifford, Katinka Wood and Aiden D were all concerned about the state of roads in their local areas, including Davistown, Ettalong and Gosford. Tahlia Hirst wrote that she would like to see drivers stop speeding down the road on Greenfield Road in Empire Bay, a concern a lot of local residents share. Luke Read told me if he were Prime Minister for a day the first thing he would do would be to have a cup of coffee, which I have to say I can't argue with at all! Rex Allwood said that if he were Prime Minister for a day he'd get voted in for longer. Travis G said that as PM he would talk to the Treasurer about how much money we can raise and give that to all the things we need to fix and all the people in need of help. Grace T would raise awareness about cystic fibrosis by starting a petition. Grace, I would certainly encourage you to do so. Sasha Riggs, Jett Wood, Matias T and Joshua Abbott were all concerned with littering and the amount of rubbish on our streets. Sienna Pearce explained that if she were Prime Minister she would make a law to ensure that everyone picks up their rubbish. Nate Townsend and Tristan Byrne were concerned with how rubbish was affecting our waterways and marine life, which is a key concern on the Central Coast. If Siena Brown were a member of parliament she would create a program for abandoned animals so that they could be adopted. Noah Todd would help increase the number of wild animals on the Central Coast. Hallie Kumar said if she could fix one thing in her suburb it would be to see cleaner beaches at Umina and Ettalong. Amelia C said if she were the member for Robertson she would make the beaches safer. Evie Myers and Ben P said if they were members of parliament they would build more playgrounds on the Central Coast. Owen Blair would upgrade the playground near his house because he and Joel Drennan said they'd love to see a skate park in Macmasters Beach. This is all about infrastructure for our young people on the Central Coast. Keelan Black said that as a member of parliament he would encourage more people to play sport and stay fit and healthy. Keelan said his plan would be to spend most of Australia's money on sport to help more people achieve their sporting dreams. Evelyn Rajasekar said the most important issue to her would be to create more jobs on the Central Coast. Noah Bootes said that if he were a member of parliament he would want more job opportunities so that people can get the job they want. Joshua Waghorn would invest more money in local news. Grace Crain said that if she were a member of parliament she would like to be the Speaker so she could excuse people during question time for being rude. Georgia Dehn said she wasn't sure being a politician was for her. She said she thinks it's a hard job. If Lucas Keogh were a member of parliament he would advocate for a soccer field in Copacabana and make a no homework bill. Matt Turner said the issue most important to him is how many people are becoming addicted to a video game called Fortnite, and he's concerned kids aren't doing homework because of it. Sasha Harding said if she were Prime Minister for a day she would make sure that more kids like her had more of a say because their opinions matter. Guess what, Sasha? You are absolutely right. Each and every voice matters. Thank you to each and every one of you for taking the time to share what matters to you, including Olivia Mitchell, Sophie Chen, Anastasia and Joshua N. No matter how old you are or where you live on the Central Coast, your voice does matter and it will be heard in this parliament. With brilliant minds like the students from year 6 at Greenpoint Christian College, I've got no doubt that our region on the Central Coast has a very bright future ahead indeed. I'm sure that students from across my electorate will make an outstanding contribution to our community in whatever they choose to pursue both now and in the future. Live Animal Exports 97 13:13 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay It's a disgrace that this morning we had this government shutting down and gagging debate in this parliament on such an important issue. The 60 Minutes footage that we all saw shook me to my core, and if it didn't shake those on the opposite side, it should have. I, along with many members of my community, were dismayed to see the animals suffering in such inhumane conditions. My electorate of Lindsay has spoken up. They've approached me at train stations, at my mobile offices and on their doorsteps when I'm doorknocking, and they have asked me to act. They have asked me what I am going to do about this to make sure it never happens again. There have been thousands and thousands of emails and phone calls. This government gagging the debate today is absolutely disgraceful. I applaud the courage of the brave whistleblower who brought this inhumane and tragic suffering to light, as well as the ABC and 60 Minutes for their continued exposure of these horrible practices and for their investigative journalism over the last many, many decades. Australia is the world's largest exporter of sheep and its second-largest producer of lamb. Around 200,000 people are employed in the red meat industry including in on-farm production, processing and retail. The gross value of the lamb and mutton production, including live exports, in 2016-17 is estimated at just under $4 billion. Labor understands the importance of live export and the meat industry. Mr Wallace interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 The member for Fisher. Ms HUSAR 263328 Jobs and livelihoods rely on the live export sector and this is why we're not calling for an immediate and complete and immediate shutdown of the sector, but we know the welfare of the livestock and success of the export industry are not mutually exclusive. The government needs to do more to make sure that we are ethical in the way that we treat our livestock. A government member interjecting— Ms HUSAR 263328 Labor has a plan of action, unlike this government who think their plan of action is to shut down debate and interject while a woman is speaking. Labor has a plan of action and our shadow minister for agriculture will succeed where this government continues to fail. This out-of-touch Liberal government is deaf on this matter and simply not doing enough to make sure that what we saw from the Awassi Express does not happen again. Labor plans to work with all those across the sheep and lamb sector to ban live exports throughout the northern summer months to ensure that the safe and humane export of sheep is possible. Mr Broad interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 The member for Mallee. Ms HUSAR 263328 Labor's plans on increasing our high-value chilled and box export markets to encourage the creation of more Australian jobs in the red meat sector. And we are committed to eventually fully phasing out the live sheep export industry entirely, once the appropriate infrastructure and support are implemented to ensure those who rely on the industry are not left out in the cold. Mr Broad interjecting— Ms HUSAR 263328 Deputy Speaker, those interjections from those opposite are pathetic, given you all had the opportunity today to debate this down in the House of Reps but you chose to gag the debate. Mr Wallace interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 The member for Fisher Ms HUSAR 263328 When will this government, an out-of-touch government, show leadership and act on this live sheep export crisis that is not meeting community expectations? This is not just a problem that belongs to the industry, with thousands of sheep deaths, but is the responsibility that falls directly on the shoulder of those opposite. We need real and meaningful action, and the community demands it. Mr Broad interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 The member for Mallee. Ms HUSAR 263328 Why has this government defunded our regulations from the sector? Unsurprisingly, the government's agriculture minister has ignored scientific and expert advice from the Australian Veterinary Association, even though he did say that he would follow this advice and the science. Well, the science is in, and this government should be doing more in the wake of the information that was revealed during the TV program and subsequent McCarthy review. This minister and the government must act or we will continue to see sheep suffering inhumane and unspeakable treatment. I say this to the Turnbull government: the people of my electorate want to see real and meaningful action. And I make this promise: Labor will not ignore the scientific evidence and the expert opinions that are glaringly available to all those who seek them out. We will not ignore the community's expectations or the voices of the thousands of people who continue to be outraged by the treatment. We will fight against the inhumane treatment of Australian livestock. We have a commitment to stopping the northern summer sheep trade at the first opportunity and we will phase out all live sheep exports over time. This is a matter of ending animal cruelty, whilst also supporting our sheep farmers and those who rely on the red meat sector to be sustainably profitable into the future. The lack of action from this Liberal government makes it clear where they stand on this issue. I implore the Australian people and my community to continue to stand and call for action against this government to send this out-of-touch government a message at the upcoming by-elections and at the next general election because they will not act on this matter. Deputy Speaker, I thank you for allowing me to make my contributions and ask that the unparliamentary remarks made during it are withdrawn. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 I didn't hear any unparliamentary remarks. Would anyone like to withdraw any remarks? No. I call the member for Bonner. Bonner Electorate: Volunteer Awards 98 13:18 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Today I want to thank everyone who put in a nomination for my Bonner volunteer awards. These awards recognise individuals and groups that have demonstrated outstanding volunteer qualities. They shine a light on people who have made a significant and lasting contribution to our community. They commend those people who have set a good example for fellow volunteers and inspired others to volunteer. The volunteer awards were a great success last year. This year has been no different, with even more nominations coming in. It's great to hear so many stories of men and women making a real difference in our community. They all deserve praise and I would like to recognise their work today. We're lucky in Bonner to have grassroots sports clubs where children of all ages can hone their love and talent in sport. These clubs depend on the hard work of volunteers. Carindale Juniors AFL club has grown to over 100 members thanks to dedicated Bonner parents. Their vice-president, Brad Abell, has donated hundreds of hours of his time coaching the under-10s, managing the umpires, repairing and maintaining their footy oval and much more. David Harvey from Manly West acts as coach, manager, game official, club referee and more for Bayside United Football Club. Jason Lavender started as president of the Bayside Jets Basketball Club in Carina last year. He stepped up to the plate when former club president Noel Merrick had open-heart surgery. He trains the kids every Tuesday night and has been getting them results. There are several other Bonner volunteers who also give their free time to help young people in the community. Marian Sheffield volunteers for a number of clubs in the Wynnum-Manly area, including the Acacia Bayside Swimming Club and the Annette Roselli Dance Academy. Michael Lakeman runs the Manly Lota Scout Group. Gloria Guthrie volunteers at Mackenzie State Special School library. Jacqueline Park volunteers as a reading tutor at the Upper Mount Gravatt State School. There are also local volunteers who help our older residents in need. Lyn Felschow volunteers at the Holland Park Meals on Wheels as well as her local church. Phil Young assists the elderly people at his local Carindale complex. And then there are volunteers who make a difference for our homeless. The Making a Difference team based in Manly West regularly helps and organises donated items for the homeless or people trying to restart their lives. Joseph Dawson is just 14 years old, and he volunteers every month with the Rosies Friends on the Street program. Joseph is a hard worker who also encourages his friends to get involved with this worthy cause. Finally, there are volunteers who've made a particular mark in our community. Linda Pascoe started the Gumdale Hub Facebook page to bring the community together to help fight crime in the area. Linda and the rest of the Gumdale Hub team do a great job running the page. Alex Wright from Mansfield is a long-time volunteer also helping to protect his community. He's involved with Volunteers in Policing and Mansfield Neighbourhood Watch. These are just two of the many organisations that Alex volunteers with. Carindale local Bruce Meers is another lifelong volunteer for many local charities and clubs—the list is too long to read here. Bruce has truly changed the lives of so many people, young and old, over the last 50 years. Congratulations to these amazing volunteers. I look forward to meeting them at the Bonner volunteers award presentation ceremony tomorrow, and I can't wait to thank them for their service to the community. Whitlam Electorate: Pie Time, Whitlam Electorate: Stella Maris Catholic Primary School, Whitlam Electorate: Rotary Club of Moss Vale 99 13:22 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I've got to say it would be downright un-Australian if every member of this parliament did not find themselves down at the Southern Highlands of New South Wales from 1 June right through 30 June to participate in Pie Time. It's Pie Time in the Southern Highlands. You're downright un-Australian if you don't get down there and have a pie. I'm involved in a very pie-partisan affair with the member for Hume, Angus Taylor. We promoted the event down at the Queen's Terrace Cafe this morning. It's going to be an absolute cracker. I don't care whether your favourites are steak and kidney or steak and pepper or you go for some of these newfangled lasagne pies, a lamb and rosemary pie or a beef pie; we have every pie on offer, every pie imaginable, in the Southern Highlands. From Sutton Forest in the south up to Mittagong in the north, in great towns like Berrima, Moss Vale, Robertson, Mittagong and Burrawang, we've got it all. It's running for a month. There are literally dozens and dozens of bakeries throughout the Southern Highlands in New South Wales which are going to have their fare in offer. Get onto one of the famous back roads, drop into the Burrawang pub or the Robertson pub—obviously you want to have a designated driver for the day. There is lots of fun to be had. While I'm giving a shout-out to Pie Time, I also want to give a shout-out to Destination Southern Highlands, who are coordinating and organising the event. The marketing campaign for last year's festival, the Southern Pielands, won silver in the Destination Marketing category for 2017 in the Qantas Australian Tourism Awards, a feat that I think we can top this year if every member of this place, their family and friends get on board. It's a short trip down the way from Canberra to get some of the best pies on offer throughout Australia. I also want to give a shout-out to the principal, the students and the school community of Stella Maris in Shellharbour. A few weeks ago, they celebrated their 60 years of existence with a week-long celebration. They held a special series of events on 20 May—unfortunately, I couldn't get there as I had competing commitments—when they had students past and present gather for a special mass in the morning, a barbecue reunion at lunch time and, something that really grabbed my imagination, a time capsule which they buried, overseen by the two school captains, Andrew and Amali. The time capsule will be opened in 2058, which will be the 100th anniversary of Stella Maris school. Good luck to the school community. You have been doing a fantastic job educating years and years worth of great citizens throughout the Illawarra. While I'm at it, I want also to say a few kind words about the Rotary Club of Moss Vale. They celebrated 70 years of existence, 70 years of supporting the community and providing great services. They are a great service club through Rotary International. They were formed in 1948 after originally being part of the Rotary Club of Bowral. They've had many, many successes over the years providing funding and person power to worthy causes throughout the Southern Highlands and supporting education and health charities throughout the world. A few examples of this include fundraising support and support for the Bowral cancer research centre. They've been great supporters of the gardens in Moss Vale, for many years have been involved in supporting the Queen Street Centre and were responsible for establishing the first meals on wheels services out of the Queen Street Centre. The meals on wheels has been taken over by another organisation now, but I can say that without the great effort of all the Rotarians at Moss Vale this certainly would not have occurred. This is just another example of the great volunteering and community spirit that I see right throughout my electorate, particularly up in the Southern Highlands. So to all my fellow Rotarians throughout my electorate of Whitlam, but particularly to the members of the Moss Vale Rotary in celebrating their 70-year anniversary: thanks for putting on a great event. We raised a few dollars for the local community. I wish you all the very best for your next 70 years, and I'm sure you are going to do a great job supporting great and worthy projects throughout the Southern Highlands and internationally. One final plug before I sit down, Deputy Speaker Hogan: don't forget to get up to the Southern Highlands for the Pie Time festival. It's one of the great events on the Southern Highlands calendar. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 Avery persuasive sales job there on the pies, Member for Whitlam. Taxation 99 13:27 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I often think that the media and even some members of this place don't have enough faith in the people that we represent. We hear too often, despite the repeated evidence to the contrary, that populist political parties and simplistic slogans work because ordinary Australians are not engaged enough to fully understand complex political issues. The shifty Leader of the Opposition is certainly relying on this assumption when he tries to persuade the public that Labor can make irresponsibly large cuts to personal taxes, wildly increase spending and rapidly reduce the deficit all at once. You'd have to be pretty disengaged to buy that sort of dishonest fantasy economics. I think anyone who has ever had a bank account or a household budget to manage would see right through that one straightaway. This week we have had clear evidence that the people of Australia are listening carefully to our nation's economic debate and that they understand the realities very well. Despite the dishonest rhetoric of members opposite, we learnt from Newspoll on Monday that 63 per cent of Australians favour executing the government's full ten-year plan for corporate tax relief. Australians understand that tax relief is not a giveaway. It is not the Government's money to give away. Tax relief simply means allowing ordinary Australians to keep more of their own money and spend it on the things that they really need. Tax relief means allowing Australian businesses to keep more of the money they earn and invest it in creating more jobs for working Australians. Nine out of 10 Australians work for a private sector business, and they have already seen firsthand the benefits of the initial phases of the government's enterprise tax plan. Our company tax cuts for businesses with a turnover of up to $50 million a year have seen more than 1,000 new jobs created every day during the past 12 months. Three-quarters of those jobs have been full time. Since the coalition government was elected, more than one million new jobs have been created, transforming lives all over the country and delivering the lowest percentage of Australians on working age welfare in 25 years. You don't have to take the Treasurer's word for it that tax cuts work; you just have to look at the million more men and women who are going to work every single day. But we must push through with the plan to its conclusion. It is critical to sustaining our future growth that Australia's corporate tax rate be competitive for all businesses. The United States is reducing their corporate tax to 21 per cent and France to 25 per cent, while the United Kingdom's rate was already 19 per cent. According to KPMG, the EU's average company tax rate is 21 per cent. In a 21st-century global economy, companies have a great deal of choice as to where they locate their workforce, and investors' money is extremely mobile. If we cannot attract and keep the high growth businesses of the future in Australia then we will not be able to grow the economy and provide the good jobs that Australians want. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 13:30   QUESTIONS IN WRITING 101 QUESTIONS IN WRITING Insurance (Question No. 943) 101 943 Mr Katter HX4 To ask the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services: In respect of a number of constituent cases in the electoral division of Kennedy, some dating back to Cyclone Yasi (2011), where it is alleged that Club Marine is bullying and intimidating its policy holders to settle for a meagre amount of their total claim, or drawing the process out for years in the hope that the policy holder will go broke or run out of energy to pursue the matter, will he order Club Marine, part of Allianz Australia Insurance, to reveal how many claims (a) have been made, and (b) have been paid, and (i) in the case where payment has been made, what percentages of the claim did Club Marine pay, and (ii) on claims that have been paid, what number have been disputed by the policy holder, and what number are still in dispute. Ms O'Dwyer LKU The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: We are advised that since Cyclone Yasi in 2011, Club Marine has received over 50 thousand claims and paid out over $350 million in claims. This includes a number of extreme weather events including Cyclones Yasi, Marcia and Debbie, and other extreme storms for which over 99 per cent of claims received were paid. It is not appropriate for the Government to intervene in private disputes. However, in situations where a policy holder is not satisfied with an outcome they should seek a review of the decision using their insurance provider's internal dispute resolution process. If a policy holder remains unsatisfied they should contact the Financial Ombudsman Service, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, or seek legal advice. I would note that on a date no later the 1 November 2018, consumers of financial services will be able to go to the new one-stop shop for consumer disputes, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA). AFCA have higher thresholds than are currently available to Australian consumers. AFCA will have a monetary limit of $1 million and a compensation cap of $500,000, which will apply to most disputes, almost double the existing limits representing significantly enhanced access to redress for consumers.