2018-09-20 45 1 7 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 20 September 2018

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

 

BILLS 1 BILLS Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018 1

Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018

First Reading 1 Second Reading 1 09:31 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018 strengthens penalties for existing offences, and amends the nation's sabotage offences, to deal with acts of food supply contamination that now pose a clear and unprecedented risk to the safety of the Australian community and to the livelihoods of our nation's food producers. The consequences we have witnessed from the contamination of strawberries demonstrate the public anxiety, the economic loss and the terrible real-world harm that one rogue actor can cause. This harm has been amplified by a rapid escalation in copycat offenders and the perpetrators of hoaxes. This bill is intended to send the simplest, clearest and strongest of messages. The behaviour we are now witnessing is not a joke. It is not funny. It is a serious criminal offence, and we denounce it, and offenders of it will face very serious consequences. Contamination of goods It is already illegal to intentionally contaminate with the intention of causing public harm, alarm or significant economic loss. It is also a crime to threaten to contaminate goods, or make false statements about the contamination of goods for one of those purposes. However, recent events have demonstrated that the existing maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment is not sufficient. The bill will address that by increasing the maximum penalty to 15 years imprisonment for those offences. This will send a strong signal to would-be offenders by placing the penalty at an equivalent level to offences dealing with matters such as child pornography and the funding of terrorist organisations. The clear and manifest risk we also see demonstrated by recent events appears to be inspiring hoaxes and copycat offenders. These people need to know that if they engage in such conduct they will be committing a very serious crime. Accordingly, this bill will create new offences that apply where a person contaminates goods, threatens to contaminate goods or makes false statements about the contamination of goods and is reckless as to the causing of public alarm or anxiety, of economic loss, or of harm to public health. These offences will attract a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Sabotage There is also a third change with respect to Australia's sabotage offences contained in this bill. The government recently modernised Australia's sabotage laws to address the unprecedented threats that we now face as a nation. These threats are constantly evolving, and our laws must evolve to keep pace. These laws currently apply to the sabotage of public infrastructure and carry maximum penalties of between seven and 25 years imprisonment. Australia's food supply infrastructure is also clearly of critical importance to our national security and the wellbeing of our citizens. Accordingly, the bill will expand the sabotage offences so that they would cover the sabotage of Australia's food supply, where such conduct is intended to prejudice our national security. Further action The bill marks an important step towards ensuring that our food supply infrastructure is afforded the same protection as other pieces of our critical infrastructure. This work must continue. The issue will be raised with state and territory counterparts to encourage them to strengthen their own laws to ensure a robust, nationally consistent approach to the protection of our food supply. It is important to remember the human toll this is having on Australian farmers and, indeed, a whole range of participants in the agricultural sector, who are already doing it tough. Helping our farmers and farming communities is a high priority of this government, and we have committed $1 million to deal with the crisis and help get the industry back on its feet. Conclusion The events of this week represent large-scale criminality relating to food products in Australia. Strong action is required to deter and punish those who would target our food supply infrastructure. Their actions hurt the Australian community. They sabotage the livelihoods of growers, communities, towns and whole regions. They unnecessarily frighten people away from enjoying the beautiful, fresh and healthy produce our farmers grow. This bill demonstrates that the government will not stand for it. It is the first duty of every government to keep its people safe, and we are committed to doing so. This bill takes us a further step down that path, and I commend it to the House. Leave granted for second reading debate to continue immediately. Mr Burke DYW Speakers have been asked to keep their speeches within a reasonable time frame on the understanding that it's the intention of the House to have the bill passed this morning. 09:36 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs As Australians would be aware, since 13 September this year, there have been a number of confirmed cases of people finding needles in strawberries. While the initial reporting concerned Berrylicious and Berry Obsession strawberries from Queensland, police and health authorities have warned of copycat cases across Australia. On 19 September it was reported by the AAP that: Australia's strawberry contamination scare has now spread across six states … The Minister for Home Affairs said on Wednesday that there were up to 100 reported cases, although many of these were believed to be hoaxes. In response to these and other stories of needles being found in fruit, some supermarkets have pulled strawberries from their shelves. In addition, a number of trade partners—including Russia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom—have reportedly blocked Australian strawberry imports. This is a block that we would all, I'm sure, sincerely hope is removed as soon as possible. It is a completely unacceptable situation. It's having a devastating impact on strawberry farmers across our country. The fear and potential panic that has been created in the community is completely unacceptable as well. The Morrison government has responded by proposing some changes to Commonwealth laws that the government says that it hopes will assist in deterring and in prosecuting the individuals who have engaged in what are obviously recklessly destructive behaviours. Specifically, this bill would amend section 380 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code to increase the penalties for existing Commonwealth offences relating to the contamination of goods from a maximum period of 10 years in prison to a maximum period of 15 years in prison. Those existing offences apply to a person who contaminates goods with the intention of causing public alarm or anxiety in Australia, widespread or nationally significant economic loss in Australia through public awareness of the contamination or possible contamination of the goods, or harm to or creating a risk of harm to public health in Australia. In addition, the bill would amend section 380 of the Criminal Code to introduce new offences. The new offences would mirror the existing offences, except that they will apply to a person who contaminates goods and is reckless as to whether this will have one of the consequences I've just outlined in relation to the intention offence. So what those additional mirroring offences propose to do is introduce an additional fault element for this kind of offence. I should say that this range of food contamination offences was introduced into the Commonwealth Criminal Code in 2004 following work done by the Model Criminal Code Officers Committee. As with much of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, these provisions replicate offences that already existed then and exist today at a state and territory level. So there are, obviously in different forms, a range of food contamination offences with very serious penalties already in state and territory law. I should note, just to give some context to what is being put forward here by the government, that the reports of sentences and convictions relating to Commonwealth law do not record that there has ever been a conviction under any of these Commonwealth criminal offences. There have, of course, in the intervening period since 2004 been a range of convictions under state and territory law for food contamination offences. The other aspect of this bill, quite different to the increase in penalties for the existing Commonwealth offences and the introduction of a new fault element of recklessness, is an amendment to the definition of public infrastructure in section 82 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code so as to include a provision that infrastructure that relates to providing the public with food is to be included in public infrastructure in future. Also to be included is food that is intended for the public and is produced, distributed or sold by a constitutional corporation for the purposes of constitutional trade and commerce. If the amendment to the definition of public infrastructure is passed, a person will commit an offence if: the person engages in conduct that results in damage to food infrastructure or to food that is intended for the public and is produced, distributed or sold by a constitutional corporation for the purpose of constitutional trade and commerce and the person intends that the conduct will, or is reckless as to whether the conduct will, prejudice Australia's national security or advantage the national security of a foreign country; the person engages in conduct that results in food infrastructure or food becoming vulnerable to misuse or impairment or to being accessed or modified by a person not entitled to access or modify it and the person intends that the conduct will, or is reckless as to whether the conduct will, cause prejudice to Australia's national security; or the person engages in conduct and does so with the intention of planning to commit one of the offences referred to above. I would note, for the assistance of the House, that section 82 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code contains the sabotage provisions which were recently introduced as part of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill introduced to the parliament by the former Prime Minister, Mr Turnbull, on 7 December last year. Those sabotage provisions carry penalties ranging from, in some cases, a maximum of seven years imprisonment to, in other cases, a maximum of 25 years imprisonment. I would have to say that a curious device has been adopted here by the government in its rush to introduce some legislation to deal with the problem of contamination of strawberries. It's a matter of concern that the government may well not have thought through all of the possible unintended consequences—and you've only got to state it to understand how curious it is—that might attach to redefining public infrastructure so as to include food in the way this bill proposes to do. We have not had time to ascertain the reasons for the fact that there have been no cases recorded of conviction against any of the existing offences in part 9.6 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. As I said, they were first introduced in 2004. But it may very well be, and it's likely, that authorities use equivalent state and territory criminal offences in relation to the contamination of goods and food. Those state and territory offences have a broader application than the equivalent Commonwealth offences, due to the constitutional limitations on the Commonwealth's legislative power. Labor is supporting this bill, but I would note that having such a short time frame between the drafting and the passage of legislation to amend the Commonwealth Criminal Code is highly unusual. The introduction of new criminal offences is not something that should be taken in any way lightly. The opposition received the draft of this bill at 6.05 pm yesterday and has had little time—and the public has had no time—to fully consider what the consequences of this legislation might be. It seems entirely possible that there are unintended consequences particularly, as I mentioned, in relation to the introduction of a new definition of public infrastructure. I call on the government to review the operation of this bill carefully over the coming months to ensure that the changes to our criminal law that this bill will introduce do not have unintended consequences. I appreciate the shortness of time we have, because it is the government's intention to pass this bill through the parliament today, but I ask the Attorney-General and the government to consider whether an amendment might be possible to provide for a statutory review of these provisions within 12 months of the commencement of the legislation simply to ensure that a thorough look is had at the consequences, unintended included, of passing legislation in this manner. I am minded to say that this legislation should not be regarded as a substitute for something that as yet has been absent—that is, a coordinated national response. We all should be asking what else could be done, in such a coordinated national response, to assist our farmers. The people of Australia must be protected from food contamination, but they already are by a range of state, territory and Commonwealth laws. Farmers must be protected, but practical action is needed in addition to this legislation in order to get to the problem that has emerged. One might have thought that consideration of whether rewards should be increased and whether the Commonwealth can provide the assistance of officers of the Australian Federal Police to state and territory police forces who are working on this problem might be a more practical approach than simply legislating. One of the real matters that should always be taken into account by this parliament in legislating is that legislation, particularly the criminal law, looks backwards. It can operate only when perpetrators have been located, and practical action should be taken right now to ensure the perpetrators are located and apprehended and their activities brought to an end. Finally, it's already symptomatic of this chaotic Morrison government that tremendous energy can be applied to some matters while a whole range of other government activity is simply languishing. What happened, one might ask, to the foreign donations bill introduced to the parliament on 7 December last year? What has happened to energy policy? What has happened to climate policy? One could go on. It is clear that the government can summon energy to do things in a hurry when it wants to. It ought to be applying the same energy to a whole range of other government inaction on which we are simply left lamenting the lack of government policy. 09:49 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I rise to support the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018. I just want to speak to the consumers, the growers and the people of Australia to explain why we support this legislation and our view about the current matters. We fully support our growers and we fully support our farmers. We will support these laws. The shadow Attorney-General has gone through some of the issues and concerns with these laws; however, we will support them. Very briefly, on the actual laws: they pose very strict penalties. They will act, we hope, as strong deterrents for anyone considering the stupid, cowardly and, frankly, bizarre act of tampering with fruit and vegies that Australians eat. I acknowledge that there are already significant laws in the state and the Commonwealth. We are proposing to amend these Commonwealth laws and, on this occasion, we will support that. But, in the broader sense—and I'm keen to talk to the Prime Minister about this—as some of the immediate urgency around the contamination of some brands of strawberries abates, I think we need to have a national discussion about what we could have done better in the last few days. Tampering with food, though rare, is not unprecedented, but it seems that this matter has caught our authorities and experts off guard. So I believe that, whilst we wouldn't want to assume that all matters are resolved, we should have a discussion about what can be done better. The first of those, I want to suggest, to improve people's confidence, is the need to review our interjurisdictional arrangements with regard to food sabotage incidents. I think the national crisis management protocol would be useful in situations like this and, given there are international implications with our brand and quality of our exports, the Commonwealth government should be the one to lead it. So far, whilst everyone has tried to do the very best they can, it would appear that some of the process has been uncoordinated between the states, with different states and authorities taking different approaches. I think, even now, with the benefit of near hindsight, talking to growers, it would appear that some of the approaches may have caused significant damage to the industry, fed the media frenzy and, indeed, perhaps incited and invited copycats. Labor wants to see us adopt a different approach to stop this kind of incident turning into a major crisis with long-term, potentially harmful implications for the industry. We need to have a better way of handling this nationally. This issue, although rare, should not have caught our authorities off guard, and I think some of the coverage and some of the debate and different responses have potentially caused more harm than some of the initial nasty acts of sabotage. Another suggestion I've heard in recent days is to set up a procedure similar to the plant and animal emergency response whereby a mechanism is used to address the issues in a coordinated way between all levels of government and industry. This means we could possibly provide compensation to affected industries through a levy set at zero but activated in an emergency response. We can work through these ideas over coming days, weeks and months, but this does need to be on the COAG agenda. Labor notes that there are other horticultural issues which have been languishing and which need addressing, be it the contamination of our prawn industry with white spot, concern over the poisoning with the frozen berries and, indeed, some debate and issues around rockmelons. We need stronger action and coordination so that we are not immediately responding to issues in the frame of a crisis but rather anticipating potential challenges, and then we can react in a calm and cautious manner, a sensible way, which doesn't cause greater damage than even some of the damage we are trying to remedy. I would also like at this point to invite Australians to spare a thought for the fruit pickers, for the casual and itinerant workforce, who rely upon this seasonal work for their sustenance. I hope the government will not be inflexible at the Department of Social Security with people who might be forced back onto unemployment benefits because the work they had expected—picking fruit—has been snatched away from them as a result of this immediate situation. But here and now, I say to the people of Australia: the most important thing this parliament can do is show our complete confidence in the quality and safety of the food that Australian farmers and growers produce. I think the most immediate and important short-term action isn't to thunder about all of the other issues but to rebuild confidence in the strawberry industry—or, to put it in other words: any of us who has the opportunity to speak publicly on this matter should not use our position to inflame fear but rather to rebuild confidence. So I would like to thank all of the honourable members who have shown strong support for growers in a host of innovative and entertaining ways. It doesn't matter if it is the member for Longman, the member for Hunter or the member for Casey, our Speaker—every member in this place who represents strawberry growing communities. We understand how important it is to buy and eat strawberries as usual—and maybe even a bit more than usual. To all Australians, I simply say: we have encountered food scares before and we've come through the other side with no worries whatsoever. So, on the way home tonight, or if you're in the supermarket on the weekend, we encourage people to grab a punnet for yourself and a punnet for the nation. We encourage them to have them fresh or to go into the favourite recipe, to put them to use. We would encourage the major supermarket chains: now is not the time to be hunting the best bargains you can off strawberry growers, but, instead, to recognise that we need to reassure people about the quality and confidence of our food chain. So we say to Australians: cut your strawberries up; don't cut your farmers out. Chop the strawberries up; don't throw them out. 09:55 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher The seat of Fisher is home to around 20 strawberry growers. Horticulture and agriculture are very, very important to the Sunshine Coast. It is an extremely unfortunate set of circumstances that has arisen to require this government, our federal government, to act in the way that it has done today. Our federal government is acting to protect our agricultural sector across Australia, but, in particular, from my own perspective, in my own patch of Fisher. It is looking to protect strawberry growers and all of our farmers as a result of what can only be described as reckless and heinous offences which are being committed by people who think that this is some sort of a joke. I call upon all Australians to remind each other that these are people's livelihoods that we are talking about. Strawberry growers like Rick Twist in my electorate have already really faced the economic pinch. It's tough enough to be a strawberry grower now in Australia without idiots going and putting pins and needles in strawberries to intentionally sabotage their livelihoods. These are mums and dads, brothers and sisters. They employ many people on the Sunshine Coast. For example, Suncoast Harvest strawberry growers in Beerwah have had to lay off 100 people as a result of this incident. It's not just the strawberry growers; it's the pickers and everybody else that relies upon those farms. If you think that this is funny, if you think this is some sort of a joke, law enforcement across Australia, the federal government, and the state and territories, will stop at nothing to hunt you down and to prosecute you to the full extent of the law. The Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination Bill) 2018 increases the penalties for these sorts of offences from 10 years to 15 years. This government, our government, is sending a very, very strong message that it will not tolerate this sort of recklessness, this sort of criminal activity. I want to pay my respects and thanks to all those hardworking farmers in my electorate, like those at Braetop Berries, Strawberry Fields, Oakland Farms, Roy's Farm, and, as I said, Suncoast Harvest at Beerwah, and over a dozen other farmers in my electorate, who are now, as we speak, having to destroy their crops. So, if you have been guilty of this sort of damage, I'd urge you to turn yourself in, because we will find you and we will prosecute you. You are better off turning yourself in now. I can't let this moment pass without identifying the cheap political points that the member for Isaacs tried to raise. At a time when we should be coming together on both sides of the House on this issue, he couldn't help raising cheap political points. Of course we are acting very, very quickly to look at and resolve this issue. Of course this government will undertake any reasonable reviews, given the speed at which we are rushing this legislation through. Of course we will do that. Now is not the time to be scoring cheap political points, and I'd urge those members opposite—for instance, the member for Longman, who I know will want to speak on this because this issue impacts upon her electorate as much as it does mine—not to be scoring cheap political points. 10:01 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter The strawberry contamination scandal has had, and will continue to have, a devastating impact on the sector, its growers and all those along the supply chain. Understandably, it has caused very real concern in our local communities. The spectre of pins in strawberries paints a particularly graphic picture in our minds, because healthy strawberries are the first choice for parents feeding young children. It's issues like these that bring us together as a parliament, and they should. It's the role of the opposition, so far as it is able, to support the response measures of the government. It is in that spirit that we support the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018. The penalty increases contained in this bill may act as a deterrent. They can certainly do no harm. But, unlike the previous speaker, I stand by the concerns expressed by the shadow Attorney-General. They are very, very real, and it is questionable whether moving the penalties from 10 years to 15 years is going to be any form of deterrent for people so intent on these reckless acts. But, acts taken in response are no replacement for acts taken to avoid these crises in the first place. That's the real work of this parliament. Let us not think that our work begins and ends with the bill we're debating and considering today. Our key objectives going forward must be threefold. We must do all we can to assist the state policing authorities, we must both strengthen food security frameworks and improve Commonwealth-state cooperation and coordination and we must also do all we can to rebuild consumer confidence, both here and in our export markets. There has been no shortage of evidence in recent days to suggest that Commonwealth-state cooperation, coordination and harmonisation is not what it could be or should be. We saw that with the white spot outbreak in our prawn sector when, clearly, the Commonwealth was slow to advise the state of its concerns. We saw it with fruit fly in Tasmania, when we saw a blame game open up between Commonwealth and state governments, and we saw that sheeted home with the abolition of the Standing Council on Primary Industries, the key COAG committee for the agriculture sector—a committee this government abolished. There's a fine line between acting decisively, as the government says it's doing today, and putting unnecessary fear into the community. I'm not convinced that the government has walked that line sufficiently carefully over the course of the last couple of days. I don't believe it was helpful that the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Minister Littleproud, when asked about growing concerns about an overreaction and its impact on consumers, said this on Radio National this morning: … that's totally fair. I've had representation to me that the state government in Queensland jumped the gun in publicising this when they were asked not to … My first point is this: the minister for agriculture should authenticate that comment in the interest of a working relationship with the Queensland government. I thought that was a most unfortunate remark. Think about this: what he was saying the Queensland government should have been doing is not warning people at the first possible opportunity of the risks involved in the contamination of fruit. I began by talking about the bipartisanship necessary, the way these issues bring the parliament together, but unfortunately it hasn't been all about that at all. We heard that again from the previous speaker. What the shadow Attorney-General said was perfectly reasonable, responsible and something that needed to be said. In closing, I will say this: rockmelon producers who suffered the impacts of a listeria outbreak would have loved to have seen the same sort of attention from the government that the strawberry industry has had. I know the situation was slightly different, but the impacts on the sector were the same, and the media opportunities weren't as great. We all stand by the strawberry sector and all those within it. We need to keep working together to rebuild that community confidence. 10:06 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax The shadow Attorney-General might think that it's best to kick the can down the road, and again go into a period of analysis, thinking and reflection, but we take no advice from Labor on this and we make no apology for moving swiftly and decisively. What idiot puts a needle in a strawberry? What act of criminal recklessness should be tolerated? Absolutely none. This government is taking action and taking it quickly. There are three simple reasons why we need to have this bill passed and passed quickly: (1) for personal reasons (2) for economic reasons and (3) for reasons of national security. Like many people in this chamber, I'm a parent. I've got a six-year-old little girl at home. I've got a seven-month-old little boy at home. Sabotaging a piece of fruit that could be swallowed by a child—anyone for that matter but particularly a child—is horrific. The increase in penalties that this bill represents is needed. We need to ensure that particularly children who might be vulnerable are protected. We need a call out to the mums and dads to make sure not only that their kids are safe but that their kids are not doing silly things, trying to stick stuff in fruit. Make sure you and your children aren't putting things on social media. I heard from another strawberry farmer this morning who was complaining about images on social media of things in fruit going viral. Check out your kids' Facebook pages and Instagram accounts. Let's make sure that irresponsible activity on social media stops. We need to protect each other and our families. There are serious economic reasons too. There are 300 strawberry farmers in Queensland. Together with the member for Fisher, and the member for Longman across the aisle, I'm from the Sunny Coast, which is the centre of strawberry growing in Queensland. We've already had one farmer close and100 businesses close down. We've had the Twist brothers that had to get out of the industry only a few weeks ago because it's such a tough industry to operate in after many, many years. I heard again from another grower, Di West, about some of the challenges of exporting strawberries amidst this existing crisis. I've spoken to the Strawberry Growers Association, who have similar concerns. This is having a detrimental impact on our economy. We are renowned across the world for food safety and food quality. Once these start getting challenged by reckless criminal behaviour, we need to take action and ensure the right deterrence measures are in place. Lastly, this is also a matter of national security. We talk about security in strategic terms, and more recently we've been speaking about it in terms of general infrastructure. Food security is key to this country. We need to ensure our supply chains in the food industry remain secure and safe. If you put a needle or any other item into a food product, you are a coward and need to be deterred. If you support people who fearmonger on this or spread images on social media unnecessarily then you too are to blame. This is a time when this chamber and the country need to come together, and so this morning we need to ensure we're eating our strawberries. Tomorrow let's have strawberries on our yoghurt in the morning, a strawberry smoothie for morning tea and a few strawberries in a strawberry cheesecake at lunchtime. If you want, for anybody over the age of 18, maybe a strawberry daiquiri would be all right. Let this weekend be the weekend of strawberries and let's be proud. We are Australian, we love our berries and we're not going to cop any idiot trying to put anything more in our strawberries. 10:11 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I rise in support of the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018 that's in front of us, and I suspect everybody will be supporting the legislation. The shadow Attorney-General, the member for Isaacs, made some points about the request by the opposition for a 12-month review. I refer to those, and in doing so I'm in no way indicating that anybody should oppose the legislation before us, but there are good reasons why there ought to be a 12-month review. It's something we are asking the government to consider, because we want to deal with it in the House and not have it come here after going to the Senate. The appropriate way for that to happen would be for government to bring in an amendment for a 12-month review, which is a simple piece of drafting and quite possible to be turned around quickly. There are good reasons for it. It is very rare for us to deal with legislation of this sort of urgency. The last time I can remember an emergency shadow cabinet meeting that took place only just having received a draft of legislation was back in 2005, when an amendment to an antiterrorism law was brought forward by the Howard government because people were planning an actual attack on sites in Sydney. There was a real threat, the legislation went through both houses that day and arrests took place a few days later. What we're doing today is a very unusual thing. With that in mind, all the normal processes of inquiry understandably aren't able to happen when it is that unusual. A review period allows the parliament to still do its job. Many of the speeches we're hearing from each side make clear that to some extent today in the parliament we are using a piece of legislation to send a message far more substantive than changing the law, and no-one wants to stand in the way of that message. To oppose the legislation would create the worst of all messages, and no-one's going to do that, but it is worth thinking through why there ought to be a review. What we have in front of us, while incredibly serious, is different to the emergency terrorism legislation we dealt with under the Howard government, with all the advice of the agencies that came through at that time. I don't know what the implications are, other than for this particular issue, of redefining our legislative definition of public infrastructure to include a strawberry, but that's in front of us right now. Mr Rick Wilson 198084 The food supply chain. Mr BURKE DYW The supply chain issue is there. If you look at the amendment, it deals with both the facilities and the food itself. It deals with both. That interjection shows that not every member of parliament is across the legislation that's in front of us. That's not a reason to vote against it. If we have members who are here in the chamber listening to the debate and giving interjections that are contrary to the legislation that's in front of them, that's the precise reason why we need to make sure that we have a 12-month review. We are also opening up a change in sentencing, which is the most significant part of sending a message. Often when we change maximum sentencing periods in the parliament, it's off the back of a view that judges have not been bringing down sentences that we believe are consistent with the intention of the parliament, where we think sentences have been too brief and, therefore, we have said: 'No, we will increase the maximum sentence. That will send a message to the legal system.' That's not what we're doing today, because there are no recorded convictions, so it can't be the case that we think the sentences to date have been too soft. That's because, without convictions, there have been no sentences under the current legislation. We're increasing a maximum to make that public statement, and no-one wants to get in the way of that public statement. But it does mean the maximum sentence that we are adopting today is more than the maximum sentence in some jurisdictions for statutory rape, more than the sentence for human trafficking and more than the sentence for strangulation in a domestic violence circumstance. Working through the implications of that is something we all have to do. We have two jobs in this place. We are members of parliament leading a public debate. We are also legislators. Today, we have decided the importance of leading that public debate is so important that we will take some short cuts. We're all in this. We're all making the same decision—me too. We decided that we will take some shortcuts on what we would ordinarily do in terms of due diligence on legislation. That's the decision we've made. In the face of that, we shouldn't, in the same breath, say, 'We will never be legislators on this particular issue.' The right thing to do is to say: 'We will send the message today, loudly and clearly. We will make it clear the level of offence that is there for people who've performed these acts. We will make clear the level of support that is there for Australia's strawberry growers.' That's the right decision today; but, at some point, unless we have a review clause in, we will never do the other part of our job as legislators. We do need to work through what the implications are. There might not be any. But we need to have, at some point, the full context of what the long-term implications are of a very significant redefinition of public infrastructure. We do need to work through what the impact is of changing the relativities on different sentencing and whether we believe that we've now got those relativities right, given where it stands next to other crimes that we would all believe are among the most heinous that could be committed. What the opposition is saying to the government today is, 'We're not going to play the game of moving an amendment insisting on it or having the House have to hang around in case we can get it through the Senate.' We're simply saying that we want everybody here to do all of their jobs. We're all doing the job properly today of leading a public debate. No-one should pretend there's not bipartisan support and cross-party support on that—there is. As we are not applying the normal due diligence we would to a piece of legislation, a review period will make sure that we fulfil that responsibility as well. 10:19 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde We can all reflect in this place that Australia has a wonderful reputation globally for producing high-quality fruit and vegetables and, more generally, agricultural products. To have to stand in this place and speak about a piece of legislation such as this as a result of the actions of people who have no consideration for the welfare of their fellow citizens is, for me, a very disappointing day. As we stand here today, we have a situation where many strawberry farmers around this country are in significant and dire financial circumstances as a result of the actions of individuals who have been determined to damage the reputation of that industry through putting needles in fruit in our shopping centres and in our supermarkets. That somebody can even come up with the idea of doing that is beyond belief. At least in this House today we see a bipartisan response to the issue and, more importantly, a timely response, which is critically important to restore the confidence of the Australian public in our fruit and our vegetables, particularly, in this case, our strawberries. I reflect on a local strawberry farmer, Laura Hendriksen, who runs a fabulous little strawberry farm out at Chambers Flat, and the impact on their business. It's a small family-run business and it's her life. My officers have been out to see her this week, and I know this has had an impact. But the other opportunity that arises out of this and out of restoring the confidence in the community is that we can support businesses such as Laura's. I will give credit to the Queensland state government for the steps that they have taken to help our strawberry farmers in this difficult time. Equally, we also, as a government, have stepped in to help them. So, whilst the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018 is about strengthening the penalties for the people who commit these heinous acts, more importantly, over the past few days, both at a federal level and at a state level, we've seen governments being prepared to step in and support our farmers so they can get through this difficult period and rebuild their businesses and put back onto the shelves the quality product that they have always provided to the Australian community. I thank Senator Amanda Stoker for bringing a large number of punnets of strawberries into our party room meeting this morning; we were certainly able to enjoy those strawberries at the whips morning tea. I say to my community of Forde and the broader Australian community: take the opportunity this weekend to go and buy strawberries. Support our farmers. The best way we can support our farmers is actually to buy their product, safe in the knowledge that they have taken the steps and the measures—and I know Laura Hendriksen has with their strawberry farm; they've bought metal detectors to ensure the quality of their fruit. Go and support Laura and her strawberry farm over the weekend. Certainly, when I'm back in the electorate next week, I will be going to visit to see how they're doing. Go and support our farmers and our agricultural producers, because they do produce some of the best fruit in the world. We should be very proud of their capacity to do that and we should support them as much as possible. I commend this bill to the House because it sends a message to those who have perpetrated these heinous crimes that we will not tolerate this, because it does our entire community an enormous disservice. It has cost people their jobs. It has cost people who have spent many, many years building their businesses their businesses and their livelihoods. I'm pleased to see today that in this chamber, on a bipartisan basis, we are supporting all of those people and calling out the people who have committed these heinous crimes for what they are—and that is cowards. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Go out this weekend and support our local strawberry farmers. Buy a punnet or two of strawberries and ensure that we continue to have wonderful fruit on our tables, for ourselves, our children and the broader community. 10:25 Ms LAMB 265975 Longman I too, along with the speakers before me, will be supporting the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, a bill that brings on stricter penalties for anyone tampering with our fruit and vegetables. I commend the Queensland Labor government for the very swift action and steps they've already taken in relation to supporting our strawberry farmers. We saw on the Monday just gone, on the Sunshine Coast, that Minister Mark Furner joined with the strawberry growers on the Sunshine Coast to work through strategies around how we move through what we're dealing with here. We've had the Palaszczuk government offer up support. It was good to see the federal government finally meet that support for our farmers yesterday as well. So I really commend the Queensland government on the steps they swiftly took in supporting the growers. There are around 120 farms in the region I come from. Longman sits in the Moreton Bay region, nestled between Moreton Bay and a bit of the Sunshine Coast region. The farmers in the regions of the members who spoke before me make up some of those 120 farmers. Less than an hour ago, I hung up the phone after talking to one of those farmers, Gavin from Pinata Farms. Gavin and I spoke for some time before I had to head to the chamber. He's feeling a lot more hopeful. He looked out into the electorate just in the last 24 hours, and there are people lined up in their cars to get to the farm and buy strawberries. So he's feeling a lot more hopeful. He is hopeful because he is seeing his local representative and the government taking this matter very seriously. He said, 'We're actually starting to see improvements in demand.' As I said, there are cars lined up at the farms to go and collect strawberries to take home, cut up and, of course, consume. I asked Gavin: 'What else can we do? What would be helpful?' He said: 'We don't need people to go out crazy and buy lots and lots more punnets. We need people to go back to their normal behaviour of what they would buy. We just need people to go back to their normal consuming behaviour. That's what would be helpful.' We are about two or three weeks out from the end of the season. I said to Gavin, 'What about next year?' He said, 'Susan, a lot of us still haven't paid for this year's planting, so we're going to need some help next year.' Like I said, the Queensland government coming out nice and swiftly and offering some assistance will go a long way to helping meet those costs so our farmers are able to plant next season. The other thing that Gavin and I spoke about, though, is what a wonderful community we live in and that real sense of community we have. He said: 'It's uplifting for all of the farmers and the growers to see people in the community really getting behind them, folding in behind them, and getting the message out: cut up your strawberries, eat them up and go back to your normal consuming behaviour.' He also mentioned to me that there is a very strong message at this time to the banks, in particular, about making sure that they are applying a sense of consideration to farmers at this very difficult time. He calls upon the banks to play a role in supporting our farmers at this time. The other thing we spoke about was the local economy, and it wasn't just with Gavin. On Monday I also spoke to Luigi Coco, who is the president of the Queensland Strawberry Growers Association, and we talked about our local economy. Our farms consist of local workers—on Luigi's farm, for example, he employs 12 local people—supplemented by backpackers. You can spend winter walking up and down King Street in Caboolture and see lots of faces of those who aren't locals but are in our local community. They are living there and visiting our local businesses while they're out picking fruit on farms. Both Luigi and Gavin said that the other thing we have to consider is the cost to our local economy. Our backpackers come and enjoy the beautiful Pumicestone Passage and go out to the Glass House Mountains—they provide tourism dollars and they spend their money in the local shops. Their leaving two or three weeks earlier than they planned to leave will come at a cost to our local economy. It's a real testament to people like Luigi and Gavin, who are concerned about that. At a time when their own industry is really suffering, these farmers are thinking about other people and other businesses in the community. That's what's really beautiful about Longman. We consider everyone else—we think about other people and not just ourselves. I am very anxious to get back to my electorate tonight. I'll go out to the farms tomorrow and next week and continue working with our farmers and the state government to work through this really difficult time. Going into next year we'll look forward to a good planting season early in the year. The other thing I wanted to pick up on is that I had an opportunity yesterday to mention a school, Grace Lutheran College, that was visiting here. Our farmers aren't just farmers; they're parents, they're employers and they belong to community groups, such as sporting groups and other community groups. Yesterday we had Grace Lutheran College here and I met with Lachlan, who was here with his school group. Lachlan's parents are strawberry farmers. His mum has been very active in the media speaking about the issue that is plaguing our strawberry farms at this time. Lachlan said to me, 'We just need people to keep eating strawberries. This is what my family needs.' Sometimes we forget that while our farmers are our primary producers they are also parents and family people. Lachlan reminded me yesterday about that. He is a child of a farming community. His family relies upon this industry for their survival. Labor will be supporting this bill. The speakers before me have outlined some concerns and some amendments, which we will be considering. But, for the most part, we do support this bill. We want to get the support to our strawberry farmers and we want to make sure that nobody is considering, in any way, shape or form, tampering with our fruit and vegetables. We want to make sure that our local growers continue to provide their produce to all of Australia. I commend them for their consideration for the broader community, as evidenced by some of the comments Gavin and Luigi have made to me over the last week. 10:34 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I would like to begin by thanking the member for Longman for her very sincere comments and support for the industry, and the opposition generally for supporting this bill, the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018. I rise today to support the hardworking strawberry growers across our nation but also in my electorate of O'Connor—people like Len and Neil Handasyde, whose family strawberry operations at Albany and Mount Barker employ dozens of people and inject a huge amount of money into the local economies, but also our larger growers in the Pemberton-Manjimup region, along the Channybearup Road, one of the richest horticultural regions in the country. Once again, they employ countless people and have a huge impact on our local economy. The actions of a few individuals, whatever their original intentions were—whether it was to get back at the boss or whether it was a prank at the local supermarket—are nothing short of food terrorism. What they've done is strike terror into the hearts of families who are feeding their children, for the most part, a favourite fruit. In my family, it's a bit of a battle to get healthy food into my eight-year-old son, Archie, but strawberries are his favourite food and one of the things that my family relies on to keep our kids healthy and happy. So Tanya and I have had the discussion: we'll cut the strawberries up and continue to feed our family strawberries, not only to support the industry but also to maintain the health of our family. I commend the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General for the decisive and quick action they've taken to increase the penalties for offences related to the sabotage of the food chain. In response to a conversation I had with Neil Handasyde yesterday, I'm particularly pleased to report that the bill will create new offences that apply where a person contaminates goods, threatens to contaminate goods and, importantly, makes false statements about the contamination of goods and is reckless as to causing public alarm or anxiety, economic loss or harm to public health. That's particularly important, because we've seen that it's not just the action of people inserting pins into fruit but also that people have made hoax or prank claims that we've seen pop up around the place and cause just as much damage as the original offences. As I said, I call on all Australians, particularly those in my electorate, to support the strawberry industry by going out and buying a punnet. I want to report something that's been brought to my attention, which I think is a wonderful gesture. The Farmer Jacks independent supermarket chain in Perth have put up a notice in their shops that says that all the proceeds of a punnet of strawberries, $1.50, will be returned to the growers. That's an action they are taking to try to support strawberry growers through a very difficult time, and I absolutely applaud them for that. I urge Australians to get out and buy strawberries. Cut them up to make sure they're safe, but keep our kids and our families healthy on strawberries and support our hardworking strawberry growers. Thank you very much. 10:38 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne There are not a lot of strawberry growers in the electorate of Melbourne, but we do support them. I expect that this weekend at the Flemington Farmers' Market, at the Collingwood farmers market in Abbotsford and over in Carlton strawberries will be doing a roaring trade. I think anyone who's seen the pictures on television, in our newspapers and online, of strawberries being dumped in massive numbers, feels for the people who grew those and whose livelihoods depend on them and would shake their heads at the waste, especially when we know that there are some simple alternatives, like just cutting them up, that would mean that those strawberries could in fact be eaten. As someone who has a three-year-old and an almost-two-year-old, I think everyone had the same instinctive reaction when they saw those images and everyone wanted to know that they'd be able to feed strawberries to their kids safely—and of course you can, just by cutting them up. I think many of us also feel, though, that we'd like to think we've got a system that is capable of dealing with issues like this when they arise, because no-one can stop the actions of a particular individual who's going to do something like this. I think people would also want to make sure they're bringing a bit of sense to the discussion. If contamination is found, people would probably presume that in Australia we have a pretty good system set up which would mean that there are easy ways of stopping that from being repeated and that, to the extent that there are ways of dealing with it that don't make the problem worse, we'd adopt those. I think a few of us are looking at the last little while and wondering whether in fact this issue has been unnecessarily politicised. We hear the growers say, 'Look, in fact, some of the ways in which authorities and governments have responded have perhaps made the problem worse for us, because they've created a sense of alarm where there didn't need to be one.' I've got some sympathy for that point of view because there is, I think, a very strong argument that this has been picked up and turned into a political debate when in fact it should have just been left to the authorities. In terms of this bill that we've got before us, the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, I actually haven't yet heard a coherent argument that the reason that this has happened is a gap in our law. Yes, it's been because of the reckless and harmful actions of some individuals, and we don't yet know why that's taken place, and perhaps over time the police will tell us. But I think most people would scratch their heads and say, 'Is the reason that this has happened a gap in our laws?' That's the implicit premise of this: that we need to somehow rush legislation through this place. Well, what's the gap in the law? Is the gap in the law around sentences, which is what has been proposed by the government? I'm not actually convinced that someone who's going to sit down and commit these kinds of acts that could result in harm to someone is going to say, 'Oh, well, now it's 15 years versus 10 years; therefore I'd better not do it.' I'm not convinced. If there's an argument that that's the case, put that argument. But I haven't yet heard that argument being put. Is there a gap with respect to the offences themselves? Perhaps there's an argument that says that, if there's a problem in the law that has meant that we haven't been able to mount prosecutions on the basis of recklessness with respect to harming a particular person, perhaps we should look at that. For example, if it's the case—and I don't know whether it is or not, because this whole thing has been so rushed—that the DPP or the police have had problems bringing prosecutions because the act requires proof that you wanted to harm a particular individual person, maybe there is a case for saying, 'Well, you don't actually have to prove which person you wanted to hurt by putting a pin in the strawberry; it's enough that you were causing a threat to health.' Perhaps, when it comes to those threats to individual people, there is a good case. In an ideal world, we'd have some more considered time to have a look at that. But this goes a lot broader than that. I just want to place on the record some concerns about potential unintended consequences that come with doing a rush job. So that people know, we saw this legislation at 9.30. We got a briefing on it at nine o'clock and saw the legislation at 9.30. We're dealing with legislation that could result in people going to jail for longer than otherwise, and we're creating new offences. One of those new offences that have been created in this bill is with respect to recklessness. As I've said, maybe there's a case for an offence of recklessness with respect to harm for a particular person, but it goes broader than that. It will now be an offence to recklessly do something—I will come back to 'do something' in a moment—that might cause public anxiety. To be honest, in the time available to deal with this, I don't actually know what that means. What does it mean to recklessly do something that might result in public anxiety? That seems to me to be a very broad question. Perhaps I'm bringing too much of a lawyer's mind to this, but, when you have these really broad offences that are now going to result in jail time, it's a good idea to know what these words mean and have time to consider whether or not there are unintended consequences. In the limited time that we've had available to think about this, one unintended consequence comes to mind. This morning is the first time I've had a look at these offences. One of the offences, contamination, includes interference with food, so it's not just poisoning or sticking a pin in something. It could arguably extend to someone who goes into, say, an abattoir because they think the processes that are being conducted in that abattoir are wrong and they want to draw public attention to it. They say, 'No, you can't slaughter this animal in this particular way.' They want to draw public attention to it in a way, for example, that we've seen some people do with respect to live exports. Some might want to go into an abattoir or a factory farm and say, 'The way this is being done is not right.' Their intention may be to draw public awareness to what is going on. They are doing it for legitimate forms of protest. Are they now recklessly interfering with food in a way that might cause public alarm? I don't know. The problem with doing a rush job with legislation is: when you are talking about people going to jail, are there potential unintended consequences? Of course, people want to make sure that all our food is safe. That's a cross-parliamentary position; no-one is going to disagree with that. But is the answer to create broad new criminal offences that might capture some other unintended consequences? Well, no, it's not. It gets additionally significant because what we're now doing is expanding some national security related offences as well—some terrorism related offences. They're very serious offences. They carry much higher penalties. We heard the term used really loosely by some government speakers saying that what has happened with respect to the strawberries is terrorism. That concerns me. We don't know. Maybe it is an individual who has some serious problems—the police will investigate and tell us that—but the conflating of that with international terrorism is of grave concern. I don't know that, on the face of it, we have enough facts to say that is what is happening here. But that's the argument the government is pushing to get us to say, 'We now need to create some new offences that will start to include some of these acts around interfering with food that perhaps might just be in the form of a legitimate protest that's taking place.' We now have an expansion of that with respect to terrorism, and an element of recklessness introduced—as I understand it in the short time we've had—with respect to that terrorism offence. The net is getting broader and broader beyond dealing with the immediate problem. In the time we've had available, which is just a couple of hours, I don't know whether or not we are passing legislation that is going to have a significant amount of unintended consequences. The rush to do this suggests it's about being seen to do something and being seen to do something quickly even if it might bring with it a pile of unintended consequences. For all of us as legislators, where we are talking about people, potentially, going to jail, that should be of grave concern. I want to place all of those concerns on the record. I've got a three-year-old and an almost-two-year-old. I want our food to be safe. I want our system to work. I want to make sure our farmers thrive. Of course, everyone supports that. The question is: in doing so are we doing things that carry with them unintended consequences that aren't about dealing with this particular issue? On the face of it, in the very short period of time we've had to look at it, it looks like there might well be. I would hope that the government gives us enough time to consider all of these issues in great detail, given the seriousness of the offences. I would really hope that the government allows that and that the government considers the matters that we've raised and works out whether, in fact, we could pare some of this back, so that we don't capture all of these unintended consequences. I am worried that in the rush to be seen to be doing something we might create a pile of offences in a situation where no-one in this parliament is intending to. I'm not impugning the government's motives in this respect, but because it's happened so quickly we don't have the usual time. I place on the record those very, very serious concerns, because I don't think we actually need to do that in order to address the problem that the government is trying to address. 10:49 Ms KEAY 262273 Braddon It is pleasing to rise on this motion to support the farmers in my area, the producers—and not just the strawberry growers but also our apple producers. Sadly, in Tasmania there have been incidents of contamination with needles in apples found in southern Tasmania. Whether or not that's been deliberate, we don't know. Certainly, the fruitgrowers in Tasmania, particularly our berry growers, have had a really tough time recently, and that's because of the Queensland fruit fly. This will now potentially be very damaging to these growers, if consumers don't get behind them. The good news, particularly for Tasmanian berry growers, is that our berries won't come online for another four to five weeks. It's pleasing to note, from the member for Longman's contribution, that consumers are getting behind these farmers. And I hope, in about five weeks time, when our strawberries come online, that consumers will do the same in Tasmania. However, there are restrictions because of fruit fly. In my electorate, Craig Morris, a berry grower running Turners Beach Berry Patch, a family business, was terribly hit by fruit fly. Sadly, those berries cannot be taken out of the fruit fly exclusion zone, and that has meant that Craig has had to come up with some very innovative ways of selling on his product—making it into jam, freezing it and doing all sorts of things to ensure that that fruit wouldn't just rot on the ground. The great thing about that grower is you can go onto his farm and pick your own berries. Sadly, though, you have to eat them there because of the restrictions in place as a result of fruit fly. The state government, which was incredibly slow to react to this crisis, is now saying that we potentially won't be fruit fly free until January of next year. With this new crisis, it's important that Tasmanians get behind our growers, not just in my electorate of north-west Tasmania, where I have significant berry producers—one, in particular, is a corporate grower, Costa's, which produces blueberries, blackberries, strawberries and raspberries—but also in Northern Tasmania, in the member for Bass's electorate, where there are some fantastic strawberry growers up along the Tamar. It's something that our fruitgrowers should not have to deal with, whether it's strawberries, apples or, even, in some cases we've heard of, bananas. What is being proposed by the government is good in the sense that it sends that very strong message to people that you cannot contaminate our food, because it does have enormous impacts on the business of these growers but also on the local economy. In my area, we've got some fantastic cherry producers as well. Sadly, they've been caught up in the fruit fly exclusion zone as well. They do put on a lot of our young people on the farms, whether they're managing the farms or managing the shifts. A significant number of backpackers come into our region to pick the fruit when it is ready. Of course, after we have our strawberries coming on in the next few weeks, we then go into apples and cherries, so the season in Northern Tasmania is considerably long. There is no doubt that it's high-quality fruit; our fruit is renowned internationally for its quality. But, if people start to baulk at buying these fruits from Tasmania, it will have more impact on those businesses, on jobs and on backpackers coming into our communities and spending their money locally as well. I want to make it very clear that, whilst Tasmanian strawberries are not implicated in what's happening at the moment, because the berries haven't grown yet, when they have grown, consumers need to get behind our strawberry and other berry producers and our apple producers when they come online a little bit later in the season. They need to cut up the fruit and give it to their children. I've got three small children in my household, and they want to eat all the time. You can imagine what three growing boys want to do when it comes to food. My rule is: 'You can eat as much fruit as you like. You don't even have to ask.' Hopefully, that's something that parents across Australia will get behind to ensure that we support our growers, support the jobs in our local community and make sure that our local economies are strong. 10:54 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra One of the great things about Australia—indeed, one of our great strengths—is our food production, and the quality and reliability of Australian food production is well known across the world. Australian food is known for being fresh, for being safe, for being delicious and for being grown in environmentally sound and sustainable ways. And that is why what we've seen over the last few days, with the 100 incidents of tampering in relation to strawberries, strikes at the very heart of what people think of when they think of Australia and its clean, safe, fresh, delicious food production. It's for that reason that we're introducing this legislation: to protect farmers, to protect families and to protect consumers generally, and to take action, decisive action, at this time. I'm very lucky in my electorate to have a number of strawberry growers. I have to say those growers are fearful of being targeted next. They're fearful about what will happen if they lose their crop, because they rely on a seasonal business, which is strawberry farming, and, if they don't make sales in the farming season, that's it for their income for the year. We're at a time in Australian history where the drought is ravaging, and farming is a tough business. To have people going out and deliberately attacking our food production processes, our food products—our safe, clean, fresh, delicious strawberries—is an attack of extraordinary vandalism. That's why this tough action is needed. That's why what we're doing here is so important. This weekend I'm going to go to the stores and do as I do every weekend, and I will be buying some strawberries. I'm going to wash them, cut them up and give them to my family. I say to everyone else in Berowra: this weekend, do your patriotic duty. Go and buy strawberries, because they are fresh, delicious and safe to eat if you wash them and cut them up. That's what every Australian should be feeling at all times. I want to respond to some of the things that the Greens have said today in their presentation on this bill, the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, because I think they deserve some response. The member for Melbourne said that no identified gap in the law has been pointed out here indicating a need for a change. It's true that there are existing offences, but the fact that there are 100 incidents in Australia shows that the existing offences and the existing penalties are not adequate deterrents. That's why it's important for us to increase the penalties here from 10 years to 15 years. It's also important to create these new offences of recklessness—recklessness as to whether the conduct here causes public alarm or anxiety or economic loss or creates a risk of causing harm to public health in Australia. This does have national security implications. If we do not look after our food production, if we do not back one of our key strengths and if people are free to interfere with our food supply, it puts the whole nation at risk. That's why this bill is so important. I couldn't believe that I heard from the Greens today the idea that tampering with food or food production in some instances could be a form of legitimate protest. I cannot think of any instance where it is legitimate to tamper with the food production or food supply of this country. Not only are you putting the producers at risk, not only are you putting thousands of Australians' livelihoods at risk, including people in my electorate, but you are putting the very safety of ordinary mums and dads and families at risk. That's why this bill is so important. That's why I urge the House to pass it in this form. 10:57 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I too rise to support the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, which has been brought into the parliament this morning. What we've seen around the country, with the contamination of fruit products with needles, is nothing short of criminal. There is no doubt about that. It is bad for producers, it is bad for retailers and, of course, it is very bad for consumers. Trust in food consumption and purchasing in this country is essential. It's essential for all of those that live in Australia and it's also essential for our export industries. As we know, farmers and agriculturalists around the country work very hard to maintain our great reputation for food production. What we have seen over the last few weeks is terrible for exporters in this country. I join with all members in this House in encouraging Australian consumers to keep buying strawberries and to keep buying all fruit. Cut it up and check it out and make sure you're safe. It's very important to keep supporting our local producers. Earlier this morning the Leader of the Opposition mentioned the need for a food security framework in this country, and I fully support his call in this regard. The incidents we've been seeing over the past few weeks may be a good pivot point for this country to consider such a framework to ensure our agricultural and horticultural security. We have seen some terrible problems in our food security and biosecurity in this country. There was the listeria scare with rockmelons, which devastated that industry; the white spot disease in prawns; and the devastation in Tasmania with the fruit fly that arrived there. Also we've seen most recently the scourge of fake honey in this country. While swift action is taking place on strawberries and other fruit, and I'm grateful for that swift action, I really wish the same enthusiasm was applied to the emergence of fake honey in this country. There's no doubt about it: the global scourge of food fraud, and in particular fake honey, is a global criminal activity. Interpol is investigating this because there are gangs around the world that are lacing what was honey with fake syrups, selling it and making a lot of money off consumers around the world. Those consumers think they are buying honey, but they are not. What is dangerous about this is, of course, is that not only are people not buying what they paid for but also we do not know what is in the products that are not actually honey. Is it rice syrup or is it something else? For my part, anything that is sold as Australian honey is 100 per cent honey, and I would encourage all consumers to support Australian honey makers. We know the ACCC is investigating the fake honey claims. That is a good thing, but I do think we need to do more in this regard to make sure this food fraud scandal comes to an end in this country. Whilst I'm on bees, people in this place know I'm a beekeeper myself. I'm an amateur, of course— Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR The Deputy Speaker just interjected on me, so I hope that gets recorded! There is, around the world, a worldwide collapse of bee hives and colonies. That's in a large part unexplained. The varroa mite marches on unhindered into beehives around the world. Australia remains the only country that is free of this damaging mite. Sadly, I don't think we will be able to keep this mite out of this country forever. What this country will need is an urgent response plan for what happens when biosecurity hazards like a varroa mite—but there may be others—take hold in this country. I've spoken before, in response to committee inquiries into the biosecurity of beehives and honey, on the need to address what will happen between the states in this country. Western Australia, as everyone knows, has extraordinary biosecurity laws. You cannot take honey from around the rest of the country into Western Australia. That is a bid to protect honey and beehives in that state. That is due to the benefits of bees, being that they pollenate two-thirds of the agriculture produce of the whole country, including in Western Australia. I would call upon the government and this parliament to consider a food security framework, which we might look at to make sure that this kind of thing doesn't happen again, and also to consider an urgent response plan for biosecurity hazards. We need to prioritise that. In relation to the legislation itself, we all admit that it has come through quickly. There has been little time for consideration. I support the sentiment of the Manager of Opposition Business, as to need to insert a legislative review provision so that we may look at this legislation again in 12 months. This is a sensible, responsible plan of action, and I urge the government to consider it. As this legislation has come on quickly, there has not been time for consultation and there may be unforeseen consequences. It may affect the food manufacturing sector. The main point is—and I won't labour this point—that we do need to review the legislation in 12 months. I do hope the government will consider that. For Western Australia, we have a strong strawberry industry. The Western Australian government has offered a $100,000 reward to try to find the criminals who are damaging this fruit in our state and around the country. I have a strawberry farm in my electorate, Russell Farm Strawberries on Thomas Road. I know people will be out and about supporting them over the long weekend, as it's the royal show weekend in Western Australia. We just need people to keep doing what they were doing. They need to continue to buy fruit as always. Cut it up; don't cut it out. I thank the House. 11:04 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes Strawberry farmers are facing dire consequences as a result of this act of economic sabotage or economic terrorism, as it can rightly be called. We are fighting back. We are fighting back in this parliament by today passing emergency legislation to increase the penalties against those criminals who engaged in this act. All Australians can help to fight back to support our farmers. This week I call on every Australian household to get out there and buy not just one or two but at least half a dozen punnets of strawberries. If we can do that, we can show our strawberry— The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Put the props down. You can give them to the attendants to enjoy afterwards! Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 I promise I will not eat them until after I leave the chamber. Seriously, it is important that we support our Australian strawberry growers this weekend by getting out there and buying as many punnets of strawberries as we can. They are at ridiculously low prices. Not only that but strawberries also have health benefits. They are fat free, high in antioxidants, a good source of vitamin C and an excellent source of folate. A 2013 study found that women who ate three or more servings of strawberries a week could reduce their risk of heart attack by 32 per cent. Further, strawberries have a high ellagic acid content, which prevents hair thinning and baldness. We should all be eating more strawberries. Whether you use them on your breakfast cereal, put them in a smoothie, bake them in a cake, have good old-fashioned strawberries and ice-cream or just eat them raw, it's un-Australian not to buy strawberries this weekend. With that I thank the House. I don't want to delay it one second longer. Let's get this legislation passed and let's all get out and support our strawberry farmers. 11:06 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo For all the laughs in the chamber about the previous speaker's contribution, he did exactly the opposite of what our strawberry farmers are calling for. The member for Longman said that, when she spoke to strawberry farmers in her electorate, they said, 'Just buy what you would usually buy.' If you're not a strawberry eater, don't feel that you have to buy strawberries, but if you are a strawberry eater, continue to buy strawberries. Our strawberry farmers are calling for calm, not political stunts or rhetoric. I've met strawberry farmers in Longman and Braddon. We have some innovative strawberry farmers in our country, particularly in Caboolture in Longman, where they have invested a lot in lifting their strawberries off the ground and growing through a tabletop method. They're at the end of their season. They privately expressed their own concerns about some of the rogue operators in their industry. I flag that deliberately, because we aren't at the bottom of this crisis yet. We don't fully know what has happened, which is why I urge the government to consider what Labor is saying about putting a 12-month review in place to ensure the amendments we move today are targeted at the people who have committed this. There is some concern about labour-hire gangs and some of the people who might be working in rogue elements of the industry. We need to look at that and ensure we are cracking down on that side of it. As the member for Braddon raised, this has happened at the end of Queensland's season. They have only a few weeks left. If people change their eating habits, the impact will be on the farmers in the south, whose strawberries are coming online as we speak. That is why I urge the government to work with the Victorian government and particularly the Tasmanian government, because, as the member for Braddon said, what has occurred in Tasmania is almost a double whammy. They're coming through the fruit fly crisis, they still don't know if some of their berry-growing—including strawberry-growing—areas will be fruit fly free when it gets to January, and now they have this crisis. There needs to be a coordinated effort to support people in Tasmania. We need to go further. We can't pretend that this legislation means the crisis is over. Since this government came to office we've had biosecurity crises and threats time after time. We need a rapid action plan where local, state and federal governments can work together when this happens. We still need to look at that framework. The other point I want to raise about this legislation, the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, and about why we need to look at a 12-month review is that there could be unintended consequences with this legislation. It will include the whole supply chain for all of our manufacturing, for all of our food processing. That means our meatworks, that means our chicken processing, and that is hundreds of thousands of workers. I know that the Greens flagged that they were concerned about what this could mean for the protesters, for the people who might come in. I'm actually really concerned about the unintended consequences for the people working in the sector. That is why I want to urge the government to consider putting in place a 12-month review. There are hundreds of thousands of people working in food processing. It is the biggest sector of our manufacturing, and this change to the legislation will impact them. We need to make sure that we are consulting and working with the Food and Grocery Council. There are a lot of people working in these sectors, and we need to know what the impact of this change in legislation will be for them. We want to maintain our safe, clean, green image. We want to make sure that we continue to be a food-processing country and that we are value-adding, and therefore it is sensible to put in place in this emergency, urgent legislation a 12-month review to make sure that our legislation is being targeted. As a girl who grew up on the Sunny Coast, I can remember going out and picking strawberries on the weekends. It was a big part of what you did if you grew up on the Sunny Coast. I know that the people still in those areas—the communities—still depend on the strawberry industry for their livelihood, including the workers who are directly employed. They continue to use strawberry picking as a way to supplement their household income. They are proud people; they work hard. I urge the government to make sure that it does take on board some of the concerns that we've raised. Building in a legislative review in 12 months will help the sector across food manufacturing come together, making sure that we are targeting the people who put our industries most at risk. 11:12 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson This is a very important piece of legislation being brought before the House today, and I rise in support of the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018. I certainly hope that by the end of today this bill becomes law, because it reflects our commitment to keeping Australians safe and supporting our farmers. We know our farmers are already doing it tough right now, and it's already hard enough with the crippling effects of the drought. The tampering of our food supply and, in this case, with something as innocuous, delightful and everyday as a strawberry is absolutely outrageous. It's not acceptable, and this bill makes that clear. The bill contains measures to increase penalties for existing federal offences related to the contamination of goods. Maximum jail terms will be increased from 10 to 15 years. This will send a strong message of deterrence to anyone who is considering such foolish actions. It also recognises the serious nature of this issue and the contamination of any part of our food supply. We're also introducing new offences that capture reckless behaviour when it comes to the contamination of goods, sending a strong message that this is a very serious crime. It's very simple; this bill is simple. The government is standing up and saying it's not okay to sabotage our food supply and it's certainly not funny. It is certainly not a joke. This bill is about providing families with assurance that the food they're putting on the table for their kids or packing in their kids' lunch boxes for school is safe. It's also about supporting our farmers. I was incredibly disappointed to hear this morning on local radio station Star 104.5 that a needle has been found in a mango at West Gosford in my electorate of Robertson. After a man found a needle in his mango that he was cutting up, it was reported to the Brisbane Water Local Area Command, and police are investigating it now. This is just not on, and I want to assure families on the Central Coast that the government will not stand for this and that we are taking action today. The sickening thing about these things is that some in our community have sought to create harm and cause distress by sabotaging strawberries, a fruit that we all love to enjoy, that we pack in our kids' lunch boxes and that we cut up and put on our breakfast yogurt. Mums on the Central Coast need to know that the things they're putting into their kids' lunch boxes and on the breakfast table are safe. Australian families, my own included, expect to be able to buy this week's fruit at their local supermarket or at the fruit and vegie store, take it home and enjoy it. The government's action today is taking important steps to make sure that families have certainty that the food they are providing is safe. The last thing that any of us want is to have our child enjoying a strawberry only to find a needle or other dangerous object there. This shouldn't be something that we are ever worried about. The worst thing that should ever happen when you're eating a strawberry is that you manage to stain a white shirt just before a meeting, or stain your school uniform or have juice dribble down your chin. I really want to encourage everyone in my community to go out and buy a box of strawberries. Continue to enjoy them but do make sure that you cut them up and inspect them first. I'll certainly be continuing to enjoy my strawberries. I'll be making some strawberry and white-chocolate muffins this weekend for the kids. I know my office is planning on making their favourite recipes and tomorrow we'll be having a strawberry cheesecake, a pavlova, and a strawberry and apple crumble, along with some of the muffins, which I'm hoping will turn out okay in the oven. I'm sure many people across the Central Coast will do the same. I'm looking forward to seeing people share their own strawberry stories and recipes on social media, because I know how much our community wants to back our farmers and support them by cutting up our strawberries and not cutting our farmers out. I commend this bill to the House. 11:16 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'm pleased to sum up this debate. I thank the members of the House for their contributions to the debate. I particularly thank all members for the multipartisan spirit in which this matter is being progressed very promptly through the House today, and as I know it will be progressed through the other house today. We booked the hall, so we need to use it. We need to get the bill passed today and it needs to get out of the parliament and into our laws so that there is a very, very clear message being sent about the resolve of this parliament and of our government. It is a great shame, I'm sure members will agree, that this is what we have to be doing today—that the idiocy, the carelessness, the recklessness, the vengefulness of some characters out there would mean that we would have to be here today passing these types of laws. But when they're necessary, you must act—you must pass them and you must act swiftly to do so. That's what our government is doing, and we're doing it with the support of the parliament, for which we're appreciative. The Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill is a powerful denunciation of the deplorable, cowardly and idiotic conduct that we've seen. It's not just about the initial intentional act that has caused this crisis and this anxiety and concern, but it is also the follow-up actions of people who should know better, and if they don't know better they should now know better. It's important for our law enforcement agencies, whether at the state level or at the Commonwealth level, to have the powers, the tools, the penalties and the support of this parliament and of the government to get on and do their job and keep our community safe, keep Australian families safe, keep kids safe, and also keep our farmers' livelihoods safe. We're dealing currently with many challenges in our rural sector, particularly in relation to the drought. To have this come on top of that is a deplorable situation to find ourselves in. But that's what we are sent here to do. We're sent here to deal with these issues and that's what we are doing, by moving swiftly to address these issues with the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill, which gives effect to the government's priority to keep Australians safe and to support the livelihoods of farmers. The bill will increase the penalty for existing offences in section 380 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which relates to the contamination of goods. These offences currently carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. We need to be clear about this: those who have commissioned acts of intent in this area are already captured by the existing law and that penalty, up until where we're standing today, has been 10 years. As a result of the measures that we are progressing through the parliament today, that will now increase to a maximum 15 years imprisonment. The bill will also introduce new offences that replicate the existing offences in section 380 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, but with the mental element of recklessness being required, rather than intention, in relation to whether their conduct causes public alarm or anxiety, causes economic loss or causes harm, or creates a risk of harm, to public health in Australia. It is basically a law against idiocy. That's what it is. If people want to act like that, they need to know what the consequences are. And there are consequences for their actions, but the ultimate decision on the full extent of any penalty that will be put in place will be left to the usual judicial process. Measures also exist at the state and territory jurisdictional level which provide that discretion to the law enforcement agencies and, indeed, the courts, who ultimately deal with these matters. For the most serious cases that have national security implications, the bill proposes amendments to ensure that sabotage of Australia's food supply is captured by the extended sabotage offences, and the penalties for these offences range from seven to 25 years imprisonment. When things like this happen, you need to take the opportunity to think about the broader possible risks that can occur from these events, and I commend the Attorney on his work in identifying these additional areas. I'm sure there'll be further work and focus applied by the government and, indeed, across the chamber to ensure that, when it comes to Australia's national security and keeping Australians safe from terrorism, we're all working together to achieve the best possible result. Recklessness will be enough for significant jail time, and in the future we will capture more serious offences that would affect Australia's food supply if it were subject to sabotage and that would be a threat to national security if sabotage were done. There are other measures that the government is taking, and I imagine there will be other measures the government will take. We are watching this closely. The legislative measures that are before the House today are our first set of responses, but we're already providing $1 million to make more food safety officials urgently available to increase detection, fast-track recalls and assist the strawberry-farming industry to rebuild confidence. That matches what has been provided by the Queensland government to spend on advertising and marketing to assist the rehabilitation of the industry. The Commonwealth Department of Health will work with the Queensland Department of Health and Safe Food Production Queensland to ensure additional resources are made urgently available, including additional inspection officers. These measures are in addition to measures outlined by the Minister for Health and the regional services minister. The food standards authority, Food Standards Australia New Zealand, will continue to lead the coordination of product recalls through a government, state, industry and retailer task force. There will be an investigation of the supply chain as well to understand whether there are systemic breaches in the supply chain. While these measures are in place, it is important customers and families are aware and take their own actions, closely inspecting and dicing fruit—cutting it up not cutting it out, and not cutting our farmers out, as we've all said. That remains an effective deterrent. These are the measures that we believe will assist. There are other things we need to be very mindful of—and I've been having these discussions in recent days—and they are to ensure that we do not lose these strawberry fields. These fields, if you don't pick them, get contaminated, and that means they have to be walked away from. There are some real pressures right now, and our government is looking at ways that we can ensure that we minimise that risk. One of the most obvious ways to do that is, as we've all been discussing, for people to go out and restore their normal habits of buying strawberries and other fruit. It's not a call to a national strawberry binge, but if you feel so inclined over the next few days to give it a big running-up start, well, by all means do so. As I said the other day, Jen's cooking a pav this weekend to go with a curry. It's not a strawberry curry, by the way; that not going to work! It won't be a strawberry curry; it'll be a dessert. But whatever it is—whether it's strawberry muffins or whatever it is—I think it's one of those things you can do. And I love the idea. As the member for Robertson said, there have been idiots on social media making this problem worse. How about a lot of good-natured Australians getting on social media this weekend and making the problem go away? Let's say, 'We're having strawberries this weekend. This is what I've done,' and share your favourite strawberry recipes. Make some strawberry chutney, if you must! But, whatever it happens to be, I think that is the great way to respond. We're acting as lawmakers in here today but Australians will act in every way they can as we stand together, as we come together, as we keep Australians together to focus on dealing with this challenge. I'm aware of the proposal from the shadow Attorney-General in relation to a statutory review. We're happy to facilitate that review administratively; you have our commitment on that. If that requires a letter, to that extent, then that can be accommodated. But I think it's important that we move forward with the bill as quickly and as promptly as we can, and take into account these matters at an administrative level, and that can be more than adequately provided for. In conclusion, we are being really serious here. People who do this are not being funny; it's not a lark. Sometimes people don't think through the consequences of their actions. What we're doing here today, as a parliament, as a government, is encouraging Australians to stop and think about this—to think about the behaviours that have serious consequences for their fellow Australians. We're making this law to put the ultimate stop in here. But let's hope the law won't be necessary. Let's hope that the good-natured and honest response of Australians will be sufficient to deal with this. This law is now there and it sends a clear message, but I have great confidence in the good-heartedness and the good faith of Australians that, together, we will respond in the right way to this. One of the good things about this sector is it can rehabilitate reasonably quickly compared to other sectors. There are exceptions to that, I know. But, if we just get back about it, if we put these measures in place and continue to address the other measures that are necessary, then we can give that assurance to those family farmers in their strawberry fields. We can give an assurance to families when they put their kids' lunches together; when they make the dinner on a weeknight and, particularly if it's a special occasion, there are some strawberries on the table; and on the weekend, when the family comes around. I think it's a great time to show our family nature as a country. I thank members for their cooperation in this place today and I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 18 11:27 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Maritime Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 18

Maritime Legislation Amendment Bill 2018

First Reading 18 Second Reading 18 11:28 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Australia is heavily reliant on shipping and maritime trade. International shipping carries 99 per cent of our imports and exports by weight. Australia's economy also relies on our domestic maritime industries, including for tourism, for transport, and for fishing and aquaculture. As a government, it is our duty to ensure Australia's regulatory framework for maritime safety and protection of the marine environment functions efficiently, effectively and is consistent with international law. This framework is vital to ensure the safe operation of vessels in Australia's waters and to ensure seafarers and passengers aboard these vessels return home safely. This framework is also vital for protecting Australia's pristine coastal and marine environments, including our internationally recognised areas of outstanding natural significant, such as the Great Barrier Reef. Today I present the Maritime Legislation Amendment Bill 2018. The bill makes important, machinery changes to the Marine Safety (Domestic Commercial Vessel) National Law Act 2012 and Navigation Act 2012. These are acts that establish key parts of Australia's regulatory framework for maritime safety and protection of the marine environment. Primarily, the bill will insert a definition for the term 'regulations' into each act to clarify that this term includes legislative instruments known as Marine Orders. This clarification is necessary to ensure the regulatory framework operates as intended. Provisions of each act rely on vessel owners and individual seafarers operating or working on vessels complying with requirements of regulations, such as requirements to hold valid safety or pollution certificates. Marine Orders deal with detailed technical and operational requirements and processes and are used to give effect to international obligations and standards. Use of Marine Orders is a longstanding and accepted regulatory practice with which the shipping industry is familiar. Marine Orders can already be made under each act for almost any matter that can be provided for by regulations. Limited exceptions include matters which affect the coverage, rather than the detail, of the regulatory framework, such as the definition of a 'domestic commercial vessel'. Marine Orders are used to set out potentially complex standards and requirements in the clearest and simplest manner possible to help the maritime industry to understand and comply with their obligations. Use of Marine Orders also ensures these requirements are set out in a consistent and familiar way that is easily and freely accessible in one place on the Australian Maritime Safety Authority's website. They are also registered and freely available on the Federal Register of Legislation. Marine Orders are legislative instruments for the purpose of the Legislation Act 2003, which means they are subject to crucial parliamentary scrutiny and disallowance. The ongoing use of Marine Orders remains appropriate and embeds agility in the legislative framework, ensuring legislation keeps up to date with technical and operational advances in maritime safety and environmental protection. Importantly, the explanatory memoranda for the Marine Safety (Domestic Commercial Vessel) National Law Bill 2012 and the Navigation Bill 2012 make clear that policymakers intended Marine Orders, rather than the acts or regulations, to continue to be used to set out these operational and technical matters and requirements, in line with longstanding regulatory practice. In practical terms, the machinery changes made by the bill will have no impact on maritime industries operating under these acts. Individual seafarers and vessel owners will continue to comply with the same requirements set out under the existing acts, regulations and Marine Orders in the same manner as today, and continue to be subject to the existing compliance framework. Legally, however, the bill is necessary to provide important clarity and certainty about the existing obligations for individual seafarers and vessel owners regulated by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority under the acts. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 19

Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018

First Reading 19 Second Reading 19 11:34 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That this bill be read a second time. New communications technology, including encryption, is eroding the capacity of Australia's law enforcement and security agencies to investigate serious criminal conduct and protect Australians. The Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 contains amendments to various legislation to create a package of reforms that strengthens the ability of Australia's law enforcement and national security agencies to deal with the challenges of encryption. Encryption underpins modern information and communication technology. It is a tool that protects personal, commercial and government information and supports confidence in a secure cyberspace. These technologies allow us to confidently transact online and to use the internet for services such as banking and shopping. However, criminal syndicates and terrorists are increasingly misusing and, indeed, exploiting these technologies. Terrorist organisations in Australia and overseas are using secure messaging services to obscure their identities and plans from the authorities. For example, ISIL-inspired terrorists used secure messaging services to plan the November 2015 Paris attacks. The lack of access to encrypted communications presents an increasingly significant barrier for national security and law enforcement agencies in investigating serious crimes and national security threats. According to ASIO, encryption has impacted intelligence operations in at least nine out of every 10 of its priority cases. The AFP advise that encrypted communications have directly impacted around 200 operations conducted by the AFP in the last 12 months, all of which related to the investigation of serious criminal offences carrying a penalty of seven years imprisonment or more. The uptake of encrypted communications platforms by criminal and terrorist groups has been sudden. It represents a seismic shift in the operational environment for our law enforcement and security agencies. In June 2013, only three per cent of internet communications intercepted by ASIO, under warrant, were encrypted. By 1 July 2017, that figure had increased to more than 55 per cent. Most of the material of intelligence value is in the encrypted proportion. Similarly, more than 90 per cent of data lawfully intercepted by the AFP is now encrypted in some form. No responsible government can sit by while those who protect our community lose access to the tools they need to do their job. In the current threat environment, we cannot let this problem get worse. The bill represents a package of reasonable and proportionate measures which will enhance our approach. The government has undertaken extensive industry and public consultation on the bill and has made amendments to account for the constructive feedback received. Outline of M easures in the B ill Industry assistance, including technical assistance and technical capability warrants The supply of communications is a global industry. With major technology providers headquartered overseas, we must work with international partners to adapt to a world characterised by ubiquitous encryption. The communications industry is in a unique position to assist in tackling the challenges we face. Encrypted products are developed and operated by a range of private providers—both inside and outside of Australia—and in a range of forms across the communications supply chain. National security and law enforcement agencies already work cooperatively with industry partners on these issues, to protect Australians. The bill seeks to enhance those existing relationships to achieve lawful and non-arbitrary access to available information in the context of serious criminal and national security threats. It complements the existing obligations of domestic service carriers to provide reasonable assistance to law enforcement under the Telecommunications Act 1997. The bill facilitates a multilevel approach to industry assistance, creating a framework to support the wide range of providers that assist law enforcement and intelligence agencies voluntarily, including foreign providers. This is reinforced and clarified by the creation of two new powers: the technical assistance notice and the technical capability notice. Technical assistance notices will be issued by an agency head or their delegate to compel assistance that a provider is capable of giving. Technical capability notices will be issued by the Attorney-General and require a company to take reasonable steps to develop and maintain a capability to respond to agency requests. The legislation will not weaken encryption or mandate backdoors into encryption. The bill specifically provides that companies cannot be required to create systemic weaknesses in their encrypted products, or be required to build a decryption capability. This is also not a new vehicle to collect personal information. Surveillance and interception must be authorised by existing warrants and authorisations, which are subject to their own safeguards, including judicial oversight. The bill requires that any obligations within a technical assistance notice and technical capability notice are reasonable, proportionate, practicable and technically feasible. We are not in the business of asking industry to do the impossible. The legislation provides for cost recovery by providers for complying with new requirements and also provides immunity from civil liability. Alternative capabilities for law enforcement Modern information and communications technology has provided more ways to stay connected and to store information. These capabilities include a wide variety of electronic protection. Agencies need expanded capabilities to adapt and to meet the needs of the evolving digital environment. To this end, the bill provides law enforcement agencies with additional powers for overt and covert computer access. Computer access involves the use of software to collect information directly from devices. Commonwealth, state and territory law enforcement agencies would be able to use this power to investigate offences with a federal aspect. The Surveillance Devices Act will include a new covert computer access power for law enforcement, like those powers currently available to ASIO. This will enable law enforcement agencies to apply for computer access warrants when investigating serious federal crimes with a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment or more, including terrorism and child exploitation. The cross-border storage of information and overseas location of service providers makes Australia's mutual assistance framework critical in enabling Australian and foreign authorities to gain access to information to inform investigations and to obtain evidence. Under that framework, foreign authorities will be able to make a request to the Attorney-General to authorise an eligible law enforcement officer to apply for, and execute, a computer access warrant to assist in a foreign investigation or investigative proceeding. Amendments will be made to the Crimes Act search warrant framework to ensure law enforcement officers do not have to physically be on premises in order to access a computer under a search warrant. Amendments to the Customs Act will enable a judicial officer to issue a search warrant authorising the ABF to search a device (such as a smartphone) held on a person. Currently, devices can only be searched when found on a premise or premises. The Crimes Act and the Customs Act will be amended to increase the maximum penalty for a person who fails to provide assistance to law enforcement in accessing a device which is the subject of a search warrant. These assistance orders must be issued by a judicial officer. The maximum penalty will be increased to five years. An aggravated offence will be created for serious offences like espionage, terrorism, child exploitation and pornography, with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. The increased penalties for noncompliance with orders for access to a device reflect the value of evidentiary material on devices and the fact that persons who have undertaken criminal activity would rather accept the current low penalties than provide data that could be evidence in a more serious prosecution. Given the increased complexity of devices and higher volumes of data stored, law enforcement agencies will now have 30 days to conduct forensic examinations of seized computers and data storage devices. This is an increase on the currently inadequate 14-day time frame for police forces and 72-hour period for the Australian Border Force. ASIO p owers ASIO is responsible for investigating some of the gravest threats to Australia's national security, including espionage, terrorism and attacks on Australia's defence systems. ASIO's ability to collect intelligence using traditional means, such as telecommunications interception, is declining due to encryption. To mitigate this decline, the bill will introduce a new framework to ensure that persons and bodies who voluntarily assist ASIO are given appropriate legal protections for this assistance. The purpose of this new framework is to give members of the public the highest degree of confidence that they may lawfully help ASIO to protect Australia's national security. Conclusion The bill demonstrates the government's commitment to ensuring that law enforcement and national security agencies have the tools they need to keep Australians safe. The government has consulted extensively with industry and the public on these measures and has made amendments to reflect the feedback in the legislation now before the parliament. The government is committed to ensuring that our legislative response to the challenges of an evolving technological landscape is reasonable, is proportionate and meets national security and law enforcement needs. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. MOTIONS 22 MOTIONS Minister for Home Affairs 22 11:44 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Melbourne from moving—That this House has no confidence in the Minister for Home Affairs. There's a golden rule in this place if you are a minister: tell the truth. Do not mislead the parliament. The parliament is there to hold ministers and the government to account. We might not like the answers they give. We might disagree with the decisions they've made. But, because ministers have enormous power that, in many instances, they exercise behind closed doors, we need them to be honest with us. So one of the most vital questions that we have to resolve now—and before question time, when all the ministers line up and give their answers—is: is any one of these ministers telling the truth? Can we have confidence in what they say? What has become crystal clear is that you cannot trust what the Minister for Home Affairs says to this chamber. I asked him a simple question: did he know someone? Did he have a personal connection with someone? He stood up in this chamber, with full knowledge of who I was referring to, and said no. He not only said, 'I have no personal connection with that person;' he went on, of his own volition, to say, 'I did not know them.' But it is now crystal clear, and the Senate inquiry has confirmed this, when the minister told parliament he didn't know someone, he did. He did, and that throws everything into question, because now the minister's credibility is on the line. The Prime Minister has laid down some very clear rules for ministers, and those rules say that you have to exercise your power with the sole objective of the public interest and you must not mislead the House. But what we have here is a minister who's about to get up in a couple of hours, which is why this is so urgent—a minister who, when he knows exactly who it is the question is about, is prepared to say to the House: 'No, I don't know them. I have no personal connection with them.' Then he goes on radio and says, 'They're a former colleague of mine.' Then he comes back later into the House and says that, yes, he did, in fact, know them. Then, not of his own volition, but because the Senate does its job and inquires into the decisions of the minister, several emails popped up. And one email popped up in response to a question from the opposition spokesperson in this House that says, 'Peter, long time between calls.' This comes from someone the minister said he didn't know. What is also becoming crystal clear is that the department and the minister's office bent over backwards to help this person in a way that has not happened with anyone else, with the exception, perhaps, of another au pair. This person got special treatment. Why? The inference is clear: because they were known to the minister. So there are multiple parts of the ministerial standards that the minister has breached. The Prime Minister has refused to take the action that's needed, which is to dismiss the minister. The minister has refused to resign. The best the minister has come up with is a Bill Clinton style defence where 'personal connection' apparently doesn't mean 'personal connection'. 'Knowing someone' apparently does not mean 'knowing someone'. He has been caught out, and that is why nothing could be more important than suspending standing orders to deal with this before question time. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Member for Melbourne, there is a point of order. The Leader of the House. Mr Pyne 9V5 Acting Deputy Speaker, I'm quite happy for the member for Melbourne to speak, but I'd like to clarify on what basis. Is he moving a suspension of standing orders, or has he sought leave to move a motion? The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Suspension of standing and sessional orders on a motion without notice. Mr Pyne 9V5 So you are moving a suspension— The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E That's right. Mr Pyne 9V5 You didn't seek leave to start with? Mr BANDT M3C No. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The member for Melbourne. Mr BANDT M3C One thing I would say to people who are considering which way to vote on this motion is that this is not about whether or not you agree with the government's border policy. It is well known that I have a difference of opinion with the minister about that. This is not about whether you in fact even agree with the decisions that the minister has made. This is about whether ministers in this government can be trusted to tell the truth to the House. I say to the members of the government backbench and to other members in this place that this won't even affect the numbers in parliament, tightly balanced as they are because the government has decided to leave the people of Wentworth without representation. This won't even affect the numbers in parliament. This is just a clear message that this minister is no longer fit to sit on the front bench. If the minister is not going to take the course that would be the honourable course, which is what you do when you are in clear breach of the ministerial standards, if he's not going to take it himself, then parliament needs to send the clearest possible message. And precedent would dictate that, if this suspension motion is passed, and then the ultimate motion is passed, the minister goes to the back bench. For that reason, we must suspend standing orders right now. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Mr Wilkie C2T I second the motion of the member for Melbourne and reserve my right to speak. 11:51 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt Of course, the government doesn't agree to the suspension of standing orders. We have important business to be getting on with in the House of Representatives, and that's exactly what we intend to do. The House this morning dealt with the legislation around strawberries to protect Australian consumers and families, and I really welcome the bipartisan approach that the House offered to the very important legislation that the Attorney-General presented and passed this morning. As people would know, it was an unorthodox approach to bring legislation into the parliament and then not let it sit on the table. So I do thank the Labor Party and the crossbenchers for ensuring that what has been a harrowing period for people in the strawberry industry has been addressed by the government as best as we can in one morning of debate in the House of Representatives. But it's an example of what we need to be doing in the parliament—getting on with the business of government. We are only halfway through the introductions of legislation. In fact, I think the Minister for Home Affairs had introduced a bill. We have significant bills that need to be introduced and passed by the House of Representatives over the course of the spring session: the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP Student Protection) Bill 2018, the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2018, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018, the Income Tax (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Amendment Bill 2018, the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Sovereign Entities) Bill 2018, and so on. There is a long list of bill introductions today. An honourable member interjecting— Mr PYNE 9V5 I'm happy to keep it going, since you want to know. There is the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018 and the Excise Tariff Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at Manufacture) Bill 2018. Dr Leigh BU8 We voted twice to stop the filibuster. You voted to keep it going. Mr PYNE 9V5 Listen, Abraham, you're not on television now. It's all right—you can give your 'close-in look to camera' speech later on this afternoon! It is important to introduce these bills into this parliament so that they can be passed in the spring session and the business of government can be gotten on with. A suspension of standing orders has been moved. When that happens, the business of government stops and a new item of business is dealt with. So the speech that should have been given by the member for Melbourne should have been about why the suspension of standing orders should be supported in order to allow him to move his motion, but I didn't interrupt him on that basis once we'd discovered what he was doing. We want to get on with the business of government. We have significant legislation to introduce into the parliament and then to debate and pass. We don't agree that the standing orders should be suspended in order to allow a motion of no confidence in the Minister for Home Affairs. We have absolute confidence in the Minister for Home Affairs—absolute confidence in the Minister for Home Affairs. This Minister for Home Affairs has stopped the boats, following on from the good work of the now Prime Minister. He's protected our borders. This government, led first by the now Prime Minister, along with the Minister for Home Affairs, has put national security as one of our very first priorities alongside growing the economy—national security, economic security. He's not running the loosey-goosey approach to the borders that the Labor Party ran when they were in office for six years, when we had 50,000 unauthorised arrivals on 800 boats and at least 1,000 deaths at sea that we know about and thousands of children in detention. We fixed it. We got on and we fixed it. On this occasion, the Minister for Home Affairs has been the fixer. He fixed it, along with the now Prime Minister. It is a very significant part of government policy because not only is it important to protect our borders and to stop deaths at sea; it also saves the Australian taxpayer billions and billions of dollars. When you open 17 new immigration detention centres and processing centres, as Labor did, it costs an extraordinary amount of money. So, on every single level, the work of the Minister for Home Affairs in protecting our borders has been absolutely outstanding. And that has been not only in protecting our borders. As the Minister for Home Affairs, he has also ensured we have a rigorous visa-processing system. He is not allowing bikie gang leaders, drug runners or sexual offenders to simply stay in the country, as Labor allowed to happen for six years. He has cancelled over 3,000 visas of criminals in the time that he has been the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and the Minister for Home Affairs. He has been acting and getting on with the job, which is what this House wants to do. My sense, hearing from my colleagues, is that they want to get on with the business of the House, because that's what good governments do. Not only has the Minister for Home Affairs protected Australians and protected our borders; he's also ensured that we have an absolute world-class approach to stopping terrorism in Australia. He's protecting Australia and putting the safety of Australians first. He has protected them from terrorism, extremism and radicalism in the approach that he has taken as the Minister for Home Affairs and before that as the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. That is one of the most important things, if not the most important thing, any government can do. Yet the Labor Party and, unfortunately, some of my friends on the crossbench—certainly the member for Melbourne and the member for Denison—want us to stop having our focus on the safety of the Australian public. They want us to take our focus off the safety of the Australian public. They want us to focus instead on these political games. The Australian public are thoroughly sick of it. We had a Senate committee report handed down last night. The committee had a majority of Labor and Greens members on it. Amazingly, it found against the Minister for Home Affairs—shock, horror! Who would have thought? There wasn't one Labor or Greens member who chose to back the government. It's never happened and it's not going to happen—surprise, surprise! There has not been one shred of evidence presented by the Labor Party—or the Greens, for that matter—as to why this motion of no confidence should be carried on the Minister for Home Affairs. That is why the government will not support a suspension of standing orders to facilitate this motion. A motion of no confidence in a minister—or a government, for that matter—is one of the most serious things that a parliament can consider. So serious is it that, from memory, we didn't move a motion of no confidence in the Gillard government in the entire 43rd Parliament. We moved a few suspensions of standing orders, but we never moved a motion of no confidence in the government, because the most serious thing a parliament can do is consider such a motion. Mr Hill 86256 She didn't lie. Mr PYNE 9V5 The member should withdraw that statement accusing the Minister for Home Affairs of lying. I will give him the chance to do so. Mr Hill 86256 I said Gillard didn't lie. Mr PYNE 9V5 Oh, well, you, the Labor Party, dispatched her anyway, which is not to your credit. In fact, you started all the instability in the last 11 years. It's the Labor disease. We have absolute confidence in the Minister for Home Affairs. He is a fine individual who has spent the better part of his working career working for the Australian people in Dickson and representing them in the parliament with absolute integrity. He is beyond reproach. Labor and the Greens are yet to present any credible evidence that would suggest to the government that there is any reason why the Minister for Home Affairs should have a motion of no confidence passed on him. In fact, Labor's attacks on the Minister for Home Affairs in the last two weeks have been utterly shameful and humiliatingly bad. You really need to get the member for Isaacs back on the tactics committee—he's been off it—because it has been a hopeless performance from the Labor Party. They have not landed one glove on the Minister for Home Affairs or anyone on this side of the House over the matters that have been raised by the member for Melbourne in this debate today. The prosecution, so-called, of the Minister for Home Affairs has been woeful. Of course, that's not the reason we're voting against the motion, but it does speak volumes about how little credible evidence the Labor Party has been able to find to impugn the good character and name of the Minister for Home Affairs, who has served the people with distinction for the last 18 years as a minister and, initially, as a backbencher. I am very proud to call him my friend and colleague. 12:01 Mr BURKE DYW Watson The opposition will be supporting the motion that's been moved by the member for Melbourne. I think everybody now knows after that recent speech that, if you're ever in trouble, there's one person you don't want to be charged with defending you, and that's the Leader of the House. That was extraordinary. He claimed there was urgent business that the House had to deal with and then said, 'Can someone please hand me a copy of it?' because he had no idea what it was. I've got to say that, if this government ever wanted to argue that there was urgent business before the House, they lost the right to do that the day they shut down the parliament. They shut down the parliament because of the person they're now in here defending—at his request, we were told. There will be lots of arguments that go back and forth in this House about the Minister for Home Affairs, but today we deal with one issue, which is that ministers must not mislead the parliament. That's it. The Leader of the House says, 'But what evidence has Labor provided?' Well there are two things here: first, is that an important principle, and, second, did the Minister for Home Affairs breach it? Is it an important principle? It's listed in the Practice as one of the reasons a minister would have to resign. It was stated in 2015—more extreme language than I'd probably use—and I quote, 'If you mislead parliament, that's a cardinal sin.' That was said by the Minister for Home Affairs in a radio interview. That's his view on how serious this is. Let's work out whether or not that has happened. There's one question here: did the minister tell the truth to the parliament? He was asked a question by the member for Melbourne, and that's why it's appropriate that it's the member for Melbourne bringing the issue to the House today. The question he was asked was this: Can you categorically rule out any personal connection or any other relationship between you and the intended employer of either of the au pairs? In his answer, the Minister for Home Affairs said: The answer is yes. And then added something even stronger than what the question said. He said: I don't know these people. He said that back on 27 March. Was he telling the truth when he said that? To answer the question as to whether or not that was a true statement, let's not go to my words or my evidence; let's go to what the Minister for Home Affairs said later about the same matter. On 3 September he was asked in a press conference in Brisbane: Minister Dutton do you now concede that you knew the man from the police force, who you assisted with the visa for the au pair? To which he said, 'I've never denied that'. I reckon 'I don't know these people' is a denial that you knew them. The claim that he has never denied it was made by the Minister for Home Affairs. The statement that he denied that he knew them was made by the Minister for Home Affairs right there at that dispatch box in March in answer to a question from the member for Melbourne. Never once, in all the issues that the Leader of the House just danced around, watching the clock as he went—it was as though the member for Higgins was making a speech; the clock was being watched for the entirety of the speech as the Leader of the House gave that answer—did he deal with the issue as to whether or not the minister had misled the House, because we all know he had. You don't need the Labor Party to tell you that, you don't need a Senate inquiry to tell you that, because the Minister for Home Affairs has told us that. He answered a question in the House and said, 'I don't know these people,' then when asked in a doorstop interview whether or not he knew those people, he said, 'Well, I've never denied that.' He did. He denied it. You will often get accusations about whether or not a minister has misled the House. You will never get one as open and shut as what is in front of us today. Of all the evidence that you get misled on, you rarely get the minister himself or herself saying, 'I've never denied that,' when the denial is what was stated in the parliament. (Time expired) 12:06 Mr WILKIE C2T Denison Central to the Minister for Home Affairs' defence is that he receives hundreds of requests from members of parliament and from senators to intervene in individual cases, and that's all he did in the case of the two or three au pairs. What he misses when he gives that defence is the fact that those hundreds of requests for intervention are genuinely for people on humanitarian grounds. There is no way in the world that the Minister for Home Affairs can lean on the defence that the intervention in the case of the au pairs was on humanitarian grounds. That is patently bunkum. And how offensive is that to all of those who care about the people who are locked up in our overseas gulags on Manus Island and Nauru? How offensive is that? How wrong is it for the manager of government business to defend the Minister for Home Affairs by saying, 'He's kept us safe,' and we don't want to keep us safe. Of course we want to keep us safe, but we also want to act like a legal country, with integrity. It is outrageous that there have been countless children now who have been desperately sick and the Minister for Home Affairs has refused to have them brought to Australia, and it's been left to the Federal Court to issue orders to bring those people to Australia. On one hand, it's okay to be intervening on humanitarian grounds for au pairs to come to this country, but it's not okay for the minister to intervene in numerous cases. For example, just this year the Federal Court issued transport orders for a 10-year-old boy on Nauru who attempted suicide three times and needed surgery. The Federal Court had to order the repatriation to Australia of a young girl who attempted suicide three times on Nauru. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 14-year-old girl who doused herself in petrol and set herself alight on Nauru. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 17-year-old boy who suffers from psychosis and needed to be reunited with his mother. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of an adolescent girl suffering major depression and traumatic withdrawal syndrome. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a critically unwell baby. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 12-year-old boy on Nauru refusing fluid and food for nearly two weeks. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 17-year-old girl on Nauru refusing all food and fluid and diagnosed with resignation syndrome. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 12-year-old girl on Nauru who has attempted suicide several times, also setting herself on fire. The Federal Court had to intervene in the case of a 14-year-old boy on Nauru, suffering major depressive disorder and severe muscle wastage after not getting out of bed for four months. But the minister says it's okay to intervene in the case of two or three au pairs on humanitarian grounds when we've got at least 30 children on Nauru who doctors say should be brought to this country for urgent medical attention. Then there's the case of all the people on Manus who are effectively detained there. It is a complete nonsense. It's deeply offensive to all of us in this parliament when we're accused of being weak on national security. We're strong on national security but we're also humanitarians. When we go to the minister and ask him to intervene, it's for genuine humanitarian grounds, because we believe we should start acting like a law-abiding country, with integrity. There's no integrity in claiming humanitarian reasons for bringing nannies into this country for his mates once or twice removed. There's no integrity in that. I'm happy to support this motion by the member for Melbourne. I will be deeply disappointed if there aren't some members of the government who will join us. The SPEAKER 00APG The time for debate has expired. The question is that the motion moved by the member for Melbourne to suspend standing orders be agreed to.

The House divided. [12:14]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 67 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 Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Kearney, GM Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Neil, CE O'Toole, C Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 68 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Joyce, BT Katter, RC Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ 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 Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 BILLS 27 BILLS Corporations Amendment (Strengthening Protections for Employee Entitlements) Bill 2018 27

Corporations Amendment (Strengthening Protections for Employee Entitlements) Bill 2018

First Reading 27 Second Reading 27 12:23 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill amends the Corporations Act 2001(Corporations Act) to address corporate misuse of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee scheme. This vital legislation cracks down hard on companies which try to evade their obligations to workers and shift the burden to taxpayers. Corporate misuse of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee scheme places an unfair burden on Australian taxpayers, who ultimately bear the costs of employers improperly relying on the scheme. It also creates an unfair commercial advantage over honest competitor businesses which do the right thing by their employees. This bill will mean we have stronger levers to ensure employers are held accountable for their obligations: stronger penalties for those who do the wrong thing; stronger options to recover entitlements; and stronger powers to deal with directors and companies deliberately evading their obligations. The FEG is an important safety net for Australian workers which protects employment entitlements when workers lose their job due to their employer's insolvency. Whilst the overwhelming majority of companies are doing the right thing, unfortunately, some employers shift employee costs onto the FEG scheme for their own advantage or just to exploit the scheme. These changes are tightly targeted to deter and punish only those who seek to avoid their employee entitlement obligations and exploit the FEG scheme. This improper use of FEG is contributing to a significant increase in scheme costs. Average annual costs under the scheme have more than tripled from $70.7 million in the four years to 30 June 2009 to $235.3 million in the four years to 30 June 2018. The amendments in part 1 of schedule 1 of this bill strengthen enforcement and recovery options under the Corporations Act to deter and penalise company directors and other persons who engage in or facilitate transactions that are aimed at preventing, avoiding or significantly reducing employer liability for employee entitlements in insolvency. The changes in part 1 of schedule 1 of the bill include: extending the fault element necessary to contravene the existing criminal offence in part 5.8A of the Corporations Act to include recklessness; significantly increasing the penalties applicable to contraventions of the criminal offences under part 5.8A of the Corporations Act; introducing a new civil penalty for entering into a transaction that is likely to avoid, prevent or significantly reduce recoverable employee entitlements, with an objective test based on what a reasonable person in the circumstances would have known about the transaction; and expanding the parties who can commence civil compensation proceedings to include the Australian Taxation Office, the Fair Work Ombudsman and the Department of Jobs and Small Business. The amendments in part 2 of schedule 1 of this bill enable the court to make a contribution order against an entity in a corporate group or closely connected economic relationship with an insolvent company, where: that insolvent company has unpaid employee entitlements; the other entity has unfairly benefited from the work done by the insolvent company's employees; and it would be just and equitable for the court to make the order. The amendments in part 3 of schedule 1 of this bill strengthen the ability of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission to disqualify company directors and other officers, either directly or on application to the court, where they have a track record of corporate contraventions and inappropriately using the FEG scheme to pay outstanding employee entitlements. The reforms are the result of extensive public consultation processes conducted during 2017 and 2018. They have been developed with the government's insolvent trading safe harbour reforms in mind and are tightly targeted to deter and punish only those who do the wrong thing by workers and taxpayers. They will not affect the overwhelming majority of companies that are doing the right thing. The reforms build on other actions that the government has taken to protect employee entitlements, such as; amending the Fair Work Act to protect vulnerable workers, including increasing penalties up to tenfold for serious contraventions of workplace laws, strengthening the Fair Work Ombudsman's investigative powers, and making franchisors and holding companies responsible for breaches of the Fair Work Act in certain circumstances. providing a $20.1 million increase in funding to the Fair Work Ombudsman over four years; establishing the interagency Migrant Workers' Taskforce led by Professor Allan Fels AO; introducing legislation to tackle non-payment of the superannuation guarantee by targeting employers that fail to meet their superannuation obligations; releasing draft legislation to combat illegal phoenix activities involving the deliberate avoidance of company debts, including employee entitlements, by company operators and pre-insolvency advisers who facilitate this activity; and legislating that a company must pay its employee entitlements when they fall due, for its directors to rely on the insolvent trading safe harbour. The Legislative and Governance Forum for Corporations was consulted in relation to the bill and has approved it as required under the Corporations Agreement 2002. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I am sure that all of those present will be keen to support the bill and ensure these important protections for workers and taxpayers come into effect as soon as possible. Debate adjourned. Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP Student Protection) Bill 2018 29

Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP Student Protection) Bill 2018

First Reading 29 Second Reading 29 12:29 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Introduction Today I am introducing the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP Student Protection) Bill 2018, which will provide a remedy for students who, due to the inappropriate conduct of their VET provider, incurred debts under the VET FEE-HELP loan scheme. This bill is all about cleaning up another mess left for Australian taxpayers from the previous Rudd-Gillard-Rudd Labor government. The VET FEE-HELP loan scheme changes of 2012 have resemblances with other poorly designed Labor programs, such as the disastrous pink batts scheme and the schools halls debacle, which resulted in Australian taxpayers being ripped off. The 2012 changes to the VET FEE-HELP scheme by the former Labor government allowed a number of unscrupulous training providers to offer bogus courses to Australian students, often with the inducement of a free laptop or tablet, without advising them they were incurring a debt to the Australian Taxation Office. This arrangement left vulnerable Australian students and ultimately Australian taxpayers with the bill. It also had the potential to damage the reputation of the overwhelming majority of training providers who were doing the right thing. VET FEE-HELP scheme The VET FEE-HELP loan scheme operated from 2009 to 2016, with some continuing students accessing loans during 2017 and 2018 under grandfathering arrangements. The VET FEE-HELP loan scheme was originally designed to assist students with the cost of VET studies that led to a higher education outcome, such as a bachelor's degree. The loan to students covering their tuition fees for the cost of their study had income-contingent repayment arrangements. In late 2012, the VET FEE-HELP loan scheme was changed and the requirement that the VET course provide a bridge to a higher education outcome was removed. This opened up the scheme to more VET students, but unfortunately, because of the Labor government's very poor design work, unscrupulous training providers took advantage of vulnerable students. The Australian National Audit Office, in its 2016 audit of the VET FEE-HELP scheme, characterised this amendment as: heavily … supporting growth in the VET sector— while providing— … insufficient safeguards for students from misleading or deceptive conduct, and inadequate monitoring, investigation and payment controls for poor or non-compliant— VET— providers. The abuse of the VET FEE-HELP loan scheme after the 2012 changes is well known, including that students at a number of unscrupulous providers incurred debts as a result of being signed up to courses they would never complete. The 2012 changes meant that VET providers would receive payment of the amount of the student's loan in accordance with the data they reported on students enrolled in units as at the census date for the course—that is, the time at which the enrolment is finalised and the debt is then incurred. Opportunistic providers attempted to enrol as many students as quickly as possible so they could benefit financially. In doing so these providers and their agents targeted some of the most vulnerable Australians, including people with limited educational opportunities, people with disabilities, and Indigenous people. They employed deplorable tactics, including aggressive marketing schemes, using brokers and cold-calling people. They offered inducements such as laptops and iPads in exchange for a person's agreement to enrol in a course. They provided inaccurate advice regarding courses and the consequences of enrolment. In many instances, these students were not advised that VET FEE-HELP was a government loan that had to be repaid based on the student's income, so that if they reached a particular threshold this would trigger a requirement for repayment through the Australian Taxation Office. These aggressive marketing techniques were targeted at people who were not looking for a particular field of study but were enticed by the rewards on offer rather than genuine students focused and prepared to complete their course of study. I am aware of the case of one student, Gabrielle, who has bipolar disorder. Under the VET FEE-HELP program, she was contacted by an education agent acting for a training provider and encouraged to enrol in a Diploma of Business course. The agent convinced Gabrielle that the course was 'free'. Gabrielle was also offered a 'free' laptop as an added incentive to enrol in the course. Before the course commenced Gabrielle realised that due to her condition she really wouldn't be able to undertake any course at that time. Gabrielle contacted the training provider to explain her circumstances and asked to be withdrawn. Gabrielle said that the training provider convinced her to change courses and she subsequently enrolled in a Diploma of Counselling course. Realising her mistake, Gabrielle contacted the provider again and asked to be withdrawn from the second course. The provider did not action either of her requests to cancel her enrolments and Gabrielle incurred VET FEE-HELP debts of over $20,000 for the two courses. Gabrielle submitted an unacceptable conduct application to the department to have the debts cancelled. This legislation will help ensure that those students, like Gabrielle, who were ripped off by the unscrupulous providers that were allowed to flourish under Labor's poorly designed program, can have their debts cancelled by the department. Increased regulation of Commonwealth assistance to VET students The changes in this legislation build on earlier work from the government to clean up Labor's mess. The Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP Reform) Act 2015 and the Higher Education Support (VET) Guideline 2015 commenced on 1 January 2016, and began the process of strengthening the safeguards within the VET FEE-HELP scheme to address this exploitation. These reforms included introduction of the concept that the exploitative practices of providers amounted to 'unacceptable conduct'. Where a student successfully claimed unacceptable conduct occurred on or after 1 January 2016, the student's VET FEE-HELP debt was remitted. This went some way to limiting the most exploitative practices of VET FEE-HELP through 2016, but only applied to the 'unacceptable conduct' of providers post 1 January 2016. From 1 January 2017, the VET FEE-HELP scheme was closed to new students, and no new applications to the scheme have been accepted from that date. It was replaced by the VET Student Loans program, which introduced greater regulatory controls and eligibility requirements to ensure that genuine VET students would benefit and unscrupulous providers would not. VET FEE-HELP scheme oversight Another essential reform was the establishment of the VET Student Loans Ombudsman on 1 July 2017 under the Education and Other Legislation Amendment Act (No.1) 2017. The ombudsman is dedicated to receiving and addressing VET student complaints. The VET Student Loans Ombudsman and the Department of Education and Training have already identified a significant number of students who cannot have their debt remitted under existing legislation, even though they are clearly the victims of inappropriate conduct by VET providers or their agents. As these cases came to light it became clear that the government must address this inequity, which will continue to damage the reputation of Australia's VET sector if left unresolved. VET FEE-HELP scheme remedy This bill aims to remedy the damage caused to these students and restore faith in Australia's skills and training system. The measures in the bill also reaffirm the government's commitment to the long-term viability of the VET sector. It is essential for the government to ensure that there is no financial burden imposed on those who were unfairly caught up in the disreputable conduct that undermined the VET FEE-HELP scheme. While this measure will impose a cost, over the longer term the restoration of Australia's reputation in VET through ensuring we address this inequity will reap greater benefits. Contents of the b ill The bill will provide a remedy for students who incurred VET FEE-HELP debt through the inappropriate conduct of their VET provider or their agents, by: introducing a new discretionary power to enable the secretary of the department administered by the minister administering the Higher Education Support Act 2003 (currently, the Secretary of the Department of Education and Training) to re-credit a person's FEE-HELP balance where the person incurred a VET FEE-HELP debt as a result of inappropriate conduct by a VET provider or its agent. The inappropriate conduct may have occurred at any time during the operation of the VET FEE-HELP scheme, providing a remedy for any student debtor impacted by inappropriate conduct. This discretionary power may be exercised by the secretary on application by a person, or, on the secretary's own initiative, which will allow for more streamlined re-crediting where groups of students are found to be similarly impacted; facilitating amendments to the VET guidelines, a legislative instrument made by the minister under HESA, to specify matters to which the secretary must have regard when considering whether it is reasonably likely that the VET provider or its agents engaged in inappropriate conduct; and empowering the Commonwealth to recover from the VET provider an amount that is equivalent to the debt remitted, in circumstances where the VET provider treated the student as entitled to VET FEE-HELP assistance when they were not entitled to it. Whilst it is expected that all student complaints will be resolved by 31 December 2020, this is difficult to predict at this time. Therefore the bill provides flexibility for the VET guidelines to prescribe a later date, which also allows appropriate management of costs and resourcing. This bill is about cleaning up the mess of the former Labor government, whose VET FEE-HELP loans scheme saw thousands of Australian students ripped off. The coalition recognises the valuable work of the vocational education sector who are training and upskilling Australian workers. We are ensuring that their reputation is not further damaged by the actions of unscrupulous operators who flourished under Labor's poorly designed scheme. Most importantly, we are ensuring that vulnerable Australians ripped off under Labor's program can have their debts cancelled. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2018 31

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2018

First Reading 31 Second Reading 31 12:40 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I am pleased to introduce the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2018. This bill demonstrates the commitment this government made in 2016 and 2017 to put veterans first and continues on measures we introduced earlier this year under the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No.1) Act 2018 and the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Veteran-centric Reforms No.2) Act 2018. The bill is designed to improve outcomes for serving Australian Defence Force members, veterans and their families, and will ensure that essential services are available to veterans when they need it. As the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, I recognise the Australian community has a clear expectation that veterans and their families will be well looked after. This bill will: extend claim avenues to include the Chief of Defence Force; resolve veterans' claims more quickly by strengthening the ability of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to obtain information from third parties; and expedite lump sum exemptions for veterans by simplifying DVA and Department of Human Services processes. Schedule 1 of the bill would amend the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 to enable the Chief of the Defence Force to make a claim for liability on behalf of a current serving Australian Defence Force member where the member suffers a service injury or disease and agrees to the Chief of the Defence Force or his delegate making the claim. This amendment would provide an alternative way that a claim for liability may be made. In some cases, it may facilitate an earlier acceptance of liability. The amendment is intended to benefit veterans by minimising some of the difficulties that may be encountered when making an initial claim for liability some time after the injury was sustained or the disease contracted. Veterans will also benefit in having their future claims for related diseases and conditions that manifest after their service more easily accepted. For example, if DVA accepts a knee injury at the time of the injury via a claim from the CDF, accepting osteoarthritis of the knee in the future will be much easier. DVA will be able to use the additional claim data at the point of injury to better inform decisions around trends in injuries and onset of other conditions. This may inform later policy on simplifying and streamlining the claims process. This measure introduced today demonstrates that the government is determined to ensure veterans and their families will continue to be the focus for many years to come. Schedule 2 of the bill would enable the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to obtain information in determining a claim for compensation under the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related) Claims Act 1988, or the DRCA. Veterans can be adversely affected when information critical to their claim is not provided by third parties. These provisions will provide veterans and their families with easier access to information relevant to their compensation claims. The provisions will require Commonwealth, state or territory departments, authorities and other persons, such as current or former treatment providers, or other parties to provide information on request of the commission. This will ensure that the commission has access to all the information necessary to make decisions on claims. The amendments would bring the DRCA in line with the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 and the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. Schedule 3 would improve administrative practices in the Department of Veterans' Affairs concerning income support clients and the exempting of certain lump sum payments from the income test. The amendments to the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986would allow certain exempt lump sum determinations made by the secretary for social services to apply to income support clients where the determination is consistent with Department of Veterans' Affairs legislation and policy. Currently, the Repatriation Commission makes separate, yet identical, exempt lump sum determinations for payments that have already been exempted under the Social Security Act 1991by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services. For example, the Department of Social Services made an exempted lump sum determination in relation to payments to the stolen generation. These payments are exempt from the income test. Previously, DVA would then draft an identical instrument and register it so the same exemption could apply to DVA income support clients. Under the new arrangements, DSS will advise DVA of its determination, which will be applied to DVA income support clients without the requirement to register an additional instrument. The Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986will retain the authority for the Repatriation Commission to make a determination to specify an exempt lump sum is an amount that the Repatriation Commission determines to be an exempt lump sum. The amendment will not change the current exclusions of the determination as it applies to companies, trusts and primary production. Each of these amendments will mean better outcomes for veterans and their families. I commend this bill. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018 32

Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018

First Reading 32 Second Reading 32 12:46 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Foreign Investors Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018, implements measures announced by the government to protect the integrity of Australia's corporate tax system. Most taxpayers comply with Australia's tax rules and pay their fair share of tax here. However, some foreign investors have been using complex arrangements known as stapled structures and other broader tax concessions to extract profits from Australian businesses almost tax free. This is done by converting trading income into more favourably taxed passive income in land-rich sectors such as infrastructure. Combined with existing tax concessions for foreign pension funds and sovereign wealth funds, some foreign investors can achieve tax rates well below 15 per cent on all their Australian business income—in some cases, tax free. These tax benefits are only available to foreign investors and place Australian investors and businesses at a competitive disadvantage. Because these concessions are only available to foreign investors, it results in a two-tiered tax system that distorts investment decisions and biases investment towards land-rich industries. Staples and these broad tax concessions pose serious threats to the integrity of Australia's corporate tax system. Use of staples has spread in industries such as infrastructure, property, renewable energy and agriculture. Meanwhile, access to a concessional withholding tax rate for foreign investors has spread much further than ever intended, especially in the agricultural and residential housing sectors. Hundreds of millions in revenue is being forgone. Left as is, this could grow in the order of billions. Australia has some of the strongest taxation integrity rules in the world. The government has already introduced a raft of key initiatives, such as the multinational anti-avoidance law, the diverted profits tax and country-by-country reporting. The measures in this bill build on the government's work in protecting the integrity of Australia's corporate tax system. It is important that everyone pays their fair share of tax to ensure the government is able to fund the vital infrastructure and services that Australians deserve. The bill neutralises the tax benefits delivered by staples by ensuring active business income is taxed at the top corporate rate. The government's intention in introducing this package is clear—active income that is converted to passive income should not have access to concessional rates. The Australian Taxation Office will closely monitor this area to ensure that this is the case and will take strong action if necessary. Consistent with the Australian Taxation Office's taxpayer alert, the government expects that our anti-avoidance tax laws, known as part IVA of the tax legislation, will continue to apply to egregious tax-driven arrangements such as royalty staples. The bill introduced today delivers on our promise to protect the integrity of the Australian corporate tax system and ensure taxpayers' dollars are spent prudently. Schedule 1 to the bill ensures that trading income that is converted to passive income via a stapled structure, and income from agricultural land and residential housing (other than affordable housing) will be taxed at the corporate tax rate. It neutralises the tax benefits of stapled structures and prevents trading businesses from accessing a 15 per cent tax rate on active business income distributed to foreign investors. It also ensures that foreigners that invest in Australian agricultural and residential property don't get a tax advantage over domestic investors. The government recognises that there are some sectors where incentives are justified to attract foreign investment in the Australian economy. Accordingly, a 15-year exception is available from this element of the package for new, government approved nationally significant infrastructure staples. Support is also provided to improve housing affordability by encouraging foreign investment into affordable rental housing. Schedule 1 will apply from 1 July 2019. To manage the impact on existing investments, transitional arrangements are available for existing staples of seven years for ordinary business staples and 15 years for economic infrastructure assets. Managed investment trusts investing in residential housing will have access to a transitional arrangement until 1 October 2027. Schedule 2 amends the thin capitalisation rules to prevent foreign investors from using 'double gearing' structures to convert their active business income to interest income, which is taxed at 10 per cent or less. These structures undermine our thin capitalisation limits. They use layers of trusts or partnerships to convert, frankly, equity to debt, resulting in overall gearing levels in excess of the thin capitalisation limits. The changes will group together these structures so they cannot double gear their investments. Schedule 2 will apply to income years commencing on or after 1 July 2018 with no transitional period as the amendments close a clear technical loophole in the law. Schedules 3 and 4 limit the existing tax exemptions for foreign pension funds and sovereign wealth funds. Australia's current tax exemptions in these areas are too generous. Most countries do not provide reciprocity through such broad tax concessions. This means that foreign sovereign investors and foreign pension funds generally receive a much greater benefit when they invest in Australia than we receive when our sovereign wealth funds and super funds invest in other countries. Schedules 3 and 4 will limit these exemptions to passive income and portfolio investments only—typically interests of less than 10 per cent. These changes will take effect from 1 July 2019. A seven-year transition period will be available for existing investments held by foreign pension funds, and foreign government investors that held a valid ruling on 27 March 2018 in respect of their investments. The bill is estimated to have a gain to revenue of $400 million over the forward estimates. Moreover, the package protects the revenue base going forward. These measures have been carefully developed through extensive consultation with industry groups, businesses and state governments throughout 2017 and 2018. Together the measures being implemented by this bill strengthen and protect the integrity of Australia's corporate tax base. Full details of the measures are of course contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Income Tax (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Amendment Bill 2018 34

Income Tax (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Amendment Bill 2018

First Reading 34 Second Reading 34 12:53 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill amends the Income Tax (Managed Investment Trust Withholding Tax) Act 2008 to ensure that fund payments that are attributable to non-concessional managed investment trust income will be subject to managed investment trust withholding tax at the top corporate tax rate. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Income Tax Rates Amendment (Sovereign Entities) Bill 2018 34

Income Tax Rates Amendment (Sovereign Entities) Bill 2018

First Reading 34 Second Reading 34 12:54 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill amends the Income Tax Rates Act 1986 to set the rate of tax payable in respect of the taxable income of a sovereign entity. Unless another existing tax rate applies to the relevant taxable income or sovereign immunity applies, sovereign entities will pay tax in respect of their taxable income at a rate of 30 per cent. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018 35

Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2018

First Reading 35 Second Reading 35 12:55 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Everyone needs to pay their fair share of tax to ensure the government is able to fund the vital infrastructure and services that Australians deserve. Most taxpayers pay their way, but integrity rules are necessary to ensure those taxpayers that don't are caught, and made to pay their due. Thanks to the work of the coalition government, Australia has some of the strongest rules in the world to combat tax avoidance, but more can be done to make sure multinationals pay their fair share of tax. The government, through the measures in this bill, will continue to strengthen integrity rules and close loopholes while ensuring taxpayers funds are spent prudently, amending the R&D Tax Incentive to ensure it is well targeted and cost effective. The amendments to the R&D Tax Incentive, in schedules 1, 2 and 3 of this bill, respond to the findings of the 2016 Review of the programme, which found that it is falling short of meeting its stated objectives of generating additionality and spillovers. Schedule 1 amends the income tax law to better target the R&D Tax Incentive and encourage firms to increase the proportion of their business devoted to genuine, additional R&D expenditure. From 1 July 2018, R&D claimants with a turnover of $20 million or more will receive an R&D premium which provides support for R&D that is tied to the incremental intensity of that R&D expenditure as a proportion of total expenses. This will encourage more companies to increase their R&D expenditure, providing increasing benefits as their R&D intensity rises and driving additionality in R&D. Additionally, the maximum amount of R&D expenditure eligible for concessional R&D tax offsets, will increase from $100 million to $150 million per annum, ensuring more companies can take advantage of the program. Companies with aggregated annual turnover below $20 million will continue to be supported by the government through a fixed R&D premium of 13.5 percentage points above a claimant's company tax rate and will have annual cash refunds capped at $4 million, with R&D expenditure on clinical trials exempt from the cap. Schedule 2 of this bill will strengthen existing rules in the income tax law to ensure R&D claimants cannot inappropriately obtain a tax benefit from the program, thereby improving integrity and ensuring that R&D offsets are recouped appropriately. Schedule 3 of this bill amends the Industry Research and Development Act 1986and the Industry Research and Development Decision-making Principles 2011 to improve public accountability and transparency for claimants under the program, as well as make changes to compliance and administration. These changes include improved transparency through public disclosure of claimant details and the R&D expenditure they have claimed. Importantly, there is an explicit two year delay for the publishing of claimant details and their claimed R&D expenditure to protect commerciality. Furthermore, the board of Innovation and Science Australia will have the ability to make public determinations and binding decisions about R&D eligibility, providing greater clarity to claimants as to what is eligible. Extensions of time for R&D applications, registrations and reviews will be limited to three months, preventing taxpayers from seeking R&D benefits for activities that occurred in the past. Thanks to the significant action taken over successive years by this government, Australia now has some of the strongest rules in the world to combat tax avoidance, but we will not be resting on our laurels when it comes to making sure multinationals pay their fair share of tax. Schedule 4 to this bill introduces new provisions to improve the integrity of Australia's thin capitalisation rules. These rules prevent multinationals from shifting profits offshore by having unrealistically high levels of debt in Australia in order to claim excessive interest deductions. The bill strengthens the integrity of the thin capitalisation rules by improving the reliability of asset valuations used to support debt deductions. It does this by requiring multinationals to rely on the asset values that they publish in their financial statements. This will remove the ability for multinationals to adopt a special valuation solely for tax purposes. The bill will also remove the ability for multinationals to justify their debt using assets that cannot be recognised for accounting purposes. No new revaluations are allowed after 7.30 pm on 8 May 2018. To allow companies to adjust to the changes, transitional rules will allow companies to rely on asset valuations that were made prior to this time until the last day before the start of their income year commencing on or after 1 July 2019. The bill also amends the income tax law to ensure that all foreign controlled consolidated groups are recognised as inward investing entities, even if they have foreign operations. This will confirm that these entities are not able to use thin capitalisation tests that are only appropriate for outbound investors. Schedule 4 of the bill will ensure that multinationals cannot structure to avoid our tax integrity rules, which are among the strongest in the world. These changes build on the already strong arsenal the ATO has to deal with multinational tax avoidance, which includes the diverted profits tax, the Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law and the Tax Avoidance Taskforce. Schedule 5 of the bill levels the playing field for hotel bookings in Australia by ensuring offshore sellers of Australian hotel accommodation calculate their GST turnover in the same manner as local sellers from 1 July 2019. This measure follows the government's decision to extend the GST to digital products and other services from 1 July 2017 and to low-value imported goods from 1 July 2018. Schedule 6 ensures luxury car tax is not payable on cars that are re-imported into Australia after being refurbished overseas. It will mean that, from 1 January 2019, the same tax treatment will apply to luxury cars, irrespective of where the car is refurbished. Schedule 7 of the bill amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997to extend the definition of a 'significant global entity' to include members of large business groups headed by proprietary companies, trusts, partnerships, investment entities and individuals. The significant global entity is a concept to define, generally speaking, a group of entities under the control of a large multinational. Such groups are a key focus for tax authorities to prevent profit-shifting. Many of the significant measures undertaken by this government to tackle multinational tax avoidance rely on the significant global entity definition. These include the Multilateral Anti-Avoidance Law, the diverted profits tax, and penalties applying to false or misleading statements, late lodgement or tax schemes. Significant global entities are also required to prepare general purpose financial statements. Extending the definition will ensure that multinationals cannot structure to avoid our multinational tax integrity rules, which remain amongst the strongest in the world. This bill will help ensure taxpayers pay their fair share of tax, close loopholes and ensure programs delivered through the tax system give the greatest returns for taxpayers, demonstrating the government's commitment to continually strengthening our tax system. Full details of these measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018 36

Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018

First Reading 36 Second Reading 36 13:03 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill enhances the integrity of Australia's tax system through implementing the government's response to the Black Economy Taskforce's final report. The Black Economy Taskforce was established in December 2016 to develop a whole-of-government response to tackling the black economy. The black economy includes businesses and individuals who operate outside the tax and regulatory system and avoid their withholding and reporting obligations or deliberately under-report income. Participation in the black economy undermines community trust in the tax system, gives some businesses an unfair competitive advantage and puts pressure on the margins of honest businesses. Failing to report income or the under-reporting of income are black economy activities targeted in this bill. The government is committed to a fair tax system which supports honest businesses and ensures that black economy participants cannot escape paying their fair share of tax. Schedule 1 to this bill introduces changes to tax deductibility rules, denying a tax deduction for certain payments where an entity, such as an employer, fails to comply with their withholding and reporting obligations, encouraging nonreporting or underreporting of incomes by their employees and contractors. Some businesses can currently claim deductions for expenses even where the business does not comply with withholding obligations in respect of the expense, such as paying undeclared cash-in-hand wages to employees or paying contractors without withholding tax where an ABN is not provided. This sends a conflicting message about the legitimacy of these actions. Denying deductions in cases where these obligations are completely disregarded provides a strong financial disadvantage to this behaviour and will send a message that black economy behaviours are not legitimate activities. Schedule 2 to this bill extends the taxable payment reporting system to the road freight, security and IT industries. Contractors in these industries are considered by the Black Economy Taskforce and the ATO to be at higher risk of not reporting their income. From 1 July 2019, entities that provide a road freight, security or IT service will be required to report to the ATO payments made to other entities that they engage to undertake that service on their behalf. Reporting these payments will improve transparency and bring reporting obligations for payments to contractors more into line with the pay-as-you-go reporting obligations on employers for payments to their employees. The taxable payment reporting system already operates in the building and construction industry, where it has resulted in improved contractor compliance. In the 2017-18 budget, the taxable payment reporting system was also extended to the cleaning and courier industries. The information reported to the ATO will be used for prefilling purposes to make it easier for contractors to lodge their income tax returns and for data-matching purposes to ensure contractors comply with their tax obligations, such as correctly lodging their income tax returns and meeting business activity statement obligations. The bill also targets the illegal tobacco trade and complements legislation introduced by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs, which is designed to combat imported illicit tobacco. Through effective tobacco control policy, Australia has become a world leader in reducing smoking rates. This has improved the health and wellbeing of Australians and reduced the social costs associated with smoking. It is important to support Australia's tobacco control policies with effective measures to combat illicit tobacco, which is a major source of funding for criminal organisations, and to ensure that tobacco products are taxed effectively to continue reducing the prevalence of smoking. Schedule 3 is part of a suite of measures the government announced in the 2018-19 budget to combat illicit tobacco. It moves the taxing point of domestically manufactured tobacco to the point of manufacture rather than when the tobacco enters home consumption. This schedule in conjunction with the bill introduced by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs creates a comprehensive approach to stop tobacco leakage from warehouses, which is the primary cause of the illicit tobacco trade. Stopping warehouse leakage will withdraw a major source of funding for organised crime and remove the supply of illicit tobacco to the market. Further explanations of these measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Excise Tariff Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at Manufacture) Bill 2018 37

Excise Tariff Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at Manufacture) Bill 2018

First Reading 37 Second Reading 38 13:08 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill and schedule 3 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018 are part of a package of measures announced in the 2018-19 budget implementing recommendations of the Black Economy Taskforce to disrupt and deter the illicit tobacco market. This bill alters the Excise Tariff Act 1921 to enable the calculation of duty payable once the taxing point is moved under the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018. While there is currently no domestic tobacco manufacturing, this bill complements legislation introduced by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs, which is designed to combat the evasion of duty in respect of illegally imported tobacco. As well as continuing to reduce the prevalence of smoking and ensuring tobacco products are taxed correctly, it is also important to stop the illicit tobacco trade. This bill, in conjunction with the black economy package and the bill introduced by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs, creates a comprehensive approach to stop tobacco leakage from warehouses, which is the primary cause of the illicit tobacco trade. The full details of the measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Design and Distribution Obligations and Product Intervention Powers) Bill 2018 38

Treasury Laws Amendment (Design and Distribution Obligations and Product Intervention Powers) Bill 2018

First Reading 38 Second Reading 38 13:10 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Design and Distribution Obligations and Product Intervention Powers) Bill 2018 fulfils the government's commitment to implement two recommendations from the Financial System Inquiry, Improving Australia's Financial System 2015. The design and distribution obligations and the product intervention power will ensure that financial products are targeted and sold to the right consumers, and, where products are inappropriately targeted or sold, ASIC will be empowered to intervene in the distribution of the product to prevent harm to consumers. The Morrison government is committed to fostering an environment where businesses adopt and maintain a customer-centric culture and where all Australians have a fair go when dealing in financial products. Our approach to banking and financial services reform has focused on ensuring that the financial system is resilient, efficient and fair. While the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry is continuing, our government is getting on with the job of protecting consumers. All Australians interact with the financial system in some way—through using basic banking products, buying insurance or engaging in retirement planning. This reform benefits every single one of us. It means that we can approach the financial system with confidence that firms have generally approached product design and distribution with customers in mind. The design and distribution obligations are designed to ensure that financial products are targeted and sold to the right customers. This will be achieved by requiring issuers of financial products to identify target markets for their products, having regard to the features of products and consumers in those markets. Issuers will also be required to select appropriate distribution channels and periodically review arrangements to ensure they continue to be appropriate. In addition, distributors of financial products will need to put in place reasonable controls to ensure products are distributed in accordance with the identified target markets. The obligations will apply in a scalable and flexible manner, allowing firms to take into account the specific characteristics of products in meeting the requirements of the regime. As identified by the financial system inquiry, this reform will deliver benefits to industry, including by strengthening internal risk management practices. It lowers the likelihood of there being a need for new, more complex and interventionist regulation in future, promoting efficiency in the financial system overall. But, most importantly, these obligations will encourage issuers and distributors to have a customer-centric approach to designing, marketing and distributing financial products. However, the government knows that even the most comprehensive regulatory frameworks cannot prevent issuers or distributors of products from doing the wrong thing if the regulator is not well equipped. That is why the government is ensuring that ASIC is able to proactively address harm to consumers resulting from poorly designed products or inappropriate distribution practices. Where firms are not operating appropriately, ASIC will have the power to intervene. Specifically, ASIC will be able to use the product intervention power to intervene in relation to a product where it perceives a risk of significant consumer detriment. In considering whether a product, one of its features or a practice tied to its distribution is causing or is likely to cause harm to a consumer, ASIC will be able to consider a wide range of factors. This will provide ASIC with the flexibility to use the power to address detriment that is relatively straightforward or in circumstances where the detriment being suffered by consumers is unique. However, this power will not be unfettered. To ensure that ASIC uses its power effectively, it will be required to consult with affected parties prior to making an intervention. Parliament will have the opportunity to scrutinise market-wide and permanent interventions; otherwise, ASIC's orders will be limited to 18 months in duration. This significant new power will supercharge the way ASIC delivers on its responsibilities to improve the performance of the financial system and to promote confident and informed participation by consumers and investors. It will ensure that ASIC can be one step ahead to protect consumers. After careful consideration and extensive industry and stakeholder consultation, the government is confident this bill strikes the right balance of addressing the risks associated with the mis-selling of financial products to consumers, whilst not imposing unnecessary and prescriptive regulatory burdens. Consumers will now be equipped with further protection and confidence when dealing with financial products. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 5) Bill 2017 39

Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 5) Bill 2017

First Reading 39 Second Reading 39 13:15 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill builds on the government's commitment to improve Australia's financial services taxation regime by setting an appropriate legislative framework for what is the largest managed funds industry in our region. This bill also amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997to update the list of specifically listed deductible gift recipients, and to extend deductible gift recipient status to entities promoting Indigenous languages. Finally, this bill makes changes to intellection property arrangements. Schedule 1 to this bill contains a package of technical amendments to improve the operation of the new tax system for managed investment trusts, commonly referred to as the attribution tax regime. This regime was designed to give greater certainty to investors in managed funds, reduce compliance costs for the funds and enhance overall the competitiveness of Australia's funds management industry. This bill progresses important reforms that ensure the new tax system for managed investment trusts operates as intended. This bill will assist entities seeking to opt into the attribution tax regime by clarifying the intent of the law and providing greater alignment in the tax outcomes of managed investment trusts and attribution managed investment trusts. This bill delivers on the industry's concerns by clarifying certain aspects of the law. It prioritises a package of technical amendments that will provide industry with increased investment certainty, while still ensuring the integrity of the tax system. The government's commitment to progressing these amendments demonstrates our ability to work closely with industry to ensure the policy settings are appropriate, while balancing the need to protect the integrity of the tax system. Schedule 2 to this bill updates the list of specifically listed deductible gift recipients to include Australian Sports Foundation Charitable Fund; Australian Women Donors Network; Paul Ramsay Foundation Limited; The Q Foundation Trust; Smile Like Drake Foundation Limited; and Victorian Pride Centre Limited. Taxpayers who make gifts or donations of $2 or more to a deductible gift recipient can claim an income tax deduction. Australian Sports Foundation Charitable Fund is a registered charity established to support projects where sport is the vehicle to achieve charitable aims. By granting deductible gift recipient status to Australian Women Donors Network, the government is supporting the organisation to provide a voice for gender inclusive philanthropy across all focus areas, including education, health, disability, youth and the arts. Paul Ramsay Foundation Limited is a registered charity established to be the recipient of the Ramsay bequest from the Paul Ramsay Foundation to pursue one or more of the following charitable purposes in Australia: advancing health, advancing education and advancing social or public welfare. The Q Foundation Trust is a registered charity with the principal purpose of advancing education and engagement in science and technology in Australia. By granting deductible gift recipient status to Smile Like Drake Foundation Limited, the government is supporting research into preventing drowning and provides water safety education programs for schools. Lastly, Victorian Pride Centre Limited is a registered charity established to own and operate a centre in the State of Victoria that will facilitate and host support services, facilities and resources for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and/or intersex community. Specifically listing these will give the organisations the certainty they need to fundraise successfully. Schedule 3 to this bill extends deductible gift recipient status to entities promoting Indigenous languages. The extension of this status provides appropriate assistance through the tax system for the public to make donations to these organisations. This measure will enable entities promoting Indigenous languages to be endorsed as deductible gift recipients, under the category of cultural organisations, subject to the entities meeting the other requirements for deductible gift recipient status. This will enable taxpayers to claim an income tax deduction for donations of $2 or more to these entities. Prior to these amendments, deductible gift recipient support was given to 'cultural organisations' that have a principal purpose of, among other functions, promoting the arts of Indigenous persons. However, this did not include organisations with a principal purpose of promoting the languages of Indigenous persons. There are estimated to be 250 original Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages and over 600 dialects. The government has a range of other measures in place to prevent the loss of these languages. Schedule 4 to this bill repeals subsection 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The Productivity Commission recommended repealing subsection 51(3) in its 2016 intellectual property arrangements inquiry report. The 2015 competition policy review also recommended repealing subsection 51(3). Subsection 51(3) exempts licensing or assignment of IP from most of the prohibitions on anticompetitive conduct in the Competition and Consumer Act. The Productivity Commission found that the rationale for the exemption has largely fallen away, as IP rights and competition are no longer thought to be in fundamental conflict. IP rights do not, in and of themselves, have significant competition implications. The measure will ensure that commercial transactions involving IP rights, including the assignment and licensing of such rights, will be subject to the prohibitions on anticompetitive conduct in the Competition and Consumer Act. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission will issue guidance on the application of the competition law to IP rights, as recommended by the Productivity Commission. State and territory approval for the measure was sought, as required by the 1995 Conduct Code Agreement, and all jurisdictions support the measure. The measure will take effect the day after the end of the period of six months beginning on the day the bill receives the royal assent. This transition period will allow individuals and businesses time to review existing arrangements to ensure they comply with the competition law. If necessary, they will be able to apply to the ACCC for authorisation of existing arrangements. Authorisation removes the risk of legal action under the competition provisions and may be granted by the ACCC where conduct is likely to provide a net public benefit. Full details of the measures are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Gift Cards) Bill 2018 41

Treasury Laws Amendment (Gift Cards) Bill 2018

First Reading 41 Second Reading 41 13:22 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill amends the Australian Consumer Law, contained in schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, to introduce a national regime for regulation of gift cards. It introduces a minimum three-year expiry period, requires expiry date information to be disclosed and bans the charging of post-supply fees to provide consumers with greater confidence and make gift cards simpler and fairer for all consumers. At the same time, the reforms will ensure that Australian businesses have one set of clear rules to follow relating to the regulation of gift cards. Gift card terms and conditions vary widely, making it hard for consumers to understand their rights and obligations. Consumers are often frustrated and experience financial loss from expired cards. There is currently no uniform regulation for minimum expiry periods and post-supply fees, with different rules applying across jurisdictions. The inconsistencies have created uncertainty for consumers and a regulatory burden for businesses. On 18 October last year, the New South Wales parliament passed the Fair Trading Amendment (Ticket Scalping and Gift Cards) Act 2017. This law commenced on 31 March this year, introducing a minimum three-year expiry for gift cards sold in New South Wales. Similarly, the South Australian parliament recently introduced the Fair Trading (Gift cards) Amendment Bill 2018 to impose a three-year minimum expiry date for gift cards sold in South Australia. Three years has generally been considered a reasonable period of time for consumers to use gift cards and simultaneously provides businesses with sufficient certainty to manage their liabilities. To date a number of national retailers have already adopted a three-year minimum expiry period or longer terms following the introduction of gift card laws in New South Wales. The bill imposes a three-year minimum nationally, balancing consumer rights and business compliance. It will also require the expiry date information to be prominently displayed on the card. This will ensure that consumers are able to make informed purchasing decisions by having access to the information at the time it is needed and on the gift card itself, rather than on accompanying packaging or on a website. When a gift card is given, it is not necessarily the case that the expiry date information is clear to the gift recipient. The form of disclosure provides the needed flexibility to businesses whilst being clear for consumers. Further, under the national regime the charging of post-supply fees, such as inactivity and balance-checking fees, after the gift card has been supplied will be prohibited. The bill's regulation-making power will also allow the government to provide an exhaustive list of fees for gift cards that can be charged post supply. In addition, regulation-making powers contained in the bill allow for certain gift cards, persons and gift cards supplied in particular circumstances to be exempt from all or some of the requirements imposed by this reform. This will provide flexibility to support industry to adopt innovative marketing techniques to encourage demand and manage stock levels. It will also allow the law to adapt to changes in tech and business activities to ensure essential activities involving gift cards are not curtailed to the detriment of businesses and consumers. It is an offence to contravene the reforms contained in the bill. This will act as a strong deterrent against misconduct that can have serious detriment for consumers, thereby enhancing the integrity of the regulatory regime. A contravention of the minimum three-year expiry period, disclosure of expiry information and post-supply fee requirements carries a maximum penalty of $30,000 for a body corporate and $6,000 for persons other than a body corporate. The maximum penalties are consistent with similar consumer protections in the Australian Consumer Law. Compliance with these reforms will be monitored and enforced by the ACCC. To provide industry with time to adapt to the new regime, the reforms will commence on 1 November next year, just before Christmas. This will also ensure that these important protections for consumers are in place for that important Christmas period. Consumers and businesses support this reform, as it improves consumer outcomes, provides consistency and is workable for businesses. The states and territories have also shown their support for a national regime. Full details of the measure are explained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. COMMITTEES 42 COMMITTEES Corporations and Financial Services Committee 42 Reporting Date 42 13:26 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden by leave—I move: That the reporting date for the inquiry by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services into options for greater involvement by private sector life insurers in worker rehabilitation be extended to 25 October 2018. Question agreed to. BUSINESS 42 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 42 13:27 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright On behalf of the Leader of the House, I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the following from occurring in order to facilitate the national apology to victims and survivors of institutional child sexual abuse: (1) on Monday, 22 October 2018, private Members' business in the House to conclude at 11am, at which time the Prime Minister will move a motion of apology, without limit of time; (2) the Leader of the Opposition to respond for a period equivalent to that taken by the Prime Minister and the debate then to be adjourned; (3) the House to suspend following any further procedural motions in connection with the motion; (4) the House to resume at 2.30pm for Question Time; (5) on Tuesday, 23 October 2018, private Members' business to be scheduled from 4.30pm to 5.30pm in the Federation Chamber in place of time lost in the House on Monday, 22 October, items for consideration to be determined by the Selection Committee when it meets to determine private Members’ business for Monday, 22 October; and (6) any variation to this arrangement to be made only by a motion moved by a Minister. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 42 COMMITTEES Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security 42 Report 42 13:27 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the following reports: Annual report of committee activities 2017-18and Review of the re-listing of five organisations and the listing of two organisations as terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code. Reports made parliamentary papers in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr HASTIE 260805 by leave—I table a short statement in connection with the reports. Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth 42 Report 42 13:28 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth, I present the committee's report entitled Trade and the digital economy, together with minutes of the proceedings. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr O'DOWD 139441 by leave—Digital technology has changed how trade occurs, and it is vital that Australian trade systems keep up with how businesses actually trade today. The Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth undertook this inquiry to find out how well Australia is adapting to the digital era. During this inquiry we heard some of the great opportunities that the digital economy offers to Australian businesses, as well as some of the challenges that the government will face. Businesses will be able to reach entire new markets for their products and services. New business models are being created all the time. The trade system will be improved and streamlined for both traders and government. Trade will become more efficient and barriers will be removed. However, there are challenges too, including cyberthreats. Too many organisations have not paid enough attention to building their cybersecurity and resilience. This is true for both business and government. Much greater awareness of the task and solutions is required. Australia is doing a good job, in some respects, of working with the trading partners and the international organisations to build agreements and systems. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 43 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Gellibrand Electorate: Indian Community 43 13:30 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand The Australian way is to stand beside a mate in need, and we all know that Australian farmers and their families are doing it tough at the moment, struggling to pay the bills and buy feed in the face of a horror drought with no end in sight. Jasvinder Sidhu, a community activist in the Australian Indian community in Melbourne's west in my electorate, saw this suffering and wanted to act. Many members of the Australian Indian community come from agricultural families and understand what it's like to suffer through a drought. So Jasvinder and I set out to raise $10,000 to deliver a semitrailer of hay to send to Australian farmers as a gesture of solidarity from multicultural Melbourne. We're already three-quarters of the way there, and we hope to reach our target at a fundraising event on 13 October. One of the major donors to date has been Ravinder Kaur. In the midst of grieving for the loss of her only son, Ravinder established the Rehmat Sandhu Foundation to honour his memory. The Rehmat Sandhu Foundation raises money for worthy initiatives both in Australia and abroad. It raises cancer awareness, encourages local residents to donate organs and blood, and does countless other projects that help people who are most vulnerable. I've seen the Australian Indian community in Melbourne's west come together to help people doing it tough over and over again since I became an MP. They are an incredibly generous, public-minded community and are always willing to help their fellow Australians in need. They are an incredible advertisement for the success of Australian multiculturalism, and I congratulate Jasvinder and Ravinder. Petitions: Live Animal Exports 43 13:31 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I rise today to table this petition on behalf of the WAFarmers organisation, which represents family farms and business throughout my electorate of O'Connor and more broadly across WA. This petition contains over 980 signatures calling on the House to undertake an economic and social investigation into the importance of the live sheep export trade and to focus on the likely impacts of either total cessation or significantly reduced live export on our WA industry. I give a special shout-out to Tony York, President of the WA Farmers Federation, who's up in the Speaker's gallery today, having travelled to Canberra to speak to my colleagues and seek support for our industry in this place. I thank Tony for being the primary petitioner and for his ongoing advocacy for WA farmers. I also thank former South West MLC Matt Benson-Lidholm for working with my office to compile this petition, and I thank my O'Connor farmers and their friends and families, who have circulated it widely. This petition was launched at an extraordinary meeting convened by WAFarmers in my home town of Katanning. Over 1,000 farmers, transporters, feed merchants and small business people joined together to show their support for the $250 million live export trade and to discuss the impact that the disruption of this trade was having on their livelihoods. In presenting this petition to the House, I draw attention to the uncertainty facing the WA sheep industry and call for support for an investigation into the economic and social impact of any cessation or reduction in live sheep exports, not only for our farmers but for the broader Australian community. The petition read as follows— TO THE HONOURABLE THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES This petition of concerned Australian citizens draws to the attention of the House: The current uncertainty facing WA's sheep industry caused by the suspension of live sheep exports. Farmers, livestock agents, road transporters, feed merchants and other industry participants, are facing great economic uncertainty. This uncertainty, coupled with poor seasonal conditions, sees farmers experiencing real financial hardship. Of further concern in farming communities is the issue of associated agri-businesses either cutting down on staff numbers or even ceasing operations as funds start to dry up. WA sheep farmers engaged in the live export sector are urgently seeking assurances that their farming businesses can continue to deliver the high quality product that has come from WA over many years. The state's farmers believe, however, that they continue to be let down by regulators and exporters. In recent times, public disquiet has reached disturbing levels as farmers are being blamed for animal welfare issues; nothing is further from the truth. The WA farming sector supports the maintenance of live sheep exports together with the continued improvement in animal welfare initiatives. We therefore ask the House to: Undertake a broad-based economic and social investigation into the importance of the nation's and WA's live sheep trade, focusing on the likely impacts of either total cessation or significantly reduced exports. From 985 citizens (Petition No. PN0374) Parramatta Electorate: Creativity Unleashed Expo 44 13:33 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta I encourage everybody in Parramatta and surrounds to come on down to Creativity Unleashed on 6 October. It's a great local expo, originally started by the Community Migrant Resource Centre, that displays our great local artists in the fields of photography, visual art, fashion, poetry and music. This year I'm going to have a stall. A lot of people have come down to my stall at Parramasala for local designers, but this time it's going to be bigger and better than ever. At my stall this year, we'll have Ruth Fattal, who does formal and bridal wear among other things—and there are a few things of hers in my wardrobe; Seewaa Seth with her Masai jewellery; Shipra from Melange Chic—which I happen to be wearing—with accessories and home furnishings; and Ramya from Evaloka, who handcrafts her own beautiful jewellery. We also have Resham from Indie Colours, Vaibhavi from Maa, Patsy from Vouernchea and Mansi from Mash Accessories, who do vegan accessories. They're a great bunch of local designers and absolutely worthy of local support. It'll be in Parramatta CBD at 7 Smith Street on 6 October from 11 to four; 7 Smith Street is the courtyard behind Western Sydney University. I'm not aware of any other events that have been there before, because it's quite new, but it's a really interesting space and it's worth coming down to check it out. These are great local artists. We have so many in Parramatta. We're really fortunate. If we all get behind them, we will see them grow. Creativity Unleashed is on 6 October. Come on down. United Nations General Assembly 44 13:34 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore Firstly I'd like to thank my party members in Gilmore and people across Australia who have sent good-luck wishes and supportive messages this week. The loyalty of those special Liberal branch members is a highlight for me. Thank you for many years of great friendship, and I appreciate each one of you as I make this announcement. Today I am honoured to accept the position as the federal government delegate to the United Nations General Assembly. This opportunity will enable me to see and participate in the important work of the assembly. Other duties in parliament over the last five years have been the foundation of interests and pursuits that make this so important. These include being chair of the Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development; being vice-chair of the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians on Population and Development; hosting international parliamentarians, NGOs and stakeholders involved in the issues of women's health, reproductive rights and access to education and health; as well as women's empowerment initiatives. I work closely with CARE Australia and the International Women's Development Agency and currently mentor a female parliamentarian in Myanmar. I look forward to making a contribution to the discussions and forums that are held by the United Nations and seeing firsthand how STEM education initiatives are being pursued by our regional and global neighbours. In addition to taking on this role, I wish to assure my constituents in Gilmore that I will continue to advocate for their needs, their issues, their concerns and any other problems they may endure. After all, I can work at night; my team can work during the day. Education: Politics and Government 44 13:36 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I'd like to take issue with the idea that young people are necessarily cynical about politics. I don't think that's true, and it shouldn't be. Kids probably don't learn about Pericles at primary school these days, which is fine, but it was Pericles who rightly said, 'Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.' That is the critical thing. You can choose not to be interested in politics and government, but you can't choose not to be affected by it. Young people should be active in shaping their future and contributing their ideas and their leadership. Fair enough, there are times when you'd be forgiven for being cynical, but my experience is that young Australians are interested in our democracy and they are engaged with some of the big issues that will determine their future and will determine our future. In the last couple of months I have sat down with year 4 kids at Beaconsfield Primary School to hear their commitment to stronger ocean protection, and I've done my best to answer the hard-hitting questions of the lively year 6 kids at both Hammond Park and Winterfold primary schools. The knowledge and enthusiasm of those students is a credit to them and to their teachers. Finally, I'd like to give a shout-out to Carol Denny, who teaches politics at Christian Brothers College in Fremantle. Ms Denny's year 12 students have been in touch with me to say what an inspiration she has been. It's great that young people benefit from that kind of expertise and enthusiasm from our teachers. It's lovely to know they recognise it and that they are grateful. Live Animal Exports 45 13:37 Mr BROADBENT MT4 McMillan My community has been justifiably outraged with footage of the past treatment of sheep within the live export trade. I have met with my constituents and heard their concerns. If the export industry is to continue, unacceptable practices need to change so that such images will never be seen again. What the government's done is place new conditions on sheep exporters, including: reducing stock densities; having independent observers on each boat sending back photo and written evidence daily; having independent auditing of pen ventilation readings; ensuring vessels have automatic watering installed for each sheep deck; and reducing the notifiable mortality level for sheep exported by sea from two to one per cent. In 2017, there were 1.7 million live sheep exported by sea, and 99.29 per cent were delivered in good health. But what has been unacceptable is the footage that my people have seen. I'm the member for McMillan. I represent a rural-regional seat. The concerns of my constituents are genuine, and I want to say to each one of the many people that have come to see me, the people that have emailed me and people that have written me cards and letters: if this trade is not cleaned up, if they do not perform what the government has called for, this trade will end. I have heard you and I'm responding to what you've said. Workplace Relations 45 13:39 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons In the past fortnight we've learned that more than 120 plasterers at the Royal Hobart Hospital redevelopment have not been paid for months. Where was the government's tough cop on the beat, the ABCC? It wasn't protecting those plasterers; that's for sure. It was nowhere to be seen. It was the invisible cop, the cop that wasn't there, the cop that was enjoying a doughnut while a crime was taking place under its nose. In fact, if it weren't for the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, the CFMMEU, those workers would still be languishing, waiting for justice. Those on that side take great pleasure in attacking the CFMMEU and its members, the men and women who build our cities, process our timber, sail our ships, mine our minerals and keep our lights on. Those opposite are quick to criticise the union for transgressions but are slow to thank it for the vital work it does keeping worksites safe, enforcing strict quality standards that keep us all safe and keeping Australians paid fairly for the work that they do. Thanks to the CFMMEU, these plasterers are now likely to receive their back pay from the head contractor—no thanks to the state Liberal government and certainly no thanks to the ABCC, the so-called tough cop on the beat, the weakest cop in the country. North Queensland 45 13:40 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson North Queensland is a major economic driver for this nation, but there are many untapped tourism opportunities for new resorts and new experiences around the reef, the rainforest and the outback. There are opportunities in agriculture, through the construction of more dams to open up new agricultural land. There is much more opportunity in the resources sector; we have not even scratched the surface of the enormous Galilee Basin. But these opportunities and the infrastructure needs of the north will never be taken seriously while the state capital is based in and focused on Brisbane and the south-east corner. Brisbane is closer to Sydney than it is to Mackay and closer to Melbourne than it is to Cairns, both geographically and ideologically. Only one senator in this place lives in North Queensland and only one lives in Central Queensland. Compare this with the 12 Tasmanian senators in a state with about half the population of Central and North Queensland. The only way North Queensland will reach its full potential is through the creation of a North Queensland state run by North Queenslanders willing to let North Queensland shine. The only thing that can prevent North Queensland becoming a state is people thinking it can't be done or a government refusing to enable a referendum for the people of North Queensland to have a vote. I know it can happen. I want it to happen. That's why I will be pushing for change within the Liberal National Party to allow a policy to allow for a referendum for the people of North Queensland to have their own state. Khawam, Squadron Leader Lucas 46 13:42 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra Each year, like so many of my colleagues, I take great pleasure in hosting a member of the Australian Defence Force as part of the parliamentary exchange program. Each year I am always amazed at the quality and calibre of our fine service men and women. This year is no different. Meet Squadron Leader Lucas Khawam from RAAF Base Edinburgh. Lucas was born in Syria. When he was 23, he came to Australia to do his masters in engineering. He fell in love with our great country—so much so that he decided to serve the nation and joined the Air Force as an engineering officer. Lucas is a war veteran and has deployed to the UAE, Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar and Bahrain multiple times. Lucas speaks three languages: Arabic, French and English. His cultural awareness and diplomatic liaison skills in international engagements have directly enabled the ADF to achieve its mission. Lucas is the modern face of the ADF, a multicultural and multilingual ADF that understands that diversity is a force multiplier for the security of our nation and the stability of our world. Lucas is not unique. There are so many like him in the ADF. Thank you, Lucas and all ADF members and their families, for your service to our nation. Happy birthday to your lovely wife, Lauren, who's in Adelaide and has kindly lent us Lucas for this week. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I too welcome Lucas. Murray-Darling Basin Plan 46 13:43 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray We understand that MINCo, the meeting of all the water ministers, will be held in mid-December. At MINCo, we're going to have a piece of work from the last MINCo meeting to do with the social and economic tests around taking more water out of the irrigators' pool that needs to be completed. We have it in the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. We have a 450-gigalitre amount of water, which is referred to as the up water. This 450 gigalitres can only be delivered to the environment from the irrigators' pool provided it can be proven that there will be no social and economic detriment to the irrigators or the regions. It was agreed at the last MINCo that we need to develop a very plain English-speaking definition of what constitutes social and economic neutrality or benefit, or, for that matter, social and economic detriment. Once we can get that definition clear, we will be able to apply a very easily understood speaking definition around what constitutes social and economic neutrality. One of the things that needs to be engaged with this is that we need a definition that takes on board the greater benefits and impacts for the community, not just the individual. That has to be very clearly enunciated. Climate Change 46 13:45 Mr WILKIE C2T Denison Nuclear weapons and climate change are probably the only man-made phenomena capable of destroying life as we know it on earth, but you wouldn't know it from the way this government behaves. Just in the last five years, Australia has gone from being a world leader in tackling climate change to well and truly lagging behind other developed nations. Indeed, we have seen a concerted effort from the Liberal and National parties to dismantle everything and anything that even looks like it would deal with climate change. The carbon price has been destroyed, the Clean Energy Target was kicked around and then stopped in its tracks by the climate wreckers, and it was the same with the National Energy Guarantee. And now we have learned that the government are going to dismantle the Renewable Energy Target. What are they going to replace it with? Nothing. That's right. We confront the farcical situation where Australia has no climate policy because the government either find it all too hard or don't believe it in the first place. No wonder many people aren't taking seriously the government's claim to be committed to the Paris agreement. This is a national tragedy because if we don't deal with climate change now while we have the chance then nothing else will matter. Surely our children deserve so very much better than this type of behaviour. Petrie Electorate: Redcliffe Dolphins 46 13:46 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I want to give a shout-out to the Redcliffe Dolphins rugby league team in my electorate of Petrie, who this Sunday will play in the Queensland Intrust Super Cup grand final at Lang Park against the Easts Tigers. Playing in the grand final is a result of the hard work by the players, coaches and support staff. The person who is responsible for bringing the team together, skilling up the players and, importantly, melding their personalities into a single dedicated force and team is the coach. Their coach is Adam Mogg, a former Origin player himself. He has been with the Dolphins for three years, twice leading them to the minor premiership and last year missing out by only one point—a very impressive record. I also want to acknowledge Grant Cleal, who is the football club manager and has been there for nine years. Grant does a fantastic job. He's very dedicated to the club. Bob Jones, who is the president of the club, has been there eight years and knows the heartbeat of the Dolphins. I say to the club manager, Tony Murphy, well done. To all the sponsors and the board, I say congratulations. To all the members and supporters in the Moreton Bay region, I say congratulations from me and the Prime Minister, who was up there recently looking at Dolphin Stadium. The Redcliffe Dolphins have been in 11 Queensland cups and won five. Hopefully this weekend they'll win the sixth. I'll be watching with my boys. Go, Dolphins! World Pharmacists Day 47 13:48 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell World Pharmacists Day is being marked next Tuesday, 25 September. The theme this year is: 'pharmacists are your medicines experts'. I have been a registered pharmacist for 20 years, working in community and hospital pharmacies. I am pleased to support this day emphasising our role as trusted sources of knowledge and advice for not only patients but other healthcare professionals. With medicine now the No. 1 intervention in primary care, it's appropriate that pharmacists play a role in managing medication use over the long term. The expertise of these highly trained health professionals can be better utilised by embedding pharmacists wherever medicines are used and empowering pharmacists to manage medicine use over the long term. Looking at pharmacists beyond dispensing can unlock opportunities for better health care. This year, given the publication of new AF guidelines in the hearts4hearts white paper Time to change the beat, which refers to the increased role in screening for AF by GPs and pharmacists, some pharmacists will be providing blood pressure and AF screenings to open up conversations about medicines their patients may be taking, such as blood pressure medication. It is also an opportunity to discuss potential side effects they may be having with their medications, discuss drug-drug and drug-disease interactions and refer patients to their GPs where appropriate. That's why I will be at Tuggerah Westfield on Tuesday, 25 September, to celebrate the role of pharmacists and World Pharmacists Day. Queensland: Live Music 47 13:49 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane Queensland Labor policies are slowly strangling the live music scene in Brisbane. The most comprehensive study to date, undertaken by the University of Tasmania, shows that the economic value of live music to the Australian economy is over $15.7 billion. An estimated 65,000 full-time and part-time jobs are created in the live music industry, mostly in small and medium businesses, and overwhelmingly those jobs and opportunities go to younger Australians. Live music spending in Australia delivers at least a three-to-one benefit-to-cost ratio. Take one iconic Brisbane venue, The Zoo, as an illustrative example of exactly what's happening right now. The Zoo is an Australian success story—independent and female-owned, operated and booked for at least the past quarter of a century. In that time, it has hosted the likes of Powderfinger, Silverchair, Ben Harper, the Black Keys, Gomez and Violent Soho. We need to continue that fine tradition for future generations, yet The Zoo has recently reduced its trading hours as a result of Queensland Labor's regulations, which are nanny state, one size fits all and certainly not fit for purpose. Opportunities are drying up right now for both musicians and patrons. Other live music venues are being pushed to the wall and are closing completely. The New Globe Theatre announced its closure, and Oh Hello is slated to shut next month. Shamefully, the response of Queensland Labor has been deafening silence. (Time expired) NT Water Safety Week, Veterans' Health Week 47 13:51 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon This weekend marks the beginning of NT Water Safety Week. The National drowning report, released by Royal Life Saving, has Tasmania and the Northern Territory with the highest rates of drowning in the country. During NT Water Safety Week I encourage everyone to think about how water safe they are. The week in Darwin will begin with Splashfest at the Darwin waterfront, a great family event that helps parents to teach their kids about water. Also, there will be Aquafest in Palmerston on the following Saturday. I want to thank the member for Kingsford Smith for visiting Darwin and holding a swimming and water safety forum there not that long ago. As a father of young kids, I know how important it is that our kids learn to swim and are safe around the water. Next week is also Veterans' Health Week. I want to give a shout-out to the work the Department of Veterans' Affairs is doing with ex-service organisations. This year, the theme of the week is nutrition and healthy eating. Everyone in this place is well aware of what can happen when you don't eat well. It's not good for your body or for your mind. I encourage veterans to get along to some of the great events such as the Thai cooking class that is being held in Darwin next week. Boathouse Group 47 13:52 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I rise today to recount the tale of Andrew Goldsmith, who along with his wife, Pip, founded the Boathouse Group. The group was formed in 2008 with the purchase of Palm Beach Cafe. The old boathouse kiosk was converted into a stylish cafe, well known for its rustic stone pots and retro-inspired awnings. Gradually, the Boathouse brand has spread from Palm Beach to Balmoral and to the old kiosk site at Shelly Beach. In 2017, Andrew purchased Patonga Beach Hotel on the Central Coast, which has been maintained as a pub. Key to the success of the Boathouse Group has been its uniquely recognisable external designs and decorations. The Goldsmiths have worked closely with Avalon based sculptor and special effects designer Rory Unite to introduce bespoke umbrellas, chairs and benches so as to give the venues a welcoming feel. The Boathouse Group has become a standout brand due to its focus on providing high-quality service in a relaxed environment. Aside from his business successes, Andrew has also been a well-known member of the Mackellar community and a vocal supporter of a number of local issues. I'm proud to call Andrew a member of the Mackellar community and to recognise his great achievements both in business and in community involvement. Women in Sport 48 13:54 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Yesterday was a typical Wednesday in the parliament. The day began for the Parliamentary Owls netball team playing against the DeafACT team, outside on the parliamentary court. It was a terrific game and, untraditionally, we lost, being beaten by the community team. I'd like to thank them for the match and for giving us the opportunity to play as if we were deaf people to give us some understanding of other people's lives. Last night, at the other end of the day, of course, the Australian Diamonds redeemed themselves against the Old Dart, and they did so in Newcastle, where 5,000 Novocastrians came to watch them play. I want to give a shout-out today to Lisa Alexander and the entire Australian Diamonds squad for a great performance to date. On Sunday they'll be playing at Hisense Arena against the Silver Ferns. I will be there, and I just want to say to everybody: if you can't make it to Hisense Arena, it'll be on Channel 9 or you can watch it on the live app. The Australian Diamonds will no doubt bring home the quad series when they defeat the Silver Ferns on Sunday afternoon. I'll be there with thousands of others. I encourage everyone in the parliament to get behind women's sport. Start playing, keep playing, start watching and keep watching. Boothby Electorate: Brighton Lacrosse Club 48 13:55 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby Last weekend the Brighton Bombers Lacrosse Club finished the 2018 season in truly winning style. All 14 of the club's teams, including their junior women's and men's sides, made the finals, with 10 teams progressing to the grand final round. Of those 10 teams, the Brighton Lacrosse Club last weekend claimed an astonishing seven premierships. I congratulate all of the players and the members at the club for a very successful season—in particular the club president, Jason Webb, for his hard work throughout the season. I congratulate the following premiership-winning teams: the under-13 boys, coached by Andrew Dallisson and Sam Perkins, and captained by Tom Perkins and Will Dallisson; the under-13 girls, coached by Leah Osborne and captained by Kiera Voysey; and the under-15 boys, coached by Joel Tilbrook and Bob Carter and captained by Ethan West and Harry Edwards. Congratulations also to the under-17 boys, led by coaches Toby Raymond and Peter Mathwin and captains Doug Brookes and Cody Rosenthal; the under-18 girls, coached by Beth Varga and captained by Abby Thorne and Adalia Brokensha; and the division 1 women, coached by Jayne Bartholomew and Trish Adams. Finally, huge congratulations go to the Brighton Bombers Lacrosse Club state league women's side for their premiership win against Woodville, with a very close score of 10 points to nine. This is a fantastic effort. I congratulate the entire team, including captain Bron McLeod and coaches Trish Adams and Cassie Cursaro. Congratulations to everyone at the Bombers. Burt Electorate: Bletchley Park Cup, Australian Football League 48 13:57 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt Last week I had the honour of presenting the winner's trophy for the Bletchley Park Cup for the second year. The cup is a competition held by Bletchley Park for a number of local schools to enable students with special needs or disability to have the chance to enjoy the competition of interschool sports like all other students. This year, we had Bletchley Park Primary School, Harrisdale Primary School, and Forest Crescent Primary School from my electorate of Burt joining Booragoon Primary School and Mount Pleasant Primary School. It's an excellent example of inclusive education and providing our students with the opportunities that other students in our schools get. I really want to congratulate Clint McNerney from Bletchley Park Primary School for leading the charge on creating this competition to enable those students and their families to participate in something that other students get to do. This is about making sure all students of all abilities get to participate in our schooling together so that no-one is excluded and no-one is left out. On this sporting topic, can I make this critical point to the parliament today: Melbourne Demons supporters are a pack of whingers. They complain about the cost of travelling over to Perth when West Coast fans and West Coast players have to do it every second week of the competition. So, in the preliminary final this Saturday, I say, as we play the Demons: go Eagles! Calare Electorate: Roads 49 13:58 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Mr Speaker, as you know, for 160 years people have been trying to get a road and bridge across the Macquarie River at Dixons Long Point between Orange and Mudgee. It would significantly cut the travelling distance between these two regional centres. Currently the road is unpaved, and the river means that it's accessible only by four-wheel drive, a crossing that I have made on a number of occasions, including a particularly hair-raising and memorable crossing I made with the member for Gippsland back in 2016. In recent times, both the Australian government and the New South Wales government have committed a joint $200,000 for a feasibility report. We now have those reports back, and they are looking very positive. The preferred option, a bridge over the Macquarie River at Dixons Long Point along with paving of about 40 kilometres of road, would only cost $19.38 million, and the benefit-cost ratio has come in at an impressive 2.491. This is the missing link in the central west road network and would open up the region for tourism, for commerce and for better health services. This road is all about connecting the regions, and there is a huge groundswell of support for it. I would urge all levels of government to back the project, as they know 160 years is long enough. We need to get this done. The time for a new road at Dixons Long Point along with a bridge has come. Let's get it done. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 49 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:00 The SPEAKER 00APG I'd like to inform you that we have joining us in the gallery this afternoon the recipient of the inaugural National Police Bravery Award, Senior Constable Stephanie Bochorsky. On behalf of the House I would like to extend a warm welcome to you. Honourable members: Hear, hear! 14:01 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook On indulgence, I would like to add my sincere congratulations on behalf of the House, and particularly the government members of the House, to Senior Constable Stephanie Bochorsky for her incredible bravery. I'm so pleased it has been recognised in the way it has been in this award. I also want to thank you, as there are others in this chamber who are the children of police officers, as I am, and we know the sacrifices that police officers make every single day. We understand the impacts that has on the families of police officers. When you take those risks, we know there are so many other things pressing in around you in the many other responsibilities that you have. Some nights ago, back in 2015, Stephanie heard screams from a neighbour's home. Though off duty, she rushed into that home and found a child alight, on fire, and another being doused in petrol. It's unimaginable. The children were four and seven years of age. That's enough to take in just at that. Stephanie fought off the man—I'd hardly describe him as one—who was the children's father, removed the children from the house and cared for the family. None of us can really comprehend the terror and the evil of that night and, of course, our thoughts and prayers are with the children this day. It said a lot about what Stephanie believes her service is about. Not just police officers but those who work in our paramedic and ambulance services—my brother is a paramedic—our fire services and our emergency services all have a similar culture. She said, 'I took an oath to serve and protect the community on or off duty, uniform or not, 24/7.' Everyone in this chamber has sworn an oath. You have given us an incredible lesson about how you live up to one. Thank you, Stephanie. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition on indulgence. 14:03 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I thank the Prime Minister for his heartfelt words. I would like to say on behalf of the opposition to Senior Constable Stephanie Bochorsky: you honour us by your presence today. I congratulate you on your award. It was an inaugural award presented through the Police Federation of Australia. The award made by your peers shows the respect of your peers, and I know you value that very much. The Prime Minister has just detailed much of Stephanie's extraordinary story: one moment relaxing in front of the television at home on a Friday night; suddenly, still in your pyjamas and your socks, sprinting across the street and into harm's way; answering a call for help; and finding yourself in the midst of violence and cruelty which is impossible to contemplate or comprehend as a parent. You see a four-year-old girl clinging to the bars of her cot, already in flames, and her father pouring petrol on her sister's face. If it wasn't for you, Senior Constable, confronting the perpetrator, carrying both children from the house, prying the arms of the youngest one from around your neck to soak in the cold water of your own bath at home, both of those girls would not be alive today. It is as simple as that. Stephanie, yesterday I asked you a question I'm sure you have heard a thousand times by now: how did you do it? You replied, as so many modest heroes do, by saying, 'I think anyone would have acted in the same way in that situation.' We all hope that we would, but I think in our hearts we wonder if we could. But, Stephanie, you did. The other thing you said to me yesterday that really struck me is that the rescue was the easy part; it was what came after that was difficult: your memories of the night, the scene set into your mind, the ongoing communication with these poor kids, those wakeful moments of reflection when you have to ask yourself—you wouldn't be human if you didn't, like every one of us here—how could anyone do that to a child? How could any parent do that to a child? I'm not sure there is an easy road back from that and what you've seen. I don't think there is a quick or quiet way to put those things out of your mind. Our police officers, our emergency services personnel—they are jobs that follow you home. Whether you're in uniform or out of uniform, you always wear what you've seen. But in part your off-duty awareness is the reason why these two little children are alive. I think you remind us that there's much that we can do to improve the way we support people who serve our community in the way that you do. Senior Constable Borchorsky, two precious little girls owe you their lives, Australia owes you its thanks and this House owes you a debt of gratitude, because you remind us of what's really important. Honourable members: Hear, hear! The SPEAKER 00APG I thank both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition for speaking on behalf of all members. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 50 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Minister for Home Affairs 50 14:07 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. I refer to an email from the Duty Inspector, Command Centre, Strategic Border Command in relation to the French au pair, stating in relation to the ministerial intervention submission: The ABF does not agree with the content, or think it appropriate that the Minister intervene … Why is this the sort of instance where the minister rushes to intervene? 14:08 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question and I will come to it in a minute, but if I may, I want to acknowledge Stephanie— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on both sides will cease interjecting. Mr DUTTON 00AKI I met Stephanie last night and I presented her with her award. I met Scott. It was an incredible moment. You moved many people at the event last night. It really is unimaginable, as both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have pointed out, but your true inner strength and the way in which you responded is a great credit to you. The recall of the story and your contribution to those gathered last night, I think it is true to say, left a very lasting impression on everybody in that audience. I too join in congratulating you. Thank you. Honourable members: Hear, hear! Mr DUTTON 00AKI In relation to the honourable member's question I have said to this House—and outside of this House before—that I look at each case on its merit. The honourable member made his own judgement in relation to a case that he presented to me, asking me to consider the matter. He was rallying for a convicted murderer, for somebody who had a very long criminal history. He was saying to me that he would like to see a better outcome for that individual. We can go to the member for Watson, who was advocating for a hate preacher. I can point out different members opposite who have come to me over a long period of time, asking me to act. I'll tell you what I've done. I've cancelled 3,700 visas of criminals in this country—people who would have gone on to commit offences against Australians. Mr Brian Mitchell interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Lyons is warned. Mr DUTTON 00AKI I have cancelled the visas of 194 outlaw motorcycle gang members—people who are involved in the distribution of drugs to young people— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will resume his seat. Mr Hunt interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Health will cease interjecting. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Burke DYW I ask him to be directly relevant. The SPEAKER 00APG Just before I call the Minister, he— Mr Buchholz interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wright is warned. Just before I call the minister back to the dispatch box, the minister is obviously speaking on the policy topic. He's entitled to some context, but his entire answer can't be context. He will need to bring himself to the specifics of the question. Mr DUTTON 00AKI I was asked about a particular case. I said I dealt with the case on its merit. That's it. And I do so on many cases. Something's being made of the fact that I dealt with this case within a matter of hours. I've dealt with many cases in a matter of hours. Mr Neumann interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Blair has asked his question. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Kids who are sick, where the department has advised me that somebody should be deported because their tourist visa or their visa had come to an end, a grandparent who's been ripped off, a person who wanted to go overseas for a funeral—I have looked at each of those cases on their merit, and I've made decisions based on the merit of each case. I am very happy to have my record compared to the records of some of those opposite who were involved in the immigration portfolio in the great years of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd period of government in this country. I will have my record compared to any of theirs any day of the week. Morrison Government 51 14:11 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe My question is to the Prime Minister: Will the Prime Minister advise the House how our government is standing with Australian families to keep our economy strong, guarantee essential services and keep Australians safe? 14:12 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for La Trobe for his question. It is true: our government is standing with Australian families. We are standing with Australian families to keep our economy strong because that's how you guarantee the essential services that Australians rely on, whether it's hospitals, Medicare, aged care or any of the services that Australians rely on. Those services rely on a strong economy and a government that knows how to manage a budget, which this government has demonstrated over five years. And, on top of that, we are keeping Australians safe and we're bringing, and keeping, Australians together to focus on the challenges and the opportunities that are ahead. Australian families that are having a go will get a go. That's what fairness means in this country under our government, and that's what we will continue to strive for for the Australian people and Australian families, in particular. We are guaranteeing, as a government, our government, choice in education—affordable education for all Australians, whether it is in state sector or the non-state sector. We believe passionately as Liberal and National parties in the choice of parents to educate their children in the sector that they believe is best for their children and that that be an affordable choice for all Australian parents. In the measures that have been announced by the Minister for Education today, in particular, funding for the non-state sector takes into account the actual parent income, which is relevant to those schools to ensure the funding is directed in the most equitable way. We welcome the support of both the Catholic Education Commission and the Independent Schools Council of Australia, who understand and have been delivering choice for parents for generations and generations. Those sectors have always understood that they have an ally and a partner in the Liberal and National parties, not just because we fund it but because we believe in it. That's why they can trust us when it comes to affordable education. Australian families know we're protecting them when it comes to food contamination through the swift action we've taken in relation to the strawberries crisis that we've seen in recent days, and I thank the House for its support of that legislation. Australian families affected by drought know we're taking every step, like making sure the feed and the hay can get from where it's grown to where it's needed, by simple changes and getting rid of non-commonsense regulations. That means the trucks can keep going across state borders. They can keep on trucking to get the hay to where it's needed, because that's where the families need it. Australian families know that we're acting on family budgets to get electricity prices down and to deliver real tax relief to Australian families. There is more than $1,000 for them in that relief. We're standing up for Australian families— Mr Hill interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Bruce is warned. Mr MORRISON E3L whether it is aged care or life-saving drugs, like Spinraza for cystic fibrosis. That's what we're doing. (Time expired) Minister for Home Affairs 52 14:15 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm that in the last month it has been revealed that the Minister for Home Affairs intervened in a matter of hours for two au pairs on tourist visas, misled the parliament over whether he knew one of the intended employers of the au pairs, participated in government discussions about child care when he had an interest in childcare centres and has doubts about whether he's even qualified to be a member of parliament and a minister in this government? Why is the Prime Minister continuing to support the Minister for Home Affairs? 14:15 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'm asked why I continue to support the Minister for Home Affairs; that was the question. It's because he's doing a fantastic job. That's why. I'm asked about interventions that have been made by our government and, in particular, the Minister for Home Affairs. It may interest the House to know that, during his time as minister when he had responsibility for these matters, the minister exercised a ministerial intervention power to grant 4,816 visas. Now, in just two financial years between July 2011 and June 2013, the member for McMahon, when he was the minister, and the member for Gorton intervened over 23,000 times. Gee! You would need a pretty thick paper to go through all those 23,000 occasions. There is a number that's bigger than 23,000 that relates to the member for McMahon; that's the 25,000 people who turned up on illegal boats on his watch. That is his form. That is their form. I will tell you the other reason I support the Minister for Home Affairs. It is because together he and I, in the decisions we made—I as Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and he as Minister for Immigration and Border Protection and Minister for Home Affairs—cancelled 3,763 visas of noncitizens who committed crimes; 694 were convicted for assault, 270 were child sex offenders, 69 were murderers, 193 were violent offenders and 194 were outlaw motorcycle gang members. We cancelled the visas of people like Alex Vella, who was head of the Rebels Motorcycle Gang. When I became the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, the New South Wales Police Force were very quick to tell me that this was a person who should not be in Australia. I was happy to act on that. The Labor Party sat and did nothing. They did nothing as the visa was renewed. They sat on their hands. When it comes to border protection, the Labor Party are more interested in protecting Australia from au pairs than they are from protecting Australians from violent criminals. Food Safety 52 14:18 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax My question is to the Attorney-General. Will the Attorney-General update the House on the legislation our government has introduced into parliament to deal appropriately with those who seek to sabotage our food supply, guaranteeing Australians food safety and standing by Australian families? 14:18 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I thank the member for Fairfax for his question. It brings me great pleasure to tell the parliament that just before question time the Senate did in fact pass the Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018. That is a practical act in solidarity with our great farming families. Given the very important deterrence effect that should accompany these new offences, an answer here to the question from the member for Fairfax is an excellent opportunity to explain how and why the behaviour that we have witnessed in recent days is so terribly damaging to hardworking Australian farmers and families. That's why the behaviour is now going to be the subject of serious new offences. Particularly, what our government wants anyone out there who is stupid enough or callous enough to be contemplating this sort of behaviour to know is that there is now no longer an excuse of not meaning to cause loss, damage or alarm. That will no longer be an excuse for this type of behaviour. The new offences passed today of recklessly making false statements about the contamination of goods mean that, if someone makes a false statement that induces someone else to believe that it's true and that person was simply reckless as to the fact that it would cause alarm or economic loss or a risk of harm, that person will now face a potential 10-year penalty of imprisonment. These laws now mean that there is no such thing as a harmless hoax when it comes to Australians' food. It's too early, unfortunately, to quantify the harm that has been done to hardworking farmers and families. But, for anyone out there with any doubts as to how harmful this type of behaviour can be, I'd just note that in 1997 Arnott's Biscuits was the subject of a contamination incident whereby its biscuits were removed from shelves for a period of 11 days. Arnott's lost $10 million over 11 days. And who is the victim of the sort of behaviour that we've seen in recent days? It's not a large company or a conglomerate or a corporation; it is hardworking farming families, it's mums and dads, it's market gardeners, it's fruitgrowers and it's orchardists. These people work in a backbreaking way day in, day out to make a living for themselves and their families. Finally, I would just note that under Australian law it has long been the case that you can go to jail for making a hoax threat. You can go to jail for pretending that something in the post contains a dangerous substance. You can go to jail for making a false call into 000. And the reason that has long been the case is that these are not harmless acts. For anyone who is stupid enough to be contemplating anything that resembles a hoax or a false statement, you need to know first that it damages hardworking Australian families and second that you can—and likely will—go to jail. Minister for Home Affairs 53 14:21 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question's to the Prime Minister. Today I met with Captain Jason Scanes and Lieutenant-Colonel Damien Hick, decorated Afghanistan veterans. They're sitting in the third row of the gallery. For five years Captain Scanes has tried to secure a visa for his Afghan interpreter who has served with the Australian Army. These interpreters wore Australian uniforms and helped keep our diggers safe, at great risk to themselves. Some have been murdered since. When au pairs can get visas in a matter of hours, why can't Captain Scanes even get a meeting with the Minister for Home Affairs? 14:22 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable Leader of the Opposition for his question. The reality is that this government has granted many hundreds of visas—almost 1,000, in fact—to people who have helped out the allied forces in the Middle East, in theatres such as Afghanistan and Iraq. There are many interpreters and others whom we have been able to help, and we have been able to settle those people here. I have not intervened in cases where there is advice to me—not advice that I can go into publicly, but advice that is received by me from the intelligence agencies—in relation to particular cases or individuals. I will not act against the national interest or against the national security of this country. My office has met with Mr Scanes. I'm happy to meet with him. But we've made it very clear, in relation to this particular case—and I don't know whether the Leader of the Opposition has sought any sort of briefing on this important national security matter before he's raised it in this place—there are always significant— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will just pause for a second. I'm trying to listen to the minister's answer. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for McEwen, the member for Barker and others are making that impossible. I assure members that I'm going to hear the minister's answer and, if that requires me ejecting them, I will. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Sydney and the member for McEwen are warned. Mr Rob Mitchell M3E I was shaking my head! The SPEAKER 00APG You were interjecting earlier. We can get a video replay if you really need it. The minister has the call. Mr DUTTON 00AKI So I assume that the Leader of the Opposition has not had such a briefing. I'm happy to arrange such a briefing and for him to be provided with as much information as is possible. But I can tell you that the government is proud, particularly through the advice of the ADF and some of our international partners, to help settle people who are worthy of support in our country. But, to finish on this note, there are some cases where I received advice from the intelligence agencies. In those cases, acting in the national interest of our country, I would not issue that visa. The SPEAKER 00APG Now that the minister has concluded: the member for Barker interjected again. He's now warned as well. Great Barrier Reef 53 14:24 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy My question is to the Minister for the Environment. Documents sent on 5 March to the government compliance unit in the Federal Police raised questions of most serious irregularities in the use of $20 million for crown-of-thorns starfish eradication. Some three weeks later, 9 April, it was decided that all reef action funding to the bodies in question, GBRMPA, the RRF and AMPTO, was to be terminated. Is the minister aware that one of these paid for a parliamentarian's political advertisement? Further, since starfish are removed for free and for fun, will we be assured a serious public investigation will be undertaken? I emphasise 'public'. 14:25 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I thank the member for Kennedy for his question. It's a good opportunity for us to talk about how this side of the House is dedicated to the health of the reef, so I thank the member for his question. The member for Kennedy knows that there are a number of threats to the reef. The crown-of-thorns starfish is just one of these. There are issues relating to water and issues relating to farm run-off. On this side of the House we are dedicated to the health of the reef. Australians know that we are dedicated to the health of the reef, but, in particular, those 64,000 regional Queenslanders know only too well that we are dedicated to the health of the reef because they rely upon the reef for their jobs. Also, the reef contributes some $6.4 billion to the bottom line of the Australian economy, so we take it seriously. There are a number of threats, and the crown-of-thorns starfish is just one of those threats. But I can assure the member for Kennedy that I'm very, very happy to work with him. Perhaps you and I can have a conversation this afternoon. Mr Katter interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Has the minister concluded her answer? Ms Price 249308 I have. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Kennedy can move a point of order, but as the minister's concluded the answer we're moving on. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 54 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:27 The SPEAKER 00APG I would like to inform the House that we have joining us in the gallery this afternoon the former member for Kingston Susan Jeanes. On behalf of the House, a very warm welcome to you. We also have the former Chief Minister of the Northern Territory Mr Paul Henderson. Welcome to you as well. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 54 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Education 54 14:27 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson My question is to Minister for Education. Will the minister update the House on how our government is standing by Australian families by giving parents greater choice in education? 14:28 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I'd like to thank the member for Robertson for her question. She knows affordable choice is incredibly important when it comes to education. We all want the best for our children. The Liberal and National parties have always believed that the best way to achieve quality in education is by providing choice in education. As John Howard said: … we have always believed in the unconditional right of Australian parents to choose the nature and the quality of the education they want for their children. We are unashamedly the parties of parental school choice. Today we announced a package that will continue affordable choice for parents. It includes $3.2 billion to rebalance the schools funding model for non-government schools, as recommended by the National Schools Resourcing Board. I'd like the thank Michael Chaney for the outstanding work he did with regard to that review. There's a new $1.2 billion Choice and Affordability Fund for schools that are low fee or disadvantaged, such as those in drought affected areas. I know the Prime Minister is very, very concerned to ensure that those drought affected families can get assistance when they need it, when it comes to choice for their children in the schools that they are going to. There is $170.8 million to Catholic and independent schools for interim arrangements to allow schools to plan with confidence for the 2019 school year. Our schools package provides record funding to government schools, record funding to Catholic schools and record funding to independent schools. Over the course of our funding arrangements, funding will increase by 101 per cent for state schools and by 70 per cent for non-state schools. For students, this will mean opportunity to get the best results from school. For parents, it will mean the choice remains affordable. For teachers, it will mean certainty of funding so that they can get on with the job. What have the independent schools sector said today? They have said that our package has their full support. What has the National Catholic Education Commission said today? They have said, 'The NCEC fully supports the package of measures unveiled today.' On this side of the House, we all believe in the ability for kids to have the best education they can and to make sure that there is affordable choice. But, sadly, we do know that that affordable choice isn't always bipartisan in this place. And we want to make sure that, in your heart of hearts, you agree to this package. Schools 54 14:31 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Minister for Education. Since 2013, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government has denied that it's cutting school funding. Today the Prime Minister stood up and admitted cutting funding to Catholic and independent schools and pledged to restore part of that funding. Will the Prime Minister and the education minister also restore the $14 billion that has been cut from public schools over the next decade? Mr Frydenberg interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Treasurer will cease interjecting. 14:32 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I thank the shadow minister for her question. It gives me the chance to inform the House that, when it comes to government schools, they're getting record funding levels. When it comes to Catholic schools, they're getting record funding levels. When it comes to independent schools, they're getting record funding levels. And it also gives me the chance just to mention to the House what that funding looks like. Commonwealth funding for state schools was $6.8 billion last year. It will be $7.3 billion this year, it will be $7.9 billion next year and it will be $8.6 billion the year after that. A government member: It's going up. Mr TEHAN 210911 That is going up. As a matter of fact, it's quite interesting: from 2017 to 2027, Commonwealth funding to state schools will grow by 86 per cent. According to the Productivity Commission, since 2006 on a per-student basis, Commonwealth funding to state schools has increased by 78.5 per cent. This is an incredibly important point: this is compared to a 7.7 per cent increase in the contribution from the state and territory governments. So, if we need to be encouraging anyone to increase their funding for state schools, it is state and territory governments. Economy 55 14:33 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on how our government's strong economic plan is standing by Australian families and home owners to get a strong start and have a go, including in my electorate of Forde, and is the Treasurer aware of any alternative policies? 14:34 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Forde for his question. He knows that the Liberal and National parties are committed to helping Australian families and that those opposite will only give Australian families more debt, more deficit, higher taxes and fewer jobs. That's why in this year's budget we introduced a number of measures to help Australian families. Our personal income tax plan will leave more money in the pockets of Australian families. Our support for PBS will help them lower the price of drugs. Our support for child care and the new initiatives there will ease the cost of living. We're also working hard to support families when it comes to housing affordability. Our First Home Owner Super Saver Scheme will allow first home owners to more quickly save for a deposit. Mr Bowen interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon is warned. Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Investments in affordable housing on the supply side are helping to get more construction into the sector with our tax incentives. Mr Bowen DZS How many people have taken it up? The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon will leave under 94(a). The member for McMahon then left the chamber. Mr FRYDENBERG FKL We are making it more attractive for older Australians to downsize and to put some of the proceeds from the sale of those properties into their super. These initiatives are working. These initiatives are working because in 2017-18 some 115,000 first home owners got a loan. That was the biggest number since 2009-10. We've heard the Reserve Bank of Australia talk about the positive developments when it comes to credit in the housing market. We know what is being offered by those opposite—a big new tax on housing. It's a tax which will affect 100,000 teachers, nurses and military personnel, and a big tax that affects two-thirds of people who have a taxable income under $80,000. This is what one analyst said of Labor's big new housing tax: 'It would have a negative impact on buyer confidence.' So we know that, under the Liberal-National Party, when it comes to supporting Australian families we'll put more money in their pockets. We will ease their cost of living with new initiatives around child care and health. We will also ensure more affordable housing, particularly for first home buyers. Schools 55 14:36 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Minister for Education. Two out of every three children, about 2½ million kids, go to a public school. Why is the government continuing to cut $14 billion out of public schools over the next decade? And do you guarantee that agreements with states and territories for public school funding will be signed in the next 14 days, as the Prime Minister promised yesterday? 14:37 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I would like to thank the shadow minister for her question. Can I just reiterate again—and this comes from someone who attended a public school for part of their public schooling, a state school; so this is something which I take incredibly seriously—Commonwealth funding for state schools was $6.8 billion last year. It will be $7.3 billion this year, $7.9 billion next year and $8.6 billion the year after that. When it comes to the bilateral negotiations with state and territory governments, as I said last Friday at the Education Council meeting, I look forward to beginning those negotiations as of now, and I look forward to concluding them as soon as I possibly can. I've already had very good discussions with New South Wales, very good discussions with the Northern Territory. I made an offer to the Queensland state minister, Grace Grace, whom I'm sure the shadow minister would know, to fly to Brisbane and begin negotiating with her at any time that she would like as well. Ms Plibersek 83M I seek leave to table a document, Mr Speaker. It is the document that shows the $22 billion cut over the decade by the Turnbull government from schools. The SPEAKER 00APG Is leave granted? Leave is not granted. Ms Plibersek 83M It's your document! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Sydney will resume her seat. Drought 56 14:39 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development. Will the Deputy Prime Minister update the House on how our government is standing by Australian families, cutting red tape and letting common sense drive support for rural and regional Australians during this drought? And what different ideas stifle small business growth in rural and regional Australia? 14:39 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Murray for his question. Tough times need common sense, and that's precisely what's happening. That is what this government is delivering. We came to government with a promise to cut red tape and make it simpler for small businesses to do what they do. They do it best of all the businesses. Small, family and medium enterprises do it best. That's why, from midnight tonight, truckies will no longer have a red-tape burden in getting practical support to drought-affected communities. Larger loads of hay and fodder will be allowed to travel on state and national controlled roads. I have just received a media release hot off the press saying, 'Victorian farmers welcome hay trucking.' The VFF Grains Council president, Ross Johns, said, 'We hope this is the first step towards a harmonised national hay-carting notice.' It is. It is harmonised. It is going to go right across state and national roads. Heavy vehicles up to a maximum height of 4.6 metres and a maximum width of 2.83 metres will no longer require a permit to access the existing state controlled road networks. Previously, access was limited for class 3 vehicles up to 2.6 metres wide and 4.3 metres high. Mr Shorten interjecting— Mr McCORMACK 219646 You might need to list to this, Labor leader. You are a bit of a straw man, but you might need to listen to this. We are harmonising those laws across the state and eliminating permits. The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator notice will remove the need for up to 6,000 consents a year. This is important for our drought-affected communities. This is important for those farmers who need the hay, the fodder, to feed their animals. This will benefit small family businesses such as Peacock's Transport in Rochester, run by Alex Peacock and his daughter, Beth. They cart hay into drought-affected communities interstate. They are good people. Like so many, they have opened their hearts and opened their wallets. That's true country spirit. They want to get on with the job of helping those drought-stricken communities and they see these changes as being very positive. These changes increase their capacity to deliver fodder into drought-affected areas interstate. It's estimated that farming operators will save the equivalent of up to 54,000 days per year applying for and waiting for permits. Across the board, that's 54,000 days. It is equivalent to 148 years of bureaucracy—gone like that. That's what it's doing. It follows investments in programs such as Roads to Recovery and the Drought Communities Program, which put power into the hands of locals to make local decisions. But what will those opposite do? They will put a wrecking ball through all of those rural communities and they will reinstate the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal. That will force family owned trucking companies off the road. It will unionise the trucking sector. I know that's what they want, but why force those hardworking family owned trucking companies off the road? (Time expired) Aged Care 57 14:42 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin My question is to the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care. Yesterday in question time the minister said the funding for ACFI expenditure has continued to increase against claims across all three domains. Can the minister confirm there was actually an average per-resident funding cut of $6,665 per year from 2017 due to his government's cuts, according to a report commissioned by UnitingCare? 14:43 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I thank the shadow minister and member for Franklin for her question. There's record funding of $19.8 billion this year, $6.5 billion more than Labor provided in its last full financial year. The funding for ACFI expenditure continued to increase against claims across all three domains. Funding of subsidies and supplements per person per year in residential aged care is $66,000 in 2017-18 compared to $53,000 in 2012-13, with payments increasing every year under this government. Complex healthcare payments per person per year are up from 2015-16 before MYEFO and the budget with the 2016 changes. On average $19,100 was paid per person in 2017-18 compared to $18,900 in 2015-16. In 2015-16, the figure was $18,900. In 2016-17 it went to $19,500, and at the moment— Mr Albanese R36 Per person? Mr WYATT M3A This is per person, yes. Of course it is. In 2017-18, it's $19,100. Let me quote from a joint press conference between former Prime Minister Gillard and Minister Butler to announce the Living Longer Living Better legislation on 20 April 2012: Look there are some providers who've been unusually claiming levels of money that we don't think they're entitled to and they may be unhappy that the jig is up— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Franklin on a point of order. Ms Collins HWM To be directly relevant he must talk about the per-resident funding for ACFI post their budget cuts. He has not answered that question at all. Mr WYATT M3A Mr Speaker, I've finished. Ms Collins HWM I seek leave to table a document that shows the per-resident funding cut from ACFI due to their budget cuts. Leave not granted. Economy 57 14:46 Mrs PRENTICE 217266 Ryan My question is to the Minister for Jobs, Industrial Relations and Women. Would the minister please update the House on how our government's stewardship of the economy is helping to support the financial security of Australian women and is standing by Australian families? Is the minister aware of any threats posed by alternative approaches? 14:46 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins I thank the member for Ryan for her question and for her hard work on behalf of all of her constituents. She knows how important it is that, as a government, we focus on the economic security of women, and we are. I reminded the House only yesterday about the great strides that we are making for women's retirement income with the flexibility changes that we have brought into the system for working women, something that those opposite would like to abolish if given a chance. We have provided more support for families, particularly for low- and middle-income earners, through our Child Care Package that commenced operation from 1 July this year. And this year's budget included more initiatives for women's economic capability and leadership, with funding for packages like women in STEM to increase female participation in maths, sciences and engineering. It's also very clear that the government's economic plan is working. We have created more than 1.1 million jobs since coming to government, and the majority of those jobs have been taken up by women. There are more women in work than ever before and more women in full-time work than ever before. But, of course, we won't stop there. This year I will deliver the first ever women's economic security statement, which will provide practical supports to provide more opportunities for increasing women's economic security. Those opposite like to talk a really big game when it comes to the economic security of women, but let's actually have a look at their record. When they left office women's full-time employment was going backwards. Those opposite don't just like to hike up taxes; when you look at their record, the gender pay gap was hiked up to 17.2 per cent on their watch. They hate hearing it but it is true. Under our government it has been reduced to 14.5 per cent. It is still high, but it is trending in the right direction, and we are very focused on making it go down even further. They like to pretend that they care about women's retirement balances but the Leader of the Opposition faces a test, because we have a package in the Senate right now that would end the rorts and rip-offs. He has a test, because he could support that package. He could apologise for the fact that when he was the minister he was the one who scrapped the fee protections for people with low-balance accounts. He could make it right by supporting the government's package and increasing the retirement income for millions of Australian women to the tune of billions of dollars, but if he won't he stands condemned by his record. Liberal Party Leadership 58 14:49 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has ridiculed Australians who want to know why Malcolm Turnbull is not the Prime Minister, telling them to just 'get over it'. How can he expect Australians to get over something that has never been explained to them? Why can't the Prime Minister answer this simple question: why isn't Malcolm Turnbull the Prime Minister of Australia? 14:50 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I refer the member to the earlier answers. What the Australian people know is that our government's taking action on the things that matter to them, whether it's a royal commission into residential aged care, which has been our focus this week, or whether it's taking action on the drought— Mr Champion interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield is warned. Mr MORRISON E3L which has been our focus this week, or whether it's resolving the issues in ensuring choice for parents in non-state schools. That's been our focus this week. What the Leader of the Opposition has been doing today and all week has just been focusing on the Canberra bubble. He's been sitting over there during question time, sledging away, carrying on like the usual Canberra politicians that Australians are sick of. Mr Dreyfus interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Isaacs will leave under 94(a). The member for Isaacs then left the chamber. Small Business 58 14:50 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore My question is to the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology. Will the minister update the House on how our government is standing by Australian families to grow small and family businesses, creating more jobs for Australians? Is the minister aware of any threats to the livelihoods of family businesses? 14:51 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for Moore for his question. I have visited his electorate previously, and I know that the member for Moore is absolutely 100 per cent committed to backing small and family businesses in his electorate, as is every member on this side of the House, because we understand how important small and family businesses are to our economy. I'd like to tell the House about the great support the coalition government has provided to the businesses in the member's electorate. Under the coalition government, my department alone has provided over $727,000 to support businesses in the electorate of Moore. This is over a wide range of services. It includes business advisory services. It's to work with researchers. And, importantly, it's to assist with the commercialisation of research. This week I launched the coalition government's Small and Medium Enterprise Export Hubs program. This is specifically designed to help businesses in sectors including manufacturing and food to begin to export for the very first time. This $20 million program, which is part of the Taking Local Business Global initiative that we announced in the 2017-18 budget, complements our Industry Growth Centres initiative. That means that we have growth centres in place in six key industries that are working to make sure that Australian businesses get support—for example, our food producers and, more broadly, in manufacturing. We are working as a coalition government to make sure that we are providing support to them. I would like to acknowledge the great work that our Industry Growth Centres have done. Over 15,000 stakeholders have engaged with the Food and Agribusiness Growth Centre programs, and our centre has funded a number of projects through partnering with industry, totalling nearly $19 million. That's to help generate new products, with potential sales of over $50 million. That growth centre alone has been supporting over 450 small and family businesses—companies that are working at international trade shows, trying to boost their exposure and help them to create more sales and revenue. The coalition government is absolutely committed to supporting small and family businesses. We're backing them to have a go, and we know that when they have a go it's a win-win situation for Australia. It's good for the firm, it's good for their local region and it's good for Australia. Minister for Home Affairs 59 14:54 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware of a report about the no-confidence motion in the Minister for Home Affairs that says: 9NEWS has confirmed Liberal MP Julia Banks was overheard telling colleagues 'supporting that man is not what I want to be doing'. How can the Prime Minister continue to protect the minister when even his own colleagues have lost confidence in him? Is this why the Prime Minister describes his own government as a muppet show? The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House on a point of order? Mr Pyne 9V5 We have quite a large licence in this place in question time, but asking the Prime Minister about rumours is not in order. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House can resume his seat The question is clearly out of order. Private Health Insurance 59 14:55 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker My question is to the Minister for Health. Will the minister update the House on how our government is standing by Australian families by delivering simpler and more affordable private health insurance for the more than 13 million Australians who rely on it? Minister, are you aware of any ideas that would undermine the viability of Australia's private health insurance system? 14:55 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I want to thank the member for Barker, who believes deeply in the opportunity for families to have lower cost and more choice and peace of mind from private health insurance, as does everybody on this side. It is something we believe in. On the other side, Labor hates private health insurance. They took an axe to it last time they were in government and they will take an axe to it if they ever get onto this side of the Treasury benches again. How do we know? Because we just heard from the member for Sydney, and what did the member for Sydney say about private health insurance when commenting on her time as health minister? She said: 'Every promise I made I paid for. How did I pay for it? I paid for it by targeting private health insurance.' Targeting private health insurance—that's what they think of choice. That's what they think of peace of mind. And how did they do this? They ripped away the rebate when they were in government. And who was it who suffered? Pensioners, low-income earners, families—they were the ones who paid, with record hikes in private health insurance under their watch. They didn't care and they couldn't manage and the Australian public paid for their incompetence. In contrast, what have we done? We have just passed legislation through both houses of parliament that will deliver lower pressures on private health insurance and simpler, more-understandable and more-effective approaches to private health insurance. What does it include? It includes better access to mental health care for people in private health insurance, with no waiting time for upgrades, and better access for rural, remote and regional patients. In addition to that, it includes discounts of up to 10 per cent for young people under the age of 30. But more than that, because of the billions of dollars of costs we were able to take out of it through the agreement with the device makers, we were able to deliver the lowest change in premium in 17 years—lower than every year under Labor. All of this is significant, but we think we'll do better again this year. But what Labor is now proposing for the future isn't a 10 per cent, an 11 per cent, a 12 per cent, a 13 per cent, a 14 per cent or even a 15 per cent price hike; it's a 16 per cent price hike in private health insurance premiums. Why is that? Because in the fine print of everything they're proposing is the proposal to rip away the rebate for lower-cost policies. If you rip away the rebate, that will have a massive impact on the lower-cost premiums, which will affect those who are on lower incomes. So, under Labor, pensioners and families will pay more for private health insurance. Morrison Government 59 14:59 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin My question is to the Prime Minister: Why did the Prime Minister describe his own government as the muppet show? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The members for Solomon and Oxley will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Oxley and the member for Solomon then left the chamber. 15:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question. I think the events of about four or five weeks ago disappointed Australians greatly in the way that things were conducted in this place. I'm honest enough to admit that and tell the Australian people straight about it, and I did tell the Australian people straight about that, but I'll tell you what has happened since then: our party is quickly coming back together. We're getting back on the front foot. Ms Rishworth HWA Not you, though. Ms O'Neil 140590 Still can't tell us why you're Prime Minister. Mr MORRISON E3L I hear the jeers and sneers of the members opposite, but I can tell you that the Leader of the Opposition isn't looking as certain as he was two weeks ago, before we came back to this House. He has been sitting there in question time today with his cheeky little sneers, and they're doing their little stunts. They're looking under a bit more pressure than they did two weeks ago. Do you know why? Because our government is getting on with it, and they know it. They know our government is taking decisions that matter to the Australian people. They know that we're focused on the things that concern Australians, like dealing with food tampering. Opposition members: Put your hands up! The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left will cease interrupting question time. I'll have no hesitation in dealing with them. Mr MORRISON E3L They know that we're focused 100 per cent on them, that we're looking through all the dust that those opposite want to kick up as they come into this place. Do you know how many of the more than 50 questions they've asked this week have been about drought? One, just one question on drought. They've been more interested in the politics of Canberra than in the principles, beliefs, values and issues the Australian people are interested in. That's why this Leader of the Opposition has not been able to convince the Australian people over five years that he's up to the job. They know he's a phony. They know he's not up to it. This has been demonstrated by him every day in the job. Our government over five years has been delivering for Australians, with a stronger economy, guaranteeing the essential services that Australians rely on, keeping Australians safe and keeping Australians together. Mr Shorten 00ATG You're on your third Prime Minister. Mr MORRISON E3L I hear the Leader of the Opposition interjecting. I know that the Leader of the Opposition, after our last change of the leadership, said that he has been responsible for dispatching four leaders. Two of them were his own. He said to a colleague on this side of the House after it happened, 'That makes four.' That's how this Leader of the Opposition sees this place. He sees it as a political game where he gets together with his union thug mates, gets around and tries to dispense his power and influence. The Australian people see right through this bloke. They can see right into him. (Time expired) Housing Affordability 60 15:03 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar My question is to the Minister for Families and Social Services. Can the minister outline for the House how this government is standing by Australian families through affordable housing targeted at vulnerable Australians? Is he aware of alternative approaches? 15:03 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I thank the member for Mackellar for his question. He is a very strong advocate for measures designed to assist Australians, including vulnerable Australians, to access the housing that they need, and he has a longstanding interest in serious and important matters of concern to the Australian people, unlike the trivial and silly stuff that we so often see from the other side. One of the key elements of our Liberal-National government policies to support Australians in the provision of housing is Commonwealth rent assistance: $4.5 billion a year to more than 1.3 million individuals and families, supporting people in the private rental market. If we are to be able to deliver this kind of support for people who need it, it is so important that we have a sustainable social welfare system. If people who are eligible for Commonwealth rent assistance come to the Commonwealth and seek it, they need to know that the Commonwealth has the capacity to pay, and that is why it is so important to have a sustainable welfare system, to have a strong economy, so that we can fund the services that Australians rely upon. When Labor was in government, tax revenue was growing at 3.3 per cent a year, but spending on social security and welfare was growing at nearly twice that, and that is unsustainable. Under this government, we're in a position where tax revenue is growing at 5.2 per cent and social security and welfare spending is growing at 3.7 per cent. That is a sustainable social welfare system. We are backing and supporting Australians in obtaining housing through a whole package of measures, including $1.5 billion for the new National Housing and Homelessness Agreement between the Commonwealth and the states and territories. That is funding to state and territory governments which is linked to outcomes in priority areas such as aggregate supply targets, including targets for social and affordable housing, the renewal of public housing stock and homelessness services. We're maintaining annual homelessness funding over three years. What did the CEO of Homes for Homes say? He said: The Government's investment in Homes for Homes demonstrates they are serious about supporting innovative new ways to tackle Australia's housing crisis. It is so important that we have a sustainable social welfare system, and a strong budget and economy, so that we can support Australians in need. That is what our Liberal-National government has consistently been delivering. Morrison Government 61 15:07 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm that in the last month the government deposed the democratically elected Prime Minister for a new Prime Minister no-one voted for, Nationals MPs have been in open revolt against the Deputy Prime Minister because of his failure to deliver an agriculture visa, and women in the government are quitting in disgust or being forced out? Why should Australians pay the price for a government which the Prime Minister himself has described as the muppet show? 15:07 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I wonder if the member can explain why this week he hasn't asked me one question about the drought. Mr Fitzgibbon 8K6 Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister is 11 seconds into his answer. Mr MORRISON E3L When Labor lie about things, we don't have to believe them and we don't have to accept those lies. The Australian people don't accept those lies. What we are doing when it comes to agriculture and the drought in particular is being 100 per cent focused on the needs of those families and towns. On 26 October there will be a summit on drought here in Canberra bringing together the states and territories and representatives from across the agricultural sector. Major General Stephen Day will be here reporting on the actions that are being taken in coordination with the government to ensure that we can deliver not just the relief and the recovery but the resilience that is needed into the decades to come. Just today, one of the actions that we took—and I want to particularly commend the member for Wright for his role as the assistant minister here—was to get rid of a regulation that was going to stop feed from getting to where the farmers need it. This was a very practical thing that we've done. This government is about doing practical things, such as supporting our strawberry farmers to ensure that, after the tampering that took place, we can get that industry and those farmers back on their feet and encourage Australians to get behind them. I appreciate the support of both sides and all parties in the House to ensure the smooth passage of that legislation. Our government is getting on with it. The opposition might not be able to move on and might be stuck in reverse, but we're in drive. Aged Care 61 15:09 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey My question is to the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care. Will the minister update the House on how our government is standing by Australian families to support and protect older Australians? 15:09 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I want to thank the member for Grey for his continued and ongoing interest in looking after senior Australians. This government, our government, has a $5 billion record funding level over the four years of the forward estimates to support senior Australians. It is based around better access to care, better quality of care and better ageing. Aged-care funding in 2017-18 will increase from $18.6 billion and will grow to $23.6 billion in 2021-22. Since our government was elected, aged-care funding has increased by an average of 6.1 per cent. Since the last budget, we have been delivering 20,000 new high-level home care packages, and that will continue to grow from 87,000 through to 151,000, ensuring that senior Australians have access to home care packages that enable them to live within their communities. We're adding an additional 13,500 residential aged-care places and 750 short-term restorative care places. By 2021-22, there will be an overall 74,000 high-level care packages for those who will have those needs, because of the complex health conditions that they have. They are continuing to be supported through packages that range from level 1 through to level 2 and have support through the Commonwealth Home Support Program. It is about looking after them. In addition to that, we have created the new Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, which is going to fulfil the function of bringing all those elements together. Let me tell you that our government is going further to support senior Australians, and the royal commission is one way of doing that. What we want to do is look at those things that the quality agency has also identified as being important areas. Opposition members interjecting— Mr WYATT M3A Whilst members interject, what we need to think about is that the bottom line is about senior Australians in residential aged care and in home care, and that's why we have provided $50 million to support aged-care providers to implement the new quality standards that are absolutely critical to ensuring that people in homes and in residential care are considered and looked after very carefully. It is not about neglecting; it is about considering their needs in a way that is absolutely important, and the royal commission will help to identify the areas in the shades of grey that we need to seriously consider. Mr Shorten interjecting— Mr WYATT M3A That's not a problem, Leader of the Opposition. It is important that both sides of this chamber make sure that those who built this nation are looked after, cared for and given every consideration. (Time expired) Mr Morrison E3L Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 62 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Mitochondrial Disease Awareness Week 62 15:13 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I just remind the House that it's Mitochondrial Disease Awareness Week. I thank the member for Boothby and other members in the chamber for their support during mito awareness week. I particularly want to thank Dr Karen Crawley for the amazing work that she has done as the head of the Australian Mitochondrial Disease Foundation. We all remember Kara, Karen. We remember her every day. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 62 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 15:13 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi Mr Speaker, I would like to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented? Ms McGOWAN 123674 Yes. The SPEAKER 00APG Please proceed. Ms McGOWAN 123674 In this parliament yesterday, I gave a poster to the member for Mayo. The poster encourages women to stand for election, particularly those Independent women. This poster refers to domestic discussions currently taking place in this House about the need for more women in this place. Unintentionally, it seems that I have given offence. So, no disrespect was intended to any members of this place, or, dare I say, to members of the delegation that were here at that time. My sincere apologies to any offence that was taken either by members of this House or by any members of the delegation or related parties. The SPEAKER 00APG I thank the member for Indi. I just must say to her and to other members that it is important to be very mindful that visitors here on the floor of the House in the distinguished visitors' gallery are guests of this parliament and, as I said to the member for Indi, she knew the rules on props. I know that that doesn't prevent other members holding posters, frankly, for photographs. I just ask you to be mindful not to involve the distinguished visitors' gallery. They're not here to be part of any of that. 15:15 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I seek to make a personal statement. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the Manager of Opposition Business claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BURKE DYW Yes. In question time today the Minister for Home Affairs claimed that I had advocated for a visa for a hate preacher. This is incorrect. When I wrote to the department, at no stage did I ask for the issuing of a visa. I did ask for further information on the applicant, which was withheld from me. 15:15 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I seek to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the member claim to have been misrepresented? Mr COLEMAN 241067 Yes, I do. The SPEAKER 00APG The member may proceed. Mr COLEMAN 241067 In question time today the member for Sydney stated that there was a Nine News report that I had made a comment during an earlier division in the House of Representatives as the member for Banks. There is no such report that I made such a comment, and I did not do so. 15:16 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I seek to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the minister claim to have been misrepresented? Mr DUTTON 00AKI Yes, I do, by the honourable member for Watson just at the end of question time then. To provide clarity to the matter, the fact is, as I'm advised, the member for Watson made representation in support of a known hate preacher. The hate preacher has publicly advocated for the execution of homosexuals and the subjugation of women. The individual said in a 2011 television interview— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister needs to resume his seat. If the minister, like anyone else in this House, claims to have been misrepresented, he needs to go to where he's been misrepresented, not to relitigate the matter in any way, shape or form. Question time is over. If the minister is going to go to where he's been misrepresented in another matter, I'll hear the minister. Mr DUTTON 00AKI In the contribution by the member for Watson, he made statements which sought to misrepresent my position, and I'm going to those points. There was a misrepresentation of what I had said in question time. The fact is, as I'm advised, not only did the member for Watson make representations on this issue but his office also called the department as well. The SPEAKER 00APG The Manager of Opposition Business is seeking the call. Does the Manager of Opposition Business claim to have been— 15:17 Mr BURKE DYW Watson No, I'm not rising on a personal explanation. I'm rising on the principle under standing orders that once something has been put under a personal explanation you have the capacity to intervene when an attempt is put again to put something forward that has been established as untrue. What I would invite, as a way forward, is for the minister to table the letter, because he's just characterised it in an inaccurate way, and that will put you beyond doubt so that you're able to exercise your power under standing orders to prevent this abuse from occurring again. The SPEAKER 00APG I say to the Manager of Opposition Business that it's up to ministers whether they wish to table a matter; it's not up to me. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I thought I'd done my last 94(a) for the day, but perhaps not. I say to those interjecting on my left: you're preventing me dealing with a matter raised by your own Manager of Opposition Business. If you think about it for just a second, you'll realise how truly ridiculous it is. I want to address the matter raised by the Manager of Opposition Business. It's not within my power to ask ministers to table documents. That is their choice, and, as members on my left know, if they wish to table documents, they need to seek leave. With respect to the standing order the member refers to, I've addressed this question at length in the House before. It's a problematic standing order for a range of reasons. At least on this occasion, the member concerned has raised the matter, and, if that were to be a matter of consideration, it would be at future sittings, when it comes to the repetition. DOCUMENTS 63 DOCUMENTS Presentation 63 15:19 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 63 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Schools 63 15:20 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a letter from the honourable member for Sydney, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government's chaotic schools policy. I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:20 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney The ATM government, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, has been around for five years now, and five years into the ATM government we still don't have a comprehensive, cohesive schools policy. What we have is a series of cuts and abandoned reforms. Many on this side—I'm pretty sure everybody on this side—will remember the 2013 election campaign and those blue and white signs on polling booths around Australia: 'You can vote Liberal, you can vote Labor, and there will be not a dollar difference to your school.' Those corflutes were very popular on polling booths that were schools because those opposite knew that, if they told the truth about what they intended for schools in this country, no parent would vote for them, no teacher would vote for them and no-one who's at all concerned about education in this country would vote for them. So they promised: 'Just like Labor; we'll be just like Labor.' Then what did they do? In the very first budget they had—that horrible, toxic, destructive 2014 budget—$30 billion was cut from schools. It's there in black and white. They had a graph boasting about it in the budget overview document. They were so proud of the fact they were going to cut $30 billion from schools that they had a special graph showing it, with pretty pictures as well. Of course, that couldn't get through this parliament. We on this side stopped that; we prevented that. Then came Malcolm Turnbull, the great saviour of the Liberal Party. He was going to soften the rough edges of the Abbott-Hockey years. So what did he do? He said: 'We're not going to cut $30 billion from schools. You're right; it's too much. We're just going to cut $22 billion from schools.' I have here the press release that those opposite put out on the day they announced their Gonski 2.0 funding deal, and this is what their very own press release says: Compared to Labor's arrangements, this represents a savings of $6.3 billion over 4 years … and $22.3 billion over 10 years … 'A saving of $22.3 billion over 10 years'—somehow those opposite keep saying that's not a cut. I'm not really sure how they think a saving and a cut are two different things. It was $22.3 billion. Of course, they couldn't get that through the Senate—not quite. What they got through the Senate was an amended saving of $17 billion. That was $17 billion to be cut from our schools. And do you know what? Today's press conference with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Education was finally, at long last, an admission of this cut. It was an admission that billions of dollars have been cut from Catholic and independent schools. And congratulations to Catholic and independent schools, because they've run a strong campaign against the funding cuts; they've had their complaints recognised. But who hasn't had their complaints dealt with by this government? It is the 2½ million Australian school children who go to public schools and their millions of parents and their millions of grandparents and their teachers and their principals. Two-thirds of kids in Australia go to public schools and, in fact, the majority of kids that need extra help go to public schools—74 per cent of students with disabilities, 82 per cent of students from the bottom quarter of socioeconomic advantage and 84 per cent of Indigenous children. Today, they got nothing. Those children got nothing from this government. They got nothing from this government. There were billions of dollars cut—not the whole amount cut, but billions of dollars—and a signed confession to the Catholic and independent sector. There is not a dollar of the $14 billion that was cut from public schools over the next decade. No-one voted for this Prime Minister to cut $17 billion from schools. No-one voted for him. He was the Treasurer who wanted to cut $17 billion from schools at the same time as giving a $17 billion tax cut to the big banks. Australians have rightly said: 'No way. No thank you.' But today's announcement is an admission from this government, finally, that billions of dollars have been cut from our schools. There is no way that this parliament can accept a situation where some of that funding is restored only for Catholic schools and only for independent schools and not for the sector that educates the most children in Australia. There's an admission today that billions of dollars have been cut, and I'm pleased that the government has finally faced up to that. One of the things that is tragically sad about the chaos that is bedevilling those opposite is that it's not just the billions of dollars cut from schools that troubles Australian parents and teachers; it's the fact that, for five years, there has been no reform agenda for our schools. We say, on this side, that we will restore every dollar of the $17 billion cut from schools. That's very important. It's very important to get the funding right, but what is it that we do with that money? When the member for Sturt became the Minister for Education, he threw out all of the reform that the previous Labour government had managed to get the states and territories and the Catholics and independent schools to sign up to. He said: 'That's just red tape. We don't need any of that.' The poor old sucker minister opposite, who has been brought in to clean up the mess made in the education portfolio by Senator Birmingham, has now gone begging to the states. He has this national school reform agreement. It has been leaked, of course. Like everything else, it has been leaked by those opposite. You look at this national school reform agreement, and what does it have in here? It has a whole lot of the reforms that Labor had the states and territories agree to five years ago, which were junked by the member for Sturt when he was education minister. It is back to the future! We've got a great example of time travel here! The tragedy of this is that a child who started high school when those opposite were elected at the beginning of the ATM government—that is, a child who started high school when Tony Abbott became Prime Minister—has gone right through high school with none of these reforms implemented. There's no plan for school improvement and no plan for school system improvement. The poor old sucker minister opposite, who has been brought in to clean up the mess, now has to go begging to the states and territories. He will say: 'You know that stuff that you signed up to five years ago? You know that stuff we said you didn't have to do anymore? Well, look, here's the deal: I cut $14 billion from your schools over the next 10 years and you sign up to the reforms that we said you didn't have to do anymore.' Really? Is that the best we can do for Australian children? There are $14 billion of cuts and no school reform agenda. Take the example of a unique student identifier: we had that work underway five years ago. How much have we progressed with that? What about a national schools evidence institute, recommended by the second Gonski review? We committed to that months ago. We committed to a $280 million evidence institute for schools. We committed to that months ago. Will those opposite commit to using that sort of evidence for continued school improvement? There is not a dollar extra for a schools evidence institute. This is the icing on the cake here. Yesterday, we asked the Prime Minister why COAG—the meeting that was due to deal with all of these issues around the funding and the reform—has been cancelled. The Prime Minister, in a completely tasteless move, tried to say the reason was the drought. He said, 'We can't talk about schools because this is the worst drought in a century.' Everybody on this side believes we should be dealing with that, but it doesn't mean that we can't deal with any other issue. Apparently the Prime Minister, who's only been in the job three weeks, can do only one meeting a month. He's on a go-slow already. He's only been there five minutes. You'd think he'd still be full of vim and vigour and enthusiasm for the job. The Prime Minister committed the Minister for Education to getting signed agreements with the states in the next two weeks, before that 4 October date. Apparently they don't need COAG because they're going to get signed agreements anyway. Well, I challenge the minister: let's see the agreements. 15:30 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon It gives me great pleasure to stand here today and say that this government is providing record funding for state schools, it's providing record funding for Catholic schools and it's providing record funding for independent schools. I will just go to that record funding for state schools because I think it's really important that we make clear what that is. Last year we provided $6.8 billion. This year it will be $7.3 billion. It will be $7.9 billion next year and $8.6 billion the year after that. As a matter of fact, from 2017 to 2027, Commonwealth funding to state schools will grow by 86 per cent. There's an important point to note here as well. As I mentioned in question time, according to the Productivity Commission, since 2006, on a per-student basis, Commonwealth funding to state schools has increased by 78.5 per cent. This is compared to a 7.7 per cent increase in the contribution from the state and territory governments. The Commonwealth's commitment to state schools is absolute. As someone who attended a Catholic primary school, a state high school and then a Catholic boarding school, I want to make sure that we are providing funding to the Catholic sector, the state sector and the independent sector, because it's incredibly important. That's why it was a great honour today to be able to, with the Prime Minister, announce the package that we've just agreed with the Catholic sector and the independent sector for ongoing funding for the non-government sector. I just place on the record again my thanks to the Catholic sector and the independent sector for the good faith they showed throughout those negotiations. When I became minister nearly four weeks ago, I obviously needed to build on the work that had been done by my predecessor, Simon Birmingham. Building on that foundation and being able to deliver the package that we did today was made all the easier through the excellent way that both the independent sector and the Catholic sector were prepared to negotiate in very good faith. I just want to run through, for those here in the House and for those listening, what these new arrangements are. We've extended the 2018 interim arrangements to 2019. We've made some minor adjustments around the ability for the independent sector and the Catholic sector to use 2011 or 2016 census data. That was part of the Chaney review. So that will mean that, in total, there will be $170 million extra funding for the non-government sector for 2019. We then agreed to what we would do with regard to the Chaney review, which had six recommendations. Of those six recommendations, the most important was the transition to a direct measure of personal income tax, the data which would be used being the capacity to contribute. The government has accepted all the recommendations of the Chaney review. I say to Michael Chaney and his board: Thank you for the work that you've done. You had to deal with a very complex area and you did it in a way which I think gave the government some very clear recommendations for moving forward. We've been able to agree with the non-government sector as to how we will do that. It means that at the school level they can transition to PIT scores commencing in 2020, with individual schools able to opt in in 2021 or 2022, and all schools, based on PIT data, from 2022. So all schools will have opted in by 2022. Schools that start above 80 per cent of the SRS transition will be able to phase down to 80 per cent by 2029, and schools that start below 80 per cent will transition up by 2023. It is a very sensible way of introducing these new measures. In the third part of the agreed arrangements, we are going to establish a choice and affordability fund for the non-government sector. The words 'choice and affordability' are incredibly important, because we want to ensure, right across Australia, that parents have the ability to have choice, and affordable choice. Whether they're in an inner-city area or whether they're in a rural or remote area, we want to ensure that that choice is there. That's what this fund will do. It's a sector-blind fund. It's going to be very important in ensuring that choice will continue to be there for parents over the coming decade. From my own schooling experience, I know how important that choice is, but I also know that from my own electorate. I spoke today of the town of Penshurst in my electorate and the choice that's offered there from both the state school and the Catholic primary school. With a population of 750, there are six students who get a very good education at the state school and there are approximately 35 students who get a very good education at the Catholic school. It's incredibly important that those parents in that town get a choice. It is just as important when it comes to school offerings in remote parts of the Northern Territory. We have to ensure that they, too, can get choice. That choice needs to come in a way that is affordable for members in that community. That's what this fund will do. As I mentioned in question time as well, it will also help the delivery of choice and affordable choice when it comes to those who are impacted by things like drought. As we've seen in New South Wales and Queensland, the impact of the drought has been incredibly devastating on many communities and on many farmers. I know this was something that really hit home with the Prime Minister when he visited drought affected areas. One of the things he heard directly from farmers was that, given the financial difficulty that they're now facing, they were very concerned and worried that they wouldn't be able to continue with their children's education. For many parents, when faced with hardship, that would be the last thing you would want to do or feel like you were being forced to do. It's incredibly important that we have a fund like the one that's been created so that, in times like those that New South Wales and Queensland are faced with, parents can have the option of affordable choice, whether it be in the Catholic sector or in the independent sector. It is fantastic to be able to stand here today and say that this government has a clear agenda when it comes to school policy. We have a reform agenda, which we saw with the very important agreement that came out of the Education Council meeting last Friday. There are bilateral negotiations that now need to follow on from that. We have also seen it through the work that we were able to do over the last four weeks, building on the work of my predecessor, to make sure that Catholic and independent schools have funding certainty and record levels of funding which will enable them to continue to offer affordable choice. As importantly, as I've outlined in the growth figures, the Commonwealth is providing for government schools as well—public schools and state schools. That funding grows year on year on year. It was $6.8 billion last year. It will be $7.3 billion this year, $7.9 billion next year and $8.6 billion the year after that. 15:40 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin Because I'm quite fond of the minister, I'm going to start by offering him some friendly advice. Whatever you do, Minister, do not take up the invitation by the member for Sydney for a debate on schools policy. You will be utterly humiliated. What we've seen from the minister here was a defence of his deal that's about as passionate as it could have been. It was utterly lacking in feeling. That's what's so wrong with this government's approach to school funding. This minister and this government are trying to fix the wrong problem. They're trying to fix their own political problem of their own making, not the concerns of Australian students and their families. That can be illustrated by one thing in the minister's contribution just now—10 very long minutes, I think we'll all agree—and his answers in question time, because the minister mentioned only one student: Dan Tehan. You were in school a long time ago, Minister. On this side of the House, we are concerned about students today and students tomorrow, not about looking back at our own schooling experience to justify this deal. We on this side of the House support needs-based, sector-blind schools funding not because it's a good thing in and of itself but because it is the means to an end. That end is a better society and a more productive economy. As the member for Sydney said so effectively in her contribution, it's about enabling reforms that will secure more teachers and better teachers, more support staff and more one-on-one attention to kids who need it, to give every child in every state and territory, in every schooling system, every chance of fulfilling their potential at school, which is so closely connected to their potential in life. For us it is a moral imperative to make sure that talent is not wasted and that every child gets that chance through a quality schooling system, but also it's at the core of our vision for a stronger Australian economy and a stronger Australian society. It is just galling and appalling that this government looks away from too many students. We welcome these arrangements insofar as they make a bad situation slightly better, but I think this arrangement that we're discussing now can only be characterised in the following manner: it's too late, it's too little and it affects too few of our kids. It leaves untouched 2.5 million Australian kids in our public schools, who have to consider, particularly in jurisdictions like Tasmania, the Northern Territory and South Australia, that they do not have a pathway to reaching the schooling resource standard. These kids are being actively left behind by the decisions of this government. Minister Birmingham—whom the minister at the dispatch box a minute ago thanked—of course fixed the school funding wars two years ago! We remember that, don't we? He fixed it! What is the point of this? The member for Sturt is another fixer. This government is only fixing political problems of its own making. The member for Sydney was right to take government members back to the 2013 election and their commitment to match our funding commitments dollar for dollar in every school in every sector—another broken promise. This is an empty agenda when it comes to schools. Even on its own terms, it fails. I have before me today's media release from the National Catholic Education Commission, which is a very qualified statement in support and no doubt expresses the frustration of systemic Catholic schools, as well as independents, about the difficult attitude of this government to this fundamental policy area. They talk about the changes going a long way to fixing the problems, not fixing the problems, and they reserve their rights in terms of the long-term arrangements supporting the government policy objectives. They aren't there. Anyone who looks at the actual Gonski 2.0 review will understand that the measures endorsed there require more funding. This government says it has walked away from its company tax cuts but the proof of it is pretty simple I reckon. They could put the $17 million that's earmarked for the four big banks into our schools. They could fix the whole schools funding mess and put forward a pathway to schools reform. They could attend the COAG meeting. What an absolute joke! This is a government that abdicates its most fundamental responsibilities. They won't even sit down with the people who operate our schooling systems to discuss this reform or any reform agenda. The member for Sydney was right, we are going back to the future. Stripping five years of education away from our kids is not good enough. This minister and his government stand condemned. 15:45 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee It is nice on a Thursday afternoon to hear a level of discussion rather than a level of argument about the very important role of the education of our children. I want to go back to first principles and the role of the federal government. The first role of the federal government is the security of its Australian people—our defence. The second role of the federal government is to create an economy that rewards endeavour and rewards risk. Those who get out of bed should make more money than those who sleep in. There is only one side of this chamber that will manage an economy adequately and responsibly, and that is the coalition government When we talk about what is in the best interests of our children, we do not serve our children well if we simply leave them with a debt because we haven't been prepared to make hard decisions in our generation and our lifetime. When it comes to ensuring that we manage our economy this is something that our government does very well. We need to make sure that when we think about how we spend things we spend them wisely. Mr Deputy Speaker Hogan, you would know, as a former teacher yourself, that it isn't necessarily always how much money you throw at a problem that gets you the best outcome. The Australian government has a role in creating that economy, and that economy simply gives us the engine room to build the society we want to have. What is it that makes a great society? I want to touch on this. A great society is a society that looks after the unwell, our senior Australians and those who might be having some difficulties with their health. A great society is one that looks after domestic policing, law and order. People should feel safe in their own homes. That's a very critical issue in the Victorian election coming up, where many Victorians no longer feel safe in their own homes thanks to the failure of the Andrews government. A great society is also one that builds our public transport, our roads and our rail network. And a great society is one that invests in its children. Something that I have been very keen to support, which was a Labor government initiative, is the Commonwealth top-up of the 15 hours for four-year-old child care, kindergarten— Ms Lamb 265975 Early childhood education— Mr BROAD 30379 That's the word for it! I supported it. It was a good initiative. Thank you, member for Longman. it is good you are listening. The New South Wales government has introduced six hours for three-year-old kinder. I think that's very good. I'd like to see that introduced in Victoria. In Victoria they do have that for foster children, and as a foster dad I can see the value in that. I was never a great student—I was a tradie—but I was reasonably good at my maths, and I always thought that if you have a figure and you have a greater figure on the other side that is an increase. Tell me if I'm wrong, but if— Mr Champion HW9 Are you assistant minister now? Mr BROAD 30379 I know, they let anyone in here, don't they! But listen to this: if you have a figure and then you get a bit more, that is an increase; it's not a decrease. I will run through Edenhope, in the electorate of Mallee: $631,000 and the following year $674,000: an increase of $43,700. In the school in Stawell: $1,300,000 next year and $1,397,000 on top of that. There are 129 schools in the electorate of Mallee—there wouldn't be many electorates with as many schools as mine—and every single one of them got an increase under our government. That is what it's all about. Our principals will look at the figures and they will see that the school funding has increased. It hasn't decreased; it has increased. That is the first rule of mathematics: if you have a figure and you drastically increase it, you actually do get more. Some of my students are $800 a year better off than they were the year before. Mr Champion HW9 What's inflation doing? Mr BROAD 30379 Inflation is at 2½ per cent, my friend. It is not at $800. There is something else we must be doing: we must be looking after our students when it comes to having breakfast programs. That is something this government is really starting to think about. People who come to a school in the electorate of Mallee are better off. They're getting more funding. We had a constructive discussion till that bloke, the member for Wakefield, came along, and he's just blown it out of the water. We are delivering more money for the students in the electorate of Mallee. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 Before I call the member for Moreton, I will remind the member for Wakefield: we'd been having a lovely MPI, member for Wakefield, before you arrived. It was quite peaceful. On that note, you are warned, member for Wakefield. I call the member for Moreton. 15:51 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and could I endorse your earlier comments there. This is a very serious matter of public importance. We've heard from two Victorian representatives who understand some basic mathematics but forgot to point out the big facts. We have heard it from the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the Minister for Education in the parliament over the last week: 'Oh yes, school funding is going up.' Let's go to the basic mathematics. There are more Australians, which means there are more students, which means the funding does go up. But it's obviously all about where it goes and who it goes to. The schooling resource standard is what determines where the money goes. Right now, in Queensland, kids have one more day of school left. Then they go on school holidays. It's great for those schoolkids. I've got two schoolkids, one in grade 4, one in grade 8, and I'm sure they'll be having lovely holidays. The principals of their schools, one a state school and one a Catholic school, will be sitting down—like any principal would do, like the member for Lalor, who's here in the chamber, would have done—and working out their staffing arrangements for next year. They need to lock in staff long term pretty much right now, and if they don't have funding certainty they cannot do that. Big employers, like the Catholics, the independent schools, the Anglicans and the like, are trying to make decisions about teachers and where they will go. Then we go to the state sector, the biggest sector of all. They are trying to make decisions about where teachers will go. It's especially important in Queensland. You can drive around Victoria in an afternoon. In Queensland, the most decentralised state, it is much more significant when you move teachers around. We have seen those opposite come in and, in their own budget papers, say, 'There will be savings.' For those mathematical geniuses opposite, 'savings' means 'cuts'. You say savings; we say cuts. That means fewer dollars being delivered to kids, which means you can't have one-on-one education with kids. Gonski, who looked at education with the clinical eyes of an economist and a banker, said: the best bang for your buck is in early education. Invest in early education and it will pay off. It will actually boost productivity—much more than any magical trickle-down economics theory those opposite are embracing. We know that investing in education improves productivity, improves the GDP of a nation. We know that. It's what the expert panel actually told us. That's why, under Labor, we were happy to have sector-blind investment in education. Today we heard the Prime Minister and his desperate education minister come in and announce a giant bandaid to put over the Catholic sore that Minister Birmingham got festering. Why? Because Catholic education have their own system that basically, to simplify it, involves wealthy schools in the cities subsidising poor schools, like those in Cunnamulla or Palm Island or Thursday Island. That's because of the social justice commitment of the Catholic education system. That's their basic education system. We know that the Catholics do a great job, but who does the heaviest lifting when it comes to education in terms of kids with disability? Seventy-four per cent of kids with disability are in state schools. Eighty-two per cent of children from the lowest quarter of socioeconomic advantage are in state schools. Eighty-four per cent of Indigenous kids are in state schools. There are a few private Indigenous schools, like the Murri School in my electorate, that do fantastic work—even Carinity Education, which is having its own problems at the moment, does fantastic work with Indigenous kids—but the majority of the heavy lifting, when it comes to disadvantage, takes place in state schools. We saw the Minister for Education and Training—the bumbling, hapless education minister—when he got up today to try and fix up this mess. He said, 'We'll have a $1.2 billion school choice fund.' Ms Ryan 249224 What is that? Mr PERRETT HVP That's a good question, Member for Lalor. What is it? The minister said it would be sector-blind—he actually said that—but no state schools can apply! It's a weird kind of blindness that the education minister has stumbled upon. Those opposite are a disgrace when it comes to education. (Time expired) 15:56 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman It's always a worry when a speech ends with calling the other side a disgrace. It's a slightly overused word in this chamber. In reality we have a good economy and increasing revenue for the nation. Taking hard decisions means you can invest in the social services Australians want. If we said to the average Australian on the street or sitting in the gallery today that funding last year was $6.8 billion going to $7.3 billion going to $7.9 billion going to $8.6 billion—that would be an increase, not a cut. But, of course, we've got the constant narrative from the other side of politics saying that, in every area of social policy, we're making cuts. They are sort of reverse cuts, where the money's actually going up but the other side are calling them cuts. It's mildly entertaining, I think, for people listening in, because it almost seems like the two parties are speaking different languages. The reality is that, when it comes to social policy, the Labor Party feel they always have to overpromise, and then, if they get into government, they find an excuse where the economy prevents them from delivering. The excuses come at the last minute. What happened when Julia Gillard was busily promising not one, two or five but 27 different funding models for different school sectors, where every child got a different amount of money depending on what sector they attended or what state they were growing up in? There was a complete loss of control of the whole sector. What she did was like any old bozo walking down the street who sees you coming out of your workplace and says: 'How much is the boss paying you? I'll offer to double your pay.' Then he disappears, and you go back in and say to your boss, 'Thanks for halving my pay.' That's exactly what the Labor Party did. They vanished without trace. They made invisible promises that were completely unfunded. There's a tiny issue about how government works that is lost on most Australians: in the four years going ahead, you've got to be able to find the money, if you make a promise; but after four years you can say anything, and it doesn't matter, because you don't have to budget beyond four years. What did Julia Gillard do? She brought in the big D9 tractor and pushed all the Gonski promises that went through the roof out to years 5 and 6. That was handy—not because she'd never have to deliver them, not because she'd never have to find the money, but because she knew, when she lost government a couple of weeks later, that her mob over here, fed and led by the union movement, could go on about cuts for the next 10 years from opposition. Well, it's an unhappy place over there, isn't it? It's an unhappy place where you've got one person who knows how a school works and where the most that the rest of you know about school education is where the tuckshop is! When you guys walk in, you go straight to the principal's office, shake a few hands and then walk out before you get asked uncomfortable questions by parents. You guys would not know a learning progression if it slapped you in the face. You guys wouldn't know school reform if it was laid out in front of you. None of you have postgraduate education skills. None of you have ever enrolled in anything beyond a basic bachelor degree in union rubbish. What would you guys know about a learning progression? What would you know about student centred education? Nothing! Opposition members interjecting— Mr LAMING E0H They go on guffawing, but, as soon as you challenge them to a debate, as soon as you say, 'Come to a public location and bring out the data,' suddenly the Labor Party—the great Labor Party of reform—becomes mute. Their federal and state members scurry away like rodents, reluctant to debate anything, because they want to stick to ridiculous talking points. Do you know what? You've actually got a bible. It's right here. Gonski gave you the chance. He laid out the ingredients for you on the bench. All you needed was the Thermomix to finish the job—but, no. You got de-elected, and we've come to power and produced a simple road map for the future. This says very simply: regarding investing, as the OECD says—don't take my word for it, don't believe me; I'm blue, right? Talk to the OECD—Australia has the most sector-blind, need-blind funding to those who need it, above every other nation. We don't invest the most money—correct—but there are two nations in the OECD who invest more and get poorer results, and there are two nations who invest less and get better results. We're in the sweet spot in the OECD. We're not near the Asian economies; I accept that. We are catching up very rapidly with the Scandinavian economies on school outcomes. It's not a disaster area. Can I tell you what the greatest threat is in education policy? It is the great party over there that once was the champion for education quality and is suddenly fixated on cuts. I know they'll do their mental kabuki and find a way to call it a cut. It wouldn't matter what we did, right? It would be a cut. It wouldn't matter how much money rolled into schools right across Australia; they'd find a way to call it a cut, and they'd stand up the front with their unions. I'll tell you what they do. They may well have a message for the poorly educated people who don't understand school policy and who'll buy the cut stuff, but the average mum and dad in the pick-up zone want to know more. They want to know how much the funding is going up and, more importantly, how quality education is being delivered for our next generation. 16:01 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I am really pleased to rise after the member for Bowman, because it means he has to stop talking. Before he leaves the chamber, I'd just like to say this: I'll match your doctor and I'll raise you with a school principal. Listening to the member for Bowman talk about education across the last five years has been an education, let me tell you! It demonstrates that you can be the smartest person in the school, and you can go on to be a doctor, but it doesn't mean you've got any common sense. What we have on this side is common sense. What this side did when we were last in government was a review of national education. Do you know why we did it? Because we were slipping down the scales in the OECD rankings in terms of our student performance. What did we do? We sent a banker out with a team of people. I saw David Gonski speak about what he found. I'm going to paraphrase him, because I can't directly quote—it was a live show. But he said he expected to see bureaucratic waste, and what he found was a lean machine in education across this country. What he found was that there was no waste. Every cent put into schools was going into classrooms and into education, which left him with the question: why aren't we performing like we should? He thought he'd find waste and he found none. What he did find was inequality, and what the OECD had already reported on was that those countries with the highest inequities in their school systems were sinking, and those countries with the most equitable systems, with the least difference between schools and, in schools, between classrooms, were reaching the stars. So the review went to find the answer for Australia, and what did they find? They found the schooling resource standard. They found a dollar figure that they could undo disadvantage with, to ensure that, for every child in every school, regardless of sector, regardless of postcode, regardless of parent, we could find a solution, if we could get this secret model going. That's what we went to the 2013 election with, and those opposite knew the power of the argument with the Australian people. They knew that the Australian people understand how important a quality education is for every child in this country—not just for their own children but for every child in this country. They know the economic power of a purposeful, well-funded education system and what it means for this country. They understand what it means for our economy. They understand what it means for our society. So the coalition went to that election saying, 'Not a dollar difference'. They got government, and then they trashed Gonski. They appointed the member for Sturt, with the quick repartee, as Minister for Education. I don't want to point out the obvious, but the current Minister for Education has to be the exact opposite of the member for Sturt. The member for Sturt, with his quick repartee, took on education and absolutely smashed the Gonski model. He put his sector glasses on—he put his goggles on—and he determined that they would tear up this system that was so well planned. What we then saw was Minister Birmingham, who continued on that road. As the member for Sydney pointed out today, they lost complete track of the reforms and the things this money would target to get us better quality schools and better quality teachers—teachers working together in schools with proper resourcing to improve their own practice and to improve every classroom in this country. It is a sad day today. The new education minister and the new Prime Minister—we're three for three, remember; three Prime Ministers and three education ministers. It's like a game over there: if you back the right horse, you get the education portfolio! It's a sad state of affairs that no-one has followed this from start to finish. The announcement today does not fix the problem for this government. What it does is entrench inequality. They didn't put a bandaid on today; they ripped a bandaid off. The terrible sore that is education policy for this government is going to get worse. I promise, as a former school principal: it's going to get worse. 16:06 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate on education. It will be a big year, 2019. Yes, it will most likely be the year of the next federal election, but it's also a year of significant anniversaries. It's the 100th anniversary of the establishment of British Airways—about a year ahead of Qantas. For TheLord of the Rings fans, it's the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Tolkien Society. But there's a very significant anniversary in 2019: it's the 30th anniversary of the last Labor surplus! I'd have to say that it is a very significant anniversary, because there's a big difference between our education policy and Labor's education policy, and the Prime Minister pointed it out in his news conference today: our education policy is paid for. It is not an unfunded promise. Our policy is actually paid for. The PM pointed this out quite clearly. On this side of the House we know how to run an economy. On this side of the House we can manage the economy so we can pay for our promises. Labor's education policy can best be described as nothing more than sleight of hand—an exercise in financial gymnastics rather than education policy. The previous member on this side pointed it out. The member for Bowman pointed it out with regard to Labor's alleged Gonski reforms. There wasn't much money in year 1 and there wasn't much money in year 2, year 3 or year 4, but come to years 5 and 6 of Labor's proposed education policy and the expenditure took off into the stratosphere. Why? Because they didn't have to fund it. Their education policy was largely an unfunded wish list. Labor's policy was nothing more than an unfunded fairytale. They had a very similar approach to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The expenditure went way beyond when they would have had to budget for it. We on this side of the House have, by contrast, a policy which will provide funding that is needed for schools, but in a way that is economically responsible. I'd like to look at those measures now. The government is providing an additional $4.5 billion over 10 years, from 2019 to 2029, to non-government schools: $3.2 billion will be invested over that period to support those schools which improved data has shown have the greatest need; and $1.2 billion will be invested over the period to create a Choice and Affordability Fund to support parental choice and diversity in the schools system. The fund will provide extra support to address challenges in the non-government schools sector, such as supporting schools in regional, rural and remote areas, and it will provide a flexible source of support for schools that need a helping hand. In addition, there will be interim funding of some $170.8 million in 2019 to provide additional funding early in 2019 to allow non-state schools to plan with confidence for the 2019 school year. We have a responsible policy, not an unfunded fairytale. We are a government that will be bringing the economy back into surplus. Who can forget, in 2012, Wayne Swan, the good old member for Lilley, saying 'the surpluses I announce tonight'? Well, we are still waiting to see them. We are still waiting to see those illusive surpluses provided by the member for Lilley, but what I can say is that we have a policy that addresses the issue of needs in schools. This side of the House believes in choice in education. We believe that parents should have the opportunity to choose the type of education that they want for their children and that the federal government should support not only a great public sector but the Catholic and independent sector as well. I'm certainly happy to speak on this debate, and I'm certainly looking forward to the implementation of this. (Time expired) 16:11 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth Any parent should be able to expect stable, predictable funding for their school. Sadly, there is complete chaos when it comes to the coalition's approach to funding. The complex field of mathematical study now known as chaos theory was founded on the work of Edward Lorenz at MIT, a passionate educator and a passionate sharer of knowledge. He wrote some 55 years ago a paper called 'Deterministic nonperiodic flow'. Many in this House would know that better today as the butterfly effect. I raise this because chaos theory is the only way that you can properly describe the coalition's approach to school funding. The fluttering wings in the Liberal Party have led to chaos when it comes to schools funding—chaos that has caused COAG cancellation. On 26 August the Prime Minister said, 'We've got a lot of work to do, but we're restoring stability.' Tell that to a state premier or a territory chief minister. There's no stability in their program and no stability of when they're going to meet for COAG. There's no stability at all. This debate is important to my community. It's important to me as the son of two Western Australian teachers. My father was a principal for many years. He proudly led Lance Holt School, which is now led by another great Western Australian educator, one of my former teachers, Kathryn Netherwood. Leading a school is a tough but rewarding job. You'd think, at least, that the government wouldn't make it harder and that they'd give a little bit of certainty and a little bit of stability to let educators do what they do best. I know that my father stressed about his school budget—the need to ensure the stability of the school's finances. Schools aren't just providers of education but also direct employers, particularly those in the independent and Catholic sector. When a school doesn't have secure funding, the teachers do not have secure work. It's just another way that, when you don't provide that stability of funding, when you have a chaotic schools policy, you're disrespecting teachers. You're disrespecting people like my mum and my dad. Teachers work in chaotic environments, but the chaos they're used to is handling a classroom of 30 children or teenagers. It requires strength of character. They shouldn't have to also worry about whether their school's going to have enough money to resource their school the following year. I also want to acknowledge that it's not just governments that fund schools. Parents and citizens organisations and parents and friends organisations do amazing work finding that extra $1,000 here and there to grow a school's capacity to deliver for the students. For many of those schools, the canteen might be the financial powerhouse of the parents and citizens or the parents and friends, so I'll take the opportunity to give a shout-out today in this place to the staff and volunteers at school canteens across the country providing stability—more stability than we see in this place—for the funding of their schools. When we talk about stability, it's odd that we'd see the king of chaos, often known as the member for Warringah, appointed as special envoy for Indigenous affairs. One of the things that the 'special' envoy has said is that he wants to increase Indigenous attendance at remote schools. An opposition member interjecting— Mr GORMAN 74519 I'm correctly advised that he did also say that he was going to do that as Prime Minister, although, to use that former Prime Minister's own words, he was rudely interrupted. My concern is that this is the same gentleman who said that living in Aboriginal communities was a 'lifestyle choice' not worthy of taxpayer funding. This is deeply concerning. As has been pointed out in this place already, we have had three education ministers and three prime ministers—all contributing to this general sense of complete chaos. When it comes to Indigenous education, there are some bright spots. I'm pleased that Labor has taken the lead here. It's worth remembering, as people have reminded us, that it was Labor who set the principle of a student resource standard. It was an initiative researched by David Gonski and implemented by Prime Minister Julia Gillard to fund schools and students according to need. One of those was to place Indigenous students as a key funding driver. This is how we deliver on our aspiration for Indigenous Australians. Today, I attended the launch of Labor's First Nations Women's Policy Forum report. This forum is helping to amplify the voice of First Nations women to the Labor Party and to the Parliament of Australia. I want to commend the work that Senator Sue Lines, the Deputy President of the Senate, has done in this space. It will not surprise anyone that one of the most important things those women raised was the need for certainty of funding for their schools to help kids achieve all that they can. I'm going to support them 100 per cent of the way. 16:16 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore Just now I thought I was back in my entomology class, learning to pin butterflies. Alas! It was a weak link to economic modelling. I have been in this House for more than five years, and I saw the beginning of the Gonski model of educational funding. The first four years were funded; the fifth and sixth were not. It was like sending a rocket ship up to become a satellite to make sure it measured educational process, but the rocket ship from the Labor Party was only half full of the fuel it needed. Our government, on the other hand, has a rocket ship at a slower trajectory climb, and it's got a full load of fuel, which means our plan is fully funded and is going to work. I think that's pretty good, actually. But do you know what? Another comparison came to mind when I was listening to members on the other side. We have a bucket that we call the 'revenue bucket'. We get more people employed. We have a great economy. We fill that bucket up so we can spend it on all the services that we need for our nation. Unfortunately, when Labor is in government, that bucket looks more like a colander. It has lots of revenue and lots of leaks. It all goes, and it becomes a bigger and bigger problem. I was listening to one of the speakers who talked about a moral imperative and the need for individualised attention and individualised learning and mentoring. I agree. This is absolutely critical. I'm one of the probably few members of parliament here who have actually taught in a classroom for 10 years, and I've tutored trainee teachers at university. Just throwing money at a school is not going to fix the problem. We do need better outcomes for our children. We already know that just throwing heaps of money in is not making the slightest bit of difference in the OECD figures. There are amazing programs right now that are developing and inspiring our students, and they continue to get increased funding. The federal government is providing a huge investment, over $300 billion, in recurrent funding to all Australian schools from 2018 to 2029. For example, in Gilmore, each student at Ulladulla High School will receive $3,581 in funding for 2019, and by 2027 this will grow to $5,115. At Sanctuary Point Public School, each student will receive $3,356 in funding for next year, and by 2027 this will be $4,794. Each student at Nowra East Public School will receive $4,653 next year, and by 2027 this will be $6,646. At Batemans Bay High School, which was actually visiting here today and may still be in the gallery, each student will receive $3,915 in funding next year, and in 2017 this will increase to $5,592. Incidentally, in case those opposite forgot their abacus, those are all increases. There's a pattern here that repeats across every school in Gilmore: increased funding. The federal government is committed to doing that. In addition, we have guaranteed that Australian parents will have a choice in where to send their children to school. That is very important to all of us on this side—choice is one of the dictating factors. We need choice, particularly in regional and rural communities, because there isn't such a massive income ability for schools. So, measuring the socioeconomic status of the regions is critically important. I have a large number of wonderful Indigenous students—that's part of the picture. I have a large number of children with disabilities—that's part of the picture. Distance away from central metro areas is an issue. Getting up to Sydney, getting to Canberra and even getting to Wollongong are difficult, so there's a balance there for extra money for my schools. I love my schools. They're doing an amazing job. Bucketing money in there just isn't going to be. What we need to do is to help them to use the money they are getting so that they are not having to whack it all at the end of June and say, 'Whoops, we didn't spend it all.' Get it going right. Make sure it is being monitored correctly and teachers have the opportunity to train more and to be more inspiring and grow our children's education so that in the future our children have got a STEM connection. We sponsor them into all sorts of courses so that they have leadership and resilience, they're well educated and they can represent us at all levels in all different manners and be as flexible as possible, because that's what the future will need. It's not just about money. It's about the best teachers we can get, and we have some magnificent teachers. It's about the best curriculum we can have and not loading it up with rubbish. These are the things we need to look at in education. COMMITTEES 73 COMMITTEES Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport 73 Membership 73 16:21 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks by leave—I move: That: (1) Mr C. A. S. Laundy be appointed a member of the Joint Select Committee on oversight of the implementation of redress related recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse; (2) Ms Sharkie be appointed a supplementary member of the Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport for the purpose of the committee’s inquiry into the Aged Care Amendment (Staffing Ratio Disclosure) Bill 2018. Question agreed to. Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade 73 Membership 73 16:22 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I have received a message from the Senate informing the House that the following senators are to be discharged from attendance on the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade: Senator Macdonald on 6 October 2018; and Senator Hume on 21 October 2018; and the following senators are to be appointed as members of the committee: Senator Hume on 6 October 2018; and Senator Macdonald on 21 October 2018. Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters 73 Reporting Date 73 16:22 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I have received a message from the Senate informing the House that the Senate has agreed to the following resolution: That the time for the presentation of the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters on its inquiry into the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Lowering Voting Age and Increasing Voter Participation) Bill 2018 be extended to 6 December 2018. BILLS 73 BILLS Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018, Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Australian Farmers) Bill 2018, Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016 73

Criminal Code Amendment (Food Contamination) Bill 2018

Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Australian Farmers) Bill 2018

Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016

Returned from Senate 73 Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2018 73

Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Integrity and Other Measures) Bill 2018

Consideration of Senate Message 73 16:23 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I move: That the amendments be agreed to. 16:23 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner Very briefly, the opposition is pleased that the Senate has agreed to our amendment for an appropriate impact assessment. This is a measure that the opposition has brought forward in a number of cases. We commend the Senate and look forward to the speedy concurrence of this House for Labor's amendment. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 74 COMMITTEES National Disability Insurance Scheme 74 Report 74 16:24 Mr ANDREWS HK5 Menzies On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, I present the committee's report entitled Market readiness for provision of services under the NDIS. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr ANDREWS HK5 by leave—Transition to the full National Disability Insurance Scheme is expected to be completed by 2020. The scheme is phasing in rapidly around Australia and is now fully operational in all regions of New South Wales, South Australia and the ACT. By 2020, it is estimated that 460,000 participants will have entered the scheme. The challenges for both participants and service providers to transition to a market-led service delivery model cannot be underestimated. Creating a participant-enabling environment and developing a competitive marketplace is vital to the success of the scheme. However, during the course of this inquiry, the committee heard that the NDIA, as the lead market steward, has often failed to put in place in a timely manner the appropriate measures and initiatives to support the development and growth of the disability support marketplace to meet demand. The roles, duties and activities of all those responsible for market stewardship are unclear. This is impeding the development of strategies to address key emerging issues in the development of the market. Throughout the inquiry the committee heard that many participants are not ready to confidently engage and navigate the market. Of concern is that submitters continue to raise issues around adequacy of plans and ability of participants to activate and manage plans. It appears that the resources and supports put in place by the NDIA to help participants activating and implementing their plans are not reaching all participants and their families. There is currently no clear national strategy to grow the workforce despite the need for an additional 70,000 disability workers by 2020. The committee received evidence that there are currently virtually no incentives to choose a career in the disability support sector. Indeed, submitters reported that the disability sector is experiencing a rise in underemployment and insecure work arrangements, inadequate wages with little or no prospect of professional development opportunities. The committee consistently heard that service providers are struggling to make the necessary changes to operate under the NDIS. Many service providers critically lack the capacity, expertise, cash reserves and infrastructure to make a successful transition and operate in the new NDIS environment. To date, it appears that the growth in new providers is far too slow and patchy to mitigate current and projected supply gaps. The committee heard that the NDIA as a market steward has lacked forward planning and not adequately facilitated access to support and assistance for existing and prospective service providers to operate in the NDIS environment. The committee was also troubled to hear that many service providers were unable to operate even moderately profitably under NDIS pricing. The committee continued to hear that NDIS pricing is hindering market development and growth. More concerning is that, in some instances, pricing has led to service providers discontinuing services to NDIS participants. The committee heard that some service providers are 'cherrypicking' clients and potentially leaving some of the most vulnerable NDIS participants with no access to adequate services. The committee is concerned with the lack of progress on addressing the issue of thin markets experienced by some groups. The thin markets identified are not new; it is now urgent that the NDIA intervene beyond making small adjustments to pricing. The committee is concerned that the policy on future provider of last resort arrangements has not been released and remains unclear. The committee received evidence that the lack of data on demand for specialist disability accommodation (SDA), restricted choices of living arrangements for participants, the lack of clear and consistent information available to investors and the pricing review cycle are impeding development of new SDA dwellings. In conclusion, the committee received a wealth of information and evidence throughout the inquiry and thanks all those who participated. As a result, the committee has made 29 recommendations, which aim to ensure that appropriate strategies and responses are swiftly implemented to stimulate the growth of the marketplace and ensure that all NDIS participants have access in a timely manner to the necessary and reasonable supports they are entitled to. Finally, I thank the other members of the committee and the secretariat for all their work. Law Enforcement Committee 75 Report 75 16:28 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement, I present a corrigendum to the committee's report entitled Inquiry into the trade in elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn. Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth 75 Report 75 16:29 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I seek leave of the House to continue my statement on the report. Leave granted. Mr O'DOWD 139441 Australia is doing a good job in working with our trading partners and international organisations to build agreements and systems that reflect the digital economy. But more can be done and Australia is well placed to take the lead in most of these issues. It is vital that Australia makes the most of these new technologies to rethink how our trade systems operate, rather than simply digitise paper based systems. The report makes 11 recommendations, including that the Australian government create a single portal of information— ADJOURNMENT 75 ADJOURNMENT Aged Care 75 16:30 Mr HART 263070 Bass I feel so sorry for my friend the member for Flynn! I saw a headline on my Twitter feed this week. I was shocked but not surprised. It said there was a fear that stocks in listed aged-care providers would be adversely affected by the proposed royal commission into aged care. There has been a 177 per cent increase in serious risk notifications issued by the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency in the past year. A serious risk notice is issued if an aged-care home fails to meet one of the industry's 44 standards and there is evidence the failure puts, or may put, the safety, health or wellbeing of a resident at risk. Billions of dollars have been cut from aged care in the last five years by the Liberal government. Mr Morrison, the Prime Minister, cut almost $2 billion in his first year as Treasurer. As a direct result, the system is in crisis and, sadly, the standards in the care of older Australians have begun to slip under the weight of these cuts. The royal commission needs to examine the impact of the Liberals' years of cuts. You do not fix aged care by cutting it. Labor has been saying this for a long time. I'm not exaggerating when I say that, over the last two years, my electorate office has heard from hundreds of constituents with regard to issues they or their families have had with the aged-care system. Diana from Bridport has been in regular contact with me, expressing her frustration that the My Aged Care website indicates that there are more than 80 service providers in her area—more than in Hobart—when, in fact, there are only a handful that operate in north-east Tasmania. I've also been speaking to Malcolm, who regularly visits a friend, Neil, in an aged-care facility in Launceston. Neil is recovering from a broken hip and requires physiotherapy as part of his recovery. Malcolm was horrified to learn that the only way Neil could get access to this treatment was to pay $75 per hour for a private physiotherapist. This is because the facility where Neil is a resident no longer had the funding to offer physiotherapy and other allied health services to its residents. I've heard from spouses of aged-care residents who sit with them all day. They are afraid to leave them alone because the level of care available to them does not seem sufficient. I've also recently spoken to Michael, after the facility where his mother is a resident tried to increase her accommodation fees by 60 per cent following a refurbishment. It was only after the issue was raised with my office that the facility offered to waive the increased fees just so long as Michael and his family kept the arrangement confidential. How many other residents of this facility are paying these increased fees unnecessarily? Not everyone has family to advocate for them like Michael's able to do for his mother. What about the pressure that these cuts are placing on staff? Last month, I met with a constituent, an aged-care worker, who told me about the problems with staffing arrangements in residential aged-care facilities. This worker was assaulted by a resident, a dementia patient, who had become agitated and aggressive. There were only two staff rostered on that night, and the situation rapidly became unmanageable. My constituent suffered injury and trauma as a result of the incident. Her mental health is suffering and she's not able to return to work. Labor's called on the government to immediately implement the Aged Care Workforce Strategy Taskforce's report, A matter of care. The aged-care workforce is expected to increase by 300 per cent in the next 30 years. The government must work with unions and aged-care providers to implement this strategy to meet growing demand. This is a matter of utmost importance to the Australian community. I'm very pleased to recognise that the government has seen, somewhat belatedly, the necessity for the royal commission to proceed, but this royal commission must shed further light on the pressures within the aged-care system. It's not enough for the government to claim that it's delivering increased funding year after year, all the while cutting the Aged Care Funding Instrument, which directly affects the amount of services that are available to a particular facility. We have national papers reporting in articles the fact that the aged-care system is on life support. I don't want our elderly to be regarded as simply being on life support. They deserve a proper standard of care and a decent quality of life. New South Wales Volunteer of the Year Awards, World Air Sports Federation, Norco Milk 76 16:35 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page This week the 2018 New South Wales regional volunteer of the year awards were held at the Lismore Workers Club to recognise the great work that volunteers do in our community. I'd like to congratulate Wendy Dalton, who was awarded the Adult Volunteer of the Year and Overall Regional Volunteer of the Year for her dedicated work with the Aboriginal Education Consultative Group at South Grafton. I'd also like to congratulate Karin Brown, who was named the Senior Volunteer of the Year for her work with the marine rescue at Evans Head. Both women were acknowledged for their years of commitment and passion for the areas they volunteer in. I say thank you to all the volunteers who were nominated. They come from a diverse range of organisations across my community, including the Australian Red Cross, the SES, the Cancer Council, the CWA and the rural fire brigades. I thank everyone who makes the community an even better place to live. Fifty-five years ago, the mighty Clarence River was the birth place of modern hang-gliding. John Dickenson, Rod Fuller and Pat Crowe were all members of the Grafton Water Skiing club and they were all known for their skiing capabilities, particularly around the iconic Jacaranda Festival. Inspired by the sport of waterskiing, John designed a kite so that people could be pulled behind a boat. The design became the first controllable glider. It was the birth of modern hang-gliding. From there, the three men made history, with Rod Fuller volunteering to pilot the new invention and Pat Crowe volunteering to drive the boat that hoisted it some 140 feet into the air. I have seen footage of this, and they were very brave men. For many years the New Zealand hang-gliding champion Graeme Henderson, who now lives in Tabulam, campaigned to have the trio recognised for their achievements. In 2012, John was awarded the Gold Air Medal by the World Air Sports Federation for the invention of the modern hang-glider and Rod was also recognised in 2012 by being awarded the hang-gliding and paragliding diploma. Sadly, Rod passed away before he could receive his. Last Saturday Pat was honoured with a hang-gliding diploma from the World Air Sports Federation on the banks of the beautiful Clarence River near the spot where that inaugural flight took place. I congratulate the three pioneers and thank Graeme for his diligence in having them recognised for this wonderful and significant achievement in the history of aviation. If you look into the fridges of most people on the north coast, you are going to find Norco Milk. The story of Norco starts with 40 farmers gathered under a tree in the village of Clunes in 1892. In fact, it's the village I now live in. It was to establish a stable future for the community's dairy farmers. Out of that, Norco was born. Many of the farmers who are providing milk to Norco today are descendants of those first 40 farmers and others have obviously joined the cooperative over the last 120 years. There are 200-plus dairy farmers who belong to the cooperative supplying over 200 million litres of milk to its two bottling factories and ice cream factory. They are also now exporting fresh milk to China. Norco announced early this month it would increase the price it pays to its farmers by 5c a litre. That is really important to our local dairy farmers right now. Norco is so much part of the psyche of north coast residents that, when a local newspaper shared a photo of a carton of Norco milk on its Facebook page, people started taking photos of their own Norco milk in their fridges to show their support. It's an important local enterprise employing 830 people directly. I congratulate the directors, Greg McNamara, Michael Jeffery, Leigh Shearman, Heath Hoffman, Elke Watson and Greg Billings, and the executive, including Cam Hogan, and the GMs, Andrew Burns, Damon Bailey and Rob Randall, and all the staff and owners of Norco who have kept the passion and community spirit alive for nearly a century and a quarter. I'd also like to acknowledge dairy farmers I know personally, people like Craig Waddell, Andrew Wilson, Peter Graham, Paul Weir, and all the wonderful dairy farmers who have kept a very vibrant industry alive in our region. We have much to do to continue to support them. Cunningham Electorate: Mental Health 77 16:39 Ms BIRD DZP Cunningham Suicide rates in my region, very sadly, remain higher than the New South Wales average, with 40 to 60 suicides reported each year. I just want to take the opportunity today to talk about the very critical, important work that is being done by organisations and individuals in our region to address this problem. First of all, I want to acknowledge the Illawarra Shoalhaven Suicide Prevention Collaborative. This was established three years ago this month. It consists of representatives of more than 20 local community organisations, which include the local health district; the University of Wollongong; the Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute; Grand Pacific Health; Lifeline Southcoast; COORDINARE, the South Eastern New South Wales Primary Health Network; all four local councils; and all education sectors. Last year in September, they were successful in becoming the fourth trial site for the Black Dog Institute's LifeSpan trial. This is a program that combines evidence-based suicide prevention strategies into a single community-led approach. Dr Alex Hains, who is the regional manager of the collaborative, described how important that was. He said: Suicide prevention is everyone's business, and so we want everyone in the community to understand what role they can play in reducing suicides, and to feel confident to play that role. He outlined the question, persuade and refer training, which is a one-hour online course designed to help people recognise warning signs for suicide and to help others. It only costs $10, and the New South Wales health minister has provided 1,000 free licences. Local business Internetrix has purchased some of these licences for its entire team in Wollongong. The managing director, Daniel Rowan, told the Illawarra Mercury about how important that was to his organisation: … Internetrix is more than happy to support the campaign, and it also fits in with our mission statement and values which focus on caring for our people. I want to acknowledge One Door Mental Health Illawarra. This is a small group of businesspeople who have been raising funds for more than a decade for the Light and Hope Clubhouse and, more recently, a program to support teenagers in our region who care for their parents with mental illness. For the last two years, they have held highly successful mental health in the workplace luncheons with speakers from across the area, including people with direct personal experience and organisations, which have been very successful. This will be held again in October this year. Unfortunately, I can't attend, but I'm sure it will be very successful. All the money raised at the luncheon goes towards supporting the Light and Hope Clubhouse and the support program for teenagers. Due to growing demand, the clubhouse will soon relocate to Auburn Street in Wollongong and will open five days a week rather than the current two days a week. I should acknowledge that this has been made possible by a half-million-dollar donation from the family of a former chairman of the organisation, the late Dr John Hogg. The Light and Hope Clubhouse doesn't receive state or federal funding, yet it's raised more than $1.7 million towards this program. I want to commend the whole team and in particular the committee chair, Professor Frank Deane, and the deputy chair, Janine Cullen. There are many individuals doing fantastic work and speaking up about their own personal experiences. I don't have time to give all the examples, but, if people are interested, I would encourage them to look at reports in the local Illawarra Mercury. You will see the work of people like Steve Gibbeson, Ben Woods and Dean Antony. These are local people who have been doing fundraising to assist in ensuring mental health support services are available. Only today the Illawarra Mercury has a report on the International Women's Day committee making a donation to assist young mothers dealing with postnatal depression. These are excellent examples, and the stories reflect the great commitment, which I want to also acknowledge, of our local media—and the Illawarra Mercury in particular—who have been very proactive in ensuring these issues get the airing that they need so that people are aware of the issue, they reach out, they seek help and they talk to their GP, ring Lifeline or visit their local headspace service—whichever service is relevant. I will put that information and those contact details on my Facebook with this speech. I think we all would want to carry that message to people in our communities. There is somebody there to help. Please reach out. There are these wonderful people and organisations who are there to help. We have to get those suicide rates down. Petrie Electorate: Roads 78 16:44 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie In March this year, I spoke in this place on the need for the Queensland state government to upgrade the Linkfield Road overpass at Bald Hills near the Carseldine Bunnings. It's an overpass in the southern end of my electorate that really is a bit of a death trap and it is surely a bottleneck. Every morning and every afternoon the traffic piles up on the Linkfield Road overpass over Gympie Road. It is a state government road; it's not on the Bruce Highway. I highlighted this last year, in 2017, as well, and year after year there's nothing in the state budget to address this vital infrastructure. The locals know of the congestion on Linkfield Road, and I join with the federal member for Dickson, the Hon. Peter Dutton, to talk about Linkfield Road because it links both of our electorates. We started a petition, which thousands of people have now signed. We've also written to the state transport minister, Mark Bailey—nothing. There has been no reply at all, which is really disappointing. I thought that this year in the state budget they might possibly do something about it, but, no, there is nothing. The state government is very focused on the inner city, on infrastructure there, but when it comes to the northern suburbs of Brisbane they're missing in action. This road infrastructure has been highlighted by the state government's creation of other problems, too, as the Save our Carseldine campaign has highlighted. They're planning to put 2,000 to 3,000 more people into high-rise units with the Carseldine state government project. Beams Road is already at a standstill. The state members for Aspley and Sandgate campaigned to fix Beams Road. Once again, there was nothing on that. I think they promised an overpass there. There was nothing on that and nothing for Linkfield Road, so I'm addressing it again. I'm asking the state Labor government to sort this out and fix it. It's desperately needed. This is a common occurrence. Earlier this year, on the Bruce Highway, the federal member for Dickson and I, with the then Prime Minister, also announced funding of $120 million to upgrade the on- and off-ramps at Griffin and Murrumba Downs. This is another intersection on the Bruce Highway that is affecting the people in Griffin and Murrumba Downs in the Moreton Bay region. All we required was a 20 per cent contribution from the state government—$30 million. We've got $120 million on the table. There is nothing there yet either. I believe that it's just not good enough. I'm saying to people in my electorate that I'll continue to fight for it. It really is a big issue. Some of the people in my electorate have been highlighting this to me. Mike Maniaty agreed that this intersection is the last piece in the Telegraph Road-Linkfield Road puzzle. Trent Dixon says that there must be a lot of brooms in the state government, as all they do is sweep stuff. Michael Van Oorschot from Bald Hills asks: 'When will this be done—when someone dies?' Melissa Kerman tagged the Premier, as well as the minister and the local member for Aspley, into a Facebook post and said, 'What's happening?'—nothing; there has been no reply. Kevin Dickinson asked why the overpass wasn't upgraded before Telegraph Road, and the answer is that Telegraph Road is a Brisbane City Council road, which the Brisbane City Council has been funding. Bert Beijnon agrees that the intersection is a death trap and the traffic flow is growing by the day. Bert also mentioned the Boundary Road overpass, which the federal government upgraded earlier at North Lakes and Narangba, and he said how good that is. It's really going well there. Mayur thanked me for pushing this intersection. She identified the problem outside of the state government precinct, once again, in the Dorville Road, Carseldine, area. Jennifer Lanzon-Sawtell said she was scared someone will have a serious accident on that Linkfield Road overpass unless something is done. The Queensland state government need to recognise these two vital projects, particularly Linkfield Road. I think they've announced a study about the other road. We just need the 20 per cent; we don't need another study. They just need to build it. The residents of Aspley, Bracken Ridge, Bald Hills, Carseldine, Bridgeman Downs and Griffin should not be penalised just because the state government have infrastructure tunnel vision on the inner city and not on the northern suburbs of Brisbane. I call on the Queensland Premier, the state minister and the member for Aspley to fund these two vital infrastructure projects. Bendigo Electorate: Schools 79 16:49 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Like many in this House I was quite surprised to hear today that the government has again backflipped on school funding. I believe they have committed an extra $4.6 billion in a special deal for independent and Catholic schools. I know that in my part of the world, the Sandhurst diocese, the Catholic Education Office will be cautious about this announcement today, because they have already indicated to me that the devil is always in the detail when it comes to this government and school funding. It was only one education minister ago that they went out and attacked our Catholic schools, including those in my electorate. They attacked the independent way in which they allocate funding and attacked the school communities. It was not welcomed at all; in fact, it was condemned by many of our Catholic schools. I acknowledge the work of our Catholic schools, particularly in the Sandhurst area, because they ensure that every child who wishes to have a Catholic school education receives one. At St Peters, which is in a very low socioeconomic status area of Bendigo, it was remarked to me that they don't know why that school sends out invoices to its parents to pay the fees, because so many of them can't afford it. They acknowledge that the broader Catholic education family picks up the fees to ensure that school can remain open. They work hard to ensure their students receive that education. I'm sure they welcome the news that there will be extra funding for their schools, but in the true Catholic spirit they'll also express disappointment that the government has not announced an investment to restore any of the funding they've cut from our public schools. It speaks volumes about this government that again they are looking after one sector of our education—Catholic and independent schools this time—and completely ignoring the public school sector. Currently 2.5 million children are being educated in our public schools, and again today the government has demonstrated that it is not interested and just doesn't care about the quality of their education. I acknowledge the hard work of our teachers and of their union, the Australian Education Union, and the creative ways in which they are trying their best to ensure that students in these schools receive a top education. The education minister said, 'I know about public schools; I went to one'. Well done; lots of people in this place went to public schools. I went to a public school in Queensland—a great education. But today when I go to the public schools in my electorate I notice how some have to be creative and are struggling to deliver the same education as the independent schools up the road. I quite often in this argument compare two schools in my electorate. Girton Grammar, an independent school, received an extra half a million dollars in funding under the government's model. It is a very good school. It charges high fees. It is able to put on a production every year that includes fireworks and hires top sets from Melbourne. Yet Lightning Reef, a state school less than a kilometre away, is the school of hard knocks. It is struggling to have library books and colouring-in pencils. I recently visited. Only five out of all the students at that school come from homes which don't have a healthcare card. That is the demographic at this school. I donated some library books. When I talked about the school, a couple of Labor Party branch members—ex-teachers—bought books from the local bookstore and said, 'Lisa, can you give these to this school?' These students were so excited to have their own new library books, because they are so used to hand-me-downs from other schools. This is what schools miss out on when the federal government short-changes public schools. We have schools that can't afford basics like library books and whose students come from homes where parents are less likely to read to them. Kyneton Primary School and Huntly Primary School can't afford to water their ovals. They're not talking about building rifle ranges like Geelong Grammar is; they are talking about simply watering their ovals so they're safe enough to run and play sport on. I am disappointed, not surprised, that, yet again, when this government had an opportunity to reinvest in our public schools—in all our schools—they didn't. As a result, the Bendigo electorate, regional schools and public schools will be worse off. It's not fair. (Time expired) Energy 79 16:54 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes Solar photovoltaic is an amazing technology. To be able to use silicon, glass sheets, metal frames and wire to create electricity is something that in previous ages would be ascribed to the gods and magicians. So it's no surprise that many of the advocates of solar PV today have an almost religious zeal. However, we cannot be blinded by the ideology and we can't overlook the economic realities, nor the costs. Just because something is popular doesn't mean that we can ignore those basic factors. That's why I support recommendation No. 24 of the ACCC's report titled Restoring electricity affordability and Australia's competitive advantage. Recommendation No. 24 calls for the Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme to be wound down and abolished by 2021 rather than 2030. To explain the scheme: if someone were to install solar PV on their roof today, a calculation would be made about how much electricity that would generate on their roofs out to the year 2030. For that, they would get a subsidy, a handout, of about $40 for every megawatt hour. For a five-kilowatt installation in New South Wales, which averages about 20 solar panels on someone's roof, the handout is $3,340 this year—the average across New South Wales. But that handout does not come from the government or the taxpayer. It gets loaded up on the price of electricity which every single person pays. It makes our electricity dearer. The Grattan Institute have commented on this system of subsidies in their report Sundown, sunrise. They concluded: … lavish government subsidies plus the structure of electricity network tariffs means that the cost of solar PV take-up has outweighed the benefits by almost $10 billion. By the time the subsidies finally run out, households and businesses that have not installed solar PV will have spent more than $14 billion subsidising households that have. This is a $14 billion reverse Robin Hood. The Grattan report concluded: Governments have created a policy mess that should never be repeated. Look at what this does for the efficiency of the nation to see how the costs and the economics of continuing these subsidies simply don't stack up. The Australian Energy Council, in their Solar report of January 2018, estimated the levelised cost of electricity generated from rooftop solar, and they did so using a central estimate of a 6.53 per cent discount rate. They calculated the subsidised cost of a five-kilowatt system as producing at 12c per kilowatt hour or the equivalent of $120 per megawatt hour. But, when you put the subsidies that they get back in and you calculate the true cost to the economy, we are looking at something like $180 to $190 per megawatt hour. So we are spending billions of dollars in this nation to create new electricity generation that costs at least $180 a megawatt hour to displace our existing coal-fired generators that produce electricity in black coal for around $35 a megawatt hour and in brown coal for a cost of $15 to $20. Anyone who makes anything and has one factory that produces things for $15 to $30 and who builds another factory that produces virtually the same goods, even though it may be intermittently, at $180—four, five and six time the price—will eventually go broke. That's why we need to look at this with calm, rational heads. The ACCC's recommendation is right. It is difficult policy. It is very difficult for government to take things away that they have given. But I call on all members of the House to support those ACCC recommendations. House adjourned at 16:59   The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Vamvakinou) took the chair at 10:00.

Thursday, 20 September 2018

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

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 81 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Sydney Electorate: Broadband 81 10:00 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney When Labor started building the National Broadband Network it was the largest, most important infrastructure project in recent Australian history. But since coming to office in 2013 the Liberals have completely let us down, doubling the cost and delivery time for this vital piece of infrastructure. Of course, it's a huge issue in the electorate of Sydney, which is why I've invited Labor's shadow minister for communications, Michelle Rowland, to a community forum this coming Monday night at the Alexandria Town Hall. This will be an opportunity for residents of the electorate of Sydney to tell us about their experiences of the government's NBN fail. I've heard so many of these stories already. For years, people in my community have been literally stopping me in the street to tell me about their frustrations with the government's poor delivery, about bad connections, about missed appointments, about recurring faults, about connection dropouts, about noise complaints and about agonisingly slow speeds. There are 181,300 premises in the electorate of Sydney, and one in three of them is on copper or hybrid fibre co-axial. Fibre to the node and hybrid fibre co-axial copper have twice as many faults as the other technologies and make up over 33.8 per cent of the connections in the electorate of Sydney. Many residents run small businesses from home, so they really rely on a reliable internet connection to make a living. Their connection, when it's fibre to the node, simply doesn't give them the speeds they need. Businesses have contacted me about long periods without service, and sometimes being unable to get answers from their internet providers. A survey by the New South Wales Business Chamber reported businesses losing up to $9,000 on average due to disruptions and having a poor experience when migrating to the NBN. No wonder, then, that a recent survey from finder.com.au found that over a third of NBN users would switch back to their old service if they could. I've had a couple of examples. Joshua from Alexandria needs reliable internet for his work. He said: 'Our NBN schedule has been pushed back three times since moving into our newly-built apartment block. It's now scheduled for June-July 2020. We cannot get an alternative connection, such as fibre to the building, because we don't meet the minimum unit requirement. I require fast internet for my job, and at this rate 2020 is just not going to cut it.' Jeff from Newtown has spent two years with constant daily dropouts. He's had eight modems and over seven technicians visiting, but still the line continues to drop out. (Time expired) Yeltsin, Mr Boris Nikolayevich 81 10:03 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes This week marks the 29th anniversary of one of the great, but little known, turning points of history. It happened in September 1989, when Boris Yeltsin, the newly-elected member of the Soviet parliament and supreme Soviet was visiting Houston as part of a US and Russia joint space mission. After Yeltsin had made a visit to the space station facilities, he made an unplanned stop at a small grocery store called Randall's. Yeltsin had been brought up under the Socialist ideology that the best way to produce goods and services for the public was through government planning, committees and likewise. But when he walked into that American supermarket and was able to compare it against the breadlines and the shortages of food he experienced in the old Soviet Union, his ideology changed. Yeltsin wrote in his autobiography: When I saw those shelves crammed with hundreds, thousands of cans, cartons and goods of every possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for the Soviet people. That such a potentially super-rich country as ours had been brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it. One of Yeltsin's aides later said that at that grocery store the last vestiges of bolshevism collapsed inside his boss. Leon Aron, quoting a Yeltsin associate, said of Yeltsin after his visit: For a long time, on the plane to Miami, he sat motionless, his head in his hands. 'What have they done to our poor people? Yeltsin later wrote in his autobiography: I think we have committed a crime against our people by making their standard of living so incomparably lower than that of the Americans. It was two years later that Yeltsin famously stood upon that tank outside the Russian parliament to stare down the reactionary forces that threatened to overthrow the reforms that Soviet Union and Russia were going through. It provides a lesson to us—that, although we may think the best way to provide goods and services to the public is through some central government planning and through committees, history shows that the best way is to allow that to happen through the forces of the market. That is the lesson of Yeltsin's visit to that supermarket back in September 1989. This is a lesson—a story—that should be taught in all of our schools so that our children can understand the mistakes of the past in the hope that we never fall into the same trap of repeating them again. Blair Electorate: Sport 82 10:06 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair Ipswich has a proud sporting history. Our region has produced stars like NRL legend Alfie Langer, tennis Grand Slam doubles champion Ash Barty and recent Olympic silver medallist swimmer, Leah Neale. In Blair, sport and recreation have always made up an important part of community life. Participating in sport gives participants a sense of achievement and improves self-esteem. Sport teaches teamwork, cooperation and respect. It builds character; it teaches people to win with humility and to lose with grace. Active participation in recreational sports is linked to improved mental health and concentration, and it's a great way for kids and adults to relieve stress and anxiety. That's why I've created the Blair Sports Links directory to help parents, carers and adults in our community to connect with clubs that will help adults and children in Blair live healthier, fuller and more enjoyable lives. We're about to enter our 10th year of the Blair Disability Links and Blair Seniors Links booklets. We've handed out over 100,000 of these to community groups, individuals and carers in Blair over that time. These are valuable resources, and I'm proud to extend that service to our sporting community. I would like to thank clubs and organisations around Ipswich, the Somerset region and the Karana Downs region which appear in the Blair Sports Links directory. I'm looking forward to the launch of the directory later this year with my friend and colleague Senator Don Farrell, the shadow minister for sport. I held a sporting-related event just recently when I hosted some of the region's youngest sporting stars at an event at CSI in Ipswich. The Australian Sports Commission's Local Sporting Champions program gives young athletes in Blair grants of between $500 and $700 to participate in travel to sporting competitions. At the ceremony, I told local athletes that selection and participation in a wide range of sports is tremendous for our local community. Brittany Else attended the school golf state championships in Kingaroy. Poppy Wilson attended the School Sport Australia national Swimming Championships in Hobart. Kate Galbraith and Natasha Heit represented Queensland in the National Artistic Roller Skating Championships in Western Australia, and Natasha was then chosen to represent Australia. Courtney Beahan also strapped on the skates, but for the Junior Roller Derby World Cup in New Zealand. Tyler Cuthbert-Hough received a certificate for his selection in the 13 to 15 years touch state championships in Townsville. My hope in starting the Blair Sports Links directory is that it will connect these young people and give young people like these access to teams and organisations—that it will help them achieve their potential and foster their ambition. I have every confidence that the Blair Sports Links directory will assist young people and their families across our region, and I encourage all clubs to get involved in the next edition. Lyne Electorate: Red Meat Industry 82 10:09 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne I rise to alert the House to the importance of red meat and the red meat industry, not only to the national diet but to the Lyne electorate, and also to the red meat industry's benefit to the local and national economy. I'd also like to correct some myths about the nutritional value of red meat. Red meat is one of the biggest sources of nine essential nutrients, as well as the obvious protein load. There are lots of myths about the amount of saturated fat in red meat. Trimmed meat, particularly grass fed meat, has only four per cent saturated fat. The nine essential nutrients are iron, everyone knows about iron, but red meat is one of the biggest sources of iron; zinc; vitamin B12; omega-3 fatty acids, the beneficial sort; protein; and multiple members of the B group of vitamins. It also improves satiety, physical strength, wellbeing and children's concentration when they're well fed with some protein rather than a diet rich in highly processed carbohydrates. The national economy benefits from the thousands and thousands of workers in the processing of red meat. In my electorate of Lyne we have many beef producers, north and south, east and west. We have cattle sales operating out of Gloucester, Taree, Maitland, Nabiac and Kempsey. We have transport and livestock haulage, and we have two large processing centres. Wingham Beef Exports has 370 direct employees on-site every day, when they're working and also has a host of other subcontractors and transporters. Meltique Beef in Wauchope has 70 full-time staff and many subcontractors. It provides a lot of transport workers with their employment. The red-meat industry is a huge national industry which should be championed. Not only does it feed the nation but it is healthy, as I mentioned. There are lots of people who get a very distorted view of the benefits of red meat. Diet is best sourced from multiple sources. We need to have vegetables, carbohydrates, fish and nuts as well, but the red-meat industry and red meat in the Australian diet do improve growth and development, and all those essential nutrients that get concentrated by the animals as they graze on grass are a great benefit to developing minds, strong bones, strong muscles. Red meat shouldn't be denigrated anyway. As I said, the ancient Greeks pointed out: moderation in all things. (Time expired) Workplace Relations: Dorevitch Pathology 83 10:12 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen Do you know it's been over a year since 605 Dorevitch Pathology workers went on strike to fight decades worth of low wages? Finally, their fight for fairness has paid off. I first raised this issue in August 2017, but for the past 11 years, under the expired workplace agreement, workers have been fighting hard for their wages, yet year after year nothing was being done to help the pathologists. They who were living with 2018 bills on a 2007 income. So many Dorevitch pathologists are single parents and middle-aged workers, who were earning a little over $20 an hour, before banding together to advocate for a fair go. In response to a very peaceful action Dorevitch Pathology locked out 89 frontline health workers for the high crime of standing up for their rights, making matters so much worse for those already struggling to make ends meet. On 13 September, the full bench of the Fair Work Commission finally delivered those workers a significant pay rise, with some pathologists to receive a pay increase of up to 20 per cent, with up to 30 per cent increases on allowances. They're going to be back paid to July 2017, which, for some of these workers, will take a massive financial burden off their shoulders. Throughout this campaign the HWU has worked tirelessly to secure overtime provisions, additional annual leave entitlements and strengthened dispute-resolution processes and has managed to extend paid parental leave rights, just to name a few of their achievements. But this latest determination has gone even further to secure the workplace rights of Dorevitch pathologists. On top of the pay increases, the HWU successfully fought to protect Dorevitch workers' sick leave, rostered-off public holiday benefits, accident make-up pay and the payment of pro rated long service on redundancy, which have all been confirmed. Of course, none of this could have been done without the support and determination of the HWU and the countless hours of campaigning lead by this great union's organisers. I want to congratulate a few of them today because they deserve to be acknowledged for the hard work they've done. I want to congratulate: the wonderful Diana Asmar, for her vision and leadership; David Eden, the HWU assistant secretary, because of his tireless efforts to direct this campaign; and my old mate George Droutsas, the HWU's campaign and communications manager, who managed this successful Dorevitch campaign. I also want congratulate the mighty Ray Collins, the HWU's industrial organiser, who managed to quadruple the union's membership across 350 Dorevitch collection centres from 150 to 605 during this fight; Hiba Salem, the lead industrial organiser, who coordinated the manpower; Irena Spindler, the HWU's general manager, who calculated hundreds of hours of worker classification payments for this case; and, of course, Scott Crawford, the HWU's industrial manager, who led the HWU's case in Fair Work alongside Lisa Allcock, the HWU's industrial officer. Congratulations to everyone. This long campaign shows that without strong unions and collective bargaining ordinary Australian workers would be— (Time expired) Bowman Electorate: Broadband 83 10:15 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman I want to take this opportunity to update the Chamber on what's happening with the NBN in the electorate of Bowman. I've always taken the position that as soon as I have an update from NBN Co I release that to the community. In addition to the communications by that organisation, I'm keen to let everyone know exactly where we are with boots on the ground. My goal has always been to either have the NBN connected or have boots on the ground right across the mainland of my electorate by the next election. We're still on track to do that, but it's not yet fully guaranteed; there are a number of areas that are yet to be scheduled in time for the first half of next year. With the multitechnology mix that's currently being employed, a very sophisticated cost-benefit economic analysis is being undertaken to identify which technology is best for each area. That will vary, obviously, depending on the existing infrastructure. We already have very high quality Telstra fibre, HFC, in place, and that is being re-purposed and used. Many already have connections to dwellings—about one in three. The large HFC area in my electorate, which is exclusively Telstra and high-quality, is being used and is now in the process of being connected. If you live in Ormiston, Birkdale or Alexandra Hills, there are boots on the ground as of a couple of months ago. That's very promising, because in 12 months we expect it to be fully ready to connect, although there are still areas in Wellington Point and Cleveland that won't be started until very late this year. But there is some bad news—there always is. I'm on my feet to pass on the bad news that Coochiemudlo Island has slipped back from being connected under the Victoria Point VAP to the other islands. This means they'll lose over a year for their connection date, which was expected to be late this year but will now be pushed to 2020. This very famous island, which Matthew Flinders discovered on his errands around the nation, will be facing a delay for the simple reason that Telstra's information, about running a conduit across to Coochiemudlo that we could simply push fibre through, was incorrect. When they actually examined it, there was no conduit there at all; there's just a cable lying on the seabed. Self-evidently, removing that and putting a new one in requires state and local approval—and a federal EPBC approval, because it's a Ramsar area under Moreton Bay. This will be a complicated process. My goal and my commitment is to streamline those three levels of government in every way that I can to bring those connections to the island. As they say, those who are patient and wait will be rewarded. The benefits of this real-time cost-effectiveness approach is that there are large amounts of fibre to the curb in my electorate that would otherwise not have happened. Having the fibre running right past your footpath presents obvious benefits. Large areas of southern Redlands and the islands, Sheldon and Victoria Point will be seeing fibre to the curb, which is a very impressive advance on fibre to the node. It gets the speeds that 99 per cent of residents want and can be delivered way quicker, addressing black spots and guaranteeing that we are a federal government that is delivering the NBN services that the nation needs. Local Council Elections: Tasmania 84 10:18 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons In October Tasmania will have its local council elections. Many new faces are starting to pop up—which is fantastic—for the 11 municipalities across my electorate. Local government plays an integral role in regional communities, and mayors, in particular, play a vital role communicating the needs of their constituents to state and federal members. Not a week goes by that I'm not on the phone to one mayor or another. In October we will see the retirement of four mayors in 11 of my councils. Martyn Evans, the mayor of the Derwent Valley, was a former candidate for the state Liberals in the 2014 election. I won't hold that against him. He's a great bloke, a fierce competitor and a very good advocate for his local community. Some of his work during the floods should not go unmentioned. Martyn was one of the youngest mayors ever elected in Australia when he first took office in 2008. My understanding is that he intends to stay on the council, if re-elected, but he's not seeking the office of mayor. Roseanne Heyward has been the Mayor of the Tasman Council since 2014, and she's been a champion for progressive local government in that beautiful part of the world, which includes Port Arthur and the Three Capes Track. Recently the council voted against amalgamation with nearby Sorell Council. Roseanne didn't agree with that decision, so she's decided to step down from the council. There will be very interesting days ahead for that council without her very able stewardship. I wish her all the best. She played a central role in the community during the disastrous Dunalley fires, on the border with Sorell, doing everything in her power to make sure the area was looked after. David Downie is the Mayor of the Northern Midlands Council. David was recognised with a Life Members' Award for Meritorious Service at the Local Government Association of Tasmania conference earlier this year, and after 25 years on the Northern Midlands Council he is stepping down. He was the chair of TasWater and wanted it to remain as a separate entity when the state Liberal government tried to take it over. He put up a very able fight. The Treasurer, Peter Gutwein, soon knew he was up for a fight when David stepped up to the plate. I wish David all the best in his endeavours. No doubt he'll be looking forward to continuing to get very good prices for the lambs from his farm in the Northern Midlands. Finally, Craig Perkins is the Mayor of the Meander Valley Council. Craig's been mayor since 2011. He has always said he was an accidental mayor, taking on the role when the former mayor became a Liberal MP, but Craig has been indefatigable for the municipality. I wish all four of those mayors the best, and I wish every candidate in local government all the best. Rookwood Weir 84 10:21 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I rise today to clear the record, to put forward the facts and to dispel the myths on a project that has become equal parts promising job-creator and source of frustration. My Rookwood Weir journey started back in 2012, when the coalition water task force visited and documented potential sites for water infrastructure development across the continent. On this list of some 500 sites, Rookwood Weir appeared near the end of the list. This was a project that had been committed to by Peter Beattie five years earlier, when he said Rookwood would be built by 2011. Spoiler alert: it wasn't. In 2013 we saw the election of the coalition government, and I was elected as the member for Capricornia. I hit the ground running to get to work to advocate for Rookwood. I visited government agency after government agency, to little by little open the eyes of the bureaucracy to a great project that had been somewhat overlooked. By 2015 I had had Rookwood placed on the green and white papers on the future development of northern Australia and the future competitiveness of agriculture. These are two of the most important documents this government has created, real future-proofing stuff. Of course, here was the first ALP roadblock. Labor and Greens senators on the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia tried valiantly to block this, supposedly because (a) people in the bush don't deserve jobs and (b) they didn't want me to get a win for Capricornia. I had been lobbying for this project nonstop for over two years, and I'm quite sure the member for New England was sick of me, but I wouldn't stop. In early 2016 I was fortunate to be able to take the member for New England and then-Prime Minister Turnbull on a flight across the landscape to show what was possible. Again the Labor Party said: 'It'll never happen. It's a bad idea. Landry can't deliver.' But on 25 May 2016 deliver I did. The Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister went to Rockhampton to announce that the federal coalition would not only fund $2 million for a business case to be conducted but put up $130 million for the construction costs—major investment for our region, to deliver not just a construction project but a $1 billion economic boom for the region, unheard of under Labor. The trouble is that the federal government doesn't build dams or weirs; we have to get the states to do that. This has proved anything but simple. Firstly, Queensland took over 600 days to deliver the business case. During this time, there was a state election, and only the LNP committed to building Rookwood. When the Queensland government finally delivered the business case, it rated very highly—as we knew it would—but the price had blown out to $352 million. We provided the extra $46 million to get Rookwood going. Then they hit us with the operating costs, another unnecessary roadblock. Queensland could have just sold water to cover these operating costs, but no; that would mean Rookwood go ahead. We have received promising news in the last week, but I cannot take those opposite at their word. (Time expired) Hotham Electorate: Early Learning 85 10:24 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham It is with great pride that I rise today to speak about the wonderful work that's being carried out at Monash Vale Early Learning Centre. This is a fantastic preschool in my electorate that does amazing work to ensure that children in our local community get the very best start in life. In August this year, it was announced that Monash Vale was the national winner of the Little Scientists Early STEM Award 2018. With over 100 applications nationwide, this is an enormous achievement for the young people at this centre and their incredibly dedicated educators. The centre won this award for their work investigating the water cycle, water harvesting and sustainability practices. It was based on the observations and discoveries of the children themselves. They designed, modelled and built their own working water tank. The water tank was built completely out of recycled materials. Beyond their STEM program, the Monash Vale children undertake Chinese language programs, have Indigenous-named rooms, participate in welcome to country ceremonies and also learn about the importance of healthy eating. As Amanda, the STEM science teacher, said to me, 'Education starts with a seed.' I want to pay particular tribute today to the passionate preschool teachers at Monash Vale, Michelle and Shanika, who were jointly awarded this special award with their students. The love, care and professionalism of these women is truly inspiring. They work really long hours, including weekends, and consistently go above and beyond for their young students. It's an attitude and a passion towards the education of children that I see right around my electorate in preschools, kindergartens and childcare centres. Early learning matters so much. The reason why we get to have such a powerful effect on children in these early years of their life is just down to the fact that we have this incredible workforce of dedicated, passionate and clever people who are taking their time to educate that next generation. Labor are very committed to the importance of early learning. We are committed most importantly to providing high-quality universal preschool programs, and Labor started that program in 2008. Since I've been a member of parliament in the last five years, there has been constant uncertainty about whether federal support to make sure that every Australian child gets the opportunity to go to four-year-old kinder is sustained. Almost every year I rise in this chamber or the other chamber to raise the criticality of making sure that this is a permanent program so that four-year-olds in this country get that important year before school where we know they are going to have benefits all the way down the line. I call on the government to show the same commitment that Labor has shown and to guarantee funding for four-year-old kinder on a permanent basis. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT If no members present object, three-minute constituency statements will continue to a total of 60 minutes. China 86 10:27 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I'd like to speak today on the Australia-China relationship, and in particular to reflect on an experience that I had recently courtesy of China Matters, an Australian government funded public policy initiative that took me, the member for McMahon as well as the distinguished Australian businessman Andrew Parker, the head of PWC's Asia practice, to China to more deeply understand the relationship between our two countries. Australia's relationship with China is absolutely vital. It goes back to 1972 when we first recognised China and had diplomatic relations. We have maintained since that time the one-China policy. China is our most significant trading relationship on the basis of two-way trade. It's very important to the economic prosperity of Australia. It's important to the future of Australia. It's also important to the future of China. Australia is China's seventh-highest principal import source and the 14th-highest principal export source. Australia sends to China things like iron ore, coal, wool, other animal products and copper. We buy from China telecommunications equipment, computers, manufactured goods, furniture, toys and the like. So the relationship is very important, and it's important to have a strong understanding of the nature of the relationship. This visit to China wasn't an official visit—there weren't black cars and delegations—rather it was an opportunity to try to understand how middle-class Chinese people are thinking and feeling about the current situation there. It was not just about middle-class Chinese people but also about people from other countries who are engaging with China in a business and diplomatic sense. There were three really interesting things that I took away from this trip. Firstly, China has had remarkable growth, lifting millions of people out of poverty. Particularly the growth of China's coastal cities is very impressive, but that growth is slowing down now, and we're seeing that—as we were repeatedly told—in the reduction of consumption of things like automobiles and other consumable goods. That slower growth will put pressure on China in the next few years. Secondly, the trade war with the United States will provide greater instability in China's economy. The US President has already put $50 billion worth of tariffs on China, announced another $200 billion and flagged possibly another $267 billion. This is a bipartisan position in the United States. The third thing that we saw was a more repressive environment generally, where middle-class people felt that they weren't able to, as freely as before, go about their business. These were three particularly interesting things. I'm pleased to see that Prime Minister Morrison has said that he's not going to be conducting his diplomacy with the Chinese through the media but rather through person-to-person contact and looks forward to meeting the leadership at APEC. The Australia-China relationship is very important. It's complex. Our major trading partner is not our major national security partner, but we're a mature enough democracy and the relationship is mature enough to manage both those things. Paterson Electorate: Centenary of Armistice, Paterson Electorate: Strawberry Saturday 86 10:31 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson In the months ahead, many communities across my electorate of Paterson will be preparing to commemorate the Centenary of Armistice. This solemn occasion will be marked by serving and returned servicemen, schoolchildren, relatives, friends and community members. In my home town of Kurri Kurri, preparation has been going on for many months. During the preparations, it was discovered that, at some point in the town's history, a large wooden honour roll had existed, and it had been dedicated in 1918 by the then Governor, Sir Walter Davidson. A recreation of the lost original dedicated school honour roll is being made by Kurri Kurri Men's Shed, and I really want to thank them for that. They're putting a lot of love and pride into this project. The New South Wales Governor, General David Hurley, was invited to dedicate the new honour roll. Sadly, due to prior commitments, Governor Hurley was unable to come in November, but he and his wife, Mrs Linda Hurley, very generously offered an alternative date earlier this month, and I thank them for that. The Governor and Mrs Hurley met with representatives of the Kurri Kurri community at St Paul's church hall, a humble building which, during the war, was the centre for recruitment, send-offs, homecomings and memorial services for the fallen. It was a real thrill for the kids of Kurri Kurri and our area to be recognised by the Governor and his wife. They took particular interest in the children who had dressed up and indeed the mini 'Maud Butler' who was there. The children performed and put on some really great displays in honour of the war and to commemorate the Centenary of Armistice. The Governor expressed his delight at visiting a town so engaged with its history. In a letter to thank the community for its hospitality, Mrs Hurley thanked Kurri Kurri Public School for its beautiful singing and Graham Smith for his delicious scone recipe. I know Mr Smith and his scones. They are indeed good. Thanks, Graham. Keep baking those fantastic scones. On another matter, I'd like to make this Saturday Strawberry Saturday. I'm calling out to all of my constituents in the electorate of Paterson. Get up on Saturday morning and start with a strawberry smoothie. Maybe you'll throw some strawberries in a salad, or you'll make a pav and put loads of strawberries on top, but #strawberrysaturday. Feel free to share all your strawberry recipes on my Facebook page. Let's really show our strawberry growers, who have experienced some very difficult times lately, lots of love by buying a punnet for yourself and a punnet—as Bill Shorten said—for the country. Most of all, eat the strawberries, cut them up and just enjoy them. Good luck to our farmers, who are doing such a great job under such adverse conditions in this current drought. Brisbane Electorate: Live Music 87 10:34 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane A few weeks ago, I was at the official opening of the BIGSOUND festival in Fortitude Valley. BIGSOUND's a global gathering of musicians, industry, media and music lovers. It's a music festival, a conference and serious business, all in one. BIGSOUND brings thousands of people into Brisbane, and it brings millions of dollars of economic benefits, and that's what live music represents. It's the biggest event of its sort in Australia, and that's why this government backs it with serious funding through the Australia Council. Live music—Brisbane's nightlife—was one of the important issues on which I campaigned for election. I fought hard against Queensland Labor's lock-out laws, and I was pleased to see Labor partially roll back those laws as a consequence of the strong community response. Yet our live music industry in Brisbane remains under threat. The New Globe Theatre has announced its closure, Oh Hello! is shutting next month and even The Zoo, one of Brisbane's most iconic venues, is reducing its hours. There is a recent QMusic survey showing that attendance is trending down, that two-thirds of Brisbane's live music venues have reduced the amount of live music they're staging, because of the red tape, and that 90 per cent of them are experiencing so-called operational issues with ID scanners and red tape, because the regulations are nanny-state, one-size-fits-all and not fit for purpose. Labor's laws are literally killing our live music industry—our nightlife. Small businesses are being sent to the wall. Musicians have fewer and fewer venues and fewer opportunities to play, and patrons who love live music are starting to miss out. If this continues unaddressed, live music in Brisbane could enter a death spiral. We don't want future generations in Brisbane to miss out on the next Powderfinger, the next 'Gurge, the next Sheppard. A few nights ago there was a public forum in Brisbane on saving live music venues. Not only did the Queensland Labor minister send last-minute apologies, they didn't even bother sending a representative. The local Labor member continually goes missing on this topic. What a disgrace. We need to recognise how different venues require fit-for-purpose rules. We need a commonsense approach for small venues that are set up for staging live music. Labor's response: nothing. It has no sense of urgency, no real engagement with the sector and no evidence-led policy. To those people in Brisbane who care about the live music industry, to those of you who are worried that nobody seems to be listening to you: be assured that you are not alone. I'll keep fighting to protect the industry, the jobs, our nightlife and the cultural, creative and artistic contribution that live music contributes to our wonderful and diverse community in Brisbane. Scullin Electorate: Turkish Community, Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness & Research Centre 87 10:37 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I'm very proud and privileged to represent a large community of Australians of Turkish background, and you would be well aware of the extraordinary contribution that Turkish Australians have made right across the northern suburbs, Deputy Speaker Vamvakinou, including in your electorate of Calwell. Some would say—not me on this occasion—that the contribution in Calwell might be greater even than in Scullin. You would be aware, and I would like to acknowledge in this House, that it is 70 years since migration from Cyprus to Australia began and 50 years since migration from Turkey began. I was very pleased on Saturday to join in a very significant celebration of those great anniversaries and to think about what a difference that migration story has made to Melbourne, particularly to the northern suburbs. The occasion, at Epping, brought together community members from the Turkish community and from the wider community to celebrate the Turkish contribution through the well-known medium of football—soccer, some would say. I was so pleased to be there with so many friends to see Whittlesea United triumph over Cairnlea 5-3 in the seniors and 3-0 in the juniors. I'd like to acknowledge Whittlesea United Football Club, for having me along and giving me the opportunity to participate in such a wonderful celebration, as well as such community organisations as the Moreland Turkish Association and many individuals. There are too many to mention by name with one exception, a young man named Samil Damir, who has made an extraordinary contribution at an early age and shows a quality of leadership in the community that warrants recognition in this place. I know that my state parliamentary colleagues who were with me that day—Lily D'Ambrosio, Bronwyn Halfpenny and Frank McGuire, three very engaged local members standing with and for the Turkish community—would also pass on their thanks to Samil. Also on the weekend I had the opportunity to support the Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness & Research Centre at its annual wellness walk at La Trobe University. This centre does extraordinary work. I know that all of my constituents, and people right across Melbourne's north, are indebted to the investment of successive governments, but in particular the former Brumby government, which started off this centre. It's amazing to see the difference it has made not only to individual lives but our sense of purpose and what we value. Thousands of people joined in the wellness walk on the weekend. I was so pleased to be there with Olivia Newton-John, herself; Jenny Macklin, the member for Jagajaga; and Kate Thwaites, Labor's wonderful candidate for Jagajaga; along with so many of our state colleagues. This walk really shows our community at its best, recognising a very significant community facility and celebrating it and celebrating community. Murray Electorate: Community Engagement, Murray Electorate: Sport 88 10:39 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray It has been a very busy time in my electorate of Murray over the last year. I have been able to find some time to do some listening posts, which I am sure many members of parliament do. I want to go through a few of the places I have been able to get to and the businesses I have been able to help. In Kyabram we started at Hurleys Hotel. In Shepparton we were able to set up our listening post in the marketplace. In Cobram and Yarrawonga we were able to go into the shopping strips and set up our card table. In Euroa we were hosted by the Binney Street IGA. In Nagambie obviously Harry's Cafe is first and foremost. At Rochester the Shamrock Hotel was able to host our listening post. In Echuca we were able to set up in the main CBD area. At the Rushworth Bakery we were able to have a listening post. Also in Nathalia we were at Brereton's bakery. We are soon going to be visiting Seymour and Avenel to have listening posts. As well we'll be in Tatura, Mooroopna, Numurkah and Katamatite in November. At each of our recent listening posts we have been able to have Ben Bulmer and his team from the NBN at another table to look at the issues raised in relation to the NBN. Constituents who came forward raised various issues. Many issues had a lot to do with the dairy industry; water policy; drought assistance; the horticulture industry; Centrelink; black spots in relation to mobile phone towers; water concerns; community groups like the men's sheds; the banking royal commission; disability support services, which are always front and centre; bringing the budget back into surplus; and passenger rail and freight rail services throughout the Goulburn Valley. The most common piece of commentary we got from our constituents is: 'You guys in Canberra have to do whatever you can possibly do to keep Bill Shorten out of the Lodge.' On another note, we have the highest standards of both football and netball leagues throughout Victoria. This Sunday we have the Goulburn Valley Football League grand final. Kyabram are in the grand final. They've been unbeaten in the last 63 games. The Kyabram team have had an unprecedented run of victories. The team largely boasts local players. They'll be up against the highly credentialed Shepparton team—the Shepparton Bears. They have pushed Kyabram in the last three games. With both the netball and the football it's going to be an amazing weekend. There are also a range of other leagues—the Murray league and the Kyabram district league—that will be having their finals. I congratulate all the teams that have found their way through to the grand finals this weekend. We need to make sure that the supporters get there and really support all those athletes, either on the netball courts or on the footy grounds. I wish everyone who is competing all the best. Whether you are successful or go down slightly, congratulations for being in the grand final. Belmont District Hospital Auxiliary 88 10:42 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland The pink and blue ladies, more formally known as the Belmont District Hospital Auxiliary, recently celebrated their 70th birthday. I was very grateful for the opportunity to attend their recent celebration of this important milestone. The pink and blue ladies have provided invaluable support and comfort to patients and their families and the staff at Belmont Hospital. During the 70 years of their existence the auxiliary has raised almost $2 million for lifesaving equipment for the hospital. This is a truly remarkable achievement. Belmont Hospital is just up the road from my electorate office and serves as an important mid-sized facility beside the larger John Hunter Hospital. My constituents in Belmont and many surrounding suburbs rely on these services, especially the GP after-hours service, which provides medical care to patients outside normal business hours so that they don't go directly to the emergency department. The Belmont Hospital, given the population in that area, has a particular focus on senior Australians. Of course it's the role of government to provide world-class and comprehensive health services. Australians rightly expect this, and I am proud of our universal healthcare system. However, volunteer organisations, like the pink and blue ladies, are also an essential part of the health sector. Their contribution is important and much appreciated. Two of the organisation's longest-serving members—Olive Jackson and Bess Birkett—were given the honour of cutting the birthday cake. I thank them both for their service over many decades. Over the last couple of years there has been a change in the culture of the way that the hospital works. The blue ladies at Belmont Hospital now make some of the best cappuccinos, flat whites and lattes in Belmont. They purchased a cappuccino machine when there were changes to the way they could serve and deliver food, and they not only showed their enterprise but continued to grow stronger. It was great to see some doctors at the celebration talking about the quality of the coffee they now offer. For anyone who's had the pleasure of experiencing hospital food, having an auxiliary that really puts love and care into the provision of food and drink is something that is really remarkable. The thing that I was struck by when I was talking to some of the pink and blue ladies was that not only do they provide the material comfort of a hot coffee or some sneaky chocolates for some of the medical staff to get through a long shift they provide emotional support, checking up on patients and looking after families that are doing it tough as their loved ones are going through a particularly tough time. And, as the husband of a nurse, I know they perform a great function by also looking after staff—staff who are harried and who are working extremely long hours looking after the sick in our community. So on behalf of the people of Shortland, I thank the pink and blue ladies for their 70 years of dedication and service to our local community, and I look forward to their next 70 years of service. Trans-Pacific Partnership 89 10:45 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I rise to speak in support of the TPP-11, another trade agreement signed by the coalition government. Over the last five years it has been a focus for the Liberal and National government to deliver those new trade openings, and we have signed or updated seven free trade agreements. Why is that important? Because in my area we rely predominantly on trade, whether that is the tourist trade, the agricultural trade, the services trade or even education, in terms of those international students that come to Australia to get the Australian experience and an Australian education. In fact, while in a previous portfolio role I found a Queensland trained student from the Griffith University working as a protocol officer in Fujairah, and who was also a North Queensland Cowboys supporter. They haven't had a great year this year, but I'm sure there'll be an opportunity for that gentleman in the next season. Mr Albanese R36 He got more than the Rabbitohs! Mr PITT 148150 I notice that the member for Grayndler is in the chamber, and I acknowledge his long support of the South Sydney Rabbitohs! But we are here to talk about trade. Those signed agreements account for 70 per cent of our trade, and current negotiations stand to take that to 88 per cent. This is about security for our producers and about security for our manufacturers. Looking at the TPP-11: it alone will deliver $15.6 billion net annually in benefits to Australia. We should also look at the opposition, because reports in recent days and weeks are that they are once again split. We know they're split on border security and we know they're now split on the TPP. In fact, a report from Rob Harris and James Campbell in the Herald Sun on 18 September said that there was a slight majority of 23 MPs in the Labor caucus that opposed the TPP. So I say to the people of Australia: here are your choices. At the next election, you can vote for a Liberal-National Party government which will continue to have strong trade agreements, which will continue to protect your hard-earned and which will continue to provide you with opportunities, particularly for your product to go into the nations with which we sign these trade agreements. The benefit for you is very straightforward: any tariff reduction provides for you the opportunity for a forward-facing price which is cheaper than your competitor's price. This means you can sell more of your products, it means we can employ more Australians and it means we can deliver more products overseas. Can I say, having travelled to many locations in a previous portfolio, that we provide products that they want; the world wants our trade products. They want our agricultural products and they want our resources. So, once again, the decision is quite straightforward. But I also want to point out comments—apparently, reported or allegedly—from Cathy O'Toole, the member for Herbert, who said that if Labor backed the TPP, 'I don't know how we sell that message'. Well, it's a pretty straightforward message to the people of Herbert, the people of Queensland and the people of Australia: trade means jobs and more trade means more jobs. The more trade agreements we can deliver, as a Liberal-National Party coalition, then the better the opportunity for our people. Shame on the Labor Party if they do not support it. Nuclear Weapons 90 10:49 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has just arrived at Parliament House after a three-week Nobel Peace Ride, touring its Nobel Peace Prize from Melbourne to Canberra. I joined with some of the 71 members of the Labor Party caucus who have welcomed the UN nuclear weapon ban treaty and have been prepared to work with ICAN to see it implemented. Twenty cyclists undertook the Nobel Peace Ride, a 900-kilometre journey which echoed the legacy of ICAN, an organisation that started in 2006 in Carlton, Victoria, and has impacted political conversation in this country and indeed around the world. In 2017, ICAN was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 'for its work to draw attention to the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons and for its groundbreaking efforts to achieve a treaty based prohibition of such weapons'. The Federation of American Scientists estimated that there were 14,485 nuclear weapons in early 2018. In 1986, at their peak, there were approximately 70,000 warheads. While there has been significant progress in reducing Cold War arsenals, this reduction has slowed significantly, and that's a cause for concern. All of us want a safer world for us and our children and grandchildren, and we have seen in recent years the instability that emerges in global politics when nuclear threats arise. These threats not only shape geopolitics but create a climate of fear that permeates through to our own local communities. But there are signs of change. Just yesterday, South Korean President Moon Jae-in and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un made a commitment to undertake active efforts to make the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. Whilst these talks will continue until 2021, it shows the steps that could be taken to ensure the safety of our world. Thank you to ICAN, which promotes locally, nationally and internationally the importance of a world free of the threat of nuclear weapons. It is an example of Australian determination shaping international conversation. I congratulate all those who are associated with today's event and indeed those who have made such an extraordinary effort over the last two weeks to cycle here, to our national capital, from Melbourne. Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety 90 10:51 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite I am delighted to report that people living in Corangamite and across the nation can have their say on the terms of reference for the royal commission that our government has proudly announced into the aged-care sector, through an online feedback tool. This royal commission will primarily look at the quality of care provided in residential and home aged care for senior Australians but will also include young people with disabilities living in residential aged-care settings. As the new Assistant Minister for Social Services, Housing and Disability Services, I'm obviously very pleased that people with a disability, young people living in residential aged care, are included in this royal commission. As the Prime Minister has said, there are thousands of operators, facilities, care providers, nursing and other clinical staff, volunteers, cleaners, cooks and therapists in the Corangamite electorate and across the nation who are out there working hard to improve the lives of senior Australians every single day. We pay tribute to them and we say thank you. However, we all know that, following intensified policing and inspections of the aged-care sector over the past year, information has come to light through the Aged Care Complaints Commissioner, the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency and the Department of Health that makes the case for a royal commission into the sector compelling. The final terms of reference will be determined in consultation with the community, including residents and their families and aged-care providers. On this particular note, I want to pay tribute to two women in my electorate, Kim and Honorine, both of whom are aged-care workers and have been great advocates for reform. They very strongly welcomed the royal commission on the front page of the Colac Herald just yesterday. It's wonderful to see that support resonating throughout the community. We're expecting that the inquiry will cover the quality of care provided to older Australians and the extent of substandard care; the challenge of providing care to Australians with disabilities living in residential aged care; the challenge of supporting the increasing number of Australians suffering dementia and addressing their care needs as they age; the future challenges and opportunities for delivering aged-care services in the context of changing demographics, including in remote, rural and regional Australia; and any other matters that the royal commission considers necessary. Local residents can have their say on the terms of reference via the Department of Health website, at consultations.health.gov.au, or they can write directly to Minister Hunt or Minister Wyatt. I commend as many residents as feel inclined to make that contribution into these important terms of reference. Visas 91 10:55 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie It seems that to get any information on what the government is really planning to do to privatise Australia's visa services, you need to pick up a newspaper. If it's not the Financial Review reporting on the delayed auction to design and run the new visa-processing system, it's the revelations in The Australian about the bid. You certainly don't get much information from the Department of Home Affairs. A recent Senate estimates session confirmed that they're testing the market to see what outsourcing they can do, and they revealed a list of around 1,000 jobs currently involved in visa processing. But none of this addresses the fundamental issue that this government is intent on privatising a sensitive Australian government function. Seriously, what is more sensitive than decisions on who comes into this country and on what terms? And what is the government thinking in giving some or all of that control to the private, for-profit sector? The CPSU has raised a number of concerns about what might end up as policy. They include the prospect that so-called low-risk functions of the Department of Home Affairs might end up fully automated, without a human in sight. Given the government's track record with Centrelink robo-debt, the census and what we're seeing now with My Health Record, can there be anything other than very low levels of community confidence in their ability to even know what the security provisions need to be? The CPSU also predicts a private provider running an online visa system that advertises the services of private companies to applicants as part of their visa application. Presumably the placement of those ads will cost a bomb, because it's pretty much a licence to print money. Can we expect to see a two-tiered system, where those who have the money can fast-track themselves into Australia, courtesy of a hefty fee? And presumably the private provider will take a hefty cut of that fee. Ultimately, no matter what form it takes, we will end up with a private provider managing and deciding who is given visas and how much they cost. I, for one, value the integrity of Australia's Public Service, and I know who I would prefer to have in charge of this sensitive area—and it certainly isn't people who only see this vital service as a way of making a quick buck. Labor will keep working with the CPSU and other affected groups when the government—or perhaps the media—decide to make more information about this process available. Any changes that they are planning need to be disclosed early so they can have proper scrutiny. This is not the sort of thing that you can do a deal on behind closed doors. It has to be in full view and open to scrutiny. Woolworths Drought Relief Milk 91 10:58 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper Recently in this place I raised the issue of the financial strain that my dairy farmers were under as a result of low prices for their milk and increasing costs due to the drought. I'm delighted today to commend Woolworths for their initiative to introduce a new drought relief range into their milk products. I commend them wholeheartedly. Drought relief milk will be sold at $1.10 per litre from mid-October. Woolworths three-litre full cream and lite milk will move from $3 to $3.30 until the new drought relief range hits the shelves. There will be a drought relief committee to ensure that the funds collected under this initiative go directly back to the farmers, which is very welcome. I'm pleased to see that the additional funding will be flowing through to farmers, with that added security of the committee to ensure that the money actually gets there. We often in this place criticise the major supermarkets for activities in the market, but here is a measure that is worthy of commendation. One rider I would put on it is that we have to ensure that this product is readily available on the shelves. I know that when I go into my local supermarket I always like to buy branded milk from the farmer-owned cooperative Norco. Unfortunately, often that milk isn't available on the shelves. The unbranded supermarket brands are available; the branded milk is not. I would hope that, in addition to this great measure, there is a focus on ensuring that stock control is such that customers can actually buy that milk, because I know that they are keen to support it. I commend Coles for coming on board and matching this measure. It's great to see both the major supermarket chains stepping up and assisting our farmers. It has been a huge strain on dairy farmers to meet the additional cost of feed for their herds so that we can enjoy fresh milk every single day, at the same time against a backdrop of low prices. So I give a big shout-out to Woolworths and a big shout-out to Coles. Let's see this new drought relief range hit the shelves. I'm sure that local consumers will fall in behind this measure and support our local dairy farmers. Milk does not come from a supermarket; it comes from a farm, where hardworking dairy farmers get up before dawn every day to ensure that there is fresh milk for us all to enjoy. Thanks, Woolworths; thanks, Coles; and, as always, thanks to our great dairy farmers, who produce such high-quality products. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT In accordance with standing order 193 the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. ADJOURNMENT 92 ADJOURNMENT Richmond Electorate: Rise for Climate Rally 92 11:01 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond On Saturday, 8 September, I attended the Rise for Climate rally and street march in my electorate. This local event was organised by the Caldera Environment Centre in collaboration with community groups from the Tweed, Byron, Lismore and Gold Coast areas. On that day, thousands of rallies were held across the country and in cities and towns around the world to highlight the urgent need for action on climate change and further investment in renewable energy. I was honoured to speak at the event and to outline the urgent need for governments to act to address this very pressing issue. I especially congratulated the hundreds who attended the rally to make their voices heard to ensure we have action on climate change. I also pointed out to the crowd those who were not there. There were no elected representatives from the Liberal or National parties, because they don't care and they blatantly refuse to take action. I also highlighted the chaos we have seen in Canberra, with the climate change deniers now taking over this government. The fact is: we have a Prime Minister and a government who refuse to act. The only way to get action from Canberra on climate change is to change the government. The Labor Party is the party for strong action on climate change. We have a very strong track record and understand the dire need to act. During the term of the last Labor government, we decreased carbon pollution by 11 per cent. We're committed to cutting our carbon emissions by 45 per cent by 2030, and we have a target of 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030. We'll implement plans to ensure we deliver on our pollution reduction obligations in a way that maximises economic and job opportunities and, very importantly, brings down power prices. The fact is that we can cut our pollution and transition to a clean energy economy. In contrast, the Liberals and Nationals have presided over an unprecedented energy crisis, which has seen power prices skyrocket and pollution rise while investment confidence has been smashed. Quite frankly, this is a government of environmental vandals. We see it federally and we see it at a state level in New South Wales. Let's look at the New South Wales government. We have seen their harmful plans to expand coal seam gas mining right across the North Coast, and that's still on their agenda. We see in New South Wales the harsh logging laws that will destroy our precious forests. Up our way, on the Tweed, we've also seen their plan to impose a large hospital at Cudgen, on state-significant farm land. Labor oppose this plan and will continue to fight against it and fight instead for the shovel-ready site at Kings Forest. The chaos and dysfunction of this federal government are highlighted by the appointment of the member for Hume as the new Minister for Energy. This minister is the most anti-renewable, climate-change-denying minister Australia has ever had. He led the campaign to force the Turnbull government to abandon their National Energy Guarantee, which has only made the energy crisis much worse. He has a very long history as an anti-renewable-energy ideologue. That includes fighting to kill Labor's renewable energy target, or RET, which is in fact the only thing currently bringing down prices and pollution. His appointment signals a complete triumph of hard right ideology on energy policy, which is sure to guarantee higher power prices, continued investment uncertainty and rising pollution. Indeed, here are some examples of the minister's anti-renewable and anti-climate-change-science statements. On climate change science he says: The new climate religion, recruiting disciples every day, has little basis on fact and everything to do with blind faith. What an outrageous statement! On the economics of renewable energy he says, 'Large-scale wind: it's very clear that it's not economic on any grounds.' We know exactly what we are going to get from this energy minister. We are going to get no cuts to pollution and a complete abdication of any responsibility to act in the best interests of future generations around climate change. The choice has never ever been clearer. A Shorten Labor government is for lower power bills, investment in renewable energy and cuts to pollution. The Liberals and Nationals are anti renewables, anti climate science and anti any real policies to bring down power prices or pollution. The only way to ensure that action on climate change is taken seriously is by electing a Labor government. Under the Liberal-National government power prices have skyrocketed. We've seen that. That's why a Shorten Labor government will help households and businesses get a better deal on their power prices, overhauling electricity offers available to consumers and scrapping outdated deals so that Australians pay less for their power. Labor's plan would mean households could save up to $165 per year from their energy bills and the average small business customer could save up to $1,500 per year. Only Labor can be trusted to give consumers a fair go when it comes to energy prices. Indeed, Labor has a very proud and strong history of acting to protect our environment and also acting on climate change. I'd like to conclude by again acknowledging the Caldera Environment Centre for arranging this local rally and street march. I thank them for organising it in collaboration with a whole range of very dedicated, interested community groups from the Tweed, Byron, Lismore and Gold Coast areas. It really was a united effort from all of these groups that want to see action on climate change. I would like to finish by especially thanking all of those who attended—the hundreds who attended—to make sure their voices were heard on this important matter. We need to have urgent action on climate change, and it's a Shorten Labor government that will deliver it. Calare Electorate: Netball 93 11:06 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Central-western New South Wales and the Calare electorate have a proud sporting history, and one of the most popular games in our country communities is netball. The Orange Netball Association Toyota Cup 2018 grand final was recently held in Orange at Sir Neville Howse Stadium. It was an absolute cracker of a game which kept crowds on the edge of their seats. After a long and competitive season, the Orange City Lions were up against the Orange Vipers in a battle for the 2018 premiership title. They are two outstanding teams. Only recently they had gone head to head in the major semifinal where the Vipers won in extra time. It was a close match, 46-43, and Saturday's grand final was also an extra-time thriller. The first quarter saw both sides score nine goals. This was the first indication that the game would be a fight until the end. The Orange Lions powered ahead in the second quarter to lead 24-15. They kept up the momentum in the third quarter, with the scoreboard sitting at 34-26 in their favour. The final quarter of the game saw an incredible comeback by the Vipers play out on the court. The score was set at 35-all, but Orange City Lions scored two more goals, putting them ahead by the slimmest of margins. The Vipers held on and landed two more balls through the hoop to even the score at 37-all. Then, with only seconds remaining, the Vipers scored one of the most crucial goals of the game in the final seconds. They had almost secured their grand final win, as the score sat at 38-37. The hope of holding the trophy was taken away just seconds later when the Orange City Lions levelled the score at 38-all. The Lions kept up the pressure in extra time and claimed their 11th consecutive premiership, with the final score being 50-46. I'd like to commend both teams on a wonderful game and also a wonderful season. Firstly, to the Vipers: despite the loss, they showed absolute determination for the whole game. They came extremely close to securing their first title, and I'm sure it will encourage them next season. Well done to their coach, Lynne Middleton, and players: shooter Nicole Thorogood, shooter Teigan Colley, Sophie Fardell, Em Callaway, Sheryll Selwood, Jacky Lyden, Kate Harris, Bridie McClure and Abby Tilburg. Congratulations, also, to the winning side, the Orange City Lions. What an incredible game and a wonderful milestone—11 wins in a row. What a tremendous effort. Well done to the team, including their coach, Cindy Gilchrist; shooter Milly Wilcox—Milly was awarded player of the final and deservingly so; centre Tegan Dray—this was Tegan's 9th grand final win with the Orange City Lions, an unbelievable effort; Sammie Spicer; shooter Kristin Zinga; Maddie Cole; Anna Matthews; Olivia McClure; Ellie Madden; and also Vic Briscoe. I have no doubt that both these teams will be back bigger and better next year. Behind the scenes, the Orange Netball Association has a wonderful committee. They work tirelessly all year round for our local junior and senior netballers. I would like to acknowledge the association's committee members today. I would particularly like to acknowledge president, Jacqueline Jasprizza; vice president, Penny Keegan; secretary, Vicki Pearson; treasurer Jane Dennis; registrar, Naomi Escreet; senior competition secretary, Danielle Annesley; junior competition secretary, Louise Manca; midweek competition secretary, Kate Shepherd; NetSetGo coordinator, Bridie McClure; coaching convenor, Amanda Mooney; umpire convener, Danielle Escreet; representative coordinator, Michele Turner; publicity officer, Erin Campbell; and carnival convenor, Erin Losanno. Committees are vital to any sporting club, and the Orange Netball Association is in very good hands with its dedicated, passionate and wonderful members. Congratulations to everyone at the Orange Netball Association—to the Orange Vipers, who didn't take home the silverware this year, but who put in a wonderful performance, and also to the Orange City Lions, who claimed their 11th consecutive premiership. Netball is a wonderful sport, played by both juniors and seniors right around the Central West. It is through the work of our associations and the support of the parents and players that these competitions continue to be so vibrant. I congratulate everyone at the Orange Netball Association and all the teams who participated this year. Werriwa Electorate: 2168 Children's Parliament 93 11:11 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa I have the great privilege of being an ambassador for the 2168 Children's Parliament. The 2168 Children's Parliament initiative is in its second year and is delivered under the 2168 Communities for Children program, a Commonwealth government early intervention and prevention initiative. It is supported by the Liverpool City Council, the Department of Education and Mission Australia. The child parliamentarians are drawn from years 5 and 6 from 10 local primary schools in the 2168 postcode, which is within my electorate. Approximately 40 children are involved. The children meet regularly over several months in workshops that build debating, research and communication skills. Ten children from the group are elected by their peers to advocate and present to the ambassadors. In addition to myself, the ambassadors included the Mayor of Liverpool, Wendy Waller, and representatives from the National Children's Commissioner, the New South Wales Advocate for Children and Young People, the New South Wales Department of Education and Western Sydney University. The children use the parliament to advocate for topics that they select as important to them. This year's topics included bullying, the environment, pedestrian safety and poverty. Each group not only identified the issues and gaps that related to their topic but sought to provide possible solutions. Each of the groups took up the challenge to advocate their concerns to us, the ambassadors. I was very impressed with the level of research and thoughtfulness of all the presentations. One group in particular was most concerned about the construction of the Western Sydney Airport. They have concluded that the airport should be built as a green airport, powered by solar. I've committed to take their ideas to the Forum on Western Sydney Airport, of which I'm a member. It was a truly amazing morning, listening to these students. They thought deeply and researched widely on the subjects they presented. I commend the Liverpool City Council and its staff for the initiative and the schools' teachers and the ambassadors for giving their time. Most particularly, I commend the students for all their hard work. They are tomorrow's leaders. Early last month, during Education Week I had the privilege to visit Green Valley Public School, one of the schools involved in the 2168 Children's Parliament. Over 60 per cent of our nation's children attend public schools, and Education Week seeks to bring attention to these schools by celebrating the achievements of their students, their teachers and also the wider school community. In keeping with the theme of this year, the audience was treated to a video montage where the children of Green Valley spoke about what they wanted to be when they grew up and why. Among the responses were mechanical engineer, astrophysicist, police officer and journalist. Sadly, but, probably unsurprisingly, 'politician' wasn't amongst them! In addition to Education Week, I visited Green Valley Public School to see the great work the Parents & Citizens Association have been able to achieve as part of round 3 of the Stronger Communities Program. The P&C received a $10,000 grant, which they matched dollar for dollar through their tireless fundraising efforts. These efforts included selling gelato, holding school discos and partaking in the great Australian tradition of the election-day democracy sausage. The grant has produced much needed air conditioning for the school hall, which, in addition to hosting many school activities throughout the year, is used by a number of community groups in the area, including dance, church and language groups. I'd like to thank the Green Valley Public School's principal, Brett Warwick, for organising the event and the school's P&C president, Christy Nguy, for her and her group's hard work. Both the 2168 Children's Parliament and work of Green Valley Public School are tremendous examples of how local agencies, all three levels of government, and the community can work together to create stronger bonds in the local area. I would also like to take the time left to acknowledge the work of David Sim, the principal of Lurnea Public School, for his excellence in education award, which was awarded last week. Like all the schools in Werriwa, Lurnea is led by a very enthusiastic principal. He and his hardworking staff make a wonderful environment for their students to learn in. I was lucky to visit the school late last year. It was obvious, just walking around that school, how engaged the children were and how wonderful they consider their teachers and Mr Sim. I congratulate the school community and Mr Sim on his award. Calare Electorate: Rugby League 94 11:16 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Spring in Calare brings with it grand finals fever. I would like to recognise the Bathurst Panthers Rugby League Football Club for their stellar performance across three grades in this year's grand finals. Firstly, congratulations to the under-18 side, which defeated Orange CYMS with a 20-points-to-eight victory. I'd like to acknowledge and honour each of those players, including: captain, Zac Hunt; man of the match, Ty-Lee Simmonds; try scorers Mackenzie Atkins, Finlay Grabham and Noah Griffiths; Matthew Cole, who was awarded most improved for the Bathurst Panthers at their presentation night recently; Elijah Sharwood, who received the Bathurst Panthers coaches' award; Nathan Ward, who took out the players' player; and Brad Fearnley, who along with Nathan, received the award for best and fairest. I would also like to acknowledge John Bird, Cody Craib, Dylan Miles, Cooper McDaid, Nic Barlow, Matt Ellsmore, Hunter Siejka, Koen Gillespie, Josh Payne, Braydon Burke, Tyrone Locke, Blaze Piper-Hurst and Ty Siaksioni. I'd also like to specially mention coach, John Fearnley—well done, John—as well as manager, Stu Ward; head trainer, Kevin Franklin; and trainer Steve Miles. It was certainly an amazing effort. The Bathurst Panthers reserve grade side fought all season to make it to the grand final, but unfortunately they were unsuccessful. It was a tough game against the rival Bathurst St Pat's side, who emerged victorious after 80 minutes with a score of 27-14. Well done to the boys on an incredible game nonetheless. I'd like to acknowledge: Marcus Turnbull; Ben Dolan; Jason Hewitt; Jace Hood; Stu Peel; Storm Siejka, who walked away with the club's best and fairest award recently at the club's presentation night; Trent Hotham; Tyson Chapple; Johnny Loughlin; Pat McGarry; Adrian Averio; Callum Young, who received the players' player award; Jarrod Gafa; Jamie Crawford; Braydon Wicks; and Zac Burke, who was named the most improved in the side. I would also like to acknowledge Tom Loader, Matt Hodges, Jacob Barnes, Matthew Bohane and also Andrew Bennett, who received the coaches' award for the season. Well done, Andrew. I'd like to acknowledge those who supported the side throughout the year as well, including: coaches Johnny Loughlin and Jarrod Gafa; manager, Adrian Chapple; head trainer, Kevin Franklin and trainers Tony Davis and Grant Walsh. To the Premier League side: the Bathurst Panthers took home the title in the Premier League division with a 12-10 win over the Cowra Magpies. This was the first time since 2007 that the Panthers had made the grand final. The game did not get off to an easy start as they were facing the Cowra Magpies, who had a game advantage. The grand final was a race to the clock, as the sides were only a few points apart the entire game. The premiership was only secured in the dying minutes, and it all came down to a last-minute try by the Panthers that relied on a successful conversion that had to be taken from the sideline. Five-eighth and goal kicker Willie Wright lined up the tee and kicked the footy—kicked the pill—straight through the goal posts in what will go down as one of the best moments in the Bathurst Panthers' history! Congratulations to the team, including captain coach, Doug Hewitt, who made his debut as coach this year and is also the youngest coach in the competition at just 24 years of age—well done, Doug. Brent Seager was awarded the Dave Scott Medal for player of the match and took the Bathurst Panthers best and fairest award and Wilmer Asher Ward—well done, Brent. The try scorers were Blake Hewitt and Andrew Mendes—good on you, guys. Callum Young was named the most improved at the club's presentation night. Jed Betts took home the coaches award. Luke Bain was named player's player for the 2018 season and won the Guys Weeks Memorial Trophy. Congratulations to Josh Rivett, Blake Lawson, Jye Barrow, Kade Barrow, Nick Loader, Dane Thorogood, Blake Seager, Jack Siejka, Kara Rotarangi and Trent Hotham. Well done to the support team, who included manager Danny Dwyer—well done, Danny; head trainer Kevin Franklin; and trainers Tony Davis and Grant Walsh. Grant was named club man of the year. I'd also like to acknowledge the Bathurst Panthers committee on a fantastic season, including the president, Dennis Comerford; senior vice-president, Bill Humphries; secretary, Wayne Boyd; Treasurer, Danny Dwyer; and members Jodie Hodges and Ross Woolmington. Congratulations to everyone at the Bathurst Panthers. They are a wonderful club, and they have had a wonderful season. Clubs like them contribute so much to the life of our country communities. It's a privilege to be able to honour all of the Panthers in the House today. National Disability Insurance Scheme 95 11:21 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter I rise today to highlight the growing hardship suffered by vulnerable people in our community who are attempting to negotiate the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I'm proud that in government Labor built the NDIS. It offered hope and was seen as a circuit breaker for many. However, the implementation of the NDIS over recent years has been a very sad failure. Nearly 10 years on from its formation, it is heartbreaking to see such poor outcomes. Exacerbated NDIS providers and clients describe the NDIS as much worse than the system it replaced. Problems stem from a lack of consistency, untrained and inexperienced planners and a non-functioning complaints system. More troubling, errors in the planning stage have resulted in extensive delays, with little or no communication between the NDIA and the scheme's participants. The real-life impact of these delays is that real people are suffering, and they are suffering regularly. A local provider in Cessnock, for example, has documented many heartbreaking cases of people's basic everyday needs not being met for months on end due to basic errors in the planning process. In October 2017, a client with a spinal cord injury requested a commode chair. Due to an error made by a planner she did not receive this vital piece of equipment, and despite two complaints it still has not been delivered to this date. Similarly, a powered wheelchair was approved in 2016, but due to her plan not being correctly certified by the NDIA she was unable to get out of bed, move around the house or go outside until it was finally delivered, in March the following year. That is unacceptable. Another Hunter man completed a plan in January. The NDIS funded him for supported living, even though he lived with his mother, yet they did not fund any core support for social activities and funded his employment incorrectly, meaning the provider was unable to make the claim. Despite a review, numerous complaints being lodged and an assurance by NDIA staff that his case had been escalated, a new plan review was not booked until six long months later. The impact of these mistakes on this local man's life and his independence have been devastating for him and those close to him. Passionate advocates and providers are spending more time filling out paperwork and devising ways to manipulate the failing system than ever before. The NDIA has also developed its own isolating bureaucratic language. If people don't say the right words they don't get what they desperately need. There are many people in our community who do not have someone to advocate for them and are simply unable to work their way through a confusing and broken system. Sadly, advocates and providers with overwhelming knowledge, skills, experience and history working in this area have described the NDIS's vision and principles as 'just words on a document'. Providers in my electorate have fears that the NDIS has narrowed people's lives down to a dollar figure, failing to see the lives and people behind the plans. The system has created an environment lacking in the much-needed relationship between clients and the NDIS planners to ensure that plans reflect their basic needs, let alone what's required for them to thrive in life. Too many people in my community are feeling pain, are feeling frustrated and feel like they are not being heard. This government has spent too long treating the NDIS like a political football instead of focusing on getting the rollout right. The task for us all is to ensure that the NDIS fulfils its promise to so many Australians with disability who have their hopes for a better life pinned on the NDIS. Hinkler Electorate: Welfare Reform, Hinkler Electorate: Economy 96 11:25 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I rise to talk about the cashless debit card rollout in my electorate of Hinkler. The legislation for this rollout passed both the House and the Senate last week, and I once again thank those senators who had the courage to make the decision to actually pass the legislation, which affects my community and is absolutely necessary. I also want to put on the record my thanks to a number of individuals locally. This will sound strange to those opposite, but in particular I thank Brian Courtice. Brian is the former federal Labor member for Hinkler from quite some time ago who stood in his digs, stood in front of a camera, went on ABC Radio and provided comments to the local papers about his support for the cashless debit card rollout. In his words, it was very, very straightforward for him. He is still a Labor member at heart with his social conscience, even though he is the one who was quoted as saying and says that he still stands by his quote that Kevin Rudd couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag. He was on board for this from the start, and I'm very, very thankful for his support. I also thank Faye Whiffin, who runs the Howard Community Centre, in the small community of Howard. Howard is a small town. Faye looks after the local youth. They have a local youth community group who come in. Faye has been concerned for quite some time about what is happening to the children in that town and what steps can be taken. At the end of the day, this is about action. It is a tough social issue. It is a tough policy. There is no doubt about that, and I have never shied away from the fact that there will be people who are not happy to be on the card. The cashless debit card quarantines 80 per cent of the social services payment for those people under the age of 36—which will affect roughly 6,000 individuals in the Hinkler electorate—if they are on Newstart, parenting payment single, parenting payment partnered or youth allowance (other). Twenty per cent will be provided as cash into their normal account. The reason is quite fundamental. The cashless card cannot be used to purchase alcohol or for gambling or, of course, with the limitation on cash, to purchase illicit substances such as drugs. Ted Sorensen, the state member for Hervey Bay; David Batt, the state member for Bundaberg; and Steve Bennett, the state member for Burnett, all came out in support of the cashless card. Ted Sorenson had a particularly harrowing tale of a family of children who arrived at his office literally starving. He and his staff had to go and purchase food and provided it to them. He has told me that, over a long period of time, these situations have been getting worse, so we do need to take action. Over 18 months of consultation, the feedback from our community was that this was about children. It was a real shock to me to hear just what was happening on the ground. When I went to talk to the people who see this on a regular basis—the doctors, the teachers, the school principals, the nurses, the people who work in the emergency department—their feedback to me was that we needed to do something. This was the only policy on the table, and we are delivering it, as we said we would. But it is not the only thing that we need to take action on. It is not a silver bullet. We need to continue to strengthen our local economy and to provide more local jobs. To do that, the Building Better Regions Fund in my electorate invested $16.3 million in round 1 and another $10 million in round 2, and the Wide Bay Burnett regional jobs and investment package has five projects in Hinkler worth a total of $30.8 million. That will result in 99 construction jobs and, more importantly, 333 ongoing positions. So we are continuing to strengthen our local economy. Pacific Tug is the recipient of one of these grants. It will build a 1,200-tonne ship lift at the port of Bundaberg. That will create up to 100 positions when it is fully functional. The lift will be of a size that can manage small patrol vessels and, more importantly, the Pacific barge fleet, so there will be opportunities for our local economy to continue to refit and work on those types of ships into the future. It has been slightly delayed because they've had some engineering issues with the location. They have now moved to a more suitable site and there is an expectation—I had a discussion with the manager just last week—that the project will be underway in the very short term. We look forward to that construction process and to all of these projects making a difference to our local economy, but tourism and agriculture continue to be the shining stars. Right now it is whale-watching season in Hervey Bay. More than 20 vessels out of the Hervey Bay marina are providing opportunities for tourists to go and see the whales where they actually come to rest. It is somewhere they stay for a couple of weeks to regather their strength after a very long trip. It's a fantastic thing to see and do. In the northern part of the electorate we have all sorts of local producers with tourism facilities, but I want particularly to mention Bundaberg Brewed Drinks, which tomorrow will celebrate its 50th anniversary. It's a family owned company that is now providing its product internationally—right around the world. It provides hundreds of jobs locally. It's been such an important part of our local community. I congratulate once again and send my best wishes to Cliff; the CEO, John Maclean; and the rest of the family. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 I thank the member for Hinkler. We'll have to get up to Hervey Bay. Energy 97 11:31 Dr MIKE KELLY HRI Eden-Monaro I was shocked, appalled and, frankly, angered by what we heard in question time from the new Minister for Energy, the member for Hume, who claimed that there was going to be no renewable energy target following 2020, abandoning ambitious emissions reduction costs but also emissions reductions targets, saying misleadingly that the 26 per cent target would be reached without further intervention by the government, bagging out our emissions reduction target and our renewable energy target and again reciting myths about the South Australian situation. I cannot believe that a minister of the Crown would fly in the face of the massive amount of evidence that is now accumulating. Daily we see headlines like: Claim we're on track to meet emissions targets is false— written by journalists looking at information coming from the minister's own department. Another reads: Australia on track to miss Paris climate targets as emissions hit record highs— that is the trajectory we're on. Another headline said: Scott Morrison needs a plan to cut emissions but all he has is a fairytale. A Guardian article was headlined: Steep emissions reductions targets won't drive up power bills, modelling shows It said that modelling in research by the Australian Council of Social Services showed that a claim by the minister that emissions reduction targets would drive up power bills was absolutely false. The NEG was clearly demonstrated to have failed to achieve those ambitious targets. What it really indicated was that the minister was going to push costs onto sectors of the economy other than the electricity generation sector. What that meant was that we would have seen increased costs for agriculture, mining and manufacturing, and this has been revealed by the IBISWorld analysis of what was being proposed. Industries such as beef, cattle farming, iron ore mining and iron and steel forging would have been among those that would bear the heavy cost of trying to meet those emissions targets. This is a complete failure of government policy in relation to emissions reduction. But in addition to that we are seeing the huge economic impact of not having a strategic plan—there have been five failed attempts by the government during the last five years. S&P Global said: … the best way to reduce prices in the long term was to create a stable, national energy policy that provided clear directions for investment to boost new generation and increase supply. Australia's continued energy policy vacuum risks delaying planned investment in new dispatchable generation capacity across— the national energy market. There has been a massive build-up of expert evidence—expert economic analysis—that shows what the right direction should be. Only in the last few days Deloitte has published a study on global renewable energy trends which gives the lie to the statement about the costs of renewable energy. The report said: Wholesale prices in the top European solar and wind market, Germany, have more than halved over the past decade. In Denmark, which has the world's highest share of intermittent renewables (53 percent), electricity prices exclusive of taxes and levies are among the lowest in Europe. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory estimates that once the United States reaches Denmark's penetration levels of 40–50 percent renewables, some states will see the dawn of "energy too cheap to meter." …   …   … US states with the fewest outages are among the top solar and wind states— when it comes to this myth about unreliability. The study continued: … in Texas, the state's grid reliability metrics significantly improved— due to its ambitious adoption of renewable energy. The grids of Germany and Denmark have also become more reliable over the past decade, even as the latter has seen wind and solar produce 90 percent of the power consumed in its western region for a fifth of the year. The interconnected Danish and German grids are currently two of the world’s most reliable. That's Deloitte; that's not some crazy, green, lefty economic analysis. That is the evidence. I'm only asking the government to follow the evidence. This is the government that's made a lot about trumpeting the Snowy 2.0 project. The whole purpose of the Snowy 2.0 project is to underpin the transition to renewable energy. The Marsden Jacob Associates report into the feasibility of Snowy 2.0 states very clearly that you need a 60 per cent renewable energy target by 2040 to really make the Snowy 2.0 project fly. You just have to go through some of the key quotes in the report. It says: Snowy 2.0 provides substantial market benefits … and lower operating costs The entry of Snowy 2.0 increases the economics of renewable generation and results in additional renewable generation entering under the— sixty per cent target— The market benefits provided by Snowy 2.0 are greater at higher levels of renewable generation. Bonner Electorate: Wynnum and Manly District Meals on Wheels 98 11:36 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Last month I spoke about one of the extraordinary volunteers of my electorate, Irene Edwards. Earlier this year, Irene received a Medal of the Order of Australia for her volunteer work at Wynnum-Manly Meals on Wheels and other local organisations. Today I want to talk about her husband, Ken Edwards, also OAM. Ken is the president of the Wynnum-Manly Meals on Wheels. Thanks to Ken's efforts, the efforts of other Meals on Wheels volunteers and the support of the community, construction on the brand new Wynnum-Manly Meals on Wheels kitchen and community centre at Wakerley has begun. It's been a decades-long journey for Ken and the others. It's a great story I wanted to share—one that others can take inspiration from. I'm proud to support an outstanding organisation like Meals on Wheels. I think we all know someone who Meals on Wheels has helped, whether that person is an aged, frail or disabled relative or a friend. I very much support efforts to improve the quality of life of the most vulnerable members of our society. The coalition government's announcement this week of the aged-care royal commission was very welcome. But, getting back to Meals on Wheels, the volunteers at Wynnum-Manly have made a huge difference at the local level. I turned the first sod at the new Wakerley site last Friday. Let me tell you, seeing the happiness on Ken's face, and how excited everyone was, really made me proud to have secured them $300,000 in federal funding at the last election to fit-out and equip their new facility, as well as a $20,000 Stronger Communities grant that they used to purchase new kitchen equipment. I also have to commend Brisbane City Council and my fellow Liberal, Councillor Ryan Murphy, for making the site available for lease to Meals on Wheels. These are significant investments from the government, but when we compare them to everything the local community has put forward in getting the new Meals on Wheels facility up and running we must admit that they have done an outstanding job. Since 1995 they have fundraised tirelessly to make their new and improved home a reality. Together, they have raised $2.8 million. What an achievement! In Ken's words: 'It's been a very hard slog for this length of time. The hard work and perseverance from everyone involved has been such an inspiration. And I'm glad to see the benefits will flow on to the whole community.' The centre's state-of-the art commercial kitchen will allow Meals on Wheels volunteers to cook, prepare and deliver more hot meals to more homes in the community. That means more people will receive help to stay independent and remain in their homes for longer. The fully equipped kitchen will also ensure that Meals on Wheels can prepare meals to their usual high standards. But that's not all. The centre will have many other features that local groups will be able to use for seminars, public meetings, training workshops and other community events and activities. There'll be a community meeting room available for hire that can hold up to 150 people. Training spaces will be available, as well as a boardroom with a complete audiovisual fit-out, volunteer facilities, a verandah cafe and a separate community kitchen. Sporting spaces will also be available to sports groups in the area, and Brisbane City Council is planning to build netball courts behind the new facility. These will be complemented by a canteen, dressing-room and toilets underneath the new facility. I am so proud to be part of this government, which recognises the importance of investing in vital community infrastructure projects like this. The new Meals on Wheels centre will help those in the community who need it most. It has brought the community together, and when it's completed it will serve to strengthen community ties. It will also provide a boost to the local economy by creating dozens of construction jobs. I can't wait to see the completed kitchen and community centre and join everyone on opening day. I have to thank Ken and the rest of the Meals on Wheels volunteers, and everyone who donated to this worthy project, for their unwavering dedication. Thanks to their efforts, the Bayside community will benefit from this fantastic facility for years to come. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 261393 I thank the member for Bonner for his words and also for drawing the attention of the House to the important work of Meals on Wheels. Northern Territory 99 11:40 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I rise to thank all those parliamentarians that came along to our Facing North event last night in the Mural Hall in Parliament House. It was a fantastic turnout, and on behalf of the Territory businesses and the NT government, which ran the event, I just want to thank honourable members for their time and their interest in the second Facing North event, after the successful first event last year. It was a great night, which I was proud to host, in a bipartisan way, with Senator Nigel Scullion, Senator for the Northern Territory, the senator from the Labor side, Malarndirri McCarthy, and, of course, Warren Snowdon, the member for Lingiari. We were proud to host the event with the Northern Territory government. We had several members of the Northern Territory government there with us last night, including the Chief Minister, Michael Gunner. I also want to acknowledge the driving force behind the event, the Darwin Major Business Group. I thank Ian Kew, the chair of that group, and also, in particular, Ms Jodi Linnett, who was the main organiser of last night's fantastic event. What we managed to do last night in the federal parliament was to showcase the best of the Territory to our nation's political leaders, and to emphasise the absolute importance of the federal government to the Northern Territory. We need to get the right mix of private-led and federal government contributions to make sure that we can unlock the Territory's boundless potential. As the NT Chief Minister, Michael Gunner, said last night, the Northern Territory is Australia's natural hub for national and regional security. But it's also the Territory's and Australia's natural hub of friendship, peace and cooperation—positive engagement with our region. The Territory is Australia's natural leaping-off point into the markets, minds and imagination of the booming Indo-Pacific area. We once talked about the rise of Asia and the Asian century, and that's true, but in the lexicon of today it's the Indian Ocean, the subcontinent and all the way through the Indonesian archipelago into the great nation states of Asia and the Pacific. I just want to make some acknowledgements and put those on the record. I want to thank the Prime Minister for attending and for addressing the gathering. I also want to acknowledge the fantastic speech and great support of the Northern Territory by the opposition leader, Bill Shorten. We had the Administrator of the Northern Territory, Vicki O'Halloran, visit our federal parliament for the first time. Of course, Michael Gunner was there, as I mentioned, and also our Treasurer, Nicole Manison. Also there were Ken Vowles, Lauren Moss and Gary Higgins, the Leader of the Opposition in the Northern Territory. We had local government representatives from the Top End in Kon Vatskalis, the Lord Mayor of Darwin; Athina Pascoe-Bell, the Mayor of Palmerston; and Maree Bredhauer, the Mayor of Litchfield Council. I've already mentioned Ian Kew, but his contribution to this event was significant. I will also mention Michael Tennant and Andy Cowan from the Department of the Chief Minister and from the Department of Trade, Business and Innovation. Jodi Linnett put on a fantastic event. It was her second time running it and she made a massive effort. I'll quickly run through some of the stallholders who shared their passions with the attendees last night: Parrtjima Caterpillar, made by the Arrernte people; Darwin Aboriginal Art Fair Foundation; Karen Sheldon Catering; Kungkas Can Cook; Landbridge hotel; Darwin Turf Club; Darwin Festival; Red Centre Devil beer; the Menzies School of Health Research; and, as I've mentioned, the Darwin Major Business Group. Shellie Morris and Stevie Jean, with Dale Austin, were fantastic performers. I want also to acknowledge Adriana Dent from Albertini Couture, Vervain by Crocosaurus Cove, Something Wild Beverage Company, Toll, Karen Sheldon, Sprout Creative, Arnhem Mangoes and Humpty Doo Barramundi. Thank you all for coming and being part of this great event. Wentworth By-Election 100 11:45 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway In a couple of weeks time, on 20 October, the people of Wentworth will have the opportunity to take part in a festival of democracy. I know the people of Wentworth are discerning voters. In this by-election they will make their choice based on issues that are important to them. And we know that some of the issues that are important to them relate to the communications portfolio, which I'll get to in a moment. It's interesting that the people of Wentworth will get their chance to send a message to this divided and dysfunctional Morrison government for the treachery of the Liberal Party towards one of Wentworth's favourite sons, Malcolm Turnbull. They'll have their opportunity to have their say at the ballot box. Tim Murray, Labor's candidate, does not have the machine or the cash behind him that we know the Liberal candidate will have, but one thing that Tim Murray does have is his principles. He is someone who is not only hardworking, authentic and local but deeply concerned about two issues that I will raise today, which are the ABC and the National Broadband Network. I say to the voters of Wentworth: here is your opportunity, in this by-election in Wentworth, to ask the Liberal candidate how he feels about the promise that was made by the then Abbott opposition that there would be no cuts to the ABC or SBS. Since then, the Liberals have cut around half a billion dollars from public broadcasting. They've launched what has been described as the biggest assault on the ABC's independence in decades. The now Prime Minister himself signed off on the latest $83.7 million in cuts to the ABC in this year's budget, and the now Prime Minister reappointed Senator Mitch Fifield, a card-carrying member of the IPA, an organisation that advocates privatising the ABC, Minister for Communications. Right now, the Liberals have three bills before the parliament to meddle with the ABC's independent functioning. They've got two inquiries into public broadcasting as part of a deal they did with One Nation. So I call on the voters of Wentworth to ask where the Liberal candidate stands on the ABC's funding and on the ideological attacks being perpetuated by this rotten Morrison government against our public broadcasters. Let's see what his answer is. Let's see how the Liberal candidate explains to the voters of Wentworth why the Liberals have made these cuts which—and I quote the ABC themselves: … will make it very difficult for the ABC to meet its charter requirements and audience expectations. I turn to the issue of the National Broadband Network in the seat of Wentworth. I know the dissatisfaction that many local residents have. Some of it has been quite well-publicised. For example, in February this year, when we found out that Malcolm Turnbull had not only superfast broadband but a standard of service that the rest of Australia could only dream of, we were enlightened by this report in The Australian: Penny Street … described her quest to be connected to the NBN as "grossly inefficient" and a "nightmare". Lady Street, whose sandstone home, designed by Walter Burley Griffin, overlooks Shark Island to the left and Mr Turnbull's rose-coloured mansion to the right, said she was "back to square one" after being visited by technicians "upwards of four times". "It's frankly ridiculous," Lady Street said. "In the process of the NBN installation, our computers and telephones stopped working. We lost internet capability in our Indian and Cambodian offices because those computers are linked to my server here. "We couldn't do any business in Asia. That's what went on for three days." Let's see what the Liberal candidate in Wentworth thinks about this second-rate NBN. We know that large parts of Wentworth are still waiting for access, despite the fact that they were promised this project would be completed in 2016. If you live in Clovelly, you are still waiting. If you live in Double Bay, you are still waiting. If you're in Waverley, you're still waiting. These are areas that are predominantly HFC, and a pause had to be put on this technology at the end of last year because it is so bad. This project is now $22 billion over budget, and people in Wentworth are still waiting. The Liberal candidate should be made to explain why. Freight Rail 100 11:50 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray Last Friday I had the honour of making an announcement that the federal government is going to fund a study into freight rail within the Goulburn Valley, to deliver a vision for rail freight into the future. The produce in New South Wales always has to be shipped out of Botany. About eight to 12 months ago, the New South Wales government said, 'If we can find a better option to get our produce to any port, we will look at that.' So they invested $500,000 in a study which is looking at the viability of taking produce from the Riverina region to the Port of Melbourne. Of course, that will only get the produce from approximately the Narrandera region down to Tocumwal. What happens beyond that is obviously of the making of the Victorian government and the national government. What we have here is a great opportunity, where the two states of New South Wales and Victoria could work together to see if it works out in the interests of the farmers to have their produce shipped to a different port, with lower terrain to overcome, which would therefore mean a much cheaper way of getting their produce to port. Our commitment is to try to find the best way of getting freight from south of the Murray River through to the Port of Melbourne. It's a bit of a hotchpotch at the moment, because we have no passenger lines north of Shepparton. From Strathmerton through to the Shepparton area, we have some laid-down broad-gauge line, which is not going to assist New South Wales produce coming through. A vision will probably have to see that parcel of line standardised from Shepparton through to Mangalore, where it meets what will end up being the Inland Rail line. That is currently broad gauge also, and we may need another track, in standard gauge, next to it or hopefully within the same corridor. There are a whole raft of different visions and logistics that need to be worked through, but the fact is that we are building the $9.5 billion Inland Rail. We are building that. It is going ahead. It has started. It is this government that has actually got that project up and going, to create that corridor of commerce all the way from Brisbane down through Parkes, with an opportunity to go into Port Botany at Sydney or to keep coming south down to the Port of Melbourne, taking thousands and thousands of trucks off the roads and getting produce to market via rail. For an increasing level of commodities, it is much more efficient and economic for the farmer if they can be transported on rail. We still need transport to go from port to distributor and to the retail outlets, and from farm gate to rail, so there is still an enormous need for road transport. That is why, I imagine, with all the produce that's coming out of the Goulburn Valley—some 1.3 million tonnes, projected to grow to 2.5 million tonnes by 2035—there is always going to be a very, very strong need for road transport throughout the Goulburn Valley. There are other commodities, such as grain. There is a lot of cotton from New South Wales that finds its way down to Shepparton and therefore needs to be transported into the ports. Again, this could be much more efficiently done if it were transported on rail. We know the current rail system in Victoria, in its northern Victorian stretch, is limited to just 15 kilometres per hour as it goes over the bridge at Tocumwal. Once the temperature gets above 32 degrees, which is often, it is limited to 40 kilometres per hour in speed. There are load limits on this line. I think the $900,000 that the Australian federal government has put forward for an absolutely holistic vision for rail freight throughout the southern Riverina area and possibly through to the port of Melbourne is going to deliver the vision that we all need. It will then need significant investment by the federal government, again, to make sure that that vision becomes a reality, and we will find a cheaper, more efficient way to get our produce to market by rail. Infrastructure 101 11:55 Mr CREWTHER 248969 Dunkley There are a few things that are more frustrating in the working day than the slow and sluggish drive to and from work or the painful search for a car park when catching the train. That's the message I hear constantly from constituents in my electorate of Dunkley. This government is committed to reducing road congestion so that residents in my electorate of Dunkley and across Australia can spend more time with their families and less time stuck in peak-hour traffic jams that are only getting worse. The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics said in 2015 that total passenger travel in Australian cities has grown almost tenfold over the last 70 years, with private road vehicles currently accounting for 87 per cent of the aggregate urban passenger task. As at the 2016 census night, 71,471 people identified as being in the labour force in Dunkley, but only 31 per cent of those residents actually work in Dunkley, creating significant congestion issues in and out of the electorate. This also means a large volume of people are catching the train from Frankston, Kananook and Seaford stations, resulting in a shortage of available parking. Also people from outside the electorate, all down the peninsula, in the Casey areas and beyond come to take the trains from those stations. In order to deal with the growing congestion issues in Dunkley and around Australia we must adequately fund the required construction, upgrades and improvements of our roads, rail and other infrastructure I am proud to be a part of a government which is investing record amounts in congestion busting projects. I've spoken many times in this chamber about the Frankston to Baxter electrification project, which now has $453 million on the table, with $228 million budgeted from the federal government and $225 million from the state Liberals, if elected, secured by both Michael Lamb, the Liberal candidate for Frankston, and Donna Bauer, the Liberal candidate for Carrum. This extensive project, which is the largest transport infrastructure project in Dunkley's history, will extend Metro rail to stations servicing Frankston East—so, between Frankston Hospital and Monash University—Langwarrin and Baxter. It will also provide a significantly increased service for the surrounding suburbs and towns. It will also involve the electrification and duplication of the line between Frankston and Baxter. It will build new park-and-ride facilities, in particular at Langwarrin but also at Baxter, closer to people's homes, freeing up parking at Frankston, Kananook, Seaford and Carrum train stations. It will create over 4,000 local jobs, reducing road congestion, lowering emissions and improving connectivity. Together with other federal and state Liberals, I'm proud that we have secured funding for this very important project, which will greatly ease both urban congestion and parking pressures in the electorate and beyond. Recently, the Liberal candidate for Frankston, Michael Lamb, also secured $30.3 million from an elected Victorian Liberal state government for multistorey car parking near Frankston station, which will greatly help to resolve the parking issues throughout Frankston and the wider community. In addition, one of the major issues that people in Carrum Downs and Skye raise with me on a regular basis is the urban congestion on Hall and Ballarto roads and the difficulties in simply getting in and out of their residential streets and shopping centres. This means more time on the road, more stress, safety issues and less time at home with their families. So I've been advocating and fighting for major roads infrastructure funding for both Hall and Ballarto roads to resolve the significant issues at these residential and shopping intersections, including the potential duplication of these roads so people can more easily and safely turn left and right on and off their streets and get home sooner. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Cities, Urban Infrastructure and Population, Alan Tudge, to advocate for this urgently needed funding and to discuss the delivery of the $453 million Frankston to Baxter rail extension, which will also take cars of these congested roads, meaning less commuting time, more time spent with families, easier access to local shops and homes—and, combined with that, the rail transport that the community needs. I will continue to advocate for major infrastructure funding for Ballarto Road and Hall Road as well as for the delivery of the Frankston to Baxter rail project. I'll continue to work hard on behalf of my constituents in Dunkley to deliver the congestion busting infrastructure that is needed, whether it is rail or road investment. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 12:01