The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
That the House:
(1) notes that:
(a) the Senate passed the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2) on 9 September 2019 and the bill was sent to the House for debate on 10 September 2019;
(b) the Government has prevented all attempts to debate and vote on the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2) in the House;
(c) the Government ignored a resolution of the Senate on 10 February 2020 calling on the House to vote on the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2); and
(d) in May 2020, the Attorney-General said that legislation to establish a Commonwealth Integrity Commission would be further delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, despite an exposure draft being "ready for release";
(2) calls on the Government to stop blocking debate and vote on this critically important issue; and
(3) agrees that government business order of the day No. 47, National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2), be called on immediately and passage of the bill through all stages take priority over all other business during periods of government business until its completion.
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Melbourne from moving the following motion—That the House:
(1) notes that:
(a) the Senate passed the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2) on 9 September 2019 and the bill was sent to the House for debate on 10 September 2019;
(b) the Government has prevented all attempts to debate and vote on the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2) in the House;
(c) the Government ignored a resolution of the Senate on 10 February 2020 calling on the House to vote on the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2); and
(d) in May 2020, the Attorney-General said that legislation to establish a Commonwealth Integrity Commission would be further delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, despite an exposure draft being "ready for release";
(2) calls on the Government to stop blocking debate and vote on this critically important issue; and
(3) agrees that government business order of the day No. 47, National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2), be called on immediately and passage of the bill through all stages take priority over all other business during periods of government business until its completion.
That the Member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [09:38]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
That the member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [09:43]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
The House divided. [09:46]
The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith
That Mr Zappia be discharged from the Select Committee on Regional Australia and that, in his place, Ms L. M. Chesters be appointed a member of the committee.
Broadcasting Services Amendment (Regional Commercial Radio and Other Measures) Bill 2020
That this bill be now read a second time.
Education Legislation Amendment (2020 Measures No. 1) Bill 2020
That this bill be now read a second time.
National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:
(1) affirms the need to determine a site for the storage of radioactive waste, particularly in light of Australia's international treaty obligations;
(2) acknowledges that nuclear medicine is fundamental to our world-class health care system; and
(3) supports a parliamentary committee inquiry into relevant matters, such as:
(a) concerns raised by and the involvement of interested parties, including traditional owners;
(b) costs, funding arrangements, and employment levels associated with the facility;
(c) potential impacts on affected communities; and
(d) the adequacy of the Community Investment Fund and related compensation".
The matter is pressing. Our current store facilities will be full sometime in the next decade, maybe a bit sooner
A government decision on the entity responsible for the waste management technical coordination function—
has yet to be determined and is required before an Intermediate Level Waste disposal project timeline and budget can be determined.
ARPANSA is aware that some stakeholders have interpreted ARPANSA's decisions regarding the IWS—
as a requirement for relocation of the waste stored in the IWS, even suggesting that there is an urgent need for relocation. This is not correct. ARPANSA has not raised safety concerns regarding storage of waste at the IWS. ANSTO seems to share this view. ANSTO has indicated to ARPANSA that the mandatory recertification of the TN-81 casks every 10 years can be carried out at the IWS …
States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
Native Title rights have been extinguished at the specified site; however, Aboriginal heritage, either tangible or intangible, may still be present.
9. The Commonwealth generates and holds the vast majority of Australia's intermediate level radioactive waste. Most of this waste is held by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) in Lucas Heights, Sydney. ANSTO currently has about 1,211 cubic meters of legacy intermediate level waste in storage and an expected volume of 1,849 cubic meters of future intermediate level waste.
10. The Commonwealth generates and holds the vast majority of Australia's low level radioactive waste, and most of this waste is held by ANSTO in Lucas Heights, Sydney. ANSTO currently has about 2,711 cubic meters of legacy low level waste in storage and an expected volume of 4,685 cubic meters of future low level waste.
The House divided. [12:48]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
The House divided. [12:54]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
(1) Schedule 1, item 15, page 7 (after line 24), at the end of subsection 19B(1), add:
Note: Any native title rights and interests that exist in relation to the additional land are not affected by this section (see subsection (3)).
(2) Schedule 1, item 15, page 7 (line 31), after "than", insert "any native title rights and interests that exist in relation to the land and".
(3) Schedule 1, item 15, page 8 (after line 4), at the end of section 19B, add:
(4) In this section:
native title rights and interests has the same meaning as in the Native Title Act 1993.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Payment Times Reporting Bill 2020
Payment Times Reporting (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2020
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House expresses concerns over deficiencies in the bill, including:
(1) the lack of certainty that the measure will lower payment times;
(2) the light treatment of supply chain financing; and
(3) the ability for businesses to hide extremely long payment times to small businesses".
Through a new procurement policy we will require those same large businesses seeking to tender for government contracts to match our 20 day payment policy.
Without Government intervention, payment times from large to small businesses are unlikely to materially improve.
… introducing the payment times reporting scheme was an election commitment of the Government.
Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
I am the one who stumbled across him, but everyone found him…
“Australia is going to need its biggest engines of the economy firing and construction is one of those big engines,” … “It’s important that every planning authority and local council is taking its responsibility in this very seriously. They need to have a laser-beam focus in regards to assessing these projects and assessing them much faster.
We're confident that the Australian people will be able to have their say on an Indigenous voice this year.
Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and of private Members' business and consideration of bills introduced 10 June 2020 to 12 June 2020
1. The committee met in private session on Thursday, 11 June 2020.
2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified and private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 15 June 2020, as follows:
Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)
COMMITTEE AND DELEGATION BUSINESS
Presentation and statements
1 STANDING COMMITTEE ON PROCEDURE
Inquiry into the practices and procedures relating to question time.
The Committee determined that statements may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.15 am.
Speech time limits —
Mr Vasta — 5minutes.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 1 x 5 mins]
2 JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON MIGRATION
Inquiry into migration in regional Australia.
The Committee determined that statements may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.25 am.
Speech time limits —
Mr Leeser — 5minutes.
Next Member speaking — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]
3 AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATION
Report of the Parliamentary Delegation to the 40 th General Assembly of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly in Bangkok, Thailand, and to the Philippines and Malaysia.
The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.30 am
Speech time limits —
Mr Hogan — 5minutes.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 1 x 5 mins]
4 JOINT COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT
Report 481, Efficiency and Effectiveness: Inquiry into Auditor-General ' s Reports 25, 29, 38, 42, 44, 45 and 51 (2018-19).
The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.40 am.
Speech time limits —
Mrs Wicks — 5minutes.
Next Member speaking — 5minutes.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]
5 JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE ON AUSTRALIA'S FAMILY LAW SYSTEM
Update on the activities of the committee.
The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.45 am.
Speech time limits —
Mr K. J. Andrews — 5minutes.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 1 x 5 mins]
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Notices
1 MR BANDT: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 , and for related purposes. (Fair Work Amendment (One in, All in) Bill 2020 )
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.
2 MR WILKIE: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 , and for related purposes. (Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Sustainable Procurement Principles) Bill 2020 )
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.
3 MR PERRETT: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the Family Law Act 1975 , and for related purposes. (Family Law Amendment (A Step Towards a Safer Family Law System) Bill 2020 )
( Notice given 2 March 2020. )
Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.
4 MR B. K. MITCHELL: To move—That this House:
(1) notes that:
(a) in 2019 the independent 11-member Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal did unanimously recommend that the extraordinary bravery of Ordinary Seaman Edward 'Teddy' Sheean should be recognised with the posthumous awarding of the Victoria Cross; and
(b) the Government rejected the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal's unanimous recommendation; and
(2) calls on the Prime Minister to take immediate action to reverse the Government's rejection of the tribunal's recommendation, and take the actions necessary to progress the tribunal's recommendation.
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Time allotted — 25minutes.
Speech time limits —
Mr B. K. Mitchell — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
5 MRS MCINTOSH: To move—That this House:
(1) acknowledges that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the establishment of formal diplomatic relations between the Commonwealth of Australia and the United States of America;
(2) recognises the diplomatic relationship is the foundation of the broader strategic, defence and economic partnerships between Australia and the United States;
(3) acknowledges:
(a) the significance of the recent state dinner between President Trump and Prime Minister Morrison on 20 September 2019; and
(b) the appointment of United States Ambassador to Australia, Mr Arthur Culvahouse Jnr, on 19 February 2019;
(4) encourages that the anniversary be a reaffirmation of our shared commitment to promote and uphold democratic values, freedoms and the rule of law at home and abroad;
(5) further acknowledges that a strong, bilateral relationship is vital for our continued shared economic prosperity and national security, as Australia and the United States:
(a) face increasingly complex and frequent threats that aim to undermine the integrity of democratic institutions and national sovereignty; and
(b) share the benefits of a robust trade and investment relationship valued at US $1.1 trillion that creates and sustains jobs; and
(6) commemorates the bravery, service and sacrifice of United States firefighters Captain Ian H McBeth, First Officer Paul Clyde Hudson, and Flight Engineer Rick A DeMorgan Jr who tragically lost their lives while fighting bushfires in the Snowy Monaro area, New South Wales, on 23 January 2020.
( Notice given 2 March 2020. )
Time allotted — remaining private Members ' business time prior to 12 noon
Speech time limits —
Mrs McIntosh — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue at a later hour.
Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Notices
1 MR GILES: To move—That this House:
(1) recognises:
(a) the significant contribution made by Chinese-Australians to Australia;
(b) that all people in Australia, regardless of their ethnicity, cultural or religious background, deserve to be respected in our society;
(c) that Australia is the most successful multicultural society in the world and that Australia is strengthened by our diversity; and
(d) the important role our multicultural communities have played in stopping the spread of the coronavirus;
(2) notes that the COVID-19 crisis has seen a number of appalling racist attacks on Chinese-Australians;
(3) condemns these shocking racist attacks; and
(4) supports promoting a zero tolerance approach to racism in Australia.
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Time allotted — 40minutes.
Speech time limits —
Mr Giles — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
2 MR RAMSEY: To move—That this House:
(1) notes that there are:
(a) 1.3 million Australians with diabetes registered on the National Diabetes Services Scheme, with over 280 new people diagnosed and registered each day and an estimated 500,000 Australians with type 2 diabetes which remain undiagnosed; and
(b) an estimated 2 million Australians with pre-diabetes and at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes in the next 5-10 years;
(2) acknowledges:
(a) diabetes is a complex metabolic disorder, which if not diagnosed early and treated well may lead to serious health complications such as blindness, limb amputation, heart disease and stroke, and kidney disease; and
(b) the Government's long standing commitment to improving the treatment and care of people with diabetes through establishing the Australian National Diabetes Strategy, the roll out of continuous glucose monitors and flash monitors to children, young adults, health care card holders and women with type 1 diabetes who are pregnant, while noting the need for all type 1 diabetics to have affordable access to this important technology, as well as the recently launched Diabetes in Schools program, the KeepSight program, and programs to prevent diabetes related amputations;
(3) congratulates Australian of the Year 2020, Dr James Muecke AM for his work as an ophthalmologist working in many poor and developing nations, and for raising public awareness of the need to prevent type 2 diabetes through encouraging healthier lifestyles and healthier environments; and
(4) calls on all state and federal governments to re-commit to a refreshed Australian National Diabetes Strategy and to fund and develop a national diabetes prevention program.
( Notice given 2 March 2020. )
Time allotted — 40minutes.
Speech time limits —
Mr Ramsey — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
3 MS SHARKIE: To move—That this House:
(1) notes that:
(a) water is a scarce and highly valuable resource in Australia; and
(b) Australia is prone to droughts and many parts of our country have recently experienced their worst droughts in living memory;
(2) registers its concern that:
(a) foreign entities, some implicitly backed by foreign governments, are substantially increasing their holdings of Australian water rights;
(b) Australian agriculturalists are increasingly competing with these foreign entities to secure the water rights upon which their livelihoods depend; and
(c) the acquisition of water rights is not directly subject to the approval of the Foreign Investment Review Board;
(3) congratulates the Government on committing to reform the legislation governing the Foreign Investment Review Board; and
(4) calls upon the Government to, in those reforms:
(a) ensure that water rights are directly subject to Foreign Investment Review Board approval, independent to the acquisition of agricultural land to which those rights sometimes attach; and
(b) lower the threshold for Foreign Investment Review Board approval for agricultural and water rights to $5 million.
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Time allotted — 35minutes.
Speech time limits —
Ms Sharkie — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 7 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
4 MR YOUNG: To move—That this House:
(1) commends the Government's Pacific Step-up and its focus on building prosperity across the regions, including by encouraging close links between Australian business and investors with the Pacific;
(2) recognises that the Pacific is part of Australia's family and that we have a special relationship with our Pacific neighbours; and
(3) notes that the significant Australian investment in key infrastructure projects, such as the Coral Sea Cable, is providing positive economic and social opportunities to communities in the Pacific.
( Notice given 2 March 2020. )
Time allotted — remaining private Members ' business time prior to 1.30 pm
Speech time limits —
Mr Young — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 7 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm)
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
Notices—continued
5 MS COLLINS: To move—That this House:
(1) notes:
(a) the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on older Australians, their families, their carers and the aged care workforce;
(b) the valuable contributions made by the more than 360,000 aged care workers who have continued to deliver care and support to older Australians during the COVID-19 pandemic;
(c) all aged care workers play a valuable role to deliver care and support to older Australians in residential and home care;
(d) many aged care workers are low paid and around 87 per cent of them are women;
(e) the Government's decision to exclude a large proportion of aged care workers from receiving the retention bonus;
(f) excluded aged care workers who will not receive the retention bonus include those delivering services under the Commonwealth Home Support Program as well as in-direct care workers in residential aged care facilities including lifestyle and leisure therapists, cleaners, hospitality workers and gardeners;
(g) the exclusion of any aged care worker from receiving the retention bonus is unwarranted and unfair;
(h) on 20 March 2020 the Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians issued a media release that stated the retention bonus payment would be 'after tax'; and
(i) on 5 June 2020 the Department of Health's retention bonus guidelines stated the payment would be 'subject to income tax';
(2) conveys its disappointment that the Government made:
(a) a decision to exclude about 40 per cent of aged care workers from receiving the retention bonus; and
(b) a late decision to switch the retention bonus from being after tax to being before tax that will see aged care workers lose hundreds of dollars they were previously promised;
(3) calls on the Government, as a matter of urgency, to reconsider its decision and pay the retention bonus to all aged care workers irrespective of their role or where they work and to explain why it changed the rules around the payment being after tax to the payment now being subject to income tax; and
(4) acknowledges the work all aged care workers undertake each and every day and thanks them for their continued dedication to care and support older Australians in residential and home care.
( Notice given 10 June 2020. )
Time allotted — 45minutes.
Speech time limits —
Ms Collins — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
6 MR THOMPSON: To move—That this House:
(1) notes:
(a) the work the Government is doing to address the issue of veteran suicide with the announcement of an independent National Commissioner for Defence and Veteran Suicide;
(b) that a new independent National Commissioner will be appointed to identify and investigate suicide amongst Australian Defence Force and veteran population; and
(c) that a new Veteran Family Advocate will be appointed to lead engagement, liaison and advocacy amongst families and will be at the heart of policy and decision making with the Department of Veterans' Affairs; and
(2) recognises mental health and suicide are complex issues, but issues that are everyone's business—families, friends, employers, community organisations, governments and the ex-service community.
( Notice given 3 March 2020. )
Time allotted — 40minutes.
Speech time limits —
Mr Thompson — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
7 MS CLAYDON: To move—That this House:
(1) acknowledges that:
(a) an effective public service relies on skilled public servants who have fair and equitable conditions of employment and job security;
(b) the Government's arbitrary average staffing level (ASL) policy is:
(i) driving privatisation as it forces agencies to outsource their core functions;
(ii) causing a blowout in spending on contractors, consultants and labour hire; and
(iii) leading to a hollowing out of the public service; and
(c) evidence to the Australian Public Service (APS) Review indicates that contractors cost 40 per cent more than permanent APS employees;
(2) notes that:
(a) the Australian National Audit Office Information Report No 19 of 2017-18, Australian Government Procurement Contract Reporting , indicates that in 2016‑17:
(i) Government spending on consultants was close to $700 million, up from around $380 million in 2013; and
(ii) 'the big four' had 1,617 consultancy contracts worth $502.1 million since 2012‑13;
(b) more than $400 million has been spent on privatising Department of Human Services call centres, including a $135 million contract for Stellar Asia Pacific, $132 million to Concentrix Services, $120 million to Datacom Connect and $36 million to Serco Citizen Services;
(c) the National Disability Insurance Agency:
(i) recorded a 600 per cent increase in consultants and contractors over two years—from $70 million in 2016 to $430 million in 2018; and
(ii) has previously stated its staffing levels would be 10,595 staff in 2018-2019—this is now capped at 3,230 in the 2019‑20 budget with core functions such as local area coordinators outsourced; and
(d) the Government's billion dollar plan to privatise Australia's visa system will lead to increased visa costs, data and national security risks and job losses; and
(3) calls on the Government to:
(a) abolish the arbitrary and damaging ASL policy;
(b) ensure that workers doing the same job get the same pay to stop the use of labour hire from undermining the pay and conditions of existing workers; and
(c) end the secrecy on government spending on contractors, consultants and labour hire firms.
( Notice given 15 October 2019. )
Time allotted — 40minutes.
Speech time limits —
Ms Claydon — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
Orders of the day
AUSTRALIA-US RELATIONSHIP: Resumption of debate on the motion of Mrs McIntosh—That this House:
(1) acknowledges that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the establishment of formal diplomatic relations between the Commonwealth of Australia and the United States of America;
(2) recognises the diplomatic relationship is the foundation of the broader strategic, defence and economic partnerships between Australia and the United States;
(3) acknowledges:
(a) the significance of the recent state dinner between President Trump and Prime Minister Morrison on 20 September 2019; and
(b) the appointment of United States Ambassador to Australia, Mr Arthur Culvahouse Jnr, on 19 February 2019;
(4) encourages that the anniversary be a reaffirmation of our shared commitment to promote and uphold democratic values, freedoms and the rule of law at home and abroad;
(5) further acknowledges that a strong, bilateral relationship is vital for our continued shared economic prosperity and national security, as Australia and the United States:
(a) face increasingly complex and frequent threats that aim to undermine the integrity of democratic institutions and national sovereignty; and
(b) share the benefits of a robust trade and investment relationship valued at US $1.1 trillion that creates and sustains jobs; and
(6) commemorates the bravery, service and sacrifice of United States firefighters Captain Ian H McBeth, First Officer Paul Clyde Hudson, and Flight Engineer Rick A DeMorgan Jr who tragically lost their lives while fighting bushfires in the Snowy Monaro area, New South Wales, on 23 January 2020.
Time allotted — 20minutes.
Speech time limits —
All Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
Notices—continued
8 MR ALEXANDER: To move—That this House:
(1) notes that between 1 and 2 per cent of the Australian population suffers from heart failure, with this proportion higher in Indigenous communities;
(2) acknowledges with concern the rising cost of care for the growing number of Australians with heart failure, including the duration and frequency of hospitalisation, medical management and health complications;
(3) further notes that research from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare states that over 60,000 heart failure hospital admissions, amounting to over 400,000 bed days and a cost to the healthcare system of $3.9 billion are potentially preventable;
(4) welcomes the arrival of proven technologies, including trans catheter mitral valve repair, which have demonstrated transformative improvements in addressing underlying causes of heart failure including functional and degenerative mitral regurgitation;
(5) commends the support given by clinicians, advocates, carers and families of Australians suffering from heart failure;
(6) welcomes with appreciation the announcement of the Government's commitment of $220 million over 10 years for the Cardiovascular Mission under the Medical Research Fund;
(7) acknowledges the Government's commitment to address all forms of heart disease under the National Action Plan for Heart and Stroke;
(8) notes the current consideration by the Medical Services Advisory Committee of transcatheter mitral valve repair; and
(9) calls on the Government to ensure all Australians have early access to proven procedures and technologies, such as transcatheter mitral valve repair, where indicated, to address the rising healthcare burden and premature mortality represented by heart failure.
( Notice given 3 March 2020. )
Time allotted — remaining private Members ' business time prior to 7.30 pm
Speech time limits —
Mr Alexander — 5minutes.
Other Members — 5minutes each.
[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]
The Committee determined that consideration of this should continue on a future day.
3. The committee determined that the following referral of a bill to a committee be made—
Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs:
THE HON A. D. H. SMITH MP
Speaker of the House of Representatives
11 June 2020
The damage caused by the Government's unlawful income compliance, or 'Robodebt' program.
A re-elected Coalition Government will:
Some welfare recipients make genuine mistakes—
No one who genuinely needs social welfare … and who is honestly disclosing their employment income … will be worse off under our commitment.
The Government will increase the number of assessments of people receiving payments through Centrelink, where data-matching with the Australian Taxation Office suggests the need for such a review. The reviews will seek to identify people who have failed to declare, or may have under-declared, income or assets to Centrelink. This measure will reduce overpayments and will lead to the recovery of amounts already incorrectly paid.
The measure will provide net savings of $589.2 million …
The Government will increase the number of assessments of people receiving payments through Centrelink, where data-matching with the Australian Taxation Office suggests the need for such a review.
A new data matching initiative between Centrelink and the Australian Taxation Office is expected to claw back millions of dollars from welfare recipients who have debts with the Australian Government.
… the tax garnishee process had been carried out manually once a year for the past 15 years and involved a significant amount time … The automation of this process will free up resources …
It is important that the Government explores different means of debt recovery to ensure that those who have received more money than they are entitled to repay their debt.
Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Flexibility Measures) Bill 2020
That the amendments be agreed to.
That Mrs Archer and Dr Martin be appointed as supplementary members of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs for the purpose of the committee's inquiry into family, domestic and sexual violence.
That the House take note of the reports.
That the orders of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.
Payment Times Reporting Bill 2020
Payment Times Reporting (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2020
… it is very hard to establish whether disclosure regimes have any effect.
… one piece of the puzzle but it won't solve the problem of late payment times on its own.
Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
… it is totally unacceptable for big businesses to use supply chain financing arrangements as a replacement for reasonable payment terms being offered, 30 days or less from invoice.
Third-party financing must not replace reasonable payment terms being offered 30 days or less from invoice and paying to those terms. It is not acceptable for large businesses to use small suppliers to optimise their cash flow.
We support the Payment Times Reporting Framework as one piece of the puzzle, but it won't solve the problem of late payment times on its own.
Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
We support the Payment Times Reporting Framework as one piece of the puzzle, but it won't solve the problem of late payment times on its own.
Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
Late payments by large business to small business account for 53% of invoices.
This means that $115 billion worth of payments to small business are late and stops $7 billion of working capital being available to small businesses every year.
… the Payment Times Reporting Framework as one piece of the puzzle, but it won't solve the problem of late payment times on its own. Legislation requiring SMEs to be paid in 30 days is the only way to drive meaningful cultural change in business payment performance across the economy.
The House divided. [19:01]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)
That this bill be now read a third time.
Payment Times Reporting (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2020
That this bill be now read a third time.
Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Amendment (APRA Industry Funding) Bill 2020
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes:
1. the Government has failed to provide adequate policy certainty in the superannuation sector; and
2. smaller credit unions and customer-owned banks have borne a disproportionate burden in funding the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority due to the Government’s failure to update funding formulas in a timely manner".
The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr L O'Brien) took the chair at 10:00.
A joy for me over the years is the connections I have made with students and their families.
… … …
This has been one of the greatest blessings for me.
… somebody was entangled with the evolution of the 2019-nCoV coronavirus.
In addition to the origins of natural recombination and intermediate host, the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan …
There have always been good reasons for Australia to pursue sovereign industrial capabilities. Labor has long argued the case for lifting local manufacturing capacity that complements and builds on our comparative advantages.
Since 4 January 2012 when the Human Rights Parliamentary Scrutiny Act 2011 commenced:(1) How many officers in your department have worked on human rights compatibility statements.(2) How many human rights compatibility statements have been issued.(3) What is the APS level of staff who have worked on these statements and what is the salary range of each of those levels.(4) Approximately how many hours of staff time has been spent preparing compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.(5) What is the estimated cost to your department of producing compatibility statements, over the period January 2012 to present.(6) What is the estimated annual cost of producing human rights compatibility statements.(7) On how many occasions has the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from your department about the human rights compatibility statements prepared by your department.(8) On how many occasions has this resulted in changes to the legislation presented by your department, and can details be provided of any changes that have been made.
(1) How many officers in your department have worked on human rights compatibility statements.
My department does not keep records that would allow the ready identification of the number of officers who have worked on individual human rights compatibility statements.
Human rights compatibility statements are drafted by officers in the policy area responsible for the relevant legislation. The APS level of the drafting officers may range from graduate to Executive Level. The draft statements are reviewed by legislation and legal officers in my department. Consultation may also be undertaken on a statement outside of my department, for example, with the Human Rights Unit in the Attorney-General's Department. Finalised statements are reviewed and cleared at the SES level prior to submission to me for approval.
(2) How many human rights compatibility statements have been issued.
During 2017, 2018 and 2019, 74 human rights compatibility statements have been issued for legislation (including legislative instruments) administered by the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources (or its predecessors). The research involved to answer this question for additional years would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources.
(3) What is the APS level of staff who have worked on these statements and what is the salary range of each of those levels.
The APS level staff that may work on a statement can range from preparation at the graduate level through to review and clearance by the responsible SES officer.
My department's Enterprise Agreement for 2019-2022, which applies to APS and Executive Level employees and specifies salary levels, can be accessed on my department's website (https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/enterprise-agreement-2019-2022).
(4) Approximately how many hours of staff time has been spent preparing compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that could identify the hours of staff time spent preparing human rights compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Quantifying the number of hours that staff time may be spent on a statement would depend on a number of factors, including the level and experience of officers, the number of staff working on the statement, and the complexity of the statement. Simple statements that do not engage any human rights are less resource-intense than a complex statement which addresses a number of human rights and requires a detailed assessment.
(5) What is the estimated cost to your department of producing compatibility statements, over the period January 2012 to present.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that would readily identify the estimated cost of producing compatibility statements.(6) What is the estimated annual cost of producing human rights compatibility statements.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that would allow identification of the estimated annual cost of producing compatibility statements.
(7) On how many occasions has the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from your department about the human rights compatibility statements prepared by your department.
During 2017, 2018 and 2019 the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from my department on one occasion, in relation to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2018.(8) On how many occasions has this resulted in changes to the legislation presented by your department, and can details be provided of any changes that have been made.
None. The response provided by the then Minister for Resources and Northern Australia satisfied the committee that the measures in the Bill were likely to be compatible with human rights. Accordingly, it was not necessary to make changes to the legislation.
Since 4 January 2012 when the Human Rights Parliamentary Scrutiny Act 2011 commenced:(1) How many officers in your department have worked on human rights compatibility statements.(2) How many human rights compatibility statements have been issued.(3) What is the APS level of staff who have worked on these statements and what is the salary range of each of those levels.(4) Approximately how many hours of staff time has been spent preparing compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.(5) What is the estimated cost to your department of producing compatibility statements, over the period January 2012 to present.(6) What is the estimated annual cost of producing human rights compatibility statements.(7) On how many occasions has the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from your department about the human rights compatibility statements prepared by your department.(8) On how many occasions has this resulted in changes to the legislation presented by your department, and can details be provided of any changes that have been made.
(1) How many officers in your department have worked on human rights compatibility statements.
My department does not keep records that would allow the ready identification of the number of officers who have worked on individual human rights compatibility statements.
Human rights compatibility statements are drafted by officers in the policy area responsible for the relevant legislation. The APS level of the drafting officers may range from graduate to Executive Level. The draft statements are reviewed by legislation and legal officers in my department. Consultation may also be undertaken on a statement outside of my department, for example, with the Human Rights Unit in the Attorney-General's Department. Finalised statements are reviewed and cleared at the SES level prior to submission to me for approval.
(2) How many human rights compatibility statements have been issued.
During 2017, 2018 and 2019, 74 human rights compatibility statements have been issued for legislation (including legislative instruments) administered by the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources (or its predecessors). The research involved to answer this question for additional years would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources.
(3) What is the APS level of staff who have worked on these statements and what is the salary range of each of those levels.
The APS level staff that may work on a statement can range from preparation at the graduate level through to review and clearance by the responsible SES officer.
My department's Enterprise Agreement for 2019-2022, which applies to APS and Executive Level employees and specifies salary levels, can be accessed on my department's website (https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/enterprise-agreement-2019-2022).
(4) Approximately how many hours of staff time has been spent preparing compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that could identify the hours of staff time spent preparing human rights compatibility statements and responding to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Quantifying the number of hours that staff time may be spent on a statement would depend on a number of factors, including the level and experience of officers, the number of staff working on the statement, and the complexity of the statement. Simple statements that do not engage any human rights are less resource-intense than a complex statement which addresses a number of human rights and requires a detailed assessment.
(5) What is the estimated cost to your department of producing compatibility statements, over the period January 2012 to present.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that would readily identify the estimated cost of producing compatibility statements.(6) What is the estimated annual cost of producing human rights compatibility statements.
Answering this question would involve a substantial and unreasonable diversion of resources. My department does not hold data that would allow identification of the estimated annual cost of producing compatibility statements.
(7) On how many occasions has the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from your department about the human rights compatibility statements prepared by your department.
During 2017, 2018 and 2019 the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights sought a response from my department on one occasion, in relation to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2018.(8) On how many occasions has this resulted in changes to the legislation presented by your department, and can details be provided of any changes that have been made.
None. The response provided by the then Minister for Resources and Northern Australia satisfied the committee that the measures in the Bill were likely to be compatible with human rights. Accordingly, it was not necessary to make changes to the legislation.
How many Australians are now earning more than their normal wage because they're receiving the JobKeeper subsidy of $1,500 per fortnight?
Dear Clerk
On 12 May 2020, I took a question on notice during Question Time from the Member for Whitlam regarding the number of Australians who are now earning more than their normal wage because they are receiving the Jobkeeper subsidy of $1,500 per fortnight.
I am advised that the data the Member has requested is not available.
This has also been confirmed by the Treasury in response to a question asked by the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 on 8 May and by the Finance Minister in response to a question asked in the other place on 12 May 2020.
I have copied this letter to the Leader of the House, the Hon Christian Porter MP, and the Member for Whitlam.
Yours sincerely
THE HON JOSH FRYDENBERG MP
10/6/2020