2021-02-15 46 1 5 House of Reps 0 1

Monday, 15 February 2021

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

PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS 1 PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS Speaker's Panel 1 10:01 The SPEAKER 00APG Pursuant to standing order 17(a), I lay on the table my warrant revoking the nomination of the honourable member for O'Connor and nominating the honourable member for Swan to be a member of the Speaker's panel to assist the chair when requested to do so by the Speaker or the Deputy Speaker. DOCUMENTS 1 DOCUMENTS Agreement for Members to Contribute Remotely to Parliamentary Proceedings 1 Presentation 1 10:01 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce by leave—I table an Agreement for Members to Contribute Remotely to Parliamentary Proceedings. It probably doesn't require, now that it's become more commonplace, a great deal of explanation, but this document and its terms are in very similar form to the previous iteration of it. I think on this occasion the substantial difference is that we can have remoting into the Federation Chamber. Obviously, the reason that this has become necessary is the unfortunate situation that has arisen in Victoria. COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 1 Report 1 10:02 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I present the 21st report of the Petitions Committee for the 46th Parliament, comprising 127 petitions and 106 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented. This is the first report of the Petitions Committee for what I hope will be a prosperous and happy year for all. Since my last presentation, in December, the committee has continued to receive and consider new petitions on a range of diverse topics. Many have concerned the challenges that we face with the COVID-19 virus—in fact 19 petitions and 26 ministerial responses included in this presentation are concerning matters relating to the virus—but petitioners also continue to be concerned with a range of other longstanding and important issues such as taxes, the environment, education and politics, which are also included in this report. On another note, the committee has recently launched an inquiry into aspects of the House petitioning system relating to security and accessibility. Through this inquiry, the committee will investigate how best to maintain the important responsibility we have in ensuring a petitioning system that is accessible and easy to use but also provides acceptable levels of security to reduce instances of fraudulent activity and to maintain the integrity of the petitioning process. This is an important balance that the committee has taken seriously, and we look forward to considering where improvements can be made. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I look forward to further updating the House on the work of the committee and the progress of the inquiry. PETITIONS 1 PETITIONS Climate Change 1 COVID-19: Australians Overseas 2 Members of Parliament: Conduct 2 Australian Republic 2 Climate Change 2 Human Rights 2 Pensions and Benefits 2 Welfare 3 Kurri Kurri: Gas Plant 3 Climate Change 3 COVID-19: Vitamin D 3 COVID-19: Vitamin D 3 Aged Care 4 Glenmorgan Street: Broadband 4 Education 4 Climate Change 4 Climate Change: Old Growth Forests 4 Pensions and Benefits 5 Media 5 Mental Health: Medicinal use of Psychedelics 5 Diabetes 5 Ex-Offenders: Ban the Box Campaign 6 COVID-19: Australians Overseas 6 COVID-19: Australians Overseas 6 COVID-19: Quarantine 6 Transport: Noise Pollution 6 National Disability Insurance Scheme 7 Social Media 7 Online Shopping: Country of Origin 7 Coeliac Disease: Availability of Gluten Free Food 7 Social Media 8 Members of Parliament: Conduct 8 COVID-19: Income Support Payments 8 United States Presidential Election, Media 8 National Anthem 9 Immigration 9 COVID-19: International Students 9 National Anthem 9 Australian Consumer Law 9 Australian Parliament House Petitions Website 10 Epilepsy 10 COVID-19: Australians Overseas 10 Renewable Energy 10 Commonwealth Bank 11 United States Presidential Election, Australian Elections 11 Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability 11 COVID-19: Vaccination 11 COVID-19: Australians Overseas 12 Government Accountability 12 Social Security Arrangements between Australia and France 12 Stokes, Mr Kerry, AC, Australian War Memorial Council 12 Human Rights 13 Medicinal Marijuana 13 Tudge, Hon. Alan 13 Australian Defence Force: Reparation Payments 14 COVID-19: Vaccination 14 Climate Change 14 Members of Parliament: Entitlements 14 COVID-19: Vaccination 14 Men's Health and Wellbeing 14 Republic of Artsakh 15 Afghanistan 15 Child Support Agency 15 Parliament 16 National Gold Supply 16 Veterans 16 Land Ownership 16 COVID-19: Vaccination 17 Media 17 Veterans 17 Airport Noise 17 Taxation 17 Waste Management and Recycling 17 Climate Change 18 Gender Based Pronouns 18 Southern Moreton Bay Islands 18 Ambulance Services 18 Graduate Visas 18 Tobacco Taxation 18 COVID-19: Vaccination 19 Diabetes 19 Trade with China 19 Climate Change 19 COVID-19: Vaccination 19 Vaccination 20 Film Industry 20 National Security 20 COVID-19: Business 20 Welfare 21 Climate Change 21 Cybersecurity 21 Medicinal Marijuana 21 Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme 22 Compulsory Voting 22 COVID-19: Vaccination 22 Fuel 22 Parliamentarians' Superannuation 23 Citizenship 23 Asylum Seekers 23 COVID-19: Vaccination 23 Medicare 23 Sport 24 Elections 24 Sport 24 China: Human Rights 24 Human Rights: Africa 24 Fuel Excise 25 China: Human Rights 25 Compulsory Voting 25 China: Human Rights 25 Members of Parliament: Religious Affiliation 25 Herpes Simplex Virus 25 Overseas Students 25 Australian Public Service 26 Aged Care 26 Income Tax 26 Climate Change 26 No Call Register 27 Multiculturalism 27 Energy 27 Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 28 Crohn's Disease 28 Aboriginal Deaths in Custody 28 Defence (Inquiry) Regulations 2018 28 Health Care 29 Falun Gong 29 Migration 29 COVID-19: Tourism 29 PETITIONS 30 PETITIONS Responses 30 10:02 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I present the following ministerial responses to petitions previously presented: Australia Day 30 Trade with China 30 Climate Change 31 United States of America 31 Australian Constitution 31 Education 32 Aboriginal Deaths in Custody 33 Economy 33 E-Cigarettes 34 Royal Commission: Disability Services 34 COVID-19 35 Death Penalty 36 Medicare 37 COVID-19: Education 37 Australian Red Cross 38 Legal Industry, Education 38 Lebanon 39 COVID-19: Health Care 39 Family Court 39 COVID-19: Vaccine 41 JobSeeker Payment, JobKeeper Payment 41 Employment 42 COVID-19: Hydroxychloroquine 42 COVID-19: Vaccine 43 Australian Republic 44 Health Care 44 COVID-19: Vaccine 46 Environment 46 Health Care 47 COVID-19: International Travel 47 Falun Gong 48 Australian Flag 49 Falun Gong 49 Falun Gong 50 Falun Gong 50 Aboriginal Deaths in Custody 50 Human Rights 51 Murray-Darling Basin 52 Newstart Allowance 52 Climate Change 53 Nuclear Energy 53 Australia Day 54 Child Support Scheme 54 Transport Industry 56 COVID-19 56 Pensions and Benefits 56 COVID-19: Biosecurity 57 Corruption 57 Online Travel Agents 58 Live Animal Exports 59 HomeBuilder 59 Cryptocurrency 59 Education 60 JobKeeper Payment 61 Australian Defence Force 61 Taxation 62 Azerbaijan, Armenia 62 COVID-19: International Travel 62 COVID-19: Employment 63 COVID-19: Vaccine 64 Consumer Law 64 COVID-19: Hydroxychloroquine 65 Bridging Visas 66 Parliamentary Representation 66 Health Care 66 Charitable Organisations 67 Temporary Graduate Visas 67 Banking and Financial Services 68 Disability Support Pension 69 Marriage Visas 69 COVID-19: International Students 69 Environment 70 COVID-19: Business 70 COVID-19: Vaccine 71 Veterans 71 COVID-19: Real Estate 72 COVID-19: State and Territory Border Closures 72 COVID-19 73 Privacy Law 74 Australian Currency 74 COVID-19: Vaccine 75 Energy 75 Freedom of Information 76 Tobacco Regulation 77 Mental Health: Youth 77 Morrison Government 77 COVID-19 78 Department of Veterans' Affairs 78 COVID-19 79 Environment 79 Banking and Financial Services 80 COVID-19: International Travel 80 Gambling 81 News Media Bargaining Code 82 News Media Bargaining Code 83 COVID-19: International Travel 83 Environment 84 Airport Noise 84 COVID-19: International Travel 85 Queensland: Road Infrastructure 86 COVID-19: Lockdowns 86 Environment 87 General Practice 88 Commonwealth Integrity Commission 88 BILLS 89 BILLS Migration Amendment (Common Sense for All Visas) Bill 2021 89

Migration Amendment (Common Sense for All Visas) Bill 2021

First Reading 89 Second Reading 89 10:05 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I move: That this bill be now read a second time. In introducing this bill I have a sense of deja vu. We've been here before. Indeed, I feel like the proverbial goldfish going around and around in the bowl. 'Here I am again. Oh, look, there's the minister out there making the same announcement for the third time.' But he doesn't actually make any of the changes he announces, so around we go and here we are. This bill should not be necessary, as the minister should have fixed this problem with a stroke of a pen last year, by just amending the migration regulations. But he has failed to do so. So here we are again. This bill is very simple: it's just common sense. All it does is allow people who are already safe here in Australia to stay here and have their offshore visa granted in Australia, instead of having to fly overseas and back again during the pandemic. Literally, that's it. It will predominantly benefit untold thousands of partners of Australians or their parents, as they're the most common of these visa categories. But the bill would fix the same problem for more than 30 other visa types. The minister's current regulations contain what could be called the FOFI rule—the fly-out and fly-in. The rule requires applicants for visas who originally applied when they were offshore and who are already in Australia to leave Australia just so their visa can be granted. Traditionally people took a quick trip to Bali or New Zealand and came back, and that was okay. But we're now in the middle of a global pandemic! We don't want people taking risky trips overseas if they don't have to: transiting through international airports and hotels, then flying back to Australia to quarantine, risking the spread of more contagious forms of COVID-19. The bill would also benefit a small number of Australians who are stuck or working overseas from being forced to fly in and fly out. I spoke a few weeks ago to a man who applied for his wife's partner visa two or three years ago when they were living in Australia. They've now relocated to Germany for work and they're due to come back to Australia in July next year, but the government has told them their visa is ready to be granted but they have to come back to Australia in the next few months—in a pandemic! If they don't come back, they'll have wasted the $8,000 fee and years waiting. But on quarantine right now there are 40,000 Australians still stranded overseas, desperate to come home. The Prime Minister just keeps making announcements. He promised they'd be home by Christmas, but it's all spin. The queue just keeps gets longer. Let's be very clear why. It's because the Prime Minister has refused to take responsibility for anything difficult. Under the Constitution, quarantine is a Commonwealth responsibility, yet for nearly a year the Prime Minister has just ducked and weaved, blaming the states for the lack of capacity or the issues we've seen across the country with hotel quarantine. Nothing is ever the Prime Minister's responsibility! He's just a powerless and impotent little man—until there's credit to be snatched then he pops up on TV, wraps a few flags around him and pretends he's in charge of something. It's bad enough that the Prime Minister has failed to act, but it's beyond ridiculous that the Morrison government has itself been caught wasting precious quarantine places by forcing people to make unnecessary trips overseas just so the computer will spit out their visa. This has affected the partners, the parents and the children of Australian citizens and the employees of Australian businesses. This bill will stop this madness. I honestly have no idea why the minister hasn't just fixed this. I really don't. The government's known about this problem for nearly a year. I've written numerous letters. I've spoken to successive ministers. Australians have bombarded these ministers, crying out for common sense to prevail, but ministers have inexplicably failed to act. They have however announced the same things three times! In November, the then minister made a panicked Saturday night announcement to try and shut down negative media criticism two days ahead of the last bill I introduced relating to partner visas. Note that point: common sense or decency does not work with this Liberal government. They don't respond to real problems or ordinary people. They're not a government, they're a marketing department masquerading as a government, so they only respond to negative media stories. Makes sense I suppose given they're led by a mini-Trump populist Prime Minister. But after the minister's announcement in late November, nothing actually happened! No detail, no timeline, no certainty. Just an announcement. So thousands of Australian families were forced to spend thousands of dollars more on visa extensions and other fees over Christmas. After the minister announced that he would make the change for partners of Australians, we were bombarded by the parents of Australians who had been offered a parent visa. They spoke up and they said, 'Hey, government, if you're going to change this stupid rule for partners, why not us?' These are older people, more vulnerable to COVID who the government was sending threatening letters to saying, 'You need to fly out of Australia within 28 days then fly back again to have your $46,000 visa granted.' The government's response to this was that 'parents are not family members'. I thought it was a joke when a journalist told me that was the minister's response. Then I saw it in the newspaper and in countless letters to Australians: 'Parents are not immediate family members.' And so in December I gave notice of this bill and the media campaign continued. I want to thank all the courageous people who spoke up and shared their story. I've been in touch personally with hundreds of Australians and I understand now the pain, the cost and the impact of the government's ongoing failure to act. There was a moment of hope when the previous minister—the guy who presided over the robodebt fiasco, the guy who wasted $92 million on a failed visa and citizenship privatisation and did nothing about this mess—got promoted to be the education minister. I mean good for him! It's terrible for schools, TAFEs and universities, but I thought: 'Well, he's gone. Maybe the next one will show some common sense.' But no. The threatening letters kept coming, telling parents to leave and come back again. The spin cycle repeated itself though because eventually, to shut down the negative media, the new minister made a second announcement in late January, that he would change the rule for partners and also for parents! I mean if we're trying to be glass half full, we could ignore the fact he just announced the same thing a second time for partners, and focus on the fact that suddenly parents are family! Despite the announcement, still no action from the marketing department. But then two days ago, we got a third announcement, as the minister again panicked to shut down ongoing negative media ahead of this debate. This time the minister announced some dates on which he 'intended' to make the changes. That's not a commitment to do so. It's just an 'intention'. So why, members may ask, would Australians keep campaigning and pushing for the change if the government keep saying they'll do it soon? Why vote for this bill today? It's because the ongoing delay and uncertainty is expensive and cruel. People have no work rights until their visa is granted, meaning families are going broke with one partner (or sometimes parent) unable to work. People can't buy property, they can't buy a family home, they can't sign a contract, they can't sign a mortgage and they miss out on the home grants. People keep forking out thousands of dollars, hand over fist, for visa fees, health and character checks, flight cancellations and changes, and international student fees, in some cases, for their kids—tens of thousands of dollars because the minister can't find his pen and sign the bit of paper. People don't trust this government to deliver—some people have gone and come back again, wasting tens of thousands of dollars on flights and quarantine places. I've heard from families about the anxiety and fear that the uncertainty is causing, especially for elderly parents. It might sound silly in here, but people have these letters. They believe what the government says—that they have to leave—and they're scared of dying from COVID when they're forced to go overseas. The final thing I'll say is that this bill fixes the whole problem, not just part of the problem. The government has only said it will fix this rule for partners and parents. Not the more than 30 other visa categories that would still be forced to make unnecessary overseas trips during the pandemic. A most egregious example is an emergency doctor I spoke with who has been working in a major Melbourne hospital for more than two years. The government has finally advised him and his wife that their 461 permanent resident visas are ready to be granted—but he and his wife, a busy engineer, have to fly overseas and back again to get them. The government's changes won't affect that visa. As a doctor he told me he knows just how dangerous COVID is. Why would the government force anyone to fly overseas and back again? So he went to his local MP, the member for Higgins, who's sitting over there—she is herself a doctor—but she failed to act or speak up for him. She might have been too busy on Sky News or something. It was unbelievable. So even if the government eventually does what they've announced, it will still not fix the problem. The principle underlying this bill is that no person should be forced to make an unnecessary, expensive and risky overseas trip during a pandemic just to have their visa granted. The proposition is that the minister should have the power to grant any visa onshore or offshore during the pandemic. It's common sense. Of course even if this bill passes it's of no comfort to numerous Australians who have blown their savings making that risky trip. One couple reported in the media spent $67,000 on airfares, delays and quarantine overseas and in Australia just to get their visa granted; they were already safe here. And there remains a much, much bigger mess in the partner visa program. Tens of thousands of couples remain separated, not because of the pandemic, but because of the government's cruel, illegal mismanagement of the partner visa program over many years. The budget announcements don't go nearly far enough and entrench effective discrimination. The plight of prospective marriage visa 300 visa holders is especially fraught and cruel. I will have more to say on this elsewhere. I commend the bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? Mr Perrett HVP I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. The SPEAKER 00APG The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Approval of Overseas Service) Bill 2021 92

Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Approval of Overseas Service) Bill 2021

First Reading 92 Second Reading 92 10:16 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That this bill be now read a second time. For 36 years, parties in this parliament have been pushing for oversight in the deployment of troops to fight in foreign wars. Sending Australians—potentially to their death—is one of the most important decisions politicians have to make. It is a decision that is made with unchecked powers of the executive branch of government, but should require approval of the parliament, like much of the rest of the world requires before they send their troops to war. The wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq were all wars Australia got involved in with the Prime Minister exercising the powers as though they were a monarch. They didn't even consult cabinet. All those invasions were disasters. Yet for 36 years, both coalition and Labor governments have joined together to stop any attempts of requiring parliament's approval to send Australians off to fight other country's wars. The Democrats introduced this bill in 1985 and 1988 and 2003 and the Greens have introduced it in 2003, 2014 and now again in 2021. Now it should be debated in the House of Representatives, where by extension we represent the Australian people who should be able to examine the case for war. This bill and these powers have always been right. Australia should always have been at the rank of other countries who require some form of parliamentary or congressional approval before they send troops off to war or keep them there. But it is especially timely again now. It's timely again now because of the incredibly serious documentation of war crimes by our elite special forces in Afghanistan. The four-and-a-half year inquiry that culminated in the Brereton report shows why such powers are needed. This is a point that my colleague Senator Steele-John made in the other place. He made the point: "It is now clear"—with respect to that war and the findings from the report—"that continual deployment without strategic direction was a clear part of the context in which these crimes occurred. This legislation would ensure that in future we are clear on our purpose for engaging"—or re-engaging or continuing to engage—"in armed conflict abroad and allow for a re-examination of the case for continuing." It is too late to stop what those 19 special forces soldiers did, and that should now be referred to the authorities, the AFP, for war crimes, but what this bill can do is minimise the chance of it happening again in countries that have been afflicted by war. What this bill does is require the approval of this parliament for the deployment of Australian troops overseas. There are provisions in the bill that deal with exigent circumstances where urgent decisions need to be made but provide that parliament would be called and recalled very quickly to approve decisions that are made. That would allow for a full debate in the first place about whether or not we should be putting our troops in harm's way and potentially exposing them to death, but also, importantly, this bill would require the parliament to make that approval ongoing. In other words, it requires the parliament to be informed about the progress of wars the parliament has approved that Australia's troops get involved in and also the continual re-approval. That would allow parliament to potentially help prevent the kinds of atrocities that we saw, because it would require parliament to be making strategic decisions about whether or not we should be continuing to put our troops in harm's way. That has been something that has been sorely lacking: the parliament has been denied the opportunity to debate whether we should go to war or whether we should stay at war. When we are putting Australian soldiers' lives on the line we owe it to them to at least have that debate and then to say that the parliament is backing the decision. The parliament, being the overseer for the deployment of troops, is supported by 84 per cent of Australians, according to a recent Roy Morgan poll, which is a six per cent bump since that same question was asked in 2014 after then Prime Minister Tony Abbott decided Australia would invade Syria. We owe it to our constituents to support this bill. It is their democracy. It is their armed forces, their neighbours and their loved ones who may have to go off and fight. It can't be another 35 years of brazen, unchecked warmongering before this bill finally passes and the parliament can have the final say on who lives, who dies and who we trust not to violate the human rights of others in conflict situations. It is difficult to understand the objection to this unless you are an executive government who wants to preserve the right to send troops overseas for political purposes. That could be the only reason to run and hide from the scrutiny, because all this bill is asking is for a debate and an approval by this parliament before we send troops off to war. We have been involved in too many political wars over the years. Too many wars have been commenced or have been continued for political reasons, not because Australia's national interest is under threat. We have been the only country that has followed the United States into every war, and it has had huge consequences for our people and for our troops. It is time, if we are to be truthful in our commitment to our members of the Australian Defence Force, to at least have the debate here before we deploy troops and continue to approve their deployment. In the remaining time that I have, I invite the seconder of this bill to contribute to the debate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? 10:23 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark I second the bill and note that parliamentary war powers reform is something that the member for Melbourne and I have been advocating for for a great many years. In Australia, the Prime Minister alone can send the country to war, which is dangerous, unnecessary, outdated and out of step with the practice in many parliamentary democracies, including the United States, the United Kingdom and a number of countries in Western Europe. We have seen the gut-wrenching impact of this in the dreadful and ongoing consequences of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That shocking and unnecessary intervention, almost exactly 18 years ago, was decided upon on a whim by then Prime Minister John Howard personally. It was a war based on a lie, and this parliament must ensure it is never repeated. The decision to deploy troops overseas is not one that should be taken lightly. It affects all of us, not just the Defence Force, and should be made by the parliament and not just the Prime Minister and his mates. That he or she consults with the cabinet is simply not good enough. After all, the decision to resort to deadly force is one of the most significant decisions any government can make. It is not some politician's plaything but instead a decision requiring the most stringent scrutiny. Research released by Roy Morgan late last year shows that over 83 per cent of Australians believe the prerogative to decide whether to send our troops into armed conflict abroad should rest with the parliament. Eighty-three per cent of Australians understand, that going to war is the most momentous decision that can be made on their behalf and, in a democracy, it's their elected representatives who should have that responsibility, not the Prime Minister. So I say to all members: please listen to the Australian people and support the member for Melbourne's private member's bill, because some things should be above party politics and it's undeniable that war powers is one of them. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Amendment (Transparency in Carbon Emissions Accounting) Bill 2021 93

National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Amendment (Transparency in Carbon Emissions Accounting) Bill 2021

First Reading 93 Second Reading 93 10:27 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark I move: That this bill be now read a second time. According to the Bureau of Meteorology, Australia is heading towards 4.4 degrees of warming by the year 2100, which undeniably would have a catastrophic impact on every aspect of life in this country. Frankly this is science we simply cannot afford to ignore, so we must rapidly change policy in line with the advice which is to significantly and rapidly reduce our carbon emissions. But so far the government has done the opposite, continuing to muddy the waters on Australian carbon emissions by making false claims that we're on track to meet our modest Paris Agreement targets and continuing to rush it's dangerous and distracting gas led recovery. Perhaps the greatest con of all in the government's approach is the claim that we're world leaders on climate change, which ignores the privileged accounting starting position we continue to enjoy and which still gives life to the likelihood of Australia using carry-over credits if it's to achieve any of its climate targets and aspirations. No wonder Dr John Ross, adjunct professor in the School of Natural Sciences at the University of Tasmania, tells me that the only way the government can possibly reach our Paris targets is by continuing to rely on tricky accounting and sheer luck. As I've said many times before in this place, the foundation of any good policy is expert driven evidence, which is why this morning I'm reintroducing the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Amendment (Transparency in Carbon Emissions Accounting) Bill. This bill ensures that greenhouse gas emissions data is promptly made public, keeping the community and experts informed with Australia's latest emissions figures—no more hiding behind major sporting events or national holidays, no more two-month delays while the minister refines his speaking points. No, this amendment creates a legally binding obligation on the minister to table the Greenhouse Gas Inventory updates in parliament no later than 10 days after he or she receives them. The bill has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy and I thank the members of the committee, and the groups that submitted to the inquiry, for their input. Based on their feedback I have made some technical amendments to the bill to clarify that the information to be tabled is the quarterly update of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory, as prepared by the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, and also to guarantee that the updates must be given directly to the minister as soon as possible. The minister must then table the updates in parliament to ensure the public has full and prompt access to Australia's greenhouse gas data, preventing the government from hiding or delaying emission figures. It's obvious that prompt access to accurate information is essential for good policymaking. Similarly Australians need to know the country's true contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions, which is why this bill also ensures that we collect so-called scope 3 emissions data, which are indirect greenhouse gas emissions, and in particular the potential carbon emissions contained in fossil fuels. The implication for including scope 3 emissions in Australia's carbon emissions database is that fossil fuel exports, processed and used in energy generation internationally, would be included in the Australian inventory. This would allow Australia to track its impact as one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels and give the public access to information about Australia's position in contributing to global greenhouse gas emissions. Including scope 3 emissions would mean we have a full picture of Australia's share of the global emissions budget, which is exactly as it should be seeing as Australia is actually the third-largest exporter of fossil fuels in the world, in CO2 terms, on account of being the world's largest coal and LNG exporter. Frankly it's preposterous that we currently export more than a billion metric tonnes of CO2 potential to countries around the world but still claim to be doing our bit to prevent climate change. We simply can't continue pretending that, even though it's Australia's policies which lead to Australian companies digging up Australian fossil fuels, we have no responsibility for the carbon emissions released as a result. According to the Australia Institute, Australia's exported fossil fuel CO2 potential is more than double our total domestic emissions. So, by not collecting and publicising this data, the government is pulling the wool over Australians' eyes. Surely we're responsible for the fossil fuels we dig up and ship out, and pretending otherwise is misleading and irresponsible. This bill will remedy that and ensure that the public can see how Australia is tracking in the global effort to reduce emissions. The Prime Minister could no longer downplay the importance of Australia urgently reducing its carbon emissions. In considering this bill the energy and environment committee was told that including scope 3 would lead to some kind of 'double counting'. But this is a misnomer that hides the real issue because including scope 3 emissions is just another form of analysis that captures Australia's contribution to global greenhouse emissions and does not preclude the collection of scope 1 or 2 emissions data. It simply provides another way to measure our impact. Surely the point of counting emissions in the first place is to see where we can bring them down. So if Australia is responsible for exporting about five per cent of global carbon emissions, and we are, then ultimately we're also responsible for helping to bring them down. And surely the best place to start would be to stop digging the stuff up in the first place. The committee also considered that there is no international obligation to record scope 3 emissions. But surely the fact that this kind of tracking is not required by the Paris Agreement is beside the point, because the Australian government should be open and transparent for the sake of the community, rather than claiming that Australia can do little to influence global climate change. And if scope 3 emissions data gives scientists and the community a better picture of what Australia needs to do to slow catastrophic climate change then we should collect it. It's irrelevant that we're not obliged to do so by any international treaty. Finally, Deloitte has estimated that climate change will cost the Australian community $3.4 trillion in GDP by the year 2070. And just last week the Climate Council found climate disasters have already cost Australia $35 billion in the last decade. So for businesses, including some of those 50 ASX 200 companies which already collect scope 3 emissions data, to complain that compliance costs will be too high is just patent nonsense. Frankly if we don't stop digging up fossil fuels then the costs to businesses and the economy, let alone to our communities and natural environment, will be catastrophic. In closing I simply say that Australia must urgently start doing its fair share to reduce global carbon emissions. The community is crying out for strong action, and the first step is transparency and accountability, not carry over credits and fudging the numbers. I now invite the member for Mayo to offer some remarks in my remaining time. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Order. Is the motion seconded? 10:35 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I am pleased to second this motion and the bill. The member for Clark makes a very simple and very important proposition: where our country has a clear responsibility for carbon emissions that it creates, the Australian people need and deserve transparency. And with transparency comes accountability. The explanatory memorandum to the bill puts the key proposition succinctly. The bill allows Australia to track its impact as one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels in the world and allows the public access to information about Australia's position in contributing to global greenhouse gas emissions. When we possess the facts, we can make reasoned choices in the public interest. I recognise that it's a tough reality to face up to. A sizeable amount of Australia's prosperity has been and continues to be built on selling resources that are causing dangerous warming to the planet. We must also consider the benefits that our fossil fuel export industry creates for Australian workers and the people we sell our fossil fuels to. However, we have a moral obligation here. The Australian people and we, its democratic representatives, need to be apprised of the facts so that we can understand and quantify the moral costs along with the benefits. And this bill does exactly that—it seeks to get to the facts, with timely reporting. This is critical. For too long the government has slipped out reports, slipped out data, when it thinks nobody is watching: on grand final eves; I think there have even been some around Christmas. The 10-day period is long enough. There should be no reason for the government to delay any more. I think it's incredibly important that we address this. People want to see transparency. They don't believe we're going to get to our targets 'in a canter', no matter how many times the minister says so. I commend this bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Order. The question is that this bill be now read a second time. The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 95 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Social Media Platforms 95 10:38 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I move: That this House: (1) is alarmed by the undue pain and distress experienced by Australians who are defamed, bullied or otherwise harassed on social media platforms; (2) notes that: (a) global technology companies which provide social media platforms inadequately monitor platforms for defamation, bullying or harassment of individuals; and (b) global technology companies are slow to respond when complaints are made, increasing the damage to individuals; (3) recognises that social media is a global sphere of communication in which vulnerable citizens can be unfairly targeted by individuals, with little consequence to the platform that hosts damaging content; (4) expresses concern that current regulations do not adequately address global technology companies which control social media platforms; and (5) calls on the Government to develop: (a) a public regulatory framework within which decisions about removing content are made by social media platforms, to ensure community expectations around safety and free speech on social media platforms can be met; and (b) legislation which holds social media platforms to account as publishers of the content hosted on their sites, impressing the legal responsibilities that designation entails on those platforms. Big tech companies such as Twitter, Facebook and Google have amassed extraordinary power in the global corporate and political landscape. There is no doubt that 6 January 2021 will be remembered as a dark day in American history. The events of the day and the resulting fallout will be referenced, studied and analysed for years to come. One moment in particular—the permanent banning of Donald Trump's Twitter account—will be a watershed moment in the debate surrounding free speech and censorship on social media platforms and the question of regulation of big tech companies. Thanks to the social media platforms, we have arrived at a new reality, of 'glocalisation', where the local is merged with the global through online portals. We have become increasingly reliant on big tech companies and their services, and governments around the world have not kept pace with these transformations and their consequences. We are now working to catch up. Freedom of speech is an inherent right that we must protect at all costs, but it is not a right to lie or incite violence. Free speech is vital to our democracy but must be limited to prevent harm. Limitations on free speech, however necessary they may be, will always be contestable. It remains a significant challenge to get these limitations right. However, the problem we face now is that big tech companies are themselves responsible for determining their own limitations. They are acting as the moral arbiters of our society, which, I argue, is the role of representative government, not a technology company. Big tech firms write their own rules and are accountable to themselves alone. This is causing serious issues for you and me as consumers. I have personal experience of how these issues can affect people's lives. For several months in 2020, my husband and I, as well as the charity we founded to help single mothers access education, were the targets of baseless and defamatory accusations made by a conspiracy theorist on Facebook. It was unrelenting for months. Despite originating in New Zealand, the accusations were widely distributed and even reached local networks in my electorate of Mallee. My first thought was for the reputation of an essential charity that young, disadvantaged mothers in my community rely on. I was concerned that the mothers would be driven away from the service, because of these lies, and left even more vulnerable. On top of that, my husband and I were concerned for our safety, and we even installed security cameras at our home, for our peace of mind. It was an incredibly distressing time for my family. Despite successive requests to have the damaging content removed, the posts remained public—in some cases for several months—until court proceedings got the attention of Facebook. These legal proceedings have cost us over $150,000 so far, despite a successful court case. The prospect of recouping these losses through the damages that have been awarded is also highly unlikely. Expensive civil proceedings are one of the only means of recourse currently available to people who have been defamed, bullied or harassed online. What concerns me is that many thousands of people who endure bullying and defamation online will lack the means to clear their name or protect their family. Social media enables the tarnishing of reputations and the destruction of lives, with very few avenues for justice. This is untenable, and it must change. There are multiple ways these issues need to be addressed, and our government is working to keep Australians safe online. I welcome the strengthening of the role of the eSafety Commissioner and the provision of $39.4 million over the next three years. We're also introducing a new online safety bill. The bill includes a new adult cyber abuse scheme, which would capture abusive behaviour that has reached a criminal threshold. It would provide power for the eSafety Commissioner to direct platforms to remove abusive material within 24 hours. While these are positive measures, I believe further steps need to be taken. Social media platforms need to be held to account as publishers of the content that is hosted on their sites. If a newspaper, radio station or TV channel defamed an individual or incited violence through their publications, they could be sued or prosecuted under the full extent of the Australian law. At this point, the same is not true for Facebook, Google, Twitter, Instagram and other social media platforms. The business models of social media giants are very similar to those of traditional news media, yet the rules governing print media, radio and television are vastly more proscriptive than those that apply to digital platforms. Traditional news media are held to a much higher standard under the law, which puts them at a commercial disadvantage to digital platforms. This isn't fair, and it doesn't provide for a competitive media industry. Social media giants hide behind the excuse that they are nothing more than a virtual town square and therefore they can't be held responsible for anything that is shouted out. But the fact is that the technology and algorithms that underpin these platforms are incredibly sophisticated. The platforms show you what they think you want to see. They are designed to keep you engaged for as long as possible. These facts alone demonstrate that big tech companies are making editorial decisions regarding the content that you see on their platform. If big tech companies want to preserve their power to moderate and promote content on their sites, they need to be treated under the same legislative framework as traditional news media and held to account for the consequences of hosting damaging content. In addition, the government should pursue the creation of a public regulatory framework to guide the moderation of content on social media platforms to ensure community expectations around safety and free speech are met. I understand that work is under way to develop a voluntary code along these lines. At the government's direction, DIGI, an association representing the digital platforms industry in Australia, has developed a draft code. The Australian Communications and Media Authority is overseeing the development of the code, and I hope it's found to be sufficient to address the challenges we face regarding disinformation and defamation. Both measures—treating big tech companies as publishers and the introduction of a code of conduct—are essential. Holding big tech companies to account as publishers would provide an incentive for these companies to follow the code of conduct, thereby ensuring the decisions they take to moderate and promote content are in line with community expectations. I know the minister for communications will consider further measures should the voluntary code prove inadequate to address the problems we face. Recently the member for Newcastle, Sharon Claydon, and I formed the Parliamentary Friends of Making Social Media Safe group to continue the important discussion around online safety. We are thrilled by the reception of the group so far. Seventy-five members and senators from both sides have joined the group already, which I think displays the interest and concern that so many have regarding social media. One step I've taken in my electorate is to inform young families in particular about dangers online. The internet is not just a harmless space for kids to watch YouTube. Consequently, I've drawn up a handout for the residents of Mallee about the importance of online safety. It's hot off the press and will be sent out this week to all residents in Mallee. The progress made in global communication and interconnectedness, thanks to social media platforms, has been remarkable. With this progress comes a responsibility to ensure that people are safe when using these platforms. I am focused on fighting for change to ensure our kids and grandkids are safe online and that our society has a healthy relationship with social media, going forward. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? Mr Simmonds 282983 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 10:47 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley This is a serious issue, and I completely understand the member for Mallee bringing this forward. The member for Mallee has been subjected to unacceptable behaviour online. I know what it's like, as a member of parliament myself. When social media started to get its foothold in this country—MPs were using it and in particular where the public was using it—I felt the full force of this unacceptable behaviour, which was particularly focused on my faith. Certain people online used my faith, at various points, to press their case. It's very Islamophobic behaviour that many of us have felt. I know the member for Cowan has gone through the very same thing. In my case, it happened many years ago. The member for Cowan can testify for herself as to what she has been through. It doesn't feel good. You particularly feel it as a member of parliament because you've got a public persona. The people that are close to you feel it, but also the people who are in a similar situation feel it really badly as well. It is not a nice thing to go through. It has not just been with some of these forums. It's been going on ever since the first virtual online communities were created, back in the mid-eighties. For example, the Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link—WELL, as it was known—was the first of this type of community. Created in the US, it was designed to connect people and, in their view, enable much better ways for people to relate to each other. They thought it would be a positive move. Sure enough, they soon found that it became very problematic. People, for some reason, felt like they had a licence to behave in a way that they would never do if they were physically in the person's presence. In person, they would never say those things to other people in that way and conduct their affairs in that manner. So there is something to be said about going online and treating people in way in which we would not do if we were in their presence. It is an issue, and it's something that we have not really been able to deal with. The member for Mallee referenced some of the legislative things we could do here. In the US, a lot of these firms are given licence to not be held responsible for what appears on their platforms through a thing called section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. So there is an active proposition being chased by some people in the congress, like Mark Warner, to deal with this. But it is a big issue. The thing is, Facebook, Google and Twitter didn't create Islamophobia, homophobia, racism or sexism but they've certainly helped give voice to the legitimacy of the views, and some of the material they've taken off has just been staggering. For example, in the stats for the final quarter of 2018, YouTube removed nearly 19,000 videos and 2,000 channels for violating its hateful or abusive content policy, and in the third quarter of 2018 Facebook took action on nearly three million pieces of content that violated its hate speech policies and 15.4 million pieces of violent and graphic content. Good on them, because when I raised some of the stuff that occurred previously it took a hell of a long time for anything to happen. I do commend them for taking it, but it has taken a while. A lot of the online platforms have said it's too hard to know what's on their platforms and to deal with. I think a lot of people would believe that is hard to stomach or accept. They do have a capacity to do more, and they should—absolutely—do more. There is still content on pages of these platforms that is absolutely disgusting and should be tackled. Last year, for example, I received a letter from a community organisation that had referenced a University of Victoria report on online Islamophobia and fascism. The report found that although Facebook algorithms were designed to delete posts containing profanities in them they don't necessarily pick up on the insidious nature of some extremist material. That report analysed just over 40,000 posts from 12 far-Right Facebook groups with posts that strongly targeted people on the basis of religion. I haven't heard the government deal with that, not at all. I haven't heard them come in and say it. I respect the member for Mallee has been targeted, but we should not have to wait for action because one government MP was targeted. Lots of people in the community have been targeted by this and we have not seen any action out of the government. Worse still, this parliament held an inquiry into this issue in 2018, into the adequacy of existing offences in the Commonwealth Criminal Code and of state and territory criminal orders to capture cyberbullying. It made a number of recommendations, including: placing regulatory pressure on the platforms, to both prevent and quickly respond to cyberbullying; that the Australian government legislate to create a duty of care, on social media platforms, to ensure safety; that the government increase basic online safety requirements for social media services; and to ensure that the Office of the eSafety Commissioner is adequately resourced to fulfil all its functions. We've contacted the committee secretariat and the tabling office on this inquiry. On 28 March it will be three years since this inquiry was tabled with the government, and there's been no response. So we've got this resolution now, we've had all these cases where concerns have been raised, yet nothing has been done by the government. And it's good— Dr Aly interjecting— Mr HUSIC 91219 Exactly. I'll take that interjection from the member for Cowan, because it wasn't them. For ordinary people in the community who are targeted for a whole host of things, in terms of racist and homophobic language, those issues aren't taken seriously. The government has a report on this. They've been asked to deal with it and they don't. This is the real issue: it shouldn't take one government MP to be affected before this—I totally respect and understand how much money the member for Mallee, as she detailed in her contribution, undertook. She should not have to go—no-one should have to pay $100,000-plus on legal fees to deal with this. It should be taken seriously. The other thing is it's not just the platforms where this has become an issue. The platforms give a space for this to rise. What I want to know from the government too is why don't they take this stuff seriously at its source, not just the platform but at its source? How come, whenever we have raised the issue of far Right extremism, which has driven a lot of bad behaviour online, it has taken ages for it to be responded to? We only got an inquiry into far Right extremism when the government were happy that it didn't just target far Right extremism and didn't mention it. It could only be referenced as 'extremism'. Yet we've been saying for ages that this is an issue. The agencies have said, 'This is a problem.' They are concerned about word transforming into deed and impacting on people's safety, and we've had no serious commitment out of those opposite as a government. A responsible government would take this seriously. They would absolutely treat this seriously. They would go to the source, not just to the platform that creates the environment for this hateful stuff to be said. They don't take it seriously. If the government were serious not only would they respond to reports saying, 'Treat cyberbullying, hate speech and this terrible online behaviour seriously,' and deal with that but they would also treat seriously this issue of far Right extremism. I don't care if it is an Islamist or a far Right extremist; anyone who threatens the Australian public should be dealt with forcefully. But it seems to me that it takes a hell of a long time to deal with far Right extremism. With Islamists we've seen proscription of groups. We've seen a hell of a lot of action on banning groups that don't even operate here if they're Islamist. But, if they're far Right, it takes a hell of a long time for anything to happen. The minister here is getting uptight about it. But do you know what makes me uptight? I don't like it when I see people using Nazi salutes in protests in Melbourne. I don't like it when I see swastikas being held up in people's homes. I don't like it when we hear of those groups collecting ammunition and weaponry. And I don't like it when we have a government minister in the form of the home affairs minister who cannot mention far Right extremism without having to also reference Antifa, as if you can only acknowledge it if it is balanced out that way. It's wrong. People deserve to have their safety taken seriously. (Time expired) 10:57 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I'm very pleased to rise to support this motion from my good friend the member for Mallee. I also find myself agreeing with a fair bit of what the member for Chifley has said about the importance of this issue. It's the second time I've found myself on a unity ticket with the member for Chifley, after his comments on aviation. It's becoming a bad habit for me to agree with you, Member for Chifley! But I wanted to particularly rise and express my support and my great concern about this issue as it goes for me and my community. Being one of my generation, I've lived much of my life with social media and it being a presence in our everyday lives. I want to preface my remarks by saying that I am obviously, as most people in this chamber are, a strong believer of freedom of speech and the freedom that we have to express our opinions. However, there needs to be a line drawn when it comes to issues that pertain to safety and there has to be a reasonable discussion about a level of accountability that has to be taken by social media companies as publishers. Social media is so powerful and is such an opportunity for us to stay connected, particularly during this time of COVID when we were physically separated. It has been so odd. But with great power, as the saying goes, comes great responsibility. Right now, these social media companies are taking no responsibility over the platforms that they have created and are being used for these purposes. The attitudes of Australians are changing. When social media started, the attitude of Australians was that they were willing to accept a lot of downsides for this amazing connectivity that was created. But Australians are now realising—and in my electorate I talk to people who see it all the time—that they don't have to accept this anonymous rubbish that's being hosted by social media. They do not have to accept as a trade-off for connectivity that their kids can be groomed online and that it's so hard to police. They don't have to accept that people will say things on social media that they would never say to your face or act in a way that they would never act in real life. Commercial television broadcasters operate according to the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice, developed by the industry. But social media has no such code. Frankly, we need to move faster to level the playing field with social media companies. As the member for Mallee said, social media companies need to be regulated as publishers. If they host material on this platform then people need to be able to pursue damages against them, just like in the non-digital world. It's not that much to ask. It's just that the same rules that are in the real world should also apply in the digital world. It's not difficult. These social media companies have enormous resources. The opportunity is there where, if somebody sees anonymous content hosted that they feel is defamatory, harmful or something like that, they should be able to tell Facebook or one of these other social media giants, and there should be an expectation that, if they don't remove it within 24 or 48 hours, they are agreeing to publish it and they can be held responsible as a publisher for the negative effect that it has. They have that responsibility as traditional publishers. The most worrying use of all social media is obviously in the context of the incitement of violence, child exploitation and child sexual abuse material. As a young dad, I'm obviously very passionate about preventing this. I recently visited the ACCCE centre in Brisbane, established by this government to counter child exploitation. One of the things that was raised with me by the incredibly dedicated individuals that are there trying to track down this material is the barrier that social media platforms create when trying to find, stop and prosecute these vile individuals. Did you know that Facebook and these other social media giants are objecting to one in every five lawful requests that our law agencies make to have access to individuals who are grooming or posting child exploitation material online? Just think about that: 20 per cent of lawful requests from our law agencies to these social media publishers to access the details of these people who are committing the most heinous crimes are rejected. What possible excuse could there be for that? It's simply not enough. The Morrison government is acutely aware of this. It is doing an enormous amount in terms of Minister Fletcher's online safety bill and in terms of resourcing the eSafety Commissioner, which was never there before. But we have more to do, and we need to hold these social media companies to account as the publishers they are. 11:02 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I'm very pleased to make a contribution to the debate today on the wide range of threats that are being enabled by social media platforms: threats to individuals, threats to communities and, indeed, threats to the very fabric of democratic systems like ours. I thank the member for Mallee for raising this important issue today and I thank her for reaching out to me to establish the bipartisan group of Parliamentary Friends of Making Social Media Safe, a group designed to put these issues very firmly on the national agenda. We will be launching the Parliamentary Friends of Making Social Media Safe next Tuesday with a breakfast in the Mural Hall, and I encourage all members to come along and join in the discussion on this important issue. Upfront, I would like to recognise that social media has given us some very positive things and enriched our lives in ways that we couldn't previously have imagined. Through it we have found lost friends, fostered new connections and shared knowledge, free of many of the constraints that exist in the physical world. Indeed, in these COVID times, it has helped bridge the tyranny of distance for many. But this remarkable reach and ubiquity also has a darker side because it also created fertile ground for some serious threats to flourish: for individuals to be defamed and their reputations sullied; for vulnerable people to be bullied, harassed and exploited; for coercive control to be utilised to instil fear in women; for entire communities to be maligned, victimised or persecuted; for the amplification of hate speech from far-Right extremist groups; for the glorification and incitement of violence; for dangerous misinformation to spread like wildfire; and for democratic processes to be undermined and subverted. These things matter and these threats are real, but at the moment there are precious few avenues for redress when people have been wronged. For their part, the social media companies often behave like outlaws in the new digital Wild West: answerable to no-one and not responsible for so many of the harms they are enabling. These platforms can and do moderate content on their sites, so we've moved well beyond the idea that they are merely passive, neutral conduits of information. But they have set themselves up as global entities, effectively, outside all jurisdictions, dodging scrutiny and accountability all too often, and we've seen the ills that have resulted. Enough is enough. Social media companies need to take responsibility for what their platforms have unleashed. They are well resourced and they have an obligation to the communities they currently exploit for profit. However, government has a responsibility too. The current hotchpotch of laws and self-regulation clearly is not enough, and indeed dominant platforms have even gone so far as to call for governments to regulate them properly. So what is taking this government so long? Frankly, the regulatory environment is a mess. The Morrison government talks a lot about the online safety act, but the fact is that that act still does not exist, despite all the talk. Similarly, the disinformation code still isn't in place, and I fear it won't do nearly enough, given that it's only voluntary and doesn't address misinformation as the regulator said it must. I, along with all of my colleagues on this side, welcome the eSafety commissioner and some additional resourcing that has gone to her, but let's not underestimate the enormity of her task. We know that recent global studies have shown that social media is the new frontier for gendered violence and we have witnessed the rapid escalation of it during the COVID-19 pandemic, which is chilling to say the very least and should ring alarm bells for everybody in this House. Some 65 per cent of girls and young women surveyed in Australia have been harassed on social media. If that is not pause for thought, I'm not sure what is. But, given the incredible reach of social media, there is a lot of work to do. I thank the member for Mallee for bringing this forward. It's just the start. 11:07 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson I don't think most people want to live in a world where you can only post things that tech companies only judge to be 100 per cent true. I believe we should err on the side of greater expression. They're not my words; they're the words of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg from 2019. Moreover, he went on to say this little gem in a speech in front of Georgetown University students in 2019: 'I don't think it's right for a private company to censor politicians.' We had Jack Dorsey of Twitter, tweeting out to us that 'Twitter stands for freedom of expression'—that was in 2015. Oh how times have changed where we now have these big tech social media conglomerates that are censoring political speech all over their platforms. I for one do not think that is right. It is an attack on democracy itself. It is an attack on free speech. If you can censor and deplatform the leader of the Free World, you can do it to anyone. There's an old saying, 'Whoever takes down the king, becomes the king.' These social media giants, these big tech corporations, are now way, way too powerful. They control the new town square, the new public forum, where political discussion, all sorts of discussion, goes on. Of course we should clamp down on speech that is harmful, defamatory, and illegal, and where the content is actual hate speech—not just speech that we hate, but actual hate speech; there is a difference. We should clamp down on all of those things that would not be allowed in a newspaper. But the problem is these big tech companies have gone far too far. They now are clamping down on political discussion, political commentary, political views, and they're also putting in these so-called fact checkers who give the impression that a fact you have posted is wrong when it is a fact and it is correct. They do that by saying it's missing context. Tell me which news story isn't missing some form of context! So this is a very, very big problem for democracy. Unlike other speakers in this place, I do not wish to further censor these big tech companies. I do not wish to censor what people are saying on social media platforms. But I will concede this: they're actually now no longer platforms; they're publications. They're censoring speech that is lawful on what were once platforms and are now basically online publications. That is why, if these big tech companies don't bring themselves back to the point of being social media free speech platforms, as they were originally intended, then they probably should, as the member for Mallee has suggested, be liable for defamation. They've basically become publications now, publications which have editorial guidelines—they call them community standards, but now they're basically editorial guidelines. They're major publications which have a whole heap of volunteer contributors. If that's the model that they want, then that is what they're going to have to live with, and defamation and their liability for defamation are going to have to be part of their business as usual. I wish though that they would just go back to what they were originally intended to be: platforms for free expression. I don't think we're going to see that, but I've got to say that, whether we make these social media giants go back to being platforms or whether we say, 'You're now acting like publications and so you should be liable for defamation,' they should be the focus of government. We shouldn't simply have legislation which makes these big tech companies pay big news companies. I don't want to see big tech corporations paying big news media corporations. What I want to see is legislation here protecting the little guy, protecting the average Australian, and that is what this motion is calling for. 11:12 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue and support the comments made by my colleagues the member for Chifley and the member for Newcastle. I really want to speak about the challenges faced by small-business women as they conduct their business online, especially on social media. Prior to COVID, many actively avoided social media for business purposes, but no-one could help but get online during COVID. What this has led to is a rise in anxiety about what comments will be made about them or their business or their competitors or their customers as the social media tragics target them. All of us as MPs would be well aware of the tactics—people hiding behind sometimes numerous fake Facebook profiles, sometimes using their own name but not often; comments appearing in the late hours of the night or the early hours of the morning, never alone but always with a couple of others happy to pile in, at a time when they know neither we nor our staff can monitor. Their skill is in inciting others to engage and respond to their nonsense. Some people just can't help themselves. As MPs, we recognise we'll be targets, and I know we do our best to deal with those comments, many of which I now take a hard line on and choose to delete or hide because I want people to feel they can have a rigorous but respectful discussion around policy on my page. But it is hard to get to them all. That's us with our resources. What worries me is that small and micro businesses are really feeling the pain. I've discussed this with members of women's business groups, and the level of anxiety about how to deal with it is through the roof. Some have reported being afraid to post in groups for fear of the response it will trigger. Others are concerned that conversations on their page can quickly escalate way beyond the original topic and they're just not sure how to manage it. The eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, released a report nearly a year ago showing a 40 per cent increase in reports of online abuse and cyberbullying in just the first few weeks of COVID compared with the previous 12-month weekly average. The commissioner has said she believes the increase in online harm is unlikely to go away. For me it feels like a full-time job keeping on top of it, but for small business this is not something they should have to put up with. I'm not waiting for legislation to support these women in business in coping with the onslaught. It is a wait, by the way. The government promised to bring in legislation last year, but instead, two days before Christmas, they released a draft—two days before Christmas. It was almost as if they didn't really want feedback on it. The submissions closed on Valentine's Day. If anyone in my electorate missed out on putting in a submission, please send it to me, and I will make sure it gets to the minister. The draft legislation provides the eSafety Commissioner with some additional powers to unmask internet trolls, but, as I said, I am not waiting for this government to legislate, because we've waited far too long. Working with the Office of the eSafety Commissioner, I'm running a workshop next month to empower women in business in my electorate to deal with cyberabuse and cyberanxiety. As Ms Inman Grant has said to me, 'The gendered nature of online abuse is an issue we've been grappling with for some time.' She's expanded the Women Influencing Tech Spaces program to offer in-depth social media self-defence as a way of tackling this issue head-on. I'm very pleased to be joining with the Office of the eSafety Commissioner to provide advice and practical support for women in business in my electorate, for whom social media is a vital professional tool. I'm partnering with Women with Altitude and the Hawkesbury Women in Business group, with invitations to go out through the chambers of commerce. It's open to all women in business across the electorate of Macquarie through the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury. This is something I hope will help women be better prepared to recognise online harassment and cyberabuse; to know where and to whom and when to report it; to help them make decisions about whether to respond and the best ways to do that; and to be aware about how online harassment can affect wellbeing. This will be a really practical forum with practical advice and an opportunity to discuss the things that I know women in micro and small business are dealing with every single day. The online workshop will be from 6 pm on Tuesday 9 March, and all of the details and RSVP links will, appropriately, be on Facebook. So look out for it. I urge women to join us. We should be using social media as a tool that lifts up the businesses that we work in and get one step in front of the people who are trying to pull us down, and that's what this workshop is aimed at. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting Closing the Gap 102 11:17 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges: (a) that on 13 February 2008 the then Prime Minister made a national apology to the Stolen Generations on behalf of the Parliament and the nation; and (b) the importance of Closing the Gap; and (2) reaffirms its commitment to Closing the Gap. This time last year, I made the observation that on this one significant day in February each year many fine speeches have been given in this chamber. As we mark the anniversary of the Apology to the Stolen Generations by vowing to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia, we have heard words that lifted us all—none finer, of course, than Kevin Rudd's 13 years ago. But I also warned that, if this day were to become little more than a ceremony of renewal of good intentions, that would be so far short of what it should be, of what we have to be. We cannot allow ourselves to become content with just words, as important as words can be. Fine oratory with nothing attached to it in the end amounts to nothing more than a beautifully worded indictment. Last year's Closing the Gap targets have not been backed with new investments in housing, services or programs. This year, we gather with an even greater absence. For the first time, the annual report card for Closing the Gap has been pushed back. A government that has perfected the art of nondelivery has found one more way to outdo itself—a government that shuts down debate in this parliament regularly. Today we are left with the anniversary of an event that was meant to be the start of something else. As Prime Minister Rudd reflected: The apology was unfinished business for our nation. It is the beginning of new business for our nation. But how do we move forward when we have a government so determined to stand still? In last year's Closing the gap report only two of seven targets were on track: early childhood education and year 12 attainment. None of the other targets—child mortality; reading, writing and numeracy; school attendance; employment; and life expectancy—were on track. This of course is not in the spirit of the apology. We should be forever humbled by the grace of so many stolen generations members in their willingness that day to take the hand so belatedly extended to them. It is that grace that lights the path ahead—a path that we must have the courage to take. We must take the first step, then follow it with another and another and another. Instead, we have a government that is not moving and a list of challenges that grows longer. The government has provisioned $160 million for a referendum, but the Prime Minister has refused to commit to any time line for holding one. Since the Press Club address way back in 2019, after the election, in which Minister Wyatt clearly promised a referendum this term, he has repeatedly dismissed the prospect of one in the near future, arguing that he does not think it will succeed at this time. If a fear of failure is your guiding light, you need never fear success. The government has also refused to commit to a voice to parliament and refers instead to a voice to government—two very different things. There is never any sense of urgency with this government. It is a government defined by inaction and the exhaustion of a government that has been in power so long that whatever energies it once possessed are long since spent. It is not for nothing that my good friend the shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney, has warned of the danger that the Uluru statement could end up being remembered as a noble moment but not as a turning point. We must do better—all of us. Let us take the steps that are demanded of us. Very early in the life of this parliament—indeed, in the first meeting I had with the Prime Minister—I extended the hand of bipartisanship to him to work together for progress for First Australians. We held a meeting, but there hasn't been further meaningful engagement. Progress on human rights does take time. It is not the sort of thing that can be achieved with a couple of photo-ops. I again offer to work together, and I urge the Prime Minister to take this offer as it is intended—a genuine attempt to produce outcomes we can all be proud of. We should keep turning back to the words of the great Galarrwuy Yunupingu: 'At Uluru we started a fire, a fire that we hope burns bright for Australia.' Let that hope not be in vain. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? Ms Burney 8GH I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:23 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon I rise today in this auspicious meeting place as a representative of the north-west, the west coast and King Island in the electorate of Braddon in Tasmania. I do this alongside the 150 representatives from regions right across the nation. This is a level playing field; the very layout of this chamber embellishes that. It's a circle. It represents that everybody in this place has an equal voice and, importantly, an equal right to be heard. That is a crucial part of our democracy. My role in this place is to represent every man, woman and child in my electorate. It is their voices that I strive to bring to this place, not necessarily my own. In speaking about closing the gap, I have sought wise counsel from those within my electorate. Amongst the people that I spoke to was a young Aboriginal leader, a leader in our region, and one with a true voice for Indigenous peoples. When I spoke with her yesterday, she said that she was in another meeting place, in an ancient land, a rugged land, where waves were crashing in against the rocks, at Bluff Point on the west coast of Tasmania. For 60,000 years it has been a sacred meeting place. She gave me her wise counsel, speaking from the generations that have gone before her and with a clear and genuine view for the future that lies ahead. Her name is Emma Lee. I regard her as my sister and I rate her most definitely as a true leader. Today, in this place of voices, she has leant me her voice, without agenda, in a desire to find a better pathway forward for all Tasmanians, to move towards a brighter future for us all. She gave me a very clear message, and it gives me great pride to present that message in this place to the nation. 'Ya' is the Palawa word for 'hello', and that is how a message begins. She says: 'Ya. As Indigenous peoples, we do not have a formal right or a formal say over our own affairs and, as a proud Aboriginal Tasmanian woman, I am diminished by it. I want to make a positive difference for all Tasmanians, because my cultural obligation is to welcome people to country and to care for them. If I cannot provide the advice that looks after everyone together, then how are Australian people meant to know that they too belong to us and they too share in the oldest living culture in the world?' Emma says: 'Ya. I want to make everyone welcome freely in my country with respect so that we can live and work peacefully together. The Indigenous voice will help us make a difference so that people are not lonely anymore and so that they have a connection to country and to Australia itself. I want a hand up so that you can hear me, not a hand down that speaks on my behalf. I want to belong to you so that you can belong to me and we can belong to the oldest living culture in the world. If we welcome each other in government in parliament, we can become equal in how we care for country. I want to share our culture with everyone, and I want to stop hurting, because our peoples are not allowed to have a proper say in our lives. This government can make a difference with the Indigenous voice for this place.' To my dear friend Dr Emma Lee, I deliver your message to this place and to a nation. It would do us all to take note of it. Our government has to work to do more to ensure that Indigenous advice is formally included in all process and that we are open to other parts of the Australian community. We have made a great start in the national agreement on closing the gap to ensure Indigenous organisations have a greater say in funding outcomes. It's important that we continue to build on that goodwill. The voice means that many close the gap targets will have a greater chance of succeeding, because we are now working together, as it should be, to hear from all Australians in a process that is equal for all. That must be our goal, and I am proud to support the government's policy to create that pathway so that we can stand together on issues that are important to us all as Australians. Ms BURNEY 8GH I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Grayndler. It recognises that 13 years ago the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, made a very long-awaited National Apology to the Stolen Generations on behalf of the nation. It was one of the first items of business of the newly elected Labor government. The landmark inquiry into the stolen generations, the Bringing them home report, had been launched a decade before. For 11 long years those taken, and in fact the whole nation, waited for the words 'we are sorry'. The Bringing them home report had 54 recommendations. This included that Australian governments acknowledge and apologise for the policies of forced removal. The recommendations included the Indigenous Child Placement Principle—the notion that, when an Indigenous child must be removed, they be placed with a family member, a member of the child's community or another Indigenous carer. It's not just the recommendations that are important about this report. It drew a line in the sand for us as a nation. No-one could ever say again, 'We didn't know.' It represented an important act of truth-telling. There were many thousands of people who survived and were able to tell their stories for those of us who remained. Of course, the Archie Roach song 'Took the Children Away' says: We'll give them what you can't give Teach them how to really live. Teach them how to live they said Humiliated them instead Taught them that and taught them this And others taught them prejudice. You took the children away … The motion emphasises the importance of closing the gap and a commitment to, in fact, bring about justice and equity for First Peoples in Australia. Good words are only truly meaningful when they are accompanied with sincere deeds and lasting progress. This is the first year since the apology that we will not get a report from the Prime Minister on progress, or lack of progress, on the targets. What concerns me is that, after a decade, progress against the seven targets in 2020 was dismal reading, as the member for Grayndler outlined. At the conclusion of those seven targets, only two were on track. Child mortality; reading, writing and numeracy; school attendance; employment outcomes; and life expectancy—all not on track. These aren't just statistics; they are lives. I'm sick of going to the funerals of people who have died too young. The National Agreement on Closing the Gap is indeed welcome. It is welcome especially because of the partnership with the coalition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak organisations. This is a good thing. There are 16 new targets, with two still being negotiated. States and territories will have to report, as well as the Commonwealth. Labor in principle endorsed the new targets—in particular, the targets about the overrepresentation of First Australians in the child protection system as well as the criminal justice system, two targets that Labor had been advocating for for many years. The time frame for these targets is another 10 years. This means that, on the expiration of the new targets, over two decades will have passed since Closing the Gap first began—23 years, a whole generation. I say to this parliament: that is a very long time, so it is important that we get this right this time. We must not allow this decade-long time frame to become the impetus for kicking the burden of progress to future parliaments If we want to see real and lasting progress on Closing the Gap, we need new investment. The Commonwealth government must fully embrace its share of the new Closing the Gap agreement, not simply wash its hands of responsibility and pass it to the states and territories. The First Nations people need to be placed at the centre of decision-making on issues affecting First Nations people. We are best placed to find the solutions on issues that affect us. Labor remains committed to the Uluru statement in full. This includes the constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament, a voice that reflects the diversity of challenges that we face across the nation, a voice that listens to our regions and remote communities as well as our urban areas. It's been 3½ years since the Uluru statement. It's time to get on with it and get it done. 11:29 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I welcome this motion put forward by the Leader of the Opposition. It does give us a chance to talk about a very important issue. Eight per cent or thereabouts of my electorate of Grey is Indigenous, and I have made it a core part of my workload, since I came to this place, to try and bring about a better outcome for them and their families. I note the comments of the Leader of the Opposition. Quite rightly, he raises the issue that only two of the components of Closing the Gap were met last year. But, in doing so, he also indicated that maybe he doesn't have a full grasp of the issues facing us, because he said, 'It's not good enough; it should be fixed.' If it were easy to fix, it would have been fixed long ago. The fact of the matter is that these are deep, multilayered and complex issues. The reasons that Indigenous Australia has not met the societal and health levels of the rest of Australia are complex, and it is not through lack of trying on the part of the government. I was very pleased that last year the agreement was reached with the state bodies to form a joint commitment to Closing the Gap. It makes sense, because issues of housing, education and policing, for instance, are primarily the responsibilities of the states. It's not to say that the federal government may not contribute to these financially, but we don't run them. On the other hand, the issues of health care and income support are primarily the Commonwealth government's, even though the state may employ some of the workers. So it makes sense. If we are to make commitments in this place, we need those rock-solid commitments at state level. I was very pleased we reached that point of view. Through my 13 years in parliament, I have come to realise there's a large difference between urbanised Indigenous Australia and remote Indigenous Australia. The key issue here, I think, is English as a first language. Where I see English as a second language, I see a disconnect on so many levels and the struggle to reach attainment in education. We've run programs. The school attendance program is a good program. It works when you've got an inspired leader on the ground and an engaged school principal. If you haven't got both of those, it doesn't work; it falls away quickly. Quite often the leader of the program is the most talented person in the community and they get poached into another program. But that is a bit of an aside. The Productivity Commission estimates that we spend around $44,000 a head per year on Indigenous Australia. We can't really get a precise handle on it, but it is closer to $250,000 a head in remote communities like the APY lands in my electorate. I don't bark about the money. We've got inequity there and we have to try and face it and we have to try and find answers. But it just shows that these answers are not easy. But I don't think it can be claimed that there is a lack of interest in it. It should be producing better results. In my time, there has been an improvement in the physical infrastructure. The housing is better but we could do with more quality housing. The shops are definitely better. The health facilities are better, and the school facilities. You would be pleased to send your children to any one of those things. But the outcomes are just not matching the investment, and with everything we do in this space it is reasonable to ask why that is not the case. Jacinta Price, from the Centre for Independent studies, said: The chasm shows in shocking statistics for health and reduced life expectancy, school truancy, subsequent poor education and employment levels, and the horrendous impact of high crime rates, particularly domestic violence and sexual assault. That is a very concerning statement. I know it is true. Most of us who have anything to do with this space know it is true. We are intent on closing the gap but we cannot do it on our own. We need motivation on the ground from parents to make sure their children get to school. I don't know how we do that. We try multiple approaches to bridge this gap. But I will just make the point that this government is committed. I am the representative in this place of the eight per cent of my electorate who are Indigenous. I feel as though we make a fair-dinkum effort. But do we have all the answers? Absolutely not. We need to recommit and we need to re-examine daily what we do in this space. 11:37 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd delivered the Apology to the Stolen Generations 13 years ago it was seen as a significant milestone in the nation's coming to terms with a sorry past. Out of the apology grew the hope and the expectation that we could now move forward and make change, that there would be a new relationship between First Australians and the rest of the nation. During the course of his contribution, Mr Rudd said that the core of this partnership for the future was closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians on life expectancy, educational achievement and employment opportunities. Out of that grew the COAG agreement in 2008 for the Closing the Gap targets. There were six targets: to close the life expectancy gap within a generation; to halve the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five within a decade; to ensure access to early childhood education for all Indigenous four-year-olds in remote communities within five years; to halve the gap in reading, writing and numeracy achievements for children within a decade; to halve the gap for Indigenous students in year 12 attainment by 2020; and to halve the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a decade. As we know from the report of last year, we've failed dismally on all but two of those targets—sadly. But there is no report to be tabled today. As the shadow minister said, that will now be put off until 7 August to reflect the agreement between the Commonwealth, state and territory governments and the Coalition of the Peaks with a set of new targets. What that does is break the nexus between the apology and the Closing the gap report. I think it's a way of diminishing the importance of the apology. Significantly, through the 13 years since the apology, issues for the stolen generation still remain. There has been no compensation scheme for members of the stolen generation who are in the care of the Commonwealth, and there must be. It is a simple matter of justice, of what is right. I'm pleased to say I'm very proud that the Labor Party took to the last election a policy to provide such compensation. As we reflect on the lack of achievement since 2008, is it any wonder that First Nations people were driven to meet at Uluru and together produce the Statement from the Heart? We had the fine words of Prime Minister Rudd, the high and noble sentiments, but, sadly, little has been achieved against those magnificent aspirations. Are we now at risk of another stolen generation? Twenty-four years after the Bringing them home report, First Nations children are nearly 10 times more likely to be living in out-of-home care in Australia. More than 20,000 First Nations children are in out-of-home care; that's about 30 per cent of the total number of children in out-of-home care, yet First Nations children represent only six per cent of the child population. As shocking as these figures are, they are getting worse. Surely, we are better than this. What is it that prevents this nation from truly coming to terms with our past and, finally, acknowledging and dealing with the demands and aspirations of First Nations peoples in a mature and just way? Surely, we have an obligation to accede to the request for a constitutionally enshrined voice to parliament, truth-telling and a makarrata. It is now past time we allowed our own obduracy and obstinacy to get in the way of simply doing what is right. During the course of the Rudd and Gillard governments, I had the great privilege of being the Minister for Indigenous Health. At that the time we developed in partnership with Aboriginal communities across Australia the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2013-23. After we lost government in 2013, there was an expectation and bipartisan support that this plan would be used going forward by the government to be the framework within which its Aboriginal affairs health policy would be developed. Sadly, it appears not to have been the case. There has been no properly funded implementation strategy. There is now negotiation of a new plan, yet there's been no evaluation of the outcomes from the original plan that I'm aware of. Is that an indication of how sincere successive governments from the coalition have been in addressing the issues so readily and properly identified in the first Closing the Gap statement to the parliament by Prime Minister Rudd in 2008? I fear not. 11:42 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman I welcome this important debate today as we consider the Closing the Gap targets revised last year. We would all agree that this is about healthy and economically independent Indigenous Australian families; meeting not just Australian targets but global targets; quoting not just national averages but breaking these gaps down into local government areas, regional and remote areas and by community; and making closure of these gaps the first order of business in everything we do where Indigenous Australians have a stake. Ultimately, there has to be an Indigenous private sector thriving in every corner of this land, services delivered by Indigenous Australians to the rest of the nation and thinking way beyond that the only good that can be created is dot paintings and the only service delivered being a tourism operator or a ranger. There are three hard questions that we've completely missed with these 16 targets, and it gives me great pain to point these out. But none of these targets can be met. There's no guarantee we won't have another decade of failure until we answer these three questions. The first of those is: are we prepared as a nation to have the hard conversation around empowering Indigenous men and women to lead their own communities and not have it corroded from beneath by individual welfare payments imposed as a Western model nor large payments into communities where families in an internecine way are turned upon each other? This is about allowing senior men and women not just to lead but to have the power to. Once they lead, I trust they can achieve a second of these practical goals—that is, owning education. It's not just getting enrolled in education, it's not just the education certificate; it's the outcome, not an administrative output, that matters. Where there are Indigenous Australians there must be an Indigenous say in the curriculum, the syllabus, the bilingual nature of education, complete ownership of the successes and the failures, because Indigenous education is not something that should be done to them. Once you have empowered elders and they own education, they can engage the economy. This is not just about employment anymore. What we've created is, basically, a single-pass vortex of welfare money in, leaving in the first pass straight out in non-Indigenous manufactured goods or, as they call it out there, crap—excuse the vernacular. There's no service economy of note. Healthy economies around the world have a fifth of their population in the public service, a fifth of their government spend in public services, not 100 per cent. Until we fix up this absolutely obvious distortion of Indigenous Australia, created by non-Indigenous Australia, you can't begin to hope for a thriving services sector that creates non-government employment. For those reasons, I have to finish by saying what the five great inadequacies in the targets we've just adopted are. In education target No. 3 we can't just look at school enrolments, we need to look at where it goes. It's about completion of school and the academic goals that have been achieved while at school. The 55 per cent school potential target No. 5, for the AEDC, is unacceptably low and it must be closer to 100 per cent. If we don't have children achieving these domains in the AEDC we cannot achieve targets 5 and 6. In target 7 economic engagement has to be 100 per cent, by definition. If we accept 67 per cent, we allow one in three to wash through the system as disengaged. That doesn't work in the rest of the world, let alone Australia. In employment goal 8, it's split employment into public and private, because private employment is just as important, and that gap needs to close. We simply can't employ every Indigenous Australian in the government and call it a success. While the quantum of housing in goal 9 is important, we need sustainably managed and maintained housing, where the resident can pay the rent out of private income. Finally, in criminal justice targets10 and 11 the rate of Indigenous offending is what matters, not the incarceration—that's just an administrative output by the judge. We've got to stop the offending; that's the goal that needs to be closed. We need to report all interpersonal violence, not just that against women and children. However important that is, we need the entire violence gap closed. It may not start against women and children, and we need to be measuring that too. These are highly emotional topics, and every Australian needs to be united in engaging them. 11:48 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa I start by acknowledging the traditional owners of our country. I acknowledge the Ngunawal and Ngambri people whose land on which the parliament meets, and I acknowledge the Tharawal, Gundungurra and Dharug people, the traditional owners in the electorate of Werriwa. Acknowledging First Australians and recognising them as the true owners of the land is a small but powerful message. Recognition is the first step to reconciliation, as is truth-telling, and I add my voice to acknowledge elders past, present and emerging. But there is much more that needs to be done, and Labor will always be committed to bringing justice to all Indigenous communities. It was a Labor government that made the national Apology to the Stolen Generations on behalf of all Australians. It was a Labor government that acknowledges an apology is tremendously essential; however, it doesn't close the gap. There needs to be structural, institutional and cultural change in Australia for First Nations people to have the same opportunities as all Australians. Last Friday I attended the Memories in the Mall event in Liverpool that marks the importance of the apology for our community. It is the importance to remember and to recommit to make a difference. The Liverpool council and our community have a respectful relationship with its Aboriginal residents. Recently, there was a deed of agreement between Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council and Liverpool council for the upgrade of Apex and Phillips parks. The agreement will ensure that the Aboriginal community have their history and culture recognised. There will be employment opportunities, traineeships, apprenticeships and an Indigenous garden. These are tangible opportunities for change. Also as part of the celebrations for the 200th anniversary of Campbelltown City, the council, with the input of its First People, has built a Campbelltown yarning circle. Opened earlier this year by the Mayor of Campbelltown, the yarning circle is a show of commitment to supporting and respecting the original inhabitants of Campbelltown, the Dharawal. I would like to make special mention of Uncle Ivan Wellington, who was pivotal in seeing this project come to fruition and spoke at the unveiling. Uncle Ivan spoke about the great benefits the site will bring not only to the local Indigenous community but to the wider community as a whole. Our local community is showing that it can work to improve the situation for Aboriginal residents, but more needs to be done. It's my great privilege to be part of the Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs. This committee recently handed down its report on food security in remote communities. Food security in these areas has a disproportional effect on Aboriginal Australians. The most distressing evidence about the lack of reliable food chains and supplies came from an Aboriginal elder in a remote community, who told us that she fully expected her children would be hungry for at least three months a year because of the lack of deliveries during the wet season. This wasn't just the result of the pandemic; it happened every year. This is heartbreaking. In 2021, it is unacceptable and intolerable for a country like ours. For more than a decade, the Closing the gap report recommendations have highlighted what needs to be achieved to improve the lives of First Nations people. It is disappointing that many of the recommendations have not been implemented and the targets are still not on track. Child mortality rates in Indigenous communities have stagnated for the last decade, sitting well above the targets set. Tragically, 117 Indigenous children died in 2018, more than double that of the rate for non-Indigenous children. Sadly, while the rate of non-Indigenous child mortality is improving at a faster rate, the gap is widening for Aboriginal children. But, as the member for Barton said, these are people, not statistics. More needs to be done to understand the health and social detriments of Indigenous mothers and children if birth outcomes and mortality rates are to improve. First Nations people are dying too soon. They are incarcerated too often, suffer from more preventable diseases, are educated less and are the least likely to be employed. The statistics from the report do not do real justice to the situation that our First Nations peoples face every day. This is a tragedy not of their own making. We must act. We must end the shameful history and use the figures that we have to change the lives for emerging generations. And we must do it now. 11:53 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra They say that the definition of stupidity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. And yet, in the Closing the Gap policy area, that is what we have been doing for more than a decade. The original Closing the Gap report started with the noble aims of the then Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Tom Calma, to set targets and report back in this place each and every year. Five prime ministers and opposition leaders have made beautiful and passionate speeches on this topic, some of the most beautiful and passionate speeches ever delivered in this place. I remember Prime Minister Morrison's speech last year, where he illustrated the old thinking of control, which governments have exercised over the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples for generations. He movingly read from the archival file of what was then called the Department of Native Welfare. He told to the House the story of a young boy, referred to in a patronising way as 'a good type of lad', asking for 75c more pocket money. Powerfully, the Prime Minister then revealed that this same person was today the Minister for Indigenous Australians. What an interesting and powerful illustration of the old thinking. But, despite the fact that those sentiments were written in the 1960s, the old thinking has continued to pervade these areas of policy, and, because of the old thinking, we haven't been able to shift the dial on the Closing the Gap targets anywhere near as much as we would have liked. Last year, two of the seven targets were on track: to halve the gap in year 12 attainment and to have 95 per cent of Indigenous four-year-olds enrolled in early childhood education by 2025. But halving the gap in child mortality, school attendance, child literacy and numeracy, and employment, and closing the gap in life expectancy within a generation were not on target. Those days of control should be well and truly behind us. That is why what the federal government has done—in partnership with the states, territories, and local government and, most importantly, the Coalition of Peaks—has been a complete change in the way in which we approach the Closing the Gap targets. For the first time, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have not just been the subject of the Closing the Gap targets but they have set the targets themselves in conglomeration and in cooperation with the states, the territories and the Commonwealth. This is so important for two reasons. As I began to do more work in the Indigenous policy space and as somebody who became interested in this space because of my interest in constitutional law, it surprised me that, despite the fact that in 1967 Australians overwhelmingly voted to give the Commonwealth power to make laws with relation to Indigenous people, most of the policies and laws that affect their everyday lives are made at the state, territory and local levels. Yet the old thinking left the entire responsibility for closing the gap in the hands of the Commonwealth. This new refresh of the Closing the Gap targets brings people together, including Commonwealth and state governments but most importantly the Aboriginal community-controlled sector. I want to pay tribute to the distinguished, tenacious Aboriginal leader Pat Turner, who is in the gallery today, who led the 51 Coalition of Peaks organisations to put together proposals to change these targets so that they had the buy-in of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and, importantly, the buy-in of the states and territories. New targets don't mean easier targets. In fact, many of these targets are hugely ambitious. But you would not want anything less than hugely ambitious targets, many of which are to be achieved in the next decade, when we are talking about improving the lives of and improving outcomes for our First Australians. What we've done in bringing the Coalition of Peaks together to help design and implement the new Closing the Gap targets is give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people a say, for the first time in their history, over the policies, laws and programs that affect them. This is truly a watershed moment in the history of our country and in the history of black and white relations in our country. It's important that this is not a Canberra-knows-best idea or a state-and-territory-governments-know-best idea but that this is truly a partnership between the Commonwealth, the states, local government and, importantly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who are delivering the services, who are a part of the community, who have the capacity and the accountability to the local communities to change lives on the ground. I believe that this is a really important year in closing the gap. 11:58 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise to speak on what is an incredibly important day for Australia and for all Australians. Australians need to have a strong sense of peace about our past, and that includes understanding, embracing and caring about our Indigenous people. The First Nations people have been an important and essential part of our culture and our heritage. But closing the gap remains a part of our Australian community which is something we need to address. What I would say about closing the gap is when I went to Arnhem Land nearly 30 years ago to see for myself how the Indigenous population was dealing with what is a very difficult situation, I was absolutely appalled by some of the health inequities that I was seeing. It's sad to say that many of those health inequities remain. Unfortunately, the gap in mortality rates between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples remains extreme. Unfortunately, we have some problems that are persisting: health, education, jobs. We need to do more. Today is about making practical measures in order to improve the outcomes for Indigenous people. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 108 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples: 13th Anniversary 108 12:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook by leave—We gather to mark the anniversary this past weekend of the Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples. And we do so here, in the Parliament and on Ngunawal land. It is fitting that we do this here in the place where the Apology was given and the place which free people believe can embody a nation's best hopes. Today, as we reflect, we first give honour. I honour the local custodians, the Ngunawal people and the first peoples across this great continent. I thank them and their elders, past, present and emerging, for 65,000 years of continuous stewardship of our land. I honour the Minister for Indigenous Australians and the shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, both of whom are making history in this House. Amidst the cut and thrust of this vibrant chamber, we all share a deep respect for their journeys to this place and the contribution they make. I also honour Senator Patrick Dodson, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, Senator Lidia Thorpe and Senator Jacqui Lambie. Every one of you is a testimony of resilience and strength, and a reminder of the journey our country is making. And I honour the Indigenous leaders who have joined us and representatives from the stolen generations who I met with earlier. Wonderful people with very powerful stories. It is 13 years since Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister, gave an apology on behalf of the nation in this very place. There is nothing special about that number. In the span of the 65,000 years of Indigenous habitation of this continent, it's a heartbeat. But nations are a living continuum of past, present and future. In all of us, the loves, losses and traumas of our past live on in us. They linger, they have their own life, and they are passed on. Nations, too, try to make sense of their past—to reconcile it—with truth, justice and with one another. As Sir William Deane said a quarter of a century ago: True reconciliation … is not achievable in the absence of acknowledgment by the nation of the wrongfulness of the past dispossession, oppression and degradation of the Aboriginal peoples. Earlier today, I found some quiet time to reread parts of Bringing them home. Children forcibly removed from parents; mothers chasing after police cars that had taken their children; siblings separated; adoptions without consent; forced servitude; welfare institutions were cruel, devoid of warmth, love or care; parents searching for lost children; grief, trauma, endless pain that cascaded through generations—all actioned by the state, a state that seized absolute control over Aboriginal people's lives: where they could live, where they could travel, who they could marry, and what children, if any, they could raise. Actions of brute force were carried out under claims of 'good intentions', but in truth betrayed the ignorance of arrogance, 'knowing better than our Indigenous peoples'. In acknowledging that fact, I repeat the words of my predecessor, Mr Rudd: I am sorry. Truly sorry. In past years, we have on this anniversary reported on our efforts to improve the life expectancy, health, education and economic outcomes for Indigenous Australians. But, as with so much that had been tried before, our efforts were based more on telling than listening, more on grand aspirations than the experience of Indigenous peoples. So, while there was no lack of money, will or work, our targets were unmet, and, while there was some progress, our ambitions were unfulfilled. Mostly, it was because we were perpetuating the very idea that has plagued our country for so long—that we knew better. We had to move to partnership. And so, in July last year, we signed a new National Agreement on Closing the Gap, an agreement reached through a historic partnership between Australian governments and Indigenous peak organisations. It's a new chapter in our efforts, one built on mutual trust, respect and dignity. It not only sets new targets; it changes howwe achieve them and who's driving them. Following this momentous achievement, all governments and the Coalition of Peaks will deliver their implementation plans in the middle of this year—12 months on from the national agreement. From here on, reporting on our national progress will occur mid-year, but my hope is that this anniversary will remain a poignant reminder in our national life and parliamentary calendar, as it should. As we recall what happened in this chamber—and in the life of our nation—13 years ago, we should also remind ourselves of the hope of that day. After Mr Rudd and Dr Nelson had spoken, Aunty Lorraine Peeters, a member of the stolen generations, presented the parliament with a gift. Think about that: a gift, after being wronged. The gift was a coolamon. The coolamon carries newborns. It carries life itself, the future and, with it, our hopes. The coolamon was accompanied by a message: 'On behalf of our people, thank you for saying sorry.' What grace, and what hope. The message went on to say: We have a new covenant between our peoples, that we will do all we can to make sure our children are carried forward, loved and nurtured and able to live a full life. On this anniversary, we reaffirm that new covenant and that shared hope. The SPEAKER 00APG I will just ask the Prime Minister to present a copy of the statement. Mr MORRISON E3L I present a copy of my ministerial statement. 12:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I begin by acknowledging the Ngunawal people and pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. I pay tribute to Minister Wyatt, shadow minister Burney, Senator Patrick Dodson, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, Senator Jacqui Lambie and Senator Lidia Thorpe, who have brought their commitment and passion to making a positive difference to our national parliament. I welcome members of the stolen generations who have joined us here today. We are humbled by your presence. In the 13 years since it was delivered by Kevin Rudd, the Apology to the Stolen Generations has in retrospect taken on a sense of inevitability, but it was anything but inevitable. It was resisted for years. It was resisted on the day itself by some members of this place, who walked out, rather than being part of this moment of national significance and atonement. When history was made in this room, they chose to be in another. It is almost unimaginable now, but, at the time, it was dressed up as an expression of principle, of courage. The real courage, of course, was of those members of the stolen generations who came to this place, here, which had long stood as a pinnacle of an entire system that had failed them, as governments of all persuasions had. Each year, when the anniversary falls, as we vow to narrow the chasm, which we so gently call a 'gap', we are reminded of all of the unfinished business that surrounds us, business that is spelt out in an unflinching litany of lopsided statistics. These statistics have this year been delayed. The truth is that no government can proclaim that it has got all of these issues right. We have all failed. Meanwhile, the Uluru Statement from the Heart places before us an invitation to go further. Let us have the voice to parliament, because the denial of a constitutionally enshrined voice is a denial of the Australian instinct for a fair go. But the voice will be nothing without truth-telling—truth that must fill the holes in our national memory. I spoke recently at the War Memorial about those Indigenous Australians who donned the khaki and fought for a nation that was not prepared to fight for them. They fought for a continent for which their own people had fought during the frontier wars, wars we have not yet learnt to speak of so loudly. They, too, died for their loved ones. They, too, died for their country. We must remember them just as we remember those who fought more recent conflicts. It must all be a part of our reckoning with the truth. Without it, we cannot be whole. 'Makarrata', that powerful Yolngu word, means coming together after a conflict. A makarrata commission as outlined in the Uluru statement would oversee a national process of truth-telling, agreement and treaty making. The anniversary of the apology also demands we look to the removal of Indigenous children going on now. Last year's Family matters report points to a troubling trend. Put together by the Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care, it tells us that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children represent 37.3 per cent of the total population of all children removed from their parents, but they represent just six per cent of our total child population. Just think about that. Between 2013 and 2019, the rate at which those children have been placed with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander carers actually fell from 53.6 per cent to 43.8 per cent. If we don't address this, those gaps, not least in mental health and incarceration rates, will only widen and we will have the makings of another apology in the future. There are many areas that fall to the states, but the federal government have the responsibility to do our part. As the Uluru statement puts it, when we have power over our destiny, our children will flourish. On the day of the apology, Mick Dodson wrote about the false divide between the symbolic and practical aspects of reconciliation. Mick wrote: The reality is that how you feel about yourself, and whether you feel your culture and your history is acknowledged and respected is a key part of facing your problems and being able to turn things around. In this spirit, Labor extends the hand of bipartisanship in support of a referendum on constitutional recognition this term, which is what Minister Wyatt committed to at the National Press Club on 10 July 2019. Let's not keep kicking this down the road. Labor's support is based on just two conditions: that the proposal is supported by First Nations people and that it is consistent with the Uluru statement. Let it be worthy of the grace that we saw in 2008. On that extraordinary day 13 years ago, as the Prime Minister has said, Aunty Lorraine Peeters, who I had the honour of meeting on that day, a member of the stolen generations, presented Prime Minister Rudd with a glass coolamon, and she said, 'We have a new covenant between our peoples.' Let us commit to extending that covenant. We have what it takes. Let us get it right and then let's get it done. We have a great country, but an even greater nation is within our reach. We have the chance to again make history. Let us not go looking for a way out but instead embrace a way forward together. It has been identified for us in the beautiful, extraordinary and remarkably generous Uluru Statement from the Heart. Opening our hearts to advance this agenda will enrich all of us, just as we are all diminished by our national Constitution not recognising the privilege of living with the oldest continuous civilisation on earth. 12:14 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the House take note of the document. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the House take note of the document. 12:15 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I want to acknowledge the members of the stolen generations and Indigenous people in this chamber today sitting and observing. To my parliamentary colleagues who are Indigenous members of this parliament: thank you for the work that you do; it is important. I acknowledge the Ngunawal people, who are the traditional custodians of the Canberra area, and pay my respects to the elders past and present of all Indigenous peoples. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures have spanned 65,000 years. Ours are cultures that care for country, land and water. They are cultures that are sewn into the fabric of modern-day Australia, and they are cultures that have survived dispossession, disease and disruption. Today I stand in our national parliament, like Harry, as the son of a stolen generations survivor. I stand here as the first Aboriginal person elected to the House of Reps and a first on many other fronts. But I know that my mother would have been proud to have seen me stand in this chamber. I see all too often the disadvantage in our communities, the struggles of our people to be heard. I've spent many hours over many years listening to the men and women of the stolen generations whose experiences have left them with indelible memories of the things done to them because of government policy, even well-intentioned. My mother's own story, and that of her brothers and sisters, has affected my approach to life and what I fight for. I have read my grandparents' and mother's native welfare files that outline the way in which they were controlled and managed by government and the institutions of the day. On 13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stood at the dispatch box and delivered a formal apology to Australia's Indigenous people—particularly to the stolen generations, victims of past government policies of forced child removal and cultural assimilation. On that day, on behalf of all Australians he said: 'I am sorry,' and I associate myself with the comments of both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. Today those words are as important, as a reminder of the journey that we have all walked, a significant moment on the path to reconciliation and an acknowledgement of our shared history and the importance of our contribution to this national story. Following the national apology came the effort to close the gap. For over a decade, we saw mixed results, inconsistencies in outcomes and a failure to achieve permanent change. This is not to detract from the commitment and motivation of former governments in their efforts to close the gap. Under our government, we are changing the way in which we work with Indigenous Australians, not just in our efforts to close the gap but in everything we strive to do. Our government is committed to working in genuine partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians because we know that the best outcomes occur when governments and Indigenous Australians work together, from the landmark national agreement on closing the gap to the ongoing work to empower Indigenous Australians through the Indigenous voice codesign process and ongoing work to ensure economic recovery provides opportunity for our peoples through skills, jobs and wealth creation. The Prime Minister has made it clear that the National Agreement on Closing the Gap is a whole-of-government priority. The targets and reforms agreed to in the national agreement require governments to change the way we work, and, as a government, we are changing the way that we do business. Our ministers are working together, and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations, to deliver a Commonwealth implementation plan that will achieve better life outcomes in partnership with our people. This includes the work underway to develop the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Early Childhood Strategy, in concert with SNAICC, as part of our implementation approach. Working in partnership, our focus is to ensure young children have access to good-quality, culturally safe and accessible care and education services. This means that when a child goes to school they'll have a better chance of success. Across all jurisdictions and with the peak organisations there will be shared accountability. For the first time state and territory governments will need to present to their parliaments on their progress towards closing the gap. It is the job of all Australian governments to address Indigenous disadvantage and to implement programs that contribute to closing the gap in all of the key and critical areas. The Prime Minister will deliver the Commonwealth's implementation plan and report on progress that we have made against the targets using the Productivity Commission's data review midyear, and it will clearly show how our actions are contributing to achieving the priority reforms and targets and how we are reporting and leveraging existing initiatives—such as mental health, skills and job creation—to achieve targets and to embed the four priority reforms. The new actions we commit to taking are actions to bring about the change imagined in the national agreement, and significant progress is being made. It is about thinking differently, but there is much more to do. Again, I state that our commitment to working in genuine partnership is the foundation for the changes that we need to achieve. As we implement the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, we will continue to work closely with our people. We will continue to co-design an Indigenous voice because there is much that we can take from the past as we look to the future. I ask that we all look at the role that we can play in empowering Indigenous Australians, our elders and traditional owners, and work to continue to improve the lives and futures of the next generation of Indigenous people as we continue to walk side by side, as one, to reflect, respect and celebrate that which makes us all Australians: Indigenous and non-Indigenous. I saw that reflected in one of the recipients, Miriam, who said, 'Do things with us: walk with us, work with us, listen and then shape the future'. To all of the stolen generation members: what we want to do is honour what they achieved, acknowledge what happened and ensure that it doesn't happen to future generations. That is a challenge for every one of us in here, because when we are one we are strong and when we walk together we have limitless potential. I acknowledge, in closing, all of those who are still with us from the stolen generation and all Indigenous Australians who aspire to a better future, to better opportunities and to their rightful place in every facet of Australian life. 12:23 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I recognise country and everyone that has joined us today. I want to tell a very personal story of a remarkable day: 13 February 2008. The story had started many years before. It began with the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families—the Bringing them home report—some 11 years earlier. It followed a decade of stubborn refusal by a Prime Minister and a government, for reasons I will never understand and from whom an apology required so little yet means so much to so many. I will never forget 27 May 1997 when Mick Dodson and the late Sir Ronald Wilson lodged the Bringing them home report at the convention centre in Melbourne at the 1997 Reconciliation Convention. Senator Dodson, our chair, his bravery was extraordinary. He declared in front of the world there can't be reconciliation without social justice, a moment that held such power, such truth and, in my mind, always will. Thirteen years ago, after the election of the Rudd government, the apology allowed this country to breathe again. We'd been holding our collective breath for so long it was like suffocating. The power of words must never be underestimated: they can hurt but they can also heal. That day I sat in the third row of the Speaker's gallery, up there—your gallery, Deputy Speaker Gillespie. As I looked down on the chamber, there were present all living former prime ministers, bar one: Paul Keating, Bob Hawke, Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam. I remember survivors of the stolen generation were sitting around the chamber, and we heard both the Prime Minister and the leader of the Labor Party talk about that today. I also acknowledge the presence of the stolen generations with us at the moment. We sat not quite believing the moment. As Prime Minister Rudd began to speak, the tears flowed not just in this place but across the nation. Prime Minister Rudd said: We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians. He went on to say: We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country. For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry. To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry. At the conclusion of the apology, as the Prime Minister and my leader have said, a coolamon was presented to the parliament by way of Kevin Rudd and Jenny Macklin. It was a powerful acknowledgement of the apology as a coolamon is traditionally used to keep safe our infants. This was a remarkable gesture of grace, generosity and dignity. I don't think I'll ever see anything like it again. I left this chamber and made my way to the forecourt. Aunty Mae Robinson—she's gone now—was carrying a large black-and-white photo of a young Aboriginal girl with a big bow in her hair. It was her mother. We fell into each other's arms, and, through tears, Aunty Mae said: 'I brought Mummy with me today. She was removed and sent to Cootamundra.' On the lawn, thousands of people were holding each other and crying. It was a good day. But the apology was not just about saying sorry; it was about making things right. It marked the beginning of a commitment by government to close the gap, to heal the very real inequalities between First Nations and other Australians. We all know the grim statistics, so familiar that our eyes glaze over and our ears close up, but think of these statistics, so familiar, as our mothers and brothers, fathers and cousins, sisters and friends who pass on while still so young. Labor supports the new approach to closing the gap and the new targets, but in the 2020 report only two of the seven targets were on track. After more than a decade, the other five were not, including life expectancy. Refreshing the targets and setting new deadlines that are yet further away must not become a bureaucratic sleight of hand that lets this parliament off the hook for another decade—and I include all of us in that—because by 2031 a whole generation will have passed. We must all be accountable for the central commitment of closing the gap—closing the life expectancy gap in a generation. In 2005 the Social Justice Report set Australia the challenge of closing the gap. As one of the first items of business, the Rudd Labor government committed to closing the gap as part of a great national effort. In 2017, the Uluru Statement from the Heart set this country the challenge of delivering voice, treaty and truth. Three and a half years later, those aspirations remain outstanding. If we want to see real and lasting progress on closing the gap, First Nations people must be at the centre of decision-making. I know the new agreement is about that. That is why Labor is totally committed to all three elements of the Uluru statement: a constitutionally enshrined voice to the parliament, not just the government; and a makarrata commission of treaty making and truth telling, because the healing power of telling the truth, as my leader has said, did not end with the apology; it began. A constitutionally enshrined voice to the parliament is within our grasp if this government wants it and we extend our hand. As the Labor leader has said, we want to work with you in the spirit of bipartisanship to make this a reality in this term of parliament. I don't care who gets the credit. I really don't. I just want to see it done. If political parties offer their full-throated endorsement of an enshrined voice to the parliament and a model is settled with the broad support of First Nations communities, I have no doubt a referendum will succeed. There is time to get this done if we work together and with the community. The government started out this term speaking with real ambition, and now it's time for action. An enshrined voice to the parliament would mark the beginning of a pragmatic new way of doing business for all of us—a new way of listening, of being heard, of being accountable and of making sure the laws, programs and policies of the government are actually working to achieve what we, on this day each year, profess as our national duty: to finally close that gap. Can I complete my statement with a direct quote from the Bringing them home report: Most of us girls were thinking white in the head but were feeling black inside. We weren't black or white. We were a very lonely, lost and sad displaced group of people. We were taught to think and act like a white person, but we didn't know how to think and act like an Aboriginal. We didn't know anything about our culture. We were completely brainwashed to think only like a white person. When they went to mix in white society, they found they were not accepted [because] they were Aboriginal. When they went and mixed with Aborigines, some found they couldn't identify with them either, because they had too much white ways in them. So that they were neither black nor white. They were simply a lost generation of children. I know. I was one of them. Debate adjourned. MOTIONS 113 MOTIONS Minister for Home Affairs 113 12:33 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Minister for Home Affairs arbitrarily rejected merit-based recommendations made by his Department for the distribution of Safer Communities Fund grants; (b) the Minister for Home Affairs cut funding to a number of projects recommended by his Department in order to fund projects in marginal and Government-held electorates; (c) the Minister for Home Affairs announced funding for two projects during the Braddon by-election before grant guidelines were written, spent more than $36,000 on Royal Australian Air Force jet flights for associated travel, and went ahead and funded those projects even though his own Department advised him that they were "unsuitable and ineligible" for funding; (d) the Minister for Home Affairs also fast-tracked an $880,000 grant to the National Retail Association one week after a $1,500 donation was made to the Liberal National Party to support the Minister's election campaign; (e) this Government has a proven history of rorting taxpayer-funded grant schemes for its own political benefit, including sports rorts; and (f) the Minister for Home Affairs has prioritised his political fortunes over his responsibility to keep Australian communities safe; and (2) calls on the Minister for Home Affairs to attend the Chamber immediately to explain his actions. Leave not granted. Mr CONROY 249127 I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Shortland from moving the following motion forthwith: That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Minister for Home Affairs arbitrarily rejected merit-based recommendations made by his Department for the distribution of Safer Communities Fund grants; (b) the Minister for Home Affairs cut funding to a number of projects recommended by his Department in order to fund projects in marginal and Government-held electorates; (c) the Minister for Home Affairs announced funding for two projects during the Braddon by-election before grant guidelines were written, spent more than $36,000 on Royal Australian Air Force jet flights for associated travel, and went ahead and funded those projects even though his own Department advised him that they were "unsuitable and ineligible" for funding; (d) the Minister for Home Affairs also fast-tracked an $880,000 grant to the National Retail Association one week after a $1,500 donation was made to the Liberal National Party to support the Minister's election campaign; (e) this Government has a proven history of rorting taxpayer-funded grant schemes for its own political benefit, including sports rorts; and (f) the Minister for Home Affairs has prioritised his political fortunes over his responsibility to keep Australian communities safe; and (2) calls on the Minister for Home Affairs to attend the Chamber immediately to explain his actions. Dirty Dutton dirt cheap! This minister sacrificed safety for buying political— 12:37 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member be no further heard.

The House divided. [12:41]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 12:44 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 12:44 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I second the motion. Rorts, rorts and more rorts, and Peter Dutton is up to his neck in it! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Isaacs will resume his seat—and I would just remind him to refer to members by their correct titles. The Leader of the House. 12:45 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member for Isaacs be no further heard.

The House divided. [12:46]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 12:47 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved be agreed to. I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. 12:47 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio Sports rorts 2.0—this government can't tell the difference between public money and— The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Leader of the House. 12:45 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the question be now put.

The House divided. [12:48]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 12:51 The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the motion be disagreed to.

The House divided. [12:51]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 66 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Haines, H Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 57 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 Crown Resorts 120 12:52 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Melbourne from moving the following motion immediately: That this House: (1) notes the Bergin report concerning Crown's gaming operations and its findings of money laundering and criminal activity; (2) calls on all political parties and candidates to join the Greens and independents in refusing to accept donations from Crown; and (3) also calls on the Liberal, National and Labor parties to return the almost $2 million in political donations received from Crown since 2000, or to transfer an equivalent amount to a charity or support service that deals with problem gambling. Crown money is tainted money, and it has— The SPEAKER 00APG You were seeking leave, weren't you? Mr BANDT M3C No. The SPEAKER 00APG You just moved it. Sorry—proceed. Mr BANDT M3C Crown money is tainted money, and it has no place in politics. Big corporations have too much power over politics and politicians, and they exercise that power through political donations. Because these big corporations make political donations to Liberal, Labor and National, decisions get made in this place that are in the vested interests—not for the public interest. We have seen, time and time and time again, good legislation and good reforms that are for the welfare of the Australian people be stymied in this place by politicians who take money and whose parties take money from these big corporations, including Crown casino. We have seen it in the past, when very, very important reforms being brought by the then member for Denison and now member for Clark to deal with the surge of problem gambling in this country were scuttled. Why? It is no coincidence that the major parties were taking donations from the gambling industry for years and years and years, and as a result families and people around this country and children continue to be devastated by the effects of problem gambling because the establishment parties in here are on the take. They are taking money from the Crown casino. It is time to get this money out. 12:55 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member be no further heard.

The House divided. [12:59]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 13:02 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 13:02 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark I second the motion and I observe that the major parties are running a protection racket for Crown casino that we know— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Clark will resume his seat. The Leader of the House? 13:02 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member be no further heard.

The House divided. [13:03]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 60 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 13:06 The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Greens be disagreed to.

The House divided. [13:06]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 61 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 BILLS 124 BILLS Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020 124

Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020

Second Reading 124 13:08 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam Two years ago the Treasurer stood before the Australian people, puffed up with confected anger, and cried a river of crocodile tears. Releasing the final report of the banking royal commission, he could barely have been more explicit in his criticism of the banks and the system which allowed them to perpetrate serious crimes on thousands of unsuspecting victims. He said the report was a scathing assessment of the banks' behaviour, driven by a culture of greed that breached the law. He said the price paid by the community was 'immense'. He spoke of broken businesses, the emotional stress and the personal pain that thousands of victims had experienced. He promised change. This is what he said at the time: … the community's trust in our financial institutions has been lost and this is why it must now be restored. From today, the banking sector must change, and change forever. He then promised action on all 76 recommendations of the royal commission. Those of us who've been involved for a long period of time paid careful attention to those words. Promising action on all of the 76 recommendations is not the same thing as promising to implement each of those 76 recommendations. We were sceptical because this government had voted 26 times against the forming of the royal commission. So resistant had they been to a spotlight on the goings-on within the financial sector, we could not trust them to implement the recommendations of that royal commission. We were right to be sceptical, and their actions every day since have proven that to be true. You could fill Lake Illawarra with the crocodile tears the Treasurer wept on that day. Two years on, just 27 of the 76 recommendations have had any action—that's just one-third. Worse, the very first recommendation, recommendation 1.1 to keep the responsible lending laws in place, the government has sneakily rejected; and it now plans to unwind those laws that were put in place over a decade ago helping us to get through the global financial crisis and this most recent crisis. I will come back to that issue. But for now I want to say that the issue of the wide gulf between what the Treasurer says and does is growing by the day. This is not the only broken promise this government has made. Time and time again, the government has broken its promises to the Australian people, particularly when it comes to their personal finances. When this government makes a promise, it's time to take out some insurance. Remember the last election, when the Prime Minister and the Treasurer promised workers that they would get their legislated superannuation contributions, that he wanted to see them paid in full? It was another broken promise from this two-faced government that simply cannot be trusted with workers' money. While they pay themselves a healthy superannuation contribution of 15.4 per cent, they are now planning to cut workers' superannuation contributions—9½ per cent is enough for the workers, according to this government. Where they once told everyone that 12 per cent was adequate they now argue, all of a sudden, that 9½ per cent is adequate—15.4 per cent for them, 9½ per cent for the people who clean their offices. That tells you everything you need to know about this government. Between now and the next election, we will be reminding every one of their voters what they intend to do with their superannuation. There is absolutely a big con going on here, a huge con. First, they are trying to use the COVID crisis as cover to cut workers' superannuation. But workers aren't buying it. The second big con is this: they are somehow trying to convince people that if their superannuation is cut they will somehow get a pay rise. Workers aren't buying it. They know what happened to the last bloke who cut their superannuation and they know what happened to their wages after that. I am of course talking about former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. He argued that if you cut superannuation then wages would magically grow in response. What have we seen since 2013? Wages have flatlined. If this Prime Minister gets his way and gets to cut workers' superannuation again, the very same thing will happen. We are not going to see a magical increase in wages. In fact, we know it because we have before this parliament this week legislation which is attempting to enable workers' wages to be cut, their penalty rates to be reduced and their job security to be made even more insecure. You cannot trust a word that this Prime Minister and this government have to say about superannuation, about workers' wages and their personal finances. The Morrison government's plan for economic recovery is quite simply this: cut workers wages and conditions and hope for the best. We're not buying it and the workers of Australia won't buy it either. There is nothing more certain than this government being willing to run a protection racket for those organisations that are exposed by the royal commission. Let's go through the history that has led us to this point. First, they tried to stop the royal commission. They voted against it 26 times. At least that was an honest approach. Having failed to stop Labor's campaign to get the royal commission happening, they then promised the Australian people, through a veil of mock outrage, that they'd implement the royal commission's recommendations. Predictably, when the news cycle moved on, they invented excuse after excuse to break that promise. Two years ago, Josh Frydenberg promised to protect Australians from greedy banks who were too willing to break the law for a quick buck. Now, instead of making the banks follow the law, he's changing the law so that the banks can keep taking advantage of vulnerable Australians. His excuse is the pandemic. We are not buying it. Apparently, there's a consumer credit squeeze that's threatening to derail the economic recovery. That's news to everybody else outside of the government party room. Apparently, the responsible lending laws are somehow to blame, the same laws that simply ask banks to do two things: if you're going to offer a loan to somebody, make sure they can afford it; and make sure that it's appropriate. It's not a very high hurdle to get over. In the old days, we would have called it just good business sense: make sure that the loan you're going to offer somebody is affordable and make sure it's appropriate. But, apparently, according to this government and to this Prime Minister and to this Treasurer, that hurdle is too high and is, somehow, choking off the recovery. This excuse runs in the face of the facts. Auction clearance rates in the housing market in Sydney last weekend were up to 90 per cent. Home lending over the month of December alone was up 10 per cent. In fact, many economists are concerned we're at the very beginning of a housing price bubble. Housing prices are booming. There is absolutely no evidence, no evidence whatsoever, that the current responsible lending laws are choking the economic recovery. The hint is in the name: responsible lending laws. They ensure that if you're lending somebody some money you're doing it responsibly. We're going to back the laws that have been critical to our economic stability for the last 11 years—an observation that was made by the Treasury themselves when they gave a submission to the banking and finance royal commission. Far from putting a restraint on economic activity, they argued that the responsible lending laws were probably stabilising economic growth and ensuring that credit flowed responsibly, a submission that we 100 per cent endorse. Where is the evidence that asking banks to take a responsible approach to lending is hurting the economy? It simply is not there. All we have, instead, is a desperate Treasurer looking for ways to retreat from his pantomime of sympathy just two years ago. For evidence of this, look no further than the Treasurer's confected concern about the Down syndrome teenager sold life insurance by an unscrupulous commission-hungry bank salesman. Two years ago the Treasurer said, 'This is appalling.' He promised that such things would never happen again on his watch. Late last year the man's father wrote to the Treasurer and begged him not to scrap these laws. We call on the Treasurer, we call on the government—we call on every member of the government—to listen to the words of that father. Do the right thing. Keep the laws in place. Back your very own promise to implement the recommendations of the royal commission. We are running a very real risk that the whole story of the royal commission gets overturned. A very dangerous story is being peddled by members on the government benches, at the moment. Three years after the royal commission—and let's not forget the 10,000 submissions from victims of financial misdoings and financial crimes—and two years after the royal commission handed the report to the Treasurer, what we heard back then was the government saying: 'We were shocked. We did not know—we could not know—that this behaviour was going on.' Of course, this could not be further from the truth. If you look at the recommendations that were issued by the royal commissioner, by Ken Hayne himself, and if you look at the history of those recommendations, the overwhelming majority of them had been presented to government before—through recommendations of the Productivity Commission, through recommendations of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, through recommendations of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority and through recommendations of committees of this parliament. If you go back and trace each and every one of those recommendations, you'll find that they had been presented to government before. Far from the government being surprised at what the royal commission found, far from the government being taken back and saying, 'Oh my God, these recommendations—there's a lot of work here; we didn't expect any of it,' each and every one of those recommendations had been presented to government before. So there can be no excuse for ignorance and there can be no excuse for inaction. But the government is peddling this myth: 'That that was then and this is now. COVID has changed everything. The banks have learnt their lessons, and they are now going to behave in a responsible way, as are the insurers and the superannuation companies.' Well, putting that argument at its very highest, let's just assume they're right—that the senior personnel within those banks and insurance companies have learnt the lessons of the royal commission and will correct their behaviour. History teaches us one thing, and of this we can be certain: the senior personnel of those banks will move on and their behaviours will creep back in, by stealth at first and then with great force. It is exactly for this reason that we need strong laws and strong regulators. But what we have seen from the government and government members is that, each and every time they have the opportunity, they seek to undermine the authority and the powers of the regulators. Their argument beforehand was that the regulators, who they put in place and who were under their watch, somehow weren't doing their job at the time. But we've also seen some pretty extraordinary things said by government members more recently. When the regulators actually do their job, we see aggrieved government members arguing that they should stop, that ASIC's going too hard on the poor banks and the poor financial sector; they should stop going so hard on those they regulate. Mr Falinski interjecting— Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B This is exactly what they are doing! I've heard the member for Mackellar, who's always got an interjection to make, make exactly the same argument. Then they argue that somehow the regulators should spend less time making regulations and more time going out and chasing corporate criminals. I ask you to interrogate that for a moment. I have stood at this dispatch box over the last three years and I have argued—when bills come before this House with a thin stream of legislation meandering its way through vast meadows of regulatory delegation—that this is not the way the parliament should be doing its job. If something is important enough to legislate and regulate then the force should be in the legislation itself and not delegated to a regulator, such as ASIC, Treasury, APRA or another regulator. The parliament is the place where this regulation should be done. These members over here, including the member for Mackellar, have argued against me and said that this is confected outrage. Yet they themselves are the ones who are saying that ASIC is too busy making regulations, under the powers authorised by the government, to do its job of hunting down corporate crime and corporate misgivings. It's confected outrage! The member for Goldstein should know it. The member for Mackellar and the senator for New South Wales in the other place are equally culpable in this respect. We should resist the narrative that is being peddled by this side that somehow the royal commission is done and dusted, that COVID has changed everything and that we can turn back the clock and let everything go back to the way it was before. We should resist this narrative, and we should start by doing it in this place. We will, of course, support the measures within this bill. We welcome the enhancements contained in the bill governing the provisions of financial advice to clients under ongoing fee arrangements. We support the new disclosure requirements for financial advisers. They ensure any adviser who is not truly independent must provide written outlines detailing any of the potential conflicts of interest that they may have in advising their clients. In supporting this amendment, we make the observation that members of the government have fought against these provisions for seven long years or more. Indeed, when we go back to the Ripoll inquiry in 2013 where some of those matters were first exposed and the Future of Financial Advice reforms were brought into this place, members of the Liberal Party and the National Party fought Labor tooth and nail—an egregious restraint on financial advice. The world would come crashing down. They fought against it. In fact, they rolled it back when they had the opportunity to do so. They rolled back many of the key provisions of the Future of Financial Advice reforms. We then had the royal commission. We now have this legislation before the House today. It's through gritted teeth that we know that members of the government will be voting for this provision, which will implement that recommendation of the Hayne commission. About damn time. It's also about time we had new provisions contained within this bill prohibiting the charging of fees for advice on superannuation accounts without the expressed permission of fund members. The Hayne commission exposed this and gave it a name: fees for no service. There should be outrage. It's a behaviour that members on this side of the House ran a protection racket on year after year after year. Mr Tim Wilson interjecting— Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B And when the game was over, they protected their mates, because they knew in one section of the industry this was the only way that they could keep that steady flow of dividends running from unsuspecting member accounts through to shareholders of those for-profit organisations. They protected that, year after year after year, and, once they knew that the jig was up, they then turned on the industry as a whole. Without Labor's pressure, this measure would not be coming before the House. The member for Goldstein knows it, and that's why he makes so much damn noise about the provision. It's confected outrage. He makes so much noise about the position because— Mr Tim Wilson interjecting— Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B This guy makes so much noise, because he has been running a protection racket for this part of the industry for decades. Now that it's been exposed he wants to make a lot of noise about it but has been caught out. The rank hypocrisy of this guy is unbelievable. These measures are going to go some way to address the unethical conduct laid bare by the royal commission hearings. The health of our economy is underpinned by trust and ethical behaviour. As Commissioner Hayne observed, advisers 'cannot stand in more than one canoe'. The duty to serve a client's best interest should come ahead of the heedless pursuit of sales and fees, but all too often it did not. I want to pause for a moment and give a shout-out to the very many honourable, diligent financial advisers who were ashamed of this behaviour. They knew it was going on. They counselled government to do something about it because not only could they see that it was a crime being committed against those unwitting customers of those financial advisers—the rogues—and there were victims of that rogue behaviour but they could see that it was bringing down the reputation of the profession as a whole. They urged government to do something about it. Government was not willing to move until it was exposed by the Hayne royal commission. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265991 Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 128 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Lunar New Year 128 13:30 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta It's lunar new year again, and we ring in the Year of the Ox—a time of stability and calmness, which is something we need. It's interesting the way the lunar new year usually gives us exactly what we need when we need it. It's predicted to be a year of great opportunity and economic prosperity. But it's been a much quieter lunar new year this year than I've experienced in my 16 years of enjoying it in Parramatta. Usually we have the Chinese community, the Australian Korean community and the Australian Vietnamese community celebrating. I go from event to event. There is lots of dancing, lots of food, lots of fireworks, lots of colour and, of course, the lion dancing. We did have that this year. On Saturday, once again, the Sydney Youth Dragon & Lion Dance Troupe with William and Jane Ho formed up at Parramatta Town Hall and went down Church Street blessing the various businesses in the street. It's something I usually participate in every year and it's a great event. I say to all of my Australian Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese community that, even though we didn't get together and celebrate it in the way we usually do, I know it's an incredibly important time of the year for you and your families and I really hope that once the ox has done its job this year, when it comes around to lunar new year next year, we'll be out in the streets once again celebrating together. This is now an Australian festival. It has been celebrated in Australia for more than a century. We do it every year now and we'll do it again next year. Happy new year! Rural and Regional Services: Health 128 13:31 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey During the last week, I was very pleased to host the Minister for Regional Health, Regional Communications and Local Government, Mark Coulton, in my electorate. We met with a number of delegations of doctors, discussing the rural doctor crisis. We met with, I think, 12 different mayors in a couple of different groupings, and I can tell you that pretty much the No. 1 topic on the mayors' list as well as the doctors' list is the shortage of doctors in the region. There was a debate or a discussion recently around the fact that there was an article in The Weekend Australian saying that we spent $2 billion on these problems over the last 10 years but we've still got the problem, and I couldn't agree with that more. I think we are going to have to strike a different stance on making sure that we've got good medical cover in the country. One of the doctors I met with had been looking at retirement. He'd served the Port Augusta community for 50 years and moved to Adelaide. He's now moved back to prop up the service at the age of 78. We can see this retirement wave coming down the pipeline as practitioners in their 60s and 70s are saying, 'I can't go on anymore.' We're seeing practices pulling back from providing services to hospitals and we're seeing state governments forced to use locums to fill up the gaps at four times the cost. COVID-19: Arts and Entertainment Industry 128 13:33 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide Last week, on Monday 8 February, I joined some wonderful supporters and volunteers at the Capri Cinema in my electorate to call on the Prime Minister to do more to support independent cinemas across Australia. Independent cinemas across Australia had a day of campaigning last week. My electorate is home to the majority of South Australia's independent cinemas including the Capri Cinema, the Palace Nova Cinemas and the Piccadilly. These are much-loved independent venues in Adelaide. Not only do they provide entertainment but they're also an important drawcard for other businesses in the area like cafes, restaurants and shops, and they support many other local businesses. But, as we all know, COVID has hit the independent cinemas and they've suffered around a 70 per cent loss in revenue. They still cannot operate at 100 per cent. Their cinemas are half empty, or you could call them 'half full'. Many of them are way down in takings and turnover, and many new releases from the US and Hollywood are not coming to our shores. People are holding back until COVID is done. They will be up and running, hopefully, later on. Many of them are Australian owned family businesses that will struggle to stay open when JobKeeper ends in March. And I'm joining together with many other colleagues in calling for a targeted government support package to see them through this health and economic crisis. We cannot afford to lose our independent cinemas and the government must— (Time expired) Chinese New Year, China 129 13:34 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth I extend my warm wishes for the new year to the many Australian Chinese communities—the Year of the Ox. Happy new year! Australia is blessed to have a large number of diverse Chinese Australians who have come here from mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Macau and other places, as part of the Chinese diaspora throughout the world. Their contribution has made Australia immeasurably richer. They, of course, were here in the early part of Australia's history as a colony during the gold rushes, but, more recently, in the last two to three decades, they have migrated in large numbers and chosen to make their homes in places like my own city of Sydney, also in Melbourne and, indeed, throughout Australia. Everywhere they have settled, they have made a contribution. Be it enriching the cultural life or enriching community life with the value that they place on education, family values and upholding the stability and security of Australia, they've made a tremendous contribution. I know that this has not been an easy year in relations between Australia and the People's Republic of China for a number of reasons. Of course, Australia is committed to working through those and ensuring we have a productive and constructive relationship with mainland China, but it's always important to make sure that those disputes are kept in the diplomatic sphere, and we recognise that our differences with another country should not reflect our attitudes towards people of that ethnicity living in Australia. Once again, I extend my warm wishes to the Chinese Australian community in the Year of the Ox. Veterans 129 13:36 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I want to talk about an issue which is of great importance to our nation but which, unfortunately, isn't being treated as important by those opposite, the members of the government. It is the need in this nation for a royal commission into veteran suicide. It is far past time that those opposite stand up and stop the protection racket for this incredibly important issue for people in our nation. In my electorate, at a veterans roundtable that I had in the last couple of weeks, the young veterans in particular are asking for this and want to know why the former Defence people in the government are not standing up and saying: 'Yes, this is a massive issue. Yes, we need to have a holistic arms-length inquiry to find out why the patriots of this country, the men and women who have served us in uniform, keep taking their lives and why they keep dying by suicide.' I've recently had a conversation with a member of the government who said no-one in the Liberal Party and no-one in the coalition wants a royal commission because it will cost too much. The Minister for Veterans' Affairs says it will cost $100 million. I could go through a list of companies that keep paying out executive bonuses and dividends through JobKeeper. If we used those funds, we could have a royal commission into veteran suicide tomorrow. We need it done. Bonner Electorate: Infrastructure 129 13:38 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I'm very pleased to share with the House that the Lota Skatepark and the Minnippi Parklands bikeway are two of the 41 projects to benefit from a $40 million Morrison government injection into local projects across Brisbane. The funding has been delivered to Brisbane City Council and will support a year's worth of employment and support to local businesses and industry across Brisbane. In my electorate of Bonner, I'm very pleased to see these two projects will benefit from this funding. Lota Skatepark will receive a much-needed upgrade with a complete replacement of the existing facility. This project will be funded with $400,000 from the grant, and council will work with local park users to determine the best design and elements to give locals a fresh new skate park facility for all to enjoy. The second project will be the construction of a bikeway through Minnippi Parklands at a cost of $3.7 million which will connect Wynnum Road and Creek Road through the existing bushland reserve. Construction will get underway mid-year and will be completed by the end of the year, just in time for the school holidays. Thanks to the Morrison government, Brisbane City Council will be able to deliver a diverse range of projects across the city, including these projects in my electorate of Bonner. These local projects will put money into the pockets of local suppliers and residents putting a much-needed economic boost into our region. Pearce, Mr Kevin, OAM 129 13:39 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell In January, the late Kevin Pearce was posthumously awarded an Order of Australia Medal for his service to the Wyong community. Kevin worked as a criminal lawyer with Aubrey Brown Lawyers on the coast for 34 years. He was highly respected locally for his volunteer and pro bono work, including mentoring mock trial students from local high schools. He also played a key role in the establishment of the Wyong Local Court's Traffic Offender Intervention Program and the Wyong Community Aid Panel Program in the 1980s. Both programs are recognised as being ahead of their time and are now commonplace across New South Wales, benefiting thousands of people. In addition to his professional work as a lawyer, Kevin was also heavily involved in sport and the wider sporting community, particularly rugby league, having served the Wyong Roos as a player, board member, director and chair. Under Kevin's watch, the club has built a strong community profile across and beyond the coast, with the leagues club supporting schools, other sports and charities in our community. Kevin also served as a director of the Wyong Race Club for 20 years. Kevin dedicated his life to Wyong, to our community, and he made our community a better place. I am very fortunate to have known Kevin and to have gone to school with his children. To his wife, Nola, and their children, Kelly, Angela and Ben: thank you for giving so generously of your husband, and father, to all of us. To his grandchildren, who affectionately knew Kevin as 'Hadda': I know how much you miss Hadda—we all do. Energy 130 13:40 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I have some good news. Today the Essential Services Commission of South Australia released figures showing that electricity prices in my home state have fallen by an average of $111 a year for retail household customers. This is the third year in a row of reducing electricity prices in South Australia. The year before it was an average of $96 per household bill, and the year before that it was $62. So over the last 2½ years the average household electricity bill in South Australia has fallen by almost $270. You can contrast that with the last two years of the previous Labor government, where prices went up by over $400 a year for the average household electricity bill in South Australia. It's great to see that the Morrison and Marshall governments are working together to reduce electricity prices in South Australia. One of the really good partnerships has been the Home Battery Scheme, which is a partnership between the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, at the federal level, and the state government. They are hoping to roll out 50,000 batteries linked to solar panel generation across the state. This is one of many things that are contributing to electricity prices coming down. I'm excited to see the news today of a further drop of over $100, but we have only just begun. We want to keep getting electricity prices down and make sure South Australia is the most competitive place to live and do business in the country. Indi Electorate: People with Disability 130 13:42 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi There are times when I'm so proud to share the story of a local hero in my electorate. Today, I commend Ms Jennifer Tait, who has dedicated her life to helping people with disabilities. Ms Tait has opened both a plan management and support company, called Blue Goose, and a social enterprise cafe, the Purple Chicken. These businesses create jobs for young adults with disabilities and help them to transition into open employment in a variety of industries right across the border region. Many young adults with disabilities in our community are either unemployed or underemployed, and this is being addressed through the Purple Chicken cafe. The cafe employs up to 30 young adults, who learn hospitality, social employment, social skills, employment preparation and daily living skills to live more independently. The participants love their training at the cafe so much that they're often heard to say, 'I'm never leaving.' Currently, three young adults have moved into their own homes, nine have achieved jobs, four have progressed to further training at school or work placements, and six are going for their driver learner permits. Young adults such as Rhys, Shaun, Ray, Harry and Mitch are a true inspiration and are working hard to lead fulfilling lives with the support of many in their NDIS plans. I commend Jen Tait and all involved in the Purple Chicken cafe but, mainly, all the incredible young adults who are benefiting from the opportunity this fantastic initiative provides. Board, Ms Jennifer 130 13:44 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert Two Friday nights ago, Townsville lost a young woman to a senseless crime. Twenty-two-year-old Jennifer Board had only just bought her new motorbike when she was hit by a car that was chasing a stolen car. Tragically, Jennifer did not survive. The next day, the crash scene was covered in orange, Jennifer's favourite colour. A fence was lined with flowers and cards. Hundreds of people—friends, family and strangers—gathered together to try and make sense of the shock and grief that they were feeling. How could a young woman well known, respected and loved in our community be snatched from us in this way? Jennifer loved adventure, the outdoors, her bike and fitness. She loved helping people in her job at the gym. Her friends say she could never hurt a single person in her life. Now Townsville is without one of our people who exemplify what is great about our community. The emotions at Saturday's impromptu community memorial were real and raw. Ever since, people have been asking the question: how could this have happened? It's a question that's repeated in my mind over and over. Why has it taken a tragic event like this one for Townsville's long-running issue with youth crime to get the attention it deserves? We owe it to Jennifer to be better, to do better. I'm sorry. We have failed you. Rest in peace. Eden-Monaro Electorate: Tumbatrek 131 13:45 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro Thank you. I rise today fresh from a 9.5-kilometre walk through the both beautiful and traumatised landscape of the Snowy Valleys. Tumbatrek was the brainchild of the late Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer. On and off since 1985, hundreds of people have gathered each year to walk and talk with all levels of government and share their ideas for our community. I thank the current Deputy Prime Minister, Michael McCormack, for entrusting me with Mr Fischer's walking stick. Better telecommunications was a major talking point as we weaved in and out of towering gums over the weekend. Tumbarumba and surrounds, like many communities in the mighty Eden-Monaro, found itself cut off from the world during the darkest days of our Black Summer bushfires. The sense of isolation is now a deep part of the community's trauma. The Morrison government says it has committed $2 billion to bushfire recovery and that helping Australians recover is a national priority—good words but, sadly, hollow words for the people I spoke with at Tumbatrek. Of the more than $27 million those opposite have committed to strengthening telecommunications against natural disasters, just $100,000 has been spent. Fourteen months on from the worst natural disaster this country has witnessed, this government has spent less than 0.36 per cent of the allocated budget. Burnt-out communities I represent need these practicalities, and we will continue to fight for them—all photo ops and no follow-up. (Time expired) Forde Electorate: Twin Rivers Community Mallet Sports Club 131 13:47 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I'm very proud to be the patron of the Twin Rivers Community Mallet Sports Club, one of the many great sports clubs in my electorate of Forde. This club was formed by Des and Beryl Schodel and five friends when they started to play croquet on the cricket oval at Olivers Sports Complex in Eagleby in July 2010. By August 2010, the group had grown to 14 players and it was decided to form the Twin Rivers Community Mallet Sports Club. Sadly, Des is no longer with us. The club continued playing on the cricket oval until September 2014, when changes to leasing arrangements meant they were forced to find a new location. Finding a permanent home for their beloved game has been problematic, and over the following six years the club moved to five different locations. But it was with great joy and celebration that club president Ian Every cut the ribbon recently to allow play to begin on their new courts. The club's new courts at Bedford Park in Eagleby have been made possible thanks to the three levels of government coming together to work for the community. This included a $30,000 community development grant from the federal government. The spirit and tenacity of this club is emblematic of our community, and I would like to thank all in the club for all their hard work. At last the Twin Rivers Community Mallet Sports Club have a place to call home, and I wish them the very best for the future. COVID-19 131 13:48 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara It is a difficult thing to be here while my home state is in a five-day lockdown and it is heartbreaking for all the Melburnians and Victorians who have endured so much throughout this pandemic. But our city have done something remarkable—they have already overcome the second wave—and I am absolutely confident that Victorians will overcome this current outbreak. But this virus is becoming harder to manage. We've seen outbreaks in quarantine in Adelaide, in Brisbane, in Perth, twice in Sydney and now, of course, in Melbourne. All of these cities bar Sydney have been in three- to five-day lockdowns with these highly infectious new strains of the virus. We've seen outbreaks in New Zealand, Taiwan and Vietnam. Countries with some of the most outstanding responses to the coronavirus are struggling to contain the mutated version of this virus. This pandemic is not over, but the federal government are ending their support for businesses. They're ending JobKeeper for Victorian businesses. They've done a lot of press conferences on rolling out the vaccine, but they haven't done one simple thing: actually roll out the vaccine. I'm losing count of how many press conferences the minister and the Prime Minister have done. If they'd done as many vaccine rollouts, maybe we wouldn't have as many outbreaks as we do right now. This pandemic is not over. We need to continue to support businesses, we need to get the rollout of vaccines underway and we need to support Victorians in these difficult days. Anzac Day 131 13:50 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I rise to speak on an issue that is absolutely outrageous. In Queensland the RSLs have put forward a proposal with a COVID-safe plan to the Queensland government for a very modest Anzac Day dawn service in Anzac Square and a small march at the RNA showgrounds. It has been weeks, and they have received absolutely zero response—crickets—from this Queensland Labor government. It seems that, if you're a member of Extinction Rebellion, you get more help from the Queensland Labor government to march in Brisbane than if you are a veteran. That is just crazy. We should be doing everything we can to see the Anzac marches go ahead, with Brisbane residents in attendance so they can support our veterans and, more importantly, so our veterans can feel their support. For goodness sake, if the Queensland government can find a way to have a ticketed event for the AFL grand final, with tens of thousands of people there, they can find a way to have a ticketed event for our veterans, so that our veterans can come together and feel the support of Brisbane residents. It is not that hard. I am concerned that COVID is being used as an excuse to simply cancel events when it's all getting too hard for the Queensland Labor government. Whether it's Australia Day—where this federal government had to step in to support those events in a COVID-safe way—or, now, Anzac Day, we need the Queensland Labor government to stand up and support our veterans so we can have a proper Anzac Day march go ahead under the current arrangements. This federal government and certainly I, as a local member, support it wholeheartedly. (Time expired) Etsy 132 13:51 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons Earlier today I spoke in the Federation Chamber about Etsy, which is an online, US based shopping portal. It's a very popular website, especially with women. It sells a lot of handmade, handcrafted goods. It's a really, really good website, except that, on this website, alongside Father's Day gifts, you can buy child sexual exploitation material. You can buy child sex dolls, which, of course, are illegal in Australia. But they make these available on the US based website, and Etsy—a major company with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and a very well-credentialed board of directors—are doing nothing to stop this disgraceful trade. They're doing nothing to stop this reprehensible material being made available on their website. Shoppers will get onto Etsy and look up Father's Day gifts and gifts for the kids and they'll come across this material if they use the search function. It's really filthy stuff. I don't even want to say what the messages and slogans are on T-shirts, and, of course, the child sex dolls are absolutely outrageous. The dolls are illegal in Australia, and the rest of it should be. There's an online petition being run by a Victorian designer called Anna Cordell. It has 33,000 Australian signatures. I ask every member of this House to join this petition. Let's get this US based website to drop this disgraceful material. If they don't act, then the authorities should. Employment 132 13:53 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher After months of silence from members opposite about what the policy of the Labor Party was on anything, we have finally had a thought bubble from the Leader of the Opposition. If this is the best that Labor can come up with, we all know why they've been so quiet up until now. Labor's one idea is to cut the pay of 2.3 million Australian workers by 25 per cent. If you're one of the one million casual workers in this country, Labor and their union mates will take away your casual loading and replace it with entitlements like long service leave, whether you like it or not. Never mind that many of these workers organise their lives to benefit from flexible hours and rely on the higher hourly pay that casual work delivers in order to make ends meet. Opposition members interjecting— Mr WALLACE 265967 No, no, no—they know better. They in the unions know better. On average, a Labor government would mean an overnight pay cut of almost $8,000 for millions of Australians who can least afford it. From struggling workers in hospitality, tourism, retail and construction who are still clawing their way back from a devastating year, the Leader of the Opposition wants to take away more than $150 a week. Labor don't understand workers, and they have no idea how to run an economy. It's obvious now to Australian workers if it wasn't before. Labor—(Time expired) Sexual Harassment 132 13:55 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley How many times do we have to hear about sexual harassment, discrimination and even assault occurring in the corridors of this parliament, or in the bars and boardrooms surrounding it, before something is done to change it? Why is it that time and time again it takes a brave, often young woman to be strong enough to tell her story, to make herself vulnerable and exposed in public, before the gendered cultural and systemic failings of political culture are even discussed? How many scandals can this government ignore before it does anything real to address the cultural and systemic failings that are obvious for all to see? Every single person who comes into this building has the right to a safe and positive culture. It is unacceptable that the Australian parliament continues to leave unaddressed systemic biases which mean that women's experiences of working in this building are too often fundamentally different to men's. We can't continue to tolerate a workplace which too often allows gendered misuse of power to seemingly go unpunished, and, worse, in which the victim is the one who experiences damage to their career, their reputation and their health. It's time for this parliament to do two things: firstly, establish an independent review to see how wide and deep the problem is; and, secondly, work to establish an independent office to provide truly independent advice, counselling and support. Victoria, the UK and New Zealand are doing it. We should be doing it too. Food Labelling 133 13:56 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee Last week the Australian and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation drove a stake through the heart of the citrus industry in my electorate of Mallee. Now, 100 per cent fruit and vegetable juice, with no added sugar, will score as low as two stars in the health star rating system. That is lower than many diet soft drinks. Although the Commonwealth voted against these changes, growers across the country have been betrayed by the states and territories that supported the new ratings, including Queensland, Victoria, the Northern Territory and the ACT. The health star rating system was designed to help consumers make healthier choices. However, following these new ratings when choosing something to drink will legitimately make you less healthy. These changes completely undermine the system and make it virtually pointless. The state and territory jurisdictions that supported these changes need to admit they got it wrong and work to rectify this ridiculous decision. Nathan Hancock of Citrus Australia, in Mallee, said this decision could rip hundreds of millions of dollars out of the regional industries and communities. We can only hope that consumers will use common sense and see these new ratings for what they are: idiotic. I will continue to support local industries in my electorate by drinking fresh fruit and vegetable juice, and I hope Australia will do the same. Morrison Government 133 13:58 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs Rorts, rorts and more rorts—that's the standard Australians now expect from the Morrison government, because this is a government whose members are only in it for themselves. Just the latest in the long line of Liberal Party rorts is the scheme run by the member for Dickson, who treated money set aside to make Australian communities safe as yet another secret Liberal Party slush fund. Does anything better sum up this government than the minister responsible for community safety rorting money from a community safety fund? Because this Prime Minister has made it clear that he's just fine with corruption and rorts, the member for Dickson could confidently act with impunity in his abuse of taxpayer funds. This rort was so shameless. With the Liberal candidate for Braddon, he announced two grants in a by-election, before the guidelines for the fund had been established and before the application process had even opened. That's some rort! The ever-growing list of scandals surrounding the Morrison government shows why Australia needs a powerful, independent and transparent national anticorruption commission and why this Prime Minister and his Attorney-General will do everything in their power to prevent one from being established. Australian Labor Party: Housing Affordability 133 13:59 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein () (): With Labor, it's always them first, you last. At the last election, Labor said negative gearing was critical to housing affordability. They knew it wasn't true, and yesterday Labor MPs backgrounded the press, saying, 'For the amount of money it raises, versus the political pain, it's just not worth it.' Either housing affordability matters but they'd rather have the votes, or it doesn't and they just want your cash. Labor first, you last. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Goldstein will resume his seat. In accordance with standing order 43, the time for member's statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 133 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Members of Parliament: Staff 133 14:00 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister advise the House how the government has responded to the allegation that a woman was sexually assaulted in the defence minister's office in March 2019? Has an appropriate duty of care for the woman been exercised? 14:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook My government takes all such matters, all matters of workplace safety, very, very seriously. Everyone should feel safe in their workplace, wherever that is. Reports today are deeply distressing. This matter is under consideration by police. At all times, guidance was sought from Ms Higgins as to how she wished to proceed, and to support and respect her decisions. This important best practice principle of empowering Ms Higgins is something that the government has always sought to follow in relation to this matter. The government has aimed to provide Ms Higgins with her agency to provide support to make decisions in her interests and to respect her privacy. This offer of support and assistance continues. It is important that Ms Higgins's views are listened to and respected, and I table for the purposes of the House a statement issued by a government spokesperson today on these matters. COVID 19: Vaccines 134 14:01 Mr IRONS HYM Swan My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister inform the House about the latest developments in the Morrison government's COVID-19 vaccination strategy and how the rollout of safe, effective and free vaccines will underpin our continued recovery from the pandemic? 14:02 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Swan for his question. This is an historic day for Australia. As the health minister has just confirmed outside this place, I can confirm that Australia's first delivery of COVID-19 vaccines has arrived. The vaccines have touched down in Australia—142,000 doses of the Pfizer vaccine arrived in Sydney around midday today. Free and equitable access to safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines is this government's policy, and it is in delivery. One of the largest logistical exercises ever undertaken in this country has been planned for and is now underway. We have been building this vaccine portfolio—onshore manufacturing capability, the workforce, the cold chain logistics, the vaccination locations—working together with our medical experts, state and territory governments around the country to ensure the effective implementation of this critically important program for our country. This program has been developed by medical experts and approved by medical experts, so Australians can have confidence in the Australian vaccination strategy. The Therapeutic Goods Administration is final testing the Pfizer vaccine this week, and the government's total support across our vaccine program now amounts to some $6½ billion with an initial allocation of around $1.9 billion for the rollout of that vaccine. People who need to get the protection first will get it first—the most vulnerable in our community, those working in those critical areas is where the vaccination strategy begins. But also I note that this is just the start of the process. I visited with the health minister last Friday in Melbourne the CSL installation where they're doing the final stages of the Australian production of the AstraZeneca vaccine, some 50 million doses. In August of last year we took the decision not to leave ourselves vulnerable to international supply chains and to ensure that we had the Australian sovereign capability to actually produce these vaccines here in Australia. We had the opportunity to thank those Australians who have been working around the clock for many months at CSL to ensure that the domestic production of those vaccines is available right here in Australia to ensure the success of our vaccination strategy. This will play a key role in continuing to restore confidence in not just the community but also the building and growing confidence that exists in our economy. It has always been our objective both to saves lives and save livelihoods, and the successful implementation and development of that vaccination strategy are there to see. Workplace Relations 134 14:05 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister agree that two workers doing the same job at the same workplace should get the same pay? 14:05 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook All of our policies seek to achieve the objectives of ensuring that Australians get into jobs and they get treated fairly in the workplace and that they are treated safely in the workplace and all of the industrial arrangements that sit around those matters are appropriately in place to protect those workers. That is what our policies do. That is what the policies that are before the House in our legislation seek to do, and we would seek the support of the opposition to help us get more people into jobs. COVID 19: Vaccines 134 14:06 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid My question is to the minister for health. Will the minister please update the House of the Morrison government's response to COVID-19, including the vaccine rollout, and how this approach will ensure a stronger Australia and save lives? 14:06 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders Thank you very much to the member for Reid, particularly, for her work as a health professional taking care of the emotional needs and the psychological needs of Australians, before coming to this place. One of the important pieces of news today, before we get to the vaccines, is that I'm advised there are now no Australians in ICU for COVID-19 reasons, anywhere. These numbers, of course, may change over the course of the coming months, but as of this day we've seen zero lives lost in 2021 due to COVID in Australia—but, sadly, the world has reached approximately 2.4 million lives. We now have no Australians in ICU or on ventilation due to COVID and, significantly, we have had only one case today in the community, one case in Victoria, and none in seven out of eight states and territories, so a very important result nationwide. Another important thing to happen, as the Prime Minister has set out, is that the first shipment of vaccines has now arrived in Australia, 142,000 doses of the Pfizer vaccine. Of those, which will now be taken by the TGA and they'll be assessed to make sure that safety, quality and there's no damage, no breach, of the integrity of them during the course of the transmission—that they've all been maintained. Subject to that, we will then be in a position to ensure that we have 62,000 doses provisioned for second doses in continuous supply and that we have 80,000 doses available, commencing on 22 February—Monday of next week—around Australia for the vaccination program. That program will begin with the most vulnerable, a combination of the border and quarantine workers, our frontline health workers, and our aged-care and disability residents and staff. That's about ensuring that those that are the most at risk of contracting and transmitting or those that are most at risk from the consequences of the illness are dealt with in that first phase. It's expected that first phase will take, approximately, six weeks. Subject to the Therapeutic Goods Administration making a positive decision on the AstraZeneca vaccine, we are then expecting that AstraZeneca international vaccines will add to that and double the number of weekly vaccines, in early March, if not earlier, and then this will be added to by the CSL production, coming out of their Parkville plant, of a million doses a week from late March. I've been advised that that fill-and-finish process commenced today. So today's an important day. It's the next step in protecting Australians, in saving lives and protecting lives. Workplace Relations 135 14:09 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister now tell the House whether he agrees that two workers doing the same job at the same workplace should get the same pay? 14:09 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook The opposition seek to take on a matter that is actually far more complicated than they suggest, because there are many other issues that go to what is happening in any one workplace. What's important is that, in that workplace, there should be the opportunities for Australians to be able to get the hours they're looking for, to be able to extend their hours and to be able to earn more in their place of work. The best way for them to achieve that is working for businesses that are actually making profits and are actually going forward. In the absence of a growing economy, in the absence of a government policy that is actually encouraging businesses to get back on their feet, workers are worse off. In an alternative policy setting that would see higher taxes under the Labor Party— The SPEAKER 00APG The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW It's on direct relevance, Mr Speaker. It's a really tight question. It's the second time we've asked it in this form. There are a whole lot of opportunities for the Prime Minister to give wide-ranging industrial relations answers, but this one is about same job, same pay. The SPEAKER 00APG I'll make two points briefly. Yes, it was a tight question, but it was one of those questions that's highlighted in Practice as inviting a yes or no answer which you can't compel the Prime Minister or a minister to give. So the Prime Minister is entitled to go over the territory he went over until just very recently. The question doesn't allow an examination of alternative policies. The Prime Minister was in order until that point. Mr MORRISON E3L So the government will continue to ensure that businesses in this country pay lower taxes as our policies deliver to continue to operate together with employees to ensure they have the best possible set of arrangements to ensure that Australians can get back into work as a result of what we're doing post this COVID-19 recession so they can earn more, so they can get more hours and so they can support those enterprises to go forward with confidence. We're seeing confidence lift in our economy. We're seeing the comeback well underway. Under those policies, Australian workers are better off. China 135 14:12 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Minister, you're aware of China's Daru initiative in the Fly River, half of New Guinea. The Singapore Strait is controlled by Muslims enraged by Chinese treatment of Uighur. In the alternative Torres Strait, more young Chinese men with curious backgrounds have opened a shop on yams. Similarly, four Chinese are attempting to buy the tip of Cape York from traditional owners, two whitefellas from Sydney. Not a single Australian believes these are commercial initiatives. What action, Minister? 14:13 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. Obviously the Australian government has an incredibly important and valuable relationship with the government of Papua New Guinea. The Prime Minister has a very close relationship with Prime Minister Marape, and all of us work constantly to make sure that we are doing all we can for PNG, a very important country in our region. We will work with PNG. I know the Prime Minister's raised this issue which I think is highly speculative, if I might say so, to the member for Kennedy. I've seen the press reporting around the Daru proposal. It's highly, highly speculative. But only this week the Prime Minister has raised that with Prime Minister Marape, and we will continue to work with our PNG counterparts. In terms of the Western Province, we are putting a significant amount of support into that province, working with the government there and making sure that we can provide support to that part of the world, particularly at the moment in relation to the response to COVID. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Health have had a particular focus on making sure we can have the vaccine rolled out across the Pacific, but in particular in PNG we're working closely with our colleagues. I will finish on this point. The government takes very seriously any attempts to subvert our sovereignty. We are putting more and more money each year into ASIO, into ASIS, into our national security agencies, to make sure that our equities are protected, and this government will always stand up for the interests of Australians. Transport Industry: COVID-19 Vaccine 136 14:15 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne My question is to the vaccine and how this will be critical to the Morrison-McCormack government in building a stronger Australia? 14:15 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Lyne for his question. I acknowledge his work as a health professional, not just in the past but ongoing, and his interest in these matters. I acknowledge the transport companies within his electorate and the fine job they do, particularly for regional Australia. After a long 14 months of dealing with COVID-19 across the nation, we've now reached a point where we can start to vaccinate Australians. We sympathise with the 909 families across the nation who have lost a loved one through COVID-19. James Kwan lost his life on 1 March in Perth last year. He was the first person to lose their life through COVID-19 in Australia. We continue to mourn for all those families who have lost a loved one. Compared to other nations across the world, what we have been able to achieve as a nation has been quite remarkable. I thank all Australians for the efforts they have gone to in complying with best medical advice—for wearing masks when asked to do so, for social distancing and for quarantining. Those things have been very difficult for their lives and livelihoods. I thank them very much, as all members of the parliament do. The commencement of administering the COVID vaccine will be a historic day, as we begin to look forward to a future beyond COVID and some sort of normality beyond this global pandemic. The Australian government is placing great stock in making sure that we've got the right strategy when it comes to the vaccine rollout. The rollout of the vaccine across Australia is going to be one of the largest logistical tasks ever undertaken by this nation. Just yesterday, I was in Western Sydney with the member for Parkes, the Minister for Regional Health, as well as the CEO of the DHL supply chain, Saul Resnick. We were looking at the protocols DHL have in place for this large logistical exercise. We were looking at the cold stores. We were talking about how the vaccine will be rolled out across Australia. It's a big country, and this is a massive task, but we will absolutely get it done. And the important thing is that regional and rural Australia will not be left behind. They will get the vaccine, just like the people in metropolitan Australia will. Certainly, they will be able to get that jab as soon as anybody in metropolitan Australia. The government is working with both DHL and Linfox to ensure cold chain and supply to all Australians, including those in every far-flung nook and cranny of this nation. The government is working with state and territory governments, primary health networks, general practices, Aboriginal community controlled health services and general practitioner led respiratory clinics. And I know the role that the Minister for Health and the Minister for Regional Health have played in this exercise to ensure appropriate coverage across all Australians. It has been so important. I urge and encourage all Australians to get that jab to help their own health and to help their economic recovery. Workplace Relations 136 14:18 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister, and I refer to the working conditions of Queensland coalminers Simon and Ron. They work in the Bowen Basin, in the same job with the same boss, side-by-side on the same roster. Simon is a permanent employee but Ron is employed by a labour hire company. He is paid 20 per cent less and has none of the worker entitlements that Simon has. Can the Prime Minister advise the House how this is fair? 14:19 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce It's a serious question and it goes to the issue of the use of labour hire. The earlier formulation of the question was whether or not it was agreed that two workers doing the same job at the same place in the same workplace should get the same pay. That is not even the Labor policy. When you read their speech, they say that a labour hire firm who employs someone at the same job at the same pay should get no less. It's actually not even their policy, and they have had some difficulties in working out what their own policy is. The difficulties, of course, arise with labour hire. For the benefit of the House, the ABS notes that labour hire as a proportion of all employees has been stable at about two per cent over the last decade. What is very important—and what the government absolutely ensures occurs—is that under labour hire agreements people should have exactly the same rights as other employees, including, of course, unfair dismissal rights; award entitlements; bargaining rights; general protections; and work, health and safety protections to name but a few. The Labor Party say that they have a policy for perfect equality between those two forms of employment, but when you actually read their policy they acknowledge that that is incredibly difficult. Indeed, in their policy, they say that someone at the labour hire with the same type of work at the same place should get at least as much but could get more—not exact parity, as they pretended in their earlier question. The reason why that is actually very, very difficult to achieve in practice is, for instance, an employee who is remunerated directly— The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Albanese R36 It was a very specific question— The SPEAKER 00APG Is this point of order on relevance? Mr Albanese R36 Yes. It was a very specific question about real workers in the Bowen Basin and their real conditions they enjoy right now. Their photo is available—Simon and Ron. And you need to address it. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. Members on my right will cease interjecting. Mr Christensen interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Dawson is now warned. The question certainly had a long preamble, and I gave a lot of latitude to the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the House has been relevant I think up until about this point. The question didn't ask about any alternative policies; it asked about the government's approach. I'd ask him to come back to the question. Mr PORTER 208884 The Leader of the Opposition pretends that some perfect parity between two workers—one in labour hire and one directly remunerated—is an easy thing to do, but he can't tell us how that would be done. Indeed, the Leader of the Opposition can't even get exact parity in two versions of his own speech inside 24 hours, but he's going to try and pretend to these two workers he can sort it out, notwithstanding having no plan to do it. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House will resume his seat. Mr Thistlethwaite interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Member for Kingsford Smith and other members, I remind you of the provisions of 94(a). They don't require a warning. I'm not going to keep interrupting proceedings for members who continually interject. Many of you have your names in Hansard many, many times. JobKeeper Payment 137 14:23 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer please update the House on the success of the Morrison government's JobKeeper program and how it proved to be such a valuable lifeline for jobs and businesses while Australia endured the height of the COVID-19 pandemic? 14:23 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I acknowledge the distinguished service in the Australian Defence Force of the member for Herbert and his support, like others on this side of the House, for policies that have delivered tax cuts to more than 70,000 people in the electorate of Herbert. The Australian labour market is undergoing a remarkable recovery. The unemployment rate fell to 6.6 per cent in December; 320,000 jobs have been created in the last three months; 90 per cent of the 1.3 million Australian workers who either lost their jobs or saw their working hours reduced to zero at the start of the pandemic are now back at work; the participation rate is at the record high of 66.2 per cent; and last week we saw the Reserve Bank upgrade its employment forecasts and its rate of unemployment, which will see the rate of unemployment fall to six per cent this year and 5¼ per cent by mid-2023. On the RBA forecast the employment rate is recovering three times faster in the COVID recession than it did in the 1990s recession. We're seeing strong numbers across the rest of the economy. We see strong numbers in the housing market, strong numbers in terms of automotive sales and strong numbers in terms of business and consumer confidence coming back. Also today we have new data from the ATO about the JobKeeper program in the December quarter. It shows that 2.1 million Australians have graduated off JobKeeper and 520,000 Australian businesses have graduated off JobKeeper. Across Western Australia there was a 70 per cent fall in JobKeeper recipients in the December quarter. Across South Australia there was a 67 per cent fall. In Tasmania there was a 65 per cent fall. In Queensland there was a 64 per cent fall. In Townsville there was a 72 per cent fall. Across New South Wales there was a 60 per cent fall. Unfortunately Victoria, which has experienced a second wave, had just a 44 per cent fall. What these numbers show is that across the economy, in every state and territory, across all regions and across all sectors, we are seeing thousands and thousands of our fellow Australians graduate off JobKeeper. There is still a long way to go. Australians are doing it tough still. Across many regions they are doing it tough and in many sectors they are doing it tough. But JobKeeper has been a remarkable program. It's been an economic lifeline for millions of Australians and it has played an important role in the strengthening of the labour market which we're seeing right now, this very day. Workplace Relations 138 14:26 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is to the Minister for Industrial Relations. The minister says that paying at least the minimum wage to every worker is complicated. What exactly is complicated about workers being paid at least the minimum wage? 14:27 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce Minimum wage applies. There should never be any excuse and it's unlawful to not pay the minimum wage. That is a very well-known principle. If the member is asking questions about people to whom the minimum wage doesn't apply, I'm sure he would be able to clarify that in a further question. COVID-19: Income Support Payments 138 14:27 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer remind the House of the wide range of economic supports the Morrison government is providing to create a stronger Australia as we continue to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic? 14:27 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Boothby for her question and I acknowledge her experience as a journalist before coming to this place, her experience working for the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and her support for policies that have led to tax cuts for 77,000 people across the electorate of Boothby. The Australian economy begins 2021 from a position where it is strengthening. We're seeing an economic recovery that is underway. The International Monetary Fund has forecast that the economy of Spain is going to contract by around 11 per cent; the economy of the United Kingdom will contract by around 10 per cent; the economies of France and Italy will contract by around nine per cent; the economies of Germany, Canada and Japan will contract by more than five per cent; and the economy of the Unites States will contract by 3.4 per cent. But their forecast for Australia for its contraction in 2020 is less than three per cent. This is why, based on the economic and health position we are in today, you wouldn't want to be in any other country but Australia. A key part of that economic recovery that we have seen is the commitment by the Morrison government to $251 billion of economic support, $148 billion of which is already out the door. That includes $83 billion for JobKeeper out the door, a cash flow boost of $35 billion out the door, and $19 billion for the JobSeeker coronavirus supplement out the door already. When it comes to $750 payments—two of them—and a further $250 payment to millions of pensioners and carers and veterans and others on income support, around $10 billion is out the door. Those programs have been critical as an economic lifeline for the Australian community. But, on top of that, we've put in place the HomeBuilder program, which has more than 80,000 applications. The Master Builders Association has said it's helped save thousands of jobs. We've put in place 340,000 training places. We've brought forward billions of dollars of infrastructure programs. When it comes to tax cuts, we believe in allowing Australians to keep more of their hard-earned money. There's more than a billion dollars a month that will be flowing through to the pockets of hardworking Australian families through our tax cuts. The combination of these programs, as well as the COVID support that we put in place at the height of the pandemic, is seeing economic recovery underway—that is, economic recovery that has seen 90 per cent of the 1.3 million Australians who either lost their jobs or saw their working hours reduced to zero at the start of the pandemic now back at work. There's a long way to go, but the Australian economy is recovering. Employment 139 14:30 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is for the Minister for Industrial Relations. Could the minister outline to the House which workers the government believes should be paid less than the minimum wage? 14:30 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce It was this government that ensured that the laws that require that people be properly characterised in their employment are as strong and as well enforced as possible as has ever been the case. The coalition made it unlawful to misrepresent an employment relationship by treating someone as a contractor rather than as an employee. In the 2019-20 budget we took further action in that space—action that was never taken by members opposite—by providing $9.2 million in additional funding to the Fair Work Ombudsman to establish a dedicated unit to crack down on sham contracting. People should be properly classified in their employment and, where they are subject to minimum wage, that wage must be paid. Indeed, part of the legislation before the House is to ensure, for the first time, criminal penalties would apply to wage theft, and members opposite will vote against that. For the first time ever there'll be sufficiently strong penalties to ensure that people are not underpaid, including a quantum of benefits obtained, which means that the financial penalty will actually, for the first time ever, provide a disincentive to underpayment. Members opposite want to vote against that measure. For the first time ever, people who are in casual employment will have a strong, secure, consistent pathway to move from casual employment to permanent employment, and members opposite want to vote against that as well. COVID-19: Business 139 14:32 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney My question is to the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology. Will the minister please outline to the House how the Morrison government is backing innovative businesses to commercialise new products as we continue to recover from the COVID pandemic? How does this support our government's plan to build a stronger Australia? 14:32 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for his question. Our government understands that science and technology are key enablers of industry growth, and that is particularly important through new technologies that are going to give our industry a cutting edge on the global stage, that will boost competitiveness, create jobs and take our economy forward. That's why we've made a record investment in innovation, science and research in the budget. That's why our $1.5 billion Modern Manufacturing Strategy focuses on harnessing science and research collaboration to deliver the real practical results that we, as a government, are very focused on delivering. Our government has always backed innovative businesses, by getting the economic conditions right, as well as through a range of very practical support programs—for example, our Accelerating Commercialisation program, which has a tremendous track record of helping Australian entrepreneurs take their products to the world. There's a whole range of different products that we have supported as a government. It includes a nasal spray that can help treat dementia. It includes self-driving smart wheels that can be clipped onto manual wheelchairs. It includes long-life milk or fresh milk that can be made to remain on the shelves for up to 60 days. And just yesterday I was delighted to announce a further $4.2 million in matched funding in the latest round of the Accelerating Commercialisation grants. This includes $1 million for agricultural science company Sea Forest. Sea Forest will use that funding to increase supplies of their seaweed additive for livestock feed. This reduces livestock methane emissions, and it improves herd health. So it is a win for the environment and it is a big win for our farmers. Over the last five years, Sea Forest has worked very closely with the CSIRO to test and refine its product, and this is exactly what the Morrison government is all about: doing all that we can to facilitate industry and researcher engagement, because, as we harness that, we know that our businesses will be able to grow. As a government we are very committed to making sure that our small businesses grow into medium enterprises and our medium enterprises grow into large businesses. One of the ways that we're going to do that is by harnessing the technology and making sure that we are using technology and not taxes. Workplace Relations 139 14:36 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, food delivery rider Rosya suffered a concussion and an arm injury in a road accident while on the job. She says she had to return to work before she was ready because 'she had no other choice' and was then sacked because she couldn't ride fast enough due to her injuries. What's complicated about workers who are injured on the job having time to recover before returning to work? 14:36 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'd ask the Minister for Industrial Relations to add to this, but that is why, in the changes that we're bringing forward into this place, we are creating the pathway from non-permanent work—casual work and other forms of work—into permanent employment. This is why we're seeking to do exactly that. If someone is in a temporary form of employment, in a casual form of employment, then— Opposition members interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L I'm just answering the question. It made no reference to the type of the employment contract— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW Yes, just on direct relevance, which might assist with the answer as well: the person concerned, as described at the start of the question, is not employed as a casual; they're engaged as a gig worker. Therefore, the relevance of the bill that the Prime Minister's referring to doesn't help this person at all. The SPEAKER 00APG The manager has completed his point of order. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr MORRISON E3L The question made no mention of the nature of the employment contract that the individual was involved in. What our government is seeking to do is get people back into jobs; that's what we're seeking to do. We're seeking to get people onto higher rates of pay by ensuring they're not locked into award wages but have the opportunity to get into enterprise agreements, where the experience clearly shows that they have the opportunity to earn more. We want people to be able to get additional hours and additional shifts, and we want to ensure that the things that are preventing that are removed. That's what we're seeking to do. What those opposite are seeking to do is stop us from doing that. The issue that is highlighted by the member is of course concerning. It is very concerning. We want to provide more opportunities for the type of employment that provides that security, and I am aware of no other alternative that has been put forward by any other member of this place that would address the situation that has been highlighted by the member, including the policy outlined by the Leader of the Opposition, which does not achieve the outcome that the member has referred to. COVID-19: Film Industry 140 14:39 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff My question is to the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government's handling of the pandemic, combined with its Location Incentive Program, have brought world-renowned screen productions to Australia, which is creating jobs and ensuring a stronger Australia? 14:39 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I thank the member for Moncrieff, who is of course a former professional musician—one of the many diverse backgrounds on this side of the House—and is therefore very familiar with the glamour of show business but also the sheer amount of hard work that's involved. And I'm pleased to say we've had our fair share of the glamour of show business in recent months, with some of the world's leading directors and actors coming to Australia. I had the pleasure of visiting the set of 13 Lives on the Gold Coast last week and I spoke with director Ron Howard, who told me why the movie is being filmed in Australia. It's because of our skilled and talented actors and crew. It's because of the great locations that Australia has. It's certainly because of Australia's careful management of the COVID risks, which has been noticed around the world, and of course it's because of the direct support provided under the Morrison government's $400 million Location Incentive Program. As well as 13 Lives, we've got NBCUniversal filming Young Rock, featuring Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson—and if, like me, you have a 12-year-old son, you are very familiar with his oeuvre. And Joe Exotic and Irreverent are also being filmed in Queensland. In Melbourne, there is Blacklight, with Liam Neeson—and Canberra got in on the act, too. Escape from Spiderhead is being filmed by Netflix on the Gold Coast. The Tourist is being filmed in South Australia. Thor: Love and Thunder is being filmed in Sydney. It's a cornucopia of global productions. But it's more than glamour. It's jobs. We've attracted 19 productions so far, under our Location Incentive Program, with a total production budget of almost $1.5 billion. That's over 11,800 jobs for all those skilled Australian crew and cast that Ron Howard talked about, all of the downstream businesses that are providing catering, props and all kinds of services to these productions. It builds on our support for the Australian film sector—our $50 million Temporary Interruption Fund, with 37 productions approved for coverage under that. We allocated an extra $53 million in last year's budget for Screen Australia and the Australian Children's Television Foundation. Our Location Incentive Program is succeeding in bringing global productions to Australia. We're building scale. We're creating jobs for our Australian screen production sector. Morrison Government 141 14:42 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My question is to the Prime Minister. Was the decision by the Minister for Home Affairs to provide the National Retail Association an $880,000 grant from the proceeds of crime, after they had donated to his election campaign, consistent with the Prime Minister's ministerial standards? 14:43 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question. On this matter, decisions relating to the funding of local projects to improve community safety under the Safer Communities funds were made consistent with the relevant rules and guidelines. They were made consistent with those matters, and I think that settles the issues. Agriculture 141 14:43 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison-McCormack government's trade pillar of the Ag2030 plan is working to expand international markets for Australian farmers and facilitating more efficient export processes? How will this plan work to ensure a stronger Australia? 14:44 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I thank the member for Nicholls for his question. I acknowledge the agricultural powerhouse that is the member's electorate, and the significant contribution it makes to our $65 billion agriculture industry. It will play a significant part in agriculture reaching its plan of being a $100 billion industry by 2030. In the budget, the government announced ourAg2030 plan—a seven-pillar plan to support agriculture in achieving their goal. One of those key pillars is trade. You've got to understand that we're a nation of 25 million people and we produce enough food for 75 million people. So if don't engage the world, if we don't trade with the world, we don't need the number of farmers that we've got and we don't need the communities, like Shepparton, that are there to support them. That's why we're building on the free trade agreements that we put in place with China, Korea, Japan, Peru, Indonesia, the TPP-11, which those opposite said we were wasting our time on. I'm proud to say, because of the investment in our budget inputting agricultural counsellors on the ground—these are the men and women that get rid of the technical barriers, in a country, at government-to-government levels—we are, for the first time, sending a shipment of barley to Mexico, going into their beer, because we've been able to support our producers to be able to diversify. We're also sending 730,000 tonnes of feed barley into Saudi Arabia. That's an extra $230 million to the Australian economy, diversifying our economic base, giving our farmers the opportunity to send boats left and right to be able to diversify into new markets. We're also working at making sure that those agricultural counsellors are expanded. Last budget, we went from 16 to 22. In fact, we put our first one in Mexico, in Mexico City, to address Latin America. And now, as part of further measures, we're having a surge of five additional agricultural counsellors that will look at new markets, working with industries, to ensure that we can open up market access, get rid of the technical barriers and allow our exporters to continue to diversify. But we're also looking at what we're doing, in how we as a government are in their lives and how we can get out of them as quickly as we can while maintaining the regulatory barriers that make sure that we protect brand Australia. And we're doing that by cutting red tape, working with industry to ensure that there are practical, technological ways in which we can help them not only apply for export permits but make sure that they are keeping up the regulatory framework that we would expect in protecting our brand. Our technology framework is also looking at making sure we get rid of over 200,000 export permits a year issued manually, doing it digitally, also making sure that those that want to export are cutting the number of application forms from around 20 down to one. That's just common sense. So what we're doing is putting the environment around our exporters, around our agricultural sector, because if we trade with the world then, I can tell you, Australian agriculture will meet its $100 billion target by 2030. Safer Communities Fund 141 14:47 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that the $880,000 grant to the National Retail Association was a completely one-off separate grant from the safer communities program and the Minister for Home Affairs instructed his department to design that grant program for the National Retail Association at the same time as the NRA made a $6½ thousand donation to the Minister for Home Affairs? The SPEAKER 00APG Before the Prime Minister answers that question, the last part of the question is out of order and will need to be rephrased. What he's implying is an improper motive, that the said association gave money directly to the minister. I'll allow you to rephrase the question. Mr CONROY 249127 Thank you, Mr Speaker. Is the Prime Minister aware that the $880,000 grant to the National Retail Association was a completely different program to the Safer Communities Fund and the Minister for Home Affairs instructed his department to design it purely to provide a grant to the National Retail Association? 14:48 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I am advised that the guidelines have been followed in relation to all of these matters. The government has been focused on ensuring our communities are safer. That's what these programs do. I was up around the member for Shortland's electorate just the other week. I'd suggest the member for Shortland spent a bit more time focusing on his constituents and their jobs, who he is acting against the interests of in this place, rather than coming here and throwing muck around. HomeBuilder 142 14:48 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde My question is to the Minister for Housing and Assistant Treasurer. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government's HomeBuilder grant is creating and supporting jobs in the construction sector, including in my electorate of Forde, while helping build a stronger Australia in 2021? 14:49 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I thank the member for Forde for his question. Like so many on this side of the House, the member for Forde is so focused on the jobs of those in the residential construction industry—the tradies, the carpenters, the bricklayers and many others. I had the great honour last week of meeting a number of workers in the member for Forde's electorate who are benefiting from the HomeBuilder program. The HomeBuilder program has ignited the residential construction industry not just in Forde, not just in Queensland, but throughout our country in every major city, in every regional area and in every small town. The residential construction industry has been absolutely set alight by the HomeBuilder program. What we have seen, Treasury estimates, is $18 billion of direct construction activity as a result of HomeBuilder with $60 billion of broader economic activity being driven by the HomeBuilder program—$60 billion of economic activity that the Labor Party opposed. In Queensland, in the member for Forde's home state, we've seen 18,000 applications, 18,000 projects. Part of the reason we have seen up to a million jobs in the residential construction industry supported by the HomeBuilder program was brought home to me and the member for Forde when we visited the Stoddart Group in the member for Forde's electorate just last week. The Stoddart Group, which makes steel frames for homes, has now gone to three eight-hour shifts. Importantly, not only are we keeping their workforce gainfully employed in the HomeBuilder program, they have put on 40 new staff on the floor that the member for Forde and I were able to speak to; 40 people with fantastic jobs at the Stoddart Group because of that. In addition to that, the Stoddart Group also informed me that, due to the instant asset write-off—for which they wanted to thank the Treasurer—they'd also invested in six new roll forming machines at $1½ million. You can see the HomeBuilder program igniting demand in the residential construction industry and taking advantage of other incentives being put in place by the government. Not only are we supporting the million jobs in the residential construction industry, which is so important and the primary driver of HomeBuilder, but we're also supporting first home buyers. Homeownership and first home buyers are so important to the members of the coalition. In fact, we've seen first home buyer levels at their highest for over 10 years. We've seen new home sales up by 32½ per cent. As I always say, new home sales means more jobs, more economic activity and that is what will partly fuel our recovery this year. Safer Communities Fund 142 14:52 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Why did the minister announce two Safer Communities Fund grants during the Braddon by-election before grant guidelines were written, before grant applications were written and before his department had provided him with advice, which was that the projects were both unsuitable and ineligible? 14:52 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. I want to quote the Waratah-Wynyard mayor, Robby Walsh, who said with regard to funding for the CCTV cameras: I think it's a great, positive move that will assist with both Somerset and Wynyard in curtailing vandalism and detect incidents. Why have we provided funding to local communities? Because we want to keep people safe. The decisions have been made in relation to these grants— Opposition members interjecting— Mr Hill interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will pause. The member for Bruce will leave under 94(a). The minister's concluded his answer. Defence Industry 143 14:54 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison government's record investment in Australia's defence industry is helping to create jobs and ensure a stronger Australia as we continue our recovery from the COVID-19 recession? 14:54 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I thank the member for Robertson for her question and I thank her for and acknowledge her great support for the defence industries in New South Wales and more broadly across Australia. The Morrison government is investing $270 billion in our defence capability, and our record investment is helping us to drive our economic recovery from the COVID-19 recession. Our investment is creating and supporting thousands of Australian jobs right across our great land. Just last week I had the great pleasure, together with the Prime Minister and some of our other colleagues, of visiting the Hunter region, where we announced that our first F-35 aircraft had been inducted into BAE Systems Australia's maintenance depot. This is part of the next milestone of the F-35 program, and indeed it was a very exciting and uplifting day. This depot will be a regional maintenance, sustainment and upgrade hub for the F-35 aircraft in the Asia-Pacific region. Hundreds of F-35 aircraft will flow through the doors of BAE in Newcastle in the decades ahead. This investment, and this new maintenance hub, is all about protecting and securing Australia's interests, but it is much more than that. It's also about creating generations of jobs and driving investment in the Hunter region and across this wide brown land. This induction demonstrates to the world the leading capability of our local defence industry in Australia, and, let me tell you, it is something that we all should be incredibly proud of. I think the Prime Minister said it best the other day, when he said, 'Everyone involved with the F-35 program is a top gun.' Our government wants to give as many Australian companies opportunities in the F-35 program— Ms Swanson interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Paterson! Ms PRICE 249308 We're already doing that, because we have some 50 Australian companies involved in the F-35 program working on contracts in excess of $2.7 billion. There are other— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Paterson will leave under standing order 94(a). The minister will pause. The member for Paterson left the chamber. Opposition members: Come on! The SPEAKER 00APG I'm not going to have people saying, 'Come on!'. I asked the member for Paterson to cease interjecting, and she even interjected back at me to say why she was interjecting. The minister has the call. Ms PRICE 249308 It's a great pleasure to be able to talk about the companies that are already involved in the F-35 program, and there'll be more to come now that we have this Asia-Pacific regional hub. These are companies like Marand, in Melbourne, who are manufacturing the vertical tails; Queanbeyan based Lintek, who produce the circuit boards and are the only company in Australia to do so; and Brisbane based TAE Aerospace, who are maintaining the F-35 engines. It's a real feather in the cap for Brisbane based TAE Aerospace, as this is the first time that the work they're performing on the F-35 has been done outside the US. It's great news for them, and it's a great example of the Australian capability. Minister for Home Affairs 143 14:57 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Why did the minister reject merit based recommendations from his own community safety experts for the Safer Communities Fund and redirect funding to government-held and marginal seats? What's the point of having community safety experts if the minister just ignores them? 14:58 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. Under the Safer Communities program, we've committed over $180 million to local councils, places of worship, not-for-profit organisations and organisations working with at-risk young people, leading to greater community resilience and wellbeing. The split between coalition and Labor seats under that program—wait for this startling number—is 51.45 per cent to coalition seats, and 48.55 per cent to Labor seats. You would expect there to be a variation in the number because we have more seats in this place than they do. One may ask: 'What is this issue about? Why are they throwing mud?' I've been in this place long enough to watch a Labor leader under pressure. When they're under pressure they look to distract. They throw mud and they look to distract. You are in your dying days, brother. Resources Sector 144 14:59 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson My question is to the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia. Can the minister inform the House how the Morrison-McCormack government is supporting investment in the Australian resources sector and resources projects, including coalmining, which supports jobs in regional Australia? Can the minister advise of any alternative approaches? 14:59 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I thank the member for Dawson for an excellent question. The member comes from one of the outstanding resources sectors in Central Queensland. Around Dawson, there are an enormous number of jobs in the resources sector, and the member for Dawson stands up for jobs. He stands up for the coal sector, he stands up for critical minerals, he stands up for gas and he wants the people he represents to actually have a job into the future. In Queensland, there are some 78,000 individuals directly employed in the resources sector. There has been 17.9 per cent growth over the year, and in Queensland coal jobs are up 22.8 per cent, to 62,000—a 22.8 per cent increase. I note the questions earlier in question time. I'm pretty sure the Leader of the Opposition didn't even meet any of those individuals at Moranbah. He didn't take the time to get there and head up to Central Queensland to get into a coalmine and see exactly what's happening on the ground. Whether you're in Bulga, whether you're in Dawson or whether you're working at Cannington, we are supporting those individuals who are out there working hard. We are the ones out there supporting their industry. We are the ones who continue to put money on the table to ensure there are opportunities into the future. We've put $225 million into Exploring for the Future—$125 million most recently. Exploring for the Future will ensure that, as we move forward, there are opportunities for additional exploration so that we can identify more resources, find more jobs and open up places like the Beetaloo Basin. We have put out a strategic basin plan for the Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory, the hottest play on the planet, with over $200 million committed from us already. That includes infrastructure like roads. That includes putting forward $50 million to ensure that exploration occurs earlier, not later, so we can get this gas into our systems as soon as we possibly can. So there are opportunities for the resources sector. There are opportunities for more jobs in our sector. There are opportunities for us to continue growth and continue to contribute to the Australian economy. I was asked about alternatives and whether there are any alternatives. We know that those opposite are having a go each way, but that has become no way. They are not supporting offshore oil and gas. They are not supporting gas. They are not supporting coal. They are not supporting those hardworking men and women who are out there in the resources sector every single day putting money into our economy, putting royalties into the bank and ensuring that the essential services that Australians rely on can be paid for. There are opportunities into the future. We will ensure they are developed. We will ensure that people have a job. We will ensure that, in the member for Dawson's electorate, there will be even more opportunities than there are right now. MOTIONS 144 MOTIONS Minister for Home Affairs 144 15:02 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Minister for Home Affairs cut funding to projects recommended by community safety experts in his department to fund projects in marginal and government-held electorates; (b) the Minister for Home Affairs announced funding for two projects during the Braddon by-election before grant guidelines were finalised, before grant applications were written, and before his department had provided him with advice, which was the projects were "unsuitable and ineligible"; (c) the Minister for Home Affairs also gave $880,000 from the proceeds of crime to the National Retail Association after it made a donation to support the Minister's election campaign; and (d) this is just the latest scandal involving the Government rorting taxpayers' money to advance its political interests; and (2) therefore, calls on the Minister for Home Affairs to immediately explain his actions to the House for a period not exceeding 15 minutes. Leave not granted. Mr CONROY 249127 I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Shortland from moving the following motion immediately—That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Minister for Home Affairs cut funding to projects recommended by community safety experts in his department to fund projects in marginal and government-held electorates; (b) the Minister for Home Affairs announced funding for two projects during the Braddon by-election before grant guidelines were finalised, before grant applications were written, and before his department had provided him with advice, which was the projects were "unsuitable and ineligible"; (c) the Minister for Home Affairs also gave $880,000 from the proceeds of crime to the National Retail Association after it made a donation to support the Minister's election campaign; and (d) this is just the latest scandal involving the Government rorting taxpayers' money to advance its political interests; and (2) therefore, calls on the Minister for Home Affairs to immediately explain his actions to the House for a period not exceeding 15 minutes. This minister is trading votes for making the community less safe. He doesn't care about— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Shortland will resume his seat. The Leader of the House? 15:05 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is the member for Shortland be no further heard.

The House divided. [15:09]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 15:10 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 15:10 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Seconded. They've learnt nothing from sport rorts, thinking every government program is a Liberal Party slush fund— The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Leader of the House. 15:10 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member be no further heard.

The House divided. [15:12]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 15:13 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio They take public money and spend it on their own jobs. Spreadsheets based on the marginality of— The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Leader of the House. 15:13 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the question be now put. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the question be put.

The House divided. [15:14]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 15:16 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the member for Shortland be disagreed to.

The House divided. [15:16]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 66 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Haines, H Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 55 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hayes, CP Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 13 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.

 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 151 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples: 13th Anniversary 151 15:17 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australians. Will the minister please outline the importance of the National Apology to the Stolen Generations and update the House on the Morrison government's commitment to working in partnership with Indigenous Australians? 15:18 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck Thank you, Member for Braddon, for your question. It's a good question, because I heard you this morning deliver a speech in this chamber and I saw the very affectionate and warm response from Dr Emma Lee, who is an Indigenous anthropologist. She appreciated the fact that you acknowledged the history of the past. Member for Barton, when you were reading that extract out of the Bringing them home report this morning, what it made me do was reflect: what are we doing for young people? Your point is very strong in terms of cultural identity. At the girls academies, we've increased the number of places from 2,900 by an additional 2,700. That allows young women to come together within those academies to look at their academic pathways and, at the same time, share cultural strength and identity. We do the same for the Clontarf boys. Those programs underpin the ongoing credentialing into adulthood by the supportive nature that exists within them. In addition to that, it is about building hope and building an opportunity for them to go on to other places that they aspire to in their lives. I've been to many of them. The Closing the Gap strategy this time round has a target on out-of-home care which will really test every system on the placement of Indigenous children taken to out-of-home care programs. Family violence—these are all key initiatives within closing the gap, but we are doing it on a co-design basis. When the PM first said to me, 'You'll work with 50 organisations,' I frowned at him and said: 'You're asking me to do an incredible challenge. If you know the politics of our community, that's hard work.' But by co-designing we now have ownership between the Commonwealth, state and territory governments and Indigenous Australians. So it augurs well for the future. We're working with SNAICC to develop an early childhood strategy, which I negotiated in early days with the Prime Minister. That is now bringing together the fundamental tenets of good early years in life and better opportunities. We will continue to build on all of our work and continue to focus on the history of the past in order to make the future better. To all of you in this chamber, I thank you for the commitment you give to Indigenous Australians. Mr Morrison E3L I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 151 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Deputy Clerk 151 15:21 The SPEAKER 00APG I have a short statement to provide some information to members. As many of you would know, shortly after the House rose last year, our Deputy Clerk, Catherine Cornish, made known her intention to retire. Those of you who have worked closely with Catherine will not be surprised that it was her wish to make a quiet departure, but I thought it appropriate for the House to formally acknowledge her many years of expert support, guidance and advice. Catherine joined the Department of the House of Representatives in April 1994, working first in the Committee Office. As her parliamentary career progressed, Catherine led the Table Office and then the Procedure Office before her appointment as Deputy Clerk in 2019. She has been the consummate professional, respected by members and staff alike. For many years, Catherine has made a strong procedural contribution to the work of the House, most visibly in her role as Clerk at the table. Perhaps not as visibly, for some 20 years Catherine has also made a significant contribution for members and staff in parliamentary knowledge-sharing and capacity-building. The capacity-building aspect of Catherine's work extended to members and staff of developing parliaments around the globe through work here and at those other parliaments, including in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia and the Pacific. In recent years, Catherine has been a guiding hand for a new suite of procedural resources and programs, not only for this House but also in support of Pacific parliaments. As Catherine will shortly embark on her retirement, I know members will join me in thanking her for her years of dedicated service to the House and to the parliament. Honourable members: Hear, hear! The SPEAKER 00APG I'm pleased to inform the House that after a competitive selection process Mr Peter Banson, the Clerk Assistant, will become the new Deputy Clerk of the House. Many of you know Peter; he's here today in question time. As you know, he has a strong record of achievement. I know you'll join me in congratulating him. We know he'll do a great job. Congratulations, Peter. Honourable members: Hear, hear! DOCUMENTS 152 DOCUMENTS Presentation 152 15:23 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce 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. COMMITTEES 152 COMMITTEES Corporations and Financial Services Committee, Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Select Committee 152 Membership 152 15:24 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler by leave—I move: That: (1) Mr Falinski and Ms Hammond be discharged from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services and Mr Wallace be appointed a member of the committee; and (2) Mr Connelly, Dr Martin and Mr Simmonds be appointed as members of the Select Committee on Mental Health and Suicide Prevention; Question agreed to. BILLS 152 BILLS Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020 152

Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020

Second Reading 152 15:25 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's a pleasure to be able to stand and speak on the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020, which is part of the package this government is delivering on the recommendations of the Hayne royal commission since its report was handed down a couple of years ago. I know there's a lot of colour and light going on on the opposition benches, a bit of ranting and raving because they're saying, 'Why weren't the bills introduced and legislated earlier?' There was this thing called COVID-19. I'm not sure if you're familiar in it. Early last year there was—and we're still getting to the bottom of the origins, but most people think it came from Wuhan in China—a virus and it distracted the political discussion and the priorities of governments, not just in Australia but all around the world. We had this reprioritisation to say, yes, these sorts of urgent reforms matter, but saving human lives, protecting the Australian community, making sure we had the necessary health systems and making sure we provided the economic support measures to make sure people didn't lose jobs all mattered a bit more. The confected outrage of those members on the opposition benches falls a bit flat because what we're doing—now that the Treasury has the bandwidth, the government has the bandwidth and, frankly, this parliament has the bandwidth—is getting on with the job so that we can make sure that Australian consumers are protected. The role of financial services is to manage and create the wealth of our great nation, but to do it in alignment with those who own that wealth. Of course, we've had reforms already, and there are many reforms to go. But there are other things that we need to focus on as well as a consequence of the Hayne royal commission. This legislation is relatively straightforward. It's to make sure that financial advisers' interests are aligned with the interests of the people that they're advising. You would have thought this was self-evident for financial advisers and that, when they clip the ticket because they provide a service which is entirely reasonable and fair, they do it on the basis that they are actually helping the people who are gaining a benefit from their services. Their interests should be in alignment and not in contrast. When fees are being charged—as clearly has occurred with some financial advisers—against the interests of their customers, they are being rorted of their savings and investments because people are using it as an opportunity to mine for fees and their own interests. If financial advisers are doing that, they should be held to account. That's what this legislative proposal goes part way to addressing. We should never turn a blind eye when we find this happening in other places. As you would be aware, Deputy Speaker, I am the chair of the Standing Committee on Economics. We are running a term-long inquiry at the request of the Treasurer into the implementation of the Hayne royal commission. The member for Dunkley probably wasn't on the committee when we discovered some super funds were also charging members fees without providing a service. The only response from the opposition to this fee-for-no-service moment was to run interference and to distract from what was going on, and we wonder why. It might be because it was being done by their friends in the industry super fund ecosystem. They were actually caught red-handed reactivating low balance inactive accounts—which, by law, should have gone to the Australian Taxation Office—so that they could harvest them for fees and insurance people didn't want or need because it could underwrite their profitability. It is the most despicable thing, in exactly the same way financial advisers have been caught out by the Hayne royal commission. Hayne missed this one and we have done something about it despite the efforts of the opposition. In the end, fees for no service is wrong, and it doesn't matter whether it's a financial adviser or an industry super fund. When they're caught red-handed, they're culpable and we need to make sure we change the law to protect people. This shows a fundamental blind spot of the opposition around financial services. Their interest is not in stopping wrongdoing; their interest is what they can gain from it, like the dodgy financial advisers that this bill is stopping. That's what we discovered in the Economics Committee. We're also seeing it in their behaviour around so many other issues around financial advice and prioritisation. Just before question time, I drew an explicit contrast between the rhetoric of the Labor Party and the opposition and what they do. I'll repeat it just for clarity: when it comes to Labor, it's always 'them first, you last'. At the last election, Labor said negative gearing cost housing affordability. That was their big narrative. That's what they do. They conned millions of Australians into believing this lie, but they knew it wasn't true. Yesterday in the Nine press, Labor MPs backgrounded that by saying in relation to scrapping negative gearing, 'For the amount of money it raises versus the political pain, it's just not worth it.' Clearly, their only priority is not housing affordability and it's not improving the homeownership rate of young Australians; it's merely their take of your money. Either housing affordability matters but they'd rather have votes, or it doesn't and they just want your cash. It's 'Labor first, you last'. Now they're doing the same thing with super. Since the 1990s, Labor has championed taking workers' wages to stop them saving a deposit to own their own home. Unsurprisingly, homeownership rates amongst young Australians have declined while Labor has been prioritising super ahead of homeownership. The average age to buy a first home has now blown out to 36. Labor's solution is to double down and make it harder for you, the people of Australia, to save. Labor want a nation of renters because homeownership gets in the way of handing moolah to their mates. Liberals want you to own your future—your security for you and your family. Liberals want a nation of homeowners. This is not the first time we've had this debate. At the end of the Second World War, most people remember the divide between Chifley's Labor Party and Menzies's Liberal Party as being about bank nationalisation, but go back to the speeches and look at one of the other critical divides. Labor wanted to use federal state housing agreements to create a nation of dependent renters where people were denied the dignity of ownership of their own homes. Menzies was committed, and our party has been committed at every point, to the democratisation of wealth creation and distribution through the power of homeownership. We did it in 1949 and we drew a line in the sand. It's hardly a shock that, for many years after that, the Australian people never forgot the Labor Party's and the opposition's betrayal of Australians' aspirations to own their own home. Liberals want you to own your future. Super matters but homeownership matters more; it should be 'home first, super second'. The only people who want to obsessively argue against it are the people who have their interests in the till of keeping the super system prioritised ahead of homeownership. That's why it's wrong. I know that a lot of members of the opposition find it outrageous that someone would dare say that homeownership matters more than super. There's such a con at the heart of their argument. They have no issue with your super being used to invest in build-to-rent housing, so super funds will own housing stock with your money and they will say that you must rent it from them. That is a betrayal of the Australian social contract. It is a disgrace, and they sit there on the other side of the chamber and applaud it along. The idea that you would rent off your own super fund, from your own money, is despicable, but that is where the Australian super system is heading: to create a neo-feudalism at the heart of Australian society, where young Australians, new Australians, migrant workers and low-income workers will be denied their own dream, to serve the interests of super funds and be serfs to their own super, rather than having the dignity, the pride and the ownership they'd have not just of their own home but of this great country. I know there's a mocking dismissal by members of the opposition, but that is where their priorities sit in the financial services sector: Labor first, you last. They've taken that attitude in the economics committee, they take that attitude in this parliament and they continue to mock and deride the opportunity for young Australians to be able to own their own home. It's a disgrace. They can't see it, because they're blind, because at the heart of these debates they see themselves and their interests, not the opportunities for you, the people of Australia. So in this piece of legislation we are taking sensible action to make sure that financial advisers don't rip off customers. We've already done the same where we found industry super funds ripping off fund members and those with low-balance accounts, sometimes the most underprivileged low-income Australians. But again the member for Dunkley simply shrugs her shoulders at the rip-offs of industry super against nurses and teachers and those people who've made the effort to be able to save for their own dignity. Now give them the choice, the opportunity to empower themselves. Give them the opportunity to be able to use their savings, their money, their effort and their reward to own their own home. Instead we'll get the sneering arrogance of the opposition in opposing it every step of the way. My response is: bring this fight on, because it should be home first, super second. 15:37 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin It's difficult to know where to start when you have such an unhinged, breathless, desperate attempt to distract from the fact that those opposite have been running a protection racket on the rorts and rip-offs in the banking system for some years. Those opposite, time and time again, have been given opportunity after opportunity to say something about the rorts and rip-offs that made this banking royal commission necessary in the first place. There's been not a word from those opposite about cases such as that of a young man with Down syndrome who was forced into purchasing life insurance he could never benefit from, or about charging dead people for financial advice, or about shoving clients into high-risk, low-quality products. There's been not a word about case after case after case which we heard about before the royal commission and during the royal commission and which made the royal commission itself necessary. I think that speaks volumes about those opposite and the fact that they will always side with the big banks and the big financial institutions against the interests of ordinary working people. That's why we had the protection racket for so many years, and I'll come to that in a moment. This legislation before the House, the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020, is about the implementation of some of the recommendations of the Hayne royal commission. It contains three schedules, which implement four different recommendations made by Commissioner Hayne in relation to aspects of financial advice. Labor will be supporting the passage of the legislation, but I'm also proud to move the second reading amendment circulated under my colleague the member for Whitlam's name and to speak in favour of that amendment. I move: 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 the Government has: (1) taken far longer than promised to implement the recommendations of the Hayne Royal Commission; (2) failed to establish a compensation scheme of last resort, as recommended by the Hayne Royal Commission; and (3) actively rejected the very first recommendation of the Hayne Royal Commission, by proposing to repeal the responsible lending obligations in the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 for the vast majority of credit contracts." This legislation goes to the core of the delays that we have seen in the implementation of the Hayne royal commission recommendations. What is says and what it shows is just how little those opposite's heart is really in the implementation of this. The last time this parliament sat we saw the two-year anniversary of the handing over of the Hayne royal commission recommendations and still only something like one-third of the 76 recommendations have been fully implemented by those opposite. That does speak volumes about a government long on announcements but short on delivery. It was two years on that day since that awkward photo-op where the Treasurer was sitting, all grins, begging Commissioner Hayne to smile or shake his hand. There was a look of disdain on the commissioner's face as he handed over this royal commission report. It says everything about the government: they put all the planning in the photo-op. You don't have to scratch the surface of the Treasurer too much before you'll interest him in a photo-op. Here he is with Commissioner Hayne in this awkward hostage situation of the handing over of the report. In the two years since that moment only a third of the recommendations of the royal commission have actually been fully implemented. This has a history—and I'm pleased the member for McMahon is at the table as well, because it was almost five years ago in April, after listening to and consulting with the victims of misconduct in the financial system, that I, the member for McMahon, the member for Isaacs and the member for Maribyrnong stood up in Melbourne and said: 'Enough is enough. What's necessary here is a royal commission to get to the bottom of these rorts and rip-offs so that we can get justice for the victims of what's gone on here.' From that moment forward, for two full years, those opposite ran a protection racket against that banking royal commission. Twenty-six times the Prime Minister voted against having a royal commission into the banks. Despite the overwhelming evidence of banking misconduct, despite all of the stories day after day of rorts and rip-offs in the banking system, those opposite ran a protection racket. You know what changed their mind? The member for Whitlam and the member for McMahon will remember this. It wasn't that there'd been a particularly impactful story or case that had come to light; it was because they got a permission slip from the banks. They got a letter from the banks saying, 'Okay, look, you know what, it's probably okay if you agree to a royal commission.' Armed with that little permission slip, they announced a banking royal commission. Throughout that period, from that moment until the 2019 election, they went all around the country and said: 'We're really serious about this. We will implement quickly the recommendations of the banking royal commission.' They cried crocodile tears for the victims. All over Australia, in every electorate of Australia, they pretended to care about implementing the royal commission recommendations. As soon as they were through that election, we got excuse after excuse for delay, and that's what we're seeing here. It's been more than two years now since the recommendations were handed over and only a third of the recommendations have been put in place, and that shows that, if the people of this country want a federal government, a national government, on their side when it comes to looking after their interests in the financial system of this country, then only Labor will provide that kind of government. What those opposite have shown for the last five years or more—for much longer than that, but in this case for the last five years or so—is that they have absolutely no interest in protecting the welfare of the Australian people in the banking system. Instead, they've spent the bulk of the last five years running that protection racket for the big banks. They will always side with the big banks against the interests of ordinary working people in this country. Every Australian has an interest in us having a robust, competitive and profitable financial system that works well. It's such an important part of our economy. We want to have a well-functioning financial system. We want the banks to be profitable on the basis of providing good services, not cutting corners. It's really key, as we emerge from the deepest, most damaging recession in almost a century, that we get the financial system working right, but we won't do and we won't give the Australian people the confidence that they need to have in their banks unless and until we implement these recommendations properly so that people can have confidence that the political world, the government here in Canberra, has listened to what's happened, taken the recommendations seriously and implemented them afterwards. In the absence of that, people will conclude with some justification not just that the government are not on their side when it comes to rorts and rip-offs in the banking system but also that those opposite never intended to take it seriously and, until they do take it seriously, there will be a cloud hanging over the financial system. We don't want that. We as a country want to move forward with confidence. We want finance to flow freely in our economy and in our communities. We want all of that to happen. But, for that to happen, those opposite need to drop the habit of a lifetime and actually care about the welfare of ordinary Australians, ordinary working families, the people of Middle Australia in the banking system, who have been treated in some instances very shabbily in the recent past. Those opposite need to represent their interests and not just the interests of the banks. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Bowen DZS It is seconded, and I reserve my right to speak. 15:46 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher In my electorate of Fisher we are fortunate to have a highly professional and engaged local cohort of financial advisers. Even before the report of the financial services royal commission was handed down, these advisers reached out to me to help me understand their sector, the benefits that advisers deliver and the challenges that their industry faces. I've been determined to ensure that these concerns are heard and that, in ensuring that the public are protected from malpractice, the government delivers targeted, effective regulations without adding unnecessary red tape. In December 2018, I hosted the then Assistant Treasurer in Fisher to meet with 40 Sunshine Coast financial planners to discuss their concerns and gather their experiences. In February 2019, I met with some 50 mortgage brokers in Mooloolaba, while in October 2019 I spoke with another 25 financial advisers. Between those times and now, I've had many further discussions with individual financial planners all over the coast and even presented to the local financial planners association early last year. I've written to the Treasurer and to the minister for Superannuation, Financial Services and the Digital Economy on these issues, and I'm grateful to both of them for the serious consideration they have given to the concerns of my constituents and their businesses. Indeed, the minister for financial services has met with me many times on these questions and even took the time herself in July 2019 to come to Fisher and speak with local financial planners. I know that they appreciated the opportunity to be heard. Financial planners have raised with me the question of the tax deductibility of financial advice. They've raised increases in ASIC charges for self-managed superannuation fund auditors and financial advisers. They've expressed disappointment at the new education requirements for experienced financial advisers and made me aware that some in the sector want an extension of grandfathered conflicted remuneration. Sunshine Coast financial advisers spoke to me about increasing regulatory costs, professional indemnity costs and the incongruity of third-party licensing in light of the royal commission's findings. In general, time and again they have highlighted to me the importance of ensuring that small, family owned businesses in this sector do not take the fall for the bad behaviour of large financial institutions. I think it is really apt at this point to point out that those members opposite, those in the Labor Party, when they talk about the big banks and the Hayne royal commission, are oblivious to the impacts of the Hayne royal commission on small mum-and-dad financial planners. They talk about the terrible ills that the banks have perpetrated on Australians, and they were wrong, but what about the small, independent, mum-and-dad business operations that have worked in this industry for years and years? Without any form of discredit on themselves, those members opposite continuously talk about the big banks but you will never hear them talk about the small businesses that have been impacted. Now, I don't profess to be an expert in this field, but I do understand the importance of business and of the issues we're talking about, and I know that the minister appreciates them as well. Many of these questions have no easy solution. In every case a delicate balance must be struck between preventing a repeat of these bad practices that have gone on before and ensuring a strong sector that can serve those who'll need it most in the future. The bill before the House today is another important step in striking that critical balance. This government understands there will always be a market for good, professional, sound financial advice. ASIC, after all, found the majority of consumers who seek financial advice do so because they feel advisers could recommend products that they could not find on their own. I know the government also understands that, from its beginnings in the insurance sales industry, in recent years, the financial advice sector has been moving closer to what the public are demanding it become—that is, a more professional sector akin to medicine and the law. I'm pleased to say that not one financial adviser I have met has quibbled with me about that very fundamental need—that is, the need for them to become more professional. However, given the important role these advisers play in our financial sector, self-directed improvement is no longer enough, and it is critical that the industry is held to the highest of standards. In the light of the royal commission's findings, we must eliminate any misconduct. That's why the government committed to the Australian public to act on every one of Commissioner Hayne's 76 recommendations before the last federal election. It is an important matter of trust that, in this place, we live up to the commitment that we have made to the Australian people. To date, I believe the government has done so, while taking into account financial advisers' legitimate concerns. For example, in keeping with the royal commission's findings, the government has introduced a minimum educational requirement and an exam to ensure that, like doctors and lawyers, everyone in the sector has the same defined body of baseline knowledge, regardless of whether or not they have specialised during their career. We're ensuring that every adviser in the country has the complete body of knowledge which underpins the profession and the professionals' capacity to competently and ethically practice. However, we have balanced this with the proper recognition that the experience of advisers should also be taken into account. That is why the government has stipulated that existing advisers need only complete an eight-subject graduate diploma rather than a full 24-subject bachelor's degree. In addition, the government has recognised that existing advisers need more time to meet these new standards. With the urging of many members on this side of the House, the government has introduced legislation, which means that existing advisers will have until 1 January 2026—that's two additional years—to meet the qualification requirements and one additional year until 1 January 2022 to complete their exam. I want to thank Minister Hume for listening to me and my colleagues and stakeholders on these very important issues. The reforms in the bill before the House today are similarly effective in striking that balance. It is vitally important that there is transparency and clarity for consumers around fees when it comes to financial advice. We want to avoid the fee-for-no-service conduct we've seen in the past. However, just as importantly, we must not add unduly to the reams of paper that financial advisers are already required to provide to their clients when delivering any services. I'm sure we have all had the discouraging experience of being handed a thick wad of legal papers to read before purchasing a service we want and need. It is a simple fact of human nature that the greater bulk of fine print we are given to read, the less likely we are to read it and take it all in. How many Australians read the fine print when we're asked to agree to terms and conditions by Apple, for example? They provide reams and reams—in that case, electronic reams—of material. The more you provide and the more complex you make it, the less people will read it, and if people don't read it they will come unstuck. The more complicated we make the compliance for the adviser, the greater the risk for the consumer. Under the reforms in this bill, financial advisers would be required to provide clients with a fee disclosure statement every year, which would detail the fees to be charged in the following 12 months and the services that the client is entitled to receive during that period. Critically, the bill would also require that clients provide active written consent to those fee arrangements going ahead, before any fees are charged. This will ensure the transparency that consumers need. However, just as important, under this bill these fee disclosure statements would take the form of a single document, delivered annually at a predictable time. The bill also removes the current requirement for financial advisers to provide a renewal notice to their clients. Both the disclosure statement and the request for renewal would be outlined in one straightforward document under this bill, preventing unnecessary duplication. Equally, this bill provides for critical transparency by requiring financial advisers who are not independent, impartial or unbiased, as defined under the Corporations Act, to declare as much in a written statement to all clients before providing them with any advice. Failure to do so will incur a substantial civil penalty of up to three times the benefit derived or 5,000 penalty units. However, once again the bill prevents duplication by requiring the statement to be provided as part of the existing financial services guide, which is already mandatory in most financial advice arrangements. Finally, under the reforms in this bill, unnecessary and unwanted ongoing advice fees from MySuper products will be prohibited, stamping out one of the more common fee-for-no-service arrangements identified by the royal commission. However, the government recognises that some members will want to see further financial advice, especially as they are approaching retirement. As such, the bill allows for non-ongoing fees to be charged where the individual gives their explicit consent. In each of its three schedules, this bill delivers on the financial services royal commission's recommendations and ensures that consumers have the protection they need. In each case, the schedules do this while listening to the industry and preventing the unnecessary duplication and bureaucracy which are making it increasingly difficult for advisers to service clients with lower value asset pools. That point was made continually to me by the industry. The financial advice sector delivers much-needed services to every corner of the country and impacts the lives of every Australian in some way. The government's reforms are not just change for change's sake. They will make our financial system more efficient, more competitive and more trusted, for the benefit of all Australians. I know that many of the financial advisers in Fisher will remain concerned for their lower value portfolio clients. I understand they will remain concerned about their ability to service these clients whilst staying compliant with their new regulatory obligations. However, these changes are necessary to protect the public, and they are very timely. They are the right thing to do for the public and for the industry. In my experience with dealing with financial advisers, I've learnt that as a profession they are excellent at adaptation. They have had to be. This process will be no different. Strengthening the sector will benefit all Australians, as they will be able to access better quality advice that is affordable and helps them make good financial decisions. Strengthening these protections will ensure that Australians are receiving the best possible guidance. Ultimately, the reforms in this bill and all of those in the government's financial sector reform package are going to result in greater consumer confidence in the financial services industry and support the sector's ongoing place in our society in the years to come. I will continue to work with financial advisers to consult. I will listen to their concerns and ensure that this government gets the balance right between the interests of consumers and those of their financial advisers. Members opposite continually talk about the big banks, but they always forget small business. Members of this government, the Morrison government, never forget small business. Small business runs through our veins. Most of us come from small business. We know what it's like to have to meet payroll on Thursday. We come into this place with that responsibility. We look at bills through that prism. We will continue to do so, and I commend this bill to the House. 16:01 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley The speaker before me made the assertion that Labor never talks about small business. Let me start my contribution on the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020 by talking about not just a small business but the human beings behind that small business, whose financial interests, health and welfare have been devastated by the action of a bank and the failure of this government to make sure processes are in place so they get proper restitution. It's a shame that the member who spoke before me has walked out as I rise to speak on the subject that he said no-one from Labor ever speaks on. My constituents Mr and Mrs Furneaux, small-business people, had a business loan from the NAB of about $240,000 in September 2006. They started to struggle. It was an interest-only loan, and they thought that would continue for two years. Something happened. The banks said they weren't meeting their contractual arrangements, and they tried to negotiate with the bank about how to deal with it. They looked at their private properties and they looked at whatever they could do try to service their loan. The bank says they were served with a notice of default, but they never received it. That led to years and years of nightmare in the Supreme Court, trying to negotiate with the bank and trying to keep their heads above water. As a result of the way they were dealt with by the bank, they've lost both of their residential properties and their business. The Furneauxs aren't people who are just complaining because their business has failed; they're people who have been doing everything right to try to get a resolution for this problem with the bank. They haven't had any help from AFCA. The negotiations with the bank, which were supposed to be done in good faith, fell through. They don't know what to do now. They've pleaded with me to raise it in this parliament as an example of victims of bank misconduct who to this day, in 2021, are still struggling for an outcome. They're not the only constituents of mine who have complained about their dealings with AFCA. Stephen has contacted me a number of times. As he said to me in one of his most recent emails: 'It's very disappointing that a government agency is so unhelpful and unable to do what it is meant to do. It's past time when more action is needed. I've done all I can and I need assistance.' AFCA's caused a lot of extra work for all involved, with significant delays. It's a matter that has been before them for many months, and the delay is entirely due to AFCA, but Stephen said he is given just seven days to reply. He can't get the help he needs. It's about time this government looked at what is happening at AFCA. It's interesting that the current chair of AFCA is also the chair of Crown. Perhaps it's about time the government took an approach to dealing with institutions and appointments that is something other than jobs for former Liberal politicians or their mates. It's also time this government told the truth about its lack of implementation of the recommendations of the royal commission. After voting against the royal commission 26 times, the government finally bowed to pressure and introduced a royal commission into banking and financial institutions. I don't think anyone in Australia can forget the image of the Treasurer trying to shake Commissioner Hayne's hand when the recommendations were handed down, or his Academy-Award-winning performance of outrage at the way hardworking Australians had been treated by the banks—his scathing assessment of the banks' behaviour. The Treasurer of Australia said the banks were driven by a culture of greed that breached the law and the price paid by the community was immense. The Treasurer spoke of the broken businesses, the emotional stress and the personal pain of thousands of victims, and he promised change. That is what he promised the Australian people. All you need to do is go to his website and have a look at his press release of 19 August 2019. The Treasurer said: The need for change is undeniable, and the community expects that the Government's response to the Royal Commission will be implemented swiftly. According to the Treasurer back in August 2019: Excluding the reviews that are to be conducted in 2022, under the Implementation Roadmap: by the end of this year— 2019— more than 20 commitments, around one third of the Government's commitments, will have been implemented or have legislation before the Parliament; by mid 2020— last year— more than 50 commitments, close to 90 per cent of commitments, will have been implemented or have legislation before the Parliament; and by the end of 2020, remaining Royal Commission recommendations requiring legislation will have been introduced. According to the Treasurer: For measures contained in legislation introduced into the Parliament before 1 July next year— 2020— the Government expects the majority to commence by 1 July 2020 or Royal Assent. According to the Treasurer: Given its scale and complexity, this represents an unprecedented response. I'm not sure how you can have an unprecedented response to a royal commission that had just handed down recommendations, but we'll move on. According to the Treasurer: It demonstrates the Government's commitment to strengthening consumer protection laws and empowering Australia's financial regulators to enforce the law. Well, on the government's own measure, on the Treasurer's own measure of the demonstration of the government's commitment, they get a big 'F' for failing, because what would actually demonstrate the government's commitment to strengthening consumer laws and empowering Australia's financial regulators to enforce the law is delivering on it. I know: 'There was COVID. Doesn't everybody know there was COVID?' According to the member for Goldstein, in his hyperbolic and tremendously loud contribution to this debate, that meant the government was focused on other things. Apart from the things that this parliament supported and that went through, like JobKeeper and JobSeeker and JobMaker, he didn't really say what else the government was focused on. He didn't, for example, highlight that the government was focused on doing the exact opposite of recommendation 1 of the royal commission, which is to keep the responsible lending laws. Apparently, all of last year, for the times that the government didn't cancel parliament and parliament was actually sitting, the government was able to bring in legislation to establish an integrity commission for cheaters at university, because that was urgent, as opposed to an integrity commission for this parliament and the Public Service. So they could do that. They could bring in legislation which changed the fees for courses at universities, which has the impact of making it harder for students and young people from poorer families to go to university because they can't afford to leave with a $50,000 debt. The government could do that last year. It could introduce substandard environmental protection laws. It could introduce legislation which established a pale alternative to a royal commission into veteran suicides, which is what the defence community would like. It could introduce legislation to extend the racist cashless welfare card system onto more vulnerable Australian people. This parliament could have introduced 181 pieces of legislation last year, including private member's bills, which, fair enough, by the standards of what the previous Labor government was able to do during the global financial crisis, is pretty poor. It could introduce 181 pieces of legislation but couldn't focus on implementing the recommendations of the royal commission into banks and financial institutions. That's the real measure of this government's commitment to making banks follow the law and protecting Australian small businesses and individuals who have been the victims of malpractice. I just mention the member for Goldstein—and I know he's not in the chamber, but I'm sure he is sitting avidly watching my contribution. I want to put in the Hansard that he noted that at one point, during his contribution, my shoulders were shaking. It's true: they were. But not for the reasons the member for Goldstein suggested. I was just trying to get the ringing out of my ears that was caused by the volume of his contribution. I would suggest that, if it's possible, Hansard records that contribution. I've suggested previous speeches be recorded in capital letters. Maybe they want to put the one delivered today in bold and italics. I don't know how you're going to record the hyperventilating in Hansard—I'll leave that up to the experts. This legislation introduces reforms which are needed and which are supported. There is no doubt about that. They are overdue, but it's good that they are happening now. What needs to happen is more of an actual commitment. We heard horrific stories from person after person after person who went before the royal commission and bared their lives with some of the most devastating experiences they have ever had to go through in the hope not only that would they get some recompense but that it wouldn't happen to anyone else. We need to honour what they did for the rest of the community and the work that the royal commissioner and everyone at the royal commission put in with the recommendations and get them implemented. The way to do that is not to strip away responsible lending laws. The way to do that is not to blame having to deal with COVID—which, by the way, the states did a lot of, but that's another speech. The way to do that is for the Treasurer to do his job. There are a lot of recommendations outstanding, and I look forward to the flurry of legislation that must be about to come to implement them. Thank you. 16:13 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It's interesting listening to the member for Dunkley's contribution and I would agree with her on one point: the behaviour of the banks, particularly during the GFC, that ultimately led to the royal commission was reprehensible. As somebody who spent a career in the banking and financial services sector before coming to this place, it was extraordinarily disappointing that the banks didn't take in a professional manner their social responsibility and social license to look after their customers and assist them through an extraordinarily difficult time. That it had to get to a royal commission for some of those issues to be ventilated and articulated was equally disappointing. But the member for Dunkley's contribution also demonstrates my concern with those opposite and their complete and utter lack or apparent lack of an understanding of the financial services industry, particularly the advice part of that industry. Nothing in the member for Dunkley's contribution spoke to the substantive matters in this legislation, and it didn't demonstrate that she even understands the industry that we're talking about. What I am pleased to see is, over the last 12 or 18 months since the royal commission, a move by the big banks to divest themselves of their financing planning arms. I've long held the view that if you provide financial planning advice you should not be able to be owned—or you should not be owned, full stop—by a product manufacturer, whether that's a bank, whether that's an insurance company or whether that's a fund manager, and even whether that's an industry super fund because they are also, ultimately, a product manufacturer. Advice should be completely separate from the people who create the products that advisers recommend. The important part of this equation that gets overlooked is that advisers can only recommend a suite of products as per their approved product list. But there are professional advisers out there—and there are a great many. The vast majority of the industry are professional advisers who have been in the industry for 20 or 30 years or longer and have had clients who have been with them for that whole journey. It's a completely and utterly different model from the sales model that existed within the financial planning arms of the big institutional banks, in particular, and AMP. Those people, the professional advisers who have run their own businesses for the past 20 or 30 years or longer, who deal with ordinary Australians each and every day and work with them to ensure that their financial goals and objectives are realised, that their wealth is protected and that they are able to achieve their retirement goals, focus not on the product. The most important part of the advice that they provide is the strategic advice that is designed to assist everyday Australians meet their goals and objectives. This is whether it's getting a mortgage paid down, whether it's saving or accumulating X amount for retirement, whether it's accumulating an investment portfolio within super or outside super or a combination of the two, or whether it's ensuring they've got the right mix in structure of insurance policies, both to protect their own personal wealth that has accumulated and their family's wealth should something unfortunate happen to them. But also, if they're in a business and have a business partnership, it's to ensure that they have the right structure of insurance products to fund their buy-sell agreements or their exit strategy should something happen to them. There are a whole range of pieces of strategic advice that professional advisers, outside of the banks, provide each and every day to Australians. They're the people I focus on, each and every day, because the majority of these people are small-business owners. That is the point the member for Fisher was trying to make, in his contribution, that the member for Dunkley completely missed in her contribution. The member for Fisher was speaking about mum-and-dad Australians who have their own small businesses providing professional financial advice to other mum-and-dad Australians. They're the people who go out there each and every day and, just like the small-business owner the member for Dunkley referred to that the banks treated so shabbily and who has put all of their assets on the line every day, it is the same for these individual advisers and their small businesses. They do exactly the same thing. Their family's wealth is based on the value of the client relationships that they work on, based on the professional advice that they provide in a variety of areas. This is where this piece of legislation is so important, in that it seeks to ensure that we improve the level of disclosure with regard to the fees that advisers are charging their clients. This is critically important because it is important to ensure that there is complete transparency about the fees that an adviser is charging on an upfront basis but also on an ongoing basis. Again, much of the fee-for-no-service issue that we saw out of the royal commission came from the big institutional players at that point in time. We heard very few if any instances of fees for no service for small to medium-sized financial planning firms that actually take the time and the effort, each and every day, to look after their clients. That's not to say that, within that part of the financial services sector, there aren't people who do the wrong thing. We should have a suite of legislation. And ASIC also, in doing their role, should ensure that those people are removed from the industry. I have no argument with that whatsoever. We do not want people in the industry who are not going to put the best interests of their clients first. They have a legislated responsibility to do that. Even before that, most of the professional advisers did that. Sadly, there are those that didn't. This legislation is focused on improving that disclosure but also, at the same time, ensuring that what was potentially three documents that you had to give to your client is now a single document. We know, from the research and work done, that the more paperwork we give clients—and this was a piece of work that ASIC did a number of years ago—the less likely it is that clients actually read that paperwork. What we actually want is for clients to read the documentation that they are given so that they understand what they're paying for, what they're receiving and what the services are that they expect to receive as a result of the ongoing fees that they are paying. Like the member for Fisher, I frequently meet with financial advisers, both in my electorate and more broadly, and we discuss these issues. I accept there's stuff in here that some in the industry would want to go further with. However, the reality is that these protections being put in place are designed to protect consumers, and the reason we need this legislation is that we have seen that there are those who don't put consumers before their own interests. The important part of this legislation, though, in trying to take three documents and put them into one, is that also it helps mitigate one of the big issues that has faced the industry over the last few years, and that is the cost of the provision of advice. I acknowledge the work that ASIC is doing to try and understand how we can reduce the cost of advice so it's more affordable for a broader range of Australians. So I commend this bill to the House, in its unamended form—because, as usual, those opposite have chucked in a few pious amendments. This bill, in schedule 1, will improve the disclosure by advisers for the personal advice that they provide to their clients under the ongoing fee arrangement. It also provides a degree of flexibility to the provision of the financial disclosure statement, and that's important because, whilst it sets a fixed anniversary date for their clients, we all know that clients' circumstances are not set in stone and that their circumstances might change or they might need to see advisers at different times of the year. But it's important that, in the totality of the service that is provided over the course of the year, the clients receive the services that the adviser says they're going to provide and that the fees charged are appropriate. The new requirements will ensure clients are given a more frequent opportunity to opt in. In the current regime it is two years; it will go to an annual opt-in. That can be in hard copy but, importantly, it can also be in electronic form. So it creates some flexibility in how that written consent can be provided to the adviser and, subsequently, by the adviser to the fund manager, so that the fund manager has clear evidentiary documentation that those fees can be charged. These changes come in from 1 July 2021. Other changes, which are equally important, include the disclosure around independence and any conflicts of interest. If nothing else, that's one of the things that came out of the royal commission—that lack of disclosure of a lack of independence, particularly by advisers within the bank network and their own adviser groups; people not understanding those links; and the consequent impact of the products that were recommended as a result. I think that is a good clarifying schedule in this bill. That makes the disclosure of independence more and more important. The last change relates to advice fees for MySuper products: where there's a specific piece of advice provided on a one-off basis, the fee for that advice can be charged from a MySuper product with the client's explicit consent, but ongoing advice fees cannot be so charged. There are a myriad of other methods by which they can be charged, though other investment accounts or via direct debit or other things. I firmly believe that the financial advice industry is working towards becoming more professional and more transparent about what it does. It needs to do that to ensure there's the confidence in the Australian community for people to be able to go and get unbiased, independent advice. Importantly, that advice should be focused on the strategic needs of the client: what are their requirements to improve their wealth, protect their wealth or accumulate their wealth for the future? Once we get to an industry that focuses on those core needs and gives that strategic piece of advice properly, in a cost-effective manner that builds the wealth of everyday Australians, then we will have a professional industry. I look forward to seeing that day, but I commend this bill to the House as a step on the road to continuing to work with the industry to build that professional industry to provide professional advice to Australians of all parts of our country—those who have small account balances and those who have large account balances. This is the next step in what I think is a very good suite of legislation to come down the track. 16:28 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite I rise to speak on the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020. The bill before the House alters the laws which guide professionals when they provide financial services to their customers. The passage of this bill will block banks from some of the pathways to customer mistreatment that they have previously taken. Specifically, this instrument seeks to limit the capacity of banks to charge fees for no service. The practice of charging without providing a service was aggressively highlighted through the banking royal commission. If passed, this draft legislation would require an annual review of fee arrangements and explicit disclosure of a lack of independence or conflict of interest where it exists. The financial sector reform bill also sets stringent demands on the timing of advice fees for superannuation members. These are good things. These changes will protect Australians from unjustifiable and immoral financial malpractice. The Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill is in keeping with recommendations made by the banking royal commission. But there is a problem: while the bill before this House suggests the government has engaged with the final report of the Hayne royal commission in good faith, the government's behaviour elsewhere shows the exact opposite. The National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Supporting Economic Recovery) Bill 2020 is currently subject to a Senate inquiry due to report on 12 March this year. Schedule 1 of the national consumer protection amendment removes responsible lending obligations for most consumer credit contracts. Recommendation 1 of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry states that the National Consumer Credit Protection Act should not be altered to lessen the safeguards that ensure responsible lending. In simple terms, the first recommendation of the banking royal commission is to retain responsible lending laws. This government has introduced legislation to do just the opposite. It is truly mind-boggling. We currently have protections in our lending laws to make sure that loans are affordable, suitable and ethical. The Labor government introduced the National Consumer Credit Protection Act in 2009, and there were two key reasons for responsible lending laws. The first is that irresponsible lending leads to extremely personal hardship. This can arise with no fault by the borrower and is frequently linked to domestic abuse or other devastating life challenges. The second reason is structural. Irresponsible lending introduces weaknesses into the economic system. Irresponsible lending generates bad debt. At low incidence, bad debt generates economic drag and lowers prosperity across the country. At moderate to high incidence, bad debt causes economic collapse and decimates prosperity across the country, the exact opposite of what we want during COVID. This is what we saw through the global financial crisis. Officials from this government's Treasury department sat before the banking royal commission and very clearly explained that the laws the government is now trying to cancel serve to protect our economy. The Labor government introduced the National Consumer Credit Protection Act in 2009 partly in response to the global financial crisis. It is incomprehensible to suggest that the draft legislation would have a positive impact on wellbeing or prosperity in Australia. It could not and it will not. Two clients of my community law centre, the Barwon Community Legal Service, clearly show the absolute importance of retaining responsible lending requirements. Sally has two children to her de facto partner, John, who had a gambling problem and was very controlling with money. John wanted a new vehicle but his credit rating was poor and he was unable to get a loan. After several weeks of coercion, including physical and emotional violence, they went to a car dealership and John negotiated a purchase while Sally stayed outside. When it came time to sign the contract, John brought Sally into the store, explained to the car dealer that she would be the borrower and they proceeded to complete the paperwork, with Sally not asked one more question. That lender issued Sally a $25,000 loan at 20 per cent interest per annum via their own finance company. The car was registered in John's name and Sally never drove it. She only had her learner's permit. After they separated due to the ongoing family violence, John took the vehicle and left Sally with the debt. Barwon Community Legal Service assisted Sally to argue that the finance provider had breached responsible lending laws by not making inquiries or verifying information despite clear signs of coercion. Eventually, after making a complaint to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, the debt was waived. This waiver would not be possible and could not have been achieved without the responsible lending laws that this government intends to remove. Then there's Ahmed, another client of the Barwon Community Legal Service, who was deep in debt from business and personal loans and looking for a way out. He signed up for a course with a private college on the promise that he would earn an extra $1,000 a week after completing the qualification. When he couldn't afford course payments, they offered to organise finance for him. Ahmed got a phone call from someone who asked for all his bank statements and other details. The caller, a finance broker, connected to the college and applied for a loan on Ahmed's behalf at a rate of 22.9 per cent interest, using extremely inaccurate information. The course wasn't as advertised, and Ahmed was left with a loan of $30,000 to repay on top of all of his other debts. Barwon Community Legal Service stepped in and helped Ahmed make a complaint to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority on the grounds that both the broker and the lender breached the responsible lending laws. Ahmed eventually accepted a settlement from the finance broker. The lender wiped $22,000 of the debt and allowed him to repay the remainder at a rate he could afford, without interest. Like Sally, Ahmed is extremely thankful that Barwon Community Legal Service was able to advocate on his behalf. Without responsible lending laws, this would not have been possible. I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the hugely committed team at Barwon Community Legal Service. The work they've done for Ahmed, Sally and thousands of others across my electorate is beyond commendable. They witness and fight the harm brought about by inappropriate lending practices and other social ills on a daily basis. In the last financial year Barwon Community Legal Service saved clients over $350,000 in waived, renegotiated or revoked debts arising from breaches of the very legislation this government is rushing to water down. They run a tanker ship on the smell of an oily rag and make our country a better, fairer and more compassionate place, so my heartfelt thanks go to the Barwon Community Legal Service. The Barwon Community Legal Service bears witness to the harm caused by irresponsible lending. The Treasury has testified to the significant and negative economic impact of responsible lending, but the Morrison government still has the gall to claim it will do Australians and the Australian economy good. Rubbish! We say no to any effort to strip back responsible lending. We say no to the Morrison government. We say no to the government's dodgy banker mates. Instead, we stand with Treasury and community legal services. We stand for the banking royal commission recommendations. We stand with Sally and Ahmed and every Australian who relies on every MP in this chamber to do the right and decent thing and protect them from harmful and irresponsible lending practices. 16:37 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Every Australian will rely on some form of financial services during their lifetime. Be it superannuation in their workplace, a life insurance policy, or advice from a bank when they are seeking to get a mortgage or a loan, everyone relies on financial services at some stage in their life. Unfortunately, for the past couple of decades in Australia, many Australians have been ripped off by dodgy practices and unconscionable conduct by people who had a power imbalance in their favour in the relationship between adviser and client in financial services. That, of course, led to the banking royal commission. That commission was resisted at every stage by those opposite in the early days. They didn't want to see the findings that were uncovered in the financial services royal commission come to light in Australia, because they knew that there were some bad practices going on. They were protecting their mates in the banking industry from having some of these insidious practices covered by not only the media but a royal commission. That royal commission was very thorough and made a number of recommendations, and this bill delivers on some of those recommendations made by the Hayne royal commission. It contains three schedules which implement responses to four different recommendations made by Commissioner Hayne in relation to various aspects of financial advice. Schedule 1 relates to ongoing fee arrangements. This requires financial advisers to annually renew with their clients, through their express consent, the provision of those financial services. This comes about as a result of recommendation 2.1 of the royal commission, in which Commissioner Hayne recommended changes to fee renewal arrangements for financial advisers. Under the current law, these renewals can be taken biannually, and renewals are not required for pre-2013 arrangements. We saw in the Hayne royal commission the result of that. One of the outcomes was that people were paying fees for no services, because they weren't sitting down on an annual or biannual basis with their financial adviser and going through the fees and commissions that were paid. They weren't seeing where their hard-earned money was going, in terms of those fees and commissions and renewing that advice for the next period of time. This recommendation deals with that, this legislative change deals with that and the proposed new law will require such renewal statements to include information about the service provided in the past year and the services that will be provided over the coming year, to make sure that there is more information and more transparency for people before they take on an advice relationship with a financial adviser in the future. That is a good thing. Schedule 2 relates to a disclosure of a lack of independence and will require financial advisers to provide written disclosure of a lack of independence to clients. This implements recommendation 2.2 of the royal commission, which recommended: The law should be amended to require that a financial adviser who would contravene section 923A of the Corporations Act … must, before providing personal advice to a retail client, give to the client a written statement … explaining … why the adviser is not independent … This, of course, came up in the royal commission on several occasions, these murky arrangements that were in place between financial advisers, some of the platform operators and the companies whose products the financial adviser would recommend to a particular client. The client would not be aware that that financial adviser may be getting a commission from promoting that particular product to them or may be getting some form of financial benefit from that ongoing relationship with a product provider. What is important in these types of relationships, where there is a fiduciary duty to act in the interests of the client, is transparency, ensuring that those relationships are disclosed to the client and that they go in with open eyes before they sign on the dotted line and give their consent to that adviser acting on their behalf. That hasn't been happening in the industry. It's one of the areas that Hayne recommended in his report needs to be addressed. The current law only prohibits advisers calling themselves independent, unbiased or impartial in certain cases where they receive benefits from financial product providers, commissions, conflicted remuneration and other benefits. It does not require a positive declaration of the lack of independence, and under the proposed law ASIC will be required to determine the specific requirements for this disclosure. Schedule 3 relates to advice in superannuation. It increases restrictions around charging advice fees to a member of a superannuation fund. This implements the government's response to recommendations 3.2 and 3.3 of the financial services royal commission, which recommended that the government prohibit the deduction of advice fees, other than intrafund advice from MySuper products, and limit the deduction of advice fees from choice products. Many of the fee-for-no-service issues that were identified by Commissioner Hayne in the royal commission were in relation to retail superannuation fund providers—unfortunately, particularly AMP—charging advice fees to members. With many of those fees that were charged to those members, the member wasn't exactly aware that they were being charged. Across a particular platform and across a particular firm, this was happening on a regular basis. This proposed law would prohibit superannuation trustees from charging members for advice without the express consent of the member. It would also prohibit superannuation trustees from charging ongoing advice fees to members of MySuper products. This doesn't prohibit superannuation trustees from charging one-off advice fees to MySuper members with their consent. It's worth noting that the proposed law differs from the recommendation made by Commissioner Hayne who recommended a strict prohibition on advice fees being charged to MySuper members. Mr Dick interjecting— Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 The member for Oxley behind me says, 'It's the complete opposite.' It's worth noting that it differs from what Hayne recommended. Stakeholders in the superannuation sector, including the industry sector, are supportive of this model and it allows funds to provide advice to members in relation to key life events while prohibiting the provision of an ongoing fee for service. It later recommends that supporting this change in the provision of targeted advice at retirement with the consent of the member is likely to be beneficial to that member. What is important is that we have a retirement income system that provides dignity for workers in retirement. The basis upon which Australia's superannuation system was established was to provide dignity for workers in retirement. It's about government basically saying to workers: 'Over the course of your working life, you've worked hard. You've added to the economic growth of our country as an individual and collectively. And for that we'll support you in your retirement through a tax concession, for you to save during your working life and to enjoy the benefits of that retirement when you reach the preservation age. Then you can pay off your house. You can make sure that you can have a holiday every now and then, and you can look after your kids and your grandkids.' However, this government is attempting to undermine the notion of that dignity in retirement by attempting to look at cutting the legislated increase in superannuation that this parliament has committed to and this government has committed to on numerous occasions. During the last election campaign the Prime Minister gave a promise and commitment to the Australian people that his government would deliver a legislated increase in superannuation to 12 per cent for Australian workers. Now we see rumblings on their backbench and a number of members of this government starting to try and crab walk away from that commitment. They're even setting up websites, trying to harvest people's data, so they can run campaigns against the increase in superannuation that is legislated to occur for workers in Australia over the coming years. It is disgraceful because it's undermining retirement incomes for Australians but it's also a broken promise by this government to Australians in a very, very difficult time. In a time of a recession and coming out of it, the last thing you want to do is cut the retirement incomes of hardworking Australians and risk that dignity that they all deserve in retirement. That is exactly what this government is attempting to do. Many members on the government's backbench are attempting to undermine the commitment to increase the superannuation guarantee in Australia. What that will mean over time is that the average Australian worker retires with less in their superannuation account, which will make it more difficult for them to plan for their own retirement, save for their own retirement and fund their own retirement, and it will obviate the need for people to rely on the age pension. Why on earth with an ageing population in Australia would we want to bring in a policy that makes it more likely that more Australians are going to have to rely on the age pension in their retirement to fund their retirement? It will create a bigger impost on the Commonwealth budget at a time when we're now racking up a record debt under this government where debt is going to go through a trillion dollars, where the budget deficit is going to blow out to hundreds of billions of dollars. Why would you want to create and bake in a system that's going to see larger budget deficits into the future because Australians don't have the wherewithal and the necessary minimum superannuation guarantee to plan for their own retirement? It makes no economic sense whatsoever. Members of this government in the House of Representatives and the Senate—all of us—get 15 per cent superannuation. So it's fine for us to pocket 15 per cent superannuation, but this government's saying: 'No, we don't want to increase the basic rate of superannuation savings to 12 per cent for the average worker over the course of the next few years.' That is hypocritical and despicable, and it is letting Australian workers down. It's breaking an election commitment that this government said was set in stone and that the Prime Minister himself, on numerous occasions during the election campaign, gave to the Australian working people. Well, this Labor Party will campaign against the breaking of that promise. We'll campaign against ensuring that this government can get away with cutting the retirement savings of the average Australian worker and with not meeting the commitment that they gave to Australian workers over the course of the last election campaign to increase their superannuation savings at what is a very, very difficult time for the average Australian worker. In conclusion, these reforms are important. They deliver on the Hayne royal commission's recommendations, particularly around providing transparency on advice that's given to clients before they sign up to a particular program of financial advice. But what is also important is making sure that Australians have the retirement incomes to be able to engage those financial advisers into the future, to plan for their retirement. If the government do get away with cutting the legislated increase in superannuation from 9½ to 12 per cent, they will be doing a very bad thing by the Australian people—by working Australians. They will again be breaking an election commitment. Labor will hold them to it and Labor will fight them every step of the way. 16:51 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise to speak tonight on the Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2020. As we have heard, the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry was finalised on 1 February 2019. As we know, the government's response was publicly released alongside the final report on 4 February. In August 2019, the government indicated that the vast majority of legislation required to implement the FSRC's findings would be completed and introduced to parliament by the end of 2020. More than half of the recommendations made by the banking royal commissioner, Kenneth Hayne, either have been abandoned or are yet to be fully implemented. Tonight, I want to spend some time on what that actually means and what the practical implications of that lack of reform have meant to the sector. I will be encouraging all members of the House to support the second reading amendment circulated in the name of the member for Whitlam and moved by the member for Rankin and particularly to recognise that these recommendations of the Hayne royal commission have taken far longer to be implemented than was promised and that the government have failed to establish a compensation scheme of last resort, as recommended by the Hayne royal commission, and have actively rejected the very first recommendation of the royal commission. Here we have a royal commission which the government—let's be honest—did not want. The inquiry and the royal commission into the banks was fought tooth and nail by every member of the government. The government were dragged kicking and screaming until we finally had justice for victims of the banking system in Australia. Then the very first recommendation has been rejected. In fact, by proposing to repeal the responsible lending obligations in the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 for the vast majority of credit contracts, the government is doing the complete opposite of what Commissioner Hayne recommended. I'll talk about that a little later in my remarks tonight, if time permits. I want to focus now on what the government should have done—and, in my opinion, what the government still has time to do—in regard to the outrageous scourge of payday lending in this country: of vulnerable Australians being ripped off due to people making profits from those who can least afford it. This takes us to the government and its lack of action when it comes to the recommendations and policies that protect Australians around lending. The reckless behaviour of payday lenders has gone on long enough. I would take a bet that I have spoken more than anyone else about payday lending, in this parliament and the last parliament. I'd have to check the Hansard, but I'd back myself in on that from about the end of 2016, after I visited St Ives Shopping Centre in Goodna. I was approached at Woolworths by about three or four really well-dressed ladies who were wearing badges. They were getting supplies from Woolworths for their op shop, and they came up to me and said, 'Oh, you're Milton Dick, aren't you?' I was newly elected and pretty impressed that they knew who I was. They read the riot act to me and said, 'What are you going to do about payday lending?' I said: 'What can I do? I've just been elected to the parliament.' They said: 'We are sick and tired of people coming to the St Alban's welfare ministries week after week with mounting debts. People are being tricked and conned into taking out payday loans. They are buying fridges, which should cost about $700 or $800, for $4,000 to $5,000. They are taking out loans to fix their cars for around $1,500, which ends up costing them $5,000.' I vowed from that moment onward that I would do everything I could to give justice to all of those people out in the community. When I looked into this a little further, I recognised that the then Turnbull government had planned to do something about it, and all credit to Kelly O'Dwyer in her former portfolio, as Minister for Revenue and Financial Services. She delivered a review with 20 recommendations, two of which would crack down on payday lending, one specifically to deal with household goods. The now Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, Michael McCormack, stood in this chamber proudly as the then Minister for Small Business and said that he would deliver those reforms. He presented a draft exposure of a bill to do exactly what the government had promised to do with their own review. Then what happened? The 'parliamentary friends of payday lending' in the government got their hands on it and ripped it up, and we've heard nothing since. Since then the Independents, Labor members of parliament and a whole range of stakeholders and individuals have stood up and said, 'Please take action.' The government have not heard their pleas. Between April 2016 and July 2019, just over 4.7 million individual payday loans have been written, worth approximately $3.09 billion. I realise this is big business, and I know some of those loan sharks will be monitoring this speech. Every time I speak about this they email me about the speech I've made and start trolling me on social media, which I wear as a badge of honour. Two years ago I did get a letter back from the then Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Turnbull—the only letter I've had personally addressed to me by a prime minister of this country—saying: 'Yes, we're going to take action. You've got my solemn commitment. I will take action. It will be delivered, and you can be part of that.' I've got it framed in my electorate office at Forest Lake. As the member for Barton said today, he was not interested in the credit; he was just interested in it actually happening. Two weeks later the members of the government rolled him. It was just that little bit too late. Since then I've written to minister after minister after minister over and over again. Hopefully, a ministerial adviser will be listening to this and adding it to their dart board in their offices yet again. I know I speak for the people who have been ripped off. Around 15 per cent of payday loan borrowers end up in a debt spiral, which leads to events such as bankruptcy. I also speak tonight for the women who are accessing payday loans, the number of which has jumped by 28 per cent since 2016. Of course, we now know about the cycle of debt addiction that affects a lot of people who are being preyed upon because they are desperately in need of cash—because of insecure work, because of falling wages and because there are a million people unemployed. Eighty-six per cent of loans are now accessed through a website, on a mobile or a tablet. Just over the last couple of weeks, I've seen on my Facebook page—and residents have showed me on their Facebook pages—generous payday lenders offering to help with back-to-school products. They aren't helping with back-to-school products; they are offering a loan. They are offering a get-rich-quick scheme that's too good to be true, over and over again. While the Morrison government sit and do nothing—while it would be bad enough not to look at the small amount credit contract review, which they promised to do—they are now planning to make it easier for people to have access to unfair credit. They are seeing reforms being watered down—not recommended by the royal commission, not recommended by the royal commissioner himself, but in fact doing the opposite. So what does this all mean? What does it mean if these reforms happen? I refer to a media report in The Guardian on Thursday 4 February entitled 'Australia risks household debt disaster if responsible lending laws scrapped'. It said that Australia's predatory lenders are set to see a household debt disaster—according to an alliance of consumer rights groups which I'm very proud to stand alongside. The media report said responsible lending obligations, as we know, were introduced in 2009 through the National Credit Protection Act, which attempted to stop risky lending by the banks. It said that the alliance—including a whole range of community organisations, financial counsellors and a number of great community advocates—said the inadequate consultation for a change is unacceptable and that 'this bill would only serve to extend the impacts of the economic downturn and it risks prolonging or worsening the financial hardship of Australians through bad debt in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, just as government supports such as JobKeeper and JobSeeker come to an end'. The government's bill will also make significant changes to the laws governing small amount credits, usually referred to as payday loans and consumer leases. What this really means is that a double whammy is coming to vulnerable Australians. We will see a JobKeeper cliff happening in March. We are seeing communities across Australia with record unemployment. We are seeing government ripping away support—rolling back support in March, in a matter of weeks. I recently travelled to North Queensland and met with a number of businesses. I heard from tourist operators in Cairns just last week, as part of Labor's pandemic recovery job and industry task force, with the Leader of the Opposition. Businesses are crying out for relief. They are worried if JobSeeker goes. All those employers are looking over a cliff in a matter of weeks. The city of Cairns has more people on JobKeeper than any other postcode in Queensland. So you are seeing all these people with government support being ripped apart, and the government is saying it's all Premier Palaszczuk's fault, it's all the border's fault or some nonsense. The minister for tourism visited Cairns last week on the same day as the Leader of the Opposition, and he promised absolutely nothing for the tourism industry. One operator said they normally have about 570 boats out on the ocean, and they have collapsed right down to only a handful. And we're seeing these credit reforms in the bill and the second reading amendment that we're dealing with tonight to put those people even further behind. We know that consumer groups have said the changes will weaken the system and make it easier and easier for people to be ripped off. This constitutes a broken promise. A joint submission to the Senate inquiry led by the Consumer Action Law Centre said looser lending would reduce the incentive for banks to comply with lending standards because of the removal of penalties. It said: Repealing responsible lending obligations in the national credit legislation will remove individual legal rights to challenge lenders about their lending decisions and remove the penalty that can be awarded by the regulator ASIC. So we're basically saying it's okay to be ripped off; it's okay for the banks to go back to where we were. The recommendations put forward by the royal commission are now going to be weakened. The ironical part of this is that the banks don't even want this; the banks didn't ask for this. All consumers rely on their lender to make assessments and let them know what amounts they can borrow and what is affordable. We now risk lenders going back to being about selling credit rather than ensuring loans are affordable. I pay credit to Gerard Brody, the chief executive officer of the Consumer Action Law Centre, a fantastic advocate, and his team, who are speaking out every single day and trying to make the government listen—that loosening responsible lending practices will make things worse. The proposed legislation will wind back responsible lending obligations to credit contracts under $2,000 and consumer leases. The current legislation, as I've said, introduced in 2009, requires banks to check the financial situation and objective of each borrower applying for credit. The soaring loan numbers contradict the premise of the legislation that the economy was crippled by a lack of credit flow. The ABS lending data indicates that the growth of new loans is at a record high, and this includes occupier home loans. Commitment to a new dwelling of significant high-end value of total loan commitments, including personal finances, is also rising. So it does seem to be a broken promise by the government—their promise to implement the recommendations. The commissioner was clear that responsible lending provisions should be retained and more adequately enforced. So I say again to the government this evening—to the ministers and the members of the government—you gave a commitment to make sure that we would crack down on payday lenders and to make sure that there was responsible lending in this country. You gave a commitment to make sure that the recommendations of the royal commission would be implemented. For goodness sake, listen to what the experts are saying. Listen to what consumers are saying. Stand up for them just this once instead of standing up for the banks in this country. 17:06 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell Firstly, I would like to thank all those members who've contributed to this debate. Schedule 1 of the bill enhances the framework governing the provisions of financial advice to clients under ongoing fair arrangements to prevent fees for no service. Schedule 2 of the bill introduces a new disclosure obligation to ensure that financial advisors who are not independent in relation to the provision of personal advice are required to provide their clients with a clear and concise written disclaimer that outlines that they are not independent and explains the reason why. Schedule 3 to the bill strengthens protections for individuals against paying fees for no service from their superannuation by prohibiting ongoing advice fees in MySuper and increasing the visibility of fees to individuals. I commend this bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Rankin has moved as an amendment that at all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.

The House divided. [17:12]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 65 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Haines, H Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 56 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilson, JH Zappia, A 14 PAIRS Buchholz, S Chesters, LM Coleman, DB Collins, JM Evans, TM Gorman, P Goodenough, IR Wells, AS Hastie, AW Mitchell, RG Hogan, KJ Khalil, P Howarth, LR King, CF Joyce, BT Byrne, AM Kelly, C Ryan, JC Landry, ML Mulino, D Marino, NB O'Neil, CE Morton, B Payne, AE O'Brien, LS Thwaites, KL Wood, JP Vamvakinou,

Question agreed to.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.

 17:13 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy (In division) Mr Speaker, could I observe that the honourable Leader of the Opposition has called for a cover-up on many occasions. Could I suggest that he be a good example of preaching what he actually proposes? The SPEAKER: Practice makes clear that it's acceptable if you're at the gym to rush to a division, but I wouldn't encourage the member for Kennedy to do it. Third Reading 169 17:16 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020 169

Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020

Second Reading 169 17:16 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon Labor created the Clean Energy Finance Corporation in 2012 with $10 billion worth of funding to support emerging renewables and energy-efficient investment and to reduce the cost of capital for important investments which have great benefits for our country. Since then it's become one of the world's leading green banks, described as such even by the current Prime Minister. It's deployed $6 billion worth of funds and leveraged around $27.3 billion in private investment. In doing so, it has helped finance around 18,000 projects and is responsible for around a million tonnes of abatement annually. This success comes despite the efforts of the current government. This government has sought to attack the CEFC on multiple occasions. It's sought to abolish it, undermined it and dilute its purpose, and there is much of that in the bill before the chamber today, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020. There are some things in the bill that are sensible and which the Labor Party would support. For example, we support the CEFC having an expanded remit to help deliver a modern electricity grid. That's a sensible idea, and it's one that we've spoken about. In the Leader of the Opposition's budget reply, he announced the Rewiring the Nation initiative, under an Albanese Labor government. So it's a sensible idea. But what we won't do is allow the government to use the sensible idea in this bill as cover, as a Trojan Horse, for the undermining of the integrity of the CEFC to give unprecedented powers to the minister and to change the role of the CEFC away from its original intention. It appears that the government have given up on their dream of abolishing the CEFC, but they are still finding ways of undermining it. They are still finding ways of trying to take the CEFC away from its original purpose. They even attempted to stop the CEFC from investing in wind or rooftop solar. I can't think of anything better for the CEFC to invest in than wind and rooftop solar, and yet the government are trying to expand the remit of the CEFC—they tried to reduce it before and now they're trying to expand it—into areas it should not be investing in. I'll deal with that a little later. They've also altered the investment mandate, significantly limiting the degree to which CEFC could support new technology deployment. Since then, they've used the CEFC's $10 billion to create announcement after announcement of reallocated funding as a fig leaf for their inaction on climate change. The government have said that they believe in the CEFC, but this bill is really a mechanism to undermine it. Former leaders of the CEFC and ARENA have written a letter expressing their concerns and their opposition to the bill as it stands. They've said: We do not support changes to the CEFC's legislation that undermine its independence, low emissions remit, commitment to profitability, or its avoidance of fossil fuels as part of a clear commitment to assist in the reduction of Australia's climate emissions. So the experts say the CEFC should be independent, have a low-emissions remit, support economically viable projects and avoid fossil fuels. That makes sense to me, so I will move amendments to make sure that those principles remain. It's up to the government to decide whether they will accept those amendments or not—whether they will continue to undermine those commonsense principles by insisting on their approach. That will determine whether we vote for the bill in its final form. If our amendments are accepted, we will happily pass the bill. If they're not accepted, we will oppose the bill. This bill seeks to make the most significant changes to the CEFC since its establishment. With that shaky record of the government when it comes to investment in renewable energy, these changes should be seen in this context. Again I say that Labor particularly welcomes changes that would make it easier for the CEFC to invest in transmission, storage and reliability assets. These are sensible changes. They're a small step towards Labor's own policy to invest $20 billion to rebuild and modernise our outdated electricity transmission system, which is so important for reasons of grid reliability as we transition to renewable sources. But we won't support the bill as it's drafted, because of three fundamental concerns. The first goes to independence. This bill would undermine the independence of the CEFC and hand unprecedented powers to the minister. In our view, a fundamental reason for the success of the CEFC thus far has been its independence. That's how the previous Labor government designed it: to be at arm's length from the government of the day to make investment decisions based on their merits. The CEFC does not need political interference. The bill includes a provision which allows the minister to directly determine whether an investment is eligible for CEFC support or not. It will give the minister unprecedented powers in shaping CEFC investments. There's no explanation from the government as to why this is necessary. They haven't outlined the problem that they're trying to solve. They haven't pointed to a mischief or a shortcoming in the CEFC's current operation. They simply say they want more power. It's a fundamental concern of the opposition that this ministerial discretion and power will be provided to the minister of the day. I would have this concern about any minister. I would have this concern regardless of who the minister for climate change and energy was. I would oppose it on principle. But I must say I'm particularly concerned that it's this minister, with his track record of problems in his portfolio and of not accepting the fundamentals of climate change science. This embattled minister has in so many instances found himself having to answer questions about his performance. Whether it's the Sydney City Council, whether it's matters in his electorate or whether it's conflicts of interest, this minister has been very embattled. I certainly would not support this minister having those powers. But, as a matter of principle, I don't believe any minister should have those powers, including if there were a change of government. I myself would not want those powers. I would want the CEFC to do its job. It has a highly credentialed board and management structure. Very respected individuals have served on the board of the CEFC over the years—some of Australia's most senior businesspeople. They don't need ministerial interference. They don't need ministerial direction in relation to how the CEFC does its job. So our amendments will seek to reverse that change, which has been unexplained. I would suggest that it's unexplained because it's inexplicable, apart from being a power grab. The second issue relates to changes in the definition of 'low-emissions technology' to include gas. At the moment, there is no explicit prohibition on the power of the CEFC to fund projects related to gas; they simply don't meet the emissions standards that are required. Gas can't be regarded as a low-emissions technology. I understand the importance of gas to the Australian economy. I understand its importance and the role it will play for years to come in firming up the grid as we transition to more renewables. I understand its importance in providing feedstock to manufacturers for plastics across a whole range of manufactures. Gas will play a role in our energy supply for the foreseeable future as we transition to other mechanisms which can firm up the grid, like hydrogen. But that is not going to happen today or tomorrow, so we're going to need gas in the system. The question is not about the role of gas; the question is whether the CEFC should be providing a public subsidy for gas projects. The experts say the case for public funding of new gas power generation is weak. It's a well-established technology. The CEFC is designed to support emerging technologies and work that is at its earlier stages—and at various points along the continuum—which requires investment but can make a contribution. Gas, despite its importance to the system going forward, does not meet those criteria. If gas were a low-emission technology, the government wouldn't need an amendment; gas would pass the test that already exists for CEFC investments. There would be no need for legislative intervention by the government. The CEFC Board could simply approve and fund gas projects because gas is a low-emissions technology. The fact of the matter is that it is not. Gas does not meet the test of being a low-emissions technology simply because it isn't. It has a role to play and it's important, but it is not a low-emissions technology, and the government is engaging in sophistry by suggesting that it is. Changing the definition to allow investment in gas flies directly in the face of the CEFC's mission, which is to support renewables generation. We on this side of the House believe that the CEFC should remain a renewables and decarbonisation funding agency—not one that can be directed by the minister of the day to fund fossil fuels, as important as gas is. It should not be the remit of the CEFC to fund those projects, and our detailed amendments will reflect that. The third concern of the opposition goes to the bill's removal of the requirement that the CEFC investments make a positive return. I would have thought the government, which wraps itself in alleged fiscal responsibility, would want the CEFC to be making investments projected to give a positive return. It's been crucial to the success of the CEFC. Since its inception, the CEFC has returned $718 million to the Commonwealth. I suspect that's why the Prime Minister himself has referred to the CEFC as 'the world's most successful green bank', due not only to the investment projects it has created, the jobs it has created and the investments it has leveraged from the private sector but also due to the returns to the government. That is a good thing, and it beggars belief that the government would want to overturn that. Do they want the CEFC to make investments that don't provide a positive return? Are they encouraging that sort of investment by the CEFC? It's the only explanation one could reach. Again, our amendments will deal with that. We'll be moving amendments to this bill to protect the independence and financial integrity of the CEFC and to ensure that it remains focused on low-emissions technology. Before giving way to the honourable member for Groom, I move the second reading amendment which has been circulated in my name and which goes to the issues that I have outlined to the House: 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) notes the failure of the Government to adequately address energy policy uncertainty, undermining investment in the sector and the affordability, reliability and security of Australia's energy system; (2) further notes that this failure has undermined the economic recovery from the COVID-19 recession, as well as Australia's long-term economic development; and (3) calls on the Government to implement a national energy policy that will support the investment needed to modernise Australia's energy system and deliver affordable and reliable energy." I commend the second reading amendment to the House. I also commend the detailed amendments that I will make to the bill when it reaches the third reading stage and reiterate the position of the Labor Party that, if our amendments are accepted, we will vote for the bill willingly. If our amendments are not accepted by the government, we will not be voting for the bill. I am happy to yield to the member for Groom and wish him the best for his inaugural speech. I will leave my remarks there in order to facilitate the consideration of the second reading amendment. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 Is the amendment seconded? Dr Leigh BU8 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. Debate adjourned. BUSINESS 171 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 171 17:30 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell by leave—I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Groom making a statement immediately and that the Member speak without limitation of time. Question agreed to. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 Before I call the honourable member for Groom, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies. 17:31 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom I am honoured to represent the good people of Groom. It's a place of strong community values that is proud both of its ambitions for the future and of its history. My own family's history is but a small part of the great Australian journey, and I stand before you as both a proud citizen of modern Australia and a proud descendant of the pioneers whose labours laid the foundations of this nation. My father's ancestors arrived as Scottish farmers, who followed the promise of opportunity that called them out of Glasgow and out of Fife. They docked at Adelaide and made their way by horse and cart into northern New South Wales, eventually reaching the golden triangle between Inverell, Moree and North Star. Life wasn't always easy but it was good, and Australia has given us much. The Australian journey was entirely different for my mother's family. William Shaw arrived as a convict on the Third Fleet in 1791; Catherine Neal was transported some five years later, and I'm the product of their union, nine generations on. Another convict ancestor, Humphrey Gainey, was sent here much later, in 1830, following a rather unsuccessful stint as a highwayman in Cork. The Gaineys and the Shaws struggled to find their place in Australia, but, over time, duty called and they were ready to serve. My great-grandfather, John Hercules Robertson, was gassed in the First World War and, upon his return home, his lungs continued to painfully deteriorate. He lived just long enough to see both of his sons return safely home from the Second World War, and I think of what dark nights he must have spent, waiting for news of his boys. My grandfather's story is very much that of the men of his generation. Due to his injuries, Stuart Robertson returned from the war too late to receive the soldier settlement scheme and together with his wife, Hazel, who had served in the Australian Women's Army Service, had to start from nothing, having been prepared to give everything. But they never complained. With his own hands he built a jig to cast concrete blocks on Sundays, while the rest of the week he worked three jobs to save enough money to buy a plot of land. When he finished building his house, he turned his boundless energy to building the community of Warialda that he so loved, and I thank the member for Parkes for his own dedication to that beautiful town. For 25 years my grandfather was chief of the local fire brigade, volunteered with the Lions Club and was Santa Claus to a couple of generations of kids. When Hazel descended into dementia, he spent every breakfast, lunch and tea for 11 years by her side at the nursing home. He served his country, his community and his family with loyalty, good humour and kindness. He had a hard life but a good one, and he gave Australia much. What is shared amongst my family's stories, be it in finding here plenty or penury, is what makes Australia great; with hard work we can build something good within ourselves, and with service we can build something even better together. This nation has always understood the value of equality of opportunity and reward for effort—the foundation principles of our coalition government—which is why a Centre-Right coalition has been called into government by the Australian people for 68 of the last 98 years. Australia today is greater than it has ever been, with greater reward for effort and greater opportunities for all Australians. This country is full of family histories of service, of dedication, of hands heavy with the callouses earned under the slow labours of crafting this country. We come from varied beginnings but together we have built a nation that Australians are proud of. It is our responsibility to place into the next generation's hands the tools and the callouses they'll need to build our future. My greatest hope is that our nation will always be a place for people from every corner of the world to contribute and gain reward for their effort. My father-in-law's family fled Europe after the Second World War and came to Australia with not a pound in their pockets, not a word of English on their tongues. Many Australians will understand, having experienced that very situation. Alphonsus Vanderhorst was raised with a deep love for his new home and a desire to serve the nation that had taken him in. My wife and I were extremely proud when he recently retired after 49 years of service and support to the Australian Army, many of those spent at the Oakey Army Aviation Centre in my electorate. The seat of Groom nestles around the city of Toowoomba, Queensland's very own shining city on a hill. It was there that my wife was born and raised, and when it came time for us to settle down and raise our own family there was no easier decision to make. Encompassing towns and villages such as Pittsworth, Oakey, Highfields, Bowenville, Greenmount and Goombungee, Groom is characterised by its thriving agricultural industry and its beautiful, tree-lined suburbs. However, drive through our region and you will find we are much more than just farmland and feedlots. I've mentioned the Oakey barracks, with another barracks at Cabarlah, and we have a mine at Acland that at its peak supported 500 local jobs and I hope to see those good days return. Underpinning these heavy industries are Groom's manufacturing and transport industries that place our region as a strategic hub as we build Inland Rail. In Toowoomba Region health is the largest employer and our wonderful health professionals play such an important role in our city, with health care being one of the key reasons that so many people choose to move to Toowoomba. In education, again, our region plays the role of a hub, with an extraordinary array of excellent public and private schools servicing families from all across southern Queensland and northern New South Wales. Heritage Bank, Australia's largest customer owned bank, has its headquarters located in Toowoomba and our region greatly benefits from the support of our local financial industry. With such strong foundations in place you can see why the Toowoomba Region is a great place to come to, and it's with pride that we reflect upon the many success stories of those Australians who've chosen to make their home among us in more recent years. It's a joy to walk through Queens Park on a weekend afternoon and see the children from so many different cultural backgrounds playing together. The integration of the Yazidi and Somali communities in Toowoomba sets the benchmark for modern immigration, and if regional Australia is to thrive we need to learn from this experience. I recently received a note from a local resident, Mrs Bonita Cattell, that best describes how we work together in Groom. She writes: We met some (Yazidi) families in a park twelve months ago and have had them in our home a number of times. We went to an end of fast celebration in December where we met a young Yazidi (man) from Armidale. He said his parents were lonely in Toowoomba as they had not met many Australians. So we visited them two days later … and are having them in our home. We are in our seventies and our lives have been enriched by them. Mrs Cattell goes on to ask that I pass on her thanks to former Prime Minister Tony Abbott for the role he played in bringing these people to Australia. Well, for the first and the last time, I will dare to speak on behalf of Mr Abbott and say, 'No, Bonita, it is you who deserves the thanks.' The reason we work together so well in Groom is that we have a strong sense of our culture—we know who we are and what we are about. Our service clubs, religious organisations and community groups are committed to helping others. I know that my predecessor, Dr John McVeigh, felt very passionately on this point and I thank him for his service to our community. Toowoomba was and continues to be built by people who are driven to lead their communities, from the early pioneers to modern pioneers, like Clive Berghofer, John Russell, Gary Gardner, the Wagner family, and the many others who understand that we were not born to be shaped by government but, rather, that the future will be shaped by the hands of the people themselves. Groom has never lacked leadership and it is my privilege to serve beside the region's leaders of today. The political history of Groom tells us much about the contribution that conservatism has made to modern Australia. Our first federal member, William Groom, after whom the seat is now named, spoke on the role of the individual in shaping the nation and warned against the spread of socialism. In doing so, he gave word to the beliefs of those who valued a fair go. He understood that national growth could only be supported by government and not led by it and that it would be individual enterprise that our nation must be built on. He also believed in the value of community and that it was the duty of every person to lend a helping hand. A society's capacity to act upon its compassionate instincts is underlined by economic strength and individual freedoms. Littleton Groom carried on his father's place in parliament and pushed strongly for rail infrastructure to open up supply and distribution networks for Toowoomba's agricultural sector. Nearly a hundred years later, in the age of Inland Rail—a project that will arguably benefit the Toowoomba region more than most along its entire route—it's important to remember that this concept is not new, nor is it unproven. Littleton Groom believed in the power of nation-building infrastructure, and it's a belief that has passed on through every federal member for Groom since. I'll work hard to ensure that Inland Rail delivers every possible benefit to the people of the Toowoomba region. While delivering Inland Rail will keep our hands busy in the short term, we must look to the future, and fast passenger rail connecting Toowoomba to the rest of South-East Queensland is inevitable, with the question being not if but when, as the city continues to grow and prosper. Every member for Groom has stood up for a prosperous, fair and united Australia, and I will be no different. I'll work for a future that pays less attention to the unimportant differences between us and instead rewards good character and hard work. I'll work for an Australia that centres itself around the family. I'll work for an Australia that has opportunity for all and is strong enough to give a hand up to those who have fallen on hard times. I'll work for an Australia that continues the traditions and institutions that have made Western civilisation the greatest source of good known to man. These are the beliefs that make me a proud member of the Liberal National Party, and I hold them dearly. What unites us is an understanding that freedom and responsibility can only ever exist in the hands of an individual, an understanding that no amount of government intervention can stay the sweep of Adam Smith's invisible hand. I believe in equality of opportunity as best not only for the individual but also for the nation, as it allows for discrimination only on the basis of competence, ensuring our best people are given the greatest chance to do the most good. We pray that 2021 will be a very different year from 2020. I was not surprised to find that we ended 2020 with consumer confidence at a 10-year high, because this confidence has been noticeable in the conversations I've had with the people of Groom. Our people have confidence in Australia's ability to handle the pandemic, they have confidence in their community's ability to work together for a greater good and they have confidence in the Morrison government's plan to rebuild our economy. The people of Groom are optimistic about their future, and this is a very good thing for Australia, because we're a great contributor to the nation, with a high gross regional product. I represent an area where, if government makes an investment, it will get a return on that investment. I represent an area that is growing and wants to continue to grow. Gus Romero and Mark Cassidy, both owners of Harvey Norman franchises in my electorate, tell me they're excited about the current growth they see in Groom's property market. They know that, after you build a new home or after you renovate your home, the next thing you do is furnish it. In Highfields, the Avenues development sold 30 blocks in 14 days after the announcement of the HomeBuilder grant. This wasn't an injection of cash; it was an injection of confidence. I bring to the parliament a keen interest in foreign policy that has grown during my time overseas, in countries aligned to our values and not. I view Australia, more and more, as having a significant role to play in the world. We are a Western nation in all but geography, and our future success lies not in becoming more politically akin to our neighbours but in continuing to provide them with a unique proposition. We are a safe haven for their investment, a willing partner for their trade. The trajectory of this entire region bends towards Western ideals, and we have an important leadership role to play. We must always value our point of difference and fight to retain it. As a trading partner we have so much to offer our neighbours—we have an abundance of natural resources, great educational facilities and excellent agricultural products that we can deliver with high quality and high reliability. We seek trade partnerships in good faith and understand that a rising tide lifts all boats. I'm very proud of the contribution Groom has made to our nation's military efforts, and we have a long history. Toowoomba Grammar School's Army Cadet Unit predates the formation of the Australian Army itself and counts among its alumni the great ANZAC general Sir Harry Chauvel, who served with such distinction in Gallipoli and the Middle East. I'm also very proud of the contribution that the defence industry makes to our local economy and our local community. Toowoomba is a great place to expand our defence facilities, as we have room to grow, infrastructure in place and longstanding bonds of friendship with the defence community. I take this opportunity to bring to the House's attention the goodwill that our defence community generates not just at home but internationally. During last year's bushfires, the Republic of Singapore Air Force contributed two Chinook helicopters, which are based at Oakey, to support relief efforts carried out by the Royal Australian Air Force. Our defence community not only are there to protect us in times of trouble but also serve as terrific ambassadors for us on the international stage. Long may Australia's defence community call Groom home. As a mining engineer, I've seen both good and bad mining around the world, and Australia should be very proud of the high standard of mining practices that take place within our borders. The men and women who go to work in Australia's pits and portals are amongst our best workers, and, as a project manager, it was always such a privilege and an honour to lead my crews into their daily work. Australian miners operate under the world's best quality, safety and environmental standards while still presenting a highly profitable investment option. In part this is due to our readiness to champion new technologies and push the development of future technologies. Prior to entering politics, I led research in the mining industry with a cooperative research centre. The new technologies that have been advanced by that organisation have been enthusiastically supported by the industry with companies such as Hatch and Orica committing to commercialise research undertaken there. Big miners such as BHP Billiton, Newcrest and Anglo American have partnered with CRC ORE because they know that these Australian technologies have the power to reduce both water and energy consumption thus reducing the cost and the carbon footprint of their operations. This is an example of government accelerating the process of technology uptake by bringing together researchers with end users in an environment that demands performance and cost efficiency. We cannot underestimate the role that technology will play in addressing the future challenges faced by government, industry and households alike. At the University of Southern Queensland, Groom's future as not just a regional but a national technology centre is being realised. USQ is building sovereign defence and space capability in advanced manufacturing, hypersonics, rocketry and astrophysics. In this context, 'building sovereign capability' is another way of saying 'return on investment', and this is a great example of an Australian university proudly contributing to Australia's national interests. The Darling Downs Health Service has plans for a new state-of-the-art hospital in Toowoomba that will not only cater for the region's growing needs but will provide access to the latest medical technologies and incorporate expanded teaching and research facilities. Obadare Group received an accelerating commercialisation grant from this government and have turned themselves into Australia's only API-licensed drill rig producer, now establishing the Toowoomba region as a service centre for the oil and gas industry—again, more investment, more return. Local builder, Geoff Gibson, is using Earth Friendly Concrete, a product researched, developed and commercialised in Toowoomba by Wagners, that reduces the embodied carbon of concrete by up to 80 per cent. This product is now being used in London on the biggest infrastructure project in Europe, HS2, and is another example of technology driving Toowoomba's future. In Groom, we're unafraid to push into the future of energy production with a truly agnostic approach having a thermal coalmine, two solar farms and a gas-fired power station. We happily embrace opportunity and are ready to face the challenges that lie ahead. I'm humbled to be standing here today and I'm aware of the incredible opportunity that I have been afforded, to focus my energies solely on the doing of good for my nation; there are many people to thank for that. To the Liberal National Party, its members across the state and particularly the Groom FDC and the excellent SECs of Toowoomba North, Toowoomba South and Condamine, I owe a debt of service. To Cynthia Hardy, John Martlew, Ben Ready and all the volunteers who stood out on prepoll and election day, I say thank you. Last year, the member for Lingiari spoke movingly on the impact that his political career had on his family, and, although we sit on opposite sides of the chamber and at opposite ends of our careers, his words formed in me a chord that I would like here to strike. I want to thank my parents, Allen and Barbara, for inspiring me to ask for more out of life. As a boy and a young man, I had the pleasure of working side by side with my father, labouring under the hot Queensland sun; no-one has ever asked more of me nor shown me more the extent to which the mind can overcome the limitations of the body. My mother has been the living embodiment of the idea that 'life is good', and what stores I have of resilience and humility I get from her. Mum, I remember, as a boy, watching you working as a Hansard reporter down here in this very chamber. I hope you like the view from the gallery as much as I did. To my beautiful wife, Louise, your love, the persistence of your honesty and your belief in what we can achieve together continues to surprise and overwhelm me. This, as with every other step we've taken around the world, is a shared journey; we are here together. To my beautiful children, Adeline, Everard and Claude, I love you and I'm proud of you. I give you the same challenge that my father laid upon me: that is, it is your responsibility to take a step further in life than I have. I trust you with that. There are some people that I have long called friends, that I now get to call colleagues, and I wish to thank them for all their help and support. Senator Rennick, you have been a good friend and a great mate. Senator Stoker, I thank you for always supporting me. I thank you and Adam for helping Louise and I make the decision to stand for Groom, and I thank you for being a role model to my daughter. Sadly, I do not have the chance to be a colleague to former Senator Barry O'Sullivan, but I treasure his friendship and guidance all the same. Barry keeps his best deeds private and makes his rougher edges public in complete opposition and perhaps stubborn defiance to the trends of the day. I thank him and Kristina for their support. I thank Sam Catalano for setting us both the challenge on the day of our graduation of building 'exceptional careers'. Sam, we've always held each other to account, together meeting both success and failure as the imposters they are. To my other great mate in the UK, Oliver Richbell, Tangles, you may not know it but it was in our many conversations at the Jamaica Wine House and on the late train to Bedford that my political convictions were forming. You have played a bigger part than you know. I want to thank the teachers I had at Ipswich Grammar School—Mike Murray and Maggie Chay in particular. Mike joins us in the gallery. I recall the memory of two fine educators who did the most to shape my young life, Mr Ray Swan and Mr Dick Rima. Finally I thank Wendy Armstrong, Trevor Watts, Fred Geldart and Bill O'Chee for their kind care and counsel. The LNP works best when it recognises itself as a grassroots volunteer organisation. There have been hundreds of people who have stood up for me, but I want to mention the small handful of very young party members who got behind me from the moment I put my hand up for preselection. They carried no weight in the party and they promised no influence; they only demanded that I always remain true to myself. Doug Allen, Justin McGovern, Ben Apsey and Jeremy Bazley, you are the future of the LNP. Our party and our nation depend upon constant renewal of ideas and reaffirmation of beliefs. Doug, I look forward to your future contributions. Today, under the strong leadership of Scott Morrison, we are bringing together Australia's stories—those of our modern nation and those of what was—and we are creating something even better as we continue the great Australian journey. I leave you with the epigraph to On Our Selection written by Groom's own Steele Rudd: PIONEERS OF AUSTRALIA! To You "Who Gave Our Country Birth;" to the memory of You whose names, whose giant enterprise, whose deeds of fortitude and daring were never engraved on tablet or tombstone; to You who strove through the silences of the Bush-lands and made them ours; to You who delved and toiled in loneliness through the years that have faded away; to You who have no place in the history of our Country so far as it is yet written; to You who have done MOST for this Land; to You for whom few, in the march of settlement, in the turmoil of busy city life, now appear to care; and to you particularly, GOOD OLD DAD … Thank you. BILLS 176 BILLS Aged Care Legislation Amendment (Serious Incident Response Scheme and Other Measures) Bill 2020 176

Aged Care Legislation Amendment (Serious Incident Response Scheme and Other Measures) Bill 2020

Returned from Senate 176 Royal Commissions Amendment (Confidentiality Protections) Bill 2020 176

Royal Commissions Amendment (Confidentiality Protections) Bill 2020

First Reading 176 Second Reading 176 17:56 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell I move: That the second reading be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The government is moving for this message to be made an order of the day for the next sitting, not be dealt with today, as the government does not support this bill, the Royal Commissions Amendment (Confidentiality Protections) Bill 2020, which has passed in the other place. The government agrees this is a significant issue and it is important to ensure that people with disability can engage and fully take part in this nationally significant inquiry. The government has listened to people with disability, their families and carers, and the broader public about the importance of ensuring that people have the confidence to come forward and tell their story. While there are extensive protections after a royal commission has ended, we understand that there may be some concerns about the willingness of some to come forward. Of course we want people to come forward, but we cannot support the Greens bill today, as it does not fully capture what is needed for this particular royal commission. On 20 October 2020, the government announced it would introduce measures to protect the confidentiality of information given to this royal commission. We've been carefully considering the full implications of these protections on criminal prosecutions and civil proceedings, and the government's bill will be sensitive to the various ways in which people have given information to the royal commission. The government intends to bring forward its bill in the coming weeks. There are issues with the bill, which I will briefly outline. There are several problems with the Greens bill. First, the bill appears to try to replicate section 60N of the Royal Commissions Act, which protects information if the commission has indicated that the information would be treated as confidential after the inquiry ends. However, this may be problematic as the disability royal commission has said publicly that some information may not be confidential. It's important that the legislation protects information which was not provided on an understanding of confidentiality by the commission. Second, the Greens bill does not attempt to identify the types of sensitive information caught by this provision. Item 600 of the Greens bill appears to try and replicate section 60N of the act but has removed the description of the types of information the section is intended to apply to. By contrast the government's bill will provide comprehensive protections to appropriate categories of information, for example in relation to the child abuse royal commission protections where applied to the accounts of an actual person's experiences of child sexual abuse and also accounts of what happened to other people. Unlike the Greens bill, the government's bill also includes other amendments to the Royal Commissions Act 1902 sought by the commission's chair—amendments to streamline information-sharing between Commonwealth royal commissions and concurrent state royal commissions, and amendments to address practical issues raised by the chair, including the issue of non-publication orders. This is important as they often need to be made in urgent circumstances to protect a person's identity and they currently need to be made by a number of commissioners together, despite them being geographically located in different states and territories. With that, I reiterate to the House that the government is moving for this message to be made an order of the day for the next sitting, not be dealt with today, as we do not support this bill. 17:59 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words— "the Bill be considered immediately". There is a loophole that has been open since November 2019 that is hampering the work of the disability royal commission and that is stopping people having the confidence to come and tell their stories. The government has known about this loophole since it was first raised by the commissioner. Then, in this parliament, Senator Steele-John took the matter to the government in February last year and said, 'There is a problem with the legislation.' The problem with the legislation that the royal commission itself has identified is this: there is a real question mark, in many instances, over whether evidence that someone gives or comments that someone makes or information that someone provides to the commission remains confidential when the commission concludes its work. You only have to think about this for a couple of minutes to understand why this would make some people—people who have already been through a lot; more than any of us should have to go through—think twice before coming to give their stories. You can understand why it led the commissioner and the royal commission, in its recent report, to say, 'This question around confidentiality is getting in the way of us doing our work.' So we brought it to the government's attention. The royal commission raised it in 2019. We brought it to the government's attention back in February 2020 and said, 'You need to introduce a bill to fix this.' That was a year ago. A year ago we put this to the government, and the government said, 'Yes, we accept it's a problem.' Great, you accept it's a problem. It's a problem that is hurting people with a disability who want the confidence to tell their story. It's a problem that the commissioner says is affecting the commission's ability to do its work. The government has known this for over a year and has admitted it is a problem. We kept waiting and waiting and waiting for the government to bring in a bill to fix it, and it won't do it. The government refuses to do it. It's either laziness, malice or a distinct lack of care. Whatever the excuse is, it is inexcusable. The government can rush into this place legislation that takes away people's rights at work and say, 'It's urgent; we've got to deal with it.' But, when they've had over a year to close a loophole in one of the most important royal commissions we have had for some time, they can't get around to doing it. So we have taken action. We have taken action to close the loophole. We have taken action and brought into the Senate a bill that will close the loophole. With the support of the Labour Party and the crossbench working together, that bill got through the Senate. That doesn't happen every day. It does not happen every day that we sit here in this chamber and deal with a bill that has majority support in the Senate. Think about the varying interests represented in the Senate. Think about what it takes to get them all lined up against the government. The government has to have seriously stuffed up for the whole Senate to join together and say, 'You have refused to close this loophole for a year with no good reason, so we are doing it for you.' The government comes in here today and says, 'No, we can't consider it immediately because—just take it from us—we've got a bill in the works.' Well, that's what you said back in October, government. When we introduced this bill and brought it to the Senate in October you said: 'No, we can't support it now, because we've got our own bill. It's coming. Just you wait.' We are here in February 2020, a year after we raised it with the government, and there is still no bill. I guess it shouldn't surprise us, because that's exactly what the government have done when it comes to establishing an independent anticorruption commission. They said, 'Oh, no, we cannot possibly deal with a bill that has passed the Senate and got support from the Senate, because we've got our own.' It shouldn't have surprised us. But we did hold out hope that, even if they wouldn't listen to the Greens, they would at least listen to the royal commission. The Second progress report of the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability makes it clear that the limitations of the confidentiality provisions are impinging on people's willingness to speak with the commission and affecting the scope of the commission's work. An entire section of this progress report is devoted to confidentiality protections, or the lack thereof, and the challenges this situation presents to the important work of the commission. You can only be left with the conclusion that, if they won't bring a bill in when they are being asked to fix a problem and close a loophole, the government are perhaps deliberately trying to undermine the work of the commission. They have had over a year to bring in a bill that deals with a technical matter about confidentiality. All of the words from the government about supporting the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability evaporate when you understand that they are not giving the commission the tools to do its job, and one is invited to form the conclusion that they are doing it deliberately. Why else would you sit on your hands for more than a year? Maybe it's laziness, or maybe it's priorities—maybe it's more important to cut people's rights at work than it is to give people with a disability the right to go and tell their story. We have had ample opportunity during the course of a year, in what is the longest and most expensive royal commission in Australia's history, to tidy up this loophole and to help the commission do its work, and the government has refused to act. When this bill was being debated in the Senate today, members of the government were almost embarrassed to get up and make their contributions. They were falling over themselves to say, 'We not only support the commission; we understand this is a problem and we really hope it's going to be fixed.' They are right to be embarrassed. The people with responsibility have dragged their heels for over a year, and they cannot come up with a single good excuse as to why it has taken this long, other than that it is supposedly complicated. Well, that's why you've got a department. That's why you've got the resources of government at your disposal—to deal with things that actually aren't that complicated. We all know what the problem is. The royal commission has spelt it out in detail. Bring in a bill to fix it. I heard those embarrassed members of the government backbench saying today, 'Look, just take it on trust that this problem will be fixed by the time the commission concludes.' Has anyone else ever been asked to give information or evidence to a royal commission, under circumstances where they think it's confidential, to just be told, 'Oh, no, it might not be confidential now, but trust us and we'll fix it up by the end'? No-one has ever been asked to appear before a royal commission or to provide information to a royal commission on the basis of an IOU from the government that they'll fix it up before the commission ends. No! And no-one should be asked to do it for this critical royal commission either. I say to the government: we've heard this before. We've heard your excuses before, over and over again—'Don't worry, a bill is in the works.' Well, it is now at the point where the royal commission itself is pleading in its interim report to fix this problem. You know, government, that this is hampering the commission's ability to do its work. You know that it's inhibiting people from feeling the confidence they need to come and tell their stories, at a time when they need everyone supporting them, including the government and the force of law. I hope the government reconsiders. It tells you something when the whole political array of the Senate lines up together to say, 'Fix this loophole.' Bills like this don't come very often, and, when they do, it's a sign the government has failed to do its job. The government should support this amendment, debate the bill and pass it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Is the amendment seconded? 18:09 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I rise to second this most important amendment by the member for Melbourne. The Royal Commissions Amendment (Confidentiality Protections) Bill 2020 would amend the Royal Commissions Act 1902 and make consequential amendments to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 to ensure ongoing confidentiality protections for people seeking to give evidence to the disability royal commission. Just to explain to Australians who are listening to this parliamentary debate and to those in the media who are curious why the government is opposing this, the status quo is that there's a disability royal commission underway, one which I called for with Labor in 2007 and one which the Greens have been on the record as supporting for a very long time. The federal government did move to set up a disability royal commission in 2019 I think or at the end of 2018. This royal commission is underway, and it's heard horrific stories. Currently, the process is that evidence which is received in private sessions conducted by the disability royal commission is guaranteed to remain confidential after the commission's work is done; however—and this is where the need for these amendments, supported by the Senate, remarkably, comes into play—the same privacy protections do not apply where evidence or information was received by the commission outside of private session. Not all evidence is given in private session; some evidence is given outside of private session. Prior to the evidence or information being given, the commission indicated to the person providing the evidence or information that it would be treated as confidential, so, even if the commission said they'd treat it as private, that can't be enforced. In fact, even after it was received by the commission, the material was treated as confidential, but the privacy protections do not apply. So this is an important bill. We're fixing up something which should be fixed up. Most significantly, even though the government demonstrated some recalcitrance, to which I'll return, the majority of the Senate, one of the two houses of the Australian parliament, passed this bill. Bizarrely, although the coalition oppose this bill and they were in the minority in the Senate voting against it, they've actually agreed with what the bill proposes. For Australians driving home or listening to this debate, I'll repeat that. There is a flaw in the disability royal commission. The flaw has been pointed out. The Senate has, by a majority, voted to rectify the flaws, and we seek to now do that in the lower house, but the coalition said, 'Yes, you're right: there are flaws. But no, we will not vote for it.' This is why people hate Australian politics! This is game playing at its most extreme. It is up to the coalition and the backbench of the coalition to explain why they are holding a position which is so bendable, so rubbery that on the one hand they think it should be fixed but on the other hand they don't think they should fix it now. The position of the coalition would not be out of place in the famous illustrated Indian Sanskrit text—this Australian government is so contorted. In fact, the Attorney-General put out a media release in October of last year and he entitled it 'Legislative reforms to provide greater privacy protections for participants in disability royal commission'. In it, the government pledged to make amendments to the Royal Commissions Act, which this bill before the House does today, to provide the confidentiality of information given to this nationally significant inquiry. So the Attorney-General has said that they want to have a bill which does what we're doing today, but they can't actually vote for it. The reason why this has come about is the chair of the royal commission, the Honourable Ronald Sackville, AO, QC, requested these amendments which we're putting up. So not only has the government agreed there's a flaw, not only have the opposition and the crossbenchers recognised there is a flaw, but it's on the basis of the chair of the royal commission, who the government appointed to do the work. He's said people with disability should get the reassurance their information will be protected during the life of the royal commission and after it's concluded its work. So the Attorney-General, when he was taking his sensible pill, said he's instructed his department 'to work swiftly on the amendments.' Well, they certainly haven't won any medals for swiftness. In fact, the government's been so plodding and ponderous on this that others have had to step into the breach, hence this bill. Disability advocates have argued persuasively that to maintain the integrity of the royal commission people should have their privacy protected. The amendments in this bill have been sought by disability advocates and sought by the chair of the disability royal commission. In fact, it is impossible to find anyone who doesn't agree with the amendments. But this is the stupidity of Australian politics at this point in time. The coalition know our amendments are right, they just cannot vote for them. I say again: they know this is correct, they just won't vote for it. They privately say it's correct. Everyone says this is correct. But we are stuck in this very unusual situation. So, despite the Morrison government's aversion to following through on its agenda and actually doing what it says it'll do, are the House of Reps coalition members really going to vote against legislation their own Attorney-General said should be swiftly enacted, the royal commission said should be enacted, disability advocates said should be enacted and the Senate said should be enacted? The reason why they oppose it, though—and this really needs to be explored—is that this is essentially their own plan. The unkind would call this an act of bastardry. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. I'll leave it to the people of Australia to judge this. But, whatever you call this act, it is certainly strange and surreal. They're saying to Australians with disability, 'We'll get around to giving you a royal commission where your privacy is protected but on our terms and only on our time line.' They're simply saying, 'Too bad, so sad; we can't do this.' This is actually ridiculous. Members of the government might say, 'If the opposition and the Greens want to do it, we must vote against it.' That's what people hate about Australian politics. Disability organisations raised this privacy problem 300 days ago, in May 2020. Yet we're still here and we're still waiting—waiting for people with disability just to be able to have the protections of privacy in the royal commission which this government's called. The government have consistently shown a disinterest in acting on things, and this is what I want to talk about in the remaining few minutes of this presentation on this amendment. People with disability, and carers, have worked this government out: they're just not interested—for whatever reason. This is a case where the government have said, 'Yes, we know it should change, but, because someone else is saying it, we won't do it.' This is arrogance. This is hubris. This is conceited behaviour. This is pompous behaviour. This is haughty. This is a government with an exaggerated sense of their own infallibility. But we've seen this throughout the handling of the disability portfolio and government services. We've had the poor old head of the National Disability Insurance Agency declare, in year eight of this government, that they're going to go back to basics for the NDIS. What have you been doing for the last eight years? Now we're paying senior public servants and ministers to go back to basics, but what have you been doing for the last eight years? We've got the robodebt issue, which was pointed out by advocates as being a problem for years. I had the temerity to write an article in a newspaper saying it was probably an illegal scheme more than a year ago—but this government has to wait till the Dawe report and its own ministers and senior public servants will be dragged to give evidence to finally settle. This is an out-of-touch government. We've already celebrated the third birthday of Labor's call to set up a national anti-corruption commission and this government won't do it. They spent a year and a half fighting the advocates once it was absolutely established beyond doubt that robodebt was illegal—and they wasted hundreds of millions of dollars more in fighting the claim. We've got the disability support pensioners, who were neglected during the COVID crisis. The government's ultimate salt on the wound of its treatment of disability and carers is to give us Stuart Robert as the minister for that area, showing what the government really thinks of the portfolio. But all issues aside—that laundry list of government neglect and disinterest—this bill should be supported because there is a flaw in the ability of people to have privacy when they give evidence in a royal commission. The flaw has been spotted and identified. The Attorney-General said he wanted swift action. Disability advocates have said this is a terrible flaw. The chairman of the royal commission, the Hon. Ronald Sackville, has said something needs to be done about this. And yet, like the good old troops that they are, the coalition lions on the backbench led by the donkeys on the frontbench are going to march into the guns of voting on something which is errantly stupid. There is no argument. What the government spinners say behind lines is: 'Oh well, the royal commissioner can do this anyway. This is all a fuss about nothing.' Well, if it was a fuss about nothing, why would the chairman of the royal commission be raising it? If it was a fuss about nothing, why did the Attorney-General say to act swiftly? I would just say to coalition members that blind obedience to stupid orders isn't always the wisest course of action for your constituents. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D The original question was that this motion be agreed to. To this the honourable member for Melbourne has moved an amendment. The question now is that the amendment be disagreed to. A division having been called and the bells being rung— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D To Senator Steele-John: thank you very much for joining us here in the chamber. During the division, would you mind coming to sit near the advisers' box, please, just to allow members to come in. Thank you. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that the motion be agreed to. To this the honourable member for Melbourne has moved an amendment. The question now is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Melbourne be disagreed to.

The House divided. [18:24]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Chester, D Christensen, GR Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hawke, AG Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Laming, A Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 59 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Champion, ND Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Keogh, MJ King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Original question agreed to.

 Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020 181

Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020

Second Reading 181 18:29 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for McMahon has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question. 18:29 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins The world economy is transitioning to a zero net carbon future in a bid to protect future generations from the effects of climate change. Countries with the strongest ambitions in this transition are relying on more renewables and other emerging technologies, such as hydrogen, to get there. As many of us know, Australia has a long and complicated energy history, but it is now emerging at the forefront of renewable technology investment under the leadership of the Morrison government. Alongside its commitment to renewable energy, the Morrison government is committed to encouraging investment to support the reliability of the electricity grid and improve affordability for energy users. On 30 October 2019, the Morrison government announced the introduction of a new $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund. This fund, to be administered by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, will support investments in new energy generation, storage and transmission, and investments in infrastructure, including eligible projects short-listed under the Underwriting New Generation Investments program. The Grid Reliability Fund will unlock private sector investment for clean energy projects. The fund will draw on the energy and financial markets' expertise of the CEFC to make further investments in reliable, clean energy technologies. The benefits of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020 are, ultimately, threefold. Firstly, it will secure the reliability of the grid. A reliable electricity supply that keeps the lights on is essential for Australian households and businesses. With an anticipated doubling of demand in our electricity sector, our energy mix will require an increase in energy generation that can deliver when customers need it. Providing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation with an additional $1 billion will benefit energy market participants by providing a trusted counterparty for grid reliability investments, allowing the government to crowd in private sector involvement and to leverage its finance. Secondly, this bill will put downward pressure on prices. It is not enough just to keep the lights on; these lights must also be affordable. This can be achieved by shaking up the energy market and making way for new players. As Liberals, we know that competition is good for consumers. Projects supported by the CEFC and the new generation investment program will also address the concentration of energy generation asset ownership by improving access for new and smaller participants in the market. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found that these small players often struggle to secure necessary finance due to large customers being unwilling to enter long-term offtake agreements. Additional support for these businesses will put downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices by increasing competition amongst generators. This is great news for Australian businesses and for Australian households. Thirdly, this bill supports Australia's growing appetite for renewable energy. In 2019, Australia's investment per person in renewable energy was greater than countries such as the United States, Japan and Britain. That's no surprise. We are a large continent with lots of resources, when it comes to wind and sun. Consumers in Australia have got behind this. More than 2.2 million Australians have rooftop solar panels—the highest uptake anywhere in the world. This is, indeed, good news. As a smart country with a willing citizenry, we are poised to identify new economic challenges and opportunities, particularly for technologies that provide storage and backup to the electricity, industry and transport sectors. This bill supports just that. The Grid Reliability Fund will also support the government's commitment to the Underwriting New Generation Investments program to support eligible and viable projects that are within the CEFC's investment mandate. The bill will not change the CEFC's ability to make individual investment decisions independent of government. Gradually, coal-fired generators will leave the market to make way for new and innovative sources of energy generation. Many major energy companies are already making this energy transition. They will look to new flexible and dispatchable resources, such as pumped hydro and large-scale battery storage. However, as this transition takes place, gas will remain critical in its role in stabilising the grid, as has been identified by Australia's former Chief Scientist and chair of the Independent Review into the Future Security of the National Electricity Market, Dr Alan Finkel, a constituent of Higgins. This will allow the integration of renewable energies without compromising reliability and cost. In fact, in Dr Finkel's address to the National Press Club in February last year as Chief Scientist, he outlined the orderly transition to the 'electric planet', as he calls it, and that natural gas will play a critical role in that transition. Around the globe, many nations are using national gas as a stable, cheap and low-emission electricity supply. Indeed, on home turf, South Australia has shifted from coal to an energy mix of solar and wind that sits at around 51 per cent. But, as we all know, when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining, natural gas supply stabilises the electricity supply in South Australia. We truly are at the dawn of a new and thriving industry, and, with government support from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, we will unlock these industries and support existing companies to shift to more renewable products and practices and to help new and emerging companies to enter the market. Last year, I joined some of my parliamentary colleagues and visited the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, often referred to as ARENA. Through ARENA, ActewAGL has received $2.4 million in funding to demonstrate vehicle-to-grid services in Australia. This is very exciting technology. It's still in the research phase but vehicle-to-grid technology is, basically, a battery on wheels that allows electric vehicles to discharge electricity back to the grid or even provide services to improve grid security. If this is to come to fruition, this project will be the first time that a fleet of vehicles using bidirectional charges will supply the grid. It's hard to imagine, but it's talking about converting our fleet of cars on the road to a virtual power plant on the move. This, essentially, means that, in the future, every time we get behind the wheel of an electric vehicle, we'll be adding power back into the grid. This means lower emissions and better electricity security. This is certainly just one step on the journey to creating an emissions-free country, but this is an example of Australian home-grown technology leading the way and something that we as a country should be enormously proud of. The Morrison government understands that to reach future targets and reduce overall emissions we need to set out a clear pathway for business to thrive, and we are doing this through innovation and technology, not taxes. This is being done through the national Technology Investment Roadmap, a landmark paper that will drive investment in low-emission technology to strengthen our economy and support jobs and businesses. This will become more and more important as we start on the road to economic recovery from COVID-19. This road map will prioritise Australian government investments in new and developing technologies. Deploying the right technology when and where it is needed will allow Australian industry to capture these new opportunities. The road map will focus on some key points. These include developing technologies to support job growth, backing new industries to help regional communities and local economies to prosper, putting Australia at the forefront of research and development, and maintaining our strong track record of reducing global emissions. Australia's climate action agenda is practical and it's clear-sighted, but it's driven by science and technology. It's driven by a clear understanding that science has come to our aid at many other times in a crisis and it will come to our aid again. There is enormous potential in technologies like hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, soil carbon sequestration, biofuels and resources and energy exports to reduce emissions whilst strengthening our economy. We will focus on technologies where we have a competitive advantage, in partnership with the private sector and like-minded countries. The Morrison government knows that a shift from our reliance on coal will not happen overnight. The road map outlines key technology opportunities for Australia in the short, medium and long term. In the short term, investment will be key. This will set a strong foundation for a future of lower emissions. In the medium term, energy storage and infrastructure will mean we are set for the future. A shift to electric vehicles will also become tangible, as costs come down as more competitors enter the market. This is about a free-market approach to the EV. Finally, in the long term, we will reach a stage where we are global players in low-emission resource exporting. As Dr Alan Finkel said in his National Press Club speech, and is often prone to say, it's about shipping sunshine as an export. Business and industry will be poised to move operations like manufacturing to more carbon-neutral practices—there's even a possibility of investing in the development of small modular reactors or molten salt reactors. Indeed, small modular nuclear reactors, at half the construction cost of today's reactors, have been identified as a focus for US president Joe Biden's new climate tech R&D agency, ARPA-C. In contrast, those opposite have dismissed nuclear energy as a fantasy. If we are going to get to a zero net carbon future, why have one arm tied behind our back? Last year the government released its first annual Low Emissions Technology Statement, and this is a key milestone of the road-map process—it's the first in Australia's history. It identified the following priority stretch goals, and these are important because they provide a pragmatic way to understand how technology will underpin the transition. The first of those five stretch goals is clean hydrogen at under $2 per kilogram. The second is energy storage electricity for firming at under $100 per megawatt hour. The third is low-carbon materials, including low-emission steel production at under $900 per tonne and low-emission aluminium at under $2,700 per tonne. The fourth is carbon dioxide compression, hubs transport and storage at under $20 per tonne of CO2, and the fifth, which is great for farmers, is soil carbon measurement at under $3 per hectare per year. These are all pragmatic ambitions for our country to drive jobs, help our economy and get us to a clean and green future. It's an incredibly exciting time to witness and be part of the new generation of energy production in Australia. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation will continue to be at the forefront of encouraging investment innovation and bravery within the renewables space. As a scientist who believes in technology and innovation, I commend this bill to the House. 18:42 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I rise to speak on the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020. I do so echoing the position of the member for McMahon and following the contribution of the member for Higgins. I know there are others across the aisle who are receiving a lot of heat from their electorate and a lot of demands to be a part of some of the solutions around climate change and lowering our emissions, but the reason why they have no credibility and why the small group of MPs on the other side of the House who dress themselves up in modernity are so uncomfortable is that they keep bowling up bills like this. I'm going to go through this bill and go through the amendments that the Labor Party is going to put forward, and I'm going to reiterate the point that, if the Labor Party is unsuccessful in getting our amendments through this place and through the Senate, we will not be supporting the bill. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation was a creation of the Gillard government—a proud legacy of the Gillard government—and it was designed, as you may guess, to finance clean energy. It got this fancy name because it was really designed to boost renewables and low-emission technologies in Australia. The other thing it was meant to do was to do this in a way that made money, in a way that was economically viable. Its projects were to stand up with the support of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation in a way such that the corporation wouldn't just be expending but would also be getting a return on investment. This bill that is before the House goes to the very fabric of what the Clean Energy Finance Corporation was all about. This bill contains amendments to make it so that it doesn't invest in just clean energy or low-emission technology, and it does it in a way that tries to remove some of the financial requisites in order to fund projects. They want to turn the Clean Energy Finance Corporation into the 'not such good investment on any sort of technology' corporation. They want to take the 'clean energy' and the 'finance' out of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. It would be laughable if it weren't so shocking. It is clear why this small group of so-called modern Liberals are so uncomfortable with their position on climate change; it's because the government keeps bowling up bills like this. The first thing to point out is that, since the corporation's inception, the federal government—the coalition—have, at every stage, tried to undermine the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. They have attacked it at every opportunity, and this is just the latest iteration. The first thing we are opposing in this bill is the provision relating to ministerial power. This bill seeks to introduce provisions that mean that, instead of the corporation having to make investment decisions based on factors like whether or not a project involves clean energy or is financially viable, the minister will have the power to supersede the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. We didn't hear anything from the member for Higgins about the ministerial power amendments in this bill, and I'm sure we're not going to hear anything from subsequent speakers about why it's such a good idea to give the current Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction power to overrule and intercept the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. We have seen time and time again why this government can't be trusted to manage the taxpayer funds of Australia. We saw the sports rorts saga where, instead of funding eligible sporting clubs, ministers intervened and funded clubs based on where they fit in the marginal seat spreadsheet, in collaboration with the Prime Minister's office. We've seen this minister for energy be far more distracted with interventions and downloads from the City of Sydney website, creating wars with Clover Moore. Most recently, we've seen the Minister for Home Affairs use his ministerial discretion on the Safer Communities Fund—the fund that is literally designed to protect our vulnerable communities. This is something I have a lot of experience with, having been involved in the design and also the rollout of some of the iterations of this program and having some of the vulnerable communities in my electorate. These are communities that are deemed at risk not by the whim of a minister but by our policing agencies and by our intelligence and security agencies. Instead of funding the eligible projects under that program, ministerial intervention resulted in the current Minister for Home Affairs investing in projects based on the seat's marginality. If a seat can be the basis on which a minister makes a decision, who knows what sort of ministerial intervention there will be in regard to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation! I think that one of the biggest indications is the fact that this government wants to insert gas into the Clean Energy Finance Corporation capable technologies. I absolutely reiterate the words from the member for McMahon: gas has a role. It is a feature. Those who work in our gas production and gas pipelines are good and great Australians who work hard, contribute to our economy and do noble work. But what we're talking about here is whether or not the Clean Energy Finance Corporation should invest in technology that isn't clean or low emissions technology. It's a fact of science that gas is not a low emissions technology; it is an emissions intensive technology. While it still has a role to play in our economy for the foreseeable future, it is a fact that it shouldn't be underwritten by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. We will move an amendment to say that the ministers should not be able to intercept the decision-making of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and that this is a body that should be independent from government and should be making decisions based on strict criteria around whether or not it achieves low-emissions standards. We, on this side of the House, believe that gas should not be a part of that. The final amendment really grinds my gears. To be honest, I think we all expected this government to attack the 'clean energy' part of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation—that would be true to form—but the finance bit really tells you a little bit about where this government is at. Not only are they wanting to tackle the clean energy bit and take the 'clean energy' bit out of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation but they want to soften and lower the financial requirements around positive returns from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. Let me get this straight: they want to make a reform to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation by taking out the standards around clean energy and they want to do it in order to make it so that it doesn't get proper returns on investment. You couldn't make two more terrible changes to an act that is literally designed to do the exact opposite. The finance corporation is named in a way that is designed to show what it's all about, and this government wants to change it. They want to remove the 'clean' bit, the 'energy' bit and the 'finance' bit. They're leaving 'corporation' though—thank goodness! Or maybe they're not; who knows? We, on this side of the House, say that the Clean Energy Finance Corporation should stick to its original principles as set out by the Gillard Labor government. It is a fund of government to help drive new and exciting technologies that are going to create jobs. We know that tackling climate change, taking action on climate change, is going to create jobs in this country. The new industries that are going to power Australia and help us develop into the next century are going to be jobs from the moving and low-emission technology that we are talking about today. What this government wants to do—and what will be the legacy of this government—is remove the requirements around clean energy and remove the requirements around the financial return in a way that gives the minister responsibility on the decisions. Well, it's hardly surprising that the minister wants those things taken out for his decisions. He wants to make decisions that result in bad financial outcomes and that don't invest in clean energy. That sums up this government pretty well: bad financial decisions and not investing in clean energy. The final thing I want to say as I wrap up is about a comment made by the member for Higgins around nuclear energy. I'm guessing the member for Higgins doesn't flag that too often in her conversations with her local environment groups, but I can certainly say that, while we stand open on this side of the House to look at the technology advancements of nuclear technology as they unfold, right now the only technology that nuclear energy has are the large-scale nuclear reactors. That's the only thing that is there now that we can safely look at. If we were to build a large-scale nuclear reactor in Australia, it would take at least 15, maybe 20, years. It would cost somewhere in the vicinity of $10 billion to $15 billion. It's not viable. Ziggy Switkowski has had a look at this in great detail, and we have had a look at this as part of our environment and energy committee. It is just not feasible. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation is a wonderful reminder of the need to look for the projects that are cheaper, that are more cost effective and that are going to give us that rate of return. Nuclear energy isn't even in the conversation. It's the most expensive form of energy, and that hasn't changed even without all of the technological advancements. But the other thing to say about nuclear energy is that small modular reactors, which are obviously the talked-about emerging technology, are something that those on that side of the House like to fawn over. Well, they don't exist. If anyone can point me to a factory that's building modular reactors in the world right now, I'll buy your lunch. It doesn't exist. Small modular reactors aren't a thing yet. They might be in a decade—small modular reactors may become a thing. At the moment, NuScale has just pushed back its rollout of its first prototype to the end of the 2020s; it may even be to the start of 2030. It was meant to be delivered in 2026. They're often the prime example of this sort of modular prototype of a nuclear reactor that can be built in a factory. But, unless you're talking about the nuclear reactors that exist on submarines—and those are not 'modular'; they're just small reactors—they just don't exist. And they certainly don't exist without a military or government budget; I can assure the members of this House of that simple fact. Those opposite come at this debate obviously uncomfortable from the pressure that they're feeling from their electorate, but they need not look at their electorate to realise why they're uncomfortable. They need to look at the legislation they keep bowling into the House of Representatives. The reason those modern Liberals on that side are so uncomfortable with the state of play of this government is: when we're talking about the opportunities of government, when we're talking about legacy in this place, when we're talking about the future of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, what is their answer? Their answer is to rip out the 'clean energy' bit and to rip out the 'finance' bit and to give the current Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction free rein to make bad decisions that don't lower emissions and that reduce your financial return on investment in energy. It couldn't be a worse return. So, unless the amendments that are moved by the Labor Party pass this place, we will not be supporting this bill. And we stand ready to fight the awful legacy that is being left by this government which has no faith and no belief in the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. 18:57 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth It's a pleasure to talk today on the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020, but first I did want to thank my colleague the member for Macnamara for his concern for my welfare and wellbeing and I did want to assure him and others opposite that I'm entirely comfortable and relaxed—in fact, enthusiastic—about the government's energy policies and I feel entirely comfortable, relaxed and enthusiastic in explaining and articulating those to my constituents. I think this is an important bill but, to understand why we are here, it's important to understand the journey, the story of how we got here, and it's the story of the energy transition that's underway in Australia. I know that this inflames passions amongst many people, but, to me, it has a sense of historical inevitability to it. It's like many of the industrial or energy transitions that humanity has been through before, in many iterations of our history. This journey in Australia is underway at quite a remarkable rate. It was just a few weeks ago that the Clean Energy Regulator estimated that a record amount of seven gigawatts of new renewable energy capacity was installed in Australia last year. That is a record. It beats by 11 per cent the figure for 2019, of 6.3 gigawatts, and that 2019 figure was itself a record, beating the previous record of 2018, and on it goes. The increase in renewable energy capacity in Australia is underway at an exponential rate. It has been, by and large, a solar installation boom that has driven this new record—notwithstanding the fact that COVID-19 restrictions did impact on the ability of solar rooftop installations to continue throughout last year. We're now in a situation in Australia where 2.2 million Australian homes, or roughly one in four Australian homes, have solar, which is the highest uptake of household solar anywhere in the world. In fact, in 2019, the last year for which these sorts of figures are available, Australia deployed new renewable energy capacity at least 10 times faster per person than the global average and four times faster per person than market countries such as Europe or the United States or China. It was 10 times faster than the global average and four times faster than OECD countries. In 2020, Australia invested $7.7 billion, or $299 per person, in renewable energy. This places us ahead of countries like Canada, Germany, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United States on a per-person basis. In fact, Australia now has the highest solar capacity per person of any country in the world, at 644 watts per person, and the highest wind and solar capacity of any country outside of Europe, at 804 watts per person. These are all good stories. Over the last quarter of 2020, the share of renewables in the national electricity market—the main electricity market taking in most of the eastern states of Australia—exceeded 30 per cent, which is another first. In 2020, a record 53.6 terawatt hours of electricity was generated from renewables, including rooftop solar, in the national electricity market. Again, this is 16 per cent higher than the previous record, which was set in 2019. The strong investment in renewables is forecast to continue. Australia is projected to deploy an additional 24 gigawatts of rooftop solar by 2030. That's on top of the 6.3 gigawatts we installed in 2019 and the seven gigawatts in 2020. That will mean a tripling of the nation's small-scale solar generating capacity over the course of a decade. The important lesson from all of this, I think, is that progress here is not linear; it's exponential. If you look at the years 2007 to 2013, for instance, when those opposite were in government, the policy imperative to switch to renewables was just as high but the technology was not as cheap, not as widely available and not as commercially competitive. In that six year period we managed to install a total of 5.6 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity—5.6 gigawatts over six years. Last year we installed seven gigawatts, the year before that we installed 6.3 gigawatts and in the next six years we expect to install another 24 gigawatts. The story is positive elsewhere too. In the year to June 2020, emissions fell three per cent to their lowest level since 1998, and our emissions now are nearly 17 per cent below our 2005 levels. If you want to compare that figure to elsewhere, the OECD average for emissions reductions across the same period is nine per cent; in New Zealand it's one per cent and in Canada it's less than one per cent. As members here would know, our Paris emissions reduction target is 26 to 28 per cent below our 2005 emissions levels by 2030. The year is 2021, and we are already down 17 per cent on our 2005 levels; we are more than halfway there. It's clear to me that we will be able to meet our Paris emissions reduction target and that we will be able to do this without use of our Kyoto credits—which, I hasten to add, were legitimately earned by virtue of the fact that we beat our 2020 target by 459 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This energy transition that is underway in Australia—and it is a remarkable story of transition—is not being driven by government fiat, new taxes or the exhaustion of fossil fuels. Like nearly every other major economic and energy transition that we've been through in our history, as a species, this transition is being driven by the availability and affordability of new technology, by commercial imperatives, by consumer appetite and by investor sentiment. The bill we are debating and discussing today, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020, is another step in this direction. It was in October 2019 that the government announced the introduction of a new $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund. This fund, which will be administered by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, will support investments in new energy generation, storage and transmission infrastructure, including eligible projects short-listed under the Underwriting New Generation Investments program. The CEFC Grid Reliability Fund bill will amend the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Act 2012 in order to implement and create the Grid Reliability Fund. Specifically, it will establish a $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund through a new special account, to be administered by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and allow for permits for regulations to expand this appropriation in the future so we can put more money into this fund. It also establishes a new category of Grid Reliability Fund investments, which are to be funded from this GRF special account. The GRF, the Grid Reliability Fund, will enable the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in additional energy generation, storage, transmission and distribution infrastructure and grid-stabilising technologies. This will provide, over time, for greater affordability, reliability, stability and security of the electricity system, ensuring that, as we transition to more renewable energy in the grid, we combat intermittency and we ensure that the power provided is reliable and affordable. Providing the CEFC with an additional $1 billion will benefit energy market participants by providing a trusted counterparty for grid reliability investments and allowing the government to leverage private sector involvement and investment. The Grid Reliability Fund will help ensure that Australia's world-leading deployment of renewables is integrated and backed up. As I said, it will support private investment in storage and transmission infrastructure and new reliable energy generation. As Australia recovers from COVID-19, affordable and reliable power will be critical to growing the economy and creating new jobs. Equally, for our survival as a nation and a species, it is important that we continue the transition to a lower emissions future. Australia's experience throughout this has been that, when new technologies become economically competitive, households and businesses rapidly adopt them. We are seeing that firsthand with renewables right now. On an energy-only basis, costs have fallen rapidly, and we've seen $30 billion invested in renewable energy since 2017. As I said earlier, Australia is now deploying new wind and solar 10 times faster per person than the global average and four times faster per person than places like China, Japan, the United States and Europe. One in four Australian households have solar panels on the roof or elsewhere around the home. In 2019 the share of wind and solar in Australia's electricity grids was more than double the global average, and it is projected to rise rapidly in coming years. Of course, all of this renewable energy in the grid brings new challenges. While there's no shortage of investment in clean energy, the government has identified a lack of investment in the dispatchable generation needed to support the increase of intermittent generation. We need more flexible backup generation and storage, pumped hydro, batteries and, yes, gas to balance and integrate high shares of renewable energy. By focusing on getting the cost of new technologies down, we won't raise the cost of incumbent technologies, like coal and gas, that continue to play an important role in the energy mix. The Grid Reliability Fund will work alongside the government's Technology Investment Roadmap to ensure affordable and reliable energy for all Australians while reducing our emissions. Eligible investments will include energy storage projects like pumped hydro and batteries, transmission and distribution infrastructure, grid-stabilising technologies and other eligible projects identified in the government's Underwriting New Generation Investments project. Importantly, the fund will not divert the CEFC's existing $10 billion allocation away from clean energy projects. The Grid Reliability Fund is $1 billion on top of that. Some examples of projects that the Grid Reliability Fund could support in New South Wales include the creation of renewable energy zones, like the proposed Orana REZ; upgrades or extensions of the transmission network to support improved interregional trade and the reliability of grid stability; and dispatchable generation projects, like the UNGI short-listed Armidale pumped hydro project or the Port Kembla gas project. In Tasmania, projects that could be supported include the Marinus Link and the Battery of the Nation renewable pumped hydro projects. In South Australia, projects like Project EnergyConnect, the Baroota Pumped Hydro Project and the Reeves Plains gas project could be supported. In Victoria, projects could include improved transmission infrastructure projects, like the proposed VNI West project, and dispatchable generation projects, like the Bairnsdale gas upgrade or the proposed Dandenong power station. In Queensland, projects could include new transmission projects, such as CopperString 2.0, and dispatchable generation projects, like the proposed Cressbrook reservoir pumped hydro project near Toowoomba. I know those opposite have difficulty with gas. They have difficulty with fossil fuels more generally. It's the case at the moment that coal continues to provide roughly 60 per cent of our power generation in Australia, and, whilst that percentage will undoubtedly lessen over time, it will remain an important part of our energy mix for the future. Anyone who follows this issue closely and invests it with the seriousness it deserves understands that, until such time as large-scale storage projects come down in cost, particularly battery technology or potentially hydrogen, we are going to be relying on gas to play more of a role in firming our grid and to allow the transition to a cleaner future, where renewables play a bigger role. That's the simple fact. The Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel, has laid this out quite clearly. Until at least 2030, possibly longer, we will need gas as a stabilising force within the grid to allow us to put more renewables into the grid and ensure that intermittency does not become an issue. Fundamentally, I am an optimist about our ability as humans, as a species, to overcome some of the challenges that are placed before us. I don't think this is by any stretch the greatest challenge we've faced. There was Thomas Malthus's prediction that famine was an inevitable part of the human condition and would permanently limit the population of the earth. When Thomas Malthus wrote this in 1798, the world's population was 800 million people. Today it is 6.7 billion people, and on average they are much better nourished and much better fed, with much better life expectancy and a much better quality of life. Or there were the worries in the 1990s about the rapid depletion of the ozone layer. When the ozone hole was first discovered in 1982 it caused panic at the time, and rightly so, but today—you'd have to look this up because it's not in the news any more—the hole in the ozone layer is the smallest since it was first discovered in 1982. Mr Bandt interjecting— Mr SHARMA 274506 Because we did do something about it—I take the interjection—just as we are doing something about CO2 emissions in Australia. Mr Bandt interjecting— Mr SHARMA 274506 I take the member for Melbourne's interjection. As I say, this is not an argument for complacency; it is an argument against the counsels of despair that we hear too often in this debate, including from people such as the member for Melbourne. Based on our ingenuity and our innovation as a species, I believe that getting the world to net zero emissions by 2050 is achievable. I would like to see Australia do it. I'd like to see us do it sooner if possible. As the Prime Minister said in his Press Club address earlier in the week, we need to focus not on the what but on the how. It will ultimately be the commercial availability of technology that drives this—our success in engineering new industrial methods, our ability to create renewable liquid fuels, our vision in reengineering our transport system, our success in creating new carbon sinks in the soil and elsewhere. These are fundamentally practical challenges of the sort we have overcome many times in our history. If we solve for these, we solve for net zero. So let's focus our efforts here. 19:11 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne This is a slush fund for big gas corporations. That's what the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Amendment (Grid Reliability Fund) Bill 2020 is. The government that says, 'Technology, not taxes; we've got to let the market decide,' is about to open up the $10 billion that exists in the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and make it available to big gas corporations. We know that gas is as dirty as coal. We know that methane, which leaks and is released into the atmosphere when you start fracking under good farmland and land across Australia, is up to 86 times more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. We know that, if we unleash the gas in the Beetaloo Basin or in other places around Australia, we can say goodbye to making our contribution to giving our kids a safe climate to live in. We know that the technology is there now, with renewables and storage, to drive a clean energy revolution. But what does this bill do? This bill comes in and says, 'Let's make public money available for gas corporations.' I notice the members on the other side have gone very quiet about this. For all their free market rhetoric, they cannot wait to shovel billions of dollars out the door to give to their mates in the gas corporations—the same corporations who turn around and donate to them. The biggest gas corporations in this country over the last few years brought in about $50 billion in revenue and paid zero tax. They did make some donations. They made donations to the government and they made some donations to the Labor Party, but they paid zero tax. You would think the starting point with big corporations that are contributing to wrecking our planet should be, 'Pay some tax on the massive superprofits you are making and contribute a bit to the cost of dealing with the climate crisis.' But, no, this supposed free market government, that says it loves technology and won't want to interfere in the unleashing of technology, is about to take the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the $10 billion that is there to drive the uptake of clean technologies in Australia and make it available to dirty, polluting gas and toxic methane. How is it going to do that? This bill changes the definition of what counts, effectively, as clean energy and what counts as low-emissions technology and expands it to explicitly include gas. Let's just think about this for a moment. We have been told that the decisions we make in the next 10 years will determine whether we get the climate crisis under control. It is a matter of science that we are rapidly heading towards the edge of a cliff. If we go over that 2030 cliff, you can have all the 2050 targets in the world you like, and all the aspirations of getting there, but it will be too late. By that point, climate change will have become an unstoppable chain reaction and we won't be able to rein it in. On current forecasts, which the government blithely accepts, by the end of the century, during my daughter's lifetime, we are heading for an Australia that will be heated by more than four degrees. In a four-degree world, there is carrying capacity on this planet for a billion people. Going from 7½ billion people down to one billion people is an extraordinary amount of war and devastation and conflict. That is what is facing us. On the government's forecasts, that is the temperature we are heading towards unless we act in the next 10 years. That is why, in the next 10 years, we need to massively invest in renewables and come up with a plan to put coal and gas out of the system. But what's the government doing? The government brings on a bill and says, 'We want to change the definition of clean energy to include gas.' President Biden and his climate envoy, John Kerry, have got it right. They've said that, at this stage, new gas infrastructure is not only going to end up as stranded assets but is massively counterproductive and will get in the way of us tackling the climate challenge. They've said very, very clearly that there is no space for new investment in gas if we want to stay within our carbon budget and avoid going over that climate cliff. That's what the United States government has said and it is what scientists have said. And they are right. And what does this government do? Instead of coming in and saying, 'Let's have a plan to phase it out,' they're saying, 'Let's take public funds and give them to the gas corporations that pay no tax at the moment and make massive super profits.' This is a subsidy for big corporations that pay no tax and pollute and kill our planet. Why are they getting this money? It's because they make donations. They make donations to the Liberal Party, the Labor Party and the National Party—millions of dollars of donations—and they get their way. What's even more astonishing is that the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is making a profit at the moment. It is investing in clean energy technologies, and that's the future. And it is making a return to government. This government wants to turn a profit-making Clean Energy Finance Corporation into a venture that invests in losing money on gas. The government knows that public subsidies for gas are the only way gas is going to be profitable, so it is turning a profit-making corporation into something that is going to start losing money on its gas investments—because it wants to bankroll them, and it wants to bankroll gas investments. The government knows that no-one in their right mind is looking at investing in new fossil fuel investments, so they come to the government with their hand out and this government of largesse and donations and subsidies for big corporations is giving money to them. It is not asking these big corporations to pay more tax. Instead, it is giving them massive public subsidies. I'm waiting for the spirited defence from the member for Goldstein about why there are massive subsidies going to big corporations in his supposedly free market. I'm not hearing very much. All the free market 'technology, not taxes' rhetoric dissolves into dust when it comes to subsidising their big corporate mates. Big corporations have too much power over politicians. They exercise that power through political donations and, in return, they get things like this bill—a massive multibillion-dollar slush fund for big gas. And yet people wonder why the cost of going to the doctor keeps going up or why, when you send your kid to a public school, you get hit with all these voluntary school fees, and what is meant to be a free education turns out to be far from it. Why is everyone else having to pay more? Because these big corporations get away with paying no tax. And, instead of rectifying it, the government is about to give them even more public money. So we are going to move to amend this, to stop this being turned into the minister's slush fund for gas. We will move to amend this. This government has never seen a fund that it didn't rort. This government loves rorting. The minister in question, the minister for energy, has a very dubious relationship with figures and data. So we are going to move to amend this bill so that the minister does not have the power to tell the independent Clean Energy Finance Corporation how to spend its money and so that the minister cannot come along and say, 'I am going to define gas and maybe even coal as a low-emissions technology.' We are going to stop the minister from being able to do that. And we are going to say to the minister that, if he really wants to take public money and put it into a new coal- or gas-fired power station, as he is regularly on the front page of various papers saying he wants to do, he should come back with a separate piece of legislation. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation is the 'Clean' Energy Finance Corporation. Don't try and use it as another slush fund for corporate mates to funnel money back to gas corporations. That is what he is proposing to do. This Clean Energy Finance Corporation was set up by the Greens and Labor in the power-sharing parliament of 2010. This government has tried to destroy it. This government tried to wipe out all of that legacy. The only time pollution in this country meaningfully came down was when the Greens, Labor and Independents worked together and put a price on pollution and put in place the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, put in place the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and put in place things like the Carbon Farming Initiative. It has worked. The government tried to get rid of the CEFC. The government does not want this body to exist. The government does not want there to be a profitable government owned organisation that helps clean technologies expand. This is what the Clean Energy Finance Corporation does. It was established to say, 'When these new technologies that are invented pass the proof-of-concept space and turn out to be viable propositions, we will use public funds to help them grow and become self-sustaining businesses.' And it has worked. The CEFC has invested $8.2 billion of public money to generate $29 billion of new economic activity to support jobs and infrastructure and to bring new clean energy technologies online. The technology that the Prime Minister loves talking about doesn't come out of nowhere. It comes out of organisations like the CEFC supporting researchers and businesses to take their ideas and turn them into viable commercial enterprises. That is what the CEFC is there for. Because renewables are the future and the fuel is free, the CEFC by investing the money has made $1.7 billion in profit from carefully chosen investments, money that actually goes straight back to the government's bottom line. So the CEFC is using public funds to take really good ideas in the renewables and clean energy space and help grow them into viable and thriving businesses. It makes money for the government, because when the businesses make money they pay some back. It is a terrific idea, and that is why the Greens, Labor and the Independents established it. The government wants to repeal it. It has tried time and time again to repeal it. Because it has been unsuccessful in repealing it, it is now coming back with a different approach. The different approach is to say: 'We know that the public likes renewables and we know that this thing set up by the Greens, Labor and the Independents has been a roaring success and the public wants it. We can't repeal it anymore, so what are we going to do? We are going to change it. We are going to make the money available to the gas corporations. We are going to make it so that there's less money available for renewables and more money available for dirty fuel.' The thing that needs underlining is that the government is now hanging onto the CEFC and ARENA and saying, 'Look at these wonderful things that we are doing.' President Scott Morrison is telling Joe Biden, 'Don't worry; I have the CEFC and ARENA here'— Mr Howarth 247742 The member did not refer to the Prime Minister by his correct title. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Please refer to the Prime Minister by his correct title. Mr BANDT M3C I thought I did. The Prime Minister is telling Joe Biden we've got all these wonderful things. He doesn't tell him that we tried to repeal them. What he doesn't say is that the only thing this government, in all the time since it's been elected, has that wasn't a Greens or Labor idea is its Emissions Reduction Fund, which has saved barely 200 million tonnes of abatement over its lifetime. The CEFC alone, last year, brought in 250 million tonnes. And the government's Emissions Reduction Fund involves the public paying the polluters whereas things like the CEFC make money by growing new technology and new businesses. Why on earth would you want to tinker with that and take money away from renewables and make it available to the gas and coal and dirty fuel corporations? There can only be two answers. One is that you don't seriously believe in climate change—and we heard from the Deputy Prime Minister that he doesn't care what happens in 30 years time. He doesn't care if we go over that cliff and our kids are left to pick up the mess. So we understand why the government is moving this bill. It is because they don't care what's going to happen in 30 years time. The only other reason you'd do it is that your big corporate donors have asked you to. Those big corporate donors, that pay zero dollars in tax, aren't being asked by this government to pay their fair share. Instead, they're being given more handouts. It's time to say enough of the handouts for the big corporations. The big corporations and the billionaires need to pay their fair share of tax. They need to pay a bit more so that everyone else can pay a bit less. That's going to start by amending this bill. 19:26 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's not often I get to start a speech in this chamber by saying, 'I'm about to get a free lunch!' because the member for Macnamara put out a challenge that any member who could come in and explain where a small modular reactor was being developed or utilised in the world today would get a free lunch. I went and did the research. Lo and behold, there is a floating SMR, Akademik Lomonosov, in the north-east region of Russia, right now, and it's used for the purpose of water desalinisation—the power of technology utilised to build the future and hydrate the planet and desalinate water. So, member for Macnamara, Elwood Bathers is a great restaurant in your electorate and I can't wait for the lunch! It must be a difficult conversation for the member for Macnamara. He fits in as part of the science deniers on the Labor side of politics, who deny the science behind nuclear power and don't want to engage in understanding the power of these technologies. Don't get me wrong. As bad as the member for Macnamara is, he's not as bad as the ineffectual Marxist member for Melbourne, who's a science denier on genetically enhanced food and a science denier on nuclear power. And Senator Hanson-Young, in the other place, is now talking about how the Greens party is being infiltrated by anti-vaxxers, vaccine deniers, who are starting to look at the Greens party and go, 'They really don't like science technology, progress and building the future of this country.' The focus of this government is to bring the future forward and build jobs and opportunities for Australians. Honourable members interjecting— Mr TIM WILSON IMW I hear the derision they throw towards gas. Clearly, the Marxist member for Melbourne has never been to a factory in his life. Go out the back of the Goldstein electorate and to parts of Hotham and parts of Isaacs and go to those factories that melt metals as part of their business. Do you know what fuel they use to melt the metal? It's gas. So you can rant and rave as much as you want about how you can't support it, about how you can't have it as part of the economy, but it's a critical part of the manufacturing base, including to do things like build components for electric cars. That's exactly what they do. But you can't do it. What are you going to do? Are you going to melt metals with the burning flames of what comes out of wind power or solar power? It's simply absurd. We've got to look at a mix of technologies. What we're trying to do in this bill is build a reliable energy base for the nation, and we should be holding on to that. When the Marxist member for Melbourne gets up here and says that he's so antinuclear and won't support it under any circumstances, even though he says there is a climate crisis, it shows you that he's prepared to shove other things in front of it and it's a dishonest statement. He doesn't actually believe it. He is not committed to it. He's an antinuclear activist who's not actually campaigning on climate Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 191 ADJOURNMENT National Critical Care and Trauma Response Centre 191 19:30 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari I was just amused by that comedy. Last week I was honoured to visit the National Critical Care and Trauma Response Centre at its dedicated facility at Darwin airport and later at its Howard Springs operation. The centre had previously been hosted at Royal Darwin Hospital, and it still has an important presence there. It was established, you'll recall, Mr Deputy Speaker, after the dreadful and horrific 2002 terrorist bombings in Bali, in which so many Australians lost their lives. Funded by the Australian government, the centre is focused on enhancing Australia's capacity to provide clinical and academic leadership in disaster and trauma care. The centre provides an internationally unique crisis and disaster response capability. It has been coordinating our COVID response for Australians who are overseas. A team from the centre looked after the Australians evacuated from China's epicentre at Wuhan in February 2020, as well as the evacuated passengers off the Diamond Princess cruise ship after the coronavirus outbreak on board off Japan. The centre has had staff deployed on 21 occasions in a range of international operations, principally through South-East Asia and the Pacific and locally in Australia. It is a strategically important asset. It looks after those repatriated Australians arriving each week for quarantine at Howard Springs. The centre is by any measure a unique national gem which all Australians should be proud of. It's a fantastic tribute to the brilliance, professionalism, commitment and knowledge of Len Notaras and his magnificent team of clinicians, administrators, researchers, logisticians and the many other skill sets that are engaged. I can't go past the need to acknowledge Michelle Foster, who has been on the ride with Len from the outset. We owe them all a tremendous debt of gratitude. The second part of my visit was to the Centre for National Resilience at Howard Springs under the care of the Australian Medical Assistance Team, or AUSMAT, which is coordinated by the National Critical Care and Trauma Response Centre. It has been 12 months since our first COVID evacuees arrived at the Howard Springs facility. Since repatriation flights to the Northern Territory began on 23 October 2020, 3,780 international arrivals have undertaken quarantine at the Howard Springs Centre for National Resilience. Sixty-five positive COVID-19 cases have been reported among those repatriated there. It is through the exceptional management under the leadership and guidance of Abigail Trewin, who has directed the disaster preparedness and response—a true international star—that there has been not one case of community transmission. The professional facilities are an absolute credit to the Territory team involved and the clinicians who have come from around Australia to undertake this important work—people such as Dr Alex Swann, a specialist from Western Australia who I had the great pleasure of meeting during my visit. I learned a great deal and was overawed by the depth of knowledge and expertise that has been developed at Howard Springs. They clearly are the gold standard. The fastidiousness and professionalism shown by the team in dealing with those in their care have made a significant contribution to the protection of all of us from the spread of this insidious virus. An absolute bonus of the trip to Howard Springs was meeting with the indefatigable Karen Sheldon and her wonderful catering team, who are providing meals for the Australians returning and in quarantine. Karen's team of largely First Nations staff, including chefs and cooks, are serving up three meals a day to over 800 people plus staff. As you would expect if you know Karen, these meals are inspired by the Territory but seek to cater to the tastes of those in quarantine. All are prepared on site. I can personally vouch for their quality, having sampled one last week. But most telling was the pride shown by those First Nations employees, who, thanks to the training they are receiving, are doing such great work for the whole community. They make a significant and not-to-be-underestimated contribution to the success and reputation of the Howard Springs quarantine facility. All Australians should be proud of the National Critical Care and Trauma Response Centre. It's done fantastic work for all of us and for many of our neighbours. Travel Agents 191 19:35 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper Today, in this place and also in the Federation Chamber, much has been said about the plight of our nation's travel agents, and justifiably so. There are some 40,000 people in the industry, 80 per cent of whom are women, and 60 per cent of the businesses of those travel agents are in regional and rural Australia. They were the first to be hit by this pandemic, and they'll be the last to come out of this pandemic. We have an obligation as a government to support them, and we have. I've spoken to literally hundreds of them over the past six months, and they were very, very grateful for JobKeeper, they were very grateful for the $128 million support package, and they were very hopeful that, in a bipartisan approach, we can see our way to an industry-specific support package in line with the continuation of a JobKeeper style. But there is something else we can do as a government—again, in a bipartisan way—that will assist not only the travel agents but also service providers such as hotels, resorts et cetera, and that's by shining a light on online travel agencies such as Trivago, Expedia, Wotif, Skyscanner, Booking.com, Airbnb and Kayak. They're all based in Germany or the USA or are Chinese owned. They do not have the same obligations as travel agents in Australia, in that they don't have to disclose their commissions when they accept a booking. Our travel agents have to tell the client, 'My commission is 10 per cent, and that's reflected in the invoice.' Online travel agents don't have to disclose that, they don't have to disclose where that money's going to and they do not pay tax in our country. We need to do everything we possibly can to educate the public on that fact. We have to move the goalposts for online travel agents to make it fair for our travel agents. They take tens of billions of dollars a year from the pockets of our travel agents and our service providers. If we can educate the public by legislating that online travel agents must disclose what their commissions are and where they are based, that should change the way of thinking of people who book online. They will say, 'Well, I'm not paying $3,000 of my money to a German based or Chinese based company; I'm going to go straight to the accommodation service provider and book with them, or, if I want the security of booking through a travel agent, I'll book through an Australian based local travel agent for 10 per cent, because that's all they charge.' A fellow emailed me and took a screenshot of his account. He was very grateful for a $3,000 grant from the New South Wales government, but, two entries below, you could see this: 'Booking.com BV, Amsterdam, 13 July 2020, $3,272.60'. In one fell swoop, there goes the $3,000 from the New South Wales government, straight into the pockets of a big corporate in Amsterdam. He said to me: 'I don't mind paying commission for people doing work, but it must be fair. Ten per cent—I'm happy with that. But these companies charge up to 25 or 30 per cent commission on top of what people pay.' That's not fair. If our travel agents have to disclose what their commissions are, where they're based and have to comply with all these other transparency rules, then it is only fair that we as a government ensure that online travel agents are subject to the same obligations. Paterson Electorate: Independent Cinemas 192 19:40 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson Most of us love a trip to the movies—the smell of popcorn, the choc-top and the big screen. Last week I visited Scotty's Cinemas in Raymond Terrace in my electorate of Paterson. I was pleased to meet Scott Seddon, president of Independent Cinemas Australia and proprietor of Scotty's Cinemas in Raymond Terrace and the famous Heddon Greta Drive In in my home town. Accompanying Scott was Neil Merrin, proprietor of Nelson Bay Cinemas, and Brenda, a resident and local movie buff. Scott reached out to my office at the start of the pandemic last year. His business was in trouble with the pressure of COVID restrictions. Scott has a long history of working in the cinema industry and understood that independent cinema would be hit hard. Scott understood the solution. Labor understands the solution. At the time, the union movement, our Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, and many of us on this side called the government to follow global trends and implement an immediate wage subsidy. I know some of those opposite—not all, but some—want to rewrite history. They want to pretend that they showed up on day one with this magnificent idea called JobKeeper. Well, that's actually not quite how it happened. Those opposite would remember the calls for a wage subsidy. They would remember the New Zealand Labour government announcing a wage subsidy. They would remember the pleas from us on the Labor side, the pleas from small and large business, to finally make the government act. And, woe betide, those queues at Centrelink certainly tipped them over the edge. We know the PM came up with the quirky label 'JobKeeper'—and, sure, he's good at spin; we can give him that. However, those opposite are so quick to forget that we have this fantastic resource called Hansard and it's all there for everyone to read. Those opposite can spin it all they like, but the facts are the facts. It almost seems like it's in the DNA of the Liberals to never learn from past mistakes. Why are they refusing to extend JobKeeper? Many small businesses are still crying out for help, and independent cinema is a case in point. It's two extremes with this government. They allow the subsidy to be so broad that it's pumped money into multimillion-dollar companies, allowing them to turn healthy profits, but then they want to refuse continued support for vulnerable small businesses like independent cinema. The arrogance of this PM to say, 'We're not running a blank cheque budget,' when they've tripled the national debt before the pandemic and while the PM was our Treasurer! The fact is that many industries are still doing it tough. Small businesses across the hospitality, entertainment and tourism sectors are all in desperate need of sustainable support—until we get on the other side of this pandemic. When I visited Scotty's Cinemas and spoke with Neil last week, he told me that he currently employs 12 staff. That's 12 local jobs. Those are jobs that are tied to our COVID recovery. He told me that his local cinema has serviced our community for over 40 years and that, without the wage subsidy, it may have been lost to our community forever. Independent cinemas like Nelson Bay Cinemas have employed hundreds of locals over the years and offered endless hours of entertainment to families across our community. Local ventures like Nelson Bay Cinemas and Scotty's Cinemas cater for all ages and, without these cinemas, locals would find it difficult to travel for entertainment. These local independent cinemas are vital to the identity of our regional communities and they sell our local stories too. Once we lose them, they're going to be gone for good and we can't afford that. Small businesses must be supported. The small independent cinema industry must be supported. Minister Fletcher is bragging that this government is pouring millions of dollars into the film industry, but that's exactly the problem. They want to brag and subsidise the wages of actors and enable movies to be made here; they're just too short-sighted to realise that cinemas are the critical end of the business cycle—the last three feet, as it's often known. If you don't have the screens, you don't have customers. Let me tell you: independent cinema has survived radio, TV, colour TV, Beta, VHS, DVD, pay TV and streaming, but will it survive Minister Fletcher? That is the absolute question. Support your local cinemas. COVID-19: Business 193 19:45 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt I rise this evening to pay tribute to the businesses across my electorate. Like many others across the nation, they face challenges like never before. Far North Queensland, especially Cairns and Port Douglas, was the first region in the nation to be severely affected by the coronavirus pandemic. Sadly, we'll also be among the last to recover. The latest figures reflect this, with 16,617 Cairns workers still on JobKeeper payments. Tourism is the No. 1 economic driver for our city and our region. In good years Cairns generates more than $3.5 billion in tourism dollars. Last year that figure was less than $1.5 billion. That is a pretty stark figure in anyone's book. While some might say, 'It's just a figure,' it's far more than just that. That staggering drop in tourism dollars represents the livelihood of somebody's mum, dad, sister, brother, aunty, uncle or other loved one. The Morrison government is absolutely committed to working with the sector to address the challenges that have emerged and continue to emerge during COVID-19. To date the federal government has injected $27.9 billion in direct economic support into homes and businesses across the state, including in Cairns and Far North Queensland. This is more than three times the $8.8 billion spent by the Queensland Labor government, mainly on health initiatives, which is the lowest spend as a proportion of economic activity of any state in the nation. There is absolutely no doubt that the federal government will need to continue to support Cairns and Port Douglas businesses in some capacity and in moving forward. I might add that in other communities, like Cooktown and in the Torres Strait, there is need for help as well. That's not because Annastacia Palaszczuk and Labor have demanded it but because the federal government value their local tourism industry, workers and families. To highlight the effects of snap border closures on our businesses and travel confidence, I would like to highlight the plight of tourism businesses in my electorate. Getaway Trekking and Adventures, owned and operated by Wayne and Sue Fitcher, is an adventure tourism business operating out of Far North Queensland and Victoria. Pre COVID they were largely inbound and travelling predominantly in Papua New Guinea. The pandemic stopped their business overnight. The owners were faced with three options: close their doors, resulting in 200 clients losing their deposits; hibernate until international borders open; or take the opportunity to adapt and reimagine their business as a domestic tourism operator. They chose the latter. The company was just about to embark on its first major trek from Melbourne to Penola but—you guessed it—the South Australian border to Victoria was slammed shut and then came a five-day Victoria lockdown. Just think about the flow-on effect these decisions have on this one business, its clients and its suppliers—and, of course, the list goes on. Border closures should be a last resort and not the first option, as has been the case. Queensland's hardworking doctors, nurses, health professionals and contact tracers are the best in the world. There's no question about that. They're the ones that have kept us seriously safe. I have the utmost faith in their ability to continue to deal efficiently and effectively with any potential hotspots in the future, without the need to slam borders shut over one case. I'll just say to you, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, for the figures that were just announced there—the 16-odd thousand—with the decision to shut the Victorian borders, I've already got so many reports, including the one from the Fitchers. People have cancelled their trips, and people are now reluctant to buy tickets to come up to our region because they're frightened they'll get stuck up there. Finally, as I mentioned earlier, serious consideration needs to be given to support packages for those industries that will continue to face challenges due to the coronavirus pandemic. It would be a crying shame for us to have successfully overcome the health and economic challenges—and we will; there's no doubt about that—only to realise that we no longer have a tourism industry to showcase our natural beauty to the world. So I'd just say that it's absolutely critical for areas like Cairns and Port Douglas, and for other businesses that continue to be affected, particularly from these border closures, even though they try to make the changes. We need to continue the support. Werriwa Electorate: Aged Care, Liverpool City Council: 2168 Children's Parliament, COVID-19: Australians Overseas 194 19:50 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa This government is not on the side of Australian families. Whether it's cutting wages, breaking promises, rorting community grants or making dishonest land deals, they continue to neglect everyday Australians. One area where this neglect is most stark is the growing waiting list for home-care packages. As of 27 October 2020, there were over 98,000 Australians waiting to be offered approval for their home-care package and more than 3,000 of these Australians are from the south-west of Sydney, where my electorate is based. Senior Australians in Werriwa have been waiting for years for their home-care packages. They now have to rely on the Commonwealth Home Support Program. The problem with the CHSP is that there is a lack of service providers to provide the services that are needed by older Australians. In Green Valley in my electorate, constituents don't even have access to services to mow their lawns, as there are no providers that provide that service in the district. My office has received over 40 calls from senior Australians regarding My Aged Care recently. Complaints vary from unacceptably long waiting lists or no service providers to a lack of access for those who are from non-English-speaking backgrounds. With the complex and complicated processes to be navigated and the documentation required, many are more than likely to give up in frustration. The organisations that support older Australians from non-English-speaking backgrounds are provided with limited funding, as this government, as with most of its other policies, prefers a lazy, one-size-fits-all approach. We know that aged care in Australia was in crisis long before COVID-19 applied more pressure. If older Australians are supported at home, there are significant savings to the nation—not to mention their quality of life and that of their family. Yet the government has also been failing senior Australians who choose to live at home. Over the last three years, more than 30,000 senior Australians have died waiting for a home-care package to be approved. Lives could be saved if this government had not neglected aged care. Despite the government's obsession with avoiding responsibility for anything, the fault sits fairly and squarely with them. I've reported to parliament on many occasions about the Liverpool City Council initiative of the children's parliament. Children from years 5 and 6 from schools in the 2168 postcode are elected by their peers to represent concerns they see in the local area. The issues raised through the lens of our children have included the environment, safety around the school and, more recently, issues about poverty they see with their friends. Liverpool council recently surveyed children from the 11 representative schools. Six hundred and seventy-five responses were received. Over 40 per cent of children see poverty affecting other children's families. Forty-one per cent of students have witnessed someone in their school missing out on food because of poverty. Seventy-one per cent of the students said they could do better at school if they had proper devices and access to the internet. There is only so much young students can do when they experience so much hardship in their lives. Too many children are being left behind because they don't have the essentials and the resources to do well. An overwhelming number of students have noted cases of poverty and peers who don't have food at school, and that is too high and too unacceptable. Governments on all levels need to ensure that students across Australia experience a fair level of schooling and support, no matter what their circumstances, or I fear many students will fall through the cracks. Another month, and there are still thousands of Australians stranded overseas—Australians who have been left overseas with no money and no prospect of coming home. Abandoned by their own government, Australians have had to dip into their bank accounts to survive in foreign countries and pay exorbitant prices for commercial flights home. Government assistance shouldn't be limited just to loans. The loans don't guarantee you a return ticket to Australia, and they push citizens further into debt. They also have to pay out of pocket for their hotel quarantine, although, if they're back on Australian soil, many people are more than willing to do that. Labor is on the side of families. It's time we brought people home. Whether it's those in aged care, those waiting for home care, students who live in poverty or those overseas waiting to come home, Labor won't neglect them as this government has. Under Labor, no-one will be held back and no-one will be left behind. Bloom, Ms Sam 195 19:55 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar Who amongst us here is good enough to have a movie made about their lives? Who can claim to be so charismatic that Naomi Watts would be happy to portray us? None, I am guessing. But such a person does exist on the Northern Beaches of Sydney—a person who has strength and determination, a person who is a passionate adventurer, a talented surfer and a dedicated mother of three. I speak, of course, of the great Sam Bloom. Sam was born on 13 August 1971. Growing up on the Northern Beaches with her two siblings, she developed an affinity for the ocean at an early age. This love of the ocean inspired her first passion: surfing. Sam would meet her friends down at Bilgola Beach every afternoon after school in order to go surfing. She admits that she was the only girl surfing in a pack of boys, but I have no doubt that Sam had no trouble keeping up with her male counterparts. Sam was equally as passionate about travelling as she was about surfing. Her wanderlust was inspired by her parents, who took her and her brothers and sisters out of school for three months in order to travel across Australia. Sam shared both her love of the ocean and her thirst for adventure with her husband, Cameron, whom she met shortly after graduating high school. After 10 years together, they started their own family. Their first-born son, Rueben, was shortly followed by Noah and their last child, Oli. Desperate to share their love of travel with their children, Sam and Cam took their children on their first overseas holiday to Thailand. What was meant to be a picturesque beach holiday turned into anything but that. The family spent their first morning frolicking in the tropical waters before they retreated to the small hotel to embrace the view from the observation deck, which is when everything changed for the worse for this family. Sam leant on the balcony, craving a closer look at the beauty before her. The wood below her gave way, and her section of the balcony fell more than six metres onto the concrete below. Her sons and husband can recall the horrific scene. They looked down only to see Sam unconscious and badly injured. Life as the family knew it had changed. Sam had a severe spinal cord injury. Understandably, Sam spent much time grieving the loss of her old life. Now a full-time wheelchair user, she had lost her independence and relied on her husband for even the smallest things. Her middle son found an injured baby magpie that had fallen out of her nest. Desperate to bring the black and white waddling magpie to safety, he brought Penguin home, and Sam nursed her back to health. Noah believes that the injured bird unified his family at a time when the Blooms needed it the most. Sam believed it was Penguin that gave her hope. As the bird's injuries began to heal, Sam began to heal, too. She started kayaking and was grateful to soon be accepted for the Australian paracanoe team. She travelled to Italy to compete in the world championships. Five years after that fateful day, Sam began to surf again, albeit lying down. To no-one's surprise, Sam was as determined and passionate as ever. She was soon selected to compete with the Australian adaptive surfing team in San Diego. Now a published author, Sam and her family have travelled a long way since that accident in 2013. I stand today proud to commend the lived bravery and strength of Sam Bloom and her family. We are so lucky to have such an inspiring individual and an incredible athlete within our community. I highly recommend seeing the movie as it is very worthwhile and it is a great Australian production. House adjourned at 20:00 NOTICES 195 NOTICES

Monday, 15 February 2021

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

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 197 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS St Sava College 197 10:30 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa I was honoured to be invited to the opening of St Sava College in Varroville last month with my colleague the member for Macarthur, the state member for Macquarie Fields and the member for Hughes. St Sava College will be an open, friendly and inclusive educational institution. The student body of the college will predominantly come from the Serbian community, who have a large presence in the south-west. However, it is anticipated that students will come from the Greek, Russian and Arabic Orthodox communities and the broader community in surrounding suburbs. The college is named after the patron saint Sava, who was a Serbian prince, the first Archbishop of the Serbian Church and widely considered to be the founder of Serbian medieval literature. Although the idea of establishing an Orthodox college in Sydney was conceived in the early 90s, the project was postponed due to the war in the Balkans. After the purchase of the land in 2003 and the laying of the foundation stone by the Crown Prince of Yugoslavia in 2005, building approvals were finalised by Campbelltown City Council in 2007. It is due to the many years of hard work and the labour of love of volunteers and workers that the college is now open for K to year 2. I congratulate the Serbian Orthodox community and wish the college a fantastic inaugural year of schooling. It was a joy to celebrate Lunar New Year this weekend at the Mingyue Lay Buddhist Temple in Bonnyrigg. Mingyue Lay Temple is one of the most significant cultural buildings in south-west Sydney. It is also home to one of the largest Chinese Buddhist congregations in the southern hemisphere. Lunar New Year has been celebrated at Mingyue Lay Buddhist Temple for nearly 30 years. It has been my privilege to join the president and secretary, Vincent Kong and James Chan, on so many occasions to share the celebrations and milestones of this community. Lunar New Year celebrations are always special. This year, not only were the colours and movements of the daytime fireworks and lion dances COVID safe, but the rain did not dampen the spirits of the community. I'd like to commend all the volunteers that ensured that the temple held another great event this year. The temple also maintains a strong sense of community. Volunteers and staff conduct major fundraising activities for humanitarian causes such as floods and bushfires, and we as a community can't appreciate that more. When they heard about the loss of firefighters Geoffrey Keaton and Andrew O'Dwyer, from the Horsley Park Fire Brigade in 2019, they raised an amazing quarter of a million dollars for the bushfire brigade. This not only provided material support but also emotional support for those left behind. To the Chinese and Vietnamese communities celebrating Lunar New Year at the moment: happy new year. (Time expired) Wentworth Electorate: Boosting Female Founders Initiative 197 10:33 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth I want to congratulate three innovative and accomplished women in the Wentworth community who were successful in receiving a Boosting Female Founders Initiative grant recently. Members may know that the Boosting Female Founders Initiative program is designed to help female founders of start-up business scale their businesses to reach domestic and global markets and help them overcome some of the disadvantages in access to finance and support experienced by female founders. It is a $52.2 million program, and there were three recent recipients in my electorate of Wentworth, and I want to single them out here. Zara Lord, the founder and CEO of uPaged Pty Ltd, was a registered nurse who saw a gap in the market and helped create a platform where casual nurses could directly connect with employers, predominantly hospitals, to showcase their skills. UPaged focuses on having a disruptive impact on the health industry, cutting out the middleman placement agencies and giving nurses more autonomy over their workplace choices and hospitals better access to staff. On being awarded a Boosting Female Founders grant of $398,155, Zara has been able to accelerate the growth of her start-up business to a wider Australian healthcare market as well as undertake global expansion. The uPaged business model uses technology to advance employment practices, increasing employee wages and choices and lowering employer costs for health-care organisations. With the assistance of the grant, expansion of such an innovative and transformational business has been particularly timely given the changes and challenges that the health industry has faced in the last year through COVID. Well done to Zara and the uPaged team. I also met with Kylie Legge, the CEO of Place Score. Place Score is a company which collects human-centric data to guide decisions on planning within cities and towns. The $186,000 Boosting Female Founders grant has helped Kylie's business create a nationally consistent online platform for measuring and tracking liveability in urban environments from a community perspective. The idea is that different levels of government and the private sector can use these insights to understand community values and be better informed when making investment and planning decisions. The third recipient who I met with is Cate Hull, the CEO and founder of Freight Exchange. Kate helped develop a digital market for freight connecting carriers with shippers and enabling the efficient management of freight in one place, in particular removing some of the paperwork that currently bedevils freight practices. Cate was keen to expand the reach of Freight Exchange, and the $400,000 Boosting Female Founders grant has enabled Cate to launch her business in a multimodal and global way, including with sites in Hong Kong. Congratulations to Zara, Kylie and Cate on your vision, hard work and entrepreneurial skills. With these business women's ongoing determination, and with the assistance of Australian government grants, these Australian founded businesses will continue to grow and in so doing create jobs and help contribute to the strengthening of the Australian economy. COVID-19: Income Support Payments 198 10:36 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The Morrison government's focus on announcement over delivery is putting at risk tens of thousands of jobs of workers in our travel and tourism industry and the small businesses that employ them. The travel industry, both domestic and international, has faced some of the harshest conditions throughout the last 12 months. I have recently met with a number of small business operators and staff from the travel and tourism industry in my electorate. Many of them have said that when JobKeeper ends and JobSeeker reverts back to its original rate, these businesses simply will not be able to survive without further support. A recent survey of travel agents showed that just one in 10 businesses will survive beyond April without urgent targeted support. After months of pleading the travel agents got some assistance through the Consumer Travel Support Program, but, despite detailed feedback from the industry, the grants program has been so poorly designed that it's failing to deliver support for those who it's supposed to help. Many travel businesses and travel agents are failing to qualify for that support because of the way they define their turnover in their business activity statement. Despite repeated warnings, the government launched a program that it knew would not work. But they still went ahead and did it. It's seeing agencies close and jobs lost. Faced with the reality, the newly appointed minister continues to defend the program, which is expected to see many small and mid-sized agency collapse. Labor has repeatedly called on the government to address this issue, highlighting the concerns raised by the sector, members of the peak body, and the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman. The government must fix this bungled program before more agents are forced to close and more Australians lose their jobs. It's been clear for nearly a year that the broader tourism sector is not going to be able to snap back as the Prime Minister hopes it will. Labor has repeatedly called on the government to address issues, highlighting the huge challenge faced by the tourism and travel sector and the importance of these operators surviving. I recently met with Patrick Barden, who runs This Is Africa. He used to employ 11 staff; he's now got five left. As he said, who's going to process the clients' refunds and bookings when there are no staff after March if these businesses have to close when JobKeeper ends? Peter Burke, who represents Travellers Autobarn, has been a tourism operator since 1993. His business has overcome the Ansett pilot strike, 9/11, SARS, swine flu and bird flu and the GFC, but he's now on the brink. He's pleading for the Morrison government to take responsibility and act. In his letter he says: 'Why would the government provide enough support to almost save the tourism industry? We have come this far. We've not profited from JobKeeper. We've worked exactly as the government hoped, but we're bleeding money. We need a lifeboat to stop the slow leak.' That's the view of the travel and tourism sector. The government must support our travel and tourism operators and the staff that they employ. Boothby Electorate: Australia Day Awards 198 10:39 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby I would like to congratulate our Australia Day award winners in Boothby. The City of Mitcham's Young Citizen of the Year is Tom Morrison, who has been a vocal advocate for our local environment. Tom's work commenced through his Facebook page, 20 Metre Trees, which he started in 2017 to raise awareness of important large trees within Adelaide. The City of Mitcham's Active Citizenship award went to the Big A Charity shop in Hawthorn. Selling fresh produce from their community garden and second-hand bargains for over 20 years, the shop provides a welcoming atmosphere for many in the community who regularly stop by for a coffee and a chat. Along the coast, the City of Holdfast Bay's Young Citizen of the Year award went to Lori Chandler. A member of the Seacliff Surf Life Saving Club, Lori not only coaches athletes from ages five to 60; she has also worked hard to increase female retention at surf clubs. Through her effort she established the Girls at Seacliff committee within the club, which looks at ways to better engage with female members. The City of Holdfast Bay's Active Citizenship award this year went to Emma Sandery for her contributions to our local community. Emma established the Seacliff Community Produce Swap, where local residents can come together to swap excess home-grown produce. Emma has also created a 'Buy Nothing' Facebook group which encourages people to share, swap, give away or lend items for free to prevent them going to landfill. The City of Holdfast Bay's Community Event of the Year award went to Sarah Tinney for her Marilyn Jetty Swim. Participating in a bike and jetty classic for the seventh year, a group of adventurous women and some men dressed up from head to toe as Marilyn Monroe to raise money for the Cancer Council of South Australia. Over 300 Marilyns took the plunge for this year's classic, which took place earlier this month. They hoped to raise $100,000 this year, but Sarah and the Marilyns truly went above and beyond and blew that target out of the water; they have so far raised over $160,000. At the City of Marion, the Marion RSL Bowling Club took out the Sports Team of the Year award. The club was dominant throughout the 2019-20 season, with three of their teams winning pennants in the Metropolitan Bowls Association. Not only was this the most pennants won by any club; they did so while fielding just five teams—an incredible success rate. The winning teams were: Wednesday Division 4 South West; Saturday Division 6 South; and Saturday Division 7 South West. Congratulations to all of this year's Australia Day award winners. We thank you most sincerely for everything you do for our local community. It's volunteers like all of these outstanding local residents who make Boothby such a wonderful place to live. Western Australia: Bushfires 199 10:42 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle Last summer's unprecedented bushfires, our first national climate change disaster, were of course concentrated in Victoria and New South Wales. While there were significant fires in Western Australia, including blazes in Cape Arid and Stirling Range National Park, we were fortunate last summer that human communities in Western Australia were little affected. This summer we have not been that fortunate. There have been numerous fires that have threatened residential suburbs, including Cockburn in my electorate, and the fire that raged through the Perth Hills a fortnight ago that was devastating for those communities. There were 86 homes destroyed as a result of an inferno that tore through 11,000 hectares. Power was cut to 600 residential and business premises. It is estimated that the damage bill will run to in excess of $40 million. Deputy Speaker Irons, as you will know, the response from fire and emergency services was incredible, and the conduct of community members in terms of following advice and supporting one another was crucial in facing that emergency. Since that time, the outpouring of support from the wider Perth community, especially through the Lord Mayor's Distress Relief Fund, has shown exactly the kind of solidarity and generosity of spirit that we rightly value as part of our character in WA and in Australia more broadly. I particularly want to acknowledge the 500 professional and volunteer firefighters and the SES volunteers, without whose work we may well have seen loss of life, and we certainly would have seen much greater loss of homes and natural habitat. I know that volunteer firefighters from my electorate, coordinated through the Jandakot and South Coogee bushfire brigades, put in some 800 hours of work in hot, blustery, scary, exhausting conditions over the course of 12 days. I say thank you to all those people. I'm glad these efforts ensured that the fire didn't affect two critical sanctuaries—Karakamia and Paruna—that are operated by the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, in the Perth Hills. Our biodiversity is in such a bad state that we really can't afford to see these vitally protective enclosures harmed. It should be a reminder that the climate change disaster we saw last year in eastern Australia resulted in the scorching of 12 million hectares and the loss of three billion Australian animals. We already have so many species close to extinction. These fire events push endangered animals close to the brink. It's bewildering that in these circumstances the government has no interest in acting to address Australia's failed environmental protection framework. Instead it seeks to maintain the status quo, a weak and ineffective set of national standards and no monitoring and compliance agency to enforce them. That's despite the clear recommendations by Dr Graeme Samuel, who was appointed by the government to lead reform of the EPBC. The fires in WA, which coincided with the COVID-19 lockdown, have made it a very difficult start to 2021 for the communities that we all represent. But Western Australians have faced those challenges by living up to our values, by showing great resilience and forbearance, by supporting and caring for one another and by facing dark days together with as much energy and laconic good humour as possible. Braddon Electorate: Wave Energy 200 10:45 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon It's my pleasure to update the House on an exciting project that's taking place in Grassy Harbour on King Island. Thanks to a collaboration between the Morrison government, Wave Swell Energy Limited, motivated investors, the King Island Council and dozens of local businesses across Tasmania, about 1,000 tonnes of cutting-edge wave energy technology is currently being deployed and tested. Funding through the Morrison government's Australian Renewable Energy Agency provides this crucial data from the $4 million investment which is set to inform us about the potential of wave energy and how it becomes a significant contributor to global needs for clean, emission-free electricity. The trial at Grassy Harbour works like an artificial blowhole. There's a big underwater chamber that's open at the front, and as water passes into the open chamber it forces a turbine and consequently generates electricity—clean, green, renewable electricity. Research estimates that wave technology energy has the potential to contribute up to 11 per cent of the nation's energy by 2050. That's equivalent to the energy needs of the city of Melbourne. Once operational next month, this trial could potentially make King Island a global leader, with power generation that operates from three different types of renewable energy: wind, solar and wave. This is incredibly exciting for me, for King Island and for Tasmania more broadly. It was only a couple of months ago that we reached our target of being 100 per cent powered by renewable energy in Tasmania. We've reached this benchmark two years ahead of schedule, and this project will play an important part in moving Tasmania forward towards its 200 per cent renewable generation goal by 2040. The eyes of the world will be watching closely, and rightly so. Tasmania is way out in front when it comes to emission reduction and playing its part in the development of new, practical technologies that will reduce emissions globally. Of course, projects such as this could not happen without the support of our great businesses. Our small businesses, our manufacturers and in this case over 20 local businesses based in the north-west of Tasmania were contributors to the project. I know that Wave Swell Energy has sung the praises of everyone involved, the quality of the workmanship, the enthusiasm for the project and their genuine desire to get the job done during what has been an incredibly trying past 12 months. Projects like these have flow-on benefits, with flights, accommodation, vehicle purchase and hire, general supplies and retail purchases further boosting our economy and our region. I'll be on King Island early next month and am looking forward to seeing the project, climbing onboard and seeing how it's generating clean, green, renewable energy for the great island of King Island. Aged Care 200 10:48 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson The royal commission into aged care will be completed and delivered at the end of this month. The recommendations are vital to fixing the flaws—indeed, fault lines—in aged care in Australia. This government has failed senior Australians. This government has failed the families of senior Australians who rely on and want to be able to trust that their loved ones are being properly cared for. This government has failed workers in aged care. The coalition has had the past eight years to reform aged care and has missed the mark at every single opportunity. I, like many Australians am, frankly, outraged and disgusted by the failures of this government and its dereliction of our aged-care sector. That's why today I want to tell you a story about Judy, who contacted my office last year after the tragic loss of her mum. Judy's story has hit me professionally but personally too. Judy's mother, Joan, passed away tragically well before her time, presenting to hospital from an aged-care facility with pressure wounds, dehydration and malnutrition. She had widespread body wounds that had developed into narcotising fasciitis; gas gangrene, which is just putrid; and septic shock. This tragedy around Joan's death has been medically substantiated and well documented. It is not just family hearsay. To say Joan's pathology at the time of hospital admission was alarming is truly an understatement. Despite the trauma of losing her mother, Judy committed to advocating for the system to be better, to make Joan's passing something that would change things for the better. She wrote to the minister and submitted many questions to the commission. She pleaded for answers at the time. The minister's office promised her that the commission would answer all of her questions. Despite many questions being asked, the appropriate answers were never given. I am disgusted that this coalition government would deem this okay. Where is this okay? When is this ever okay? Every day we are losing senior Australians, like Joan, to a failing system that is underfunded and, quite frankly, under-regulated, not to mention understaffed. I implore those opposite to consider the loss of life we have seen in just the past year across this sector. The aged care minister may not know the figures but he should know the consequences. This government must fix aged care in Australia. Food Labelling 201 10:51 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker It's my melancholy duty to inform the chamber about the decision recently by the Australian and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation, which rubberstamped the previous decision of them, which has cut at the heart of the horticultural industry in Australia and New Zealand. Their decision will now allow fruit juices, and for that matter vegetable juices, to be rated as low as two health stars based purely on their sugar content, ranking them lower—lower!—than many diet soft drinks. Industry proposed a sensible middle ground solution, four health stars for 100 per cent Australian and New Zealand made fruit juice with no added sugar but that was rejected. I congratulate Mr Littleproud on the campaign but, unfortunately, we haven't seen success. What's most disappointing from the decision of states and territories like Queensland, the Northern Territory, the ACT, Victoria—and, of course, Jacinda Ardern's New Zealand—is that these governments have betrayed Australian and New Zealand farmers and they've let down people who rely on these health star ratings. The low health star rating for juice blatantly contradicts the Australian Dietary Guidelines which places fresh fruit in the 'eat more' category. These guidelines allow for juice to substitute for free—125 millilitres of fruit juice equates to a serving of fruit. It's almost inconceivable that despite the many benefits of fruit juice all-natural Australian fruit juice will attract a rating below 2½ stars. At a time when only five per cent of Australians get their daily recommended intake of fruit and vegetables, regulators such as the Australia and New Zealand Ministerial Forum on Food Regulation have a moral responsibility to encourage the consumption of fruit and vegetables. As a result of this change, I feel confident that we'll see less Australian 100 per cent grown fruit juice in trolleys. That's the last thing we need around the country. It's the last thing consumers need and it's absolutely the last thing Australian producers need. The Australian citrus producers in my electorate turn out some of the best product in the world and to think that an orange juiced without any sugar added to it would be deemed less healthy than Diet Coke—Mr Deputy Speaker, I'm sorry for the unparliamentary language—is batshit stupid. My call-out to Australians who are listening to this is: do me a favour, support these producers, next time you're at the supermarket put some 100 per cent Australian fruit juice in your trolley and tell the regulator to get stuffed! Calwell Electorate: Grech, Mr Charlie 201 10:54 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell At our Australia Day citizenship ceremony this year, it was an honour to be present when Mr Charlie Grech was named Hume City Council Senior Citizen of the Year. Charlie was unfortunately unable to attend in person to accept the award because he was in hospital and seriously ill. His son, Dr Charles Grech accepted the award on his behalf. Sadly, Charlie passed away last Wednesday, and I want to say some things today about Charlie's 40-year service to our local community. Charlie's community mindedness and his desire to make a difference led him to serve nine years as a councillor with the former City of Broadmeadows. His passionate advocacy for local issues saw him play an integral part in shaping some of the more significant and enduring community projects, including the Broadmeadows Hospital, the Rotary Park at Johnstone Street and the establishment of Northern Brite Industries, which today continues to provide excellent service and care to people with disabilities and their families in our community. As a long-time resident of our community, Charlie, since 1978, held a number of posts and responsibilities. He served as president and secretary of the Greenvale Residents Association, where he spent over 20 years as an active member and an office holder. Charlie and I first met when, as the newly elected member for Calwell, Charlie wrote to me demanding action on the long-promised state government plan to build a secondary school college in Greenvale. His energy and determination was aided by his very deep knowledge of how things worked, as he would always say to me, because, when it came to engaging local members of parliament, I was always put on notice that this was a man to be reckoned with. His energy was abounding and, when I was first invited to attend a Greenvale Residents Association meeting all those years ago to hear residents' demands for the school to be built, Charlie introduced me and began reading from my maiden speech, where I spoke of the transforming power of public schools. Charlie always did his homework. The decades-long community campaign for a secondary school in Greenvale, which Charlie was integral to, was finally given the go-ahead by the state government in 2020 and is due to open in 2022. Charlie continued to advocate for the residents of Greenvale, always willing to take action when needed. He lobbied VicRoads for improvements to dangerous roads and intersections and the installation of traffic lights, and never gave up until the job was done. In addition, Charlie spent many years as president, treasurer and committee member of the Rotary Club of Broadmeadows. Charlie loved his community. He cared for it and he fought for it. I was saddened to hear of his illness and rapid decline. I'm saddened by his death. Charlie will be a great loss to our community. He belonged to a generation of Australians who gave their time willingly to the betterment of their community. His voluntary work was commendable— (Time expired) Lindsay Electorate: Manufacturing, Hotel Energy Uplift Program 202 10:57 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay I am passionate about ensuring Western Sydney is at the heart of the new era in manufacturing. That's why last week I was proud to join the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction to take a tour of a great Aussie manufacturer in Lindsay, in St Mary's. Custom Denning are pioneers in the next generation of technology and they are great entrepreneurs, doing it for themselves. They're taking risks, they're investing themselves and they are succeeding. Grant and Scott showcase their range of electric buses and the new technology that they are developing, and, like all great Australian manufacturers, they're delivering a higher quality and better product than their foreign competitors. The minister and I then joined a great Aussie business, the Australian Arms Hotel, which is down the road from my office, on High street of Penrith. It is a fantastic local pub. We announced the Morrison government's $10.2 million investment into the Hotel Energy Uplift Program. This program will help small and medium sized hotels, motels and serviced departments, like the Australian Arms as well as others right across the country, to access grants of up to $25,000. These grants can go towards things like upgrading their air conditioning, refrigeration, windows, insulation, and more, for energy efficiency. By helping them become more energy efficient, we are also helping them drive down their own electricity bills. This program will also help support more local jobs, with electricians, carpenters, engineers and plumbers all ready to help businesses with their installation. Business people in Lindsay know how important it is to deliver affordable, reliable energy and to create more local jobs. We know that local hotels have been hit particularly hard by the coronavirus pandemic, so I was pleased to hear from Luke that people are coming back into the pub, locals are coming back to work and business is improving. Delivering lasting energy savings for these businesses will help them get back to doing what they do best. I also hosted a forum with the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. That was an opportunity to hear from local businesses about how they're going through the coronavirus pandemic, to give feedback on energy and for us to have some really good discussions. I was really pleased to hear from the manufacturers in the room about how our manufacturing strategy as well as our energy policies are supporting their local businesses. I want to thank everyone in my community of Lindsay who came out and supported the minister's visit, and I look forward to seeing you all back in Lindsay when I get home soon. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 202 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Tourism Industry 202 11:01 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the dire financial situation facing travel agents and the tourism industry in general as a result of Australia's current health and economic crisis; (2) notes that: (a) travel agents play a significant role in our tourism industry, sustaining businesses and employing thousands of people across Australia; (b) tourism was one of the first industries to be hit and will likely be one of the last to recover; (c) for many of our approximately 40,000 travel agents, the cost of staying open in order to reimburse customers who were forced to cancel holidays is contributing to significant losses; and (d) with international travel restrictions likely to remain in place for the foreseeable future, travel agents need urgent assistance; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) develop a comprehensive industry-specific support package for the tourism industry, which acknowledges the important contribution this sector makes to the economy; and (b) provide an urgent lifeline for travel agents on the brink of collapse, instead of the inadequate loss carry-back scheme, for which the vast majority of travel agents appear to be ineligible. This is an important motion that relates to travel agents and the significant role that they play in our tourism industry. They sustain businesses; they employ thousands of people across the country. Many are just mum and dad small businesses in neighbourhoods. We know that tourism was immediately one of the hardest hit industries once the coronavirus hit Australia. We know that for many travel agents, around 40,000 across Australia, the cost of staying open in order to refund and rearrange travel arrangements for people who were forced to cancel holidays is absolutely—you can imagine not earning any money, but still having to keep your doors open to pay back fares and to rearrange the many travel arrangements that had been made. They have been working tirelessly for zero money for the last 12 months. We know that the majority of the profit made in travel agencies is through international travel, and they have really been suffering. International travel restrictions will likely remain in place for a number of years in the future. Travel agents needs urgent assistance. We need the government to develop a comprehensive industry-specific support package for the tourism industry that actually works for the travel agents and acknowledges the important contribution that they make. An urgent lifeline is needed for travel agents who are on the brink of collapse. The travel agents I talk to in my electorate are all on the brink of collapse. We know a scheme has been purpose-built for travel agents, but we need a scheme that actually works—not the inadequate loss carry-back scheme for which the vast majority of travel agents appear to be ineligible. I was recently contacted by Tashi Lachman who, together with her husband, owns and runs Thor World Travel, a long-established travel agent in my electorate, in Frome Road in Adelaide. It has been running since 1988. Tashi is absolutely desperate because she's got no idea how to keep her business open through 2021. She relayed to me the announcement of $128 million in grants to the sector was incredibly welcome, but the application process is a shambles. It's too confusing and has resulted in many travel agents missing out on the grants they could have been eligible for. The instruction from the Australian trade and investment group was to apply based on the business's Australian GST revenue. As a result, Tashi was eligible for only $4,000. But this does not reflect the actual losses travel agents have faced. Tashi has tried to reapply using her adjusted business activity statements, but Services Australia is unable to assist unless the ATO provides a new certificate. She then goes back to the ATO. The ATO say they can't do this unless Services Australia send them a request. The reality is that, because of the confusing instructions, Thor World Travel may miss out on the $20,000 it was likely to be eligible for. What a ridiculous catch 22. It's not as if travel agents didn't have enough to worry about, now they have to worry about the botch up of this particular grant. There are countless travel agents in my electorate and around Australia in the same position. This is typical of the government—big on announcements but very poor when it comes to detail and implementation. We've been calling for a targeted, sustainable support package for travel agents for a long time, because travel agents like Tashi and her husband are still struggling and are facing 12 months of uncertainty, if not longer. They've managed to keep their doors open and keep their staff, thanks to JobKeeper, but they're now concerned that JobKeeper may end, and that will absolutely ensure they will not be able to operate. Since the announcement that international borders are unlikely to open before 2022, even more of Tashi's clients have decided to ask for refunds for trips booked for the coming year. This hurts the business even more. Like so many travel agents across the country, Tashi and her husband are facing a very uncertain future, and it's heartbreaking. They started their business in 1988 when they migrated to Australia. They're proud small-business owners and they consider themselves fortunate to have always been able to work and support their family. They've never been a burden on the system. They've trained the hundreds of employees they have employed over the last 30 years. These are good small-business people. She wants her business to survive. The travel agent industry is a very important industry for Australia. We will need travel agents and the tourism industry to emerge from this economic crisis. Surely we can do better by people like Tashi and other travel agents who have given so much to our nation. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM Is there a seconder for the motion? Mr Shorten 00ATG Yes, there is, and I reserve my right to speak. 11:06 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Every single electorate across this country has travel agents who go about their business every day and try to help Australians realise their ambitions and their dreams. There are of course many Australians who dream about owning their own home. There are Australians who want to retire with dignity. But people also want and dream about the opportunity to travel overseas as part of the choices they have in their life, and travel agents are a part of fulfilling that. But, of course, as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, many travel agents have been brought to the precipice because of the simple fact that when we have international border closures it is almost impossible for anybody to book with confidence or to be able to make decisions about where they're going to be in only a few short months. To take myself as a classic example of this, I had booked a trip to Queensland at the end of this month, but the lockdown in Victoria has seen the end of that. Then there are the people who wanted to go overseas throughout all of last year, as well as those who are returning home. The government understand why it has been so critical to support travel agents throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. We've provided assistance and support through the JobKeeper scheme, which has been enjoyed by many businesses, but we also understood the specific need for targeted measures to support the travel agent sector. We have $128 million from the COVID-19 Consumer Travel Support Program, announced on 1 December 2020, that provides one-off grants for up to $100,000 to help travel agents continue to operate and process refunds for consumers. Those refunds have been a big burden on the travel agent sector. It is one of the reasons why, when we had the head of the ACCC, Rod Sims, before the House Standing Committee on Economics in October last year, we got him to formally state publicly that travel agents are entitled to take a share of the booking as part of a cancellation fee, so that every travel agent understood that they had choices and that they had options while protecting consumers, particularly in terms of the challenges they face with their cash flow. But that doesn't negate the fact that, because international borders continue to remain closed, travel agents need support. On 16 September last year, I met with the Australian Federation of Travel Agents as well as many travel agencies within the Goldstein electorate. We are an electorate that has a lot of retirees, who use part of their retirement planning to plan to travel overseas and see the world in a way that they may not have been able to do during their working life, as part of their choice in their retirement. The travel agencies were clear about the impact they were continuing to experience. Many of these businesses have been built up over decades. There are small businesses in the Goldstein electorate—and I'm sure in many members' electorates—where there are skills and expertise that has been built up over decades to build travel agencies which the communities are rightfully proud of. There is the point of trust and credibility. Yes, we can all get information on the internet, but it's about the integrity, trust and reliability, and the personal experience and skill set in understanding, what happens in different locations—making sure that customers have a full range of options, insurance and protection—that travel agencies embody. That's why they're so critical. It's also because they employ a very large number of older workers in the latter stages of their career—particularly women. Often, they have particular expertise from their own travel and experience to be able to guide customers. That's why the Morrison government has provided so much support through the Consumer Travel Support Program, to make sure that we have the back of travel agents through JobKeeper. We know that there are specific measures and support needed for the travel sector. That's because it's only travel agencies which have those skills within them which consumers rely on, which we want to have at the end of this pandemic, so that Australians who need to travel overseas can access the support services they need. The good thing is that $60 million has already been provided and paid for under this program. As of 1 February this year, 1,541 travel agents have received payments and another 1,003 are being processed right now. So if you're in the travel agent sector, we know you're doing it tough. We know you need support and assistance, and that's why we've provided it. The Morrison government understands the challenges faced by small business. The people in this place are doing everything they can to support them in these difficult times. 11:11 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I am speaking on this motion to support travel agents because it's time for Scott Morrison to wake up—to wake up to the fact that travel agents are doing it hard. I am, like every federal member of parliament, getting inundated by calls from travel agents, travel agencies and tour operators, especially, but not only, from those who deal in international travel. JobKeeper, which the Morrison government introduced for travel agents, is a good thing. I'm not here to have a Liberal versus Labor tit-for-tat. But come 31 March there is a crisis. The iceberg is going to hit the travel agency industry and tens of thousands of people agents, predominantly women and predominantly small businesses, are about to hit that iceberg, and the travel scheme that the government announced with much fanfare isn't working the way it should. It's red tape, too long and, because of the different accounting standards used within the travel agent industry, some people are getting decent support but a lot of others are missing out. What I want to do in parliament when I speak to Mr Morrison on behalf of travel agents is to use not my voice but the voices of the travel agents. I was just on the phone to a lovely travel agent before coming up here. She was in tears today because she has to retrench two of her six staff. She employs women, and this is a business which has been going for 17 years. She said: 'I don't understand why it's so cruel. I have to lay them off now as my directors duty, because I don't know if JobKeeper is going to continue.' How is it that we can be so cruel to our travel agents? If the government is going to continue JobKeeper after 31 March then just tell people! Just tell people now. And if they're not going to then they need to wake up to themselves. The travel agents I speak to have recovered billions of dollars for their customers and their clients. That's right—billions of dollars. Since March and February of last year, when COVID hit and the international borders slammed shut, Australians had billions of dollars of holiday bookings. And it hasn't been the government chasing the money, it hasn't been the sheriff's office chasing the money and it hasn't been Mr Morrison chasing the money for the customers, it's been travel agents. What is particularly cruel is that when they get the money back they of course have to refund their commissions in many cases. What we have today, right now, is 40,000 people on the phones in their lounge rooms, because their landlords wouldn't extend their rent. They have had to give up their super and they've had to negotiate all sorts of difficult payments, and every day they are chasing refunds for clients. So whilst travel has stopped, he travel agency industry hasn't stopped. Sometimes in politics, it's not a matter of left or right, Labor or Liberal. Sometimes it's just a matter of right and wrong. What's happening to travel agents is wrong. I don't understand why the government can't see what needs to be done here. Until international borders are opened again, travel agents should get JobKeeper, in my opinion. Until we don't have states slamming up the borders and slamming down the border, we need to have JobKeeper. We need a travel scheme which actually reflects that there are four different ways that the accounting industry calculate total turnover in the travel agency industry, which is the sweet spot for getting some government support. I just say to the government: this is not a matter of who's right and opposition or government; this is a matter of travel agents. I want to give you some words from people. One lady has written: 'We have had volcanos to deal with and we've had tsunamis. We have no complaints. But this is an issue which now the government needs to help us on.' Another lady has written to be and said: 'Since international border closures, I have been working at least 30 hours a week, seven days a week handling cancellations and trying to obtain refunds. I have utilised all my superannuation to survive and loans which have to be repaid to family and friends. I need JobKeeper to continue.' A travel agent said: 'I attended a Fight Cancer Foundation charity lunch the other day. It's normally held in December. Eighty travel agents attended the lunch. You can cut the anxiety with a knife.' The travel agents industry and tour operators feel deserted. They feel deserted and let down by their government. They feel they have been thrown on the garbage heap. They feel that perhaps the government thinks it can go online or travel agents are a thing of the past. We're not going to have overseas travel recovery until we back our travel agents. Please wake up Mr Morrison, and save our travel agents. 11:16 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I thank the member for Adelaide for putting this motion on. I have been speaking with the travel agents across my electorate and indeed across Australia for the past six months. The last speaker is quite correct. This has to be a bipartisan approach. I have stood in this Federation Chamber and on the floor of the House and I have called for the government to make an industry-specific package. We worked together to get the $128 million that is currently being fed out to those needy recipients through the travel agents. There are some 40,000 people in this industry. Eighty per cent are women. They are mum and dad businesses, sometimes generational businesses. Sixty per cent of those small family businesses are in regional and rural Australia. We have an obligation to ensure their longevity after this year. The borders will not open this year; it is quite clear there will not be international travel. These businesses rely on between 90-95 per cent international travel. They are unable to make an income from their current profession. I have been speaking with, Darren Rudd, the CEO of AFTA, in relation to the $128 million and also the potential for an ongoing 'travelkeeper', in line with the JobKeeper, for this industry. We can see that most industries have come off JobKeeper because they no longer need it. They have recovered sufficiently and they are back on their feet. They are able to make money and pay their employees. It was a great government initiative. It kept us economically financial and kept a lot of people in work. What we see now is that the travel industry is one of a handful of industries who require that ongoing support. We do need to approach it on a bipartisan basis. We can't say us and them. We need to work together to ensure that that happens. What you've seen over the past 12 months is an industry that has continued to work effectively for free. The borders were closed for the right reasons. The borders were closed for the health of our nation. Everybody agrees that it had to happen. When those borders closed, the travel agent industry was the first to be hit, and they would be the last to come out of it. But they didn't just stop work and apply for JobKeeper. They continued to work with $10 billion of booking fees over 12 months, to ensure that that $10 billion was returned to the citizens of Australia. At last glance they had returned I think around $7 billion to $8 billion worth of those travel fees. And not only did they not get paid, but the ACCC made a ruling that the commissions for the work they had previously done had to be repaid, so they were out of pocket for that work. But did they complain? No. They continued to do the heavy lifting for that industry to ensure that that money was returned to its rightful owners. They also continued to do the heavy lifting in getting our own citizens back into the country. So, we owe them a debt of gratitude for the work they have continued to do. And we owe them the opportunity to maintain their living, maintain their profession so that it will be there in 12 or 18 months time and so that they aren't on the edge of the cliff. I've spoken to literally hundreds of travel agents around the country, who tell me that they are facing bankruptcy, that they are having to hand back cars they have leased. They are facing an incredibly difficult time, but they are also appreciative of this government for the $128 million. They are appreciative of this government for the JobKeeper payment that was provided. And now they're asking this government to provide to them an industry-specific— An opposition member interjecting— Mr CONAGHAN 279991 I'll take that interjection—bipartisan approach—from the other side. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM I call the member for Oxley—and hopefully he'll enjoy his opportunity to be heard in silence. 11:21 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley Well, I'm happy to have interjections, because I'm not afraid of a debate. Talk is cheap, from the member we've just heard. Yes, the cliff is coming, but the cliff isn't some magical year or two away; it's right now. The industry is suffering now. I was in Cairns, on the ground, last week, and I can tell you, this government is not popular with tourism operators in North Queensland. And while he scurries out of the chamber, I say to the member: go up to Cairns, have a talk to the operators, look them in the eye, don't run out of this place because I'm holding you to account but actually have the guts to talk to those operators. The cliff is coming right now. Our tourism industry is still facing a dire financial situation. I refer to my own home paper, The Courier Mail, today. The front page says it all: 'Figures show tourist towns exposed when subsidies are cut off'— The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM No props—the member for Oxley will put that prop down. Mr DICK 53517 'Praying for keeps'—it's a front-page story: More than 250,000 Queenslanders were still relying on JobKeeper towards the end of last year, with fears there will be job losses across crucial industries - particularly tourism - when the subsidy dries up next month. New Treasury figures reveal more than 500,000 JobKeeper recipients have come off the pandemic subsidy, but some key tourism hot spots have remain disproportionately impacted. Queensland Tourism Industry Council chief Daniel Gschwind said that many operators would 'shed jobs' without government support. He said, 'We hold a lot of concerns for operators around the state. It's very visible in Cairns, but the same applies for the Gold Coast. When I was in Cairns last week as part of the federal opposition's jobs task force, I met with a number of businesses, and the Leader of the Opposition heard firsthand about exactly what is happening in regional and Far North Queensland. We heard over and over again that people are reliant on tourists, particularly international travellers, for their survival. So, this makes it an issue of federal concern. I don't want any more speeches in this chamber about how hard the industry has worked. I don't want any more cheap words in this chamber about what the government could be doing, what the government should be doing. We know what the industry has asked for. The postcode of Cairns has the highest amount of JobKeeper of any postcode in Queensland. It is not rocket science. The minister was there the same day I was in Cairns, and what did he come and do? He offered absolutely nothing: nothing to the tourist operators, nothing to the hospitality industry. One vendor told us in January last year that they had 530 guests going out to sea on the reef that day. At the same time this year it was 27 guests. Then we have all the nonsense from the government saying: 'It's something to do with the Queensland borders. It's something to do with Annastacia Palaszczuk. It's something to do with Gladys Berejiklian.' What rot. Seventy per cent of the tourist dollars come from overseas in Cairns, and this government tries to have a fig leaf and say, 'It's something to do with border closures.' It is nonsense. Instead of ignoring the tourist operators, the businesses are crying out for help. The JobKeeper repeal, which this government has committed to by the end of March, will see the industry drop off a cliff. More than 250,000 people in Queensland alone are still counting on it for survival. The government says on one hand the economy is recovering well, 'building back' or whatever is the latest marketing slogan the Prime Minister is on about. In reality it's working from the same old playbook, looking after itself this time by using businesses in metropolitan areas that are doing well as an excuse to rip money away from regional businesses, whose revenue is still down and who may never recover without ongoing subsidies. So today I call on the government. I want clear answers about what's replacing JobKeeper for the struggling tourism sector in Queensland at the end of March. We need an industry-specific support package. Talk to the tourism operators; they'll tell you exactly what they need. If you don't have a plan, continue JobKeeper. Protect jobs, invest in skills, look after the national asset that is our tourism industry, built up through so many decades. Our economy in Queensland relies on JobKeeper—the tourism sector right up and down the coast, from Cairns to the Whitsundays to Hervey Bay, right down to the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast. This shouldn't be a debate we're having in this parliament. This government should be looking after the tourism industry. Talk is cheap. Today I call on the Morrison government to do the right thing and support JobKeeper for tourism in Queensland. (Time expired) 11:27 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong Thank you to my colleague, the member for Adelaide, for raising this issue. We've all heard so many times about the effect COVID has had on our economy. Unemployment soared through 2020, and service industries ground to a halt. The government had to mobilise, and through schemes like JobKeeper and JobSeeker we were able to shift rapidly and keep most people's heads above water. Almost a year on, we're finally seeing the effect these reforms had. After just a few months, growth is bouncing back, unemployment has turned the corner and, notwithstanding the handful of quick lock downs like we're seeing in Victoria right now, life seems to be returning to a form of normal—a new normal. Economic data released recently shows the economy rebounding across most sectors. Shopping is back up to where it was, as are hospitality visits and other sectors. But one sector remains in the doldrums: the travel industry. Of course, it stands to reason: borders are closed for our safety, and the lack of international travel has been one of the things that has kept Australia as one of the healthiest in the world last year, but the follow-on effects are pretty grim for the travel industry. Bennelong has self-travel agents, and I've spoken to many of them in recent months. It is clear that 2020 has been the toughest year that they have ever faced. I've heard stories of the pain of individuals working in the industry, uncertain about how long they may have a job. I have heard from small-business owners expressing their frustration and concerns for their staff. I've heard from businesses down the line who support the travel industry in various ways and have seen their biggest customers dry up. Many have pointed out one of the unique paradoxes of the travel industry: while airlines are huge companies, many with international or government backing, over 70 per cent of travel agents are small businesses and franchises. They don't have the capacity to absorb shocks, so the crisis has gone to the heart of their small family businesses. This pain has travelled down through the industry to its customers, and plenty have felt the pain in the hip pockets over the holidays which have been planned and then cancelled. Many of these people have lost large amounts of money and received huge inconveniences that we must find ways to address. However, their particular plight is not the matter at hand here. Frankly, it deserves a debate all of its own. Thankfully, the government has brought in specific reforms to address the unique concerns felt by the travel industry. At the beginning of December the government announced the COVID-19 Consumer Travel Support Program. This $128 million set of grants allows travel agents to claim between $1,500 and $100,000 to ensure they continue to operate. Nearly half of this allocation has already been spent, but I would encourage any travel agent in trouble to look at this scheme. Additional to these bandaid solutions, we're also investing in our regional tourism offerings to encourage people who would otherwise be going overseas to travel domestically. Millions of dollars have gone to Tourism Australia, national parks, the Recovery for Regional Tourism Fund and, of course, support for the airlines. Together this will help domestic tourism get back on its feet, which will in turn provide the demand that travel agents need to survive. So it is clear that, while there are huge amounts of pain in the industry, the government is moving to help those who are needing it and has recognised the unequal nature of the economic recovery. I'm confident that we will retain this flexible approach through the coming year so that we can adapt to any further systemic shocks that this chaotic and adaptive virus may bring. Most importantly, I look forward to a time in the near future when we can all get vaccinated and get back to travelling as we did before 2020. While support grants will keep businesses above water, nothing will be as good as businesses working as they are designed to do and getting us back out to see the world—and getting the world to come and see us. 11:31 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin I rise to speak in support of the motion moved by the member for Adelaide. The government's mantra that Australia has not been hit as hard as most other countries by COVID-19 and that we're doing so well in comparison with most other countries is no comfort at all to the tens of thousands of people whose lives have been left in turmoil by COVID-19 here in Australia—people who have lost lifelong jobs, who have now got no income, who have lost their savings and even their superannuation, and who have little prospect of getting a job in the future because of either their age or their lifelong experience in one industry alone. There is no sector that has been hit harder with respect to all of this than the travel sector. With no warning and no foresight, they've had the rug pulled from under them. Their businesses have literally vanished. There are some 40,000 people who work in the travel industry today, and over 70 per cent of them are women. There are about 4,000 travel agents throughout the country, and most are in small family owned enterprises that have often taken out loans to set up their businesses, that have been operating pretty much on a shoestring budget and that now find themselves with no income and no prospect of their business reviving in the near future. They'll also find themselves, unlike most other businesses and as others have already said, actually refunding money from previous years' earnings. Even worse, given what the government has already done in terms of support—I'm talking about JobKeeper, JobSeeker and the $128 million assistance package—the reality is that there is also some discrimination in terms of the way they get all of that support. It's discrimination that is brought about both because of Australia's tax laws and the way that the government has structured the support packages, including JobSeeker. I have spoken to some travel agents in my part of Adelaide who are all struggling to get those benefits simply because of the way they manage their operations; indeed, one of those people, Connie Dziwoki, who I spoke about in this place only a few weeks ago and who I know has since written to several government ministers about her dilemma, makes that absolutely clear. It's to do with the way they report their income for the purpose of their business activity statements. Business activity statements can be reported in different ways and the same outcome results in terms of the tax that they are obliged to pay. How these people report, however, determines the level of assistance that is given to them from the government's $128 million package. It turns out that two identical operators, literally working in the same area in the same kind of travel agent business, can receive a vastly different amount of support. It's different almost to the point of 10 to one. In this particular person's case—she operates Genesis Travel and Cruise—the amount she has actually been offered as part of the assistance package is just over one-tenth of that offered to a similar business, simply because of the reporting nature. What has the government's response been to all of that? 'We will not allow you to change or amend your funding application,' because, of course, that means they would have to pay out a lot more money—I'd imagine that's the real reason behind it. When they realised that there was an anomaly in the reporting method they put on a cut-off date of 4 January, saying that after that you cannot amend your application and therefore you will only be entitled to the amount based on the figures you originally supplied, not the figures that would otherwise have, quite rightly, entitled you to the higher amount. That is simply absurd and simply unfair. One in 10 travel agents are likely not to survive if the government does not extend the JobKeeper program. If that happens, we will not only lose years and years of expertise but, quite frankly, we'll leave the whole travel agent sector decimated. In years to come when, hopefully, things do rebound we will not have the people there to give travellers the support that they've been getting for years and which they will depend on in the future. The government needs to extend JobKeeper, it needs to have an industry-specific support program and it needs to allow amendments to the application process. (Time expired) 11:36 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls I want to commend Mr Georganas for putting this motion before the House. It is certainly timely. This is a genuine industry that has effectively come to fore of the government's understanding. The government understands that it does have specific needs. Recently I had the opportunity to host around 10 travel agents in my electorate office. I heard firsthand how they have effectively had to work for the last 12 months whilst international travel, where they make all their money—they make very little money from domestic traffic—shut. They have had to continue working because around $4 billion of Australians' money was stuck somewhere—maybe in an airline's account, or some overseas travel agent's or tour operator's account or in some accommodation house's account. All this money has, effectively, had to be reprocessed back, either to be refunds or in the form of credits. This has been through the tireless work of these travel agents, effectively working for nothing. They are very grateful for the support of JobKeeper; in fact, JobKeeper is keeping them in business. However, JobKeeper is fine for their wages but they're also going to need additional help in relation to paying their utilities and their other ongoing expenses. That's why, in fact, the government put $128 million on the table to assist. Yes, as a previous speaker said, there was a large cohort of these travel agents who put in conflicting amounts for their turnover, GST or commissions. Those who put their total turnover in were compensated in what I would say was the right amount, but those other two categories have been left out. The government is moving to assist those travel agents because the government understands that this is a critical industry and that if we don't offer them the assistance that they need then they will go to the wall. This industry needs to be commended. The main issue of the travel agents who I spoke to—their sole issue—is to look after their clients, to make sure that more of that $4 billion that is still sitting overseas somewhere, or is sitting with an Australian airline company, or is in the form of credits or potential refund money does in fact find its way back. If these tour operators, travel agents, effectively go out of business because we can't get the right assistance to them, then we're going to have a whole cohort of Australians who are not going to be able to be quite sure who it is that's going to help them get their refund or get their credits lined up for when we go into the future. It is an amazing industry. There's a wealth of knowledge tied up in this industry. These people love their work. They love their work, primarily because so they make so many Australians very, very happy with being able to organise their tours and organise their holidays. It is an industry where you're finding that they are put into a very, very difficult situation now. They get their commissions at the time of the holiday but the bookings are made many months in advance, so they find themselves in a very difficult position. They do need additional assistance. I'm sure we are looking forward to announcements into the future. Firstly, getting this $60 million-odd, that's still outstanding, from the rescue package that was put in place by the government. The first thing we need to do is get that sorted out so that our travel agents can, in fact, get the money that the government intends them to receive. Then we need to look at how we're going to continue that support so that this particular industry, the travel agency sector, can maintain its workload into the future so that it can keep supporting all of those Australians who have so much money, right at the moment, tied up in an account somewhere for a holiday that they're yet to have. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation 209 11:41 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I move: That this House: (1) recognises that the Government has established the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation (ACCCE) as the frontline defence in the Government's fight to protect children from predators online, in Australia and across the world; (2) acknowledges that: (a) ACCCE brings together the specialist expertise and skills from government agencies, law enforcement and advocacy groups, in a central hub, to investigate cases of child exploitation and to implement prevention strategies; (b) in the period 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020, the ACCCE received more than 21,000 incoming reports of child exploitation, compared with 14,000 in 2018-2019, from this, 134 children were removed from harm; and (c) recent operations by the ACCCE removed 16 children in Australia from harm and arrested 44 offenders with 350 charges collectively; (3) welcomes the Government's significant investment in establishing the ACCCE, with $68.6 million committed over four years to further the crucial work they do to protect children; (4) notes the recent opening of the new purpose-built facility and thanks all the Australian Federal Police and state police officers for their selfless work in tracking and apprehending predators; and (5) commits to the ongoing safety of all Australian children, both online and in our communities, by continuing the Government's recent investment in anti-exploitation measures. As a young dad there is nothing more important to me than protecting my kids and I know it's the same for every parent in the Ryan electorate. Child sexual abuse is a very real threat in Australia. It is a scourge that we must not shy away from and we must tackle head-on and with courage. It's highly confronting. The things that we hear in this space are terrible crimes that you can barely manage to hear or to consider, but we can't stay silent on this issue. That is what the predators count on. I have said it before in this place: these predators count on us turning down the TV or turning the page of the newspaper when we hear or see the horrors of these stories. We can't do that. We must talk about these issues. We must talk, importantly, about its prevalence in our community, so that parents know the risk—they must talk about it with their kids—so that we can work together as a community to prevent it. It's for this reason that I rise and move this motion today on the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, known as the ACCCE. I want to start by acknowledging the Minister for Home Affairs, Minister Dutton, for being the driving force behind the establishment of the ACCCE and for his unwavering commitment to find, stop and prosecute these sickening offenders. In response to an increasing number and severity of reports of child exploitation received by Australian law enforcement agencies, in 2018 the Morrison government, with a $68.6 million commitment, established the ACCCE. For those not familiar with it, it is led by the AFP and brings together skills across public and private sectors, all working together in one central hub, to protect our kids. The ACCCE provides a capability that no single federal or state agency has by itself, provides a conduit for foreign law enforcement to tackle the borderless crime that is creating and sharing child abuse material. It has been joined by some world renowned child protection personnel now working right here in Australia. Last year I got to visit the ACCCE in person, because it's located in my home town of Brisbane, and I spoke to the many dedicated employees and officers who are working there. The work done by each and every team member is incredible and we are really in their debt for the work that they do. I just want you to imagine the work that they do because it is hard to fathom. They work through thousands of reported images of the most disturbing nature. They are going through these materials and these pictures, intercepting messages across the dark web, posing in these forums as pedophiles themselves in order to infiltrate the networks of offenders producing and sharing this content. Many of them, as they are doing this, are parents themselves and have their own kids in the back of their minds. You cannot even come close to imagining the challenges that their work poses. Thank you, a very real thank you that we're expressing today as a House, doesn't even come close to expressing the gratitude that they deserve. That's why I have moved this motion in this place to thank them for all their efforts. The difference that they are making is profound. Recently in this place, together with my friend the member for Macnamara, who's here, we launched a parliamentary Friends of Combating Child Exploitation in Australia and the ACCCE. It shows you what a bipartisan effort this particular field is. There are no politics when it comes to stopping child exploitation. I know that every member of the Labor Party is dedicated, as we are, to ensuring that it happens. The member for Macnamara's passion for this is greatly appreciated by me and other parents. During the launch we heard from the Assistant Commissioner Northern Command, Lesa Gale, and Detective Sergeant Kate Laidler from the AFP victim identification unit, who provided an update on Operation Arkstone, which is being run from the ACCCE Operation Arkstone has resulted in 46 children being removed from harm, including 16 from a child-care centre—these are kids in Australia right now—and 828 charges being laid. The victims range from 16 months to 15 years, with an average age of eight years old. The positions of the alleged offenders were child-care workers, a volunteer soccer coach, a disability support worker, an electrician, a supermarket employee and a chef. These are people who have been invested with a great deal of responsibility and trust by parents and our community, and they have abused in the most horrible way. Since its inception over the last two years, the ACCCE has led to 1,214 charges being laid by the AFP, 161 arrests and 28,000 reports of child abuse triaged. We owe them our great thanks on behalf of all Australians for the tough work that they're doing for Australian families. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? 11:47 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I second the motion. I'm pleased to follow the member for Ryan after his contribution and to support him in this motion. It is an important motion in the House. We on this side of the House are pleased to support it and to echo many of the sentiments expressed by the member from Ryan. We don't agree on everything, and the member for Ryan and I have sparred on a few different occasions, but on this we are absolutely united. I acknowledge him as the driving force in establishing this friendship group. I was pleased to support and help him and to co-chair, but I acknowledge his leadership and initiation of this important parliamentary friendship group. I hope that the need for it dissolves quickly, but I fear that is not going to be the case. I hope that as long as there is a need this friendship group established by the member for Ryan stands in this place as a counter to some of the horrific crimes and exploitation that we see of young Australians, some of our most vulnerable Australians. When I received the call from the member from Ryan to be a part of this and to co-chair this organisation, it was of course an immediate yes, and it was of course an immediate call to action to be a part of and to help support our incredible front-line law enforcement officers. We had our first meeting on 8 December 2020. We were briefed by Assistant Commissioner Gale and Detective Acting Sergeant Laidler. They came into the parliament and gave a briefing on Operation Arkstone and all of the different facets of that operation. They were going into some detail about the level of infiltration of some of these circles that the Australian Federal Police does and that their members do on a daily basis. You could see that even though this is their job, even though they are in some ways hardened by this work and they are two fierce, strong Australian women serving in the Australian Federal Police, there is no doubt—and this was clear in their presentation—that for them and their colleagues turning up to work each and every day and being confronted by the sorts of material and images that they are trying to combat takes its toll. It does. It would take its toll on anyone. Personally, I couldn't imagine being in their shoes, having to get up and go through the daily grind of working in this space, but they do it because they know it's so important. For every child where they intercept and prevent something that will change the child's life for the worse, they are doing incredible work. They are literally saving lives each and every day. I join the member for Ryan in saying that we don't just thank them for their work for the Australian Federal Police and for the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation but are also in fierce admiration of their work. We are in fierce admiration of the men and women who get up every single day to insert themselves in some of the most dark and predatory behaviours in our country in order to save and improve the welfare and the living experiences of our youngest and most vulnerable Australians. For that we say a deep thank you. In this place, I'm very pleased to follow the member for Ryan in acknowledging them. The only other bit I would like to say is that one thing that I've certainly come to appreciate and pick up as part of the experience of the friendship group is that it's often not strangers. There is obviously an online presence where there is predatory behaviour by people the young person doesn't know, but, as is so often the case, these crimes are committed by people who are known to the young person. I'm the father of a beautiful little girl, but I also used to work in a classroom, I used to work in child care and I used to work in kindergartens. It was great work and it was a lot of fun, but you also have a real sense of the responsibility and the duty of care that you have in those places. This is, unfortunately, work that must go on. I commend the member for Ryan for his leadership and initiative, and we on this side of the House stand in 100 per cent support of the government's actions in this space. 11:52 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman Last week, a 61-year-old Victorian male was charged by the Australian Federal Police for allegedly paying to watch live-streamed child sex abuse. A 42-year-old woman was arrested in the Philippines for her alleged role as a facilitator. As a result of the investigation, nine children were removed from harm. Last month, a 26-year-old Sydney male was arrested in his Lane Cove home as part of the AFP-led investigation called Operation Arkstone. He is facing child abuse material offences. Since beginning in February last year, Operation Arkstone has resulted in 17 arrests, 843 charges laid and 46 child victims removed from harm. Also last month, a 35-year-old male was arrested in Zetland, New South Wales, and charged with five counts of possessing child abuse material and one count of accessing child abuse material. A couple of weeks ago, I noticed a media report that actually shocked me. For years, proud parents of school children would take snaps of their little ones on their first day of school and post them on social media, yet, in this media report, the AFP were advising parents not to make these photos publicly available, because it might put the child at risk of being groomed by one of the child predators. This was not just a precautionary warning. The AFP had actually seen instances of online grooming in which the predator used information from a parent's photo to get to the child. We are living in a world in which four out of five children aged four years are using the internet. According to recent research, 30 per cent of these four-year-olds have their own phone or tablet. Fifty per cent of children under the age of 12 have their own personal device and 50 per cent of all children have access to at least three different devices. Remarkably, the same research suggested that many parents were perhaps a little apathetic when it came to their children's online activities. Just three per cent of parents or carers listed online grooming as a concern, 16 per cent sought out information about online child exploitation, and 20 per cent of parents and carers are not comfortable talking to their children about online child sexual exploitation. Sadly, we are living in a world now where our children have to be wary of online sexual predators. It is unacceptable to me and, I'm sure, to every other parent in this country. That's why the Australian government is investing millions of dollars every year to combat online child exploitation. In March 2018, the government and the AFP established the AFP-led Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation. The centre is committed to stopping child exploitation and abuse and is at the centre of a collaborative national approach to combatting organised child abuse. In the 2019-20 financial year, the centre made 161 arrests and removed 134 children from harm. This is a fantastic result, yet sadly the number of reports of child sexual exploitation is increasing. The following year there were more than 21,000 reports made—an increase of around 7,000. After the Lane Cove arrest last month, AFP Detective Superintendent Ben McQuillan said this: "Our investigators have been combing through every image, video and communication since Operation Arkstone began, to find and bring to justice those who carelessly abuse and forever traumatise our children,"… After the arrest in Zetland, AFP Detective Sergeant Jarryd Dunbar said this: "Online offenders may believe they are anonymous but they are not. It doesn't matter where they live, the AFP together with our partners across Australia and around the world are keeping a watch on every corner to protect our children,"… The message is clear: the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, in partnership with other agencies and task forces, with the support of the federal government, will track down and arrest anyone involved in the abuse and exploitation of children. The more we can educate our kids about stranger danger online, the more savvy they will be and the less likely they will be at risk. I was somewhat heartened during a visit last week to Tullawong State School in my electorate of Longman when I spoke to students about Safer Internet Day. Quite of a few of the young students, particularly those who play games like Roblox online with their friends, were savvy about not interacting with strangers online. One boy even said that he would check with his friends to make sure that the person in the game was actually who they claimed to be. It's a start. The much-needed growth in awareness and education is beginning to come through, but it is not fast enough. Let's all do our part to educate our kids and grandkids when it comes to e-safety. For more information and helpful tips on how to protect your children and grandchildren from this scourge on our society, please go to esafety.gov.au. 11:57 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand I thank the member for Ryan for moving this important motion and recognise his ongoing interest in this issue and the advocacy that he has done in this House on this cause since being elected. It is a cause that is shared by all of us in this building. There wouldn't be a single member of parliament from any political party of any particular persuasion that would not be as equally committed to stamping out this most heinous, most repulsive and most revolting of crimes—child abuse. The motion rightly recognises the outstanding work done by the Australian Federal Police and, in particular, the ACCCE. I'm pleased to support this motion that recognises this vital work and the role that our law enforcement agencies and policymakers across the spectrum play in keeping our children safe from predators. There were more than 21,000 reports of child exploitation to the ACCCE in 2019-20. All of us in this place agree that the ACCCE and the AFP perform many crucial investigative, intelligence and national security functions in this fight, and we can all agree that this cause should be above politics of any kind. We can have differences of approach. We can discuss the best way to deal with this scourge. But we do it in good faith. We do it knowing that all sides of this chamber are trying to get to the same end goal. The ACCCE's objective to free children from exploitation through its four pillars would be supported by all members—preparing future capabilities and technologies to counter child exploitation, preventing the exploitation of children, intervening earlier in the abuse of victims, protecting victims from further victimisation, protecting the wellbeing of members and supporting authorities to pursue and prosecute child sex offenders and remove victims from harm. Child exploitation didn't stop with lockdowns during COVID-19. It never takes a break. Unfortunately, this is a crime that is growing exponentially. Officers have continued to be at the coalface, fighting this crime during the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, child exploitation cases more than doubled in the first months of COVID-19. The AFP laid 1,078 child exploitation charges against 144 people in the 10 months to May 2020. It's an outstanding job, but it reflects a horrific reality. The officers at the AFP have worked tirelessly throughout 2020 to keep Australian children safe. As the motion notes, recent operations in Australia removed 16 children from harm and arrested 44 offenders, laying 350 charges against them collectively. It's worth reflecting on what those statistics mean in the real world, what the consequences of those actions by the AFP mean to those children. The mind boggles. It's an incredible contribution that these officers have made. The AFP has also assisted with eight international arrests over the 12 months to November 2020. These officers do an incredible service to our nation and to children across Australia, but they need our support in the work that they do. Child exploitation is a heinous crime and the officers who do this work are exposed to images and to situations that are traumatising, that are horrific, that none of us even like to think about, let alone confront face to face. We really need to make sure that, as a government, we support AFP officers who do this critical work to ensure they get access to the services and support that they need so that they aren't paying a price for doing this invaluable work for the nation. All of us have a role to play in this fight against child abuse and child exploitation, in this fight to stamp it out. Law enforcement is on the front line against offenders, but all of us—in our communities and in our families, as parents, as family members—have a role to play in having a hard conversation with our families, with our children about these risks. As the member for Longman rightly pointed out in his contribution, it's hard to have these conversations. It's awkward. It makes us feel terrible. But we need to confront this for the sake of our children. So have that conversation with kids about knowing who they're engaging with on the internet, about knowing what the risks confronting them are. It's uncomfortable, it's awkward, but it's a small price to pay in the face of statistics that are, frankly, horrifying and that show the growing nature of this threat around the world. All of us have a role to play in this chamber, in our communities, in our families, and I thank all Australians who are united in their common purpose to fight against this scourge against children in our society. 12:02 Mrs ARCHER 282237 Bass As I've said in this chamber previously, no group in our community is more deserving of our protection than our children. I'm extremely proud of the government's commitment and tangible action to ensure our children are kept safe from harm and that offenders are brought to justice, and I'm very encouraged by the bipartisan support that we see in this place for this issue. The Australian government has provided the Australian Federal Police with $68.6 million to drive a world-leading response to counter child sexual abuse. As part of this funding, in September 2018 the Minister for Home Affairs announced the launch of the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, a world-leading centre coordinating responses to counter the online exploitation of children. Collaboration is key to addressing the scourge that is online child sexual abuse. The ACCCE works closely with the states and territories joint exploitation teams—JACETs—as well as with international law enforcement counterparts, industry, nongovernment organisations and research bodies to strengthen the domestic and global responses to these crimes. It was this very collaboration between the Tasmanian JACET, the AFP and the ACCCE that was responsible for a warrant executed against a Tasmanian man in December, who was charged with child exploitation. We like to think that abusers don't live in our own backyards, but they do. They are our neighbours and in our community and often in positions of trust. Just last week in Hobart, a man who worked at a local childcare centre was charged with producing child exploitation material. In my own northern Tasmanian community, a Riverside man was charged last year with child exploitation after a lengthy AFP investigation as part of Operation Molto. Operation Molto is the most recent ACCCE coordinated national operation, involving police in all Australian states and territories, and has led to 65 offenders being charged with 525 offences and 18 children removed from harm. That's a very difficult statistic to say out loud, and it brings home the point that these operations are not just about numbers. The fact that 18 innocent children were abused is horrifying and utterly devastating. Sadly, too, as the pandemic has brought a variety of challenges, COVID has also seen a significant increase in the amount of child abuse material downloaded successfully on the dark web. Between April and June of last year there was an average increase of about 163 per cent in activity compared to the same period in the year before. The government has made the protection of children a priority and has reformed laws to achieve this aim. In September 2019, the Combatting Child Sexual Exploitation Legislation Amendment Act came into effect in response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. It addresses difficulties that operational agencies face in investigating and prosecuting new child sexual abuse related trends. Additionally, I spoke in the chamber last year in passionate support of the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Act 2020, which came into force in June last year. This legislated a number of much-needed measures, including mandatory minimum penalties of at least four years imprisonment for the most serious offences and for repeat offenders. Proper funding and effective legislation both to track down and sentence offenders are necessary but it is imperative that we instil protective behaviour in our children, teaching them how to keep themselves safe online and offline. Recent ACCCE research indicates that only 52 per cent of Australian parents and carers talk to their children about online safety, which is a really scary statistic. As a parent of five myself, I know that I am concerned about the amount of time that my children spend online and recognise that I need to have continuing conversations with them to ensure that they're protected when they're on their devices. The eSafety Commissioner website and the thinkuknow.org.au website, along with terrific organisations such as Bravehearts and The Alannah and Madeline Foundation, are great resources for parents and carers. They have an incredible amount of useful tools and information available to help so that we're all better equipped to deal with the challenges online and to teach our kids to protect themselves. 12:06 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons As an adult, I can think of no greater duty—none—than the protection of children. Labor supported the creation of the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, which aims to tackle the prevalence of digital exploitation and online predation. We are pleased to see that it's getting results, and all strength to its arm. The centre is mandated to do the following: 1. Reduce economic, social and individual rewards from child exploitation. 2. Reduce harm from complex, organised child exploitation networks. 3. Enhance capability and interoperability between the public and private sectors, and civil society. 4. Enhance community confidence that authorities, civil society, and the private sector are addressing the issue of child exploitation. In the House an hour or so ago, there was a very good debate on the role that social media platforms have played in spreading hate and disinformation generally. That debate was during a private member's motion brought by the member for Mallee, Dr Webster, who herself has been targeted in the most egregious way on social media. But many people in the community are affected by what is occurring online. The social media platforms must do better in facing up to their responsibilities. This stuff does not happen in print or on broadcast media at anywhere near the frequency that it does online. Perhaps that's because over the years and decades laws have managed to keep pace with community standards. The same can't be said about the online world. The internet has been part of our world for 30 years now and is inextricably woven into every aspect of our lives, but it's still like the Wild West. As the elected representatives of our nation, we have a duty to keep the internet as free as possible while ensuring that it remains in line with community standards. That means pretty much extending the same standard to platforms that we expect of newspapers and television stations. However, we have grown accustomed to thinking that this stuff happens on the margins of the net, in the grimy underbelly of the dark web and peer-to-peer portals. But it is happening in full view, on popular shopping websites accessed by millions of Australians. In recent weeks, I have joined a campaign launched jointly by Victorian designer Anna Cordell and a group called the Collective Shout which seeks to get child abuse material and products off the popular shopping website Etsy. I mentioned this campaign in passing a few weeks ago in the House, but it's worth raising again. Etsy is a very popular, US based website which millions of Australians, mostly women, use to purchase gifts and crafts. Many Australians also sell their own goods on the platform. Members will be shocked to learn that Etsy, which describes itself as a 'mindful, transparent and humane' business and which caters overwhelmingly to women looking for handcrafted and unique products, is also platforming child sexual abuse material. As The Daily Telegraph reported two weeks ago, alongside handmade baby blankets you can buy rape dolls—they call them 'child sex dolls', but they are rape dolls—resembling children as young as 10. One is listed as having the height and weight of a 12-year-old and is photographed in teenage clothing. The listing promises 'discreet shipping' and plain brown boxes. These dolls are illegal in Australia. Importing one can cost you more than half a million dollars in fines and up to 10 years in prison. As of December last year, ABF has seized 191, up from 145 the year before. Also on Etsy, alongside gifts for Father's Day, you can buy T-shirts and underwear with slogans including 'Daddy's Little—' and I won't include the word, 'whore', and 'Daddy's Little—' and I won't include the word, 'slut', and others. When Anna Cordell was made aware of the disgusting material that her products were being sold alongside, she left Etsy and started a petition demanding that the products be removed, that the sellers be banned and that Etsy commit to ensuring that its site remains free of such material in the future. To date the petition has gathered more than 33,000 signatures, including my own, and I would certainly encourage members to join us. Unfortunately, Etsy appears to have turned a deaf ear. Some of the material is no longer there, but the sellers are still there. Etsy has not issued any public statement committing to keeping the site clean. This week Anna wrote to the Etsy CEO and board asking, 'How do factory-produced sex dolls and child sexual abuse fit with Etsy's stated values?' She continues: 'I am struggling to understand why, despite the petition, media coverage and widespread condemnation, you continue to remain silent.' Etsy's board is well credentialed. Some very fine people are on there. But they cannot hide behind the facade of their decency. They are complicit. They know about this now. They've been told that this material exists. They must act. They must get this material off their website. It is disgusting. There's no place for it. These well-credentialed, fine, upstanding citizens on the board of Etsy have nowhere to hide. If they don't remove this material, they are complicit in the crime of selling it. 12:12 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper Firstly, I would like to commend both the member for Ryan and the member for Macnamara for bringing this motion to the Federation Chamber today and indeed commend both of them for starting the parliamentary friendship group on combating child exploitation. I've signed up to that group, and I again commend them for starting that. As a former police officer, detective and investigator, I unfortunately not only have seen this type of material but also have dealt with the victims of child sexual assault and sexual abuse. I would like to pay tribute to those investigators who deal with it day after day after day, whether it's the Federal Police or state specialist investigators. In my 12 short years as a police officer, whether as a detective or as a police prosecutor, nothing affected me more personally than having to view this material. It was so incredibly difficult as a detective dealing with children who were so young that they couldn't express what had happened to them; they were that small. We as a society, and the structure that surrounds these investigators, must support these officers every step of the way. Otherwise, they will simply fall by the wayside. These are images and situations that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. We owe it to them to support them as much as we possibly can, as much as we owe it to our children to protect them from these monsters. I sometimes struggle with the concept of good and evil, but with this it's very simple: this is nothing but evil. These people are not the types of people who can be rehabilitated. Yet in society they are just another person, just another businessperson or the person who lives next door. You can't pick them out. I think that was shown in the recent investigation Operation Arkstone that the assistant commissioner spoke about at the parliamentary friends group that we went to. That was in the electorate just next to mine, and I remember reading about it in the local paper. One thing that struck me was one of the mums said, 'My husband said to me something wasn't right; there was something just not right about that.' I have said before that, if you think something is not right, you should go with your gut. I'd rather apologise to somebody for getting it wrong than apologise to my child or somebody else's child for not actually doing something, for not actually taking that step. I think that, as parents, we have that heightened sense of when something isn't right. So don't sit back. Don't stay quiet. If Mum, Dad or a caregiver think there's something wrong then they have an obligation to look into it. They have an obligation to start asking those questions. You also have an obligation to educate yourself about the Internet, about apps, about the websites that your children are looking at. Something that I cannot comprehend is that over the last 12 months, during COVID, this type of material and people using it increased 163 per cent. It's just unbelievable that we in a society have people who are prepared to engage in this, but it's fact. If we have people who are prepared to engage in that in Australia then we must increase all of our efforts and we have increased all of our efforts to target these people, to put them in the only place that they should be in the absence of capital punishment: in jail for a very long time. I commend the members for Ryan and Macnamara for bringing this to this place. I will continue to advocate on behalf of not only children but also the investigators. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. COVID-19: Economy 215 12:17 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley I move: That this House: (1) notes that in July 2020, the UN Sustainable Development Goals index ranked Australia third globally for our management of the COVID-19 crisis, but 37th for our long-term direction; (2) acknowledges that prior to 2020, Australia experienced 28 years of economic growth, where annual GDP growth peaked at 5 per cent and troughed at 2 per cent—but notwithstanding that GDP growth, inequality has increased, wages have stagnated, more people on low and precarious incomes are being left behind and the natural environment is in a fragile state; (3) recognises that COVID-19 has illustrated that it's impossible to separate the wellbeing of our people from the health of our economy, society and environment; and (4) calls on the Government to consider developing a national account of wellbeing in order to judge the success of recovery from the global pandemic, not just by how swiftly the economy rebounds, but also by whether our country is meeting measures of what Australians value as contributing to a 'good society'. Economic prosperity fairly shared must play a central role in our national agenda, but, in order for Australia and Australians to truly thrive, it should be embedded in a larger story of wellbeing, of people, of communities and of the places we live and love. My argument is that, if we take the approach of national wellbeing and national economic growth being indivisible and if we measure and report on both at the same time, Australia can be a country that not only is excellent in a crisis but also one that takes full advantage of prosperity in all of its dimensions. Right now we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to, as economist Kate Raworth has put it, 'change the goal'. Previous generations have done it. Between 1901 and the first World War, Australia built a thriving democracy based on the living wage, supplemented by an aged pension, an interventionist state and a near-universal franchise that included women but, sadly, not First Nations people. After World War II, Australian governments committed to full employment, mass migration, a huge expansion of housing and, later, the broadening of tertiary education. From the eighties, sweeping reforms deregulated and opened the economy; expanded the social wage with Medicare, family support and superannuation; and better protected the environment. These kinds of profound national changes all followed crises which impacted health, wealth and wellbeing, and in all instances political leaders and leaders from civil society, business and unions addressed immediate challenges but also took one step back to forge a simple, compelling narrative for reform that the population could rally behind and that would endure. Now, more than 40 years since the last period of major change, we can decide to view the health, social and economic damage wrought by COVID-19 as also providing the conditions for a re-imagining and renewal of the country we love. Before the events of summer 2019, 2020 and now, sadly, 2021, we were all aware that Australia is a country of people who care not just about their physical and mental health but also that of their families and friends. They cherish connection to community, are concerned about the health of the natural environment and the planet their children will inherit, and want to live in a society that is broadly equal and fair. But COVID-19 and devastating bushfires demonstrated to all of us how fragile what we value the most really is. Right now, we have an opportunity to decide how we as a nation can secure what we value. We can judge not only the economic sense of our recovery from the global pandemic; we can also decide to set our collective trajectory towards a future where prosperity is harnessed to deliver a uniquely Australian concept of national wellbeing, and we can decide to measure our success not just by how swiftly the economy rebounds but also by whether our country is meeting identified measures of what we value as necessary for a good society. Measuring wellbeing is neither a new nor a radical suggestion. Simon Kuznets devised a measure of national income after the Great Depression and he noted: The welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measurement of national income ... Infamously, the American Senator Kennedy described GDP as measuring everything except that which we hold dear. Once, Australia led the world in this area. The ABS was the first national statistical organisation to measure wellbeing. In 2004, the Australian Treasury developed a wellbeing framework, which was sadly discarded by this government, and in 2013 the Australian National Sustainability Council produced measures of sustainable wellbeing, which was work also discontinued by this government. And we now have a Treasurer who has mocked the suggestion of a wellbeing budget, which ignores both the history of GDP development and the modern international trends. Various international jurisdictions have considered what a national account of wellbeing might look like—for example, France's Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission, the OECD High-Level Expert Group on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, the UN Sustainable Development Goals, the New Zealand wellbeing budget, and the work undertaken in Scotland, Iceland and here in the ACT. We should be developing an Australian approach. I suggest a quadruple-bottom-line approach to measuring national wellbeing. Economy, society, environment and democracy could provide the foundations, and the specific line items under each of those measures could reflect a modern Australian description of what is required for or what constitutes a good society. We know we have plenty to build on with our pioneering work in the past and the strength within our communities and institutions. We can emerge from this current crisis with national policy settings which ensure that we grow not only wealthy but also wise and well, working towards the future we want together. It won't happen without a government committed to introducing a framework within which to do it, and I commend a wellbeing budget as a central part of such a framework. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? 12:22 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 12:22 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise today to highlight and defend Australia's profound dedication to the achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and our post COVID recovery. I think there are very few people in Australia who don't actually believe that we are in a very good position in this country and that we are very lucky to be Australians. That is not down to any accident; that is down to the good governance of this country by the federal parliament, led by the Morrison government, the state governments and territories working together and, indeed, local councils. Australia actually should be celebrating our achievements in the year 2020. That's not to say that quite remarkable tragedies haven't happened across this great country, but the framework that has been put in place—firstly, the response to the bushfires, followed by the response to COVID in 2020—is something to be remarked on and celebrated in this great nation. I'd like to firstly say that our response to COVID has been quite special and unique internationally. Australia took very early steps to close its borders internationally. That was internationally regarded as something quite unexpected. In fact, when you speak to experts who informed the evidence for that decision, you understand that it was a decision that had not been made lightly and had not been undertaken without a great deal of discussion and forethought. Indeed, the decision to close the borders was the greatest public health decision made in this country. That included bringing quarantine measures to Christmas Island so that those who were returning initially from Wuhan returned through Christmas Island. There was great international outcry that this was a negative step, but it has been seen to be a very important first step to keeping this country safe. Then there has been a whole ream of measures undertaken for aggressive suppression, understanding we remain connected internationally to the rest of the world but knowing we have to learn to live with this virus. We can't lock down the whole country without making sure we are keeping the economy safe. What I would like to say is that the dual economic and health crisis that this country has faced has been well addressed by this government's response to COVID, and, more importantly than that, this government cares about the things that are important to Australians. That includes the dignity and respect of having a job. We can see that clear philosophical understanding by this government, about the respect people have for the dignity of work, in the economic response which was JobKeeper. I have had so many of my constituents write to me, email me and phone me about what a lifesaver JobKeeper has been. Last week the Prime Minister came to visit Higgins, and I was able to introduce the Prime Minister to a number of businesses in my local electorate and show him the impact JobKeeper has had, with the temporary transitional support given to them to help them through what has been an unprecedented health and economic crisis in this country. The issue about JobKeeper is the philosophical underpinning that it was about keeping employees connected to their jobs, connected to their workplaces, connected to the dignity of work. We are seeing now that JobKeeper has been a wonderful transition to the other side of COVID. We are now in a good position nationally, albeit unfortunately still in lockdown in Victoria, for the COVID vaccine rollout that is coming at speed. The COVID vaccine rollout gives this country a very important opportunity. I welcome the COVID vaccine national rollout, and I hope all Australians get behind this in a bipartisan way because this is going to give us, as a country, an opportunity to get in control of the COVID pandemic in a way that would not have been foreseen one year ago. Being a medical researcher myself, I know that the speed with which this vaccine has been developed and manufactured, and is now about to be rolled out, is unprecedented in medical research history. It is in fact a modern miracle. The Australian government has got behind this vaccine development and rollout with investments, with partnering. To have the vaccine developed, grown and manufactured here onshore is a really good thing for the Australian population. It will, hopefully, turn COVID from a deadly disease into a serious and nuisance disease. In order to do that, we need to get behind the COVID vaccine rollout. To go forward as an economy and as a nation, we need to have the trust and respect of the Australian people. I think 2020 has shown that we have a government that is sensible, that is pragmatic, that is not ideologically driven and that is going to continue to lead Australia to better outcomes going forward. 12:27 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I thank the member for Dunkley for this motion. The wellbeing of people is clearly linked to the health of the economy, society and environment. But Australians shouldn't be surprised that, as the motion says, under the Morrison government Australia now ranks 37th in the world on the SDG index for its long-term direction. Indeed, on numerous critical measures Australia has been falling behind the rest of the world after more than seven years of this Liberal government. Australia is less productive, more unequal, more corrupt, less happy, more indebted, less affluent and less trusting of public institutions than when this mob over here were elected in 2013. That is nothing to do with the pandemic; it is the government's record. Global rankings and independent reputable data show that the Liberals mismanaged the economy badly for seven years before the COVID-19 pandemic, just as they're now mismanaging the recovery. The reason we hear the government say every day in question time 'our economic plan'—they keep talking about the economic plan—is to cover up the fact there is no plan: 'If we say "plan" a lot, people will believe there's a plan.' The truth is that the Liberals are hopeless economic managers. They hate hearing this because it is part of the myth, the brand propaganda, that people think they manage the economy well: 'Yeah, we're nasty, divided, cruel, out of touch and rich, but that doesn't matter; we're okay with the economy. Don't worry about the truth.' But the facts don't lie. Examine their record of failure in their eighth year of government. Real wages were lower in 2019; after six years of this government, real wages were lower in Australia than they were when this government was elected. We are third-last in the OECD globally for wage growth. Well done, government! Working families have less in their pockets than they had when this mob over there were elected. The government's response to this: new laws to allow bosses to cut wages. What a great idea! Shockingly, the latest OECD figures show Australia's economic productivity in negative territory. Under Labor productivity growth was the 10th highest in the OECD. Under the Liberals it ranked fifth last. Australia's housing market is now the third most unaffordable in the OECD. The government's response: wheel out nutty backbenchers to say, 'Let everyone spend their super on housing and push up the cost of housing'. What a brilliant idea! As has been said, our health response was led by state premiers and ranks eighth in the world for success. But the latest comparative OECD data shows Australia lagging badly behind in the jobs recovery, at 18th out of 28 nations. In 2010, under Labor, after the GFC Australia ranked fifth in the world for jobs performance. Today we rank just 18th. Even $1 billion of taxpayer funded advertising from the Prime Minister, the failed marketing man, is not enough to change the fact, or cover up the fact, that our economic performance was failing badly before COVID-19. We heard about JobKeeper from the previous speaker. Australia's only weathering the recession because of the wage subsidy schemes and the boost to social security that Labor and the unions proposed. For weeks last year this marketing guy, the Prime Minister, refused to act. Tens of thousands of Australians joined the unemployment queue in that gap, who should have remained attached to their employer. Eventually he introduced JobKeeper, a scheme so well designed that it has been milked by millionaires and billionaires to pay themselves executive bonuses. That just goes on the national debt. Well done, government! We should really thank you for that! Of course, a few weeks ago the Prime Minister turned up to the National Press Club to try a bit more spin to try and cover up and distract from this record of failure. Mr Dennis Atkins aptly wrote afterwards: It was the speech of someone who doesn't think deeply and whose vision extends only to the bathroom mirror. Australians deserve more from this government than a failed marketing man. When the PM won the 2019 election he opened his victory speech by asking: how good is Australia? He has since developed the truly inane habit of repeating that question over and over and over again. But an honest answer to the inane question in the eighth of this year of this government is: not good anymore. Australia's economy is going backwards and Australians are being left behind by the government. Facts still matter. As the member for Dunkley said, Australia is more than just the economy. The health of our society is about the environment and education outcomes. Have a look at education outcomes. Australian children are now outperformed by their peers in 23 countries in mathematics, 12 countries in science and 10 countries in reading. Performance in maths and science under this government, relative to the rest of the world, has fallen. Degree costs for students are amongst the highest in the world. The average annual student borrowing jumped 36.7 per cent in four years. Well done, government! We're happy about that. It's not good enough, but the Prime Minister tells us we're leading the world. We're leading the world in vaccines are we, government? We just heard that from the previous speaker. There are two continents in the world where you can't get a vaccine: Australia and Antarctica. Around the world 140 million people have been vaccinated. We're at the front of the queue are we? It's all a load of marketing spin. The facts speak for themselves. 12:33 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I thank the member for Dunkley for moving this motion and for making some of the points she did. I agree with the basic premise that it is wrong to separate the wellbeing of our people from the health of our economy, our society and our environment. Having a strong economy is not, and should never be, a standalone goal. No government should ever pursue a strong economy simply to tick a box or to say how great we are. As I said in my first speech to parliament: a strong economy is dependent upon ensuring that our country has all of the essential services and ingredients which are vital to our national wellbeing. We need educated, skilled, healthy people. We need quality infrastructure. We need social services to help those in need and we need a secure, protected and safe country so we can deliver a strong economy. But we need a strong economy to deliver each of those. They are entwined. We need a strong economy to ensure that people have the opportunity to reach their full potential and to provide the choice and freedom to people to live their best lives. A strong economy is the gateway to what Australians value. It's the gateway that ensures Australia has a world-class health system, which provides universal access to affordable medical services. It's the gateway to investment and innovative thinking so that we can get our best minds tackling environmental challenges, tackling health crises. It's the gateway to creativity, the arts, leisure, sports—all of the things which broaden our lives and bring us joy. Having a strong economy ensures that, when something like COVID-19 comes along, the government is in the best position it is able to be in to support the Australian people with support measures like JobKeeper, JobSeeker and JobMaker. I actually agree with the member for Dunkley that governments shouldn't solely measure economic success. We also need to measure and monitor outcomes in other areas. The government does this already through a variety of existing mechanisms. Because of the lack of time, let me simply focus on health. In 2017, the Australian government, with states and territories, agreed to the Australian Health Performance Framework—a vehicle to support system-wide reporting on Australia's health and healthcare performance. This was followed in December 2019 with the release of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare's 'national front door', which serves as a navigation tool to access data on the health of all Australians. As we can see from the national front door, Australia's health and wellbeing are improving in certain areas. For example, in 2017 there were 324 acute coronary events per 100,000 people compared to 379 per 100,000 in 2013. But the national front door also notes things that warrant attention, such as the increase in deaths by suicide. There were 12.1 suicides per 100,000 people in 2018 compared to 10.7 in 2009. It's important to recognise that the government responds to and is informed by these realities, because all of us recognise that behind a health statistic is an individual. Governments must always strive to use the data they have at hand to direct policymaking and improve outcomes. We can see how the government is responding to these measures and the monitoring of different systems by how it is responding to the increases in suicide and mental illness. It includes the Fifth National Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan and the recent launch by the government of the first phase of the $89.5 million intergenerational health and mental health study, which will focus on mental health and wellbeing. Actions like the fifth national plan and the intergenerational plan help inform our long-term direction. The economy is not some separate entity from individuals, nor is the wellbeing of individuals separate from the economy. They are interrelated and they must be. As the Productivity Commission's report into mental health that was released last year showed, the cost of lost productivity due to mental health was conservatively $12 billion. But we also know that you cannot measure mental illness purely in monetary terms. No government should ever be single-mindedly driven by economics, and we're not. A division having been called in the House of Representatives — Sitting suspended from 12:37 to 13:11 13:11 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Dunkley. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought uncertainty to all of our lives. We've lost loved ones, we've been separated from family and friends, we've faced lockdowns, businesses have folded and jobs have been lost. As our country begins to show the first signs of recovery, there is a growing sense that we need to change how we measure the success of our nation—to move beyond the traditional metrics of national income, such as GDP, as indicators of success, and to develop a new way of capturing our overall wellbeing as a country. COVID-19 has been a stark reminder to all of us, that it's impossible to separate our wellbeing from the health of our economy, our society or the environment. Considering more than just national account figures to capture our national success—to focus on the economy, of course, and the health of our society, our environment and the strength of our democracy—could provide the foundations for a post-COVID-19 or COVID-normal approach. A wellbeing approach or wellbeing budget would provide an opportunity for a genuine whole-of-government, joined-up approach. The COVID pandemic has highlighted the need for such a joined-up, whole-of-government approach, especially in mental health. Mental health isn't just a health issue. Your mental health is impacted by where you were born, where you live, where you work and your age. These underlying causes can impact our lives suddenly and often without warning: insecure work, housing stress and financial hardship. In its prebudget submission for 2020-21, Mental Health Australia said: There is clear evidence for the need to address the social determinants of mental health in order to reduce the impacts of mental illness. … Australian research has found people who have recently experienced financial hardship are 23% more likely to experience decreased mental health in the next year, and people experiencing severe psychological distress are 89% more likely to experience financial hardship in the next year. That explains so many people and their circumstances last year and into this year. Even before the pandemic, inequality was rising and wages were stagnating; COVID-19 has only made things worse, exposing the fault lines in our society, particularly in regional and remote communities. At the height of the pandemic there were 36 jobseekers for every job vacancy on the Central Coast, where I live. There were nearly 5,000 businesses with close to 19,000 employees on JobKeeper and many are fearful of what may happen when support is cut in March. It is measures like a wage subsidy, called for by Labor, which led to the UN Sustainable Development Goals index ranking Australia well for our management of the COVID crisis. However, the same index ranks our long-term direction at 37th. On Sunday, before parliament came back, the Treasurer appeared on Insiders and ruled out the possibility of extending JobKeeper, stating that it was always a temporary program. The Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe expressed concern about job shedding after JobKeeper is removed. The January Sensis Business Index highlighted 'increasing distress about the loss of the JobKeeper lifeline that saved hundreds of thousands of businesses from going under due to COVID-19 lockdowns.' From the survey, 60 per cent of transport owners said the loss of JobKeeper would have a major impact, up from 25 per cent in November, and 36 per cent of health and community services said the loss would have a major impact—again, up from almost 24 per cent. And 35 per cent of manufacturing businesses said it would have a major impact, up from 21 per cent. The government can talk about a recovery and that we are all in this together, but businesses and industry, particularly in some communities and sectors, are jittery. In the National Suicide Prevention Advisor's interim advice, one of the main recommendations was that the government should develop a Commonwealth process for reviewing new policies or initiatives to ensure that they assess any impacts, positively or negatively, on suicidal risk or behaviour. The government has consistently declared mental health to be a priority, and I believe that the Prime Minister is genuine in this commitment. The release of the Productivity Commission's final report on mental health gives the government a pathway towards reform. In his Press Club speech on 1 February the Prime Minister declared that there would be a new national agreement on mental health and suicide prevention this year. But what people across Australia need is action now. It's urgent. The delayed release of the Productivity Commission report wasted valuable time in which to begin implementing recommendations and actions of the report and the chance to respond in the October budget. This delay has also meant that no announcements were made during the October budget. The May budget is now only three months away, and the government's response: a mental health committee to report on the findings of reports stemming from the committee which began its work in 2018. We can't go back to the old ways of measuring wealth in society. We must look beyond income and start measuring our society as a whole. This will help us to emerge from this crisis a fairer, healthier society. 13:16 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney I want to start by acknowledging the member for Dunkley for moving this motion today on COVID-19 and the economy. The thing we can agree on in relation to the motion is the importance of remembering that the wellbeing of a nation and its people is a lot more than economic statistics—a concept the Deputy Speaker might find hard to fathom, but it is certainly true that there are a range of measures that should judge a nation and how well it's performing. But the disappointing aspect of this motion—and it's a disappointment that we see consistently through what the opposition is doing in this place—is its glass-half-empty approach to Australia. Unfortunately the opposition, at every opportunity, is determined to talk down Australia and its achievements. That is implicit in the wording of the motion we have before us today. It's a disappointing approach, because if there's anything we should have learnt from the last 12 months it is how high we can hold our heads as Australians on the global stage. Our response to the COVID pandemic has been to deal with an individual crisis, but through that response Australians and their governments have demonstrated all that is good about our nation and the reasons we are such a success. It is something I see in my own electorate. I see the greatness of Australians in helping each other. It is true to say that my electorate, by relative standards, is an affluent one. But it is still an electorate where there is so often a need for support for those who are more vulnerable. And I see, through the range of voluntary organisations that exist in my electorate, Australians coming to support each other. I also see that Australia is, despite what the opposition would have you believe, such a successful nation. As part of our duties as local members of parliament we all attend citizenship ceremonies, and it is fair to say that we get such a phenomenal response from those new citizens, who are so excited to be joining the Australian family because they recognise that there is no better place on earth to be making their home and their future. I particularly want to turn to the health aspects of wellbeing that are being raised in this motion. Again, I think the past 12 months have demonstrated the extraordinary success of Australia in achieving the wellbeing of its citizens. For example, the Lowy Institute has rated Australia in the top 10 nations in terms of managing the health consequences and the economic consequences of the COVID pandemic. Being in the top 10 nations of almost 200 is something we can be exceptionally proud of. It's also perhaps a time to remind those on the other side about what the Morrison government is doing to improve not only the nation's economy but also the health and wellbeing of all Australians, outside the conditions of the pandemic that we're seeing at the moment. Combined with strong and decisive action taken by this government and informed by expert advice, Australia's world-class health system guarantees universal access to affordable medical services and is ranked No. 2 in the world by the respected and independent Commonwealth Fund. That is why we have been so well prepared to meet the challenges of COVID. In addition, the government has continued to make significant investments to support access to high-quality medical services, along with longer-term reforms. Whether it's our strong support for Medicare—our NHS, but I would argue a lot better and more successful than the NHS—the support we're giving for life-saving medicines and their availability at low cost to Australians, our achievements in achieving a record level of bulk-billing, our investment in medical research to make Australia the leader it is and can further be in medical research and science, or the work that I've seen as chair of the House's health committee—all of these things point to the incredible contribution that we as a government, that we as a nation are making to the wellbeing of Australians when it comes to health. The National Health Reform Agreement sets a clear reform direction for all Australian governments to ensure we can help reduce pressures on public hospitals, shift more towards hospital avoidance programs and increase sustainability while improving peoples' health. The numbers speak for themselves: a record four-year investment of $467 billion into health; investment into Medicare of $119.3 billion over 2020-21; $41 billion for medicines funding and the creation of the new PBS New Medicines Funding Guarantee; ensuring hospital capacity with a $133.6 billion investment over five years. This points to the type of work that this government is getting on with. Of course we can make our nation better—the task of government is never-ending—but we can be so proud of all that Australia has achieved and will continue to achieve. 13:21 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin This is an important motion moved by my friend the member for Dunkley, and it raises some important questions about where we're going as an economy and, more profoundly, how we are doing as a society, and how we might do better. I was pleased to be in the chamber for the remarks of the member for North Sydney. He talked about his disappointment. Well, what disappoints me about the member for North Sydney and, indeed, about his government is their view that they are not only entitled to their world view, but to their own facts. This motion clearly sets out some facts that should be concerning to all Australians. This government is a government that seems resistant to truth telling in every aspect. We have seen that this morning. We have seen that in its response not only to the great challenge of closing the gap between Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians, but also to responding to the generous offer that First Nations people have given us to walk with them on their terms, not on the terms of this government. So I am disappointed that the member for North Sydney and the government, of which he is a part, can't accept these facts or some of the challenging statistics that the motion before us sets out. It does set out the great achievements of our economic growth, and that's something that we should celebrate; but we can't look at that in isolation from some of its consequences, in particular the increase in inequality. This is something that has been shown to all of us as local members. It's so readily apparent and hard to ignore, through the experience of COVID and the pandemic response, where the gaps between those who have and those who have not have been so cruelly exposed. This motion really asks us to consider two things: inequality and the consequences of growth. I would have thought that was a matter that members from all side of politics would be conscious of. It is the case that Australia is becoming a more unequal society. For me, that's a moral challenge. For those of us on the Labor side, it is a moral challenge. But we know now that there is an emerging economic consensus that this is actually a barrier to growth. It is something we need to respond to if we're going to ensure our economic recovery is all that it could and should be. We also have to reflect on the experience, more broadly, of the pandemic, what it has revealed, the gaps in our safety net that have been cruelly exposed, and also for us to think about what really matters to us as communities and as a nation. We know the things that we decide to measure really matter. They drive the decisions we make in this place; they drive the work of the public service; they drive our political debate. I share the member for Dunkley's conviction—also so eloquently expressed recently by the member for Dobell—based on her experience as a representative, and in her former life, that we need, as a government, to take a broader perspective on these matters. We need to ask, as the English commentator Will Huttner said, 'How good can we be' not to cheerily talk about 'how good is', as the present Prime Minister is so fond of doing, and to seek to mark our progress towards this goal of a good society, of a country every bit as good as the Australian people, all of them. This isn't a novel concept that's being advanced today. The shadow Treasurer, when he talked about the need to measure things more broadly, referred back to Robert Kennedy's1968 remarks that GDP 'measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.' In this place all of us but particularly those who occupy the government benches for now have the opportunity and also the obligation to do whatever we can to make life worthwhile for all Australians. We have the tools that will help us do this internationally, with the sustainable development goals and the work of the OECD, which is something that members opposite should have regard to. Yet the Treasurer seems to think this is something that's worthy of mockery, often in offensive terms. This is unworthy. He should have look around the community that he represents and recognise that we are less equal in Australia right now than we were before the pandemic and that this is getting worse. Before the pandemic, we were headed in the wrong direction. We can't continue down this path. We have often heard said in this place and elsewhere by politicians on all sides that we are all in it together, but, until we take a more rounded approach to measuring the work of government, we will not all be in this together. We need to turn this around. We need to recognise and honour the sacrifices of ordinary Australians by building a future that's secure for all of us. The DEPUTY SPEAKER G86 The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. COVID-19: Gambling 221 13:26 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) Australian Institute for Family Studies research shows that more than half a million Australian adults regularly bet on sports; (b) 41 per cent of these gamblers, or 234,000 Australians, experience serious gambling related problems; (c) in total, Australians spend more than $24.8 billion a year on gambling; (d) research from the Australian Institute for Family Studies shows that Australians who gamble have on average increased the frequency of their gambling and their amount spent during the COVID-19 pandemic; (e) the same research identifies that half of gamblers have experienced a deterioration in their mental and physical health during the pandemic; and (f) professional players in the NRL and AFL are increasingly experiencing online harassment and threats from gamblers who have lost money through betting on matches in which they participated; (2) commends the Government on its action to date to restrict the level of gambling advertising broadcast during live sports; and (3) encourages the Government to continue to explore options to further reduce the harm caused by problem gambling. Among the many other harmful effects of this COVID-19 pandemic, one very damaging consequences is going to prove extremely difficult to reverse. Australians already are the world's biggest gamblers, and today they are spending, betting and losing more than ever before. A survey of more than 2,000 adults who gambled, conducted by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, has found that one in three Australian gamblers has opened more betting accounts during COVID-19. The number of adults who gamble more than four times every week has increased by 40 per cent. Young men aged 18-34, who are already some of our most at-risk gamblers, have increased their average spending from $687 to $1,075 during this pandemic despite losing access to casinos, betting shops and racetracks for much of this year. Disturbingly, 79 per cent of adults who gamble were classified in the study based on their responses as being at risk of or already experiencing gambling related harm. Gambling in Australia results in enormous financial, personal and social costs to our community, and these are only rising. It ruins many thousands of lives and robs ordinary families of almost $25 billion each year. It's for this reason that I will always advocate strongly against gambling's further promotion and proliferation in our country. We are running short on time today, so I want to spend the last couple of minutes talking about what this government has done and what we need to be doing more of to protect Australians in this space. I want to acknowledge this government's efforts in restricting live sport betting. I cannot tell you how many families, how many mums and dads, have approached me and spoken to me about the prolific nature of gambling in sport. We all know. We've all watched different types of sport and been bombarded with live sport betting. What concerns me the most, particularly around young people, is that, when I was growing up—even when you were growing up all those many years ago, Mr Deputy Speaker Falinski—we used to be able to tell you who was playing full-forward for Collingwood or St Kilda or who was a basketballer or NRL player, but now it's not just about the players; it's about the odds. With the way sport and gambling have come together in recent years, young people are unable to differentiate between gambling and sport, and that is so very tragic. We've recently seen some of our headline sports stars come out in the media and talk about how they have received death threats because they didn't perhaps play as well as they should have and how people have lost money on their performance. While this government has acted to restrict live sport betting, much to its credit, there's still a lot of work to be done. While I have breath in my lungs, I can assure you that I will be continuing to press this government to act further. We've got to stop the craziness in this country, where people are spending $25 billion on gambling. That is the equivalent of six or seven brand new public hospitals that could be invested in by a government. It is $25 billion which is being lost by families, some of whom are unable to put food on the table or pay the rent. These gambling companies are raking in billions of dollars, whilst Australians can't pay the bills. This is something we've got to do. This is something I'll continue to press this government to do. The DEPUTY SPEAKER G86 Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Sitting suspended from 13:31 to 16:00 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 222 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mayo Electorate: Langhorne Creek Wine Region 222 15:59 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo The wine region of Langhorne Creek sits on the rich soil of a flood plain in a cool-climate region, resulting in high-quality grapes that produce many sought-after varietals. Langhorne Creek, in my electorate, is approximately 6,000 hectares in size, making it the second largest wine region in South Australia. I'm going to talk about just a couple of wineries at Langhorne Creek that have recently held special events, one being Bremerton Wines. It was established in 1988, when the Wilson family produced their first wine grapes from a neighbour's grapes. They planted their own grapes in 1991 and opened their cellar door in 1994. Today sisters Lucy and Rebecca run their family business and have just unveiled a new cellar door and tasting room in a beautifully converted, rustic barn featuring recycled materials from all across South Australia. Last week I attended the opening of the Barrel Room at Lake Breeze winery. Lake Breeze is a fine example of a thriving family business, with generations of the Follett family working together side by side. It's lovely to see a family—many generations—working with each other, deeply respectful and with a great love for each other. Lake Breeze first produced their wine in 1987 and opened a cellar door in 1991. The Barrel Room is a contemporary function space and has views across the vineyard. I'd encourage anyone to come and visit Langhorne Creek in my electorate. You won't be disappointed. It's a beautiful place to be. Ivermectin 223 16:01 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes On Saturday The Canberra Times published an article in which it referred to ivermectin as both a treatment and prophylaxis for COVID as 'a snake oil remedy'. Therefore, I'd like to take this opportunity to update the House on the published studies on this so-called snake oil remedy. At last count there were 39 published studies conducted by 275 scientists with 11,371 patients. These include 20 randomised, controlled trials. Of these trials, 10 are prophylaxis trials, which on average show a 90 per cent reduction of COVID infections. The latest study, a double-blind placebo controlled study by the Israeli professor Eli Schwartz, found that ivermectin could shorten the viral shedding period. Of these 39 studies, 100 per cent have found ivermectin to have a positive effect. So, the probability of an ineffective treatment or a mere 'snake oil', as The Canberra Times calls it—to get 39 out of 39—is actually one in 550 billion. That's right: one in 550 billion. I call on our national COVID evidence group to again look at the evidence. They've looked at only seven studies. They have looked at less than 10 per cent of the evidence. They've got to get on and look at all the evidence and make sensible recommendations based upon the science. Members of Parliament: Staff 223 16:03 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Today we were confronted with yet another shocking revelation of alleged sexual harassment within this building. I do not use the word 'shocked', because, sadly, I'm not. My heart goes out to the young woman, Brittany Higgins, who came forward with her story. But how many times do we have to be confronted by headlines before anything's done? How many times do we have to listen to those opposite use sanitised language, such as 'extremely distressing', before systematic change is enacted? Why is it that time and time again it takes a brave and often young woman to put herself in the firing line of public opinion, to put her job on the line, before parliament discusses this issue and we review behaviours, guidelines and governance? Every person who comes to Parliament House has the right to a safe workplace and positive culture. This is not the first time a victim has come forward, and we have the chance for it to be the last. On days like this I think of my two young daughters, who are about to enter the workforce. They, like all women, deserve to be treated with dignity, with respect and without fear of reprisal when they need to speak up. We have let so many women before Brittany down. Every day that we go without systemic and cultural change we let others down, too. Let's work together and make change so that women can be comfortable, safe and secure in this place. Redlands Youth Justice and ICE Forum 223 16:04 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman In the shadow of the Australia Day atrocity in my electorate, my city of Redland came together to seek solutions to youth justice and ice addiction. Recognising that Queensland has double the mainland state average for violent related crimes and triple the mainland Australia average for vehicle related crimes, there is a need to take particular action in my state of Queensland. I want to thank Mr Mick Bloye and his wife Ronnie for getting together at the Alex Hills AFL club to make sure we had a forum and a venue to make this possible. Last Friday night 120 locals met to discuss these issues with the support of elected members from all three levels of government and the following organisations: Redlands Local Drug Action Team, youth ambassadors from across Redlands, Love and Hope Redlands, Youth YOU Program, police and ex-police officers, Traction youth program, Australian Drug Foundation, Queensland Injectors Health Network, The Cage Youth Foundation, Sarina Russo, Redlands Coast Chamber of Commerce, Australian Industry Trade College and their students, Alcolizer Technology Cleveland—which is engaged in making illicit drug testing systems in my electorate—Redlands Psychologists, headspace, Metro South Primary Health Network, Queensland Network of Alcohol and Drug Agencies, legal practitioners from across Redlands and Redlands sporting clubs as well as the parents of the many youth that were of key voice in the first third of this forum. We now have solutions. They are challenges. The ideas will be distilled in a white paper. I hope that all three levels of government can engage to come up with a better youth justice system for this country. COVID-19: Vaccines 223 16:06 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner Across the world, 171 million doses of the COVID-19 vaccine have now been delivered, including 50 million in the US, 15 million in the UK, five million in Brazil, two million in Indonesia. Israel has delivered 72 doses per 100 people. The Prime Minister said that Australia would be 'at the front of the queue', and the health minister said that vaccination would be 'commencing in January'. But the fact is that Australia didn't strike our first vaccine deal until September 2020, six months after other nations had lined up vaccine supply for their citizens. The delayed vaccine rollout in Australia isn't just a health issue; it's an economic issue too. Last May the Treasurer said that the lockdown of the economy was costing $4 billion a week. Tardy vaccine rollout doesn't have quite the same cost to the economy as a lockdown but must nonetheless have a massive economic impact. We cannot recover the economy in sectors like international tourism and in-person services until Australia has a high rate of vaccination. Yet the tardiness of the Morrison government has been costing Australia in health terms and in economic terms. They promised that they would be as swift as an eagle. In fact, when it comes to vaccination, they have been as slow as a turkey. Berowra Electorate: Smith, Mr Lionel 224 16:07 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra As a community we owe a great debt of gratitude to the men and women of the Rural Fire Service, particularly those who have dedicated their life to serving through the RFS. Bruce Linton, of the Kenthurst brigade, recently reminded me about Lionel Smith, who has now given 75 years of his life to the RFS and has served with significant distinction. This makes him one of the longest-serving RFS members in the Hills District, if not in New South Wales. Lionel began his service with the RFS as a founding member of the Oakville Fire Brigade in 1946. Throughout his illustrious career, Lionel has held the ranks of deputy captain, group captain, deputy fire control officer and fire control officer in the Hills District. Lionel served the community on the Bushfire Council of New South Wales, as a member of the technical committee and radio subcommittee as a technical officer. He was the former chairman of the Fire Control Officers Association of New South Wales. He also developed the foam proportioning system now used on all New South Wales RFS appliances. For his services to the RFS he has achieved the Australian Fire Service medal in 1960, the National Medal, first and second class, and he has received long service awards for 35, 50, 60 and 70 years of service. Lionel continues to serve as a life member of the Round Corner and Kenthurst brigades, currently serving as deputy captain of the Kenthurst brigade. He continues to be an active and valued member, attending fires and completing training activities and maintenance duties. On behalf of the whole community: thank you, Lionel, for your extraordinary service to the RFS family and to our community more broadly. India and Myanmar 224 16:09 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Darwin is the northern capital of Australia but we are also at the forefront of the Indo-Pacific region. Recently, two of our most important regional partners, India and Myanmar, have experienced significant turbulence. Since November, thousands of Indian farmers have protested proposed agricultural laws. These protests have triggered concerns and anxiety amongst many of my constituents in Darwin and Palmerston, who worry about violence and destabilisation. Our relationship with India is extremely important. That importance continues to grow, yet it's a relationship that those opposite, the Morrison government, continue to neglect. The excellent Varghese report on building stronger trade links with India is just sitting on a shelf collecting dust. We need to do much better than that. The recent military coup in Myanmar has also been deeply troubling. It represents a dramatic retreat that country has been making from democracy. Yesterday, in my electorate in Darwin, I joined the Myanmar community at a rally to condemn the coup. The voice of the people in Myanmar must be respected and it must be heard. I call on those opposite, the government, to immediately take all steps to work with our international partners to reverse this coup. In both India and Myanmar, the rights of their citizens to be free and to peacefully protest must be respected and enabled. Chisholm Electorate: Nicolas, Mr James 224 16:10 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm Today, I would like to acknowledge someone who has gone above and beyond for our Chisholm community. When James Nicolas walked into the Blackburn Football Club in 2016, he fell in love with the place and was taken aback by the spirit and dedication of its volunteers. So, naturally, he decided to write the club's history. This was a real labour of love. James has devoted literally thousands of hours to his research. He has studied more than 117 years of local and state records, as well as club annual reports, and interviewed hundreds of past players and club members, but it has all been worth it. The result of his work, titled The Mighty Fighting Burns: The History of the Blackburn Football Club, will be an incredible resource not only for local football fans but also as a history of the Blackburn area. It also happens to be a great read. Last week, I was thrilled to present James with a Chisholm community award to recognise and celebrate his incredible contribution to local football and our community. Congratulations, James, and thank you. Moreton Electorate: Lunar New Year 225 16:12 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Gong xi fa cai to all who are celebrating the Lunar New Year, welcoming the Year of the Ox and bidding farewell to the Year of the Rat. I think that, after 2020, we can all say, 'Good riddance.' It was during the Lunar New Year in 2020 that people returning from visiting family overseas started to self-isolate, even before the rest of Australia understood this necessity. In 2020, events were cancelled and wearing masks around my electorate, in Sunnybank particularly, became the norm. Here we are, 12 months on, and communities have still managed to celebrate the good fortune we have locally. Sunnybank Plaza held its cultural stalls, Sunnybank Hills had a lovely lamp display, and at Market Square on Friday I saw line dancing, bringing fortune and chasing away some evil spirits. You might have guessed that the Year of the Rat is traditionally a year of turbulence, in which change and disasters are commonplace, and certainly last year lived up to that name. However, this year, 2021, the ox is seen as a hard worker, and zodiac experts, whom I've consulted extensively for this, believe the Year of the Ox is a period when hard work will be rewarded, even more than usual. Let me tell you that we have all been working hard at saying goodbye to the Year of the Rat and welcoming the Year of the Ox. To all those celebrating, I wish you good fortune in the Year of the Ox. Xin nian kuai le! I thank the member for Chisholm for the pronunciation tip. Gong xi fa cai! Bass Electorate: Rosevear, Mr Patrick 225 16:13 Mrs ARCHER 282237 Bass It's always an enormous privilege to speak about the wonderful members of my local northern Tasmanian community, particularly when I've had the opportunity to meet them in person. I was fortunate enough to meet Patrick Rosevear in late 2019 when he was nominated for an achievement award for his work with rural youth. Living on a farm myself, I was immediately impressed with Patrick's passion for farming and agriculture. Recently, Patrick was named as a local winner of the ABC Heywire competition, telling the story of his love for the land and farming. It was particularly wonderful to read of Patrick's love for his parents and the role they have played in ensuring that Patrick, who was diagnosed with autism at four years of age, had all the opportunities to fulfil his dreams. Patrick, who hails from multiple generations of sheep and livestock farmers, is currently studying for a certificate III in agriculture and has a work placement at the Powranna Sale Yards, south of Launceston. As Patrick told Heywire: 'My perfect day would be bringing the sheep from their overnight pens, pushing them up through the draft, where they get separated and penned into the saleyards, then putting all the cards onto the fence for the auctioneer to read. Noise can be an issue for me; I hate sirens. But when you're busy working you don't notice the sounds and they're there for a reason.' Patrick, it's clear to anyone who has met you that farming is your passion. You're well on your way to achieving your dreams and I wish you every luck for your future. Macquarie Electorate: National Broadband Network 225 16:15 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie Yet again, the needs of Macquarie internet users have been ignored by the Morrison government. In this case, it's the upper Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury users on fibre to the node. The government has announced another smattering of suburbs to receive a fibre overbuild, something the upper mountains in particular have been calling for for years. From Lawson to Mount Victoria, parts of Pitt Town, Wilberforce and all of McGraths Hill, people are stuck with the antiquated, copper-heavy FTTN. In a relay, you're only as fast as your slowest runner, and with the NBN you're only as fast as your slowest technology. Copper is the tortoise of the race. Business needs fibre, students need fibre and retirees need fibre too. I met 87-year-old Bruce Sinclair in Leura last week. Along with his love of Star Wars, this former school principal has a love of online gaming. It's one of the ways that this active octogenarian stays connected and agile. When I visited, Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order was taking hours to download. But, while he's technologically savvy and can push through the appalling FTTN, he knows that too many of his friends just give up. It shouldn't be this hard, and fibre to the home would have avoided all of that. In spite of the need for a fibre overbuild, it's pretty obvious that this particular overbuild is not a quick fix and still likely to have a hefty price to connect. Lindsay Electorate: Sporting Infrastructure 225 16:16 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay The St Mary's Convent Football Club is a passionate and enthusiastic team oriented club. Last week, it was a delight to join the under 13s and under 11s at training on the Myrtle Road playing fields under brand-new lights. Under the Community Development Grants we delivered almost $86,000 to install floodlights over the playing fields, as well as upgrading the surface. Phil, the club secretary, said that this upgrade has made the field 100 per cent better than what it used to be. For the St Mary's Convent Football Club, local cricket clubs and local schools these upgrades enhance safety and open more opportunities for training and competitions at night. Our local sports clubs are such an integral part of our community and play an important role in helping our kids stay healthy and active—something I'm passionate about—to make new friends and to learn lifelong skills. Sharon, the club president, told me how the club had overcome challenges and retained almost all of its players throughout the coronavirus pandemic. I also visited the Kingsway Sports Precinct, where joint federal and council investment has delivered floodlighting to allow thousands of players to play safely at night. I would also like to congratulate the clubs there, particularly the touch football and Oztag teams which have volunteered to ensure that our community, players and spectators have kept safe during the coronavirus pandemic. You have all done such a tremendous job. Oxley Electorate: Oxley Men's Shed 226 16:18 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley Ten years ago a man in my electorate called John Brown wanted to open a place where men could go to relax, to rub shoulders and to exchange banter—a place to get out of the house and maybe have some company with fellow mates. At the age of 82, John established the Oxley Men's Shed. He came to my office when I was the local councillor and said, 'Let's make this happen.' As a lifelong handyman, he has built a great many things. But the most important thing that he's created is a safe place that provides a shoulder to lean on for men in our community. These are men who have lost their partners or who are struggling with their mental health, or maybe there are those who only have months to live and want to do something meaningful with their final days. Last week, at the age of 92, John stepped down and handed over the presidency at the AGM, which I attended. I know that he will continue to make a legacy in community outreach within schools and kindergartens, and now in supporting the 35 men who find solace in the shed. John says that he has done a lot of things which have brought him satisfaction through his long life, but heading the men's shed has been the most satisfying of all. He told me: 'I've been able to help so many people, especially people with depression. They've come through it beautifully.' John has pledged to continue his work at the shed, and although he is looking forward to a well-earned holiday I know he'll be back and turning up to St John's church each week. It's been a privilege to support John's hard work; he's a true local hero. Congratulations, mate, and I look forward to many cuppas in the years ahead. Wide Bay Electorate: Infrastructure 226 16:19 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay The new Orealla Crescent bridge at Sunrise Beach is a major feat of quality Australian workmanship and engineering and a great example of this government's commitment to working with local councils to fund safer, more reliable local roads and bridges. It was built using a lego-style construction with 40 tonnes of Australian steel, more than 210 cubic metres of concrete, 140 tonnes of asphalt and 32 concrete wall panel and deck units. This state-of-the-art bridge will be used by more than 12,000 vehicles every day, improving Noosa's road network and boosting the movement of freight. It's got a 166-tonne rating and a lifespan of 100 years, which means it'll cater to Noosa's traffic needs for generations to come. Importantly, the project generated more than 50 local jobs, involving 34 suppliers, creating much-needed jobs as we recover from COVID-19. It was funded with a fifty-fifty split between the coalition government's Bridges Renewal Program and Noosa Shire Council. The unique design and construction helped keep costs much lower than originally budgeted, slashing nearly $3 million from the initial projected $6.3 million. That's a big win for Noosa ratepayers and a big saving for Australian taxpayers. Tourism Industry 226 16:21 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta Australia is speeding towards the JobKeeper cliff: that moment at the end of March when this government cuts JobKeeper to zero. For some sectors—tourism, for example—it is not going to be a soft landing. A recent national survey of travel agents found that just one in 10 believe they will survive the JobKeeper cliff without urgent intervention. That's 40,000 jobs lost. One business in my area—Helloworld in Carlingford—has been talking to me about just this problem. The owner, Angie, has seen a lot in her 40 years as a travel agent. Her business has survived disruptions like SARS, the GFC, terrorism and the Ansett collapse, but nothing compares to COVID. Since the border closed almost a year ago, Angie and her staff have been working tirelessly to secure refunds for their customers. It's cost her $60,000 to keep her business running so she can provide refunds to customers, with no business coming in. Agents like Angie have been crying out for help for months. It took the Morrison government until December to announce tailored support for the industry in the form of $128 million in one-off cash grants. But the scheme is so poorly designed that, because of the way they report turnover, the majority of travel agents, including Angie, received no support. Because of timing and the way her business is structured, Angie also missed out on the lost carry-back measures in the budget. We are losing incredible investments in relationships when we lose these businesses, and they will not be easily replaced. Fairfax Electorate: School Principals 227 16:22 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax Time and hindsight will see many a lesson learnt about the pandemic that we're now amidst, but one of the early lessons—and a big one—is the need for resilience and resilience not just at the national level but at the local level, to ensure that people don't fall through the cracks, to ensure that confidence is maintained and to ensure that local communities can bounce back when they face hardship. But such a local response requires local leadership, and I want to pay tribute today to school principals, who play an instrumental role in ensuring local resilience through this pandemic. Last week I visited a few schools and saw these principals in action. I'm talking about Chris Ivey at St Andrew's Anglican College and Chris Gold at St John's College. I'm talking about Greg Myers at Good Samaritan Catholic College and Anthony Ryan at Coolum State School. These are principals who are showing leadership not just in their schools but, indeed, in their local communities. It's due to local community leadership that we are seeing every little pocket, certainly in my seat of Fairfax, respond to this pandemic with strength and with unity. I thank them and I encourage them to continue to provide this local leadership until we're through the other side of the COVID-19 pandemic. Tourism Industry 227 16:24 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong In the short time available to me I speak again today about the plight of travel agents as we head towards 31 March. Travel agents talk about their plight better than any politician can. Tina from the Latrobe Valley says: 'A 29-year-old business. Credits owed to customers. Refunds being chased. People facing retrenchment. The value of the business smashed to nothing.' They need help. Neil on the Sunshine Coast says he just wants an extension of JobKeeper until international borders are raised, perhaps a better retail guarantee from landlords and the sorting out of the additional grants scheme, which has been poorly administered by the tax office and Austrade. Angie, from north-west Sydney, reports on the difficulties they're going to have in being able to chase refunds if JobKeeper is not extended past 31 March, and I thank them. Dave from Nerang has been working 13 hours a day, seven days a week chasing up people. He faces bankruptcy. He's had to spend his super. He says, 'The government's travel agents support package hasn't delivered what was promised and needs to be redesigned.' And Melanie, from Brisbane, has a small family-owned business. To the best of her ability she's chased money for her clients for the last 12 months. There's still money outstanding. If the travel agents aren't there to help the passengers and the tourists, the money won't be recovered. We also need Tourism Australia to do more to promote using local travel agents than international travel platforms. Climate Change 227 16:25 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I rise to talk about the shock announcement by the ANZ Bank, who recently pulled funding on the world's biggest coal-exporting terminal in Newcastle under the bank's new climate change policy. Are other banks to follow? Just watch this space. We cannot afford to have this spread to Gladstone and other ports in Queensland and across Australia. ANZ last year released the most ambitious zero net emissions action plan of the big four banks by imposing low carbon deadlines for the agriculture, energy and transport sectors. The value of our coal exports in December rose by 26 per cent from November, with coal worth $3.7 billion to the economy in December alone. This is going to show that coal is still a vital player in our economy. As we shift nearer to net zero emissions by 2050 we need to make sure we get the balance correct. Did I hear the bank say they were going to finance the importation of solar panels from China or wind turbines from Germany? I'm calling on the banks to get real and support our regional jobs and industry. Chill Out & Look About 227 16:27 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley No doubt 2020 was a difficult year for all of us, but for some people it was perhaps the most devastating year of their lives. In March last year Dylan Briggs, a year 9 student from Frankston High School, was riding his bike home. He was hit just a few hundred metres from his home, and died in hospital five days later. I can't comprehend, and I don't know how many people can comprehend, the unspeakable grief for Dylan's family. This tragedy was felt by his friends, by his school and by the wider Frankston community. Dylan's classmates stepped up. They wanted to celebrate Dylan and share his story in a meaningful way. They've created the Chill Out & Look About campaign. It's an initiative which aims to improve road safety and awareness for all road users, and I encourage everyone to find it on their Facebook page and their website. It's an amazing initiative, and the very worthy winner of Frankston council's Community Event of the Year at the council's Australia Day ceremony. Kai Malcolm was the Young Citizen of the Year. I want to congratulate Kai and his classmates and everyone from the school, particularly Sarah Bahramis, his teacher. I give my condolences to Dylan's family, particularly his mum Sarah-Jane. As she said, Dylan's lasting legacy was that he was an organ donor. He saved the life of a mother, a young boy and many others. McDonnell, Mrs Agnes Mary (Bub) 228 16:28 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker Today I rise to offer my condolences to the family of Agnes Mary 'Bub' McDonnell, who passed away at the age of 94 on Sunday 24 January. Matriarchs and the importance of matriarchies are sometimes underestimated. Bub was a matriarch in the truest sense of the word, not just to her family but also to her broader family, the community of Mount Gambier. She was mayoress for 19 years, between 1983 and 2002, the point at which we experienced the untimely death of her husband, Don. She made an impact across the community, but, beyond that, she was a loving and devoted mother and mother-in-law to Frank and Kay, Judy and Robert, Fay and Johnny, Michael and Susan, Brian and Tracey, John and Virginia, Helen and Robert. She had an amazing 23 grandchildren and a herculean 43 great-grandchildren. I have had the benefit of reading the eulogies read and prepared by her grandsons, Nick O'Connor and Joseph Contin. They speak of the deep warmth that 'Bub' had for her family and for her community. 'Bub' is someone we should all strive to be—a pillar of the community, and a person who lived her strong family values and was devoted to the community that she made better for her presence in it. International Day of Women and Girls in Science 228 16:30 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle Last Thursday was International Day of Women and Girls in Science. When we consider the range of scientific challenges before us, from pandemics to climate and energy, from plastic waste to biodiversity conservation, we must recognise that our efforts are weaker than they could be simply because the participation of women is skewed low rather than being equal. Efforts have been made to encourage and support women and girls in science, yet globally only 30 per cent choose science related fields. Of all science researchers, less than 30 per cent are women. In Australia it's welcome that half of all PhD science graduates today are women, but at the same time women make up only 17 per cent of senior academics in our research institutes and universities. Last Thursday I met with Natalie Elliott, who studied science at the University of Western Australia and now applies her skills and expertise in managing park services on Rottnest Island. For Natalie the lightbulb moment was a story her mum told her, of the rediscovery of Gilbert's potoroo in Albany in the mid-1990s. The potoroo was thought to have been extinct. It remains Australia's most endangered marsupial. That reality, and the challenge and prospect of making a difference, led Natalie to study science—a decision that she says has carried her towards worthwhile life's work. I'm sure that's true. The underrepresentation of women and girls in science is both an inequity and a missed opportunity. We must keep working to remove the stereotypes and structures that have created this imbalance in the interests of fairness and the interests of science itself. Agriculture Industry 228 16:31 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon The Morrison government is committed to supporting Australian agriculture, which of course includes aquaculture and forestry, to achieve its ambitious goal of $100 billion in farmgate sales and output by 2030. It's important for our nature and for our ongoing food security and economic recovery. Already, unmet demand in agriculture is significant. Recent figures indicate that there are five jobs for every graduate in agriculture. This is why I fully support the federal government's decision to reduce the out-of-pocket costs for students studying a degree in agriculture by 62 per cent. It has meant that young people are investigating this pathway for the first time and asking the question, 'Could agriculture be for me?' The answer is, of course, yes. Enrolments in the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture's science degree have almost doubled this year—good news for agriculture. These are smart, well-paid jobs that offer an exciting career path that could take you anywhere over the nation or throughout the world. Today's agriculture is about drones, robots, cutting-edge AI, GPS systems, problem solving and research. Skills in agriculture, maths, teaching, nursing, clinical psychology, English and languages, science, health, architecture, environmental studies, IT and engineering are all in demand, and it's because of the federal government and its increased public contribution made to these courses, making these courses more affordable than ever before. (Time expired) Pathinathan, Mr John, Polvere, Mr Donato 229 16:33 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I rise to remember two constituents—two good friends of mine—who made extraordinary contributions to community life and deserve to be remembered in this place. I am proud to have known John Pathinathan and Donato Polvere, and to have been associated with them and been able to witness the profound difference they made to their community and the Australian Labor Party. I am in their debt, and so are, I know, many others. When I think about Donato's contribution to the Italian community in Melbourne's northern suburbs, including in particular La Festa di San Donato, I'm in awe of what he gave to a community and what he meant to so many. I can't do justice now to his contribution and the lives it impacted, but I want everyone who was close to Donato to know how well he was thought of in a community that meant so much to him. Vale, Donato. John Pathinathan was a dear friend who gave so much to the Tamil community, to the Catholic Church, to the Australian Labor Party and to Melbourne's northern suburbs. He was always there with advice for me and my colleagues on any number of policy matters. He lived a life that was characterised by selflessness and generosity. To all in his family and to all who knew him, I say, vale, rest in peace. Working Holiday Maker Program 229 16:35 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey In November last year the final report into the Inquiry into the Working Holiday Maker Program was delivered. I'm drawn to recommendation three: The Committee recommends that Working Holiday (subclass 417) and Work and Holiday (subclass 462) visa holders should be able to work in tourism and hospitality in all hard-to-staff rural and remote areas of Australia as part of their 88 days or 6 months to qualify for their second- or third- year WHM visa. I would like to thank the committee for that recommendation. It was in response to a submission that I put in on behalf of those members that represent inland Australia—remote and very remote Australia. You basically draw a line around the middle. We're finding it's very difficult to get workers in hospitality everywhere in Australia at the moment, it must be said, and that plays into a larger debate. But this has been an ongoing issue for places in my electorate like Oodnadatta, Marree, the Flinders Ranges, Coober Pedy, which actually revolve around tourism but can't get workers. They've been competing against the agricultural and mining industries where, of course, the 417 visa makers could get the extension. It has been recognised previously that they face these issues above the Tropic of Capricorn, so I've asked for a continuation of that. I met with the minister a week ago and he seemed very open to moving on this space and I just ask that that is exactly what happens. Australian Defence Force 229 16:36 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson It goes without saying that I have the best electorate in the country! I live there. I holiday there. One of the jewels in the crown of Paterson is RAAF Base Williamtown. I'm pleased to say that I want to wish it a happy 80th birthday today—established in 1941. I'm also pleased to say that RAAF Base Williamtown provides fantastic employment and a lifestyle that many defence families say is the envy of the defence community. I want to congratulate Group Captain Anthony Stainton. Good on you, George, you are doing a fantastic job as the new SADFO. I often joke that I am the self-appointed member for the F-35. We know that we have 54 of the 72 F-35s based at Australia's premium jet base in the country. I also want to acknowledge today that it's the 30th birthday of Fighter World, which is located right next to the base. Last week I was pleased to visit Fighter World and meet up with Bernie Nebenfuhr and Air Vice-Marshal (Ret'd) John Quaife, who showed me around Fighter World. It displays aircraft, uniforms, memorabilia, but most importantly it provides a place for our students to go and do the most incredible workshops. They talk about aviation and being part of the modern Defence Force in Australia. Congratulations and happy birthday. Sydney Jewish Museum 229 16:38 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth It is easy for people to feel disconnected from major historical events as time passes and that is why firsthand testimony is so important. It provides proximity to realities that we cannot easily grasp ourselves. Last month I visited the Sydney Jewish Museum with the New South Wales Treasurer, Dominic Perrottet, where survivors have been doing the important work of educating thousands on the horrors of the Holocaust, for over 28 years, ensuring that we never forget. As many grow older the museum is now using cutting-edge technology to immortalise the stories in hologram form. The Dimensions in Testimony project is creating interactive biographies with six holocaust survivors. Each survivor is asked literally 1,000 questions and their interviews are filmed in 360 degrees by 23 cameras. The result will be a 3D interactive image, like a hologram, where visitors can ask questions and the virtual survivor will respond in real time. During our visit the Treasurer and I had the privilege of meeting survivors Eddie Jaku and Jack Meister, and I would like to thank them. I would like to thank Olga Horak, Kuba Enoch, Yvonne Engelman, Paul Drexler and Francine Lazarus for sharing their stories of survival and giving their time to ensure that we never forget the Holocaust and we always remember the tragedy and the horror. I commend the Sydney Jewish Museum for this innovative program, which will continue to give a voice to survivors and inspire change. I want to thank Gus Lehrer, the president of the board; Norman Seligman, the CEO; and Greg and Cathy Shand, both board members. Gilmore Electorate: Volunteers 230 16:39 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore This last year might be remembered for many reasons, but I think it should be renamed the 'Year of the Volunteer'. Last year our community was hit with drought, bushfire, flood and a pandemic. We have never needed our volunteers more. Time and time again, we have seen our volunteers step up when they were needed most, supporting local people who were having the hardest year of their lives. I want to sincerely thank all our local volunteers for everything they have done. In the last round of volunteer grants at the start of last year, I had an absolutely overwhelming response, with over 74 expressions of interest from local organisations. At the time I requested the minister make further funds available for our hardworking volunteers. I was delighted to see those funds being made available through the Supplementary Volunteer Grants program, and now 12 local volunteer groups in my electorate will share in more than $41,000 as part of this program. I would like to congratulate all of the local recipients: the Bay and Basin Cancer Support Group, Community Life Batemans Bay, Eurobodalla Meals on Wheels, Gerringong football club, the Kiama Show Society, Kiama Woodcraft Group, the Lions Club of Batemans Bay, the Rotary Club of Kiama, the Rotary Club of Nowra, the Shoalhaven Historical Society, Shoalhaven Neighbourhood Services, and the Lions Club of Jervis Bay. Well done, and thank you for all your work over the last year. Ryan Electorate: Roads 230 16:41 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I went to the last election promising to fix local roads in Ryan, and I'm very pleased to report that the latest project is underway to do just that. Early works have begun in Ashgrove to replace the Gresham Street bridge. Councillor Steven Toomey and I visited the site last week to inspect the work and to speak with the tradies who are already on the ground. This has been a long-awaited project for local residents, particularly those in St Johns Wood, and I appreciate their patience. It has been federal funding, combined with funding from the Brisbane City Council, that has seen this project finally commence. The bridge was built in 1931 and is now nearing the end of its serviceable life. The new Gresham Street bridge will have increased vehicle weight limits and improved flood resistance—important over the creek—and will provide a wider footpath for pedestrian safety, which is particularly important because it is en route to a local school. Along with improving our local roads, this project, importantly, is creating jobs in the Ryan electorate. This government is about committing funding to shovel-ready projects to get our economy firing again, and Gresham Street bridge project, to be completed in 2022, is just one example of that. It's also a fantastic example of how LNP governments, at both the council and the federal level, are working together to get long-awaited projects moving. It is because of the federal funding and the funding from the Brisbane City Council that this project has now been delivered for local residents. We are fixing local roads. COVID-19: Travel Agents 230 16:42 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I rise to acknowledge the local businesses in my electorate who are facing probably the toughest challenge of their time in business. They, of course, are the travel agents. I, along with Senator Farrell, our shadow minister, met with over 40 travel agents locally in Macnamara last week and with the Australian Federation of Travel Agents, and we listened. We listened to their experiences. We listened to the feedback the travel agents were giving us. Most importantly, we listened to the feedback around the level of government support. We know this pandemic is not over. Many travel agents don't receive most of their income from domestic travel. Most travel agents traditionally receive their income from international travel, from hotel stays and from some of the package deals they so amazingly put together. They are hardworking businesses and hardworking Australians. It's clear from the feedback we are receiving from our local travel agents that without JobKeeper they will be finished and jobs will go and that without a return to open international borders their business model isn't sustainable. This pandemic isn't over. We're asking businesses like travel agents to make significant changes to the way in which they do business in Australia. We have a choice: we can let them fold and let jobs go, or we can do what we've done so far and provide JobKeeper, provide support for businesses and provide support for the Australian workers who add so much to the Australian economy. The government shouldn't be pulling JobKeeper. They should be supporting Australian businesses like our travel agents. Marshall, Ms Isobel 231 16:44 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I would like to spend my time today paying tribute to Isobel Marshall, who was announced as the Young Australian of the Year by the Prime Minister at the event here in Canberra on Australia Day eve. Isobel lives just outside of my electorate of Sturt in Adelaide. I know her whole family very, very well. They're great philanthropic contributors to so many worthwhile causes in South Australia. But what she has done is truly inspirational. Isobel, with a friend from school, established a charity called TABOO. They produce women's sanitary products and sell them, and the profit they make through that process they invest in providing those same products into disadvantaged communities, both overseas and here in Australia: in Africa in particular, Uganda and Sierra Leone, but also in remote Indigenous communities in Australia. The initiative is truly inspirational. She started it when she was in secondary school, as a Year 12 student. She is now a medical student. You're hardly renowned for having much spare time when you're studying medicine, but what she has achieved already is extremely inspirational. She is only at the beginning of what she intends to achieve through that initiative, but I'm so proud of her and so proud that she was recognised by her country for what she has achieved. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 In accordance with standing order 43 the time for members' statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 231 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS COVID-19: Income Support Payments 231 16:46 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That this House: (1) notes that the Jobkeeper program is the most expensive one-off program ever implemented by an Australian Government, estimated to cost around $100 billion—it has been effective in supporting jobs, but the unprecedented spending requires close scrutiny; (2) acknowledges that millions of Australians were excluded from Jobkeeper, including short-term casuals, arts sector workers, and the entire university sector; (3) recognises that: (a) the Jobkeeper program is scheduled to be terminated at the end of March 2021, despite severe problems in many sectors and regions across Australia, and the warnings from economists that support should not be withdrawn prematurely; (b) while many were left out of Jobkeeper, the program provided support to firms that: (i) recorded record profits in 2020; and (ii) paid executive bonuses; and (c) the practice of paying executive bonuses by firms receiving Jobkeeper has been criticised by the Australian Taxation Office, the Business Council of Australia, former Liberal Premier of Victoria Jeff Kennett and the Australian Labor Party, but not the Government; and (4) calls on the Treasurer to make a statement to the Parliament no later than 25 February 2021 revealing how much Jobkeeper support was paid to firms that: (a) saw their profits increase from 2019 to 2020; and (b) paid executive bonuses. When the pandemic hit, Labor were quick to call on the government to follow the lead of other countries and put in place a wage subsidy program that would save jobs. According to Treasury, JobKeeper has saved some 700,000 jobs since it was put into place. But with unprecedented spending, unprecedented scrutiny should be required. It is not good enough that the government treats JobKeeper money like it is Liberal Party money and refuses to provide appropriate accountability to the Australian people for some of the reasonable concerns about JobKeeper. One of those is that firms have taken JobKeeper and used it to pay executive bonuses. The firms that have done this include Accent Group, IDP Education, Star Entertainment Group, Lendlease and Premier Investments. The practice has been criticised by Jeremy Hirschhorn from the Australia Taxation Office; by Jeff Kennett, the former Liberal premier; and by Jennifer Westacott, the head of the Business Council of Australia. All of them recognise that it is not appropriate, if you are receiving taxpayer subsidies, to be paying your multimillion dollar CEOs additional bonuses—in the case of Premier Investments, a bonus of $2.5 million, more than most Australians will earn in a lifetime, paid out in a single bonus to a firm receiving JobKeeper. And yet, extraordinarily, we haven't heard a word from the government on this issue. It has only been Labor that has been critical of firms paying executive bonuses. When we pointed out that firms that were receiving JobKeeper appeared to have seen their profits rise, the Prime Minister said I was engaging in the politics of envy. Prime Minister, this is not the politics of envy: this is the politics of fairness, the politics of decency. Some firms have done the right thing. I'd give three cheers to Toyota Australia, Super Retail Group, Domino's and Iluka, and 1.5 cheers to Nick Scali, who have paid back half of the JobKeeper they have received. Yet other firms have failed to follow suit. It is ironic that at a time when debt is going to $1 trillion, it is Labor that's publicly calling on firms whose profits rose while receiving JobKeeper to pay the money back. You would imagine the Treasurer might be part of that call, but he is missing in action. Today we saw another firm report increased profits, Seven West Media, whose largest shareholder is Kerry Stokes, reported an underlying profit up 25 per cent, having received around $35 million in JobKeeper. I called on the Treasurer to ask the House Economics Committee to initiate an inquiry into the extent to which JobKeeper went to firms that then became more profitable. I'm yet to receive a response to that letter to the Treasurer. We've seen the hypocrisy from the Treasurer of the drip feed of information about certain aspects of the JobKeeper program. He is in The Australian today on page 11 providing a breakdown of JobKeeper numbers by time, region and industry. Yet he won't disclose some of the issues that have been raised by sensible critics about the JobKeeper program. The Taxation Office now has four business activity statements and one income tax return for every business that received JobKeeper. The tax office must disclose the actual experience of businesses over this time, in aggregate. We're not asking for the details of every small business to be made transparent. But for businesses with a turnover of $1 billion that forecast a 50 per cent turnover drop from March to June 2020, the Australian public have a right to know how much JobKeeper went to those that did not experience that forecast drop in turnover. For businesses with a turnover below $1 billion that forecast a 30 per cent drop, how much JobKeeper went to those that did not in fact experience such a drop? How much JobKeeper has gone to firms that have paid executive bonuses? How much JobKeeper has gone to firms that paid out stonking dividends to billionaire shareholders? Australians want the truth. The Morrison government has the receipts, so why won't they tell the taxpayers where the billions of dollars went? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Is there a seconder for the motion? Ms Templeman 181810 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Thank you. I now give the call to the member for Moncrieff. 16:51 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Well, Labor really are struggling to be relevant as an opposition at the moment, and that's never clearer than when they talk about JobKeeper. In fact, they love to say it was their idea—when it suits them, of course. The truth is that on the other side of the House they are huge fans of JobKeeper, because Australians are big fans of JobKeeper. As Labor members talk to their constituents, they are having conversations about JobKeeper that are very similar to the ones government members on this side of the chamber are having. JobKeeper was fast, it was effective and it was very welcome, particularly in my electorate of Moncrieff. It was understood to be a temporary measure because of its huge scale and the risks to the economy of prolonging it, and those on the other side know that. Only last week, when the Minister for Tourism, Trade and Investment joined me in Moncrieff, on the Gold Coast, the conversations with local tourism operators reflected that reality: that business operators indeed accept that the government must adjust its economic measures as the situation evolves, and they said so loudly. Every one of them thanked the government for their JobKeeper lifeline. It's commendable that the member for Fenner is making an effort to be constructive on JobKeeper—and I note that he's now left the chamber. However, no program of this scale—rapidly implemented, as was necessary—could have achieved perfection. I'm also not sure that he'll achieve very much from this temporary measure when the real issue is: what is our next changing economic circumstance, and will we manage it? Let's be clear on some points. JobKeeper was always a temporary program that needed to taper off with the improvement of our economy, for two very good reasons: (1) to not jeopardise the very recovery it's designed to bridge and (2) because it would be irresponsible to not limit the program to its necessary levels, given the potential debt burden for the next generation. I note that those on the other side grin. They grin in agreeance, of course. The evidence that the recovery is underway is very clear, with over 785,000 jobs created over the past seven months. Fewer businesses and their employees are in need of JobKeeper and other temporary economic support. On the Gold Coast there has been a 59 per cent reduction in the number of people on JobKeeper—in one of the worst-affected regions. This job creation over the past seven months means that fewer businesses and their employees are in need of JobKeeper and other temporary economic supports. The Treasurer has always been clear on this issue. He said: Based on what we know today, there should be no expectation that JobKeeper will extend beyond the end of March. It was always a temporary program. In Moncrieff, the government's other stimulus measures have also been very effective in protecting jobs, keeping businesses in business and of course keeping those doors open—absolutely. Over $200 million in personal income taxes has gone into Moncrieff. There have been business investment incentives, the JobMaker Hiring Credit and the HomeBuilder program, and they've all assisted the local economy. In fact, I think there was around $28 billion in support from the federal government to the Gold Coast alone across the five electorates. The Morrison government has delivered the tremendous support that Australians have needed: $267 billion in direct economic and health support. Of the $251 billion in direct economic support, around $148 billion has already flowed to Australian households and businesses. The JobKeeper payment has provided $83 billion of support to businesses and their employees since the start of the pandemic to date. This has kept businesses in business and Australians in those all-important jobs. It's clear in Moncrieff and at the national level that the economic circumstances of families and businesses vary quite dramatically, depending on industry, location, business model and exposure to ongoing uncertainties like state government border closures. That's why I'm very focused, now and in the future, on the government tailoring further measures as required. In Broadbeach in the last week we had one of the Gold Coast's largest employers, Atlas Staff, hosting a round table with the Minister for Trade and Tourism with stakeholders from the tourism and events industry and local ministers Andrews and Robert. I organised the round table because the Minister for Trade and Tourism knows, as I do, that supporting an industry starts with listening to it. Certainty and confidence were the two main points that came out of that round table—certainty and confidence. That means better management of outbreaks by state governments and more stability on border conditions. That means tourists are able to move freely, with confidence, between states. That's what we need in Moncrieff and that's what we need on the Gold Coast. 16:56 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie When you're a government, you make mistakes—especially in a crisis, including in a pandemic. You bring in policies that might not have had every detail thought through. You spend a lot of money and, in hindsight, you may have done things differently. That's forgivable, although you wouldn't have thought so if you had heard the Abbott opposition and subsequent Liberals carrying on a treat during and after the global financial crisis. But on this side, we are a responsible opposition which puts the interests of the country ahead of political pointscoring. During COVID we've been extraordinarily focused on being constructive rather than combative. We did the right thing. But we won't sit back and watch the Morrison government patting itself on the back for adopting our idea and the union movement's idea of wage support or fail to call out the behaviour of big businesses which have pocketed JobKeeper payments when they didn't need them. JobKeeper is the most expensive one-off program ever implemented by an Australian government. The estimate is that it will cost around $100 billion. We've supported the existence of the scheme and, in fact, we're calling for it to be maintained for businesses which have not yet recovered, and that's to protect jobs. But there are big businesses which have taken advantage of the scheme to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. These big listed companies have literally pocketed the JobKeeper funds. Premier Investments, the owner of Smiggle, Just Jeans and Portmans, made a bigger profit last year than it did in 2019. It paid shareholders $57 million in dividends, and Solomon Lew received more than $20 million of that. It also paid its chief executive, Mark McInnes, a $2.5 million bonus, taking his total pay to more than $5 million. That's not bad during a pandemic. So how much JobKeeper did Premier Investments receive? It was $40 million. Some big businesses which found that times weren't as tough as they expected have done the right thing—not Premier but some others. Nick Scali is an example; it has handed back most of its JobKeeper—$3.6 million. Hopefully, they'll hand it all back but what they've done is a start. Toyota returned $18 million and the owner of Rebel and BCF is repaying $1.7 million. Domino's has paid back JobKeeper. Platypus and Hype DC owner, Accent Group, took $14 million of JobKeeper funds but it hasn't paid any back. Instead, it paid a bonus of $1.2 million to its head and $50 million in dividends. After 25 years of working in the listed corporate world my experience is that while big businesses will sometimes do the right thing out of a sense of social responsibility, mostly governments need to mandate it. That's the bit I don't get from the Morrison government. It had no hesitation in hounding welfare recipients that it had overpaid. It sent them threatening letters as part of the robodebt witch-hunt, yet the Prime Minister won't support the call from the Business Council of Australia, from the former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett, from the Australian tax office and from us, Labor, who are critical of firms hanging on to JobKeeper at the same time as paying themselves huge bonuses, big dividends and making big profits. It is forgivable to make a mistake, but it is unforgiveable not to learn from and correct those mistakes. The university sector was told repeatedly last year that it did not deserve JobKeeper. Hardworking academics in my electorate are being told that overpaying big business is more important to this government than the work that they do. Most people working in the arts and entertainment industry were excluded from JobKeeper. Local government employees were excluded. Casuals of fewer than 12 months service were excluded from JobKeeper payments. People on temporary protection visas and international students all missed out. Small businesses in my electorate were left out. Where two people were in a partnership, only one person was eligible for JobKeeper, yet many big businesses raked it in. That shows you whose side this Morrison government is on. It shows you not with their words but with their actions. There's been a 50 per cent increase in the average wealth of Aussie billionaires in the last year, yet regions like the Upper Blue Mountains, where international tourism is crucial for local jobs, are about to lose the one thing that has helped them keep some staff employed some of the time and allowed their businesses to keep their heads above water. The Prime Minister and Treasurer need to come clean on their mistake. They need to tell us how much JobKeeper support was paid to firms who had an increase in profit, paid executive bonuses and paid huge dividends. It's absolutely clear whose side this Morrison government is on. 17:01 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins COVID-19 has resulted in the most severe global economic crisis since the Great Depression. Across the world, the equivalent of 600 million people have tragically lost their jobs. The global economy is expected to have contracted by four per cent compared to just 0.1 per cent during the global financial crisis. Australia has not been immune to this crisis. In April 2020, more than one million Australians lost their jobs or saw their working hours reduced to zero and the economy entered into recession for the first time in nearly 30 years. However, Australia's economy is now fighting back. In the September 2020 quarter, real GDP increased by 3.3 per cent, well ahead of market expectations and our international counterparts. From May to December last year, over 784,000 jobs were created. Ninety per cent of the 1.3 million Australians who either lost their jobs or saw their working hours reduced to zero are now back at work. That said, while Australia's recession may be over, it is important to note that our economic recovery is not. One key source of support thus far throughout these challenging times has been the JobKeeper program. It's on the lips of every working Australian. We know it has helped keep businesses in business, it's helped keep workers at work and it's helped families keep food on the table. I'm grateful to the member for Fenner for providing this opportunity to highlight the unprecedented support undertaken by the Morrison government to save lives, cushion the blow and help Australians remain in jobs. In fact, I'm very proud of this particular Liberal approach that the Morrison government has taken to keeping people connected to their jobs. As this motion outlines, JobKeeper is the largest economic lifeline in Australia's history. In its first phase, it supported over one million business and over 3.8 million jobs, including 6,800 businesses in Higgins. One such business in my electorate supported by JobKeeper was Carnival for Kids, a party shop and children's party venue owned by local mum, Catherine. When COVID-19 hit early last year, Cat watched her busy calendar of upcoming parties and school holiday programs evaporate and, with that, her business confidence and her dreams for the future. She feared having to say goodbye to long-term dedicated staff, and dreams and plans to expand her business felt out of reach. However, thanks to the JobKeeper program, as well as additional targeted government support, Cat has now been able to not only maintain her business but also invest in new capital and keep her staff employed in her team. In fact, Prime Minister Scott Morrison and I had the privilege of seeing firsthand just last week how local kids are enjoying the fantastic premises and fantastic cupcake-making in her glorious and funky studio, in large part thanks to the government's support. A big shout-out to Cat for hosting us; it was great fun being with the kids. Unfortunately, it was the day before lockdown in Melbourne. It was a lovely day, but we've had to backtrack now that we're in lockdown. A shout-out to Cat and all the community for the work they are doing in supporting their businesses. Mr Deputy Speaker Gillespie, you would know as much as I do that the creative and performing arts sector has also been a major beneficiary of JobKeeper, contrary to what members opposite would have us believe. Earlier this month, you, as Chair of the Standing Committee on Communications and the Arts inquiry into Australia's creative and cultural industries and institutions, which in fact I called for, heard that approximate coverage of JobKeeper within the creative and performing arts was around 50 to 60 per cent. By contrast, coverage for all employment was around 30 per cent. We are about the creative and performing arts sector and we are getting on with the business of delivering ongoing support for it. So where to now? It's important that we continue to support, as we have, all small businesses, including tax relief, targeted funds for new apprentices and trainees through the JobMaker hiring credit system, and the JobTrainer system. There's so much more that we continue to do. We're about jobs, building back the economy and rolling out the COVID vaccine. Certainly the historic and grand nature of the JobKeeper scheme highlights the Morrison government's commitment to ensuring that Australians are supported when they need it most. 17:06 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons Let me put on the record that at every step of the way the Labor Party has backed in JobKeeper. It was our and the union movement's idea, and we backed it in from day one. We gave the government all the license in the world. In fact, we backed laws in the parliament that gave the Treasurer extraordinary powers—wartime powers—to change the JobKeeper requirements as he saw fit. We'll get to that later. At the end of 2020, 1.54 million Australia were still on JobKeeper. There is a recovery underway, but let's not forget 1.54 million Australians still need this payment. This includes 24,000 Tasmanians who still rely on the subsidy. They need this to keep the lights on, to put food on the table, to get the kids to school—life's essentials. The figures are better on the mainland, but in Tasmania a quarter of the jobs lost during COVID are yet to return, so JobKeeper is absolutely essential to my state. More than 45,000 Tasmanians remain unemployed or underemployed, and the recovery from the pandemic in my state is precarious. There's a budget update out today in Tasmania. Unemployment is forecast to be 6.75 per cent in 2022 and 5.5 per cent on the mainland. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 17:08 to 17:18 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Before the suspension I was saying that Tasmania is still in a precarious employment position, with forecast unemployment of 6.75 per cent for 2022 and 5.5 per cent on the mainland; jobs growth in Tasmania projected to be 0.5 per cent in 2022 and 1.5 per cent on the mainland; and economic growth projected to be three per cent in 2022 and 3.5 per cent on the mainland. I give those figures to show that, in Tasmania, the jobs recovery is not as fast as on the mainland, which is why JobKeeper is so important to our state. The unfortunate thing is that the government just doesn't seem to realise this. The government seems hell-bent on saying 'end of March; that's it'. We have Hobart City Mission in Tasmania preparing for a doubling of demand for emergency relief support. We have the TasCOSS CEO, Adrienne Picone, calling on the Tasmanian Liberal government to: … go into bat for Tasmanians by advocating for the JobSeeker payment, which currently sits well below the poverty line, to be restored to a liveable, humane rate. Of course she's saying that because with JobKeeper coming off, more people will go onto JobSeeker, which is unliveable now. The welfare people in Tasmania know there's a cliff coming. They can see the cliff coming. Families and small businesses that are working hard to recover from the COVID-19-induced economic downturn are bracing themselves for the unplugging of the JobKeeper lifeline. Entire sectors, including tourism and hospitality, are now in crisis without government support. These sectors have not recovered. They are not recovering as fast as we would hope. We have lockdowns in Melbourne this week. The situation is fluid. And tourism and hospitality in Tasmania is not recovering as we would hope. Sadly, in the communities built around these sectors jobs have already been lost, and more will go. The tourism industry is crying out for support. Luke Martin, CEO of the Tourism Industry Council Tasmania, says: 'You can't just leave a whole bunch of businesses to fall off a cliff in March and not expect a lot of trauma. There has to be some form of support.' It's not good enough and, in conclusion, I would like to turn my attention to the rorts side of this equation. Labor support JobKeeper, we always have. We gave extraordinary power to the Treasurer to fix issues. The government got the payments out quickly—terrific; we supported that. We gave the Treasurer the power to fix the problems as they emerged, and he chose not to exercise that power. When the issue emerged of highly profitable businesses giving their CEOs and their executives and their boards and their shareholders millions and millions of dollars in dividends and bonuses, he could have stepped in and fixed it like that. He chose not to. Yet this is the same government that will go to the ends of the earth to chase down $10 from a Centrelink recipient. It's not good enough. It's a double standard of gargantuan proportion. I fully support the member for Fenner in his call for an inquiry into this. Who got the money? If they didn't need it, they should be made to pay it back. The government can't sit on its hands and pretend this problem will go away. It's unfair. It's so demonstrably unfair to the millions of Australians who pay taxes in the belief that it's going to where the relief is needed and not to those who don't need it. 17:22 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner JobKeeper has been a lifesaver in my electorate of Bonner. Since JobKeeper was rolled out in March 2020, the payments have provided $83 billion of support, to date, to businesses and their employees. In my electorate of Bonner more than 5,200 businesses utilise this payment to stay in business and to keep staff in their jobs. While those opposite accuse this program of being a waste, I ask you this: is it a waste to save lives and livelihoods? Is it a waste to save our economy and help businesses recover quickly? Is it a waste to protect Australians from a recession and far worse consequences? Last year the Reserve Bank of Australia confirmed our government's quick action to roll out JobKeeper helped reduce total job losses by at least 700,000. That's 700,000 people who were able to put food on the table, pay their mortgage, buy school supplies for their children, keep the lights on, afford medicine and health services and put fuel in their cars. Thanks to JobKeeper and our economic recovery plan 80 per cent of those Australians who sadly lost their jobs, or saw their work hours reduced to zero, are now back at work. I wouldn't call those outcomes a waste, I would call them a win for all Australians. When JobKeeper first rolled out, I knew we were doing the right thing. In my electorate, I had businesses who had never contacted me before get in touch to share their gratitude for this vital support. Here are just a couple of examples. 'Dear Ross. I just wanted to provide a message of support for the federal government's suite of measures in support of small business during the COVID-19 crisis. The small business stimulus and JobKeeper program will provide a lifeline to our business that will contribute greatly to our chances of survival and recovery on the other side of the pandemic. Despite the inevitable flak that the government will cop in the coming months when a small minority attempt to take advantage of this program, I know that this is excellent public policy. This support will make a substantial difference to the lives of all those who are connected to our business. I would be grateful if you could pass this message on to the team of policymakers. Regards, Anthony of MIG Training.' Consider the message delivered, Anthony, and thank you. The next feedback is from Peter at Wallum Nurseries: 'Our business was falling off a cliff prior to JobKeeper. Once the wage subsidy scheme was implemented, we were able to ensure that we could maintain all our staff, and since then we've even hired another four people part-time.' And, finally, there is some feedback from David at Tangalooma Island Resort on Moreton Island: 'The Morrison government's ongoing leadership and management through the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be underestimated. We are deeply appreciative of this critical support we have received as a business in the hospitality and tourism sector during this crisis, specifically regarding the provision of the JobKeeper stimulus package. During this crisis, JobKeeper has been the single most effective form of support our business has received from any level of government. It has enabled us to endure crippling economic conditions and provide an opportunity for our business to build our recovery on the other side. Tangalooma Island Resort employs over 350 staff and provides essential services to our property owners, government emergency services and the ongoing operation of our general resort, hotel and tourism services. The COVID-19 crisis placed us in a position of extreme financial vulnerability, which escalated drastically when we were forced to shut down due to the Queensland government's restrictions. The JobKeeper initiative allowed us to continue our operations, where practical, provided our staff with an ongoing link back to our company and provided us with the opportunity to navigate the complexities of resurrecting and reopening our multifaceted business and broader community again. The significant impact that JobKeeper has had on our business is difficult to articulate but, to put it simply, it's like we would still be in a shutdown mode and would have been forced to lay off in excess of 90 per cent of our employees had this initiative not existed.' To those opposite JobKeeper has been deemed a waste, but to the thousands of businesses and people these wage subsidy has helped it has been a wonderful lifesaver. 17:27 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I'm grateful to the member for Fenner for bringing this important motion forward for debate and I urge anyone who is watching or listening to get behind his efforts to scrutinise the uneven and unfair application of JobKeeper. That's something you'd think that the government itself might do in relation to the largest one-off commitment of taxpayer's funds in Australia's history but, unfortunately, you'd be wrong. There is a basic obligation on government to take action that's necessary and effective, but to do so in a way that is honest and fair. After being dragged by Labor to accept the need for a wage subsidy in the face of a pandemic, the Morrison government has delivered a program that is full of holes and full of blind spots. There is no support for universities, no support for arts and cultural workers, no support for local government employees and no support for nearly a million casuals in Australia at the time of a pandemic. But when it comes to large, profitable companies, companies which actually increased their profits through the circumstances of the pandemic, they have been well looked after. They have received tens of millions of dollars of taxpayer money. As a result, they've paid enormous dividends and executive bonuses. Crown Casino received $111 million in JobKeeper and yet paid a dividend to shareholders of $203 million. Harvey Norman's profits jumped by 160 per cent. They received $9 million in JobKeeper support and then paid $75 million in dividends. And Premier Investment, a retail conglomerate that includes Just Jeans, Portmans and other businesses, received more than $40 million in JobKeeper support but made a bigger profit in 2020 than in 2019. It paid out $57 million in dividends, of which the chairman, Solomon Lew, alone received $24 million. In the circumstances of a pandemic, with economic pain and suffering all around, those companies received $160 million of taxpayer funded support they clearly did not need. What did the Prime Minister say about that situation? He said: Now, if there are some companies that feel that they want to hand that back, great! Good for them. Good for them! What did the Minister for Human Services say about the people the government had wrongly and illegally targeted with the industrial-scale cruelty of robodebt? He said: 'We'll find you, we'll track you down, you'll have to pay those debts, you may end up in prison.' No good for poor people, no good for disadvantaged Australians, for veterans, disability pensioners and the unemployed. Not good for them; for them threats, collection letters and legal action. For them penury, deprivation and despair. As millions have struggled through this pandemic, lost jobs, lost wages and been forced to ransack their superannuation in a falling market, the billionaires of Australia have seen their wealth increase by 50 per cent. How can that be right, and how can a government program contribute to that kind of grotesque outcome? Those massive holes and blind spots, the squeezing of those who have least and taxpayer funded sunshine for those who have plenty corresponds exactly to the value system of this government. We've seen it from the beginning. It goes back to Joe Hockey and their concept of lifters and leaners. While they peddle the rubbish of transcending ideology and occupying the magic world of the pragmatic middle ground, look at the reality: business tax cuts that never trickle down; penalty rate cuts that result in no new jobs; wages as a share of national income at a 50-year low; unemployment support below the poverty line, with fully one quarter of all single-parent households below the poverty line. At the same time, there are tax cuts for profitable big businesses; personal tax cuts the vast majority of which benefit high-income earners; and taxpayer funded handouts to businesses whose profits have gone up. This is a hands-off government. It's a 'nothing to see here' government. It's a 'how dare you question us' government—a government of the spreadsheet for the spreadsheet of their own self-interest; a government that is always there for friendly companies that could use $80 million for water that never arrives or $30 million for Leppington land worth a tenth of that. But it is never, never there for those doing it tough. There are millions of dollars worth of carrots for those doing well, and for those doing it tough it's always the stick. I know what the government will say. They always get wounded and indignant and say, 'We reject the politics of envy.' In the meantime Solomon Lew profits $24 million while a million unemployed Australians crunch back down to $40 a day. In the meantime Australian billionaires grow their wealth by 50 per cent in a single year while 17,000 university workers lose their jobs and a million casuals are denied support. What will the Prime Minister do? He'll get angry and defensive and say, 'We're not into class warfare.' Not half they're not. 17:32 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn The Morrison government has always maintained that JobKeeper is a temporary program designed to taper off as economic confidence and momentum builds. Based on what we know, expectations that JobKeeper will extend beyond 30 March are not on. However, we also know the way COVID-19 can extend another wave. We'll have to be flexible, and the Treasury is aware of that fact. But it always has been a temporary program. We're seeing through the 750,000 jobs created so far in the past seven months that fewer businesses and their employees need JobKeeper and other temporary support measures. The government's economic plan also includes a range of stimulus measures apart from JobKeeper and JobSeeker, to keep Australians in jobs and in business, including personal income tax, HomeBuilder and the apprenticeship wage subsidy scheme, instant cash write-off and business investment incentives, and JobMaker hiring credits. With the economic recovery well under way, Australians have a cause for optimism and hope as we emerge out of this COVID-19 recession. Let's keep the fingers crossed there. JobKeeper remains available to those businesses and organisations experiencing a decline in revenue until the end of March. We'll see what happens after that. All these calls have been received about job shortages. There are lots of industries in my electorate that are saying they cannot get workers to their businesses. I can quote Emerald Tavern. It's short of ten staff: bottle shop, bar staff, kitchen staff and a chef. The Biloela piggery has vacancies for six workers, but cannot get one. SwarmFarm, a robotic farm near Emerald, at Gindie, wants 10 extra workers—mechanical engineers, agronomist and market developers and leaders to market their products. Many restaurants in and around Gladstone and Biloela are short of workers. That's the problem Australia's got. I say, let's get Australia working again. 17:35 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Like many of my colleagues in this place, I love to spend non-sitting weeks on the streets of my electorate, speaking with small businesses and having in-depth conversations with constituents. Back in August, when I drove my 'conversation caravan' down to Mansfield, a small town on the edge of the Victorian Alps in the south of my electorate, the message was clear from the main street small businesses, local tourism operators and local financial advisers. All of the people I spoke with told me that JobKeeper was a critical lifeline. There was a mood of restrained pessimism. JobKeeper had saved countless businesses from financial ruin and kept employees with no immediate alternatives with pay in their pocket and a connection to their employer. Fast forward to last week when I drove that same conversation caravan down to Murrindindi shire and the townships of Alexandra, Yea and Marysville on the fringe the Yarra Valley just outside Melbourne. I spoke with many businesses and community organisations, from Helico Australia and the Grant Street newsagency in Alexandra to the Lake Mountain reception centre and the Marysville and Triangle Community Foundation. It was clear to me that community views have pivoted dramatically since August. For the first time in months I felt a spirit of optimism and energy to get business engines running again and employees back on the books. Quite a number of businesses had already stopped using JobKeeper, and many were keen to do so soon. Some were also concerned that the blunt incentives that JobKeeper is built upon had been open to exploitation, and some told me about market distortion as a result of JobKeeper. All of that might have been a forgivable consequence when we needed to get money out the door asap at the peak of the crisis, but we need to be more diligent now. It's also important to note that it's not optimism all around. I've heard from many travel agents, event businesses, catering services and the like that JobKeeper is still a critical lifeline to them. These businesses aren't ready for any kind of bounce back soon, not least the end of March, and to do so for them would be a disaster. We must also not forget local artists and dedicated academics and administrative staff at our regional universities—all our universities—who were nonsensically locked out of JobKeeper and remain in insecure positions. What does this tell us? We have to apply common sense when it comes to tapering JobKeeper. First, we need to be there for the businesses ready to jump back in again. They're brave, and we should acknowledge and support their courage and enthusiasm. We should offer these businesses a staged process to make sure they're best positioned to hit the ground running. It also means we should be there if the unexpected happens again, like the snap lockdown in Victoria. This road is not a straight one. Second, we cannot abandon those who are still in economic peril—wedding businesses, casual academics, local painters and freelance graphic designers. The list goes on. These businesses and contractors are still hurting. If the government were not able to be there for them last year, they have a higher duty for them to show up now. Third, we need to get other macroeconomic settings right. While RBA Governor Philip Lowe was optimistic in his statements earlier this month, they were very cautious and based on some long-bow assumptions. The cash rate remains at 10 basis points. We've just seen another $100 billion out the door in government debt. Wage growth is stuck at the bottom of the barrel, and all prudent economic modelling suggests no significant improvements until 2024 at the very earliest. Sure, you cannot run the Australian economy on tax dollars forever, but that does not mean you can abandon fairness and equity. For example, permanently raising JobSeeker to give those who have few savings the chance to income-smooth and bounce back is smart, value focused economics, not state dependency. The same goes for how we taper JobKeeper. This should not be about turning the tap off overnight. It's also not about picking winners and losers sector by sector. It's about being rational, considered and specific about how we wean off JobKeeper so that the economy at large is best positioned to recover and thrive again. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Horticulture Industry 238 17:40 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) horticulture is essential to the Australian economy and is critical for the nation's food security; (b) the gross value of horticultural production in Australia was forecast by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) to be $12.6 billion in 2020-21, of which the value of fruit and tree nut production was forecast to be $5.3 billion; and (c) the Victorian Goulburn Valley region produces almost 50 per cent of the value of Victoria's fruits, excluding grapes, worth $337 million; (2) recognises that: (a) ABARES estimated in the 2019 peak harvest months from February onwards that there were 63,300 overseas workers in Australia; and (b) international travel restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic has left a massive shortfall in available labour for fruit growers; (3) acknowledges that: (a) the Government developed a pathway for 20,000 Pacific Islanders to be available for seasonal work; and (b) the Queensland and Northern Territory Governments acted to support producers by bringing in Pacific Islanders for harvest; and (4) condemns the Victorian Government for its delay in delivering a means for Victorian producers to access Pacific Island workers while fruit goes unpicked and vegetables are ploughed into the ground. Mr Young 201906 I second the motion. Mr DRUM 56430 The horticulture industry in Victoria is facing an unbelievable crisis on the back of the total inaction from the Daniel Andrews government in Victoria. Unpicked fruit is now being left by the pickers—fruit that would be picked each and every year. The farmers are now having to go through the heartbreaking role of going into the orchards, picking their very best fruit and leaving 20 to 30 per cent of perfectly good fruit on the trees because they have been unable to get the labour force they need. On 11 December, after some heated questioning at the national cabinet, Daniel Andrews faced the media and acknowledged that he had a role and a responsibility to bring 15,000 to 20,000 workers into Victoria. He acknowledged that this was his responsibility, and he acknowledged that other states had already moved in this area. He acknowledged that the Northern Territory had already brought in mango pickers from the Pacific islands, where they were free of the virus. He then acknowledged that Queensland had brought in pickers from the Pacific islands and put them into quarantine, on farm protocol. That state and that territory were able to put in place the pickers they needed, and the federal government facilitated all the way through. All the way through, that state and that territory—both Labor governments, by the way—were able to get the assistance they needed with a very quick phone call. We effectively had the federal government stamping the visas and allowing these people to come in, but the guidelines and the protocols for the movements of the pickers were put in place by the states. The pickers were sourced by the states. This is the states' responsibility. Ms Collins interjecting— Mr DRUM 56430 Why on earth would the member for Franklin want to come in and somehow or other start being untruthful about this? The quarantine process is put in place purely by the states. We have told Victoria—and Daniel Andrews has acknowledged this—that it is their responsibility to get these pickers into Victoria. So Daniel Andrews has now made a decision to bring in 1,500 pickers. We didn't make that decision; he made the decision to bring in 1,500 workers. Daniel Andrews has put in place a time line that will probably run post the end of the financial year, when all of the fruit will have already dropped on the ground and rotted. Normally inaction is a course taken by the bureaucracy and the departments who don't want to do anything different to what has already been done. Normally it's a safe pair of hands just to do nothing. But doing nothing in this area has been incredibly damaging. It is going to cost $350 million minimum—that is the cost that they are putting on the farms. Not only that; there is the opportunity of creating a Queensland fruit fly phenomenon that they'll never be able to get back on top of. Normally a few fruit falling on the ground in backyard orchards in the towns creates a huge problem for getting on top of Queensland fruit fly. But to have literally thousands of tonnes lying on the ground around the orchards is going to create an absolute haven for Queensland fruit fly and create serious problems into the future because we've been unable to get this fruit off the trees. It is one thing for a government to have a gigantic failure. I understand it. They're absolutely scared senseless that they're going to bring the virus into Victoria. I get that. But they showed that they could do it for the tennis championships. To bring the Australian Open and to make it work, they've taken huge risks, and it looks like they may get through this. But, if they can take huge risks for a tennis tournament, surely they can take lesser risks, because they're not bringing these pickers in from countries that are rife with the virus; they're bringing these pickers in from areas that are clean. They have proven that they can take these risks for the Australian Open, but they've also proven that they will not take any risks for the people of the horticultural industry, and it's a disgrace. 17:45 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I am still in disbelief that this motion even appears on the Notice Paper. Here again is the federal government trying to walk away from its responsibilities like it does all of the time. I mean, really: what is the point of you being in government? You're responsible for quarantine, you're responsible for the Seasonal Worker Program and you haven't done either in this case. Yes, there's fruit rotting—absolutely. There has been at least $45 million to date. I've been up to see some farmers in my home state, and they're having the same issue. They have dumped fruit because they haven't been able to get workers. It is happening all over the country because your government didn't do its job, because the minister didn't do his job. The National Agricultural Workforce Strategy has been sitting on the minister's desk since October. What has he done? Absolutely nothing. That's what he's done. It's disgraceful that the farmers, after what they went through last year with droughts and fires, now have got the good weather and a bumper crop but now can't pick it, because your government didn't do its job. And you want to come in here and blame premiers? That is just outrageous. It is outrageous that you are trying to blame state premiers when you didn't do your job as a government, because that's exactly what's happened here. The federal government is responsible for quarantine. The federal government is responsible for seasonal workers. Queensland is going to be in a similar position in weeks because they still don't have enough workers either. This is your government that hasn't done its job. The minister came out and he said he had all these workers lined up and he was going to do this workforce strategy, and we have nothing. We have nothing because your government didn't do its job in quarantine and still isn't doing its job in quarantine. Your government hasn't done its job in terms of the Seasonal Worker Program. You have not done your job. We have farmers who are just beside themselves with their bumper crop that they thought would turn it around after everything that's happened to them. After everything they've been through, finally they get a bumper crop and they don't have the workers to get it off, and that is your government's fault. It is not the state and territory governments' fault. A government member interjecting— Ms COLLINS HWM That is outrageous, Deputy Speaker. He should withdraw that comment. Seriously. I am telling the truth: the seasonal worker program is your responsibility and you are responsible for quarantine. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Order! There was so much shouting, I didn't hear what was said. An opposition member: He said she was lying. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 It would please the proceedings of the chamber to withdraw that comment. A government member: I withdraw. Ms COLLINS HWM What we see from this government is continually trying to blame the states for their job. Last time I checked the Constitution, they are responsible for quarantine. Last time I checked, they run the Seasonal Worker Program. That is the point. A government member interjecting— Ms COLLINS HWM No, the farmers know I'm not wrong. I can tell you that. When I've was talking to them in my home state last week, they knew your government hadn't done its job. They know the government is still sitting on the National Workforce Strategy. It was given to the minister. Consultations closed in August last year, and it's been on his desk since October, sitting there. The government hasn't done its job. A government member interjecting — Ms COLLINS HWM It's on your government website, you know. It's actually on your own website. It is just outrageous that they come into this place and try to blame state premiers because they didn't do their job. Instead, perhaps they could actually show some empathy for what is happening on the farms around Australia, for the farmers. You pretend that you support the farmers, you pretend you are the farmers' friend, but you don't do anything to help them—absolutely nothing. To date, $45 million of fruit and vegetables has gone to rot on farms because they haven't been able to get the produce off. They haven't been able to get the produce off because your government hasn't done its job. That is absolutely what has happened here. I cannot believe that you would put a motion like this, trying to blame one state premier for an issue in one state, when this is a nationwide issue. It is happening all around the country. Your government was supposed to coordinate a response and said it would and it did not. It has not done its job. I cannot believe that those opposite would come in here and make these outrageous statements. Where is the empathy for all the hard work that has happened on the farms? Where is the empathy for all the families and friends I know that have gone in to help the farmers pick their crop and for all the local employment programs, where people are actually trying to get people trained to get this produce out of the farms and onto the tables and into the supermarkets around Australia? I'm standing with the farmers; it's a shame the government didn't. 17:51 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I rise to offer my support to this motion moved by the member for Nicholls. Along with Nicholls, my electorate of Mallee is a leading producer of horticultural products. The north-west and South Australian region, which almost entirely encompasses Mallee, produces 100 per cent of the almonds grown in Victoria, with a gross value of over $480 million in 2019. We also produce 99 per cent of Victoria's table grapes, valued at $347 million; 98 per cent of Victoria's oranges, valued at $66 million; and 62 per cent of Victoria's nectarines, valued at $59 million. Many of the horticultural products produced in Mallee and around the country are highly labour intensive, and the sector is dependent on overseas workers to get their products to our plates. Growers in both Mallee and Nicholls as well as many other regions in Australia are currently staring down the barrel of massive losses due to a lack of workers. I've spoken to several growers who are worried that their fruit is going to fall to the ground. Many have already made the heartbreaking decision to plough their entire crop into the ground. One such farmer in Lake Boga, in my electorate, is Ian McAlister, who aimed to pull off a fabulous crop but is down 25 to 30 workers. Shockingly, he had to plough in his entire peach crop valued at $300,000. Recently I met with young innovators and farmers, Dean Morpeth and Mick Young, creators of SHARP Fruit, in Woorinen, at their packing sheds. I was so impressed with their set-up and the workers who were packing the most beautiful fruit. They are currently over 20 workers short. Normally they would employ well over 60 people but this year they are down to just 40. They've had to shut down an entire packing line. This is lost revenue for the entire district. If producers can't sell their fruit and it can't be packed and sent in a timely manner, they lose it. This has a flow-on effect for all of our towns—the cafes and the other businesses. Mick and Dean expect next year to be worse if international borders don't open, as more people on working holiday-maker visas are forced to return to their home countries. I've also met with Darren Minter of Minter Magic, in Iraak. Minter Magic is famous for asparagus. I can tell you firsthand the asparagus is amazing. But asparagus is incredibly labour intensive also. Darren can see the writing on the wall and so is transitioning away from asparagus and into less labour-intensive crops, such as almonds. These decisions are facing many producers around the country. A report by consultancy firm EY released in September last year painted a grim picture of expected workforce shortages. The analysis showed that industry could expect a shortfall of up to 26,000 workers between June 2020 and December 2021. This translates to a net gap of 20 per cent to 33 per cent over an 18-month period. Consequently, the horticulture industry has suffered greatly. In August 2020 the Commonwealth and state governments, through the national cabinet, entered into an agreement to restart the Seasonal Worker Program. As mentioned in the terms of this motion, the Commonwealth has worked with partner nations to develop a pool of 20,000 pre-vetted work-ready Pacific Islanders who are eager to come to Australia to help with the harvests around the nation. It is the responsibility of each state and territory government to put in place arrangements for managing the arrival of workers, consistent with their respective public health orders and within their caps on international arrivals. Unfortunately for the horticulture industry in Victoria, the Andrews Labor government has failed to implement adequate quarantine measures in a timely manner and therefore to provide workers to farms. While the Andrews government has entered an agreement with the Tasmanian government to quarantine 1,500 seasonal workers in Tasmania, this measure does not meet the demand for Victoria's growers and comes too late for too many. Clearly COVID-19 has made it more difficult to find workers, but these challenges have existed for many years, prior to the pandemic, and will persist into the future. Providing growers with better access to legal, sustainable sources of low- and semi-skilled workers for seasonal work is something I am passionate about. That's why I recently produced a policy document on seasonal workforce to take to the Nationals policy committee. The COVID-19 pandemic provides the perfect opportunity to act on this urgent issue in order to secure the future of this vibrant industry. 17:55 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta I'd like to thank the member for moving this motion on the horticulture industry, because it gives me an opportunity to talk about horticulture in the area I live in, which of course is Greater Sydney. I doubt that many people know this, but agricultural production in the Greater Sydney region is valued at about $1 billion, compared with the state's $16 billion. So, it is actually an incredibly large part of the food production for the region. In fact, 20 per cent of the fresh food that goes into the CBD is grown in the Sydney basin, including in the member's own seat of Nicholls. It really is quite incredible. But we can't conclude that this situation will continue, because the planning that the New South Wales government has introduced allows so much of our really good-quality agricultural farmland to be concreted over and turned into urban sprawl. If the current trend continues, in the next decades we're likely to see the 20 per cent of fresh food that is going into Sydney from local farmland go down to five per cent. That is a significant shift, and going the wrong way, given the changing nature of our climate and the kinds of circumstances that will impact our food supply chains locally—bushfires, changing climate, overseas disruption et cetera. We should be looking at what several other countries around the world are looking at: how we reduce our food miles and fragment our supply chains so that there are a variety of sources of food quite close to where we live. I know that a number of organisations in Western Sydney, including a range of businesses, are working on just that. I want to point out that there's a really great project coming our way, courtesy of the New South Wales state government. I don't always praise the New South Wales state government, but the Western Sydney Aerotropolis research centre for agribusiness is actually a very good idea—a world-class research and innovation centre proposed for the precinct, focused entirely on agribusiness, at the Western Sydney Aerotropolis, which will tap into the region's history of food production—and we have quite an extensive one. We also have quite a history in food processing. In fact, Western Sydney is the largest food processor in Australia. So, we are very much about food; it's just that we don't always realise it. The plan will be on exhibition until 28 February. It outlines a vision for 10 precincts surrounding the airport. This is a really great project. The University of Western Sydney is well and truly involved in this, as are the New South Wales Department of Primary Industries facility the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Richmond High School and Richmond TAFE at Hawkesbury. So, we will be seeing some really high-tech work done in the Western Sydney region, and that's an incredibly important thing. The world faces a really interesting dilemma when it comes to food production. It's estimated that by 2050 we won't be feeding the 7.5 billion people we're feeding now; we'll be feeding 10 billion. It's estimated that over the next four decades we'll have to produce the same amount of food that farmers all around the world produced in 8,000 years. There will need to be a massive increase in the amount of food that's produced on the land we currently have and with the water resources we currently have while we deal with climate change and while we deal with that fact that whole areas that we currently farm will become less viable. We are facing quite a serious dilemma. In fact, there are many reports now that say that famine will be the issue of the 21st century, and there's no doubt that is right. We can see that beginning to happen now. We can already see the rise of famine across the world due to changing climate. Australia should be in an extraordinary position to contribute. When you talk to our farmers, there is the research being done on farms, the improvement of soil and the use of drone technology. The work that our farmers are doing to improve productivity is quite incredible. I want to point out just how far it can go. I will talk briefly about the Netherlands. The Netherlands has half the land mass of Tasmania and it has 1,300 inhabitants per square mile. It has no land big enough for large-scale agriculture—none at all—and yet it's the globe's No. 2 exporter of food, measured by value, second only to the United States. It's quite extraordinary and it— (Time expired) 18:01 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker In rising in support of the motion, I take this opportunity to congratulate the member for Nicholls for bringing this issue to the attention of this place. It's important that we understand clearly the challenge Australia's horticultural producers are facing as we move through this very intense harvest period that begins, particularly in terms of southern Australia, around February and runs all the way through June, particularly as it relates to citrus. I stand in support because, as you know, Deputy Speaker Gillespie, I represent the great people of the Riverland in South Australia. Barker is an agricultural powerhouse. While there is horticulture throughout the electorate, much of it is heavily mechanised. The labour-intensive horticultural effort finds itself, if you like, concentrated in the Riverland around sectors like stone fruit, but principally citrus. As ingenious as man is, no man has been able to effectively invent a machine that can, via means of mechanical operation, harvest a citrus tree. What it requires, if anyone wants to know, is moving relatively light, yet still somewhat heavy, aluminium ladders and literally picking fruit by fruit by fruit. That harvest— Honourable members interjecting— Mr PASIN 240756 I have to tell you, colleagues, I've done a bit of it, but, given my shape, I probably should do a lot more of it! We have such a substantial citrus industry in South Australia and across the nation that our need for harvest pickers through that March to June period is gargantuan. We're talking about thousands of people. There isn't one Australian producer who doesn't want to see Australians picking this fruit. Someone may come into this place and suggest this is a crisis that has been borne of COVID-19. No; it has simply been exacerbated by the settings. For a very long time, we've been unsuccessful in motivating Australians to travel and undertake this seasonal work. With a lot of the measures we've adopted, and this is irrespective of the government privileged to be in charge of the Treasury benches, it is effectively the equivalent of putting different forms of bandaids on a bullet wound. COVID has made this so much worse. It's made it worse because, as ABARES tells us, at any point in time we have over 63,000 backpackers in the country, many of whom do 88 days of work in regional communities to effectively earn the right for an additional period in Australia. Of course on account of the pandemic we don't have the privilege of working holiday makers coming to Australia. I don't want to alarm colleagues but it is real, we are seeing citrus producers, who pour all their input into growing oranges, limes and lemons—using expensive water, expensive inputs like pesticides, expensive inputs like fertiliser—getting their fruit to the point where they're now very anxious about getting people into the country to pick the fruit. Our government has 25,000 willing workers in the Pacific Islands ready to come and do that work today. Before those opposite say this is a partisan attack on state governments, I have got to tell you, my call-out is to all state governments—Liberal and Labor—including my own state Liberal government in South Australia, look to what Annastacia Palaszczuk has done, allow on-farm quarantine. Allow these workers to come on farm, quarantine and work for two weeks and then go about making life easier for Australian producers. I don't want to see that fruit rotting on the tree. I don't want to see Aussie fruit prices in supermarkets going up because we didn't get the fruit off. 18:06 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I would like to thank the member for Nicholls for bringing this motion. It is an incredible opportunity for me to talk about the benefits and the great the virtues of the Macarthur electorate. The Macarthur electorate is named after John and Elizabeth Macarthur, widely known as the founders of the Australian wool industry, but in fact they were the founders of the Australian horticulture industry. Camden Park, their property, still exists. It is part of the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute which surrounds Camden Park. Camden Park is still owned by the descendants of John and Elizabeth Macarthur. John Macarthur and Edwina Macarthur Stanham still live there. On that property are the remnants of the founding of the Australian horticulture industry. There are the grapevines. There are orchards which demonstrate where Australian agriculture and horticulture first started. It's interesting that the reasons for the beginning of that horticultural industry then are similar to the situation we find ourselves in now, in that we have difficulty accessing markets, difficulty accessing foods that we want so we have to grow them ourselves. So it is very opportune that this motion is being moved. I think that John and Elizabeth Macarthur would be very upset if they saw what had happened to much of the agricultural land around their original property, which has now succumbed, unfortunately, to urban sprawl, because governments have decided that this urban sprawl, these houses, are much more valuable than the agricultural land that they're built on. It is a shame to see that some of the orchards that were there in my childhood are now houses for what is effectively urban sprawl. There are still, however, a large number of Macarthur residents who work in the agricultural and horticultural sector and we still have a number of large farms in the area. As I've mentioned, the Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute is, at least partly, in my electorate of Macarthur. As a society there are many lessons that we have learnt from the pandemic—which is still ongoing. One of those was that we should plan adequately for any eventuality and we should plan our workforce adequately. Unfortunately, this is something that the federal government hasn't learnt. We haven't had cooperation in getting a workforce to our agricultural and horticultural sector like we should of, and we're paying the price for that in lack of people to pick our fruit and to till our soils. This could have been planned for much more adequately had the government sought to work cooperatively with the state governments around the country. From Tasmania to the Northern Territory, to Queensland, to Western Australia it could have been done much, much better. Our horticultural products are the best in the world. I look forward, with great excitement, to the developments around the aerotropolis of Western Sydney Airport with our high value agricultural products being able to get to markets around the world due to the access to the airport. Unfortunately, the transport around the airport has not been developed adequately—particularly from the south, where most of the agricultural land is. That will further limit our ability to get our high-value products to the rest of the world. I'm a great believer that, as a country, we should make and produce things. Support should not just be for our manufacturing industry but of course in our agricultural sector. We have huge ability to produce agricultural and horticultural products in our country. In my electorate of Macarthur we have some of the best food-processing companies in Australia and yet they're being denied adequate support, denied an adequate workforce and denied the ability to get those products to the rest of the world. I think it's bizarre that the National Party are presenting motions like this, when they themselves have done very little in their electorates to promote Australian horticulture and getting our high-value products to the rest of the world. I commend the member for bringing this motion, but I'd like to see the National Party and his government do more to promote Australia's fantastic horticultural products to the rest of the world. Thank you. 18:11 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm Today I would like to speak on how the Morrison government is committed to making sure that Australia's agricultural sector has the workers it needs. Right from the beginning of this pandemic, the Morrison government has acted to make sure that our farmers are supported. We have acted to make sure that our agricultural sector can continue to operate in a safe way. Firstly, this government extended visas for overseas workers. These workers supplement our highly skilled Australian farmers. Secondly, we provided incentives for Australians to move to the bush to work in the agricultural sector. We recommenced the Pacific Labour Mobility Scheme and this government put in place the National Agricultural Workers Code to facilitate the movement of agricultural workers. All this was done early on to make sure that this sector could continue to operate. In March, this government sat down with each of the states. We said that we needed to develop a plan to make sure that our agricultural sector keeps moving. In August we said that we wanted to see more Aussies working in the regions, while still relying on Pacific and seasonal workers. We pre-vetted 25,000 men and women from 10 Pacific nations to give our farmers the boost that they needed. The federal government was ready. However, at national cabinet the states said that they wanted to run their own quarantine arrangements. They wanted to do that and they told the federal government no. Daniel Andrews, who has continually failed Victoria and Victorians time and time again, now says that maybe the federal government should be running the quarantine program. I find this to be a bit rich after he told us no several times. Andrews wants to continue doing everything himself. Aspen Health, an internationally recognised organisation, put a proposal to the Victorian government, saying, 'We have a plan to take over hotel quarantine and to help Victoria's farmers.' The Andrews government did nothing for six months. Only in January did Andrews come up with arrangements to support farmers. The arrangements were light on detail and relied heavily on Tasmania. I am so pleased to have seen flights arrive in the Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania to help farmers and the meat-processing sector. Victoria is the only state not to bring in a single worker. Daniel Andrews is letting Victoria down again. Australia's second largest state, thanks to Premier Andrews, is being outperformed by our smallest jurisdiction. The Northern Territory has put in place arrangements to see workers start on 5 August. They are leading the way. I believe that the Premier of Victoria should be looking out for the interests of all Victorians, so I ask: why are regional Victorians being left in the lurch? Regional Australia is the engine room of Australia's economy, but Premier Andrews refuses to provide the grease to rev the sector up. Our farmers are tired of waiting on Premier Andrews. We need action from a premier that is hell-bent on locking up Victoria. Our farmers deserve better, Victorians deserve better and Australia deserves better. 18:16 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I can't agree with the previous speaker; I consider the Victorian Premier better than a comedy hour! Watch him; he's in fantasyland. It's fascinating. I enjoy him immensely. There is a bloke that does not live in the same world as the rest of Australia. There were 220,000 backpackers in Australia when COVID hit. Half of those, according to the ABS, were employed in agriculture. When I say in agriculture, I refer to how one of my parliamentary chiefs of staff said they had hotels in Hughenden, and their backpackers were classed as rural employees. Of course, in a very real sense, they are. That's a cattle area and, when the cattle people come to town, they stay overnight, so in a very real sense they're employees. According to statistics, by June of this year there will be no backpackers at all in Australia, so where do we get 50,000 workers from? I truly don't know. The hotel in Atherton—and I stay there because I enjoy all the partying of all the backpackers—had 92 backpackers stay there, but every farmer who's short of a worker just rings up the BV, or the Barron Valley, as it's called, and they will get workers out on the farm. That hotel has pioneered backpacker accommodation and backpackers as a source of workers in the area. Also, they are young people and they create an atmosphere. They swim in the big pool right in the centre of Cairns, and it's really great fun for young people. I think this crisis has brought an issue to a head. Up until last year, I reckon everyone had the freedom that, if they didn't want to work, they didn't have to work. Well, yes, you have the right not to work, but you have no right to take money off the people that are working. If a bloke wants to lounge around all day, watching the television, he doesn't take work off some poor beggar that has to get up at 7.30 in the morning, spend an hour or half an hour getting to work and half an hour getting home in the afternoon. He should not be paying for you to sit at home all day and watch the television. We're looking at about 20 per cent of the Australian work force fitting into that category. They're hiding among the disabled. They're hiding in the university and education sector. They're hiding all over the place. If you compare the people that were working—my generation, but even the generation below me—with the people that are working now, there's a hell of a lot of them just simply hiding out. Disability is one of the great places to hide out. I think we've arrived at that point. Where I find the Premier of Victoria absolutely fascinating—they put people in quarantine in the centre of a city. The last place on the planet that you put people is in the centre of a rabbit warren city! Of course our government in Queensland has done exactly the same thing, so—surprise, surprise!—we've got an outbreak. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Mr KATTER HX4 I have finished what I needed to say. Sitting suspended from 18:20 to 18 : 30 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Paid Parental Leave 245 18:31 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) there are around 2.6 million families with dependent children aged under 15 in Australia; (b) Australia has one of the least generous paid parental leave schemes in the OECD; (c) the McKinsey Global Institute found that in Australia, participation in early childhood education is lower than the OECD average and costs over 40 per cent more than the OECD average; and (d) perinatal discrimination is the top discrimination complaint in Australian workplaces; (2) acknowledges that: (a) Australia lags behind other developed countries in the provision of best practice, evidence‑based policies that support families and children; and (b) there is significant economic benefit to Australia from increasing female workforce participation, gender equity and outcomes for children; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) increase health and wellbeing support for parents and children by amending parental leave legislation and providing for a year of paid parental leave to be shared by both parents; (b) lower the cost of early childhood education for all families; and (c) improve access to paid carers' leave for parents of sick children. The motion outlines the need for a comprehensive approach to the reform of Australian parenting policies. Today, The Parenthood group and Equity Economics released a report titled Making Australia the best place in the world to be a parent—an ambitious but important goal. The report highlights the economic and social benefits of the policy proposals, including an estimated increase to GDP of 4.1 per cent, or some $166 billion, by 2050. And if we can get female workforce participation up to the same level as male participation, GDP would increase up to 8.7 per cent—some $353 billion. There are 2.6 million families in Australia with dependent children under the age of 15. In Warringah, we have 20,000 of those families, and many have told me of the need for a more supportive approach and that there is a disincentive to return to work due to the costs of child care and the discrimination experienced in the workplace. A more consistent and supportive approach to parenting strategy in Australia is required to address these concerns. From my own experience with young children, starting my career as a lawyer and then at the New South Wales bar, it was already incredibly frustrating that conferences to exotic overseas locations, holidays and ski trips were all tax deductible, but the real everyday cost of child care was not. It was, and remains, so high. The tax system is not gender neutral and it's time our system caught up with the 21st century and the reality of working parents. COVID-19 threw into stark relief the inadequacy of the current policy suite at supporting families in Australia. Parents across the country were homeschooling their children. Many struggled without access to carers' leave and were without access to child care. The government intervened to provide temporary relief through free child care, which was welcomed by many parents, but it was a minefield, and some providers, for example, were unable to afford the rent or staff required to stay open in many areas. There is a lot of complexity around this area, but if we've seen one thing it's that the COVID recession impacted the jobs of women and female-dominated industries far more than the jobs of men and male-dominated industries. The budget response last October to this pink recession was unfortunately a very blokey budget, and it was heavily criticised. It's now clearly squarely on the agenda for the Prime Minister and the government to address this in the May budget. In preparing the May budget, I urge the government to consider The Parenthood report, which delivers a blueprint for a comprehensive Australian parenting strategy post-COVID. The tools for achieving this include universal health and wellbeing support for parents and children through pregnancy and early years, and a parental leave scheme that provides one year of paid leave, to be shared equally between parents. Australia has one of the worst rates of participation by fathers in parental leave. We need this to improve, and we need sufficient parental leave, across both parents, to ensure that it is not one parent—generally the woman—who is disproportionately disadvantaged and disincentivised from returning to the workforce. And we need free and high-quality childhood education and care for all families, and of course flexible and supportive workplaces with universal access to paid carers leave for sick children. So, paid parental leave is something that's very important. Australia has one of the least adequate parental leave schemes among OECD countries. The average length of paid parental leave among OECD countries is 55 weeks, while Australia has 18 weeks. Paid parental leave in Australia is granted to one parent, the primary caregiver, whereas in other OECD countries it can be shared. More-equitable paid parental leave schemes are important because they will encourage fathers into caring roles, improving their long-term bond with children, improving participation in unpaid work in households and creating an appreciation of the work involved in raising a child. It will also provide primary carers with the opportunity to return to their careers sooner and more sustainably. Child care is commonly viewed as child minding rather than the early education of children, and that needs to change, because some great gains can be made. We need an attention to women in the next budget, and I would encourage the Prime Minister to have better female representation on the Expenditure Review Committee to ensure an equitable budget. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Is the motion seconded? Dr Haines 282335 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 I thank the member for Indi. I give the call to the member for Ryan. 18:36 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I'm very pleased to rise to speak about this motion today on family support, and I thank the member for Warringah for putting it on the Notice Paper, because it is so important to talk about Australian families and the important things the government is delivering for them. I do disagree with the member for Warringah on a very important point, and that is that I think right now Australia is the best place to raise a family. Where else would you rather be? It disappoints me so often that Labor and Independent members are willing to talk down Australia and Australian society in terms of the opportunities we give to Australian families and to our kids and that we are delivering for them. I've lived my whole life in the Ryan electorate, and I now raise my young family there, so it's something I can talk about from personal experience, along with the other 39,000 families who live in the Ryan electorate. They gave me the honour of representing them in this place, and I made a commitment that I would look out for the families in the Ryan electorate and across Australia in the work that we are able to do. So it is a great pleasure to talk, in response to this motion, about the significant efforts the Morrison government is making to ensure that the opportunities for Australian families are significant and to ensure that families are kept healthy and safe. There is certainly no place you would want to be other than Australia, particularly in this past year, through COVID. But it's not just about keeping you healthy and safe, although that is important. Brand new medicines are being listed on the PBS every week—life-changing medicines for Australian families—that are possible only because of the Morrison government's commitment to the financial discipline that simply couldn't— An opposition member interjecting— Mr SIMMONDS 282983 I'll take the Labor member's interjection. He says the PBS is bipartisan. But they couldn't do it. Labor members couldn't do it. They had to stop listing medicines on the PBS. Labor actually stopped listing life-saving medicines because of financial constraints. What an indictment on their government, that they couldn't achieve it. This government, the Morrison government, does achieve that for families. We have been able to put record amounts of funding into frontline mental health support services as well, such as Kids Helpline—things that are practical improvements in families' lives—and to give them the support they need, particularly at this difficult time. The Morrison government is also making important strides in increasing flexibility in the workplace for families. Last year the Morrison government passed the Paid Parental Leave Act 2020, which delivered just that—greater flexibility when it comes to the parental leave system. Before this bill was passed, paid parental leave could only be taken in a continuous 18-week block within the first 12 months of the birth or adoption of a child. Now, these new measures allow families to split their parental leave entitlement into blocks of leave, with an initial period to be taken in the first 12 months and the remaining six weeks to be taken at a later time within two years. These measures are designed to change what are traditionally viewed as social norms and encourage secondary carers to take parental leave. More importantly, they give families choice. That's what the Morrison government believes in and what I believe so passionately in—that families know what is best for them, that they know how to give opportunity to their kids. We're about enabling them to have that choice—not telling them how to raise their family or the manner in which they should do it but providing as much choice as we possibly can. We all know what a juggling act it is to be a parent. We see many private companies now responding to the changing needs of parents, particularly mums, providing more benefits above the minimum standards as well. There is this time as well, with COVID. Any family's life is stressful with the added pressures of restrictions and lockdowns. Many workers have had their employment interrupted, which would have been an issue for the parental leave test period. So as not to place further financial stress on families, the Morrison government has amended this test for a limited time so that parents must have worked 10 out of 20 months, not the previous 13 months, so that they won't be disadvantaged when it comes to taking this important leave. Again, it shows how this government is about supporting parents, particularly in paid parental leave, and giving them the choices they need to best raise their families. I'm very proud of what the Morrison government has achieved to support Australian families and what it is continuing to do and will do, with the vaccine rollout and other measures, to support the 39,000 Ryan families. I will continue to be a loud voice for them in this place. 18:41 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I thank the member for Warringah for bringing this important motion to the House, speaking to the report by The Parenthood and Equity Economics called Making Australia the best place in the world to be a parent. That means making Australia the best place in the world to raise a child would make it the best place in the world to be a child. Just think about that, if our nation was known for that. Too many Australian parents with children under five are caught in a trap of inadequate paid parental leave, lack of affordable high-quality learning, perinatal discrimination and myriad other social and economic barriers to workplace participation and, indeed, the full enjoyment of family life. Too many Australian children are suffering because of this. In the first five years of life children's brains are wired to learn quickly. Early learning helps to amplify their natural skills and abilities and to prepare them to thrive in later years. Children who attend early learning services are 33 per cent less likely to be developmentally vulnerable when they start school than those who do not attend early learning services. Since the introduction of universal access to preschool in 2009 Australia has made progress in the proportion of children enrolled in a preschool program in the year before school. But most of our peer countries in the OECD already provide at least two years of preschool and have done so for decades. Countries in our region are rapidly ramping up access to two years of preschool, framing this as a necessary investment in human capital and future productivity—countries in our region, right next door to us. Investing in an additional year of preschool is really the next big policy opportunity for Australia. Rural children and families are hit by these failures even harder. Noting that early childhood care and education is a private-public market and that our government has continued to encourage parents to shop around to ensure they are getting value for money—well, when there's one provider within 50 kilometres, if you are lucky, it's pretty hard to shop around. UNICEF has ranked Australia 32nd out of 41 nations for child wellbeing in 2020. This is shameful and it needs to change, and we can make it change. I know from my experience both as a parent and as a frontline worker, as a midwife, the kinds of stresses that parents face. There are parents at the emergency department in what we call the witching hours, between six and midnight—stressed, uncertain, seeking support, worried about a child who they might need to stay home from work tomorrow to look after. I know that we can get better. The report published today by The Parenthood and Equity Economics provides the solutions, and they're straightforward and compelling. What we need here is action. We know from this report that we need significant investment in four key areas. We need universal health and wellbeing support for parents and children, through pregnancy and the early years. Gold standard care requires access to mental health support through ongoing access to screening, telehealth and continuity of care throughout pregnancy—and that's something I happen to know a lot about. We know that continuity of midwifery care in this nation is only available to a handful of families right across our system, yet, if they receive it, we know it's good for mothers, good for babies and good for families: they're less likely to have an operative birth, they're less likely to have a preterm birth and they're less likely to have low-birth-weight babies, and they have higher satisfaction and earlier onset of breastfeeding. We know that mental health challenges are severe and concerning for both mothers and fathers, and we know that fathers are very unlikely to seek help. The transition to parenthood makes them vulnerable to experiencing anxiety and depression for the very first time in their life. A paid parental scheme is important for both parents. I've studied and undertaken research in Sweden, where there are 480 days of parental leave which can be shared. So, yes, we've made a beginning, but we've got so much further to go. We know that women who get more parental leave than the government system have better mental health, and, if the women have better mental health and the fathers have better mental health, we know that the children will do better, too. Free and high-quality early childhood education and care for families are crucial. We should be increasing our childhood education for these young children. Finally, we need flexible and supportive workplaces, with universal access to paid carers leave. As we've seen during the COVID pandemic, we need flexible workplaces that allow parents to work from home in a blended model, if they can. I commend this motion to the House, and I encourage the government to step up to the plate on improving access to these services. 18:46 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I wish to congratulate and thank the member for Warringah for putting this very important issue on the agenda here today. It's an issue that is seeing a constraint on Australia's economic development and a constraint on the development of families in our community as well. Australia's Paid Parental Leave scheme was introduced by Labor and started on 1 January 2011. When the scheme was introduced, Australia was one of only two OECD nations that didn't have a national scheme of that nature, with the United States being the other. In 2021, the current Paid Parental Leave scheme is up to 18 weeks at the minimum wage, and it's below the OECD average of 50-plus weeks leave. Australia now ranks fourth among OECD nations for some of the highest childcare costs in the world. Paid parental leave signals to employers and the Australian community that parents taking time out of the paid workforce to care for a child is part of the usual course of life and should be supported by government. It also enables participation of women in particular in the workforce. A high workforce participation rate is important in the context of an ageing population and the economic recovery from the impact of COVID. It helps to address the gender pay gap as well, particularly for those women on low and middle incomes who have less access to employer funded parental leave. The gender pay gap remains a big problem in Australia and has remained stubbornly high over the past two decades, with only minor changes widely attributed to the ending of the mining boom. If the Morrison government were genuinely serious about fixing the gender pay gap, they would oppose cuts to penalty rates. The vast majority of workers who have had their penalty rates cut in this country have, unfortunately, been women working in itinerate work in the hospitality and retail sectors. Those cuts to penalty rates are exacerbating the gender pay gap by making it harder for women to earn a decent income and to pay the rent and cover their bills. Paid parental leave is also meant to promote equality between men and women and the balance between work and family life, yet the shortcomings in the current approach are impacting constituents not only in my electorate but across the country. One example is Catherine. Catherine is the main income earner in her household, but she is unable to receive paid parental leave support because her income is too high, yet if their roles were switched and her husband was earning the same salary then Catherine would be entitled to the benefit. It's because the current test is based on the mother's income, not the overall household income. That is not only hampering that particular family's earning capacity and ability to support their family and grow it but also a handbrake on our economic development. With gender roles now less defined and double income the norm, is it the best approach to be helping working families if we have this impediment built into the system? This is particularly the case given that increasing childcare costs are also locking many Australian parents out of the workforce. We've seen in the recent Productivity Commission report on government services in 2021 that almost 300,000 Australians are not in the labour force because they are caring for children, and the number of parents saying they are not working mainly due to the cost of child care has skyrocketed by 23 per cent. This confirms that the cost of child care is prohibiting Australian parents from working the hours that they want. With the Morrison government itself predicting fee increases without CPI for years to come, the hits will keep on coming for Australian families. It is clear that there is a problem in this area, and that is why Labor has developed its plan for cheaper child care—to support those working families to work the hours that they can and want to support their families. That's why we will scrap the $10,500 childcare subsidy cap which often sees women losing money for working an extra day's work; lift the maximum childcare subsidy rate to 90 per cent; and increase the childcare subsidy rates and taper them for every family earning less than $530,000 a year. Importantly, the ACCC will be tasked with designing a price regulation mechanism to ensure that the costs are kept down. It's important that we support families to work the hours that they need to support their family as it's growing. But the current system is an impost on that, because working that extra day is often impaired by the way the subsidy works. That's why Labor's plan will deal with this issue. 18:51 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I'm pleased to speak on the motion moved by the member for Warringah which acknowledges the benefits to Australia from increasing female workforce participation, gender equity and outcomes for children by lowering the cost of early childhood education for all families. Sadly, women in Australia continue to take on the lion's share of family and caring responsibilities. Australian women do almost twice as much unpaid household work and caring work as men—and I'm making this speech here in Canberra while my wife Lee is in Brisbane with our children. Hopefully, she isn't listening to the Federation Chamber at this time. Of course women's career paths are often negatively impacted by pregnancy and caring responsibilities. Affordable care for Australian children is crucial. Without it, many parents, most often the mother, are forced to give up or turn down work. We are just two and a half years into the coalition's childcare system—the one the Prime Minister dubbed a 'once-in-a-generation reform' and that he personally promised would make child care more affordable. Sadly, ABS data shows that, for parents in Brisbane, child care is now more expensive than when the Morrison system was introduced. The Morrison system has done the opposite to what Prime Minister Morrison promised. Families are struggling and yet the 2020 budget had no plan for child care. Families are being crippled by ever-increasing childcare fees. They've seen an increase of 7.2 per cent in just one year—and, guess what? Wages aren't increasing at 7.2 per cent. In fact, wages are flatlining. We know that having more women in the workforce is better for the economy. A recent Productivity Commission report confirmed that the cost of child care is prohibiting parents from working the hours they want. The report revealed that almost 300,000 Australians are not in the labour force due to caring for children—all that potential. More than 90,000 of these parents say that they are not working mainly due to the cost of child care. The boost to our economy from reduced childcare costs has been modelled by KPMG and the Grattan Institute. That modelling revealed the boost to our GDP from increased workforce participation was at least $7.5 billion and up to $10 million. So it makes sound economic sense to reduce childcare costs. Every family with young children in my electorate of Moreton knows that the high cost of child care is a hit to household budgets and a brake on women's workforce participation—all that potential being untapped. It's also a huge hit to our economy as a whole. This motion notes that Australia has one of the least generous paid parental leave schemes in the OECD generous paid parental leave schemes in the OECD. Parents, both mothers and fathers, should be able to take time off to look after their newborns without having to worry about how they can pay the rent. Since the coalition have been in government, they've tried to slash paid parental leave five times. The coalition have called mothers rorters, double-dippers and fraudsters. Labor actually understands how important it is for parents to spend those early weeks with their child. You don't get that time back. It's good for the babies and it's good for the parents' wellbeing too. When in government, Labor implemented the first national paid parental leave scheme and introduced dad and partner pay. From opposition, Labor blocked the coalition government's attempt to slash paid parental leave. As a dad and as a former teacher, I know how important those early years are in a child's life. It's important to have those days and weeks after the birth of a child to bond and for babies and parents to settle in. It's important for parents to have access to good-quality, low-cost child care so they can get back into the workforce when they are ready. Unlike this government, Labor, under Anthony Albanese, has a plan to bring down the cost of child care and keep it down. Our cheaper child care for working families policy will scrap the $10,560 childcare subsidy cap, which often sees women losing money from that extra day's work, will lift the maximum childcare subsidy rate to 90 per cent and will increase childcare subsidy rates and taper them for every family earning less than $530,000. Labor will ask the ACCC to design a price regulation mechanism to shed light on costs and fees and drive them down for good. With the aim of implementing a universal 90 per cent subsidy for all families, the Productivity Commission will conduct a comprehensive review of this crucial sector. It's time that working families were rewarded. We value the family. It's time that we put that extra reward in there. It's time that second household income earners, who are usually women, were encouraged, rather than discouraged. That's the current set of arrangements engineered by Prime Minister Morrison. It's time that second household income earners were encouraged to work more and contribute to our economic recovery after the pandemic. It's time to fix the coalition's broken childcare system. Debate adjourned. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 249 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Order of Australia Honours 249 18:57 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I move: That this House: (1) places on record its support for recipients of the Order of Australia; (2) acknowledges the Order of Australia is the highest national honour awarded to Australian citizens for outstanding contributions to our communities and country, and to non-citizens who have given extraordinary service to Australia; (3) notes that since being established by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in 1975, there have been more than 600 recipients of the Companion of the Order of Australia, over 3,300 awarded Officers of the Order of Australia, more than 11,600 inducted as Members of the Order of Australia and more than 26,800 honoured as recipients of the Medal of the Order of Australia; (4) recognises the recipients in the General Division of the Order of Australia on Australia Day in 2021 come from an array of fields including science, education, governance and sport; and (5) encourages all Members to congratulate recipients from their electorates on this immense achievement. The Order of Australia is awarded to Australians who have significantly served our community and have been great achievers in their chosen field. I'm always delighted to have the chance to reflect on the hard work, service and accomplishments of Australians in my community. Several Berowra constituents were recently inducted into the order, and today I would like to take the opportunity to recognise their service and offer my congratulations. From service in education and the disability sector to contributions in aviation, law, horticulture and publishing, the recipients of this year's awards span a diverse array of fields and reflect the enormous ability of Berowra constituents. Professor Ronald Bartsch of Cheltenham has been appointed as Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to aviation law, safety and compliance. Professor Bartsch is considered one of the world's leading experts on aviation law and aviation safety. He's been a barrister and a lecturer in law for over 25 years, and, as managing director and chairman of Avlaw Aviation Consulting International, he works with almost 100 specialist aviation consultants and lawyers across the Asia-Pacific. His books include International Aviation Law, The Corona Dilemma: 20-20 Thinking for the Next Normal, Drones in Society and Aviation Law in Australia. Graham Ross of Beecroft was appointed Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to the broadcast media, and particularly to horticulture and the community. Graham has been a fixture on Australian radio and television for four decades. He's been a presenter on television shows, including Better Homes and Gardens, and runs The Garden Clinic on 2GB. He operates Ross Garden Tours, a local family-operated garden tour company, which is one of the best in Australia. Starting as a teacher at Ryde TAFE, he has been a passionate advocate for horticulture and for young people choosing careers in gardening. I particularly think of the work that he's done through the Australian Garden Council. He's also a major identity in the Beecroft community, always finding ways to contribute, not just nationally but locally as well. Today I acknowledge the immense contribution Graham has made to horticulture. Francis Deane of Castle Hill has been awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia for service to people with disability and to the community. Francis, or Frank as he's known, has contributed to numerous community organisations, including the Rotary Club of Carlingford, the Probus Club of Carlingford-North Rocks, the New South Wales Masonic Club, the Buccaneers, and the Northern Barbarians Rugby Club. He's made a significant contribution to Foresight, acting as its chair since 2014. I also want to acknowledge the contribution of Colin Llewellyn of West Pennant Hills, awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for service to the Presbyterian Church of Australia. Colin has served as a session clerk, a superintendent of Sunday schools and an elder at the Beecroft Presbyterian Church. He has also worked as the voluntary chaplain and the spiritual adviser at the Cherrybrook Christian Care Centre and has previously held positions as Chief Executive Officer of Presbyterian Social Services and the Allowah Presbyterian Children's Hospital. Congratulations to Lynn McCrindle of Pennant Hills, who was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia for services to children and to education. Mrs McCrindle was one of the founders of Pacific Hills Christian School, one of the great schools in my electorate. She worked as a teacher there from 1979 and was on the board of the school until 2018. She has been a volunteer with Christian Missions International and is on the international management committee. Mrs McCrindle has also been a volunteer with the West Pennant Hills Community Church for over 50 years and has been a volunteer with Crossroads since 1996. Her family involvement of the life of Pacific Hills continues, with her son, the social researcher Mark McCrindle as the chairman and with various grandchildren attending that school as students. David Rosenberg of Kenthurst has been awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia for services to publishing. David was the founder and director of the independent publisher Kangaroo Press until 1997, when it was sold to Simon & Schuster. While operating Kangaroo Press, David and his wife published around a thousand non-fiction books, covering Australian history, biography, military maritime history, sport, craft, agriculture, radio pioneers, gardening, railways and Aboriginal affairs. David established Rosenberg Publishing in 2002, and at the age of 89 David continues to operate Rosenberg Publishing with his wife, averaging 12 non-fiction books a year. In 2009 he was the recipient of a George Robertson Award from the publishing industry. Finally, I want to recognise Geoffrey Scott of Carlingford. He was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia for service to education and professional associations. Geoffrey's involvement in education spans over 55 years and includes seven years as President of the New South Wales Primary Principals Association. He became a school principal in 1983 before retiring in 2016 and is a life member of the New South Wales association and currently a principal support officer. He's also a life member of the Australian Government Primary Principals Association, holding several other significant roles. All these people have made a significant contribution to our community and our country, and I salute them. The DEPUTY SPEAKER G86 Is the motion seconded? Mrs McIntosh 281513 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 19:02 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon The Order of Australia is a truly great honour for Australians who are committed to serving their communities, but I'm quick to point out that there are many Australians who have not yet been awarded the Order of Australia who are incredibly committed to our community. I encourage those Australians out there, when you know a good Aussie that is doing a brilliant thing for our community, for our country, to nominate them. The Northern Territory has the smallest population for any Australian jurisdiction, with just under a quarter of a million residents, so I'm very proud to pay tribute to the wonderful Territorians who have been acknowledged for their hard work in our community on the Australia Day Honours list. The Hon. Trevor Riley QC is now an Officer of the Order of Australia. He is a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory. His legal career has spanned almost 50 years. He worked on the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, which, of course, is important work as we reflect today upon the efforts that are still required to close the gap. During his tenure as chief justice he was outspoken on such issues as alcohol abuse, high imprisonment rates and cuts to legal aid. He's made a colossal contribution, and Territorians are very thankful. Also a newly appointed AO is Professor Alan Cass, Director of the Menzies School of Health Research. I spoke with Alan at a breakfast we had just the other day for the anniversary of the Apology to the Stolen Generations. He's a kidney specialist and he's doing amazing work to get better health outcomes, particularly for the First Australians. Unfortunately, the NT has some of the highest rates of kidney failure in the world, so Professor Cass's work is literally life-saving. His colleague Professor Amanda Jane Leach has now been awarded an AM. She is doing fantastic work in fighting an ear infection which causes long-term hearing loss in First Nation's kids. When you consider that hearing loss in children often leads to less-than-great outcomes at school—dropping out of school et cetera—then this work that Professor Leach is doing is so important. Long-time and recently retired Katherine mayor, Fay Miller, has done tremendous work for her community. A member of the other side of politics, Fay has been a tireless advocate for Katherine for more than 30 years, including as deputy opposition leader in the NT legislative assembly. She has faced down huge obstacles, such as breaking her neck and rebuilding her home twice after the flooding that went through Katherine over the years. So I send a heartfelt and very apolitical thank you to Fay. Former Chief Magistrate of the NT, Hugh Bradley, was also honoured this year for his service to the law and the judiciary—well done, Hugh. David Watters was honoured for his service to law enforcement in the NT. Thank you, David, very much for your service. And congratulations to the Hagan family of Tennant Creek and also a special shout out to Katie Woolf of Mix104.9 FM, who I speak with regularly on-air. She is a great voice for our community, speaking truth to power. She has also positively channelled her grief from losing her father six years ago to prostate cancer. She started the NT Run with Dad charity to raise community awareness about prostate cancer. She's a top Territorian and so well done, Katie. As is David Dinh, who received a medal for his service to the NT Vietnamese community. On the weekend I went to the Tet celebration for the new year, which is a fantastic event. Good on you, David—we're much better off in our community for your excellent contribution. And you grow delicious mangoes! Well done, mate. Carley Scott is CEO of Equatorial Launch Australia. ELA is doing fantastic work out in East Arnhem Land for the growing space industry there. Getting NASA rockets launched from a spaceport in the outback is fantastic work—keep it up Carley! And, lastly, but very importantly, I want to pay tribute to our Public Service medallists. There is a Jodie Ryan, a long-term public servant in the Northern Territory—well done—and our Chief Health Officer, Hugh Heggie. He is doing a fantastic job with our COVID response, which has seen the Territory not have one community transmission so far. Well done, Hugh Heggie, and well done to those great Territorians. 19:07 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay I would like to thank my colleague, the member for Berowra, for putting forward this motion to recognise the men and women who were awarded an Order of Australia honour on Australia Day this year. On behalf of my community of Lindsay I would like to take this opportunity to celebrate the awards to people across our community. 'Bravery at its best' is how the Royal Australian Navy characterised the actions taken by Leading Seaman Steven Palu, CSM, of Glenmore Park. In August 2017, Australian Clearance Diving Team 1 was called on to recover three missing United States marines from the wreckage of an MV-22 Osprey—a military aircraft. In what was a demanding and hazardous dive, the efforts of Leading Seaman Palu in overcoming a challenging environment and malfunctioning equipment guaranteed the return of the body of a marine to the grieving family. He said, 'We had a job and we got it done.' But this was no ordinary job. The Royal Australian Navy notes that no Australian clearance diver has recovered human remains from a ditched aircraft at that depth in recent history. Leading Seaman Palu was awarded a Conspicuous Service Medal, citing his meritorious devotion to duty. Leading Seaman Palu's devotion to duty is unquestionable, as is his courage, determination and dedication. This truly was bravery at its best and I congratulate Leading Seaman Palu on his recognition. Also receiving recognition on Australia Day this year was Mr Shaun Danby, ACM, of Kingswood. Shaun started with the Department of Juvenile Justice in New South Wales as a vocational instructor back in 1996. Since 2017 he has been the Corrective Services Industries Operations Manager, leading a team on construction, emergency and urgent building and maintenance works. Shaun develops inmates through managing, coaching, instructing and encouraging the members of his team to help improve their skills and experience, helping them to get a job after their release and to become productive members of the community. Shaun's citation notes that he is, 'a selfless and committed leader and his dedication is exemplary'. Typical of the humble fashion in which he goes about his work, Shaun attributed his success to his team but it is appropriate that he has been recognised with the Australian Corrections Medal. Mr Eric Easterbrook, OAM, of Emu Plains received the Medal of the Order of Australia for services to the community, particularly to war widows and their families. Eric served our country in the Royal Australian Air Force for 20 years before serving as a public servant for another 22. As the Vice-Chairman of Legacy Australia Eric is an integral part of Legacy's efforts to support the families and loved ones of Australian Defence Force members who gave their lives, or who helped during or after their service to our nation. Eric has done all of what the member for Berowra notes as 'a range of fields of service to our community'. He is a member of Legacy, a volunteer for the Uniting Church, a leader of the Emu Plains Lions Club, a member of local sports including Emu Plains Soccer Club and the Little Athletics. He was a volunteer with Blaze Aid and with National Parks and Wildlife Service NSW—so much for our community. I was proud to meet Eric last year and talk about the work he was doing in our community in encouraging younger people to take part. Warrant Officer Christopher William Rohweder, CSM, of Glenmore Park was awarded a Conspicuous Service Medal. He was recognised for his meritorious achievement in the training and development of the Australian Defence Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal Remediation Program. He is known for being an outstanding professional who displays exceptional dedication to duty. His development of innovative assessment and instructional tools, subject matter expertise and professional work ethic were crucial to achieving a successful trial of the new course that has delivered improved training outcomes and a number of resource efficiencies that have advanced defence capability. I am so proud to represent the people of Lindsay. We are all proud of our community and what it has achieved—particularly to have Leading Seaman Steven Palu, CSM; Mr Shaun Danby, ACM; Mr Eric Easterbrook, OAM and Warrant Officer Christopher William Rohweder, CSM, as members of our community. They truly are outstanding citizens. I am particularly pleased of the work that is being done to encourage younger people in our community to serve as well. I congratulate all of them on their Australia Day honours and look forward to their ongoing contributions to our community of Lindsay. 19:12 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell [by video link] I would like to thank the member for Berowra for introducing this private members' motion to the House, which gives me the opportunity to speak about three of my local constituents who received Australia Day honours this year. Our Order of Australia awards recognise those who give extraordinary service to Australia. I certainly know how important they are to the recipients, their families and their communities. I want to begin my congratulating Greenvale resident Michael Panormitis Pakakis AM, Member of the Order of Australia, who was recognised for significant service to STEM education in Victoria. Michael is the director of the Victorian Space Science Education Centre at Strathmore Secondary College and works closely with the education heads of NASA, the European Space Agency and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency to develop STEM teaching resources. Michael is a child of the post Second World War nation-building migration program. His parents migrated to Australia from the island of Rhodes in Greece when he was 13 months old. In fact, Michael and I may have come to Australia in the same year. Certainly our families came here for similar reasons: a better future for their children. As an only child Michael spent many hours watching science fiction TV series and reading. Both parents were at work, his mother a seamstress and his father a tool maker. This is a very familiar migrant story. Michael had an interest in science and recalls that on the day the Americans landed on the moon, 20 July 1969—who could forget that—he told his dad that he wanted to do something related to science. He loved acquiring knowledge but he also wanted to impart this knowledge so he became a teacher. Michael has been teaching since 1985. Reflecting on his service and contribution, Michael says: During my first years in teaching, I taught disadvantaged kids from migrant and refugee backgrounds, often with poor English and learning difficulties. I used to tell them that I am a migrant too and they can achieve anything they dream of, if they put some effort in. I wanted to be a role model for them. Michael's motto is one that NASA instils in its astronauts: 'Failure is not an option. Perseverance is the only option.' Greenvale resident Mrs Samia Baho OAM received a Medal of the Order of Australia for services to refugee welfare for the African community of Victoria. Samia came to Australia as an Eritrean refugee 30 years ago. She too shares the enduring story of refugee settlement in Australia. From an early age she had to overcome challenges by being resourceful and visionary. She spoke seven languages and quickly learned English, and she went on to obtain a social work degree, a master's degree and a postgraduate diploma in women's health at the University of Melbourne as well as a certificate in cultural practice, law and health at La Trobe University. Samia became the founding member of the Centre for African Australian Women's Issues. Her experience of being a refugee has pretty much shaped her advocacy work and drives her determination to help those refugees who come here. She has led on issues related to racism and sexism, working to ensure that there are appropriate and equitable services available for African women. In the past five years Samia has worked on projects associated with sexual and reproductive health improvement for Sahel African women and is the statewide coordinator for the Productive Rights Education Program. She conducts important work in addressing perceptions about African women and family violence. Samia is very passionate about helping people find a job, especially women. As she says, 'If you get employment, your life will change in a lot of aspects.' Samia has set up a specialised centre in Melbourne's west, whose main goal is to help people into employment. She connects with a wide network of other services and people who are sympathetic to her cause and who work together to make it happen. Samia is a great woman, and I want to congratulate her especially. Craigieburn resident Kevin O'Neill is one of four Cricket Australia scorers who officiated for their club in Victoria's premier cricket competition to receive an OAM. Kevin is the Carlton Cricket Club's scorer and has held the first grade scorer's chair since 1971. He has been appointed scorer in 33 test matches, 63 one-day internationals, 186 first-class matches and 39 list A matches. Since his first match, Kevin has been Carlton's first grade scorer in 596 matches. And what a good club Carlton is! Kevin and I obviously share an association with Carlton. Congratulations, therefore, to my three constituents—Michael, Samia and Kevin. You represent the breadth of the Australian story and are rightly recognised by our Australia Day awards, and I want to congratulate you very warmly. 19:17 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby I commend the member for Berowra on moving this motion on the Order of Australia honours, and I would like to place on record my own support for the recipients of the Order of Australia in the 2021 Australia Day honours within my electorate of Boothby. As the federal member for Boothby I am honoured to be able to congratulate this year's recipients and to acknowledge the contribution of so many local residents and groups to the richness of our local community. I would like to recognise the following residents for their outstanding service. Emeritus Professor Wayne Sampson AM was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to dental education in the field of orthodontics. Professor Sampson has played a leading role in South Australia's orthodontic field since being appointed a senior registrar in orthodontics in 1975 at the Royal Adelaide Dental Hospital. Since his appointment, Professor Sampson has gone on to serve as a lecturer and senior lecturer at the University of Adelaide while assisting the dental department at the Royal Adelaide Dental Hospital in the roles of senior visiting dental specialist and senior consultant throughout the 1980s. Additionally, as a former president and longstanding member of the South Australian branch of the Australian Society of Orthodontists, Professor Sampson was awarded an honorary life membership in 2014. Currently, as the emeritus professor of orthodontics at the University of Adelaide, Professor Sampson has authored more than 70 publications in refereed journals and was presented with a Meritorious Service Award from the Australian Society of orthodontists in 2008. Through a distinguished career, Professor Sampson has mentored and guided generations of students not just through their degrees but well into their professional lives. Dr Roy Scragg AM OBE was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to medicine, to epidemiology and to professional medical associations. A former representative of the Papua New Guinea parliament, Dr Scragg was a member of the House of Assembly, the Constitutional Committee, the Legislative Council and the Executive Council. For his public service, he was appointed and Officer of the Order of the British Empire, PNG, in 1971. While significant, Dr Scragg's dedication to public service is only exceeded by his medical achievements. A longstanding medical professional in Papua New Guinea and in Australia, Dr Scragg has been an influential figure in the fields of medicine and epidemiology since joining the Department of Health for the Australian administration of the then Territory of Papua New Guinea in 1947. Following his tenure as director of the department, Dr Scragg went on to become a foundation Professor of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Papua New Guinea in 1970, while serving as a founding member and president of both the Australian Society for Epidemiology and Research into Community Health—now the Australian Epidemiological Association—and the Australian Public Health Association, which is now the Public Health Association of Australia. Dr Scragg's achievements in these fields have earned him a life membership of the Australasian Epidemiological Association in 2012 and an honorary doctorate from The University of Adelaide in 2014. The following local residents were awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia in the 2021 Australia Day Honours List. Ms Fiona Thomson, OAM, was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia for her service to youth through Girl Guides and to academic librarianship within the University of South Australia and the late Mr Douglas Robert Scott, OAM, was awarded for his service to the community through a range of roles. I would also like to recognise Detective Superintendent Kym Hand, APM, who was awarded the Australian Police Medal for his significant service within South Australia Police. Detective Superintendent Hand has served in South Australia Police since 1977, with a focus on leadership and criminal investigation roles while bringing significant reforms into the police force. This includes leading projects which implemented the deployment of portable fingerprint scanners, mobile computing and mobile automated number plate recognition. Additionally, the detective superintendent was also the officer in charge of the further development of firearms regulations in 2017. Each of these honours recipients is a dedicated member of our local community and I wish to express my sincere gratitude to each and every one of them for their contribution to our community and to the broader Australian society. Thank you all so very much for your outstanding commitments and your efforts, both within your professions and as volunteers. 19:22 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore I'd like to thank the member for Berowra for bringing this motion forward today. It is certainly a true privilege to receive an Order of Australia award. These awards recognise local people who have demonstrated outstanding service or an exceptional achievement during the year. Often they are the quiet achievers of our community who are doing their bit every day to help our community and to give back, never wanting or expecting anything from it. This year we have seen even more why these people are so special. I am always delighted to have an opportunity to celebrate people like this in our community on the New South Wales South Coast and I want to take the time now to thank each and every local recipient for the work they do every day in our community. Professor Robert Constable, AM, of Kangaroo Valley became a Member of the Order of Australia for significant service to music education, to performance and to composition. Dr Michael McDonald, OAM, of Gerroa, received the Medal of the Order of Australia for his service to the Catholic Church and to the community. The Reverend Dr John Pender, OAM, of Berry, received the Medal of the Order of Australia for his service to the Uniting Church in Australia and to education. Mrs Merrin Ross, OAM, of North Nowra, received the Medal of the Order of Australia for her service to the performing arts—particularly to musical theatre. And Mrs Julie Sydenham, OAM, of Milton, received the Medal of the Order of Australia for her service to the creative arts. Thank you from the bottom of my heart to all these amazing community members, and congratulations on this magnificent achievement. The meritorious service awards hold a special significance this year after our community's experience during 2019-2020 bushfires. All of our frontline workers deserve our praise and recognition for the work they did, but I am thrilled to congratulate some special members of our local emergency services who received special recognition in this year's awards. Chief Inspector Peter Volf, APM, from Moruya, received the Australian Police Medal for his years of work and leadership in the New South Wales police force, including during the Tathra bushfires in 2018, and for his work as local emergency operations controller during the 2019-20 far South Coast bushfires. Mr John Dun, AFSM, of West Nowra, a stalwart of Fire and Rescue New South Wales, received the Australian Fire Service Medal. Captain Dennis Stannard, AFSM, of Sussex Inlet, received the Australian Fire Service Medal for his dedication to the New South Wales Rural Fire Service, including as a heavy plant supervisor, sector commander and divisional commander during the recent Currowan bushfires. I would like to make a special mention of Captain Stannard for his role in successfully rescuing two firefighters from an overturned fire tanker during the unprecedented bushfire in Conjola on New Year's Eve 2019 in what were extremely dangerous and difficult conditions. Thank you, Captain Stannard. The South Coast is also extremely proud of the locals who received recognition as part of the Order of Australia's military division this year. Congratulations and thank you to these recipients. Lieutenant Commander Daniel Hodgkinson, CSM, of Vincentia, received the Conspicuous Service Medal for his meritorious devotion to duty as the head of officer initial training at HMAS Creswell and the executive officer of the Royal Australian Naval College. Lieutenant Commander Hodgkinson's leadership has been described as 'tireless, flexible, influential, inclusive and inspirational'. He has been credited with making a substantial contribution to remediating the Royal Australian Navy's officer workforce shortage. Well done! Finally, Warrant Officer William McConnell, CSM, of Cambewarra, received the Conspicuous Service Medal for his meritorious achievement in the field of Navy aviation maintenance. Warrant Officer McConnell's technical mastery was said to have been critical in overcoming the unique, complex and challenging circumstances associated with the introduction and development of the maritime support helicopter capability for the Royal Australian Navy. Once again, thank you and congratulations to all our 2021 Order of Australia and Australia Day honours recipients for your dedication and service to the people of the South Coast. 19:27 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I commend the member for Berowra's motion and acknowledge those outstanding individuals who joined the Order of Australia on 26 January this year. Recently I had the privilege of recognising 12 local heroes in my electorate who received an Order of Australia for their distinguished service to our community and the nation more broadly. I was delighted to recognise 11 constituents in the Ryan electorate who recently joined the general division of the Order of Australia and one who joined the military division of the Order of Australia. The first was Sue Thompson, who was awarded an OAM for her longstanding service to music education in Queensland. Sue has taught piano for 45 years and has obtained just about every honour in the music sector that you could imagine. At 94 years of age, she still teaches 10 students, who continue to excel in their studies. There was also Bronwyn Sheehan, the founder and CEO of the Pyjama Foundation, who was awarded the OAM for her tireless work helping the youth in our local community. Bronwyn plays an instrumental role for children in foster care. She started the Pyjama Foundation in 2004 to provide a service that could offer practical, hands-on support to foster children, which is so very important. There is Kirsty Brown, another member of my electorate, who became a Member of the Order of Australia for her significant service to our youth through Scouts Queensland. She was very humbled and honoured to be recognised for her selfless efforts this way. I know she didn't do it for the recognition but for all those scouts she has helped mentor. She has been involved in Scouts Australia for years, and, whilst she has never sought recognition, she has been devoted in her service. Also among the recipients was Thomas Ryan, who received an OAM for his work in medical research and to rugby union—a talented individual across a number of jurisdictions. Finally, Warrant Officer John Franklin was added to the military division of the Order of Australia for meritorious service as a sergeant major of the band of the 1st Regiment in the Royal Australian Artillery. I am very privileged to commend such worthy individuals from the Ryan electorate to the House today. It is people like Sue, Bronwyn, Kirsty, Thomas and John, who sacrifice an enormous amount of time and energy, that make Australia and the Ryan electorate such a fantastic place to live. It is their contribution to the local community and recognising it that will inspire others to step up and lead by example, just as they have done. It is so important to recognise our local heroes, whether it be through the OAM process or just in general. This year it is important to recognise the other local heroes—those who have worked on the COVID-19 vaccine at the University of Queensland. Although a vaccine hasn't come out of their work, they worked tirelessly day in, day out, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, particularly through the Christmas period, to produce their very best work on behalf of Australians. I thank all of those involved in the University of Queensland research and all of those from the Ryan electorate who received honours in the Australia Day list. The DEPUTY SPEAKER G86 Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of day for the next sitting. Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:30