﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2025-10-27</date>
    <parliament.no>3</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Monday, 27 October 2025</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Milton Dick</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petitions Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the third report of the Petitions Committee for the 48th Parliament.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PETITIONS COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">REPORT No. 03</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Petitions a nd Ministerial Responses</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">27 October 2025</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair Ms Jodie Belyea MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Deputy Chair Mr Leon Rebello MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Cameron Caldwell MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Emma Comer MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Trish Cook MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Rowan Holzberger MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Llew O'Brien MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Tracey Roberts MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This committee is supported by staff of the Department of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Report summarising the petitions and ministerial responses being presented.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The committee met in private session in the 48th Parliament on 20 August, 26 August, 2 September and 23 September 2025.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee resolved to present the following 264 petitions in accordance with standing order 207:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 20 August 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18 petitioners—requesting that all cars sold in Australia offer an option to disable features that may distract drivers (EN7343)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting policies to attract electric vehicle manufacturers to establish production in Australia (EN7344)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting Australia move towards economic independence from the United States and strengthen ties with other democratic nations (EN7349)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting reduced cigarette taxes and alternative approaches to address illegal tobacco and support low-income households (EN7353)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 57 petitioners—requesting the lifting of the ban on nuclear energy and investment in nuclear power infrastructure (EN7354)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 40 petitioners—requesting prioritisation of environmental education for foreign visitors to promote responsible tourism (EN7355)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 751 petitioners—requesting regulations to allow the importation of small quantities of well-packaged Ethiopian spices (EN7356)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting Australia cease the AUKUS agreement and trade with Canada and the European Union (EN7358)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 33 petitioners—requesting equal legal representation for both parents in Family Court and the removal of financial barriers (EN7359)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting enactment of protected designation of origin laws to support a free trade agreement with the European Union (EN7363)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting legislation to prevent companies charging women more for substantially similar goods and services (EN7367)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting that Centrelink update its definition of disability (EN7368)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting inclusion of paramedic students in the Commonwealth Prac Payment (EN7371)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting funding and programs to target literacy in government schools (EN7372)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 108 petitioners—requesting that skill assessments for physiotherapists be based on AHPRA and Australian experience (EN7373)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting laws to ensure equal wages regardless of age</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7374)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 401 petitioners—requesting establishment of a Family Court Investigative Service (EN7378)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1253 petitioners—requesting Medicare subsidised Eating Disorder Plans include individuals diagnosed with avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (EN7379)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting Australia end all treaties and alliances except with the United States and Russia (EN7380)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting removal of goods and services tax in Australia (EN7383)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 84 petitioners—requesting increased protections for self-managed superannuation fund and retail investors (EN7384)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 77 petitioners—requesting government support for victims of fraud and stricter investment broker requirements (EN7385)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting national hospital nutrition standards and improved food service guidelines (EN7389)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting recognition of solo parents as 'family' under the Family Law Act (EN7392)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 831 petitioners—requesting an independent inquiry into the Westall incident (EN7396)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting legislation to guarantee minimum Centrelink payments (EN7397)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting strengthening of the online petitions system with more options for feedback and discussion (EN7398)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting withdrawal from the nuclear non- proliferation treaty and development of nuclear weapons (EN7401)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting a Royal Commission into early childhood education and amendments to quality standards (EN7402)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting expanded powers for the Australian Electoral Commission or a new regulator to manage election and referendum campaigning (EN7403)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 211 petitioners—requesting enactment of a law to address online bullying and harassment (EN7404)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting reinstatement of the Australian Active Service Medal for warlike operations post-2015 (EN7408)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting reforms to passport laws to address coercive control (EN7411)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting inclusion of prosthetic joint infection patients in the Stoma Application Scheme (EN7412)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 113 petitioners—requesting recognition of Lyme disease as a chronic condition and improved support for patients (EN7414)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into copyright and data abuse by Artificial Intelligence platforms (EN7415)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting reform of classification standards for games, cinema and television (EN7416)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 25 petitioners—requesting a ban on lab-grown meat production in Australia (EN7418)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting guaranteed medical treatment for all former Australian Defence Force members (EN7419)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 26 petitioners—requesting legislation to prohibit politicians and political parties from making false or misleading statements (EN7420)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting consideration of acquiring Pacific National for public ownership (EN7421)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting a ban on sonar purchases by the general public and unlicensed organisations (EN7423)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting tax relief for general practitioners to support bulk billing (EN7424)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting legalisation of private collection and preservation of cannabis seeds (EN7429)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting donation of mining equipment to the Democratic Republic of Congo (EN7432)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting legislation to regulate political spam messages and require opt-out options (EN7434)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting legislation to require unsubscribe options for political communications (EN7435)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting removal of privacy and spam exemptions for political parties (EN7436)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting amendment of legislation to require unsubscribe options for political communications (EN7439)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting amendments to allow people to control who can send them text messages (EN7442)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting mandatory unsubscribe options for political communications (EN7443)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 76 petitioners—requesting mandatory unsubscribe options for political communications via text message (EN7444)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting mandatory unsubscribe options for political communications (EN7445)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting removal of exemptions for political parties from spam laws and mandatory opt-out options (EN7446)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 98 petitioners—requesting legislative amendments to prohibit unsolicited political communications (EN7448)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6154 petitioners—requesting dedicated funding for a national stillbirth awareness campaign (EN7449)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 29 petitioners—requesting mandatory unsubscribe options for political communications (EN7451)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—regarding political representatives contacting individuals without consent (EN7452)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting a ban on political spam messages (EN7453)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 105 petitioners—requesting support for the development of a new single-site hospital in Albury/Wodonga (EN7454)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting legislation to classify unsolicited political texts and calls as spam (EN7455)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting unlimited work rights for partners of international students (EN7456)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting establishment of a permanent Disability Voice to Parliament led by people with lived experience (EN7457)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into the effectiveness of Headspace (EN7458)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 33 petitioners—requesting local content quotas on streaming services</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7460)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18 petitioners—requesting increased housing availability for Australian citizens (EN7461)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting removal of political party exemptions from the <inline font-style="italic">Spam Act 2003 </inline>(EN7462)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—regarding education providers advertising placements without first arranging them for students (EN7463)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting removal of the English language test requirement for permanent residency applicants with Australian study and work experience (EN7466)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 35 petitioners—requesting a reduction in immigration and reform of the building industry (EN7467)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting investigation into vote counting and safeguards for electoral integrity (EN7468)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting deployment of a humanitarian field hospital in Gaza (EN7469)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 27 petitioners—requesting health card access for allied veterans who served in coalition forces post-1990 (EN7470)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 449 petitioners—requesting replacement of preferential voting with a simplified system and stronger transparency in political campaigns (EN7471)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a review of offshoring practices (EN7475)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting a national ban on geo-engineering and weather modification activities (EN7479)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting action to encourage de-escalation between India and Pakistan (EN7480)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 127 petitioners—requesting an end to force posture initiatives and removal of foreign troops from Australia (EN7481)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting establishment of a rural and remote veterinary service model (EN7482)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting closer integration of trade, immigration and defence ties between Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand (EN7484)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a ban on businesses charging late fees</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7486)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting reform of the parent visa program to reduce processing times (EN7490)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting reduction of the tax rate on superannuation withdrawals for working holiday makers (EN7491)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting establishment of a nationwide judicial commission (EN7494)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting opposition to any proposal to introduce a tax on unrealised capital gains (EN7500)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting increase of the personal income tax-free threshold to match the self-support income amount (EN7501)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 25 petitioners—requesting consideration of closer integration of trade, immigration and defence ties between Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand (EN7502)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 60 petitioners—requesting protection for doctors legally prescribing medicinal cannabis (EN7504)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting negotiation of reciprocal migration benefits for Australians wishing to settle in Malta (EN7506)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1533 petitioners—requesting introduction of an own use exemption for beekeepers to use non-synthetic treatments for Varroa mite (EN7508)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 416 petitioners—regarding processing of Permanent Residence (Skilled Regional) visa (subclass 191) applications (EN7512)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 24 petitioners—requesting increased Medicare rebates and unlimited bulk billing for psychiatric and psychology services (EN7513)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 33 petitioners—requesting reforms to the family law system (EN7514)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 161 petitioners—requesting national guidelines for access to loading zones for professional musicians (EN7515)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting adjustment of humanitarian visa terms to permit easier resettlement for LGBTIQ+ people (EN7520)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting removal of privacy law exemptions for political parties (EN7521)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 91 petitioners—requesting review of the <inline font-style="italic">Racial Discrimination Act 1975</inline> to balance human rights and free speech (EN7526)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 40 petitioners—requesting consideration of closer ties between Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand (EN7527)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—regarding a tax on unrealised capital gains (EN7531)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 27 petitioners—requesting a review of legislation to remove exemptions for politicians (EN7533)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting replacement of the current tax system with a single 1% tax on all purchases and abolition of income tax (EN7535)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 82 petitioners—requesting legislative reforms to ensure all laws apply equally to politicians and the public (EN7540)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 26 August 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting consideration of a federal bitcoin and cryptocurrency reserve (EN7386)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a motion expressing views on Hamas and its designation as a terrorist organisation (EN7406)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting the establishment of a special humanitarian visa program for transgender individuals from the United Kingdom (EN7430)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting the abolition of compulsory voting in Australia (EN7438)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 106 petitioners—requesting condemnation of Israel's actions in Gaza</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7472)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6276 petitioners—requesting a requirement for professional reports submitted by National Disability Insurance Scheme participants to be considered in needs assessments (EN7545)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting changes to the process for determining child support payments (EN7548)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting an increase to the personal income tax-free threshold to match the self-supporting income amount (EN7549)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting relocation of a proposed wind farm away from the Kalbarri tourist skyline (EN7550)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 87 petitioners—requesting independent investigation and reforms to address sexual assault and support survivors in the Australian Defence Force (EN7552)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1839 petitioners—requesting rejection of any proposal to tax unrealised capital gains (EN7556)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting standards for truth and accuracy in political reporting (EN7559)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 51 petitioners—requesting expansion of child care subsidies to include families who provide care at home (EN7560)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 51 petitioners—regarding government-funded parental leave payments for new permanent residents (EN7561)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting legislative changes to allow Tax File Numbers to be reissued to victims of identity theft (EN7562)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 38 petitioners—requesting the cessation of immigration and prioritisation of domestic issues (EN7602)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 136 petitioners—regarding access to guide dogs for people who are blind or have low vision and also have reduced mobility (EN7604)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting a change to the Australian National Anthem</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7606)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting an increase in Disability Support Pension payment rates (EN7607)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting abolition of taxes for lower income earners and increased taxation for higher earners (EN7610)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 221 petitioners—requesting reform of the <inline font-style="italic">Family Law Act 1975 </inline>and associated processes (EN7611)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1274 petitioners—requesting a government-backed business loan guarantee scheme (EN7615)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 433 petitioners—requesting extension of Pensioner Concession Card benefits to self-funded retirees eligible for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card (EN7616)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting establishment of a sovereign wealth fund to support social, welfare and infrastructure programs (EN7618)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5127 petitioners—requesting independent scrutiny and increased funding for support coordination in the National Disability Insurance Scheme (EN7619)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting measures to prioritise local employment and limit outsourcing (EN7620)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting measures to increase support for Australian music and local artists on public broadcasting platforms (EN7621)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting measures to support access to international artists and performances (EN7622)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 38 petitioners—requesting legislation to reduce or eliminate plastic waste (EN7623)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting an independent review of National Disability Insurance Agency pricing arrangements (EN7633)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting improvements to Permanent Residence (Skilled Regional) visa (subclass 191) processing and to the immigration system (EN7640)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 26 petitioners—requesting measures to strengthen child support obligations (EN7641)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting prioritisation of visa processing for Iranian nationals (EN7642)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting changes to the management of unemployment services (EN7644)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a policy of non-engagement in military conflicts (EN7646)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 286 petitioners—requesting mandatory labelling for all products containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (EN7647)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting establishment of cross-jurisdictional consultation protocols for renewable energy policy changes (EN7649)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting measures to strengthen privacy and data protection (EN7651)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting enforcement of daily and weekly gaming limits for children (EN7659)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting measures to strengthen cooperation with Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (EN7660)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting adoption of a military neutrality policy</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7666)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting options for non-wireless communication services (EN7669)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting clarification regarding Hungarian citizenship regulations which may impact dual nationals (EN7670)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting changes to require parliamentary approval for military deployments (EN7671)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 133 petitioners—requesting formal bravery recognition for Childers Auxiliary firefighters (EN7672)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 195 petitioners—requesting review of food safety regulations to permit dogs in indoor hospitality areas (EN7673)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting changes to taxes on unrealised capital gains (EN7674)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting review of hiring practices (EN7676)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 92 petitioners—requesting stricter regulation of overseas investments and foreign ownership (EN7679)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—regarding taxes on unrealised capital gains (EN7681)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting measures to improve access to university education for long-term visa holders (EN7683)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 130 petitioners—requesting reconsideration of a particular visa application (EN7684)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 91 petitioners—regarding mandatory registration for independent National Disability Insurance Scheme support workers and therapists (EN7685)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting the inclusion of First Nations education in compulsory citizenship materials (EN7686)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 76 petitioners—regarding legislation to tax unrealised capital gains involving superannuation (EN7687)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 884 petitioners—requesting establishment of 21 June as Flannel Flower Day for mental health awareness and suicide remembrance for veterans (EN7689)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting reform of child care safety regulations</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7692)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 2 September 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting access to superannuation funds for first home deposits (EN7493)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 50 petitioners—requesting Australia to urge Israel to allow aid into Gaza (EN7497)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 49 petitioners—requesting recognition of persecution of Crimean Tatars (EN7507)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 48 petitioners—requesting independent review and public reporting of government budgets and financial interests (EN7511)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 39 petitioners—requesting condemnation of the blockade in Gaza and support for humanitarian aid (EN7518)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2032 petitioners—requesting national regulation of assisted reproductive technology and a donor conception registry (EN7525)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting diplomatic engagement with the Israeli ambassador concerning the situation in Gaza (EN7532)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 669 petitioners—requesting a renewal pathway for offshore-qualified pharmacists to maintain credential validity (EN7534)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 184 petitioners—requesting review of Australia's defence alliance with the United States to assess its relevance (EN7614)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 85 petitioners—requesting mobilisation of Australian humanitarian aid to Gaza (EN7634)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting that Australia avoid involvement in any potential conflict relating to Iran (EN7658)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting restrictions on Australian support for United States military operations relating to Iran (EN7665)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 53 petitioners—requesting sanctions against Israel (EN7668)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2917 petitioners—requesting support for Palestinians in Australia and diplomatic measures relating to Middle East conflicts (EN7675)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 52 petitioners—requesting suspension of exports of any equipment which may be used in the conflict in Gaza (EN7682)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—regarding cheating in online multiplayer games</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7695)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting mandatory surveillance cameras in child care settings (EN7696)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a Commonwealth loan guarantee scheme to support small business ownership (EN7697)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 150 petitioners—requesting support for fair legal proceedings under international law (EN7699)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting consumer law reform to prohibit disabling purchased video games (EN7703)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 26 petitioners—requesting strengthened safeguarding measures in child care settings (EN7704)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—requesting legislation to require offline access for video games at the end of their commercial life (EN7706)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 158 petitioners—requesting a pause and review of changes to disability support pricing (EN7711)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 138 petitioners—requesting clear tax guidelines and policy review for employee ownership trusts (EN7712)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 50 petitioners—requesting improved child safety checks and accountability measures (EN7713)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into access to care for people with chronic pain (EN7723)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into establishing a civilian militia force (EN7724)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing (EN7725)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting higher travel safety level for the United States (EN7726)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 224 petitioners—requesting a unified national system to strengthen checks for individuals working with children (EN7727)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—regarding alleged violations of international law by Israeli authorities in Gaza (EN7736)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 67 petitioners—requesting a pause on immigration to address housing affordability (EN7738)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting regulation of petrol pricing (EN7739)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting inclusion of vaccines for respiratory syncytial virus and pertussis for older adults in the National Immunisation Schedule (EN7743)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 89 petitioners—requesting the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7750)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 118 petitioners—requesting support for a ceasefire in Gaza and advocacy for humanitarian access (EN7751)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—regarding the feasibility of domestic nuclear weapons development (EN7754)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting regulation of automated content moderation by large technology companies (EN7756)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting consideration of citizen-initiated referenda</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7761)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting negotiations for a mobility and security agreement with Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom (EN7763)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting establishment of a military and economic pact with New Zealand, Canada, and the United Kingdom (EN7766)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 684 petitioners—requesting expansion and reform of the Community Support Program for refugee visas (EN7767)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting support for the resignation of Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism (EN7768)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 248 petitioners—requesting the removal of Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism (EN7770)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 101 petitioners—requesting tax exemptions for part-time research student stipends (EN7775)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 168 petitioners—requesting independent safety evaluation of advanced artificial intelligence systems (EN7777)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting changes to allow dual applications to the redress scheme for survivors of sexual abuse (EN7778)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 76 petitioners—requesting stronger regulatory action and improved communication regarding complaints about charitable governance (EN7781)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting exemptions from mandatory superannuation contributions for high-income earners (EN7782)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 277 petitioners—requesting reform of parent visa programs to reduce wait times and financial barriers (EN7783)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 245 petitioners—requesting negotiations for a mobility and security agreement with New Zealand, Canada, and the United Kingdom (EN7784)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting limited preferential voting in federal elections</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7785)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting long-term specialist referrals for chronic conditions under Medicare (EN7787)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 440 petitioners—requesting diplomatic advocacy for clemency and humanitarian consideration in the case of Debbie Voulgaris (EN7788)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 27 petitioners—requesting legislation to prevent payment processors from restricting the sale of media (EN7790)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 95 petitioners—requesting review of the adoption of the World Health Organization Pandemic Agreement (EN7791)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting reform of consumer rights for digital products and services (EN7792)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting recognition of a Palestinian state (EN7795)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 68 petitioners—requesting measures to prevent extended overseas military involvement and enable investigation of potential breaches of international law (EN7797)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 56 petitioners—requesting investigation of access to digital goods and services (EN7798)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8655 petitioners—requesting regulation of payment processors as essential infrastructure (EN7799)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting implementation of age verification on the Discord platform (EN7800)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1577 petitioners—requesting investigation of advocacy organisations for alleged coercive conduct (EN7802)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting to lower the voting age and allow earlier enrolment (EN7804)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme safety net and automation of safety net processes (EN7805)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting public disclosure of funding sources and relationships for non-governmental organisations (EN7811)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 61 petitioners—requesting consideration of a transition to a four-day work week (EN7812)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting importation of hormone-treated beef be prohibited (EN7813)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 55 petitioners—requesting Australian support for the Israeli Government be ceased (EN7814)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 30 petitioners—requesting repeal of digital age verification requirements (EN7815)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—regarding concerns related to political leadership</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7816)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting transparency related to professional athlete contracts (EN7817)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting increased funding to support adoption of universal coercive control laws (EN7819)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting recognition of Palestinian statehood and support for a ceasefire (EN7821)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting support for a national clinical trial of faecal microbiota transplantation for treatment-resistant depression (EN7822)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 131 petitioners—requesting repeal of social media age limit restrictions and support for digital literacy education (EN7824)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting social media access for young people with strong safeguards (EN7826)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting exclusion of YouTube from social media age limit restrictions (EN7827)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 91 petitioners—requesting changes to online safety laws and adoption of a parent-child digital safety framework (EN7828)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting exemption of YouTube and Discord from social media age limit restrictions (EN7829)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 147 petitioners—requesting repeal of online safety legislation and protection of internet anonymity (EN7830)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2938 petitioners—requesting recognition of functional neurological disorder in disability support guidelines and improved access to support (EN7833)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—regarding the provision of supporting documents for expatriate adoptions (EN7835)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting legislation requiring employers to provide feedback to job applicants (EN7836)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting changes to the Australian National Flag</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(EN7839)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18 petitioners—requesting removal of social media age limit restrictions (EN7842)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 25 petitioners—requesting removal of social media age limit restrictions (EN7843)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 25 petitioners—requesting changes to the management of child support payments (EN7844)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 271 petitioners—requesting removal of social media age limit restrictions (EN7845)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 95 petitioners—requesting standardised referral letters for allied health services under chronic condition management plans (EN7846)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 150 petitioners—requesting repeal of social media age limit restrictions and support for parental controls (EN7847)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 84 petitioners—requesting reduction of parliamentary salaries and increased transparency (EN7848)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 43 petitioners—requesting consultation with young people on social media legislation (EN7849)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into release of high-risk detainees and other matters (EN7855)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 83 petitioners—requesting removal of subsidies and changes to taxation for oil and gas companies (EN7856)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 214 petitioners—requesting reconsideration of social media age limit restrictions (EN7857)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 61 petitioners—requesting a federally funded scheme for drug and alcohol testing in family law proceedings (EN7858)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 139 petitioners—requesting consideration of minimum wage for parliamentarians (EN7862)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 60 petitioners—requesting permanent funding and access to culturally safe telehealth services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (EN7864)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 248 petitioners—requesting reform of battery approval schemes to ensure technology neutrality and consumer safety (EN7865)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into the collapse of managed investment schemes and improved investor protections (EN7867)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 132 petitioners—requesting review of qualification pathways in early childhood education to ensure appropriate standards (EN7868)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 215 petitioners—requesting legislation to make burning the Australian National Flag a criminal offence (EN7870)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 120 petitioners—requesting prohibition of automatic LED headlights on vehicles (EN7871)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5757 petitioners—requesting a review of proposed changes to the powers of the eSafety Commission (EN7872)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The following 10 ministerial responses to petitions were received.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 2 September 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a public inquiry into the response to the COVID-19 pandemic (EN5484)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 23 September 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to a petition requesting visa application fee refunds for New Zealanders impacted by the July 2023 changes (EN5201)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to a petition requesting visa application fee refunds for New Zealand citizens (EN5213)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition regarding the outcome of the 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum (EN5551)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting an early election (EN5636)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting that a pardon be granted to Mr David McBride (EN6246)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition requesting a response to violence in Syria (EN7090)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Housing to a petition requesting actions to address housing affordability (EN7099)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 7 October 2025</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Health and Aging to a petition requesting that obstetrics and gynaecology be included in a private health insurance risk equalisation framework (EN7227)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for the Environment and Water to a petition requesting that Australia be withdrawn from the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework (EN7339)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Jodie Belyea MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair—Petitions Committee</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>9</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 264 e-petitions:</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Road Safety</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electric Vehicles</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and the United States of America</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tobacco Regulation</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tourism Industry</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Culinary Spice Imports</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>AUKUS</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Food Labelling</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>People with Disability</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Commonwealth Prac Payment</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Literacy and Numeracy</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages and Salaries</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Goods and Services Tax</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corporate Governance</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corporate Governance</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hospitals</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Air Safety</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petitions</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Early Childhood Education and Care</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Awards and Honours</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prosthetic Joint Infection</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lyme Disease</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Film and Video Game Classification</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cell-Cultured Meat</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pacific National</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Marine Environment: Sonar</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>General Practitioners</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicinal Cannabis</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Democratic Republic of the Congo</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Miscarriage and Stillbirth</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hospitals</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Students</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>People with Disability</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>headspace</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Local Content Broadcasting</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tertiary Education</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: India and Pakistan</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Animal Welfare</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Business</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family and Partner Visas</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Judiciary</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicinal Cannabis</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Biosecurity</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mental Health</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Live Music Industry</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Humanitarian Visas</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Political Advertising</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentarians' Entitlements</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Members of Parliament</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Currency</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Humanitarian Visas</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kalbarri: Tourism</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Personnel: Workplace Bullying, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Media</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Certified Petition</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Anthem</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Disability Support Pension</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Business</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Local Content Broadcasting</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Waste Management and Recycling</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Agency</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Humanitarian Visas</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Centrelink</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Defence Force</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Subtances</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Video Games</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and Hungary</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Childers Backpacker Tragedy: Awards and Honours</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hospitality Industry</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Foreign Investment</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Citizenship</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Crimea</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Assisted Reproductive Technology</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medical Workforce</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and the United States of America</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Video Games</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Small Business</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Criminal Court</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection: Video Games</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection: Video Games</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Chronic Pain</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Recruitment</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Capital Gains Tax</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>United States of America</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Immunisation Program</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gaza</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Artificial Intelligence</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia's Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Tertiary Education</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Artificial Intelligence</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Redress Scheme</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gondwana Rainforest Trust</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family and Partner Visas</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Voulgaris, Ms Debbie</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>World Health Organization Pandemic Agreement</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Palestine</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banking and Financial Services</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Charitable and Not-for-Profit Organisations</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Work-Life Balance</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Beef Industry</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sport</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Palestine</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Depression</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Functional Neurological Disorder</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Adoption</title>
          <page.no>72</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare: Allied Health</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Sector Governance</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Fossil Fuel Industry</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentarians' Entitlements</title>
          <page.no>76</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indigenous Australians: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corporate Governance: Superannuation Industry</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Early Childhood Education</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Road Safety</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>79</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Responses</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 10 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Response</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>79</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>80</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>80</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>McBride, Mr David William</title>
          <page.no>80</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>81</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>81</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Private Health Insurance</title>
          <page.no>82</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kummming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework</title>
          <page.no>82</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>83</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Statements</title>
          <page.no>83</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Among the e-petitions presented are some of the first e-petitions from the 48th Parliament to be certified. Of the e-petitions presented, five gained 5,000-plus signatures. These covered topics such as stillbirth awareness, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, regulation of payment processes and changes to the eSafety Commission. I am pleased to inform the House that the committee also certified 50 new e-petitions at its last meeting. These e-petitions are now collecting signatures on the e-petitions website. I look forward to updating the House further on the work of the petitions committee.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DELEGATION REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>83</page.no>
        <type>DELEGATION REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 45th General Assembly of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly in Vientiane, Lao People's Democratic Republic</title>
          <page.no>83</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 45th General Assembly of the Association of South-East Asian Nations Inter-Parliamentary Assembly in Vientiane, Lao People's Democratic Republic, from 17 to 23 October 2024. I was very privileged to lead the Australian delegation to the AIPA general assembly, accompanied by the member for Nicholls. AIPA claims to encourage understanding, cooperation and close relations among ASEAN members' parliaments, observer parliaments and other parliamentary organisations. The AIPA theme for the general assembly in 2024 was 'The role of parliaments in enhancing connectivity and inclusive growth of ASEAN'.</para>
<para>Participants were welcomed by the President of the National Assembly of the Lao PDR and AIPA president, His Excellency Saysomphone Phomvihane. His Excellency noted the role of the assembly in coming together to celebrate coming goals in the context of unpredictable international and regional circumstances. His Excellency noted that there were opportunities and challenges in the current economic climate as countries work to foster peace, prosperity, security and development in the region.</para>
<para>I was honoured to make a statement on behalf of the Australian parliament and of the delegation. The statement highlighted the 50th anniversary of Australia's dialogue partnership with ASEAN, which was celebrated in March 2024 at the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit in Melbourne. Key Australian ASEAN initiatives were highlighted, including the ASEAN-Australia Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement.</para>
<para>This agreement demonstrates our regional economic engagement to support the inclusive growth of ASEAN. Our observer parliament dialogue session with ASEAN member parliaments emphasised this importance and the importance of bilateral relationships, people-to-people links and diaspora communities in Australia. We held bilateral meetings with the AIPA secretary-general and delegations from Algeria, the Lao PDR and Ukraine. Many expressions of appreciation were received for the Australian presence at AIPA, with both ASEAN and observer countries keen to increase parliamentary engagement. With a widening representation of observer parliaments beyond the immediate region, the forum continues to hold importance for Australian engagement in ASEAN countries and beyond, particularly given the current global tensions.</para>
<para>I would like to express thanks and congratulations to the National Assembly of Lao PDR for its successful year of chairing AIPA and hosting of the 45th AIPA general assembly. I would also like to thank the staff of the International and Parliamentary Relations Office here in our Parliament House, the Parliamentary Library and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for their assistance in the preparations ahead of the assembly, and the Australian embassy in Vientiane for its support and briefings during the visit. I would like, particularly, to thank my colleague the member for Nicholls for his support at the conference, and I give particular thanks to our delegation's secretary, Dr Susan Love, who worked tirelessly to make sure everything went like clockwork for us. I commend the report to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I echo the statement made by the member for Adelaide and thank him for leading the delegation to the 45th general assembly of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly in Vientiane, in Laos. The member for Adelaide represented Australia. I believe we both did. It's very important that we present a united front as Australia on behalf of our parliament. I think that the member for Adelaide and I were able to do that during the discussions we had in the bilateral meetings. It was a very well-facilitated trip, as the member has said. I would like to thank the Australian embassy in Laos for hosting us and looking after us, and I echo what was said previously about Dr Susan Love and her support of the delegation.</para>
<para>One moment that stood out to me, that I'd like to share, was a wonderful conversation we had with the inter-parliamentary assembly's secretary-general, who's from Brunei, about enabling more women to be involved in parliaments across the ASEAN area. We were able to share some great examples not only of federal parliament but also of some things that the state parliament—in particular, the Victorian parliament—has done around child care. Australia can be a great example as to the way that parliamentary democracy, particularly across genders, can be enhanced around the world. I think that we were able to do that with our discussions. I echo the comments of the member for Adelaide and thank him for his leadership in the dialogue.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>84</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>84</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7387" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>84</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>There can be few more important or urgent matters for parliament to deal with than the prevention of child sexual abuse and the bringing of perpetrators to justice, as is outlined in this bill. I said all of the things I wanted to say when we moved a suspension of standing orders recently. This is not a partisan matter, but it is an urgent matter. On that basis, I cede the remaining part of my time to the new shadow Attorney-General, the member for Fisher.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion. The Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) Bill 2025 is about one simple principle: that those who abuse, exploit or prey upon children must face justice—real justice. No Australian parent, family or community should ever have to wonder whether the law truly values the safety and dignity of a child, and yet recent events show our current sentencing framework does not meet that test always.</para>
<para>In the 2024-25 financial year, the Australian Federal Police received more than 82,764 reports of online child sexual exploitation. That is a 41 per cent increase in just 12 months. It's an average of 226 reports every single day. Just let that sink in. Each one of those reports represents a child, a real child, and a family whose lives have been shattered by unspeakable harm. That means that in the 18 days between when the former shadow attorney, the member for Berowra, first introduced this bill to today more than 4,000 instances of online child sexual exploitation have been reported to the ACCCE—4,000. Four thousand children, 4,000 families, in less than three weeks. Those figures seem unfathomable.</para>
<para>When a child is sexually abused, the impact on the family is devastating and enduring. Families may struggle with disbelief, blame, conflict, while the child's sense of safety and security is deeply harmed. The trauma extends beyond the child, affecting parenting, sibling bonds and the family's overall stability. And yet too often those who commit these despicable crimes face sentences that are manifestly inadequate. The Maloney case in Victoria brought this into sharp relief. A father who committed 19 separate acts of sexual abuse against his five-year-old daughter, producing and transmitting 77 files of child abuse material, was sentenced to just 2½ years in prison. For the Commonwealth offences of producing and transmitting child abuse material, the offender received only six months imprisonment before being released on a recognisance release order. Six months imprisonment for 77 separate pieces of child abuse material—that is not justice; that is a betrayal of the child, a betrayal of the community and a betrayal of every Australian who believes that the law should reflect our deepest values.</para>
<para>The bill seeks to correct that. First, it establishes that child sex offences involving the use of a carriage service, including using a carriage service for child abuse material, is an offence under section 474.22 of the Criminal Code. This is the provision that, among other things, makes it an offence to transmit child abuse material. This is one of the offences at issue in the Maloney case. Another is possessing or controlling child abuse material obtained or accessed using carriage services, which is an offence under section 474.22A of the Criminal Code and is more or less self-explanatory. Possessing, controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining child abuse material for use through a carriage service, which is an offence under section 474.23 of the code, was the other offence at issue in the Maloney case.</para>
<para>Second, it establishes child sex offences that involve the use of a postal service, including using a postal or similar service for child abuse material, an offence under section 471.19 of the code, and possessing, controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining child abuse material for use through a postal or similar service, an offence under section 471.20 of the code.</para>
<para>Importantly, this bill closes a loophole exposed by the Maloney case. It provides that a recognisance release order, which is effectively a release on good behaviour, cannot be made for Commonwealth child sex offences unless there are exceptional circumstances and ensures that offenders cannot walk free after serving only a fraction of their sentence for crimes that devastate young lives.</para>
<para>This bill builds on the mandatory minimum sentencing regime first introduced by the coalition government in 2019, which saw longer sentences, more guilty pleas and more offenders entering rehabilitation. When we introduced that legislation, Labor initially sought to remove the mandatory sentencing provisions. But, faced with overwhelming public support, they eventually joined with the coalition in a bipartisan spirit to pass the law. I call on the government today to do the same, to put politics aside and to put the safety of our children first.</para>
<para>I want to pay tribute to my colleague the member for Berowra, the former shadow Attorney-General and the Leader of the Opposition for their tireless work in bringing this bill forward. The member for Berowra and the Leader of the Opposition acted with conviction, compassion and urgency, driven by a simple belief that every child deserves to grow up safe, loved and free from fear. I thank them for their leadership and their commitment to the protection of children in this country.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge Bruce and Denise Morcombe and the Daniel Morcombe Foundation, whose decades of advocacy have made child safety a national cause. Bruce and Denise have turned their family's unimaginable loss into a movement for change. They've given a voice to victims, survivors and families across Australia. The Daniel Morcombe Foundation has publicly supported this bill, recognising that strong deterrents and clear sentences save lives and prevent abuse before it happens.</para>
<para>The bill is not just about punishment. It is just as much about protection, because, while sentencing matters, prevention matters just as much—if not more. This bill will serve as a strong deterrent from this appalling conduct. The coalition has long called for stronger child safety frameworks across the nation, including reforms to the Working with Children Check, mandatory prevention training, and national standards informed by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.</para>
<para>The Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation is another vital part of this national effort. It was established and funded under a coalition government, reflecting our longstanding and unwavering commitment to protecting innocent lives and safeguarding Australian children, and that must always be our focus. Too often the scales of justice have been tipped towards the rights of offenders instead of compassion for the victims, who will live with this trauma forever, and of course the protection of the community. That imbalance must end. The recent case of a childcare worker charged with more than 70 offences after working in 20 different centres shows how urgently reform in this space is needed.</para>
<para>This bill is not complicated. It does not create new offences; it simply ensures that when a person commits one of the most heinous crimes imaginable the sentence they receive reflects the gravity of their crime. No-one who produces or transmits child abuse material should be able to walk free after six months—not one, not ever. This bill sends an unmistakable message: if you exploit a child you will do serious jail time. The transmission of these images is not a victimless crime; it creates a market for child sexual abuse, and anyone involved in this heinous crime should do that serious time, not just get a slap over the wrist.</para>
<para>This is an opportunity for every member in this parliament to stand together, to rise above partisanship and to affirm a basic truth: that the protection of our children is not a political issue; it is our moral duty. Our message today is simple and clear: Australia will not tolerate child sexual abuse, whether that is online or offline. Those who commit these crimes should face the full force of the law, and this parliament, united, will protect the most vulnerable among us. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill 2025 (No. 2)</title>
          <page.no>86</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7388" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill 2025 (No. 2)</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>86</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>86</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>Lobbying activities are communications with government representatives aimed at influencing government decision-making. Lobbying is a legitimate form of advocacy, but it is often available only to the wealthy and the powerful.</para>
<para>In this country lobbying has become a multibillion-dollar industry.</para>
<para>Governments have a responsibility to seek out broad-ranging perspectives—to guard against real and perceived undue influence from those who can afford to pay for access.</para>
<para>A robust statutory framework is needed to safeguard against those perceptions—a publicly accessible register of lobbying activity revealing who meets with government representatives on what policy areas and providing transparency into the government's decision-making processes on matters of national interest.</para>
<para>Australia's existing federal Lobbying Code of Conduct aims to ensure that contact between registered commercial lobbyists and government representatives is conducted in accordance with public expectations of transparency, integrity and honesty. However, that code of conduct is weak, it is ignored and it is unenforced.</para>
<para>And it applies to only 20 per cent of the many lobbyists currently plying their trade in Canberra.</para>
<para>The register of lobbyists applies only to third-party lobbyists—paid professionals engaged by corporate clients to influence public officials on their behalf. It does not include in-house lobbyists—those employed by a corporation, a business or a peak body to undertake lobbying activity.</para>
<para>Enforcement of this lobbying code has been dismal. Repeated audits have identified failure to apply formal sanctions by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and subsequently by the Attorney-General's Department despite evidence of dozens of breaches of the code of conduct.</para>
<para>Our current code meets only one of the 10 OECD principles for transparency and integrity in lobbying. The United Kingdom, Canada and the US have legislated strong integrity frameworks which include independent administration, transparency of monitoring, public reporting, post-employment restrictions and penalties.</para>
<para>Our states and territories have stronger legislated codes of conduct for lobbying activity than does the federal government. This parliament is well out of step with accepted standards of integrity, but this bill will put that right.</para>
<para>The shortcomings of our system have been acknowledged by the parties when in opposition, but they have been ignored by them when they are in government. Successive governments have been complacent about the adverse effect of rampant lobbying activity. They're conflicted because they accept the personal and political gains served up by the lobbying sector. In November 2023 the voluntary register included 703 third-party lobbyists. Forty per cent of those were former politicians, ministerial advisers or senior public servants. They were profiting from their knowledge and the networks gained from their time spent here in service to the public and funded by taxpayers.</para>
<para>What we want—what we need—is to hold public officials to a higher standard of integrity. When they leave public office, government representatives shouldn't be able to use their insider knowledge for personal gain for the commercial benefit of their new employer, and they shouldn't be making decisions prior to leaving office which might advance their future employer-to-be. Time and time again we have seen ministers accepting lucrative private sector jobs immediately upon leaving parliament and we've seen the revolving door of industry executives and senior public servants exchanging jobs.</para>
<para>A lobbying code of conduct which allows our defence minister to discuss defence business with a global contracting firm in cabinet then take a job with that firm nine days after leaving politics is a lobbying code which is corrosive of public trust. A code which allows our Foreign minister to award more than $500 million in contracts to a contractor and then to accept a job with that contractor less than 12 months after leaving politics is corrosive of public trust. A code which permits a health minister to award over $135 million in pandemic contracts to a company and then to take a position with that company six months later is corrosive of trust. A code which allows the Prime Minister discretion over its enforcement, a prime minister who, by the way, is the patron of a registered lobbying agency, is corrosive of public trust.</para>
<para>The bill that I'm presenting today, the Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill 2025 (No. 2), establishes a new, publicly-accessible online lobbyist register, which will include in-house as well as third-party lobbyists. Persons engaging in lobbying activity will be required to lodge quarterly returns online, reporting who they've met with, for how long, where and why. Ministers will also be required to publish their diaries for transparency and to strengthen compliance.</para>
<para>The bill enforces post-employment prohibitions so that ministers and senior staff are banned from working as lobbyists in their field of public service for three years after they leave federal parliament.</para>
<para>It legislates a register of senior government appointments for transparency and for compliance. It introduces real penalties for breaches. It will be enforced by the independent integrity commission.</para>
<para>At the heart of this bill is the principle that government decisions are made in the public interest and in our shared national interest—and that they are seen to be. So many of our decision-making processes are taken in the public eye—with consultations, expert advice, public submissions and published reports based on best evidence. But too often government decisions are inexplicable. Too often they benefit vested interests against the public interest. We need to know who has the ears of our politicians, and we need to close the revolving door.</para>
<para>Australians must be able to trust their government. They want this bill debated by their representatives and they want this law passed by this government.</para>
<para>This bill is an important contribution to the restoration of integrity and transparency. I commend it to the House and cede the rest of my time to the seconder.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion, and I'm pleased to again support the essential measures introduced in the member for Kooyong's Lobbying (Improving Government Honesty and Trust) Bill. I'm proud to stand with a group of crossbench parliamentarians who continue to fight so hard to reflect the wishes of their communities to strive for better transparency, greater integrity and more accountability in politics.</para>
<para>Part of integrity and accountability is understanding who is influencing our top decision-makers. We should know which lobbyists have access to ministers and cabinet. Currently, Australia lags behind our counterparts in Canada, in the UK and in the US in the transparency and accountability of lobbying activity. In each of those countries there is a legislated lobbying regime with clear reporting obligations arising from lobbying activities. Currently, in Australia's federal parliament, we only have an administrative system governed by the Lobbying Code of Conduct and overseen by the Attorney-General's Department. There are no meaningful consequences for breaching the federal code of conduct. The code of conduct applies only to professional lobbyists acting on behalf of third-party clients. This means lobbying activity that's undertaken in-house by businesses and industry bodies isn't included. In-house lobbyists are able to conduct invisible activity without regulation or oversight. The Grattan Institute has shown that highly regulated businesses have the most meetings with senior politicians, make the most use of commercial lobbyists and are disproportionately large political donors. I wonder why!</para>
<para>Australians see the impact of this everywhere. Take the issue of online gambling reform. The government asked a parliamentary committee to look at what needs to be done. A multipartisan committee led by the late member for Dunkley came up with 31 unanimous recommendations, which were handed to the government. Then it appears the lobbying began—from gambling companies, from sporting codes and from media companies.</para>
<para>Thanks to our also-threatened FOI process, we know that in the first six months the minister had no fewer than 66 meetings on the issue, almost universally with lobbyists against significant reform. We know the gambling industry peak body is taking every opportunity to rub shoulders with politicians, including at games organised at Parliament House by the Australian Parliamentary Sports Club, a registered lobby group, which kicked out sportsman and senator David Pocock for drawing attention to the 'ick' factor.</para>
<para>The hidden lobbying is gross, and Australians hate it. Transparency about the lobbying that goes on in this building is the very least the government should do in an effort to rebuild declining trust. If the government has nothing to hide, there should be no problem with greater transparency. I commend this bill to the House as another effort of the crossbench to pursue greater transparency.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>88</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7346" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>88</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I call the member for Pasin—sorry, Barker.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Perhaps one day it might be named after me, but I doubt it, Madam Deputy Speaker Scrymgour! I rise to speak in support of the Repeal Net Zero Bill, which was recently introduced to the House by the member for New England—a bill to end Australia's reckless commitment to net zero by 2050. Net zero in the most basic terms is the idea that a nation balances the amount of greenhouse gas it emits with the amount it removes from the atmosphere so that the net effect on the climate is zero. It sounds neat, even noble, but in practice net zero is a costly illusion—a political slogan masquerading as science, imposed without honesty and absent realism.</para>
<para>Since its adoption, Australia's commitment to net zero has delivered nothing but pain to the Australian people. It has driven up the cost of power, destroyed manufacturing and gutted regional communities, while doing absolutely nothing to change the globe's climate. Australia contributes just over one per cent of global emissions—one per cent—yet this government behaves as though Canberra holds the planet's thermostat. Meanwhile, China, India and Indonesia are building hundreds of new coal-fired power stations. Together they account for almost half of global emissions. They are not stopping. They're not slowing down. Yet Labor persists with this ideological crusade, punishing Australians for the sins of other nations.</para>
<para>Net zero has become a moral vanity project for those who can afford it and an economic catastrophe for those who cannot. It's easy to preach climate virtue from an inner-city office. It's much harder to pay the power bill on a farm or keep the lights on in a small workshop in regional Australia. Everywhere I go across my electorate, people are telling me the same thing: their power bills are crippling them; businesses are closing; and farms are furious at the destruction of their country for wind and solar projects that tear up paddocks, divide neighbours and desecrate landscapes that our families have cared for for generations. These so-called renewables aren't clean, and they're not green. They're future landfill—industrial junk that will one day be left rusting in our fields because this government has made no provision for their decommissioning or rehabilitation. Farmers will be left with the cost and the contamination, and those opposite in this place are doing nothing but looking the other way.</para>
<para>Labor's net zero policies are built on deceit. They tell Australians that power prices will fall, yet every bill tells a different story. They claim jobs will grow, yet we're watching our heavy industries collapse. They promise energy security, yet they are shutting down the very power stations that keep the lights on. Through the safeguard mechanism, the Capacity Investment Scheme and a web of green subsidies and taxes, the government is transferring billions of dollars from hardworking Australians to foreign backed renewable companies. That is not environmental policy. It is economic sabotage.</para>
<para>All this significantly weakens Australia at a time when the world grows more dangerous by the day. When our nation's security depends on self-reliance and strong industry, we're dismantling our competitive advantage in affordable, reliable energy. The government speaks of transitioning—but transitioning to what? A grid that is 82 per cent intermittent and dependent on the weather? Vast solar and wind farms built with Chinese steel, Chinese labour and Chinese financing? This is not sovereignty; it's surrender.</para>
<para>The greatest hypocrisy of all is that the same voices who lecture Australians on climate virtue continue to rely on fossil fuels for their own comfort and convenience. They fly across the world to climate conferences, stay in five-star hotels and demand ordinary Australians tighten their belts in the name of saving the planet. The United Nations climate bureaucracy, led by unelected officials, now dictates to sovereign nations like ours what we can mine, what we can manufacture and how we can live. I will not stand by while unelected foreigners, backed by global billionaires, tell the Australian people to accept higher costs, fewer jobs and a weaker nation. At the same time, we're witnessing the slow death of manufacturing in this country. Food plants, glassworks and aluminium smelters—industries that once made Australia strong—are being forced offshore not because they're inefficient but because they can no longer afford the price of power in Labor's Australia.</para>
<para>This legislation is not about denying climate change; it's about defending the Australian people from a policy that is impoverishing them. It's about sovereignty, affordability and fairness. It's about putting Australians first. Our duty in this place is to put the people of Australia first, not the global climate lobby. Our responsibility is to ensure affordable power, secure jobs and a strong nation. Net zero has failed economically, strategically and morally. The House must have the courage to end it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025. The member for New England has described this government's goal to reach net zero by 2050 as 'a lunatic crusade' and 'treacherous'. I think he needs to take a good look in the mirror, because that's where he will see someone that is, quite frankly, completely out of touch with regional Australia. This government's ambitious plan to tackle climate change will help all Australians, no matter where they live. The member for New England says that regional people are furious, but I say that he needs to open his eyes and look at the impact that climate change is having, with fires, floods and drought. Yes, people are hurting. Yes, farmers are hurting. Yes, small businesses are hurting. That's why we need to take action right now.</para>
<para>Climate change has had an absolutely devastating impact on my electorate of Gilmore. Lives were lost and hundreds lost their homes, businesses and livestock when the horrific Black Summer bushfires decimated the New South Wales South Coast in 2019-20. I challenge the member for New England to tell the people of Gilmore, who are still recovering, still rebuilding and still reliving those horrific weeks and months, that climate change and the road to net zero are a lunatic crusade. In recent years, we've not only been hit by fires; we've experienced record levels of rainfall and storm activity, resulting in flooding around our waterways and farmland. Homes have been inundated, crops and livestock have been destroyed, and farmers are still counting the costs from the relentless rain. Dairy and beef farmers, oyster growers and fruit and vegetable producers are all struggling after being hit by a string of fires, South Coast lows and rain bombs. Tell these farmers that the road to net zero is a lunatic crusade. Tell them our plan to reduce carbon emissions and reduce their energy costs by transitioning to renewables is treacherous.</para>
<para>Record rainfall has led to dozens of landslips, closing roads and cutting off towns and villages across Gilmore for months. Farmers couldn't get their cattle out, and people couldn't get their kids to school. Families were isolated. Businesses suffered, especially those that rely on tourism, because people couldn't get there. Across my electorate, devastating downpours have wrecked our roads and footpaths. Seawalls have been destroyed, and bridges have literally washed away. And this government has stepped up to help local councils with their massive repair bills time and time again.</para>
<para>Finally, after a decade of inaction, we are taking meaningful action to address climate change. Climate change isn't something that will maybe, perhaps, happen in the future; it's something that is happening right now. It's something that has happened, and we are experiencing it. It's not going to go away, so we have to take action. The member for New England wants to take our country back to the Stone Age. That's not what the Australian people voted for on 3 May. The message was loud and clear at the last election. Australians are ready to seize the opportunities a renewable energy future has to offer. I'm so proud to live in a regional area where people are switched on and playing their part in the country's transition to renewables. Across Australia, there have been more than 90,000 rooftop solar panel installations since our Cheaper Home Batteries Program started on 1 July. How good is that?</para>
<para>People in my region are certainly not furious about net zero. They're not angry and they don't think the path to net zero is a lunatic crusade. From 1 July this year, we've been rolling out billions of dollars worth of responsible support to build a stronger economy and deliver cost-of-living relief for Australians. The Albanese Labor government has taken strong action to provide energy bill relief to Australian households and businesses. We're rolling out critical investments in renewable energy, because the sun and the wind don't send a bill, and we've acted to make the energy market fairer. Our new rules, coming into effect in 2026, will make sure retailers aren't ripping off customers, because Australians deserve a fairer go when it comes to their energy bills. We know there's more to do, but we're on the right track. We are acting on climate change now because the science is conclusive. I think the member for New England needs to wake up and face reality.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak against the member for New England's bill to repeal Australia's net zero target. This bill, the Repeal Net Zero Bill 2025, is not just a backwards step; it's a reckless rejection of economic opportunities, of environmental responsibility and of political reality. Australia's commitment to net zero is both an obligation and an opportunity. It's our duty to future generations and our ticket to prosperity in a rapidly changing global economy. Walking away from net zero would be a betrayal of all Australians who want a stable environment and a future of abundance for our kids and grandkids.</para>
<para>The national climate risk assessment lays bare the risks that we face. Climate change is affecting our communities through extreme weather, our economy through disrupted supply chains and our environment through degraded ecosystems. The risks are escalating, and our response must match them. Our action on climate change must be ambitious, not only to meet our international obligations but to unlock the investment needed to build the industries of the future—renewables, critical minerals, green iron and clean manufacturing.</para>
<para>We have the best renewable resources in the world. We have the minerals the world needs. We have the engineering know-how and the workforce. What we lack, and what this bill threatens, is policy certainty. Investors are watching and businesses are ready, but they need a clear signal that Australia is serious about net zero. Even raising the idea of repealing our target does damage by sending the opposite message—that we are unreliable, unserious and unprepared. That's not just bad policy; it's bad politics as well.</para>
<para>Australians, including rural and regional Australians, support climate action. The last two elections have made that abundantly clear. There is no path back to government for the coalition that does not involve regaining ground in suburban and metropolitan seats—seats like mine, seats like those of my fellow crossbenchers and many marginal Labor seats as well. That path requires climate credibility. Reopening the net zero argument within the coalition paints Labor's timidity and lack of ambition as courageous innovation. This bill is a political own goal for the coalition. The coalition could be playing an important role in opposition by reaffirming its commitment to net zero, endorsing an ambitious 2035 target and accepting the economics. It could effectively hold the government to account on driving the clean energy transition in a way that's practical, cost-effective and focused on jobs and competitiveness.</para>
<para>The climate wars must end. The future is calling, and Australia has everything it needs to thrive in a net zero world, if only we choose to lead. Yet, across Australia, the Liberal and National parties show their desire to cling to the past. The WA Liberal Party's state council supported a motion to abandon our net zero target for 2050. In Queensland, the LNP has also voted to reject net zero. Although this bill has been put forward by the member for New England, who may or may not be part of the Nationals, it unfortunately signposts where the coalition is heading. The moderate Liberals were unable to drag their coalition colleagues to the centre under the Morrison government and paid the price. Still, it seems the lesson has not been learned.</para>
<para>On ABC's <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> yesterday, we heard more about the coalition's so-called review of the net zero target. Senator Canavan could not answer a question about the cost of abandoning net zero, doesn't intend to do any modelling as part of the review and claimed, without any modelling or evidence, that Treasury and so many other stakeholders lack credibility when they say that abandoning net zero will result in lower economic growth, reduced investment and higher energy prices. These stakeholders include the National Farmers' Federation, which supports the targets because farmers are on the front line of climate change. When the Nationals are taking a different view to the farmers, who are they now representing? There are really only coal and gas companies left.</para>
<para>This does not bode well for the future prospects of the coalition or for the economic future of the country. Returning to the climate wars is economic sabotage and a political dead end. Businesses and investors are ready and willing to invest in the industries of the future, but they need policy certainty, not mixed messages, from our politicians. The coalition as a whole must decide if it's in favour of Australia having a flourishing economic future on a livable planet or against it. Net zero is not a burden; it's a blueprint for a better future. It's a framework for innovation, job creation, regional development and environmental stewardship. I urge the coalition and the House to reject this bill, reaffirm its commitment to net zero and help build a flourishing economic future on a livable planet.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for New England and Member for Mackellar, everybody has the right to stand up and speak and to put their opinion. It would be good if members just allowed other members to say their words.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's not Halloween just yet, but it's getting scarier and scarier on the other side of the chamber. It says everything you need to know about the coalition that their ideological compass post election has seemingly been set by the member for New England, even when he's no longer sitting in their party room. So lacking are they in any positive vision for the future that they're outsourcing their policy direction to Senator Canavan and One Nation not just to repeal Labor's progress on climate action but to undo even the commitments made under prime ministers Morrison and Howard. While the Albanese government's first piece of legislation was to cut student debt by 20 per cent, the coalition's first priority is to repeal Australia's net zero target, a move that would damage our economy, our environment and our international credibility. Don't just take my word for it. At the Queensland LNP convention this year, an overwhelming majority voted for the federal coalition to abandon net zero, describing it as a 'dangerous scam'. Not one elected MP or senator spoke in favour of keeping the net zero policy at the federal level—not one.</para>
<para>The coalition and the member for New England could not be more out of touch with the Australian people and with science. Net zero is not some woke slogan. It's not a culture-war battleground. It's about our suburbs and regions. It's about topping our roofs with solar panels. It's about ordinary Australians making smart choices to cut costs, lower emissions and create a better future for their kids. And it's already happening in communities like mine. In Bonner, we've had one of the highest uptakes of batteries under the Cheaper Home Batteries Program in the entire state—645 and counting. Our community is leading the way because we know what's sensible. In August, I had the pleasure of welcoming the Prime Minister and Minister Bowen to visit Therese and her family, who have lived in the suburb of Mansfield in my electorate for 33 years. They've had solar for years, but it wasn't until our government introduced the 30 per cent battery rebate that they installed a home battery. In Therese's words, it was 'affordable and sensible'. That's the kind of practical, commonsense approach Australians are taking in the suburbs and regions right across our country.</para>
<para>Sadly, we're not seeing the same sense from the member for New England with this reckless bill. Recently, the member claimed that net zero and climate change policies were 'ludicrous crusades' and 'immoral'. The member also said that we have 'spent years scaring children about the weather'. Does the member for New England want Therese and her family to pay more for power? Have the 645—and counting—families in my electorate of Bonner that are set to have lower bills been scammed?</para>
<para>This government is backing Australians like Therese and her family, with real policies, real investment and real action. Since coming to office we've cut emissions to 29 per cent below 2005 levels; added over 18 gigawatts of renewable energy, enough to power six million homes; delivered $12.7 billion in clean energy investment in the last year; and passed energy-saving reforms that are cutting bills and creating jobs. This is what real action on climate looks like, nationally and in my backyard of Bonner.</para>
<para>The choice before us is clear: a cleaner, cheaper energy future or a political stunt that takes us backwards. But this bill isn't just a stunt; it's a test. We all know that the member for New England is planning to move on from his seat—he has made that clear—but what this bill will demonstrate is whether we'll see anything new or different from the coalition or just the same old faces still denying the science, still denying the economics and still denying Australians a better future.</para>
<para>Only Labor believes in a future made in Australia. Only Labor believes in clean energy, smart investment and protecting what makes this country special. Only Labor believes climate action should benefit all Australians, in the bush, in the suburbs and by the bay. We know that Australians believe that too—just like Therese and her family in Mansfield and just like the thousands of households across Bonner that have embraced batteries, solar and sensible climate action. They know it's affordable, they know it's sensible and they know it's the future.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>91</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare</title>
          <page.no>91</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government's commitment to strengthen Medicare, including $8.5 billion to deliver an additional 18 million bulk billed general practitioner (GP) visits each year, hundreds of nursing scholarships and thousands more doctors in the largest GP training program ever;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) this measure has already seen practices around Australia become fully bulk billed, with nine out of ten GP visits expected to be bulk billed by 2030 and around 4,800 fully bulk billed practices, which is triple the current number; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that while the Government is expanding access to bulk billing by expanding the bulk billing incentive, by contrast the Leader of the Opposition, as the Minister for Health:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) never increased Medicare rebates, the only health minister in Australian history to do so;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) doubled-down on the then Government's $50 billion cut to hospitals; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) continued the fight for the former Leader of the Opposition's GP tax; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further acknowledges that only the current Government will strengthen Medicare.</para></quote>
<para>I am proud to move this motion, which notes that the Albanese Labor government is delivering on its promise to strengthen Medicare, delivering the single largest investment in Medicare in 40 years.</para>
<para>Our government is committed to universal health. We are investing $8.5 billion into Australia's greatest policy achievement: Medicare. This investment will deliver an estimated 120,000 additional bulk-billed GP visits in the community that I represent. From this Saturday, 1 November, every Australian will be eligible for the bulk-billing incentive, while GP clinics that fully bulk-bill their patients will be eligible for a new, additional incentive payment on top of that. This is great for patients, and it's a pay rise for our doctors.</para>
<para>This reform is already delivering in my community. The Werribee Medical and Dental Centre, run by ForHealth, has been fully bulk-billed since 8 September, meaning locals can already see their GP without worrying about out-of-pocket expenses. ForHealth has stated that Labor's investment in Medicare and bulk-billing will see an increase from one in 10 of their clinics being fully bulk-billed to seven in 10 by this Saturday. This is just one of many clinics operated by this company across the country that are now going fully bulk-billed, including the Craigieburn Medical and Dental Centre in the electorate of the member for Calwell, who will second this motion today. It's another example of how Labor is delivering for the outer suburbs, across Melbourne and across this nation. This change alone will save my local community an estimated $570,000 in out-of-pocket costs every year. When you go to the Werribee Medical and Dental Centre, all you will need is one of these: a Medicare card. This is part of Labor's broader agenda to strengthen Medicare and ensure it continues to deliver affordable, universal health care for all Australians, from the smallest to the elderly.</para>
<para>One of the real game changers in reversing a decade of cuts and neglect under the former Liberal government has also been Labor's Medicare urgent care clinics. Since it opened, more than 27,000 locals have been treated at the Werribee Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, one of the first of 90 clinics across the country to open. These clinics are making a real difference, allowing people to get urgent care when they need it without waiting in an ED or paying out-of-pocket fees and taking pressure off our public health system. We've also made medicines cheaper, saving families money at the pharmacy. We've capped the cost of PBS listed medicines at $25, ensuring people can afford the medicines they rely on.</para>
<para>Labor created Medicare, and the Albanese Labor government will always work and act to strengthen Medicare because it is more than a policy; it is a statement of our values. It says that, in this country, access to health care is determined by your Medicare card, not your credit card. It says that, no matter who you are, where you live or how much you earn, you deserve high-quality, affordable health care. That is what Labor stands for.</para>
<para>Labor stands for an Australia where people's health is a priority. Labor stands for an Australia where preventive health has benefits that are acknowledged by all. That is what this great investment delivers. It will undo 10 years of neglect by those opposite. Worse than neglect; the freezing of the Medicare rebate for nine years meant doctors didn't get better pay. This changes all that. That is what this investment delivers, and that is why I am proud to move this motion to strengthen Medicare for every Australian.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Abdo</name>
    <name.id>316915</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Lalor for moving her motion. It is true that Medicare is at the very heart of our healthcare system, but, unfortunately, the ideal of universal health care is fast becoming a mirage. Universal health coverage means all people have access to the full range of quality health services they need, when and where they need them, without financial hardship. The reality is that Medicare has been undermined by years of rebate freezes and rising costs, and Medicare schedule fees remain unrealistically low.</para>
<para>Australia's ageing population, the growth of chronic health conditions and our increasing mental health needs mean GPs are having to schedule longer and more complex appointments. Average consult times have risen, reflecting the increased complexity of those consultations. The fee schedule forces GPs to prioritise short consultations over complex ones and to charge significant out-of-pocket fees to patients. Female GPs on average spend more time with their patients, so they're disproportionately disadvantaged. Unsurprisingly, medical graduates are deserting general practice for the specialties.</para>
<para>According to the recent <inline font-style="italic">H</inline><inline font-style="italic">ealth of the nation</inline> report, nine out of 10 specialist GPs regularly manage conditions that would typically be managed by specialists because patients have to wait too long to see specialists or simply can't afford to. Multidisciplinary team care in primary health clinics is valued and expanding. More than half our GPs engage in MDT care. Two-thirds say they'd like to participate more, but workforce shortages, lack of funding and infrastructure gaps remain limiting factors for this type of care.</para>
<para>Tragically, just this week in Melbourne, I was contacted by a number of constituents concerned about the imminent cessation of GP services at three cohealth community health clinics. These clinics serve vulnerable patients with complex needs, including refugees, people facing homelessness and people experiencing family violence. The current funding method does not adequately address the needs of these individuals.</para>
<para>The government's Bulk Billing Practice Incentive Program commences this week, but, for too many GPs, it's going to be too little, too late. The program means GPs and practices will receive added financial incentives if they bulk-bill every eligible service and patient. While four out of five GPs in the <inline font-style="italic">H</inline><inline font-style="italic">ealth of the nation</inline> report said they wanted to provide more and better preventive care to their patients, 82 per cent said that Medicare benefit scheme rebates are simply insufficient to allow them to do that. As a result, only one-third of our GPs are able to offer preventive care to patients. Preventive medicine covers a range of services. It aims to identify problems that could lead to chronic illnesses or diseases.</para>
<para>Our GPs' inability to provide those services means they're going to be struggling to cover all bases in health care. They'll be struggling to test blood pressure and cholesterol, struggling to undertake weight management, struggling to screen for cancer and for diabetes, and struggling to touch on drug and alcohol diversion programs, on mental health assessments and on nutrition. The GPs are simply unable to offer us the best care possible, because of financial and time constraints.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Kooyong, according to the recent Cleanbill report: only 16 per cent of consults were bulk-billed in the last financial year; the average out-of-pocket costs for a GP consultation was $49.91; and only 12 per cent of GP clinics in Kooyong are able to bulk-bill every patient. Realistically, schedule fees need to double. For standard consultations, that would mean the government paying out about $100, and even that's going to be less than the call-out fee for your average plumber.</para>
<para>We know that young people are increasingly putting off seeing a doctor, because they simply can't afford it. These are false and harmful economies. Avoiding vital medical care often results in later and more-severe presentations to urgent care clinics or emergency rooms. If this government really values primary health care it has to be prepared to pay to have the best primary health care provided to all Australians and to look at new models of multidisciplinary and preventive care within our universal healthcare system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABDO</name>
    <name.id>316915</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Lalor and I thank her for her commitment to her community and to protecting and strengthening Medicare, one of the proudest achievements in our national story. When Labor came to government in 2022 it had never been harder or more expensive to find a doctor. Bulk-billing was in freefall. After nearly a decade of coalition cuts and neglect, the very foundation of our universal healthcare system was eroding.</para>
<para>That is the legacy of those opposite: a neglected health system that led to bad health outcomes, longer wait times and Australians paying more out of pocket for care that should have been free. Under the coalition, Medicare rebates were frozen for six years, stripping billions from primary care and making it harder for doctors to bulk-bill. The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners estimates that general practice lost around $3.8 billion due to that freeze. And who was at the helm of that policy? The current Leader of the Opposition, then the health minister, who oversaw the continuation of that freeze and supported a GP co-payment, a policy that would have forced Australians to pay every time they saw a doctor, set in stone. In 2014-15 the coalition government proposed a $7 co-payment for GP visits and a $5 cut to that rebate, defended until public outrage forced its withdrawal. That's the Liberal record on health: freezes, fees and funding cuts. It left GP clinics struggling, bulk-billing collapsing, and patients paying the price, in money and in health.</para>
<para>Labor is rebuilding Medicare from the ground up. The Albanese Labor government is proud to be delivering the single-largest investment in Medicare history: $8.5 billion to deliver 18 million additional bulk-billed GP visits every year across the country; hundreds of new nursing scholarships; and thousands more doctors through the largest GP training program in our history. In 2023 we tripled the bulk-billing incentive and delivered the largest investment in bulk-billing in Australia's history. More than nine in 10 visits for concession cardholders and children under 16 are now bulk-billed, with 6.5 million extra bulk-billed visits in the last year alone.</para>
<para>From 1 November, Labor is expanding bulk-billing incentives to every Australian—by the end of this week—and creating a new bulk-billing incentive program, giving practices that bulk-bill every patient an additional 12.5 per cent incentive payment. This reform means that nine out of 10 GP visits will be bulk-billed by 2030, and around 4,800 clinics will be fully bulk-billed—triple the number from when Labor came to office. Importantly, this isn't just good for patients but also good for doctors. A metro GP who bulk-bills every visit will earn $5,300 more than a mixed billing GP delivering the same number of services, and in rural areas that figure rises to nearly $24,000.</para>
<para>We see the difference every day in Calwell. As the member for Lalor mentioned, just a few weeks ago Craigieburn Medical and Dental Centre, in my electorate, announced it will move to 100 per cent bulk-billing for medical visits. That's a big win for our community. It means families don't have to worry about gap payments or putting off care because of cost.</para>
<para>We're backing that up with 90 Medicare urgent care clinics already open nationwide, exceeding our initial promise of 50, with another 47 on the way this financial year. I'm proud to have announced a full Medicare mental health centre in my community to roll out more places that locals can go for free public mental health care backed by Medicare. This is in stark contrast to their plan to drive up gap fees and make waitlists longer. We've also cut the cost of medicines, reducing the PBS co-payment to $25 from January 2026 and saving Australians over $200 million a year on prescriptions.</para>
<para>This is what a government that believes in Medicare looks like. Where the Liberals froze, we funded. Where they cut, we rebuilt. Where they put up barriers, we are breaking them down. That is because Medicare in our community keeps kids healthy, older Australians independent and families secure in the knowledge that their government has their back. That is the promise of Medicare, that is the Labor difference and that is why only a Labor government will always protect and strengthen Medicare.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Calwell has fallen into the trap of coming into the chamber and just reading the talking points that Labor has given to him, making out as if all is well in the area of health. Well, all is not well, particularly in rural and regional Australia and especially in remote Australia. He talks about the urgent after-hours care clinics. That would be great if the urgent care clinics were distributed fairly across the nation, but, unfortunately, they are not. While the urgent care clinics are a good initiative, there are areas in need that do not have access to them. These areas in need are outside Labor seats, and the need and desire for them are just not being met.</para>
<para>The Labor Party talks about the decade of neglect. What Labor doesn't realise, or conveniently forgets, is that we were dealing with COVID. It was a worldwide pandemic.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I hear the minister at the table scoffing, but our response to COVID, according to the Hopkins Centre, was second in the world. We made sure that, health-wise, we provided the vaccinations which saved tens of thousands of lives. Not only that, we also provided the economic benefits to save many, many businesses from bankruptcy. That is what we did in that decade and, indeed, towards the back end of that decade.</para>
<para>When Labor talks about taking over in May 2022, with bulk-billing in freefall, the facts don't stack up, because under Labor bulk-billing rates have dropped 11 per cent, from 88 per cent to 77 per cent. That would be even worse in regional areas. What we heard from the health minister at one stage was: if you can't get a bulk-billing doctor, just make another appointment with another doctor who bulk-bills. The fallacy of that is that that might be all well and good in the leafy suburbs of Adelaide, but it doesn't cut the mustard in regional Australia and particularly in remote Australia, where, if you can find a doctor at all, you're doing well. You can't be fussy about whether they bulk-bill. You just need to get a doctor, particularly if you have chronic pain. 'When in pain, catch the plane' shouldn't be a truism in remote Australia. You should have access to a doctor right there and then. One of the worst things Labor did when it came to government was change the distribution priority areas, whereby many doctors in rural Australia literally took the plaque off their practice and moved to Newcastle or Wollongong or the Gold Coast, which, quite frankly, had plenty of doctors. I will never say 'enough doctors', because there are never enough doctors.</para>
<para>But what we have done and did do in regional Australia was put in the Murray-Darling Medical Schools Network. I was proud to finance and fund that as part of a coalition government. I know that, in a few short weeks, the minister for regional health will open the new facility at Wagga Wagga, where I went the other day. They celebrated quite a milestone. They were a clinical school; now they've become a medical school. They have produced a number of doctors who have then stayed in regional Australia. That's the crux of the issue: staying in regional Australia to practise. They come to regional Australia, fall in love with regional Australia or fall in love with somebody in regional Australia, and then they know that there is a future for them in regional Australia.</para>
<para>But we know that—certainly in Senate estimates the other day—health department officials admitted that Australians are not seeing a benefit from Labor's bulk-billing health policy. They won't see this for four long years. At the same time, people are sick, and they need to get better. If they can't see a bulk-billing doctor in regional Australia, they have to pay through the nose for it. That's just the way it is. We've got a very good health system, and we should never talk it down. I'm far from doing that. But we still have many, many Australians for whom the truth—despite the Prime Minister's claim on any number of occasions that all you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card—is that it's not being seen regional Australia in particular. But right across the nation, it is a fallacy. It is just not true that you can go to any doctor, produce your Medicare card and receive that service for free. That is not the case. The Prime Minister and Labor people should stop saying it. They should stop just reading their talking points that are produced for them, because what they're saying is simply not true. It's not correct. And Australians out there are reeling from the effects of poor health policies by this government.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Banana Industry</title>
          <page.no>94</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Australian banana industry:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) is worth $1.3 billion to the Australian economy and is the dominant employer in northern Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) represents more than 540 growers and employs over 15,000 people;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Australia, being a continent which until the 1800s had no farming, remains free of many of the world's most devastating vegetation diseases, including Moko, Black Sigatoka, and Banana Freckle;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) these diseases are found throughout plantations in the Philippines causing widespread crop losses and often producing a flawed, largely inedible product;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) these diseases will destroy Australia's banana industry and seriously damage our virgin, natural wonderland and threaten other food production activities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the US Department of Labor, the Centre for Trade Union and Human Rights (CTUHR), and the Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research (EILER) have all found significant instances of poor work conditions in banana plantations across the Philippines, including widespread child labour;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry is currently considering an application to import bananas from the Philippines, and has advised that it will only consider the risk of disease; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) bad enough in itself, the application does not consider the need for imports, the disparity in environmental conditions, chemical usage, wages and the various other factors that fail to make free trade, fair trade; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to take immediate and decisive action to protect Australia's banana industry by ensuring that the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) application to import bananas from the Philippines is rejected, due to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) unacceptable biosecurity risks that will create real danger to not only Australia's banana industry but also to Australia's virgin nature wonderland as Philippine banana imports will be the vector of a myriad of diseases including Black Sigatoka, Moko Disease and Banana Freckle;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) the economic impact of decimating Australia's $1.3 billion banana industry, specifically considering the huge social and economic impact on communities where bananas are grown;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) the devastating environmental impacts of bananas grown in the Philippines that have vastly different chemical and pesticide usage and lower overall environmental standards;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) the difference in cost of production including wages and working conditions, for example, the average wage of $50 per week in the Philippines versus $1,153.30 per week in Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) significant evidence of child labour throughout Philippine banana plantations, as reported by the US Department of Labor, CTUHR and EILER, with studies indicating that 22.5 per cent of households in banana growing regions have a child working in banana plantations;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry immediately reject the import application as there is no overriding need nor demand for the imported product; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Government immediately introduce legislation that acknowledges our other international obligations including, but not restricted to, slavery, child labour and other unfair working conditions and wages, and environmental impacts including pesticide and chemical usage.</para></quote>
<para>'The free marketeers have lowered the price of food in Australia by opening our doors to imports'—no, they haven't. The price of Woolworths and Coles has gone up 100 per cent in the last seven or eight years. That's the price of food in Australia. You not only did not succeed; you increased dramatically the price of food in Australia. You opened the doors, and what we have here is a gladiator. Send him into the ring. He says, 'Give me your shield and your helmet.' He says: 'Hey, wait on. The other bloke has got his shield and helmet.' 'Oh, no—it'll make you tougher if you fight without a shield and helmet.' The gladiator says, 'No, it'll make me dead.'</para>
<para>I'll tell you how many dead gladiators are out there. Citrus canker cost this country $427 million. That's from letting products from overseas come into this country. We had citrus canker, white spot, papaya fruit fly, fire ants, varroa mites in honey, hendra virus—people died—and avian flu—people died. What the hell did we get out of it?</para>
<para>You are paid to protect this country. If you saw the bloke in charge of the authority saying whether things can come into this country or can't, you would see an arrogant individual who is enjoying his power, knowing that it is to the detriment and at the expense of this nation—not only in terms of money but in terms of human death, the death of our economy and the death of nature. When you bring that product in from overseas it brings in bacteria and diseases. This was a country that never had farming, so we didn't have any of these diseases.</para>
<para>Just to give you one example, the prickly acacia tree has taken over 25,000 square kilometres of beautiful natural grassland—all gone, all flora gone, all fauna gone—thanks to the likes of the people in this place who keep pressing this free-market syndrome and obsession. What other country has free markets? In sugar, our farmers were getting $270 for 10 to 12 years. America's farmers were getting $700, Europe's were getting $700, Thailand was on $470 and Brazil was on $420—and Australian farmers were getting $270. So, who's free marketing? It isn't Thailand. It isn't Brazil. It isn't the United States. It isn't Europe. Well, who the hell is free marketing out there? I will now turn over to my seconder and very able colleague.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second this motion and commend the member for Kennedy for bringing it forward. He really is a fighter for the people of Kennedy whom he represents. He's a fighter for Queensland, and he's a fighter for Australia. As the member for Kennedy has already explained to this House, Australia has worked hard to remain free from many diseases that are the scourge of other food-producing countries. We simply can't afford to risk Australia's agricultural industries. The value of agricultural production in this country is about $90 billion each year. In my part of the world, the Central West of New South Wales, we view it as the food basket of the nation, and we know how important protecting Australia's biosecurity is.</para>
<para>Our country has a wonderful friendship with the Philippines. We fought alongside the Philippines for the liberation of that country during the Second World War, and both countries cherish democracy. However, I'm very concerned that allowing these imports potentially opens the door to diseases such as banana freckle, moco and black sigatoka. These types of diseases could decimate Australia's banana industry and wreak havoc across the broader agricultural sector. Think of all the jobs that are at stake: 15,000 in the banana industry. The whole industry is at stake here. It's worth $1.3 billion.</para>
<para>As the member for Kennedy also eloquently pointed out, New South Wales has been dealing with the devastating impact of varroa mite, as has Queensland. That outbreak led to extensive biosecurity measures, severely affecting the state's beekeeping industry. Pollination-dependent crops such as canola, which is vital to industry in New South Wales, have also suffered from reduced bee availability. Varroa mite was so invasive that New South Wales abandoned its eradication efforts, shifting focus instead to management strategies, and the mite's presence now poses ongoing—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Sorry, Member for Calare: you're actually not standing and speaking in the right seat, so I might have to get you to go back to where your seat is.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As I was saying, varroa mite was so invasive that New South Wales abandoned its eradication efforts and shifted instead to management strategies, and the mite's presence now poses ongoing economic, ecological and agricultural challenges across New South Wales. In fact, I was at the Australian National Field Days only recently, over the weekend, and a honey producer was telling me of the shocking impact the mite has had on their businesses.</para>
<para>Fire ants were first detected in Australia in 2001 in Brisbane. These infestations came in through international shipping, and their rapid spread has been a real challenge. Fire ants have been detected in new locations in New South Wales, posing a severe risk to our native biodiversity and biosecurity.</para>
<para>As the member for Kennedy pointed out, we've also got the looming threat of H5N1 bird flu. Australia is the only continent that has not reported an outbreak of this highly contagious flu. It's a reminder that we must be vigilant and that our biosecurity can't be taken for granted, so this motion brought by the member for Kennedy is a wonderful example of the crossbench leading the way on policy.</para>
<para>As we look across the aisle to the pain and, sometimes, dysfunction that may be being experienced by some on this side of the House or even on the other side of the aisle, we on the crossbench say that there is a better way for you. Bring us your tired, bring us your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, because a better life awaits you on the crossbench.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I know the member for Kennedy joins me in extending that invitation to anyone who is seeking a better life and a better way and a better future. I support the member for Kennedy's motion, and I commend it to the House.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Madam Deputy Speaker Scrymgour, I take a point of order. I love my colleague, but his comments reflect upon me, and I wish to make a point of personal explanation. He said we're ineffective. Well, the fact that bananas are not here is completely—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I haven't given you the call, Member for Kennedy, because I think you've had—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I didn't give you the call, Member for Kennedy. The question is that the motion be agreed to. I give the call to the member for Leichhardt.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATT SMITH</name>
    <name.id>312393</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Calare for his generous invitation, which I shall respectfully decline. I rise to speak on the motion made by the member for Kennedy. I want to put on record that Australian bananas are great. Far North Queensland bananas are the best in the world. Banana farming makes up an integral part of our culture and identity in the Far North. It also plays an integral part in my breakfast, and I'm grateful for it every day. Bananas have good potassium and 24 per cent of your vitamin B.</para>
<para>But I'm not saying anything new. There's not a person in this place who doesn't support Australian produce. It's almost embarrassing how good we are at producing food. Despite that, there seem to be some who, for political reasons, want to run a bit of a scare campaign about the future of the banana industry in this country, so perhaps it's time for a few facts, to make sure that we understand where we are.</para>
<para>On 16 September, the department advised that it is undertaking a rigorous science and evidence based assessment as a result of a request from our trading partners the Philippines to consider alternative measures to those in the 2008 import risk assessment. There is no predetermined outcome. It is important to note that this does not mean that trade will commence, that it is imminent, that a flood of bananas will come. It is a request we have to take seriously. But, as the Prime Minister, Minister Collins and other senior members of this government have said, our biosecurity is not up for negotiation. It is not up for compromise and neither is our agricultural industry. But, as a member of the World Trade Organization, we're obliged to consider formal requests for imports from our trading partners, just as other countries are obliged to listen to ours. We cannot expect others to follow the rules if we ourselves do not.</para>
<para>Australia is a proud two-way trading nation, and this is especially so of the Australian agriculture sector. As I've said, our food produce and our meat are the envy of the world. They have ads about Australian beef in America—McDonald's Australian beef. They love our food. In fact, we export around 80 per cent of our agricultural produce each year. In 2024, our exports in forestry, fishery and agricultural products were valued at $73.5 billion. That is a massive, massive number, and it is only achievable because of our position on international trade and our reliance on the trade rules, the standards that support our position as a major global exporter of agricultural goods. Operating within the WTO framework reinforces our position as a trading partner that other countries can trust.</para>
<para>If you're wondering about the next steps, I'm happy to dispel some of the rumours. Visits will be undertaken by the Australian government, and DAFF experts and technical officials will travel to the Philippines to see their banana-growing practices firsthand to better understand the risks and the controls and alternative measures proposed by the Philippines. Australian banana growers will also take DAFF to banana farms in Australia so that they understand the expertise and the work done on the ground here. The development of an issues paper, for release in the first half of 2026, will then begin. It will provide background information on the Philippines' request, what will be considered during the assessment and how the department will engage with stakeholders. That's it. Those are the facts. There is no wave of foreign bananas coming to this country. It is merely department officials considering the requests and suggestions of a valued trading partner. There's no need for a scare campaign.</para>
<para>To be clear, the Albanese Labor government will never, ever compromise our biosecurity. It is the envy of the world—ably assisted by the fact we are an island—and it is not up for negotiation. We will continue to back our farmers and producers, with trade being the most valuable and diversified it has ever been thanks to our government. Since the 2022 election, the Albanese government has committed over $2 billion in additional resourcing for biosecurity.</para>
<para>I know that the industry is concerned. I drove up to Lakeland just last week and spoke to some banana farmers up there, and I'll be meeting with the banana growers association later this week. But my message is clear: we support the industry and we support trade. If you want to support Australian bananas, go out and buy a banana, and make some banana bread, put banana on your breakfast cereal or have some banana after a workout.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time for this debate has expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>97</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government's spending will reach its highest level outside of recession since 1986;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) since the Government came to office, it has added $100 billion to the national debt, set to breach $1 trillion this financial year and $1.2 trillion by the time of the next election;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Government's new decisions since coming to office total a shocking $22 billion, and had the Government shown any fiscal discipline to find savings to fund the new commitments, the Government would be delivering a healthy surplus today;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) we are spending $50,000 on interest every minute, which is money that cannot be spent on essential services;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the persistence in inflation has pushed out the prospect of further interest rate relief with markets now expecting it may be 'one and done', that is, for interest rates to remain at around 3.25 per cent indefinitely, little more than one rate cut lower than the current level; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) millions of Australian mortgage holders will have repayments on the average mortgage set to remain at $1,700 higher per month indefinitely under this Government than under the previous Government; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to reintroduce the quantifiable fiscal rules that every recent government of either political persuasion has adopted, and to heed the calls of leading economists like former Treasury Secretary Ken Henry, and former Reserve Bank of Australia Governor Phillip Lowe, as well as leading international organisations like the International Monetary Fund to introduce such rules.</para></quote>
<para>Government spending has an impact on all Australians, but we need to remember as lawmakers, and the government need to remember every time they look to spend money, that it's not their money; it's taxpayer money. It's the community's money. Every dollar raised was earnt by someone—a factory worker in Casey, a farmer or a small-business owner who has taken an risk.</para>
<para>It is important and so crucial for the health of the country and the health of the community that that taxpayer money is spent well. Unfortunately, in Australia today we have a treasurer who has clearly lost the confidence of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister clearly has no confidence in the Treasurer, and that is a dangerous situation for our country. We know that because the Treasurer had to stand two weeks ago and backtrack on his biggest commitment when it came to raising revenue in the budget, the superannuation changes. The Prime Minister was clever. He asked, or ordered, the Treasurer to deliver that backtrack and that backflip on the first day of the Prime Minister's leave for a holiday. The Prime Minister then went to the US, and he is now at ASEAN, not in the country to face questions in question time about that huge backflip.</para>
<para>What does that say about this Treasurer? He's been rolled again by this Prime Minister, just as he was rolled at the productivity roundtable, which the Treasurer wanted to turn into an economic reform roundtable. He got pulled back into line, and it became a productivity roundtable, with one outcome: suspension of changes to the National Construction Code, which was coalition policy at the last election. So there was a three-day talkfest for the government to rebadge a coalition policy.</para>
<para>We argued at the time that, when it came to the super changes, indexation is a must and you should not tax unrealised capital gains. It is a fundamental accounting principle that can't be breached. The Treasurer—and those opposite—defended to the hilt the importance of the changes, but then he had to change when his boss pulled him into line.</para>
<para>This change by this government is going to leave a significant black hole in the budget, a budget that, by the Treasurer's own admission, is having 10 years of deficits. There are deficits as far as the eye can see! So how are this treasurer and this prime minister going to pay for this black hole? Is it higher taxes? Is it cutting services? Or is it bigger deficits? They are the three options for this treasurer and this prime minister, and they've refused to answer those questions.</para>
<para>If it's higher deficits, we need to understand that debt is not free. The debt we take on today will be repaid by our children and our grandchildren. Today, as it stands, as I speak, there is $50,000 a minute in interest repayments under this government. What it shows us is that Australians are paying the price.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Rae</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A trillion dollars.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Aged Care and Seniors wants to talk about a trillion dollars of debt. He faithfully regurgitates the Treasurer's talking points. I came prepared because I had a feeling those opposite might talk about misleading the parliament with the trillion dollars of debt they inherited. I give the minister notice that, at the end, I will table the document from ABC Fact Check that shows that is pure spin from the Treasurer and those opposite. They did not inherit a trillion dollars in debt. They did not. Those are the lies we have from this government. This treasurer does not have any solutions to the economic challenges that we face. All he can do is give talking points on spin to those opposite to try and talk his way out of trouble.</para>
<para>The reality is that spin and talking points and mistruths to the Australian people do not solve the economic challenges that our communities face. And our communities know they have been abandoned by this government. They know that this government has short-term fixes that are not working. They have no medium-term fixes and they have no long-term fixes to the economic challenges the Australian people face. It's my community in Casey and communities all across the country that pay the price. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the member's motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Caldwell</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and I reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Violi</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to table the document I referenced.</para>
<para>Leave not granted.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak against this motion. Those opposite desperately try to cling to the fantasy that they are the better economic managers, because they have nothing to offer the Australian people but an outdated fiction. The reality is this: if you are looking for the party of good economic management, look no further than the Labor Party. The Hawke and Keating governments built the modern, open Australian economy. The Rudd government steered Australia through the global financial crisis, and the Albanese Labor government has navigated Australia through an international inflation crisis, keeping unemployment low, increasing wages and delivering cost-of-living relief, all while better managing the budget.</para>
<para>It is rich that the member for Casey would bring this motion forward, when his party in government completely failed to reduce debt while cutting essential services that affected many Australians. The irony is that the rules set out by our predecessors were not worth the paper they were written on, because not once did the Liberals follow their own rules. The member for Casey refers to fiscal rules which the previous coalition governments broke time and time again. They said they would deliver a surplus. They went none from nine—doughnuts! In contrast, we have delivered back-to-back surpluses in our first term, the first government to do so in two decades. We improved the fiscal outlook by $209 billion compared to what we inherited in our first term, the biggest budget turnaround in a parliamentary term in history. They said they'd offset spending. Four out of five times they didn't. They said they'd bank revenue upgrades. They kept only 40 per cent. We have banked almost 70 per cent of revenue upgrades since coming to office, reducing debt and interest payments. They said they'd cut the payments-to-GDP ratio. It went up even before the pandemic hit. They said they'd rein in debt; instead, they almost doubled it. We reduced debt by $188 billion last year. It is now projected to peak at around 37 per cent of GDP compared to the 45 per cent peak projected under the coalition government. Since coming to government, we have found $100 billion in savings. In their final budget, those opposite delivered none. The Albanese Labor government is managing the budget responsibly, and we will not take lectures from those whose record speaks for itself.</para>
<para>Of course, good economic management isn't just about how we manage the budget; it's about what we do with it. At the last election, those opposite ran an out-of-touch platform of taxpayer funded lunches for bosses, restricting working from home, scrapping the Public Service and a taxpayer funded nuclear fantasy that would drive power prices up. Australians, and the people of Menzies, endorsed our investments in Medicare, in mental health, in fully and fairly funded public schools and in cost-of-living relief. Not only are we better at managing the budget but we've ensured that we have an economy that works for everyday Australians. The fact is that when we came to office inflation was rising, and interest rates were rising too; real wages and living standards were falling; and debt and deficit stretched as far as the eye could see.</para>
<para>Under Labor, we have made real progress in the economy and in the budget. We've brought inflation down from a number with a six in front of it to a number with a two in front of it. It is now around four-year lows. Annual real wages have been growing for seven consecutive quarters. Interest rates have been cut three times in six months. More than 1.1 million jobs have been created since we came to government—a record for any government in its first term. The average unemployment rate is the lowest of any government in 50 years. We've navigated the Australian economy through tough times, and we've done it while growing wages and keeping unemployment low. Because of the Albanese Labor government, more Australians are in work, earning better wages and paying less on their mortgages.</para>
<para>We know the job isn't finished. Australians are still feeling the pressure, and we're going to keep working to make sure the relief is reaching them. We are delivering real, practical and ongoing help with the cost of living, energy bill relief, reducing student debt by 20 per cent and tax cuts for every Australian—one last year, one this year and one next year. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure today to rise and speak in support of this motion moved by the member for Casey, because the state of Australia's financial management deserves to be highlighted.</para>
<para>We, as a nation, are on the brink of the highest national debt in our history—$1.2 trillion. The Treasurer likes to remind us all of how much of an overachiever he is. As I've said in this place before, I know that one day he'd like to be on the mugs and the tea towels out there in the parliamentary shop, but this is one record that nobody has asked the Treasurer to break, and that is that he will preside over the highest level of debt that our nation has ever seen. While he preens, it's Australians who pay—$50,000 every minute on interest. That's $72 million in just one day. It's $26 billion every year. And what could that wasted interest have funded instead? It's not abstract; it's real, tangible money. It could be paying for vital road and rail projects, Medicare, schools, pensioners or perhaps putting money back in the pockets of hardworking Australians through some tax relief. That's the opportunity cost of a Labor government.</para>
<para>Under Labor, Australia has suffered an historic collapse in living standards. And despite what my friend opposite said earlier, mortgages are up around $1,800 per month since Labor took office. Markets expect that interest rates are going to remain around 3.25 per cent for the long haul. Those higher interest rates, those higher mortgage repayments, are now baked in. The pain is being felt. Electricity prices are up 39 per cent. Housing—rents are up 21 per cent. Food, health and education costs are all up. Local families in my electorate of Fadden feel like they're working harder but that they're not getting ahead. For many this isn't a cost-of-living crisis anymore; it's a cost-of-survival crisis.</para>
<para>I want to highlight one particular sector where we are seeing the poor economic management of this Labor government hitting Australian families in the hip pocket, and that's child care. A young couple with two children in child care who live on Hope Island in my electorate talked to me about the cost rises that they've suffered under this Labor government. At the start of 2024, the daily rate they were paying for child care was $153. Now, it's up to $190.20. That is up by $37.20. That $190 a day represents a 24.3 per cent increase in their childcare fees. Yet, when we went to the last election, the headlines that Labor put on corflutes said 'Cheaper child care'. It's just not right. They say one thing, but their delivery is doing something else.</para>
<para>We heard my friend the member for Casey talking about our beloved treasurer, who only a matter of weeks ago got absolutely rolled, embarrassingly, by the Prime Minister. You see, the situation that our national accounts face is such that they are so desperate to bring in more income that they were prepared to tax unrealised gains on superannuation. That's not tax reform; that is a tax raid on hardworking Australians' retirement savings. This is not about the backflip—although that, itself, was pretty entertaining to watch. What this is about is the fundamental approach that Labor will take in trying to chase more of your money, because when they can't manage their budget they will come after yours.</para>
<para>What we've seen with this higher interest rate environment is that Australians are struggling to borrow money. They are struggling to pay these high mortgages. They are struggling to buy homes. How do we solve this? There needs to be some accountability, there need to be some fiscal guardrails, and the Treasurer needs to stop spending money on the Australian credit card and expecting Australians to pay.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SOON</name>
    <name.id>298618</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Chief Opposition Whip has us debating government spending and fiscal rules today, and I am so glad that he does. It means I get to talk about some of the most important economic reforms in this great country's history and the repair that has been required because of the actions and inactions of those opposite. While this government has an enviable record, I want to start by spending some time talking about the history of economic and budget management in this country.</para>
<para>Prime Minister Bob Hawke inherited an economy that was closed, overregulated and falling behind. He had the courage to modernise it, floating the dollar, opening the banking system and cutting tariffs. He worked with the unions through the accords to control inflation while strengthening Medicare, education and the social wage. Hawke's reforms laid the foundation for a stronger, fairer economy.</para>
<para>He was followed by Prime Minister Keating, who built on that foundation. He introduced compulsory superannuation so that every worker could retire with dignity. He reformed the tax system to make it fairer and modernised key industries through competition. Keating turned Hawke's groundwork into a productive, resilient economy that could meet global challenges head-on.</para>
<para>When the global financial crisis hit, it was again a Labor government, with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan, that kept Australia safe. While other advanced economies sank into deep recession, Australia was resilient. We kept people in jobs and we kept businesses afloat. The stimulus approach, rather than austerity, has been praised internationally and studied as a model for effective economic management. You will see a clear trend here: these were all led by Labor governments. Those opposite claim they are the party of economic management, but history tells a very different story. It was Labor that reformed the economy, it was Labor that built decades of growth and it was Labor that protected Australians in times of crisis. We make the hard decisions, we get the big calls right and we do it while keeping fairness and opportunity at the core of our mission.</para>
<para>The motion brought before the House today suggests the government should show fiscal discipline to find savings to fund new commitments. Perhaps this advice should have been provided to the former members for Kooyong and Cook instead, because we have kept average real spending growth to 1.7 per cent—less than half the former government's, which sat at 4.1 per cent. More importantly, we have also found more than $100 billion of savings since we came to government, when the former government did not deliver one dollar of savings in their final budget. The Liberals have no interest in finding savings for government or the people of Australia. They took bigger deficits, bigger debt and higher taxes to the last election—a real trifecta—in order to pay for a $600 billion nuclear scheme which they still continue to talk about. This government is addressing the big structural processes and the pressures that people are facing, turning deficits into surpluses and driving down our debt.</para>
<para>The motion before the House also talks about fiscal rules. This government has a fiscal strategy and is delivering on it. Our rules include reducing gross debt as a share of the economy, and we've got debt down by $188 billion. When we came to government, as the wonderful member for Menzies outlined, inflation was high and rising—and taking interest rates with it—while real wages and living standards were falling. The government is making incredible progress. Inflation is at four-year lows, real wages have been growing for seven straight quarters, more than 1.1 million jobs have been created, and we have the lowest average unemployment rate of any government in 50 years. The budget position improved by $209 billion, and debt, as I mentioned, is $188 billion lower, saving $60 billion in interest rate costs. In fact, last year the IMF's data saw Australia rise to second in the world for budget management, just behind the Canadians. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I completely associate myself with the remarks of my good friend and colleague the member for Casey, who highlighted the impact of the declining health of our economy on families, small businesses and the broader community. Australians are suffering right now. Many people in my electorate of Monash are doing it incredibly tough. Just last week I was volunteering at Frankies Community Kitchen, who do a terrific job of looking after people in need. I cracked a few hundred eggs during my shift, and the volunteers there enjoy good tunes and good company as they do incredibly important work. Frankies Community Kitchen are preparing 1,230 meals a day for people in need, and that need is continuing to rise. Frankies Community Kitchen supports a number of other food banks in the area, like Longwarry Foodbank. But the demand on those services is at unprecedented levels and is showing no sign of slowing.</para>
<para>The reason I raise this is food banks are the canary in the cage for how the rest of the economy is travelling. Right now, it's a very bleak picture. Labor have presided over the biggest collapse in living standards in the developed world, and they're continuing to spend. You won't see any fiscal discipline or budget control from this Treasurer. Labor are well and truly on their way to leaving a $1.2 billion debt bomb for the next generation—for young people who already see owning their own home as a dream that gets further and further away into the distant future. Every minute, Australians are paying $50,000 on the interest payments of this federal Labor government. This is not just at a federal level—don't even get me started on the Victorian state Labor government, because spending other people's money is the Labor way. Victoria's debt is out of control. It's more than the states of Queensland, New South Wales and Tasmania combined. The Victorian Labor government is paying $21 million a day in interest payments, and that is projected to climb to $29 million a day over the next three to four years.</para>
<para>Labor have demonstrated an absolute collapse of fiscal discipline, and everyday Australians are wearing the consequences. These figures are mind-boggling. You could build a new West Gippsland hospital within one week on the amount of money we're talking about. Every dollar that is spent on repaying Labor's debt is a dollar that we are not investing in schools, hospitals and regional roads in electorates like mine. You couldn't run a small business like this. You couldn't run a big business like this. You certainly could not run a household budget like this, but everyday Australians are paying the consequences. The former governor of the Reserve Bank, Philip Lowe, said that inflation remains high because of Labor's spending. When he was governor, he diplomatically said that inflation remained sticky and that it was a homegrown problem—in other words, government spending was too high.</para>
<para>There seems to be an invisible ring around Australia such that anyone outside of metropolitan areas falls into Labor's 'no-care zone'. Our plight and our challenges are invisible to this Labor government. Shortly after I was elected, I wrote a letter to the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. I wrote on behalf of drought impacted farmers in my electorate. They are doing it really tough. For many, this drought has depleted not just financial but mental reserves. I asked the Treasurer to please prevail upon the ATO to show leniency to drought stressed farmers who had been forced to sell their stock early and would have a resulting ATO debt bill that reflected this. Those farmers are doing it really tough. I'll tell you what response I got. It wasn't a response from the Treasurer; it was just a standard proforma fact sheet from the ATO. It didn't even address the concerns that I had raised. That is the level of interest and care shown to farmers right across Australia by this government. My farmers in Monash are struggling, and I say to them: I will keep fighting for you, and the coalition will keep fighting for you. This Labor government has let you down, and you deserve so much better.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>101</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Implementation of the National Redress Scheme—Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>101</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Membership</title>
            <page.no>101</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Speaker has received a message from the Senate acquainting the House that Senator Shoebridge has been appointed a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>101</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025, Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>101</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7369" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7372" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>101</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We debate a lot of things in this place. We move new legislation that becomes law and we set up new institutions. Understandably, there is sometimes confusion or not necessarily an appreciation of the significance of the moment, but I think this bill represents an important long-term contribution to the better health of the nation. We have said, through the course of a once-in-a-generation pandemic, that we would learn a lot of lessons. Now it's time to back that up with hard evidence. I would submit to the House that this is one of those cases that demonstrates just that. We've moved beyond the talk, and we're setting in place something that has been called for for nearly 40 years. The reality is that many people recognised we needed such a centre to help us with moments in time where there were threats to public health at a large scale and that we needed a coordinating body that could best inform and draw together efforts to combat those moments in time where public health was under threat.</para>
<para>Clearly, having something like the Australian Centre for Disease Control is one of those investments in the long-term health of the nation. It will be an independent, non-corporate Commonwealth entity, with the bill establishing the roles, the powers, the functions and the duty of the agency and its director-general. It was a commitment made by former shadow health minister Chris Bowen that then continued to be championed by the now Minister for Health, Mark Butler. I think it's an important and enduring part of our long-term public health architecture. An interim CDC was established in January last year, and this bill will bring to life what's required, particularly in transferring public health responsibilities to the director-general of the CDC and for the Biosecurity Act, the National Health Security Act and the National Occupational Respiratory Disease Registry Act. It will have a number of other important functions to be embedded in this CDC.</para>
<para>The CDC idea was brought to the fore during this last pandemic, which we had to all endure. As indicated, we've had to go through these once-in-a-generation pandemics. Often, people would remind us of the experience of our forebears through Spanish influenza back in the last century and how devastating that was. We've had other major public health threats as well. Sometimes the distance between those events means that our collective memory fades. We don't necessarily put the same amount of investment in being able to protect and prevent the impact of some of these things on the broader public. Or there are, understandably, advances in care and containment that would not require of us the same level of approach as has previously been experienced.</para>
<para>However, I think there are some important things that do need to be reflected on. My contribution in this debate was brought on by listening to the former deputy prime minister and member for Riverina, who I've got a lot of regard for. Even though we have differences of opinion, I do respect his contribution to the debate and his contribution in the last government, particularly being part of a government responding to COVID. However, while I might have regard for him, we do have different opinions. We have different opinions on the way that the COVID pandemic was managed by the former government. I think it is important that some of those differences be put on the record.</para>
<para>The former deputy prime minister may be proud of Australia's response to COVID, and there were a lot of elements to be proud about relative to other nations. What we saw in terms of their responses and the impacts on their populations was pretty significant. But perspective also gives you a different vantage point from which to review past events, and the history, as it was experienced in our part of the world and in Western Sydney, was different. I also think it's important to recognise that the incoming coalition government of 2013 did make cuts to pandemic preparedness that had been worked on back in 2008 and 2009 by the government before them, because people recognised that you need to. Even though it might not affect you straight away or during your course of government, at some point it will, and it's important to replenish the institutions that manage it.</para>
<para>When we started to see evidence of COVID emerging in late 2019 and early 2020, the concern about what effect this would have started to mount. I found it a bit hard, as a member of this parliament, to see a government response to COVID relegated to a dixer—a three-minute response in question time—as opposed to taking the serious step of convening a ministerial statement that would walk through what the risks were and what things needed to be done to help prepare the nation. I was critical at the time, too, of the former health minister. I appreciate that he did undertake a number of things at that point in time, but the country should have been taken into the confidence of the government and walked through what was being done ahead of what we actually experienced.</para>
<para>We had leaders of this former government encourage attendance at mass events when scientists and medical practitioners were saying that that was the worst thing to do—to attend major sporting events and be part of a potential distribution of COVID. They then had to walk that back. We tried to get vaccines developed here. Unfortunately, it didn't work, but I commend the former government for encouraging that. But then, when it was clear other jurisdictions were developing the vaccine and we needed to order the vaccine in large numbers for the population, that didn't happen, and we were in the back of the queue in terms of vaccine purchase. I don't need to mention the COVIDSafe app in any great degree; that did not work out as a great contact-tracing platform. There was a $60 billion rounding error on JobKeeper, and not everyone got access to JobKeeper. I remember talking in the parliament about workers at places like dnata who were in the electorate I represent and who couldn't get JobKeeper and were laid off and couldn't maintain contact with their work. I want to thank the Transport Workers Union for maintaining the focus on that issue. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts, the former government would not amend its JobKeeper provisions to allow for people to be sustained in their employment.</para>
<para>I spoke in this place about the docking of the <inline font-style="italic">Ruby Princess</inline>. I have friends I went to school with whose parents were on the <inline font-style="italic">Ruby Princess</inline> and died as a result of getting COVID on there. There were a whole lot of questions about why it was allowed to be docked at that point and why those aboard were just released en masse—2,000 people—into the community when there was evidence that COVID was being experienced on that vessel.</para>
<para>The New South Wales government did a good job on a lot of things, but I had big differences with them about locking down Western Sydney and dividing the city in half, and it seemed to be accepted by the former federal government. There was a saying at the time, 'We're all in this together,' but the former federal government did undertake partisan attacks on state jurisdictions. I remember the Palaszczuk government in Queensland calling for support to set up quarantine facilities. They couldn't get anywhere. The Victorian government was continually chipped and criticised by senior representatives of the former Morrison government. The federal government joined with Clive Palmer to put pressure on the WA government to bring down its borders and stop the lockdown that protected that state. That happened at the time. It was astounding. No Western Australian forgot the fact that Scott Morrison and Christian Porter, the Attorney-General, sided with Clive Palmer to bring down that lockdown. That was staggering.</para>
<para>So it seemed to me we were all in it together as long as you voted for the coalition, and I don't think that's acceptable from a public health perspective. That is a significant and, I appreciate, offensive remark for members of the coalition. I get that. But that's how it was felt. When they locked down Western Sydney—and from my recollection no national or state leader visited when that lockdown occurred—people at the time felt like they had been discriminated against and racially profiled because of where they lived. That was absolutely a point that was raised in a report by the Australian Catholic University and the United Workers Union, who said that people from Western Sydney suburbs felt targeted and racially discriminated against compared to Sydney's affluent eastern suburbs residents, who were allowed greater freedoms in the lockdown. So we had that.</para>
<para>The other thing that got to me was that, at the point of lockdown, the supports that were necessary for the region going through the lockdown—a region that contained essential workers who sustained the city during COVID—were not provided. Here are some examples. In Mount Druitt, which I represent, we fought for ages to get a vaccination hub and were denied it. There was no support out of the federal government or the state government, the Berejiklian government, to get that vaccine hub. The Premier was questioned repeatedly about this, at a time when 3,000 people a week were getting infected. The hardest thing for me is hearing stories about kids orphaned because both their parents died as a result of COVID. That was too hard. That is still, for me, a scar in my mind for the people who I represent. They didn't get the support that they needed. Mental health support hubs were set up in Liberal electorates but not in the areas that were hardest hit. That is a fact you can go and see. In the electorate of Lindsay—the state electorate of Penrith—they got a mental health support hub. Why wasn't this done across Western Sydney? It shouldn't be that way.</para>
<para>Public health is too important to be politicised. The reason why we're proud of our public health system and our universal health care is that it reflects a value of this nation. Australia says that, regardless of your income or where you live, we should fight to make sure you get the health care that you need. I'm proud of the fact that our country values that and that it fights for it. To be frank—putting aside the politics—both sides of politics get the importance of Medicare and a universal healthcare system. We may have different levels of commitment to it, but I think we have now gone beyond thinking that Medicare will be dismantled. It's about the level of investment in it. But I did feel really strongly, and I still feel really strongly, about the fact that Western Sydney was treated differently. We didn't have national or state leaders in, and we didn't have the supports that were needed, and we didn't have the coordination required to help people in need. The other thing, to talk about salt in the wound, was that the areas that were hit hardest by COVID were also hit hardest by COVID related fines. In Mount Druitt, nearly $1.4 million in fines were handed out to people in the areas I represent, some of which are huge low-socioeconomic areas. So they were not given the support—the vax hubs and the mental health hubs—and they were locked down, treated differently and fined hard.</para>
<para>The reason I speak on this bill is that, if we've learnt anything out of that pandemic, it's the need to better coordinate, to not treat people in different regions differently and to be able to do what we can to coordinate a response—particularly standing up greater levels of support for vulnerable communities. In large part, the way to do that, I would argue to the House, is setting up something like a CDC that can do just that and work across jurisdictions. I hope, when we say we've learned the lessons of the pandemic, we genuinely mean it, and I'm proud of the fact that this CDC is evidence we may be doing something to do better.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have to stand and speak on the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 because back in 2015, as the Minister for Agriculture, I moved one of the biggest pieces of legislation that we'd seen, which was the Biosecurity Act, and this intertwines with the Biosecurity Act, on the information I've received. Unfortunately, I need more information about exactly how that is fleshed out. I haven't seen that. That was a crucial piece of legislation. I've brought it to the attention of people who say that it has nothing to do with it. I just got back the information from the Library, which says, 'The bill amends a wide range of existing legislation, including the Freedom of Information Act 1982 and the Biosecurity Act 2015.' That was incredibly hard to get through. It was a very precarious day when we finally got it passed through the Senate. I hope, if the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill goes to Senate inquiry, we can get a greater understanding of exactly what the interconnection is, because we know that it is there.</para>
<para>I remember, after the passage of the biosecurity bill, at that time, it was the biggest piece of legislation that parliament had seen. I was really chuffed. I thought: 'That's pretty good! How did that happen? I hope I get a big rap.' Nothing seemed to happen; no-one seemed to care about my moment of glory. So I was trying to work out how to throw a bit of light on my magnum opus, and then this gentleman called Johnny Depp turned up with a couple of dogs, and all my dreams came true!</para>
<para>This is so important because the biosecurity of our nation is imperative, especially on the ag side. We would be decimated if we had an outbreak of foot-and-mouth. There would be an immediate shutdown of the movement of everything—the movement of soils and earthworks. Everything would stops. The whole place would shut down. You've got to understand the process of that and how it intertwines with this. If we had foot-and-mouth, the consequences to the Australian economy would be billions and billions of dollars. The consequences to regional towns would be massive. We would lose major exports. We would have the decimation of herds. As they say, when you get a foot-and-mouth outbreak, you can basically see it coming towards you, and anything that is in that area has to be destroyed; it has to be killed.</para>
<para>The problem that we've got in Australia is that it's not only in its bovine form but also in its porcine form—porcine, of course, is pigs. Wild pigs are endemic everywhere, and our capacity to actually control that disease would be near impossible.</para>
<para>I have good knowledge of this. My father was a vet for the department of agriculture when they did the impossible and got rid of bovine tuberculosis and bovine brucellosis. They thought we could never do it. Other countries—even New Zealand—couldn't do it. Australia did it. Although, we never prosecuted one person, I might say. But I do remember the heat that was involved in trying to make sure that Australia arrived at that place.</para>
<para>I'll never forget the time when my father, a vet and former serviceman, came charging out the door of the department of agriculture office on Griffin Avenue, Tamworth, with a farmer behind him. They were both taking off their ties and their coats to fight each other under the ginkgo tree, which was rather remarkable for me to see as an eight-year-old boy. I suppose that's a reflection of the heat.</para>
<para>We need to know what the interconnection is between those issues, as have been shown to me by the Parliamentary Library. I really want to know because there is so much on the line. There are other diseases, such as screwworm fly and rabies—of course, if that broke into Australia, because of our wild dog population, we'd never control it. It would completely change what happens to Australians when they go to a national park. In this instance, your safety would be called into question in certain areas. There are wild dogs, most certainly, in our area. If you go bushwalking, there are, most definitely, wild dogs there. Generally, they see you and run away. But, of course, if they are rabid, they don't; they run towards you and bite you. There is no cure for rabies; if you get it, you die and in a pretty horrific way. So these issues are incredibly important because there is a crossover between human health and animal health. I ask the minister and I ask others to dig deeper into exactly what that interconnection is.</para>
<para>I can't help, then, but to also go to the issue of how this was involved with COVID. Yes, people died from COVID, without a shadow of a doubt. Yes, people became critically ill under COVID. Yes, it was something that there needed to be a sense of caution around in terms of how people managed it. But I believe we way overreacted. What happened then was the state had primacy over the individual. You've always got to be cautious when the state becomes more powerful than the individual.</para>
<para>Right now, everywhere you go, there are going to be people with COVID. You're going to see them down the street. You're going to walk past them. You're going to be at functions with them. It hasn't disappeared—it's still there; it's all around. The issue now is—imagine if I said to you now: 'I'm going to lock you up in your house or your flat for 14 days. You're not allowed to go to the park.' We had people locked down, we had people locked out and, in some instances, we had people locked up. There was an excess to it in how it transpired, and a lot of people became—it also, in some instances, became a fan to the flame for conspiracy theories.</para>
<para>We have to be really careful when the state comes in and has this manifest power that completely consumes the right of the individual. I remember having COVID and people in hazmat suits bring the only ones allowed to come to my door. I felt fine. I started to call it all into question.</para>
<para>The other thing that happened during COVID is our national debt went through the roof. They—and it was our side!—just started borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars like it didn't matter. Well, it does matter. We still owe the money; we still have to pay it back. It's a large part of that section. When people talk about debt heading towards a trillion dollars, there is a section that the coalition is responsible for. A big section of that was the so-called stimulus payments and everything that came with COVID. I believe that was an overreaction, a massive overreaction.</para>
<para>There were other issues attached to it. We gave $2 billion to Qantas, and then Mr Joyce paid himself a $10 million bonus. That was your money! This didn't seem to add up. There was a lot of money flushing around. That was part of COVID. It was all the same. You get this sense of the government saying, 'This is the excuse,' and you say, 'I think you have to be careful about spending all this money.' Then they say: 'COVID! Can't talk about it. It's all COVID.' And it's like now in that, every time they can't think of an answer, they say 'climate change'. 'My horse didn't come in.' 'Climate change!' 'I stubbed my toe.' 'Climate change!' Back then it was COVID. There wasn't that sense of temperance and balance, of understanding the risk and not completely throwing out people's rights on the way through.</para>
<para>And everything was apparently unchangeable. You couldn't do anything about it. I will tell you what did change it: people started to protest. They started to get very angry. First of all, they'd say: 'They're just ratbags. They're conspiracy theorists. They're crazy people.' But then you started seeing people who reminded you of your aunty or mum, and they'd be saying things like: 'I can't tolerate this anymore. I'm not going to be locked up anymore. This has to stop.' And one day, in this building—this is a very interesting thing to know. There's a mall out the front. I don't know where the front is; it's probably in one of these directions. It's called Federation Mall. If you have a protest out there and it's just a few people out the front, don't worry about it too much. If a crowd turns up and it starts to go down Federation Mall a little bit, maybe have a glance at it. If they fill up Federation Mall, be really careful. But then the protest against the impositions on people's private freedom, which had been imposed on people by reason of COVID, turned up. It went down Federation Mall, around Old Parliament House, down Commonwealth Avenue, I think, over the bridge and into the park on the other side. And immediately—this is surprising—laws started changing. All these incredible laws that could never change started changing pronto because that protest said: 'You are out of government. It's all over. It's finished.' And we're lucky they turned up. We did need that change.</para>
<para>So the cautionary thing about this is: never lose sight—there will always be reasons to make incredible decisions during a calamity. But be really careful when the calamity reasoning is an imposition on your private rights as an Australian, your rights as an Australian citizen. You get the sense that, once the state gets those rights, they're just hesitant—people love power, and, when they get those rights, they're very hesitant to hand them back.</para>
<para>If you don't follow this sort of legislation closely—there are people that are not terribly interested in this—you won't find out what is happening in the chamber. During debate on that legislation there was a potential loss of your rights. The government started to have the capacity to control more of your life. You've got to be careful about it. So, when I watching this in my room, I thought, 'I'd better get in the chamber and worry about this,' because we've seen the consequences of this.</para>
<para>What we have to do now is go to the Australian people with all of this and say: 'We understood the risks. We understood that action was required. But the excesses of the proscribing of rights'—not 'prescribing' but 'proscribing', which means 'removal'—'that happened in association with COVID will not happen to the Australian people again.' It was not a war. It was a disease and it's still there. If you believe that what happened to the Australian people was not excessive, then why did we stop? Why did we stop? We should be swabbing everybody as they come into this building, we should be swabbing every parliamentarian, we should be not allowing people to go to church, we should be shutting down sporting fixtures and shutting down shopping malls, we should be not allowing people to fly anywhere, we should be shutting down planes—because it's still there; COVID's still there.</para>
<para>Now, to be quite frank, there are a lot of people who probably don't get the vaccinations—and it didn't turn out the way we thought we were told it was going to, because you can test yourself. If that had been the case, all those restrictions would still be here. But they're not, and thank God they're not. But, if you look back, we have to ask ourselves: Why did we all get caught in that, 'It's A-okay to do this'? Why wasn't there more temperance? Why wasn't there more of a debate where people said: 'Just slow down. Let's have a closer look at this. Let's get another opinion. Let's ask ourselves some serious questions. Let's have a proper debate before we start borrowing multiple hundreds of billions of dollars in stimulus packages. Let's ask serious questions before we start giving billions and billions of dollars to one organisation, a private organisation, Qantas'? When they paid themselves bonuses later on, why didn't we ask for the money back? It would have been taxpayers' money—why didn't we ask for it back? That didn't happen. With everything, you've got to be really careful of this place at times. It goes into calamity-cult mode, and all of a sudden it just charges down, and you're apparently beneath contempt if you raise a question. You've just got to be so careful of that.</para>
<para>They are doing it again. That time it was COVID. The next one is the big C—climate change. You're not allowed to ask any questions or you're a denier; you're not a believer. Therefore, we have to accept everything, chapter and verse, that is said, and a lot of it is bunkum and crazy. This time, we're going to spend over a trillion dollars trying to change the climate—from this room, from here! It is nuts! It is completely and utterly off its head! But, if you talk about it, no, you're an evil person; you're contemptuous. On this one, I hope when it goes to a Senate inquiry there is a very hard look at this piece of legislation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's always interesting listening to the member for New England. His contribution on this legislation, in my view, sums up exactly why we need this legislation—that is, the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025—which effectively sets up a centre for disease control.</para>
<para>All legislation that comes to this place is important. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be before us and it wouldn't be debated. But this legislation is particularly important. Again I thank the member for New England, who raised a number of matters as to why that is so. It's important because it's legislation that ultimately affects every single one of the Australian people, not only because it may directly affect their health but because it also affects the economy and the country in which we live. When COVID struck, Australia was not prepared for it and the world was not prepared for it. Indeed, the last pandemic to hit the world was some hundred years earlier. So nobody who was trying to respond and manage the COVID pandemic that hit us had had any previous experience in doing that. The response that we saw across the world varied from country to country, as it did from state to state here in Australia. What is regrettable is that in many cases the long-term health and economic disruptions that hit us between 2019 and 2022 still linger today, some years later.</para>
<para>Hardly a week goes by without someone speaking to me about the effects of the COVID that they contracted during that period, the effects of the vaccinations they received or, indeed, the economic disruptions they had to deal with at the time that effectively changed their life forever. In the interconnected world that we live in today it is more essential than ever before that we be better prepared for another global or national pandemic.</para>
<para>The proposal to establish a centre for disease control, which I understand is intended to commence on 1 January 2026—I hope that is the case and that it is not further delayed—was not only part of the COVID review recommendations. Quite frankly, it's a commonsense response to the lessons that we all learned from COVID. In particular, we learned that our national health services must be better resourced and coordinated and that we must have better data shared across all jurisdictions—not only jurisdictions here in Australia but across the world. Hopefully, having a centre for disease control established in Australia, as some other countries have already done, will be a step in the right direction. Importantly, the data should be collected and shared by a body that the community has absolute confidence in, a body that is independent and free of political or commercial interests.</para>
<para>The most common criticisms of the COVID experience that I have come across—I'm sure many of my colleagues in this place have had similar contact with people raising the same things—are that there were inadequate and unreliable medical research and COVID treatment options available to people, that the vaccine response was heavily influenced by big pharmaceutical companies with a vested interest in the vaccines and that directions from the World Health Organization could not always be relied on. There were, indeed, too many mixed messages and too many opinions out there at the time, which left people confused about what they should do. To this day, I regularly hear from people who are adamant that they or their family members continue to suffer from the long-term health effects of the COVID vaccines. Of course, it may be argued that the long-term health effects that they refer to could also be attributed to the COVID infection itself. Some of those questions will never truly be answered, and I know that the debate continues.</para>
<para>This legislation—the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 and Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025—better coordinates the national health expertise that presently exists. The proposed director-general and advisory council will ensure both the independence and the health expertise that the community can have confidence in.</para>
<para>Australia already has a very thorough and cautious health regulation system. In fact, when I was a member of the health standing committee of this parliament I heard through one of our inquiries, where we were looking at the TGA approval process, about how cautious the Australian health system is. Many would say that the Australian health regulators are overcautious, too thorough and, consequently, too slow to clear medical advances. Whether that's true is, again, a matter for debate. Quite frankly, I think the overcautious approach of our health regulators can sometimes be in the national interest. But I accept that at times, because of that overcaution, medical breakthroughs are slow in being allowed to be used here in Australia.</para>
<para>Nevertheless, having a centre for disease control may streamline some processes and in turn ensure a faster response to health matters when there is an urgency to do so. When COVID struck there was an urgency to do so, which was indeed one of the very criticisms that we often faced—that we were allowing vaccinations to be administered that had not been properly proven. I can recall getting briefings from our health experts in this country, and I still believe to this day that the advice provided by those health experts was that Australia had in fact taken sufficient precautions before allowing any of those vaccinations to be released.</para>
<para>I note that under this legislation the Centre for Disease Control will assume control over a number of existing health functions and that it will collaborate with world health organisations. In fact, the member for New England a moment ago talked about biosecurity issues that he has legitimate concerns about. But my view is that this legislation will allow much better liaison between each of the health teams in this country, and it gives the director-general and the advisory council direct access to all the information that is available so that they can make the best possible decision on behalf of the Australian people.</para>
<para>We live in a world where people travel more than ever before, where global trade sees millions of shipping containers move from one country to another every year. I was just looking up some statistics on that. I understand that each year around 250 million shipping containers are shipped from one place to another, and on any given day there are about six million shipping containers out there on the seas. We know that because of people travelling and because of goods being exported from one country to another the risk of disease infection spreading from one country to another is greater than ever before. Again, it is for reasons like that that we need the Centre for Disease Control, as a way of trying to manage the issues if a disease does come to our country. We have seen even in the past couple of decades things like HIV/AIDS and Ebola, as well as COVID, decimating some countries and certainly having an impact right around the world.</para>
<para>Setting up the Centre for Disease Control will of course cost money. I understand it's going to cost some $251 million over the next four years and about $70 million annually thereafter. My view is that, as with all health expenditure, the health costs of doing nothing are always much higher than spending the money up-front, being prepared and saving taxpayer dollars downstream, which is what will happen if we don't set this up and we go through another episode, as we did with COVID, where we saw the costs ballooning right out. Again, the member for New England touched on that and made that very point. So we don't want to do that again. We want to be in a situation where we can better manage an outbreak when it occurs.</para>
<para>I will finish on this point and use some examples to justify the point I'm about to make. Having a health system that the Australian people can have confidence in has been a core Labor value for decades. It has been a priority issue for the Australian people, a priority issue for the Albanese Labor government and a priority issue for the Minister for Health and Ageing, who is in the chamber right now. As a result of that, since 2022 we have seen a remarkable transformation of our health system in this country.</para>
<para>We have tripled the bulk-billing incentive, which was initially for pensioners, concession card holders and families with children. From 1 November that will be extended to all Medicare eligible patients, and I note that, previous to that, the coalition government had frozen the rebate for years. We've opened over 90 bulk-billed Medicare urgent care clinics, and there are more than another 40 to come. Labor has delivered cheaper medicines, with a script to cost Australians no more than $25 under the PBS. Again, this is the lowest, I think, since 2004. The cost of PBS medicines for pensioners and concession card holders has been frozen at $7.70 until 2030. We've established a network of 61 free walk-in adult Medicare mental health centres across Australia, and we're establishing 33 endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics across every state and territory.</para>
<para>Those are just some of the key matters, but there are a lot more, and I'm sure the minister for health can elaborate on those if he wishes to. The reality is that health is the one single issue that matters to each and every Australian, because at some stage in their life they will need to have access to our health system in one way or another. This legislation not only will directly impact on how we can manage another pandemic, should one occur, but, quite frankly, would also ensure that we better manage the economy as a result of what we saw from COVID, which had a devastating effect on so many Australians.</para>
<para>I commend the legislation to the House. I hope it is not delayed, because, personally, I'd like to see it kick off on 1 January 2026.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my friend the member for Makin for his thoughtful contribution to this bill, the Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025, and for his thoughtful contribution over many years to good health policy in this country. I want to thank other members who have contributed to the debate on the establishment of the Australian Centre for Disease Control. I want to acknowledge the genuine interest and thoughtful engagement from members of this House in relation to this important bill. I've appreciated the constructive dialogue and the feedback that has been shared, and I've met with a number of members to discuss the bill in detail. The level of engagement reflects the significance of the bill and the shared commitment to delivering an Australian CDC that will strengthen the country's capabilities. I share the members' interests in seeing the CDC become a lasting, trusted pillar of Australia's public health architecture.</para>
<para>This bill delivers on the government's promise to establish an Australian centre for disease control as a statutory agency within my portfolio, commencing on 1 January 2026. Establishing a transparent, trusted and independent CDC will strengthen Australia's public health capability, improve pandemic preparedness and safeguard the health and wellbeing of all Australians, not just in times of crisis but every day. The need for a national CDC has never been clearer.</para>
<para>The independent COVID-19 Response Inquiry found Australia went into the COVID pandemic with no playbook for the pandemic, limited readiness of the National Medical Stockpile and badly stretched aged-care and healthcare systems. The inquiry identified serious gaps in our national response to the pandemic. These included the absence of a central authority to provide consistent advice, fragmented data systems and outdated emergency planning. The message was clear: we must not allow our public health systems to fall into neglect or into short-term thinking.</para>
<para>The inquiry also spoke about the need to rebuild trust and maintain public trust. Trust in the health advice that informs governments when making decisions can have a significant impact on peoples' lives. The Australian CDC will bring the independence and, importantly, the transparency that the public rightly expects. It will make its advice to governments and the reasons behind the advice transparently available to the public.</para>
<para>Establishing a permanent Australian CDC through this bill will deliver on our commitment to create an independent agency that will help protect Australia from diseases and other public health threats. It ensures that Australia joins our international peers in establishing a permanent national centre for disease control. The Australian CDC will be an independent Commonwealth agency separate from the Department of Health. It will draw on the best scientific and technical expertise across the country and serve as a national leader and authoritative voice on public health, helping to set strategic priorities and guide responses to emerging threats.</para>
<para>The Australian CDC's initial priorities will focus on communicable diseases, pandemic preparedness and capabilities in environmental health and occupational respiratory diseases. Progressive expansion into areas such as chronic conditions will be considered following an independent review of the CDC's funding and operations in 2028. The review will assess the Australian CDC's effectiveness in delivering on its initial priorities and help inform a staged widening of its remit over time.</para>
<para>The Australian CDC will consult widely with public health experts, clinicians, academics and communities. It will engage closely with those with lived experience of health threats and response measures to inform its advice. This inclusive approach ensures that the CDC's advice is grounded in real-world impacts and is sensitive to the social, cultural and economic factors that shape health outcomes in nuanced ways across our diverse society. No Australian will be left behind.</para>
<para>The Australian CDC will complement, not duplicate, the work of existing government agencies. It will enhance our national capacity by providing high-quality, independent advice and improving access to timely, reliable data. It will support the Commonwealth and state and territory governments in planning for and responding to health emergencies. The Australian CDC will work closely with states and territories and tailor its engagement to meet the unique needs of each jurisdiction, ensuring that national coordination does not come at the expense of local relevance.</para>
<para>To ensure accountability, the Australian CDC will be led by a director-general who reports directly to the minister for health and is accountable to the parliament. Supporting the director-general will be an advisory council made up of members with deep expertise in relevant fields, including public health, clinical practice, economics, human rights, data, emergency management and communications. At least one member must be an Aboriginal person or Torres Strait Islander and must have expertise in the health needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, supporting our commitment to closing the gap.</para>
<para>Transparency is a cornerstone of this reform. One of the most powerful lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic is that Australians expect clarity in public health decision-making. The CDC will be required to publish the advice it provides to governments. This will help rebuild public trust, counter misinformation and ensure that communities and businesses have the information they need to act effectively during future crises. Data will be at the heart of the CDC's work. The COVID-19 inquiry highlighted a critical weakness in our pandemic response. Decisions were often made without sufficient evidence due to fragmented and inaccessible data. This bill addresses that gap.</para>
<para>The CDC will lead the development of a modern approach to national public health data that enables faster detection of risks, more consistent responses across jurisdictions and stronger foundations for planning. The CDC will use advanced data analytics to detect emerging threats and provide timely, independent advice. It will also streamline data-sharing across the Commonwealth and states and territories, supported, of course, by strong privacy safeguards. These data functions have been developed using a privacy-by-design approach, ensuring that transparency and individual rights are protected at every single stage.</para>
<para>This bill is the result of more than three years of policy development and public consultation. It closes the governance and data gaps that undermined our pandemic response. It reflects the input of key stakeholders. And it establishes a CDC that is built to deliver real, lasting impact. To ensure the CDC remains effective and fit for purpose, the government will conduct a legislative review every five years. This will allow us to monitor its performance, adapt to new challenges and ensure that the legislation continues to support the CDC's mission, particularly in improving the availability and use of public health data.</para>
<para>This bill establishes a permanent, evidence based institution to ensure that Australia is better prepared, more united and more accountable in the face of future public health threats. It is a long-overdue reform, one that honours the hard lessons of the past and builds a stronger, healthier future for all Australians. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Kooyong has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The honourable member for Mackellar has moved as an amendment to that amendment that all words after 'House' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Mackellar be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question now is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is the bill be read a second time.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:50]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>101</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abdo, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>38</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Venning, T. H.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, T. R.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.<br />Bill read a second time.<br />Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>110</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5), circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 5, page 8 (lines 14 to 22), omit the definition of <inline font-style="italic">public health matters</inline>, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">public health matters</inline> includes the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) health emergency management;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) health security;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) health protection;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) health promotion;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) preventative health;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) disease control;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) environmental health;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) the health effects of climate change;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) occupational exposures;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(k) injury prevention.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 11, page 16 (after line 25), after subparagraph (11)(h)(viii), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(viiia) bodies whose objects include mitigation of, and adaption to, climate change;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 78, page 63 (line 24), omit "5 year period", substitute "3 year period".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 78, page 64 (line 3), omit "5 year".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Page 64 (after line 12), after clause 78, insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">78A Biennial statement on health effects of climate change</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Within 6 months after the end of every second financial year, commencing two years after the commencement of this Act, the Minister must prepare a statement of activity that relates to the health effects of climate change including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) data and information collection, coordination, analysis, and dissemination relevant to the impacts on Australians' health of climate change; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) public education and awareness raising; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) planning and preparation for future health threats; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) development of health guidelines and standards; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) reports or materials published; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) emerging threats; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) reviews and learnings from past experience; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) the effectiveness of the Commonwealth's policies in reducing risks.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) A statement under subsection (1) is to be known as a <inline font-style="italic">Biennial Statement on Health Effects of Climate Change in Australia</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The Minister must cause a copy of this biennial statement to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 5 sitting days of that House after the completion of the preparation of the statement.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">78B Biennial statement on pandemic preparedness</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Within 6 months after the end of every second financial year, commencing in the year after the commencement of this Act, the Minister must prepare a statement of activity that relates to pandemic preparedness including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) data and information collection, coordination, analysis and dissemination relevant to Australia's pandemic preparedness; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) public education and awareness raising; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) planning and preparation for future health threats; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) development of health guidelines and standards; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) reports or materials published; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) emerging threats; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) reviews and learnings from past experience; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) the effectiveness of the Commonwealth's policies in reducing risks.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) A statement under subsection (1) is to be known as a <inline font-style="italic">Biennial Statement on Pandemic Preparedness</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The Minister must cause a copy of this biennial statement to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 5 sitting days of that House after the completion of the preparation of the statement.</para></quote>
<para>Amendment (1) refers to the definition of 'public health matters'. Each of the topics listed in the bill relates to forms of public health and harm, and it's clear and obvious that they should be the natural responsibilities falling within the scope of a well-defined and fulsome CDC. This amendment captures the additional harm of occupational exposures and the public health responsibility for injury prevention related to these. I note that the addition of public health exposures and occupational exposures has been supported by the Public Health Association of Australia, the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand and even the Australian Council of Trade Unions—a body with which the government may be familiar.</para>
<para>Amendment (2) refers to the functions of the director-general, which set out the centre's advisory role and the intersections with and coordination of bodies with health responsibilities within the CDC. The health effects of climate change are captured under the existing definition of 'public health matters' in this bill, but what is not captured is the importance of the Centre for Disease Control in providing integrated advice in a matter of national and global consequence. These amendments aim to position the CDC as an authoritative and valuable contributor to the understanding of and policy advice on climate change impacts on public health, particularly in the absence of any other national body which currently has this focus.</para>
<para>Amendments (3) and (4) will ensure that the first statutory review of the act will be undertaken within the first three years—and every five years thereafter. The centre is an essential public health authority; we all agree on that. Scrutiny of the establishment and its functions at the earliest opportunity will ensure that it meets public expectations from early in its course.</para>
<para>Amendment (5) will introduce mandatory reporting on matters of national importance, the health effects of climate change, and pandemic preparedness. Its purpose is to inform. That should be a core responsibility of the Centre for Disease Control. It will ensure accountability and transparency of the centre's activities and the whole-of-government preparedness for public health emergencies. Even this weekend, we've seen that they are on the immediate agenda, with elephant seals on the Heard and McDonald islands being affected by bird flu. The next pandemic could be months away—or even less time that that. We need to have reporting requirements which are focused on attention to and resourcing of priority areas. Amendment (5) will provide transparency around government approaches to matters of national importance. It will encourage the culture of science, expertise and public trust that we need, and it will safeguard the core purposes of the Centre for Disease Control.</para>
<para>The reports will relate to two specific areas of public health which are of national importance. The report on pandemic preparedness will ensure we have whole-of-government preparedness for public health emergencies by bringing together information on activities across a range of agencies with functional responsibilities such as research, by making sure we have the appropriate medical stockpile that we need for pandemic preparedness and by ensuring we have appropriate facilities for vaccine production and for emergency management. The process of reporting could identify potential gaps and will provide assurance to stakeholders and the general public of our nation's capacity to respond appropriately to health emergencies.</para>
<para>The report on the health impacts of climate change will ensure we have an appropriate level of resourcing over time and that the body of knowledge around climate change impacts is developed to meet the challenges of the coming decades. A high level of visibility and understanding of this area of public health will better inform climate adaptation and mitigation strategies across all agencies and all levels of government.</para>
<para>A mandatory reporting regime will strengthen the centre's core purpose. It will safeguard the centre's role as a trusted source of scientific knowledge serving the national interest. And so I commend these amendments to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kooyong for her long engagement on this question, a debate to which she brings many, many years of experience. I genuinely thank her for that.</para>
<para>As members know, including members on the crossbench who have taken a deep interest in the bill's progress and the debate leading into its introduction, the Senate committee of inquiry into this bill reported on Friday. We're going through that report. There's significant overlap between a number of amendments the members of the crossbench are proposing in the bill today and the Senate inquiry materially. I have a lot of sympathy for a number of measures contained in some of these amendments. I want to address a couple of them, though.</para>
<para>We don't support what I understand to be the impact of the member for Kooyong's amendment in relation to occupational health and safety. As I'm sure the member knows, the interim CDC has already assumed responsibility for things like dust diseases and the establishment of a registry in this area. We do see a role for the CDC in managing the public health impacts of poor occupational health and safety, but the government's view is that Safe Work Australia is still the proper place for the development of policy and standards and for enforcement in relation to occupational health. But, certainly, we are keen for my portfolio through the CDC to do things like manage the emerging public health impacts associated, for example, with silicosis and other areas of public health.</para>
<para>I have a great deal of sympathy for the remarks the member has made in relation to the climate health impacts. I've been an advocate in this area for many years, as a spokesperson for the Labor Party on climate and since shifting to the health portfolio as well. That will be a piece of work for the CDC.</para>
<para>We don't support the detail of the amendment the member for Kooyong has proposed today, although I suspect there will be an ongoing debate about that, and a number of other matters the member has raised, as this bill progresses, as I hope it will, to the other place. I want to ensure members on the crossbench, as we continue to engage around the passage of this bill through the other place, that I am keen to continue an open dialogue with members of the crossbench in this chamber as the government reaches a final position in relation to some of the amendments in the Senate.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:08]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>12</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>75</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abdo, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move amendment (1) circulated in my name.</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 78, page 63 (line 22) to page 64 (line 12), omit the clause, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">78 Review of operation of Act</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Minister must cause an independent review to be undertaken of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the operation of this Act during the 5 year period beginning at the commencement of the Act; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the operation of this Act during each subsequent 5 year period.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The review must be conducted by an expert panel comprised of 3 members appointed by the Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Each member of the expert panel must have experience in at least one of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) public health;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) clinical practice;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) economics;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) human rights;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) health data and statistics;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) emergency management;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) communications.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) A member of the expert panel must not be any of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a current employee of the Commonwealth public service;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a current member of the Advisory Council;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) a current or former member of the Commonwealth Parliament;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) a current or former employee or executive of a registered political party.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Timing of review and Minister to be given report</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The expert panel must be appointed by the Minister within 6 months after the end of the 5 year period to which the report relates.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) The review must be completed and the report submitted to the Minister by the expert panel within 12 months of the panel's appointment.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Minister to table copy of report of review and response to review</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the review to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) The Minister must cause the government's response to the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within three months of the report being tabled.</para></quote>
<para>I moved this amendment circulated in my name because it's important. This amendment would establish best practice for the statutory review of the CDC act, improving the independence and integrity of the review process. It would strengthen public trust in the CDC and its operation.</para>
<para>As it currently stands, the statutory review requirement in this legislation is not strong enough. In fact, I'd say it's weak. It makes feeble stipulations about who is able to undertake the review, limited to a requirement that they cannot be employed by the CDC. Well, obviously, that seems like a pretty basic requirement! Neither does it guarantee the independence, impartiality or relevant expertise of the reviewer. I have moved an amendment to fix this so that the government and all Australians can be confident that the CDC is operating effectively, as it's intended and as I know the minister intends it to be.</para>
<para>I am heartened that the minister has indicated that he will look seriously at recommendations coming through the Senate inquiry. I hope this is one of the recommendations that he will see and take seriously, because it is a good faith amendment.</para>
<para>Impartiality, transparency and rigorous review are all things that we fundamentally expect in our healthcare advice, and we should expect no less from the CDC. We're seeing right now in the United States what happens when health advice becomes politicised. This is a clear warning to Australia—in fact, it's a warning of biblical proportions—not to let the same thing happen here.</para>
<para>As I said to the minister earlier, we don't legislate for the here and now alone. We don't legislate for the good faith minister that we have with us here and now. I say that genuinely. We have to legislate to prevent what's happening in the United States from ever happening here. By rejecting amendments that safeguard the CDC's independence, the government truly risks undermining trust in this vital institution from the very start. Legislate right and legislate now to make sure that we protect against any risk.</para>
<para>My amendment would require the five-year statutory review of the CDC act to be independent and undertaken by an expert panel. Members would have relevant and related experience to comprehensively understand the CDC's operations and importance. To ensure impartiality, they must not be on the CDC advisory council. They must not be current employees of the Commonwealth public service, current or former member of the Commonwealth parliament, or current or former employees or executives of a registered political party. The reasons for that should be obvious to any thinking member of parliament. They are obvious to the public.</para>
<para>We must protect the CDC from vested political interests, now and into the future. Politics has absolutely no place in best practice health advice, and my amendment ensures we keep it at arm's length. I've already given you the example of what's happening in the United States. This is not a theoretical concept. This amendment will improve the timeliness and transparency of the review. The report must be completed within 12 months of the panel's appointment, tabled in parliament within 15 sitting days, and the minister's response must be tabled within three months. This is a sensible, non-controversial amendment, and it does not burden the government, the CDC or the review process.</para>
<para>I also support the amendments of my colleagues the member for Kooyong, around scope and remit, and the member for Mackellar, to enhance the governance of the CDC—and together these suite of amendments come forward with good faith and with, I must say, decades and decades of commitment to health in this country. The CDC will support public health prevention and response for pandemics, disease outbreaks, preventive health and the health effects of climate change. This is a major responsibility. We must be assured the agency operates as intended and delivers the highest quality of health advice.</para>
<para>Australians deserve a CDC that is independent, transparent and trusted. Safeguarding the independence of the review process gives us confidence and gives the people confidence. We must get it right from the very start. I call on the minister and the government more broadly to consider these amendments seriously with the intent to which they are put and safeguard the precious CDC that we're legislating for.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Indi be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:24]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>11</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>64</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abdo, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 10, page 15 (lines 9 to 11), omit subclause (3), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The Minister must not appoint a person as the Director-General unless:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Minister first appoints a selection panel consisting of at least 3 persons for the purposes of assessing whether a candidate is suitable for appointment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the independent selection panel has advertised the appointment, conducted interviews and shortlisted at least 3 candidates for appointment on the basis of the following criteria:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) appropriate expertise;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) qualifications or experience in public health matters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) integrity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) opportunities for promoting diversity in the public sector; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the independent selection panel has provided to the Minister a comparative assessment of the 3 shortlisted candidates against the criteria in paragraph (b), and a certification statement indicating that they are eligible for appointment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) that person has been shortlisted for the appointment by an independent panel in accordance with paragraph (b).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 11, page 16 (after line 19), after subparagraph (h)(v), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(va) bodies whose objects include the prevention and management of occupational disease and injuries;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 11, page 17 (after line 3), after paragraph (j), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ja) promoting public health research through:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) maintaining close relationships with key public health research entities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) providing advice to government grant making entities on research priorities for public health matters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(jb) building and enhancing expertise in relevant public health expertise and workforce capacity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 29, page 28 (lines 11 and 12), omit the clause, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">29 Chair of the Advisory Council</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Minister must appoint an Advisory Council member other than the Director-General to be the Chair of the Advisory Council.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Clause 30, page 28 (line 25) to page 29 (line 10), omit subclause (4), substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Process for appointment</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The Minister must not appoint a person as a member to the Advisory Council unless:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Minister first appoints a selection panel consisting of at least 3 persons for the purposes of assessing whether a candidate is suitable for appointment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the independent selection panel has advertised the appointment, conducted interviews and shortlisted at least 3 candidates for appointment on the basis of the following criteria:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) appropriate expertise, qualifications or experience in at least one of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(A) public health matters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(B) clinical practice;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(C) economics;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(D) human rights;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(E) data and statistics relating to public health matters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(F) emergency management;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(G) communications;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(H) any other field that the Minister considers appropriate;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) integrity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) opportunities for promoting diversity in the public sector; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the independent selection panel has provided to the Minister a comparative assessment of the 3 shortlisted candidates against the criteria in paragraph (b), and a certification statement indicating that they are eligible for appointment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) that person has been shortlisted for the appointment by an independent panel in accordance with paragraph (b).</para></quote>
<para>The amendments I'm introducing today are also made in good faith and will do four things. Firstly, they'll create an independent selection process for the appointment of the director-general and the advisory council. Secondly, they stipulate that the chair of the advisory council be a member of the council rather than the director-general. Thirdly, they expand the functions of the director-general to include both the promotion of research and advice to government on workforce capability. Lastly, they ensure consultation occurs with preventive health bodies.</para>
<para>A central objective of the Australian Centre for Disease Control is to guide independent, evidence based public health decision-making that builds and maintains public trust. While the creation of the Australian CDC as a statutory Commonwealth entity with clear lines of accountability delivers on this objective, public trust will absolutely hinge on the CDC's independence from political interference now and into the future. The politicisation of the US CDC, under the influence of health secretary Robert F Kennedy, has shown how misinformation and political pressure can undermine scientific leadership. Australia must proactively design safeguards to prevent similar vulnerabilities. My amendment to this bill would do this, so it's somewhat alarming that the way this bill is currently drafted means that the minister of the day will retain discretion over the appointment of the director-general. Again I say: let's establish this really important institution in a way that safeguards its integrity.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>117</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians deserve a government that will facilitate housing construction and homeownership. Homeownership is quintessentially Australian. It provides self-determination and traditionally has been the first step in a secure financial future. Homeownership is something that we on the coalition side of the House strongly believe in. Under this Labor government the great Australian dream is turning into a nightmare.</para>
<para>I note the recent resignation of the chair of Housing Australia last week, and I wish her well. But her departure confirms what we've been warning for months: Labor has presided over chaos, waste and dysfunction at Housing Australia. The departure of the chair raises more questions than the number of houses built by this Labor government. Under this minister, the agency charged with building homes has become a bureaucracy that builds excuses. Three weeks ago we exposed, in Senate estimates, a secret $24,000 governance report into wide-ranging issues at Housing Australia. The government is still hiding it. Taxpayers deserve transparency. Will the minister answer this: what did the governance report find, and when will you release it?</para>
<para>Labor is spending record sums of money to deliver fewer homes than the previous coalition government. Their aspirational target of 1.2 million homes is nothing more than a dream.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Braddon Electorate: Medicare Mental Health Centres, Rural and Regional Health Services</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week, along with Minister Emma McBride, we officially opened the Medicare mental health centre in Devonport, in the electorate of Braddon. This walk-in centre offers free mental health care for anyone aged 18 and over. It's open five days a week, with no appointment, no referral and no payment required. It's staffed with qualified mental health professionals, who can find the support that people need either on the phone, face to face or via the website. It's a warm, soothing environment, and as soon as you walk in the door you feel like it's giving you a warm hug.</para>
<para>These centres are a much-needed addition to my community. Following the soft opening the week prior to the official opening, the centre had 15 walk-ins. When I dropped in last week to say hello, they told me they'd had a further 10 walk-ins since the official opening. These are services which really matter in a community, particularly in regional communities like the one that I represent, and I look forward to a second Medicare mental health centre opening soon, in Burnie. This will provide services right across the two major centres within the electorate of Braddon.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is getting on with the job of supporting our regional communities with these very important services. Again, they provide a walk-in service, with no referral and no payment required. We are getting on with the job of helping people in our regional communities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wilcannia Weir</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I stood last week on the banks of the Darling River with a group of people who have been waiting a very, very long time for what is apparently a privilege: safe and reliable water. The people of the Central Darling Shire have been calling for a new weir at Wilcannia for more than 30 years. The community has patiently worked with successive state and federal governments through rounds of consultation and design, through delays and ultimately around a sudden and unacceptable change of direction. A design was agreed to by all back in 2022, with a great deal of community input. Then, with no consultation, the design was scrapped and a new one that was unacceptable to the people of Wilcannia was put on the table.</para>
<para>Originally, $30 million in joint funding from the state and federal governments was put forward. We're now looking at a project that's in excess of $100 million. There are many, many questions that need to be answered about the spending to date, the lack of consultation and the changes that have been made. But the most important thing of all is that we get this weir underway and completed as soon as possible.</para>
<para>A Barkandji man, Michael 'Cassidy' Kennedy, told me on the banks of the Darling this weekend past that the Barkandji people are river people. They need the water not only for sustenance and the basic needs of life but also to continue the critical connection that goes back thousands of years. Central Darling residents don't need more talk. What they need is action, and what they need is safe and secure water.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lalor Electorate: Schools</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The netball grand final and the AFL grand final are done, school is back for term 4, and we're just into the beginning of the Spring Carnival. So what is next? It's the VCE exams—that's what's next in the minds of most of the people in my community. Year 12 students across Victoria are going to sit their English expression exam tomorrow, and I want to wish all the year 12 students in the schools across my community the very best for the final step in their school journey. I wish them all calm and clear minds as they embrace the final opportunity to demonstrate their learning and their capacity, and I want them to remember that the pathways to their futures will be many and varied beyond the last days of year 12.</para>
<para>To their parents: please keep them fed and watered. That's what they need from you as well as your calm kiss and encouragement. To their teachers: thank you for your attention, for your care, for your dedication, for the hours you have spent preparing for their lessons—taking them through these things—and for the hours spent preparing them for these exams. I wish everyone in my community well in the VCE exams this year—the families, the students and the school communities that have wrapped themselves around them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>After asking hundreds of people their views on artificial intelligence while doorknocking in Wembley Downs on the weekend, I am proud to share the following contribution from young Curtin constituents Thomas Lenette and Minh Hoang, written for the Raise Our Voice program:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"Clankers." That's the new slur for AI and robots going viral online.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's a joke, but it's also a warning: young people are anxious, facing unprecedented uncertainty about job security and human relevance in an AI-driven future.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But young entrepreneurs and changemakers are also already using AI to solve thorny problems—improving healthcare, advancing sustainability, even sparking creativity.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">These stories prove AI's tremendous potential. But without clear direction, the risks are real: insecure work, unfair systems, and people left behind.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">So what do we need?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A national plan for AI that puts people first. We need ethical frameworks and strong regulation. We need policies that protect job mobility, alongside real investment in education and training so young people can work with AI, not against it. And we need smart safety nets for when jobs inevitably change.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The government's choices today will decide whether Australians are empowered or sidelined tomorrow. Dignity, purpose and human relevance must remain at the centre of our future workforce and the economy we will inherit.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In ten years, we don't want "clanker" to be a slur. We want it to be a joke we laugh at—remembering how we turned fear into progress.</para></quote>
<para>Thank you, Thomas and Minh.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bendigo Electorate: Bowls</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The 2025 bowls season has begun, and I recently had the opportunity to attend three different bowls clubs events in my electorate to mark the beginning of the season. On 19 September I attended Campbells Creek Bowling Club to see the grade 5 and 6 students participate in their last game with the seniors. We had helped them with a volunteer grant to go towards purchasing junior bowls. On 20 September I joined the Harcourt Bowling club to celebrate its 70th anniversary, only to learn that it was the Campbells Creek and Maldon bowls clubs that had started that club. The very next day, on 21 September, I visited Maldon Bowling Club to officially help open their season. It was great to join the club and their special player—I wish to give a shout-out to Grace.</para>
<para>Bowls clubs are a great way for people in the regions to engage and connect with others. There are 21 in my electorate, from all the way up at Rochester down to Kyneton, and only one of them is attached to gaming. That's 20 community based clubs that provide a safe and inclusive space for all ages. They become the gathering point for major milestone events in families. They are quite often the community space for big events. They create an atmosphere in lots of our small towns like Maldon and Harcourt—just to name a few. They are community hubs that engage people in a fun and inclusive way. Good luck for the rest of the season.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BOELE</name>
    <name.id>26417</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia's environment laws are broken, and we know this categorically from the Samuel review, finalised five years ago this month. Over three years ago, the then minister for the environment and water said the laws don't work to protect the environment or smooth the way for sensible development, all against a backdrop of accelerating environmental destruction. The current laws don't work—not for nature and not for business. On that, there is consensus. But the laws must work for both.</para>
<para>Where there is a tension between the two—where approval decisions could go either way—nature must win out. If nature doesn't win the battle in our environmental laws, it will not win it anywhere else. To achieve that, I implore the government to put in place this one safeguard. To reduce ministerial discretion in decision-making, we need an independent, statutory environmental protection agency with the ability to make decisions free from ministerial influence. It's ministerial influence that, time and time again, has resulted in the interests of industry being preferred over nature. Industry has a powerful voice, earned through decades and decades of political donations. Nature is voiceless. This week is Youth Voice in Parliament Week. For years, the youth of Australia have been using their voices so clearly, begging us to protect our natural environment and the climate which sustains it. This week, let's do what we must and let's listen to them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women's Health</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The 48th Parliament, a parliament where 55 per cent of the caucus are women, demonstrates that, when women have a seat at the table, we are able to get things done that support all Australians. Today I gathered with women from the federal parliament to celebrate that, on 1 November, a range of medications that support women's reproductive health will be listed on the PBS. In addition to increasing access to reproductive health medications, the federal government has established 33 women's health clinics.</para>
<para>Just two weeks ago I was pleased to visit the Young Street medical clinic, operated by ForHealth, to celebrate the reintroduction of this clinic as a fully bulk-billed clinic open seven days a week. This clinic ensures Dunkley residents can access health care when they need it. Since becoming fully bulk-billing on 18 August, the clinic has had 7,500 bulk-billed appointments, saving the local community $270,000. This clinic also operates Evoca Women's Health clinic, which provides reproductive health support to women. I am proud the Albanese Labor government is investing $8.5 billion into more bulk-billing, and it's heartening to see that the Young Street medical clinic is doing its bit to ensure my community get the care they deserve when they need it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roads</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While no-one in this chamber wants to see a single death on our roads, dropping the default speed limit of unmarked regional roads to 70 kilometres an hour is not the solution. Don't get me wrong—the regional road toll is appalling. Two-thirds of all road crash fatalities occur in the regions, yet only 30 per cent of the population live there. But a default speed limit of 70 kilometres per hour will cause more problems than it solves.</para>
<para>I ask you, Deputy Speaker: can you imagine facing hundreds or thousands of kilometres at 70 kilometres an hour and doing that regularly if not all day? The economic loss to transport companies and flow-on effects on agricultural and mining companies will absolutely impact on productivity, and the change would certainly frustrate mums and dads who simply want to take their kids to school or to sport. Regional Australians are not mugs. There are many ways to reduce the road toll, and key among them is road maintenance. When I speak to Mallee constituents, they just want the government to fix the bloody roads.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to read a speech by a student from my electorate of Melbourne. It was submitted as part of Raise Our Voice. Raise Our Voice mobilises young people through education, campaigns and communities to transform politics and policy. This week, members of parliament are amplifying the voices of young people by reading a speech written by a person under the age of 25 who lives in our electorates.</para>
<para>I was excited to be a part of Raise Our Voice, and it was difficult to select from the speeches to read because there were so many and all of them were so good. The speech I am about to read is by Bastian, aged eight. Bastian wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Use less money.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Only spend it on things we need such as fixing our roads, sick people and making school better!</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I care about the environment!</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I think we should only use natural materials to make energy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For example don't use a petrol car, use an electric car!</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I think taxes should go down.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Some people work so hard to be able to pay for the things their family needs.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">While supporting the homeless and struggling, people also help them to get a job they can do.</para></quote>
<para>Thank you and well done, Bastian.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kempsey Children's Services</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I take the opportunity to shine a spotlight on a much-loved Kempsey institution, Kempsey Children's Services. The fantastic, community led early education service recently celebrated their 60th anniversary, and it's not hard to understand why they have been so successful for so long. I went there some 50 years ago, and, while some things have changed, the core of their model has remained the same. They truly put the community first. They treat their children, the parents and their wonderful staff with an exemplary level of care and respect. While centres across the country are struggling to find and retain staff, leading to available childcare places becoming limited despite a centre's true potential capacity, KCS has bucked that trend. We need more childcare providers like KCS in the regions. With the ever-increasing pressures on the cost of living, the urgent need for both parents to actively earn income has never been greater. We, as government representatives, must highlight successful organisations like Kempsey Children's Services, actively support their growth however we can and learn from their success. We must create policies that foster the growth of not only individual centres but the sector as a whole. I'm proud to have a gold-class centre like KCS in my electorate, and I look forward to another 60 successful years in our community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>World Pharmacists Day</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On 25 September the world, including Australians, marked World Pharmacists Day, an opportunity to recognise and to celebrate the important role of pharmacists in meeting the healthcare needs in our communities right across the country. This year, the theme was 'Think health, think pharmacy first'. It highlights how community pharmacists are stepping up to deliver more health care than ever before, helping communities access care faster, closer to home and more equitably. Across the country, pharmacists are transforming how patients access care, and Australia has more than 6,000 community pharmacies, with almost 500 million patient visits per year. They are one of the most trusted professions.</para>
<para>On the Central Coast, I have met many outstanding local pharmacists who provide exceptional health care. One pharmacist who I have had the privilege of working with closely is Trent Playford. Trent is an experienced and community driven pharmacist with nearly 20 years in the profession. He's the owner of the West Gosford pharmacy and Priceline Pharmacy Kincumber, where he leads a team committed to delivering innovative, patient focused health care right across the Central Coast. I want to thank Trent and his team for all of their fantastic work in our community, and I want to thank all of our hardworking pharmacists on the Central Coast and across Australia. The work you do improves health outcomes and saves lives.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Net zero comes at a cost, and we need to talk about it. In doing so, I want to be very clear: I am criticising policy settings, not criticising the phenomenon of climate change. I am not questioning the science; I'm questioning the government. Despite constant requests of the government asking what the full cost of net zero might be, they've refused to answer at every opportunity. However, some very smart people at the University of Queensland, the University of Melbourne and Princeton University have got together and come up with some costs. They have come up with a cost estimate of between $1.2 trillion and $1.5 trillion just for us to get to our 2030 targets. That's a lot of money. It's very hard to picture what that looks like. To break that down, it's $20 billion a month, every month. What does that look like? At $2.5 billion per hospital, which is our going rate, that gets you eight hospitals a month. I'd ask Australians across the country: Are you seeing ambulance ramping? Are you seeing services out of date? Are you seeing overcrowding? These are things that can be fixed if we get our priorities right. When we started down this path of net zero, I think we all believed that it was free—that there was no cost. But there is a cost. It's significant. It's $20 billion every month. It's time we started asking more questions about what the real cost of net zero is.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Maribyrnong Electorate: Greek Australians</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tomorrow, 28 October 2025, we join Greeks, Greek Australians and friends around the world in celebrating Ohi Day, a day that stands for courage, conviction and pride. Eighty-five years ago, Greek Prime Minister Ioannis Metaxas said a single powerful word to the Italian ultimatum: 'Ohi!'—'No!' That moment sparked Greece's heroic resistance and inspired people everywhere to stand firm in the face of tyranny. But Ohi Day is more than history; it's a living symbol of the Greek spirit—resilience, unity and the determination to stand tall in the face of adversity.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Maribyrnong we see that spirit every day. Greek Australians have helped shape our suburbs, schools and small businesses for generations. From John and Susie Rerakis at Athos Cafe in Strathmore to Father John Frangos at the parish of St Dimitrios in Moonee Ponds, the contributions of Greek Australians are woven through our community life. Our local sporting clubs, community organisations and cultural events ensure this proud heritage endures, strengthening bonds of family, friendship and faith.</para>
<para>Yesterday I had the great pleasure of attending GreekFest in Moonee Ponds. Now in its third year, this festival stands as a vibrant expression of Greek culture, showcasing music, dance, art and cuisine, as well as the remarkable community spirit that defines Maribyrnong. Across Maribyrnong the story of Greek migration is one of enterprise, generosity and belonging, a legacy that continues to enrich— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia is a wealthy country, and that's because of the hard work of previous generations. But there are no guarantees that our wealth will continue. In fact, the Harvard Economic Complexity Index tells us that we are going backwards. The index places the industrial capabilities and know-how of a country at the heart of its growth prospects, and it asks a basic question: how big is your engine? The Harvard index makes it clear that Australia has a big growth problem. Our engine is too small, and it's getting smaller. We are in the bottom third of 149 countries. We rank 105th, and over the last 30 years we've been sliding down the rankings. In 1995 we ranked 62nd. Today we rank 105th. We're outperformed by the USA, China, the UK, Canada, Singapore, Japan, Germany, Italy and Sweden. Even New Zealand, at 68th, is ahead of us by 37 places.</para>
<para>So what's happened over the last 30 years? Very simply, our advanced manufacturing capability in this country has collapsed. We don't make complex things of value at scale anymore—things like cars, for example. We Australians have a choice to make, and it's an urgent one: do we want to make things again? If so, we have to make power cheap again. We have to take back control. That means killing net zero. That means getting power prices down. That means investing in manufacturing. And, to those on the other side, that means putting Australians first.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations: Secure Transport Industry</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JORDAN-BAIRD</name>
    <name.id>316021</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to stand in solidarity with the Transport Workers' Union and the Victorian and Tasmanian cash-in-transit workers currently taking industrial action to demand better pay and conditions. These workers move cash around, meaning our communities can access their own cash from ATMs and banks and get the right change from retailers. Cash in transit is one of the highest-risk jobs in the transport industry, with workers subjected to daily abuse and attempted robberies, and the take-home pay for this cohort of workers has stagnated. There has also been a loss of conditions and decline in safety standards. The cash-in-transit industry is in crisis.</para>
<para>Around 1.5 million people still use cash to make more than 80 per cent of their in-person payments. Without a sustainable funding model, cash in Australia faces the very real risk of extinction. But the big banks don't prioritise our cash-in-transit workers, and workers are rightly fed up. Right now, Linfox is refusing to negotiate with workers—workers who are fighting for pay parity across Armaguard, Prosegur and Point to Point. I'm a strong supporter of members of our community having access to their own money, and it's time that we valued our workers in the same way we value access to cash. This is about fairness, safety and respect—principles that should underpin every Australian workplace. Labor fights for all Australian workers and always will.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forestry Industry</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One group of workers Labor don't fight for is forestry workers. We have the federal government making bad decisions, but, unfortunately, we have a lot of state Labor governments making bad decisions as well. We've had a recent decision by the New South Wales Labor government that is basically going to shut down most of our forestry industry in New South Wales.</para>
<para>A lot of people don't understand the difference between a plantation and selective hardwood harvesting. Plantations are what they are. You can see them, they're felled at the end, and they make a lot of difference. There's no biodiversity there, just a monocrop. With hardwood harvesting, we go in and select, very scientifically, using environmental best practice, and take hardwood timber out of there—very sustainable and very renewable.</para>
<para>This area has been locked up because of, supposedly, koalas. I'd be happy to show anyone opposite that, where the place is locked up, what happens is lantana grows, weeds grow and the koalas leave. There's scientific proof of that. They literally can't move around on the ground, because of all the weed growth. It also causes these areas to be a tinderbox. You stop having the industry keeping fire trail access open. They do a lot of weed harvesting, but that all stops as well. The trails become more dangerous because of the fire danger that they are.</para>
<para>The last thing is we still need the hardwood, so guess what we do as a country because those opposite don't let us use our own? We import it all from countries who don't have the same environmentally sustainable standards we do. Shame!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Short, Ms Taylee</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to celebrate another champion from the Hunter. The Hunter's very own Taylee Short was recently crowned Miss Ultimate of Australia 2025 and also took out Miss Ultimate People's Choice at the Ultimate International Miss Australia event. What an incredible achievement, Taylee. You have worked your backside off for this, to get there.</para>
<para>From the training to the preparation, the outfits and the appearance, Taylee put in the hard yards. She went with her best foot forward, pushed harder than ever and made sure she was ready in every way. That determination has paid off in the best way possible—bringing home the crown. This is more than just a personal win for Taylee; it's another reminder that the Hunter doesn't just compete but leads. We are the best region in the country, producing champions in every field. Whether it's sport, community, business or, in this case, pageantry, Hunter locals rise to the top through hard work, resilience and pride in where they come from.</para>
<para>Taylee has done herself and her family proud, and she has done us in the Hunter proud. On behalf of our community, I offer you the warmest of congratulations, Taylee, on what you achieved. We look forward to seeing what you can achieve next. Cheers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Amendment (Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'We will remember them'—four simple words but four incredibly powerful words in the 'Ode of Remembrance'. There's no use-by date. It's not 'we will remember them when it's convenient for the Labor Party', but this prime minister, the veterans minister and the entire Labor Party are putting a use-by date on 'we will remember them'. Under legislation that everyone on that side voted for, we will only remember them when their heroic actions fit into a convenient timeframe of, say, the last 20 years.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You can speak up now, Treasurer; you didn't speak up when the bill was going through the House! Labor's plan to place a time limit on reviews under the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal means Teddy Sheean and Richard Norden would not have got a Victoria Cross. That's what it means, Treasurer! The tribunal has said this bill, the Defence Amendment (Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal) Bill 2025, takes away the rights of ADF personnel and veterans. The tribunal warned this will detract from the integrity of the Defence honours and awards system.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we will always remember them. I urge the Labor Party to do the same. Labor was very quick to politicise the campaign for Teddy Sheean to receive a VC. Under this legislation, it wouldn't have been possible.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">A government member interjecting</inline>—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You've found the voice now! Does anyone there have the courage to stand up and fight this bill? Why is Labor putting a use-by date on 'we will remember them'? Why is Labor taking away the rights of Australian Defence Force personnel— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Renewable Energy</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is solar. Don't be afraid. Don't be scared. It won't hurt you. It's solar, built and installed—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will put down the prop.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by the hardworking Australians that live and work in the electorates of those opposite. It's solar, powering our future—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Hasluck will pause and remove the prop immediately; otherwise, she won't be here for the remainder of her speech.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is plugged into the 100,000 new home batteries made cheaper thanks to Labor. Solar and other renewables are creating jobs. Solar is rewiring the nation, maintaining our competitive advantage in energy for the century ahead, and yet those opposite are afraid. They're afraid of each other, afraid of progress and afraid of innovation. They're afflicted by a malady you might call 'solarphobia'. While the coalition is stuck in the dark, Australians are getting on with it, putting solar on our roofs, batteries in our homes and savings back in our pockets. We are a solar nation. Under Labor we are delivering cleaner, cheaper, Australian made energy, built by Aussie workers and backed by Aussie resources, powering our economy now and into the future.</para>
<para>Australians understand what the opposition cannot: the energy transition isn't coming; it's already here.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing orders, the time has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>123</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Collard, Mr Stanley (Stan) James, OAM</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House of the death on 13 August 2025 of Stanley James Collard OAM, a former senator. Stan Collard represented the state of Queensland from 1975 to 1987. As a mark of respect to the memory of Stan Collard, I invite all present to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Honourable members having stood in their places—</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the House.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>123</page.no>
        <type>MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Temporary Arrangements</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House that the Prime Minister will be absent from question time this week, as he is attending ASEAN, the East Asia Summit and APEC. I will answer questions on his behalf.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>SHADOW MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>123</page.no>
        <type>SHADOW MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the information of honourable members, I present a revised shadow ministry list reflecting changes announced on 13 October 2025.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The document read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">SHADOW MINISTRY</para></quote>
<para>Each box represents a portfolio. Shadow cabinet ministers are shown in bold typ e.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and concerns shocking revelations exposed by journalist Nick McKenzie. Under Labor's hand-picked CFMEU administrator, corrupt and criminal CFMEU officials have been meeting with underworld figure Mick Gatto and violent abuser John Setka, as well as receiving secret bribes.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for McEwen will leave the chamber under 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for McEwen then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition will begin her question again. When I say there are not to be interjections when people are asking questions, I mean it. There are consequences for actions; everyone should understand that by now. The Leader of the Opposition has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and concerns shocking revelations exposed by journalist Nick McKenzie. Under Labor's hand-picked CFMEU administrator, corrupt and criminal CFMEU officials have been meeting with underworld figure Mick Gatto and violent abuser John Setka, as well as receiving secret bribes. Does the minister still have full confidence in Mark Irving?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. I want to make a statement really clearly: the government has absolutely no tolerance for criminal conduct or misbehaviour in the building industry. That is why our government took the strongest possible action to put the CFMEU into administration. This is very difficult work. I have spoken with the administrator on numerous occasions about just how difficult this work is, and he is absolutely committed to cleaning out this union. I want to go through some of the work he has already been doing.</para>
<para>He has taken significant steps to either remove or accept the resignation of over 60 staff, over two-thirds of whom were in leadership positions or organisers. He has developed a national code of conduct and a statement of expectations for all staff. He's made it absolutely clear where the union stands when it comes to gifts, organised crime, menacing behaviour and what the consequence will be. He has received more than 500 complaints through the anonymous whistleblowing website, which triages complaints, some of which are dealt with internally and many of which are referred to authorities. He is working with the joint agency working group that consists of the AFP, the Fair Work Commission and police forces across all jurisdictions. And he is doing his job. He is working very hard and has achieved more in 16 months than the ABCC did in the whole time it was— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and the United States of America</title>
          <page.no>126</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. What were the key outcomes of the Prime Minister's recent meetings with the United States?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. Last Monday the Prime Minister had a three-hour meeting with President Trump in the White House. The meeting was warm. It was engaging and it was constructive. The two leaders spoke about our longstanding and extensive defence relationship. They spoke about the increasing investments by Australian superannuation funds in the United States in the context of a much broader economic relationship between our two nations. And they signed a landmark critical minerals framework agreement which commits our two countries not only to extracting and mining critical minerals and rare earths but also to their downstream processing so that we are actually creating refined product in America and Australia. That is so important to giving choice and competition to the global market.</para>
<para>This is an $8.5 billion agreement. To get things rolling, there is an immediate $200 million investment in the Alcoa-Sojitz gallium recovery project in Western Australia and a $100 million investment in the Arafura Nolans rare earths project in the Northern Territory. These are just two examples of the kind of sector we can build here in Australia, which is great for our industry and also so important for our national security. President Trump reaffirmed America's ongoing commitment to our AUKUS partnership, which matters to us and is very much in the strategic interests of the United States, and he acknowledged the government's investment in the Henderson Defence Precinct. Specifically, he committed to the provision of Virginia class submarines in the early 2030s.</para>
<para>From speaking with the Prime Minister, I know that he very much enjoyed the time he spent with President Trump. There was a connection and a warm rapport, which was evident for all to see. That is a very good thing, because to have that kind of personal relationship at the very highest level is something that is very much in Australia's national interest.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Industrial Relations</title>
          <page.no>126</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Last year, when asked whether he would deregister the corrupt and criminal CFMEU, the Prime Minister said, 'Nothing will be taken off the table.' Under Labor's handpicked administrator, CFMEU officials have been caught taking bribes and running around with bikies and gangland figures. Will the minister finally deregister the CFMEU, as the coalition has called for, or is the only thing off the table this government's courage to stand up to corrupt, criminal unions that bankroll the Labor Party?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. Of course, if she had been following the debate as to why we were putting the CFMEU into administration, she would know that the strongest possible action you can take, in terms of transparency and ensuring that there is accountability, is to put the CFMEU into administration. We compare that to what the coalition did, which was stand up an ABCC which really was a toothless tiger. If we look at some of the incidents and allegations that are being exposed at the moment—they happened under the ABCC and, indeed, the coalition's watch.</para>
<para>We on this side of the House are taking this issue of stamping out corruption in the construction industry with the seriousness and the dedication it deserves. It is about getting the regulators to work together. It is about getting the police to work together. It is about an administration that is so transparent it reports twice to the parliament every single year. It appoints investigations and tables those investigations or puts them on its website. It puts its financial records out for the world to see. This is the type of transparency we need.</para>
<para>If those opposite think this is an easy task then they are naive. It has been demonstrated by the shadow minister, who today made some absolutely baseless claims about the administrator—a barrister with the standing of Mark Irving. It was absolutely a disgrace. While they on the other side might want to play politics with this issue, we take it seriously. We want to see a construction industry free from corruption. We are dedicated to the task and we will work until that task is done.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>United States-Australia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths</title>
          <page.no>126</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Resources. How is the Albanese Labor government working with allies and trading partners to secure a reliable supply chain of critical minerals and rare earths?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hunter for his excellent question. Last week I was honoured to be in the cabinet room of the White House to witness our prime minister and the President of the United States of America sign the landmark critical minerals framework agreement between Australia and the United States. This historic agreement positions Australia alongside our friends in the US in a global effort to reduce dependency on unstable supply chains and to safeguard the technologies that keep our economies and our democracies strong. The framework agreement directly strengthens the investment in Australia's critical minerals sector by providing an architecture for Australian producers to access US financing. The agreement mobilises billions of dollars in financing in Australia and America to turbocharge a $13 billion pipeline of projects across Western Australia, Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales and the Northern Territory. There will be more to come; this is just the beginning.</para>
<para>What does that mean for ordinary Australians? It means more jobs. It means more jobs for more Australians in the resources sector. This framework recognises critical minerals for what they are—not just commodities but strategic assets essential to the national security of Australia and the United States of America. By partnering with the US we're positioning our critical minerals industry at the centre of global efforts to develop secure, resilient supply chains for the technologies that power modern defence and clean energy systems.</para>
<para>I want to be really clear. The US-Australia critical minerals framework did not emerge overnight. From the very day the Albanese Labor government came to power four years ago, we have sought to grow the critical minerals and rare earth elements mining and processing sector. The Albanese Labor government has made the single largest investment in the Australian resources sector of any government. There's the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive of $17 billion; the Critical Minerals Facility now at $5 billion; and Resourcing Australia's Prosperity, which will allow Geoscience Australia to supercharge our exploration capabilities—that's a $3 billion investment. The NAIF has invested $735 million in critical minerals projects, and we are implementing a $1.2 billion Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve.</para>
<para>This is the work we have been doing since day one so that when we got to the White House on Monday, with the Prime Minister sitting alongside the President, we were able to deliver for the Americans and for the Australian people and jobs in resources. It is indisputable. No government has done more than the Albanese Labor government for the resources sector and the critical minerals and rare earth elements mining and processing sector of this country.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Believe it.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>127</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Acknowledgement</title>
          <page.no>127</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that in the southern gallery today are members of the Australian Defence Force participating in the parliamentary exchange element of the 2025 ADF Parliamentary Program. On behalf of the House, I extend a warm welcome to you all and thank you for your service to our nation. Also, there are year 11 students from Cootamundra High School, in the Riverina electorate—welcome to you all.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>127</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>127</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. The median house price in capital cities across Australia has increased by $35,000 in the last three months as a result of the government's five per cent house deposit scheme. Modelling suggests this policy could increase house prices by 10 per cent in the first year alone. Will you admit that the Labor government is driving unsustainable house-price growth for the benefit of big banks and at the expense of everyday Australians?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. We've got a housing crisis in our country that's been cooking for 40 years. The simple problem is that, for that entire period of time, our country has not been building enough homes. That's why the $43 billion package, the historic package, that our government is implementing is focused primarily on building more homes for Australians. We're doing that by building 55,000 social and affordable homes—something the Greens political party did everything to stop us doing. We're building 100,000 homes for first home buyers and we're trying to push towards this national aspiration of building 1.2 million homes over a five-year period.</para>
<para>This is the main game: building homes for Australians. But what the Greens political party are really saying to us here is that, while we are doing that hard work of addressing the fundamental issues facing our country on housing, we are not going to do anything to help the young people of today, and that is a position that our government fundamentally disagrees with. One of the main issues that young people talk to all of us parliamentarians about is the challenges they face getting into the housing market. We've got lots of people in this parliament representing Sydney seats. In your electorates, the average young couple is saving for 11 years to get into the property market for the first time. Because of our expansion of the five per cent deposit program, we are bringing that back to two or three years. This is really meaningful support for people.</para>
<para>The Greens have got a lot to say about this program, but I want them to look the people who use it in the eye and talk to them about their issues, because we now have 190,000 Australians who have been supported into their first home because of our government's program—190,000 Australians that the Greens political party are saying should never have got government support to buy their first home.</para>
<para>The Greens played a disgraceful act of politics over the last three years. They came into this parliament day after day after day, saying that they were advocating for people who need housing support and at the same time doing everything they could to work with the Liberal Party to block more housing, to block housing support for first home owners—even to block better support for renters, which is one of the things they talked about most. I hope that in this new term of parliament the Greens have the opportunity to turn over a new leaf. We want to work across the political parties to get better action for Australians. That is exactly what the Australian people expect us to be doing.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>128</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. How are the Prime Minister's recent meetings in the United States and in Malaysia, for the ASEAN Summit, providing opportunities for economic growth and job creation here at home? What has been the response?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. Today the Prime Minister is in Kuala Lumpur, attending the ASEAN leaders meeting and the East Asia Summit, and later in the week he will be in Korea attending APEC. East Asia and South-East Asia are very important to Australia's national security, but it is utterly evident that the Asia-Pacific region and South-East Asia, specifically, are completely central to Australia's modern economic story. What we see in terms of activity is that East Asia is the fastest growing area in the world. ASEAN, on its own, by 2040 will be the fourth-largest economy on the planet, and three-quarters of Australia's trade is derived from the APEC region. When our prime minister is over there, he is fighting for Australian jobs right here.</para>
<para>That is what he was doing last week when he met with President Trump, where the closeness and the trust in our relationship with America were so palpable. We have a deep economic relationship with the United States. America remains our largest two-way investment partner. Today, Australia has the lowest American tariff of any country in the world. That's why all of this should be above partisan politics. In turn, it is why, when Labor have been in opposition, we have always wanted the coalition government of the day to succeed. Historically, that's actually been the case for the coalition as well—until now, where it has been absolutely obvious that those opposite have been completely desperate for our government to fail in the management of our relationship with the United States.</para>
<para>That is now their prerogative, but those in the gallery should understand that what this represents is a historic departure for any major party of government in this country in terms of its support for the Australia-United States relationship. There have been some voices of maturity on the other side, but that definitely does not include the Leader of the Opposition. This is one of the clearest demonstrations that, right now, the Liberals are just broken. Australia deserves better. So, while those opposite are busy eating themselves, we will get on with the serious business of managing these critical relations which are central to our economic prosperity and which help keep Australia safe.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union</title>
          <page.no>128</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. The minister has said the government's administration of the corrupt and criminal CMFEU is 'the strongest available action'. But CMFEU officials have been meeting with underworld figures such as Mick Gatto and violent abuser John Setka as well as receiving secret bribes. Why has the Albanese government done nothing to address this crime and corruption, and is it because, under the Prime Minister's Labor leadership, those opposite have received almost $7 million in CMFEU donations?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll hear from the Leader of the House on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In terms of impugning motives, it doesn't get too much stronger than what just happened there, and the question should be ruled out.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We've had this issue before regarding the same topic, so we'll just get the member to withdraw the last part of that question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tim Wilson</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I withdraw the last part of the question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hawke</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you want the question again, Mr Speaker?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think we know the question. It wasn't the question that was out of order; it was just the last statement.</para>
<para>Government members: Withdraw.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He's done that.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Isaacs, I don't need your assistance when the member followed my direction. It's completely unnecessary. The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the shadow minister for his question. From the outset, I reject the assertions that were in that question. But what might help him is for me to go through some of the actions that both the administrator and the regulators have taken during the 16 months that the administration has been in place.</para>
<para>First, I would note that, as I previously said, the administrator's difficult work to date has been to remove or to accept the resignations of 60 staff, over two-thirds of whom were in leadership positions. Of course, the administrator has made it absolutely clear where the union stands on expectations of staff, and the new code of conduct has been very clear about what the consequences will be. The administration has received over 500 complaints under its anonymous whistleblowing process, and it has been working very closely with the joint agency working group that consists of the Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission, various police forces and other regulators in various jurisdictions. The administrator has also made specific referrals of criminal conduct to the Victorian and New South Wales police forces and referrals of contraventions of the industrial legislation to the regulatory agencies. The administration has established an integrity unit. It engages investigations and barristers to conduct inquiries into defined matters. The administration has commissioned leading independent corruption expert Geoffrey Watson to undertake multiple detailed investigations and has taken appropriate action based on those reports, referring many matters to regulators and law enforcement.</para>
<para>In addition to the work that the administrator is taking, our regulators and law enforcement agencies are doing their job. The Fair Work Ombudsman is undertaking significant compliance and enforcement action in relation to misconduct in the construction industry by both unions and employers. As of 12 September 2025, the Fair Work Ombudsman is progressing 19 investigations in relation to multiple branches of the Construction and General Division of the CFMEU. There's Operation Rye, which was established to assess information and coordinate investigation of allegations related to the criminal offending of the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, and the AFP is chair of the joint agency working group. So, quite frankly, to suggest that our government is not doing anything when it comes to crime and corruption in the building industry—I can reassure this House that we have done more in our term in government than those on the other side. We are taking this seriously. The shadow minister might want to pretend he's in university politics, throwing around accusations; meanwhile, we are the adults in the room and will continue to be so. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>129</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government helping Australians earn more, keep more of what they earn and retire with more? What other approaches is the government being asked to consider?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Dunkley for her question. In her relatively short time in this place, she has been a real champion for the working people of her community and our country. This week in the parliament, our payday super reforms will help ensure that more Australians get paid their super when they get paid their salary. It's about making sure that workers' super is paid and paid on time. It's another proud Labor reform, which will mean more super for workers. That's our goal and that's what we are delivering.</para>
<para>It's not the only important change we're making to strengthen our super system. We legislated the objective. We increased the super guarantee four times to reach 12 per cent. We expanded the coverage of the performance test. We've aligned the financial reporting with public companies. We've got new mandatory service standards, reforming the retirement phase. We're paying superannuation on paid parental leave for the first time. And now our changes to better-targeted superannuation concessions and the low-income superannuation tax offset will mean that 1.3 million Australians will get more super when they retire.</para>
<para>These changes will make the superannuation system fairer from top to bottom. They mean a better deal and more super for low-income workers, and that's what those opposite are really objecting to, because, when they apply their narrow, extreme right-wing ideology in government, workers in this country don't get a look-in. We saw that for the best part of a decade. They are always looking to undermine, diminish and attack superannuation because they know that super is a proud creation of this side of the House.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my left are going to cease interjecting. The Leader of the Nationals—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Under this Labor government, Australians are earning more because we got real wages growing again. They're keeping more of what they earn because we're cutting taxes three times. They will retire with more as well because of these changes. Those opposite want the workers of this country to earn less, to keep less and to retire with less. They haven't learned a thing from the last election. They haven't changed a bit. They are divided, they are divisive and they are in disarray. But this side of the House is delivering for the working people of this country, and that's the difference. Nowhere is that clearer than in our efforts to make our super system stronger, fairer and more sustainable, and, because of those efforts, more workers will have more super when they retire, and the system will be fairer, from top to bottom.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Chalmers</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Ask me a question about it.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Treasurer is warned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Journalist Nick McKenzie, who was uncovering the truth about corruption in the CFMEU and its links to organised crime and gangland figures, has endured home intrusions in a chilling act of intimidation that has no place in this country. Australians deserve to know the truth. What specific action has the government taken to protect journalists who are just doing their jobs to expose CFMEU corruption?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question was not particularly under the minister's portfolio, in terms of the action that you asked. So it should be really directed to another minister, but if the minister's happy to answer part of the question?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm happy to answer part of it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Sure. The minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, I thank the member for his question. I think every member of this House would have absolutely no tolerance for intimidation of journalists or, indeed, anyone in this country. I am going to speak to whistleblowing for people coming forward about the CFMEU, because that does fall into my responsibilities. Not only are there protections in the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act; our government specifically built in whistleblower protections in the administration. And, of course—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, I was asked about whistleblowers and protections for Australians, so I am answering that question. There are specific provisions in the administration that protect people coming forward. I would make one point, though. In my conversations with the administrator, the action that he is taking ensures, first and foremost, the safety of his staff. That is the seriousness with which he is undertaking his work, the safety of his staff, and of course that extends to all Australians. We take this job seriously. We are taking this with the level of attention that those opposite have not done.</para>
<para>There is no place for violence in this country. There is no place for intimidation of anyone—journalists or any Australian worker. We are committed, as I've said on numerous occasions, to getting the job done—stamping out violence, criminality and corruption from the building industry. We are committed to doing just that.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Artificial Intelligence</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Attorney-General. What's the Albanese Labor government doing to protect Australian creatives when it comes to artificial intelligence?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. A core Labor value is supporting Australian voices, Australian culture and Australian stories. And, of course, this government has two great champions for the arts in our Prime Minister and in the Leader of the House and Minister for the Arts.</para>
<para>Artificial intelligence presents significant opportunities for Australia and our economy. However, it's important that Australian creatives benefit from these opportunities too. Australian creatives are not only world class but also the lifeblood of Australian culture. We must ensure that the right legal protections are in place. The Albanese government has consistently said there are no plans to weaken copyright protections when it comes to AI. Some in the technology sector have called for the introduction of a broad text and data mining exception. Under such a proposal, artificial intelligence developers would be able to use the works of Australian creators, for free and without permission, to train AI systems. The government stands behind Australia's creative industries. That is why we have ruled out a text and data mining exception, and that's to provide certainty for Australian creators.</para>
<para>We welcome the support that has been expressed right across the creative industries. Annabelle Herd, the CEO of ARIA, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It's absolutely a critical step in the right direction.</para></quote>
<para>She also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is a win for creativity and Australian culture, including First Nations culture, but it's also a win for common sense.</para></quote>
<para>Australian Society of Authors CEO, Lucy Hayward, said: 'People deserve to be paid for their work. It's as simple as that.' That's what the government has confirmed with this announcement. Australian singer-songwriter, Holly Rankin, better known as Jack River, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We are on the right side of history on this—people should be paid for their work.</para></quote>
<para>And the great Kate Ceberano said, 'It's a day to celebrate.' I couldn't agree more.</para>
<para>Work is underway to ensure that Australia is prepared for future copyright challenges emerging from AI. That's why I've made the decision to reconvene the copyright and AI reference group over the next two days. It will have a renewed focus on three priority areas: firstly, encouraging fair, legal avenues for using copyright material in AI; secondly, exploring opportunities to clarify how copyright law applies to material generated through the use of AI; and, thirdly, examining avenues for less costly enforcement of copyright infringement. We encourage the tech industry and the creative sector to come together now and find sensible and workable solutions to support innovation while ensuring creators are fairly compensated.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Innovation. Minister, how many direct jobs will be lost with the possible closure of NRG Gladstone Power Station in 2029?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll start the question, but, as it was directed to a question about energy, I think it would be more appropriately answered by the minister for energy. We have been very clear that the energy sector is going through a transition as ageing coal-fired power stations close down. Unlike those opposite, we've got plans in place to drive investment into the sector. When they were in government, gigawatts of capacity closed down without a suitable replacement. And who suffered the most? Heavy industry in this country. That uncertainty drove power prices, as they had 23 different energy prices that placed Australian manufacturing under huge pressure. We're combating that right now with our Future Made in Australia agenda, which is driving investment into manufacturing because we're focused on it. Unlike those opposite, who cheered manufacturing going offshore, including the automotive industry, we're focused on cheap energy to drive manufacturing.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hogan</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a point of order on relevance. That was a very tight question. There was no preamble in the question, and I ask you to direct the minister back.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member is entitled to raise a point of order on relevance, as any other member is. He's allowed to do that. The Leader of the House, on the point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question was sufficiently tight that it was directed to the wrong minister. The minister representing is giving some general remarks, as is appropriate, but has indicated that a question about energy would ordinarily—when you're working out where a question about energy might go, the energy minister is usually the option.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Chifley is warned. I'm just going to do this respectfully so that everyone is entitled to raise their points of order. On the point of order by the Leader of the House, the member for Page.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hogan</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I go back to the point of relevance. We can go into the semantics, but the minister chose to take the question. The minister chose to take the question, so I ask him to be relevant. There was no preamble. It was a very tight question. If he's going to take it, answer it.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I guess the issue is that, when we are asking questions to ministers, it needs to be directed to the person who has responsibility for that.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The question was about a specific number, which the member for Flynn is chasing or seeking, to do with the policy. The minister can conclude shortly, and so, if the other minister wishes to address the actual figure that I think the member for Flynn is after, we'll do it that way. But it will assist the House if questions can be directed to the minister responsible, and then no-one will be in this position—including me. Minister, if you can wrap up, we'll then give the energy minister a go.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll conclude by saying we're providing more certainty to workers than those on the opposite side ever did. I invite Mr Bowen to speak.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question, and I'm glad he hasn't been sharing his views about man-made climate change with the House for a change.</para>
<para>In answer to the honourable member's question, there are about 200 direct employees at the Gladstone Power Station—there are others employed on a contract basis and indirectly—and obviously that is a significant number to the people of Gladstone. But also this is a decision taken by the owners of the Gladstone Power Station, as they have announced, and that is in keeping with the normal protocols.</para>
<para>I would make this point: those opposite are strongly supporting having coal-fired power stations open for longer and sweating the assets to see them last longer. That is the biggest threat to reliability in our energy system today. Do you know why? Because just today we've had two units out at the Callide Power Station, which the honourable member would know well. They're not operating. We have totally unplanned outages across our national energy system at 3.4 gigawatts of coal fired power—not planned; not maintenance. Coal-fired power stations that are working and then all of a sudden break down—that is the biggest threat to the reliability of our energy system. In turn, that is a threat to energy prices, because that sees prices spike, and that, in turn, is the biggest threat to industrial jobs in Australia. Those opposite don't understand the opportunities of our energy system and the need to modernise it now, not decades in the future when nuclear might become available.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>132</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATT SMITH</name>
    <name.id>312393</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to support regional communities and make sure they are better connected to the rest of Australia? Has there been any opposition to the government's approach?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Good question!</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Leichhardt for the question, and for his continual advocacy for regional Australians. I also note the interjection of the member for Riverina, who might feature in my answer a little too.</para>
<para>I'd like to add how incredibly proud I am to be the member for Ballarat and represent my regional community. In fact, this Labor government represents more regional electorates than any other party in this place—from Cairns to Launnie, from Ballina to Beverley and the many places in between.</para>
<para>We know how crucial it is that regional Australians have access to aviation to access the care they need, to see family and to pursue opportunities. That's why it was very encouraging to see the announcement last week that the sale and implementation deed to purchase Rex Airlines has been entered into by Air T and the administrators. It's a very positive step towards bringing Rex out of administration. I'd like to thank the many hardworking public servants who have worked tirelessly over the past year to try to get this done. We still have a way to go, but it is a very positive development for the future of Rex Airlines.</para>
<para>As this process continues, our priority as a government will remain on protecting regional Australians and their access to these critical services. It's why, when Rex first went into administration, we stepped up to provide a guarantee of regional flight bookings for Rex customers and a loan facility to the administrators to ensure that Rex could continue to fly throughout this process. At the time, this was not wholly supported, with members opposite calling our support for Rex 'a bridge too far' and telling us our support to extend administration so that we could get a solution was 'kicking the can down the road until after the election' to try to hide somehow that Rex would not survive.</para>
<para>But I'm very hopeful that our strong position to support regional Australians will pay off, and our position has been supported by the sector and others. The Australian Airports Association said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This is a significant development for regional aviation and provides much-needed certainty for communities that rely on essential air services.</para></quote>
<para>The Chair of Airlines for Australia and New Zealand said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I thank the Australian Government for its tenacity in keeping Rex flying and thereby protecting the airline's vital regional and rural links.</para></quote>
<para>And the member for Riverina said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I had many conversations with Catherine King and Anthony Albanese about this—</para></quote>
<para>I can confirm that that is the case—</para>
<quote><para class="block">and I thank the government for their work in supporting Rex.</para></quote>
<para>I acknowledge and thank the efforts made by some of those opposite to support the government in our work to bring Rex out of voluntary administration. We'll continue to support the process—we're not quite there yet—and work to ensure regional Australians have access to reliable, affordable and available flights now and into the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health</title>
          <page.no>133</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. Australia's hospital system is in crisis. State budgets aren't big enough to properly fund public hospitals, and health insurance isn't working for the private sector. People are suffering needlessly and, far too often, dying prematurely. Only the Commonwealth has the financial and policy heft to turn things around. When will the federal government finally act to fix things? Let's face it; just negotiating another funding agreement is hardly bold reform.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question and recognise his passion over many years in this place for better services in his part of Tasmania in particular but the country more broadly. He knows there is a lot of pressure on our health and aged-care systems after a decade of cuts and neglect, after a once-in-a-century pandemic and with very significant demographic pressures. Like the member's state, my state is slightly older than the rest of the country. We're feeling those pressures more than most, but we are seeing it right across the system.</para>
<para>I respect the member's passion for this area, but I don't agree with a lot of the suggestions in his question. I have to say that this week is a particularly weird week for the member to suggest this is not a government focused on bold reform. This is the week when we are debating a bill to introduce a centre for disease control. This is the week when the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care is rolling out a whole range of new measures to deal with the neglect that has been there for so long around women's health. This is the week when we are introducing an entirely new aged-care system under the leadership of the Minister for Aged Care and Seniors, and, at the end of this week, we will be introducing and rolling out the biggest-ever investment in bulk-billing in the history of Medicare.</para>
<para>The member for Clark knows more than anyone else in this chamber the benefit of investment in bulk-billing. Since we first tripled the bulk-billing incentive two years ago, the member for Clark's electorate has seen the biggest increase in bulk-billing of any electorate in the chamber, a 14 per cent increase, and more will come after Saturday. In Tasmania, we have seen the benefit of our policies to get more doctors and nurses into the system. The member for Clark has two urgent care clinics in his electorate, taking pressure off the hospitals that his question talks about.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause. The minister was asked about what bold reform is, and he is going through it, but I will hear from the member for Clark.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Wilkie</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance, the question went very specifically to the crisis in our hospital sector, not urgent care clinics, not GPs, not the other things that the minister has listed.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>But the question also contained, 'What is happening with funding?' and went to the position about being bold. I know what your angle is; that's the question at the end. It is pretty relevant for the minister to outline those, but I will ask him to be directly relevant. He may perhaps have more information about the funding agreement.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I do. I think in his heart of hearts the member for Clark knows our health and aged-care system is an integrated ecosystem. When bulk-billing is not working and when people are paying too much for medicines, they don't fill the scripts their doctors have said are important and they don't go to the GP when they need to, and the member for Clark knows that means they end up in hospital far more regularly than they should. That's why addressing pressure in primary care—making medicines cheaper—is not just good for the hip pocket; it's good for the health of millions of Australians who get the health care when and where they need it in the community.</para>
<para>There is no better example of our reform and its connection to the hospital system than our 90 urgent care clinics—two of which are located in the member for Clark's electorate—which have already seen more than two million Australians, most of whom say that if they weren't able to go to that clinic they would end up at the emergency department. I know the member for Clark is passionate about this. I agree there are pressures. I entirely reject the idea that we're not a government of bold reform. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>134</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JORDAN-BAIRD</name>
    <name.id>316021</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering for aspiring first home buyers? What are the risks to this approach?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for Gorton for her question. She is an extremely powerful voice for housing action within our caucus. She's coming from a very particular perspective. Not only does she represent one of the great growth corridors in Melbourne—housing is a massive issue in her constituency—but we have here a member of a younger generation who faces housing opportunities radically different from those of their parents and grandparents. She has talked to me again and again about her desire for our government to step in and do every single thing we can to help young Australians get better housing opportunities.</para>
<para>That is why our government has made an historic expansion for homeownership support for young people. Since 1 October, every single first home buyer around our country is eligible to get into the housing market with a five per cent deposit and our government's backing. This was, of course, an election commitment made by our prime minister at our campaign launch. We said that we'd do it by 1 January, and guess what? We've delivered it three months earlier than we promised—delivery, delivery, delivery! If our government sees that we can deliver support to Australians faster than we promised, we will make it happen.</para>
<para>This policy is already having life-changing impacts for people who live in the member for Gorton's electorate, in my electorate and the electorates of every person around this chamber. We have now helped 190,000 Australians get into their first home because of our expansion of this scheme. It is amazing. I talked before about the situation for young people who live in Sydney.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm getting snide remarks from those opposite, but I'd encourage them to listen to their constituents, because they're giving our parliament a clear message. They want more housing support, and that's what our government is giving them.</para>
<para>We know that a young couple in Sydney was having to save for about 11 years for a home deposit. That's a young couple who are well into their 30s who are still paying off someone else's mortgage rather than their own. Our expansion to this program will bring that back to two to three years. This is really meaningful change for the young people around this country. On housing, as with other issues, Labor is getting on with the job of delivering what we promised. The coalition are just getting on each other's nerves. They're much more focused on writing their own leadership manifestos than they are about having anything meaningful to say.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause and the manager will raise his point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hawke</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance, the minister just said she's moving to other matters, so if she's finished her answer she should sit down.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House on the point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's always been the case that, in any question, there can be moments of 'compare and contrast'. That's a principle long established, including by Speaker Smith.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The manager raises a point of order. I understand the concept here. She wasn't asked about alternative policies or alternative approaches, so she will have to make sure that her remarks are relevant. So the manager is correct. She's straying into a sledge on the opposition—a comment about the opposition—that wasn't part of the question. So we'll just get her to return to the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The point that I'm making is that we've got a government on one side of the House that's focused on delivery of our absolutely massive housing agenda, and we have an opposition that is absolutely in the wilderness, without a single sensible thing to say about one of the most important issues facing our country. The Australian people deserve a government focused on delivery, and that's what they are getting from us. There are 190,000 Australians in their own home because of our government's program, and there will be thousands more to come as we expand that program from 1 October.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>134</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question goes to the Treasurer, and it follows the Treasurer's humiliating backflip on his super tax proposal. Can the Treasurer advise the House whose rejection most influenced his decision to dump his tax? Was it (a) the coalition, (b) industry experts and economists, (c) the Prime Minister—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Macnamara will leave the chamber under 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Macnamara then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He's not to mention members by their name, particularly when interjecting on a question. I don't know why this is so difficult. When people are asking questions, don't interject. There are a lot of intelligent people here.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, in the gallery there are! We're going to return to order, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition will ask his question like anybody else, without any interjections.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question goes to the Treasurer, and it follows the Treasurer's humiliating backflip on his super tax proposal. Can the Treasurer advise the House whose rejection most influenced his decision to dump his tax? Was it (a) the coalition; (b) industry experts and economists; (c) the Prime Minister; (d) his own Labor colleagues and Labor luminaries Paul Keating, Bill Kelty and Peter Beattie; or (e) all of the above?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I will make it really clear to the House that I didn't take the advice of those opposite. I didn't take the advice of those opposite, and that's because the question comes from the same people who took to this year's election a policy to increase income taxes on every single one of the 14 million taxpaying workers in this country. They are the same people who object to smaller tax concessions for half a per cent of people in super and who wanted to jack up income taxes for 100 per cent of the 14 million taxpaying workers. That's because, as I said before, what they really object to is more super for more workers. They don't like super. They don't like workers. We know that from their almost decade in office. They are always trying to undermine and diminish and come after the superannuation that the working people of this country need and deserve for a decent retirement. Also, don't forget that the question comes from the same guy who wanted to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars to build nuclear reactors, to push power prices up, not down. He asked me who I would take my advice from. I don't take my advice from the shadow Treasurer. I really couldn't be clearer about that.</para>
<para>He can trouble himself all he likes with the political scuttlebutt and the internal far-right politics being practised by those opposite. The difference between the shadow Treasurer and me, as Treasurer, is I'm here for the outcomes. I'm here to deliver for the working people of this country. I'm here to deliver an increase in real wages. I'm here to deliver income tax cuts. I'm here to deliver more super for more workers so they get the decent retirement that this guy would deny them.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When you ask a very broad political question like that, you're going to get a broad political answer. If the Treasurer can return to the question, that would be helpful to the House.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para> The point I'm making is that this side of the House works through issues in a collegiate, considered and methodical way. We do what we can to find the best way through and, overwhelmingly, to deliver for the working people of this country, who send us here to represent them and their interests. The shadow Treasurer is here for a little pat on the head at 'Sky after dark' or a little tickle on the tummy on page 13 of the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline><inline font-style="italic">.</inline></para>
<para>We are here for the outcomes, because it's the outcomes that really matter. We're here to deliver for working people, and that's what we're doing. Because of our efforts—and this is what really offends them—more Australians are working, more Australians are earning more, more Australians are keeping more of what they earn, and more Australians will retire with more. That's because we are delivering. They are divided, they are divisive and they are in disarray—and that's the difference.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! When the House comes to order, we'll hear from the member for Moreton.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>135</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How is the Albanese-Labor government delivering cleaner, cheaper and more reliable energy, and why is unity so important in getting that done?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my honourable friend for the question. She's a great representative for the Sunshine State in this House. The people of the Sunshine State understand the benefits of renewable energy, with their massive take-up of solar energy and their very strong take-up of cheaper home batteries. The people of Queensland are well represented in the 100,282 households that have put in a cheaper home battery since 1 July. More than 100,000 households and small businesses have taken up this option. What that means is that we have now installed two gigawatt-hours of storage, and we have increased the capacity of Australia's home batteries, just since 1 July, by a full 50 per cent. This is a big boost to the grid, and it's a big boost to the opportunities for those households to reduce their energy bills.</para>
<para>On Sunday, the Attorney-General and I were in Rouse Hill visiting Kenny and his family. He told us he has reduced his energy bill, with his cheaper home battery, from $250 a month to $10. The reason the Attorney-General and I went to Rouse Hill is that that postcode, 2155, is the postcode with the highest take-up of cheaper home batteries in Australia. In Western Sydney, I know the Attorney-General is excited about that; I'm not sure about the member for Mitchell, who shares that postcode with the Attorney-General. But I know the Attorney-General is a very strong supporter of giving her constituents better choices to reduce their bills and emissions.</para>
<para>I'm asked by the member what the importance of unity is in this approach. It is very important. This side of the House is unified in our approach to reducing emissions in our pathway to net zero, and in our determination to provide cost-of-living relief to Australians as we do so. In the meantime, those opposite have been having a completely normal one over the parliamentary break. We've had the member for New England do the National Party the greatest service he's ever given them by announcing he's leaving. He might be off to One Nation. A former leader of a federal political party going to One Nation—what could possibly go wrong? We've never seen that before! It could be said they deserve each other.</para>
<para>The leader of the National Party responded to this. He said: 'Well, we won't be focused on Barnaby Joyce if he goes to another party. We'll be focused on ourselves. I don't think Australians like people who change their parties. The reality is that we will focus on ourselves.' I always try and find a bipartisan note at the dispatch box, as is well known, and I agree entirely with the leader of the National Party! They are focused on themselves. They are not focused on the Australian people. They are not focused on the economic opportunities that Australia sees in net zero. They are not focused on reducing bills for Australians in the outer suburbs and regions of this country. They are focused on their internal politics. It's the National Party interests, not the national interest. They are focused on themselves, and they continue to be.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>United States-Australia Framework for Securing of Supply in the Mining and Processing of Critical Minerals and Rare Earths</title>
          <page.no>136</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BOELE</name>
    <name.id>26417</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Last week, Australia and the United States signed the critical minerals framework agreement. Responsibly exploiting our natural resources, securing offtake and diversifying trade partnerships are worthy aims. But the owners of these resources, the Australian people, are left in the dark about how they will benefit. If the PRRT for other resources is anything to go by, this deal won't be making much from royalties that we collect. What we do know so far is that two companies will receive significant Australian government investment. When can Aussie taxpayers expect more detail about how the deal works for them?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question, and she is right in articulating that the landmark critical minerals framework agreement that was signed by the Prime Minister and the President last week is genuinely in Australia's national interest—is 'worthy', in the terms of the member—and will absolutely have a huge impact on the Australian industry and, through that, the Australian people. Critical minerals are one of the great opportunities that our nation has. We have one of the five largest resources of critical minerals and rare earths in the world. The opportunity not only to mine those critical minerals but to process them represents one of the great opportunities for our manufacturing and our industry this century. That's because of the particular items which use critical minerals and rare earths, which are simply fundamental to the modern economy.</para>
<para>Now, what we have faced globally is that, whilst we have been engaging in the mining and extraction of critical minerals and rare earths, the processing of them—a sector which would involve significant employment and significant industrial development in this country—has proven much more difficult, given the structure of the global market. That's why we have put in place a number of measures, such as the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive and the Critical Minerals Facility, to demonstrate that the Australian government is there supporting the critical minerals sector to engage in that kind of work. That represents a $28 billion investment in this sector by our government since 2022. In saying that, I would add that, when it comes to the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, we did that in the face of the opposition of the coalition, who talked about that as 'billions for billionaires', completely failing to understand what this represented for Australian industry.</para>
<para>It is difficult to do this on our own, and that is why the agreement that we signed with the United States last week, between the Prime Minister and the President, was so important. What this does is bring together the might of the US government, along with our own, in terms of being able to genuinely support these industries going forward. The benefit for the Australian people is manifest. What this will see is significant numbers of downstream processing jobs in this sector, which currently are not there in the Australian economy, and that will be an enormous advantage for the Australian— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women's Health</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering more choice, lower costs and better health care for Australian women?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Corangamite for that question. I wish the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care was able to give the answer, under standing orders, because she is leading such terrific work in this area. She and I joined literally dozens of female members of our caucus earlier this morning to announce the latest measures in our women's health agenda. Having a government that is 57 per cent women, as health minister you are under no illusion about the truism that you cannot be serious about strengthening Medicare without getting serious about women's health.</para>
<para>For too long we have heard that women have been getting a raw deal from the PBS and from Medicare in far too many areas. For more than 30 years there wasn't a new oral contraceptive pill listed on the PBS; for 30 years there was not a new endometriosis medicine on the PBS; and for 20 years there was no new menopause hormone treatment on the PBS—not because they didn't exist; they did. They were widely used. It's just that no-one bothered putting them on the PBS, meaning that women had to pay top dollar for cutting-edge clinical treatment.</para>
<para>We changed that earlier this year, with an $800 million women's health package. You have seen already, in just 12 months, three new oral contraceptive pills—Yaz, Yasmin and Slinda, widely used by women—three new menopause hormone treatments and two new endometriosis medicines at affordable PBS prices. Already, half a million Australian women have filled 1.2 million cheaper scripts, saving tens of millions of dollars at the pharmacy counter and, just as importantly, getting the dignity, respect and recognition that our system should always have been giving them. But there is more that we can do.</para>
<para>This week, we will list a fourth new contraceptive—this one a ring—which will give women even more affordable choices around contraception. On Saturday, new Medicare services will become available to allow women to access long-acting reversible contraceptives, like implants and IUDs. We think 300,000 women every year, because of that measure alone, will save around $400 to access that different type of medicine. Affordable, accessible contraception is not a luxury. It's not a discretion. It is essential health care.</para>
<para>After the further cuts to medicine prices that we'll see on 1 January, Australian women for the first time will have access to the widest possible range of contraception for no more than $100 a year. More choice, better access, lower costs—that's what we're delivering as part of our Strengthening Medicare agenda.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Marles</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>137</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Department of Parliamentary Services Annual Report</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Presentation</title>
            <page.no>137</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Pursuant to section 65 of the Parliamentary Service Act, I present the annual report of the Department of Parliamentary Services for 2024-25.</para>
<para>Document made a parliamentary paper.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>137</page.no>
        <type>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Report No. 2 of 2025-26</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a corrigendum to the <inline font-style="italic">Performance audit (Auditor-General report No. 2 of 2025–26)</inline><inline font-style="italic">: Effectiveness of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission's regulatory functions</inline>.</para>
<para>Document made a parliamentary paper.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>137</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>137</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>138</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Public Works Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>138</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's third report of 2025, referral made in July 2025, and I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's third report for 2025—the first for the 48th Parliament. This report considers the proposed fit-out of new leased premises at 7 London Circuit, Canberra City, Australian Capital Territory, by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts. The total cost of delivery for the proposed fit-out is $32.5 million. The fit-out proposed by the department will use a precinct model to provide for the long-term accommodation needs of its staff. The leases of the two existing office sites, 111 Alinga Street and 62 Northbourne Avenue in Canberra City, are due to expire in June 2026, and both buildings are at the end of their economic lives.</para>
<para>A precinct model of two existing buildings close to each other is proposed to provide a long-term accommodation solution for the department. The lease period for the new premises will be for 15 years, with an option to extend by an additional five years. As 7 London Circuit has been fully refurbished and is available for an immediate fit-out, it was selected by the department as the centrepiece for the two-building solution. The scope of the works reflects the different styles of working within the department and respects inclusion and accessibility requirements. The fit-out design is predominantly for open-plan, modular workstations with break-out areas and support facilities. The fit-out will also include a variety of workstations, settings, security services, multifaith and multipurpose rooms, staff amenities and equality of access for staff with disabilities.</para>
<para>After conducting an inquiry into the proposed works, the committee is satisfied with the proposal and acknowledges the comprehensive staff consultation process undertaken by the department. The committee encourages the department to continue to prioritise accessibility preferences to ensure the fit-out accommodates the diverse and ever-changing needs of staff. The committee recommends that it is expedient that the proposed works are carried out.</para>
<para>I thank the Public Works Joint Committee secretariat for all the work that they did in supporting the committee and putting together the information required for the committee to do its job. I commend the report to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>138</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7369" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>138</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member who was to speak in continuation is not here, so we'll move on. The question is that the amendments (1) to (5) moved by the member for Mackellar be agreed to.</para>
<para>Question negatived.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>None of the remaining movers are here, so we'll proceed.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that this bill be agreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [15:20]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>99</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abdo, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>24</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Venning, T. H.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.<br />Bill agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>139</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>139</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7372" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>139</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the members who contributed to the debate on the Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. This bill makes sure the Australian CDC has responsibilities under existing laws to protect our health more effectively. The Australian CDC will be independent and science driven, using advanced data to spot health risks early and give the best advice to government. It's about making sure we're ready to respond quickly and smartly to health threats.</para>
<para>To do this, the bill updates the Biosecurity Act 2015 so that the CDC's director-general will decide which diseases we monitor at our borders. This means we'll focus on the diseases that pose the biggest risks to Australia. The National Health Security Act 2007 will be updated so the Australian CDC can coordinate disease data from across the country. It will help keep the list of notifiable diseases up to date and act as Australia's main contact for international health emergencies. The CDC will also take charge of managing security-sensitive biological agents, which is another step in keeping Australians safe.</para>
<para>The bill amends the National Occupational Respiratory Disease Registry Act 2023 to give the Australian CDC responsibility for the National Occupational Respiratory Disease Registry, helping us better understand and prevent respiratory diseases. The bill supports the Australian CDC in managing important public health information and upholding strict safeguards to protect certain sensitive information through amendments to the Freedom of Information Act. The bill repeals the act that established the Australian National Preventive Health Agency, which ceased operations in 2014. In the future the Australian CDC may take on more work in some areas that ANPHA focused on, such as chronic disease; however, this will be considered following an independent review in the future, giving the CDC time to build its core strengths.</para>
<para>Finally, the bill includes transitional rules to make sure that the relevant parts from the old system move smoothly over to the new one. This bill gives the Australian CDC the tools it needs to lead Australia's public health response, making our system stronger, smarter and better prepared to protect all Australians. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the House is that the bill be read a second time.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [15:33]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>100</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abdo, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ambihaipahar, A.</name>
                  <name>Belyea, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Berry, C. G.</name>
                  <name>Boele, N.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Briskey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Campbell, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare, J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Clutterham, C. L.</name>
                  <name>Coffey, R. K.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Comer, E. L.</name>
                  <name>Conroy, P. M.</name>
                  <name>Cook, K. M. G.</name>
                  <name>Cook, P. A.</name>
                  <name>Doyle, M. J. J.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>France, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>French, T. A.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Gee, A. R.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P. P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Gregg, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Holzberger, R. A. V.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jarrett, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Jordan-Baird, M. A. M.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Moncrieff, D. S.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Ng, G. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Smith, M. J. H.</name>
                  <name>Soon, X.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Teesdale, J. A.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Urquhart, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>White, R. P.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Witty, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>38</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aldred, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Batt, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Caldwell, C. M.</name>
                  <name>Chaffey, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Chester, D. J.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Hamilton, G. R.</name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Kennedy, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Penfold, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Rebello, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Small, B. J.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Tehan, D. T.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Venning, T. H.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, T. R.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.<br />Bill read a second time.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>141</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>141</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7370" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>141</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. The coalition will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives; however, we do have significant concerns about aspects of the legislation that warrant further scrutiny. At all times you must remember that Australia's social services safety net is one of the strongest and most generous in the world, but it's not self-sustaining. It must be managed responsibly, because it's funded by Australian taxpayers—people who work hard, take risks and carry the task of supporting our social security system.</para>
<para>Few countries in the world provide the kind of social safety net that we enjoy here in Australia. It's something we should be proud of, but it's also something we must safeguard and protect. Our safety net is not funded by government; it is funded by real people—small-business owners, primary producers and those who work on the front line of our essential services. It is funded by small businesses that take risks every single day. They invest their savings, their homes and their livelihoods into building something for themselves, their families and their communities. These are the people who drive innovation and create jobs, who build the very opportunities that allow our economy to thrive. Our safety net is funded by our primary producers, the men and women who work the land through fire, drought and floods, who keep Australians fed and who export beyond our shores, strengthening our national economy. It's funded by those on the front line, the nurses who work the night shift, the teachers who shape the minds of our children and the police who put themselves in harm's way to keep our community safe.</para>
<para>Every dollar spent on social security is a dollar that someone else has earned. That reality imposes a clear responsibility on all of us in this place. It means that every measure, every amendment and every program must be justified. It must be fair, it must be sustainable and it must serve the purpose of helping Australians in genuine need, while maintaining the integrity of the system for the future.</para>
<para>We also have a duty to our future generations. The decisions we make today about the structure and sustainability of the welfare system will determine the cost that future Australians will bear. Our focus must be on ensuring that more Australians are working, contributing to and strengthening the economy, not on keeping people connected to welfare unnecessarily. The welfare system must always be fit for purpose; it must evolve to meet tomorrow's challenges, not remain anchored in the past. Income support should provide a strong and sustainable safety net, protecting our most vulnerable citizens, supporting those experiencing hardship, and providing clear and practical pathways to independence and self-reliance.</para>
<para>The coalition's attention remains on creating jobs and getting Australians back into work, because we know that getting a job is the single best way to improve the living standards of individuals and their families. That principle has guided our approach to social policy, and it continues to guide our thinking in opposition. Of course, these priorities are all the more critical during what has become an enduring Labor induced cost-of-living crisis, which is not going away—a time when Australian households are struggling to keep up with rising expenses, high interest rates and stagnant wages.</para>
<para>When in government, the coalition demonstrated disciplined and responsible economic management. Through that approach, we were able to deliver the largest permanent increase to the JobSeeker payment at that time, ensuring that while there was a safety net for those in need, focus remained on supporting people into employment. In April 2021, the coalition increased working-age payment rates, including JobSeeker, by $50 a fortnight. We also permanently increased the income-free area to $150 a fortnight, giving jobseekers greater flexibility and incentive to take on work as they re-entered the workforce. During the height of the pandemic, one of the greatest economic and social challenges of our generation, the coalition government provided $32 billion in emergency support payments to help Australians get through. This is the record of a coalition government that understands the balance between compassion and responsibility, between helping those that need help and ensuring that the system remains fair to those who fund it.</para>
<para>Turning to the bill before the House, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 contains four schedules that amend a number of acts, including A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999, the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, the Social Security Act 1991 and the Student Assistance Act 1973. These technical amendments in the bill have significant consequences for how social security payments are administered and how debts and undetermined debts are treated. The bill also includes provisions providing clarity to income apportionment, a practice introduced under Labor.</para>
<para>The bill seeks to do several things. It sets out preliminary and definitional matters as well as income apportionment method statements. It validates income apportionment as a method of apportioning employment income in relation to entitlement periods before 7 December 2020. It also clarifies the lawful methods of apportioning employment income when determining debts or rates of payment for periods before that date.</para>
<para>The bill expands the instances in which the special circumstances waiver can be applied to waive debts incurred under the relevant acts. The bill increases to $250 the threshold for waiving a small debt and provides for that threshold to be indexed annually to the CPI. It also provides for a one-off waiver of the Commonwealth's right to recover small undetermined debts worth less than $250 that are currently recorded in Services Australia's system but have yet to be raised. The number of undetermined debts has increased substantially in recent years due to COVID measures and the pausing of debts during the pandemic and times of natural disaster.</para>
<para>Another significant measure is the establishment of the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. The scheme will provide resolution payments to people whose debts were affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. The bill gives the minister power to determine matters relating to the scheme through legislative instrument, and it provides for a new special appropriation to fund these resolution payments. While these measures are significant, they are not without concern.</para>
<para>The first issue relates to the process by which this legislation has been developed. It appears that the income apportionment measures have been informed by the Commonwealth Ombudsman's own-motion investigation and recommendations, yet we are told that there was no direct consultation with the Ombudsman in the development of this legislation. The Ombudsman instead used the Senate committee process to contribute to the bill. That's an extraordinary omission. If the measures stem from the Ombudsman's own findings, it would be reasonable to expect the government to have engaged directly with that office to ensure the legislation aligns with those recommendations.</para>
<para>The second issue is that the timing of this bill raises serious questions. The government has waited until the tail end of the sitting calendar to bring this legislation forward. As a result, scrutiny has been rushed, with only a single day allocated for Senate committee examination. That inquiry heard almost exclusively from social service advocacy and not-for-profit organisations. Many other key stakeholders were simply not consulted. This narrow consultation raises legitimate concerns about how many voices the government listened to when preparing the bill.</para>
<para>The Ombudsman, in its submission to the Senate inquiry, highlighted a serious omission—namely, that the issue of remediation for individuals who have been criminally convicted in relation to debts that were invalidly calculated using income apportionment is not addressed in the bill. That is not what we would call a minor point. It goes to the heart of fairness, accountability and justice. If the government acknowledges that income apportionment was used unlawfully for years, then the question of how that impacts those who face prosecution or conviction as a result cannot simply be left unanswered.</para>
<para>Further, the bill leaves many operational details unresolved. It's not clear how the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme will interact with the Scheme for Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration, the longstanding framework for compensating individuals adversely affected by administrative errors. Much, it seems, is being left to legislative instruments—we hear this a lot from this government—meaning that critical decisions about the design and implementation of the scheme will be made outside the direct scrutiny of the parliament. That is deeply concerning. Due to the absence of these essential details in the primary legislation, parliament's capacity to properly scrutinise the scheme has been limited. The coalition has been advised that schedule 3, which establishes the resolution scheme, will cost approximately $97.2 million over the forward estimates. Once the delegated legislation is tabled, we will closely examine and consider those instruments to ensure that the scheme is fair to those affected by income apportionment and fair to taxpayers who foot the bill.</para>
<para>There are also unresolved questions about how the special circumstances waiver will operate in practice. The bill provides little detail about the measures, procedures and thresholds that will guide Services Australia in deciding whether special circumstances do exist. Without clear criteria, there is a real risk of inconsistent decision-making and unequal treatment of applicants. We must ask: how will Services Australia seek information from victims-survivors of coercive social security debt, and how will staff be supported to make informed and compassionate decisions? These are not academic questions; they go to the heart of how the law will affect real people.</para>
<para>Minister Plibersek, in her second reading speech, said that existing safeguards would be strengthened to prevent manipulation of the waiver system, yet no detail has been provided on what these strengthened safeguards will look like or how they will operate to prevent misuse or manipulation of the social security safety net. These are issues that must be addressed before the parliament can have full confidence in the practical effect of these amendments.</para>
<para>As the coalition, we will continue to be constructive where we can. We recognise that the bill contains technical corrections and seeks to address longstanding administrative challenges. But we will also continue to hold the government to account on how it develops and implements these measures. The Australian people deserve transparency, accountability and confidence that their parliament is doing its job. We will not oppose this legislation in the House today. However, our concerns remain about the absence of essential operational details on the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme from this primary legislation. As outlined earlier in my contribution, the coalition will closely examine and consider the resolution scheme legislative instrument once it is tabled. We will insist that the government explain how the resolution scheme will operate in practice, how fairness will be guaranteed and how integrity of the bill's measures will be maintained across all aspects of the social security system.</para>
<para>Every dollar spent through the social security system is a dollar earned by hardworking Australians. It is our responsibility, indeed our duty, to ensure that those dollars are spent justly and wisely—in ways that strengthen rather than weaken the foundations of our safety net—and that any fraud is dealt with appropriately. Above all, our task in this place is to ensure that Australia's welfare system remains one that supports people in genuine need, provides real pathways to independence and sustains itself for the generations yet to come. That is the coalition's enduring commitment to fairness, to responsibility and to the integrity of the Australian social security system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A game changer—that's how Economic Justice Australia described the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. It's a reform that will make our social security system fairer, simpler and more humane. At its heart, this is about people. It's about respect, dignity and decency—values that sit at the centre of Labor's purpose.</para>
<para>For too long, too many Australians have faced unnecessary stress, confusion and, at times, outright injustice through the way our social security debts have been managed. This bill is about fixing those longstanding problems. It reforms how we treat small debts, strengthens protections for survivors of financial abuse and, finally, resolves the decades-old issue of income apportionment once and for all. Taken together, these reforms will wipe away nearly half of the undetermined social security debt backlog, simplify debt management for the future and ensure Services Australia can focus on what matters most: helping people who need support.</para>
<para>Our social security system speaks to who we are as Australians—a fair and compassionate people who believe in lending a hand to those who need it, without judgement. It exists to uphold dignity, not diminish it, yet for too long a flawed system has too often done the opposite. Outdated rules like income apportionment and absurdly low thresholds for small debts have caused needless hardship. This bill recognises that reality and takes decisive action to put things right. The small debt waiver has existed since the nineties, but since its introduction the threshold has remained frozen at $50—not indexed, not adjusted, just stuck. Meanwhile, government payments have tripled in value since 1993. What was once small three decades ago is no longer small today. The result? Services Australia has spent countless hours chasing debts of $50, $70 or $100, sometimes spending more to recover the debt than the value of debt itself. It's wasteful, it's wrong and it causes real harm. Imagine a single parent from Airport West receiving a letter from Services Australia demanding repayment of $75. They've done their best to report every shift, every hour and every payslip, but a small timing error has triggered the debt. That $75 might mean a skipped meal, missed medication or not being able to pay the electricity bill that fortnight. That's not a fair system; that's a failure of compassion. This bill fixes that.</para>
<para>We are lifting the threshold from $50 to $250. That means that in 2025-26 around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived—will never need to be raised in the first place—and 1.2 million Australians will be spared needless anxiety. That's 1.2 million administrative processes removed from the system, and a public service freed up to focus on people, not paperwork. Let me be clear: this is not about letting bad actors off the hook. We are maintaining all safeguards against fraud and deliberate misuse, but what we are saying, and saying clearly, is that the vast majority of people that interact with this system do so in good faith. They deserve a system that treats them with fairness, respect and dignity. This is what responsible government looks like: maintaining compassion with fiscal responsibility. As the Prime Minister has said, kindness is an Australian value, and our government reflects that value in action.</para>
<para>We know that family and domestic violence remains one of the greatest challenges our nation faces. Within that, financial abuse and coercive control are among the most common and devastating forms of harm. Too often, perpetrators weaponise systems—banking, tax and, yes, social security—to entrap their partners. Right now, the law doesn't adequately allow Services Australia to waive debts incurred through coercion or financial abuse. If an abuser-partner forces someone to sign forms, to provide false information or to hide income, that victim can end up carrying a debt that isn't truly theirs. That's cruel, double punishment; it's abuse followed by bureaucracy.</para>
<para>This bill changes that. It gives Services Australia explicit power to waive debts in cases where coercion, control or financial abuse are at play. When an officer considers whether someone knowingly made a false statement, they must take into account the context of coercion or abuse. This reform directly responds to the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse. It aligns with our national plan to end violence against women and children, and it delivers our commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems.</para>
<para>We're not stopping here. The government is consulting on further reforms to ensure that perpetrators, not victims, are held accountable for debts incurred through abuse. This bill is a crucial first step, but it is not the last. For too long, government systems have unwittingly reinforced abuse. This bill begins to undo that.</para>
<para>From 1991 until 2020, Services Australia used a method known as income apportionment. When someone submitted payslips without daily breakdowns, Services Australia would spread their income over multiple fortnights to calculate eligibility. The intent was practical, but the practice was inconsistent with law. It should never have been used that way. To be clear, this government ended income apportionment, but millions of historical debts were calculated by using it.</para>
<para>While we cannot foreseeably reopen every case spanning decades, repayments and even deceased recipients, we can bring legal certainty and moral resolution. That's what this bill does. It provides legal clarity to settle the issue, and it creates the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme to deliver fairness. Under the scheme, people with debts raised between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 can apply for a resolution payment of up to $600, depending on their case. This isn't about compensation for its own sake; it's about acknowledging error—acknowledging that the system got it wrong and giving people closure. To ensure accessibility, the government will support Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS to assist people through this process. Through this scheme, we can provide recognition without reopening old wounds.</para>
<para>One of the clearest lessons from the robodebt royal commission is that governments must never again create or tolerate systems that lack legality, compassion or accountability. Robodebt was different to income apportionment, but the warning is the same. When governments prioritise debt recovery over fairness, they lose sight of their purpose. When flawed methods replace sound judgement, when people are treated as numbers and when harm is dismissed as collateral, trust in government erodes. Trust, once lost, is hard to rebuild. This bill helps rebuild that trust. It brings clarity, it delivers fairness, and it puts compassion back where it belongs—at the heart of public administration.</para>
<para>These reforms will touch the lives of millions, including many in my electorate of Maribyrnong. They will mean that single parents juggling jobs and care won't face the stress of small debts for honest mistakes. Students and apprentices working casual shifts won't be penalised for income mismatches. Pensioners taking on a few hours of work won't lose their dignity over a $100 notice. People with disability will be able to navigate the system without fear of bureaucratic penalty. And victims-survivors of family violence will finally have laws that protect them, not punish them. That is fairness in action. That's government doing what it should: helping people to live with dignity.</para>
<para>These reforms are modest but meaningful. The $250 threshold is practical. Fraud safeguards remain strong. Fiscal discipline remains firm. What changes is the spirit in which this system operates. We're saying that we will not punish honesty. We will not waste dollars chasing cents. We will not allow old, unjust systems to persist simply because they were complicated to fix, because that's not fairness, and it's not government at its best. Government at its best is a force for good. It uses the levers of government to make people's lives better, fairer and kinder. That's what this bill does. It corrects historic wrongs, it reduces stress and red tape, it protects those who've experienced abuse, and it helps rebuild public trust in the system designed to serve us all.</para>
<para>Labor has always believed in a safety net that gives dignity, not despair—a hand up, not a put-down. For too long, these outdated practices stood in the way of that principle. Today we are putting fairness back where it belongs. This bill is fiscally responsible, socially just and morally right. It honours our commitment to women's safety and gender equality. It reflects our values of kindness, fairness and accountability. And it restores dignity to a system that millions of Australians rely on.</para>
<para>For decades, Australians have had to put up with a debt management system that too often has treated them as case numbers instead of people—treated them without dignity. Enough is enough. This is a bill about justice, compassion and common sense. It's about government working for people, not against them. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. In particular, I wish to commend Minister Plibersek on introducing the debt reform measures and expanding access to the special-circumstances waiver for social security debts. The proposal to raise the threshold for small debt waivers and to index this threshold in future is supported by a number of advocates and experts, because it eases hardship for people who are on the lowest incomes while also reducing the administrative burden on Services Australia. It's a win-win reform, and I support that measure.</para>
<para>I'd also like to make clear my support for the expansion of the special-circumstances waiver and the intention to make the waiver more easily available to those dealing with the difficult circumstances of family and domestic violence. This is a waiver that allows the government to choose not to pursue individuals for debts. In technical terms, the special-circumstances waiver provisions in each act, once amended, will extend the waiver in three situations where it wasn't previously available: firstly, where the debtor caused the overpayment by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation but the debtor's actions were justified in the circumstances; secondly, where a person other than the debtor caused the debt by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation but the debtor was not aware of the other person's actions; and, thirdly, where a person other than the debtor caused the debt by knowingly making false statements or knowingly failing to comply with the relevant legislation and the debtor was aware of the person's actions but their failure to correct the issue was justified in the circumstances.</para>
<para>In practical terms, expansion of the special-waiver provision will now include debts incurred through family and domestic violence, coercive control and comparable circumstances. If a victim-survivor of abuse was not aware of their partner's actions in creating debt, the waiver can be applied to their debt.</para>
<para>In the process of reviewing this legislation I reached out to a number of lawyers and advocates in my electorate to see how the bill would impact my constituents. Dr Lisha van Reyk from Deserving Better WA, an organisation that supports and advocates for people suffering domestic and family violence, said, 'It's significant and much-needed reform.' She said that Deserving Better has seen many examples of financial abuse intersecting with social security debt. This includes cases where perpetrators have accrued debt in the victim's name, where debts are shared, where tax records show income under the victim's name despite their never having access to these funds, and even a couple of situations where debt continues to be accrued in the victim's name after separation. Dr van Reyk did express concern, however, about the practical application of the reform, because the decision ultimately rests with individual Services Australia staff, and it relies heavily on their understanding of coercion and financial abuse, as well as their empathy in applying the waiver.</para>
<para>It also depends on victims being able to clearly articulate their circumstances, which is often something that's extremely difficult if they are living in fear, trying to navigate the system and simultaneously trying to detach from an abusive relationship. One of the lawyers I spoke to said that, in Western Australia, victims of family and domestic violence can already terminate a residential tenancy by citing domestic violence as the reason. She said these reforms are a natural extension of those existing protections and remedies for genuine victims. Many of her clients raised financial abuse as part of their experience. Most often, it involves control of bank accounts and restrictions on what can and cannot be spent. At times, it extends to taking out credit, such as loans or credit cards, in the client's name without consent.</para>
<para>I thank Dr van Reyk and the lawyers who spoke to me about this issue and commend them on the really important work that they do in our community. I'll continue to advocate for appropriate funding for community organisations like Deserving Better, which provide support for women experiencing family and domestic violence and coercive control.</para>
<para>I note that this bill is being considered by a Senate committee, with the first public hearing held recently. A common issue with process in this place means that we in the lower house are being asked to analyse and debate legislation before we've seen the outcomes of the review. I note that there are already a few suggested amendments to this bill from experts and advocates, including Anglicare, Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS, which I hope will be proposed and debated in the Senate.</para>
<para>I'm supportive of any measure that can better support survivors-victims of coercive control and of family and domestic violence from having the additional burden of debt being enforced by government agencies. I urge the government to listen to the advocates operating at the front lines of community services and constructively consider any amendments proposed.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, which is part of the Albanese Labor government's drive to further strengthen Australia's social safety net.</para>
<para>Social safety nets are designed to provide a basic level of financial and social support to individuals and families in need, helping to alleviate poverty and prevent economic hardship. Social safety nets play a critical part in reducing income inequality by providing a safety net for low-income individuals and families, helping to ensure a minimum standard of living. An effective social safety net can help break the poverty trap by providing resources and support to individuals and families, enabling them to access opportunities and improve their economic situation.</para>
<para>Even in this great and successful country, not everyone has the same opportunity to contribute, to access paid work, to work as much as they want to. Illness, disability, accidents or acting as a carer for others—things that no-one wishes for—sometimes intervene to limit the contribution an individual can make. Sometimes it is simply a case of lightning strikes, meaning access to a fair and effective social safety net is critically important. It is also important to strike a balance between the optimal level of government intervention to provide support and the promotion of agency and individual self-reliance. In this respect, this bill is a significant step towards a fairer, more efficient social security system that better supports Australians when they need it most.</para>
<para>This bill also represents the government's response to the full Federal Court case of Matthew Chaplin v the Department of Social Services, which addressed the method for recalculating robodebt related welfare debts. The case was an appeal on a question of law under section 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, where Mr Chaplin received youth allowance payments under part 2.11 of the Social Security Act 1991, and the question of how and when a person's ordinary income would be considered in the fortnight in which it is first earned, derived or received. In examining this question, the full Federal Court also keenly observed:</para>
<quote><para class="block">As a general proposition, the purpose of benefits under the Act is to "maintain a basic level of income for those who [are] unable to receive sufficient income to provide for themselves".</para></quote>
<para>This is a very articulate expression of the purpose of the social safety net.</para>
<para>Mr Chaplin received youth allowance from 10 July 2014 to 24 June 2015, at a time where a person's entitlement to youth allowance generally ascertained and paid on a fortnightly basis was determined by various matters, including by applying an income reduction to reduce the rate of youth allowance by reference to the person's income. The relevant method statement for calculating the income reduction required the secretary of the department to determine the amount of the person's ordinary income on a fortnightly basis and required ordinary income to be taken into account in the fortnight in which it is first earned, derived or received. It was the operation of these provisions, and the phrase 'first earned, derived or received' in particular, which was the issue that went to the heart of the case.</para>
<para>Over the period he received youth allowance, Mr Chaplin consistently reported his net, not gross, income and thereby received more in youth allowance payments than he was entitled to. In doing so, there was no suggestion of wrongdoing by Mr Chaplin. When it was brought to the attention of the department in 2019, section 1223 of the Social Security Act was enlivened. It provides that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… if a person receives the benefit of a "social security payment" and was not entitled to obtain that benefit, the amount of the payment (or the relevant part thereof) is a debt due to the Commonwealth, taken to arise when the person obtains the benefit of the payment.</para></quote>
<para>Ascertaining the existence of a debt therefore involves ascertaining a person's entitlement. The next step involves calculating whether the person has received more than that to which they were entitled.</para>
<para>The department therefore set about determining how much Mr Chaplin had been overpaid by reassessing his entitlement by reference to his actual income rather than the lower amounts he had reported. Having determined the amount it considered to have been overpaid, the department issued a demand for repayment. To do this, the department needed to reach a view about the rate of Mr Chaplin's entitlement to youth allowance at the relevant time. The material before the department established that and also established Mr Chaplin earned or derived that income before it was received.</para>
<para>However, for certain amounts of income the evidence was insufficient to reach a conclusion about whether the income was earned and received in the same youth allowance fortnight or was earned in the youth allowance fortnight immediately before that income was received. This then led to income apportionment, which was a practice that was previously used to evenly divide or apportion a person's employment income across two or more Centrelink fortnightly reporting periods to work out the appropriate level of income support a person was entitled to each fortnight. The practice was used if a person's employer pay period didn't line up with the person's fortnightly Centrelink reporting period or if the person's payslip or income report showed total earnings but did not show which days were worked or how much was earned each fortnight and there was no other information available. A person's payment rate was still based on the total income that the person reported across those fortnights, but eligibility or payment rates may have been impacted if the actual days worked in those fortnights were not evenly spread out.</para>
<para>Income apportionment resulted in unfairness, and this bill addresses that. The Albanese Labor government will wipe almost half of Australia's social security debt backlog and roll out resolution payments of up to $600 for those impacted by this historic debt calculation method of income apportionment. Further, a new $300 million package will see investment in a range of measures to ensure our social security system is producing fairer outcomes for Australians. Australians expect and Australians deserve our social security system to be fair and transparent. In situations where the department says there is a debt, it must provide proper and fair evidence and use clear and robust processes that minimise financial distress and confusion for those affected.</para>
<para>Importantly, the threshold for waiving small accidental debts will be increased for the first time in over 30 years, to $250, with around 1.2 million debts expected to be waived or no longer needing to be raised in the 2025-26 financial year as a result. This makes sense. It is often the case that the administrative cost of recouping small accidental debt is higher than the value of the debt itself, making the process of debt recovery inefficient from both a time and a cost perspective. This decision will mean Services Australia can spend more time on significant matters and upholding the integrity of our social security system. To ensure that this waiver is applied fairly, existing safeguards will be strengthened to ensure it cannot be manipulated. For example, it will not be available in circumstances of significant noncompliance or fraud. In those cases, every cent of debt will be pursued.</para>
<para>People with historical debts effected by income apportionment from 2003 to 2020 will also be eligible to apply for a resolution payment in recognition of the fact that we now know that this method of calculating entitlements was invalid. To assist those effected to navigate this resolution scheme, Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service will each be provided with $400,000 of funding. The Albanese Labor government never practiced income apportionment, but we are dealing with its legacy in the most responsible and cost-effective way that we can, and this bill is an important step in the process of systemic reform. In this respect, the bill necessarily also includes a measure to provide legal clarity to this historical practice, which ran through the early 1990s all the way until 2020, to avoid the need to recalculate potentially millions of debts at a significant cost to Australia's social security system. Recalculation of debts would place significant burden on individuals and employers and would involve a significant diversion of resources, effecting Services Australia's ability to help Australians who need assistance now.</para>
<para>I recently met with the team at the Norwood branch of Services Australia, located in my electorate of Sturt. Led by Nico, that team includes several dedicated staff members who told me they had been working for Services Australia and its previous equivalence for over 30 years. They know the system, they know the customers and they know how to assist their customers to navigate the system. They know how to help vulnerable Australians in need and they are motivated to do it. Their time is best spent helping Australians who need that help now, and that is where this government wants their time to be dedicated. That is where Australians expect their time to be dedicated, including Australians like Carole and Kay, who are part of a Sturt based group called Grandmas for Action and who came to see me recently to talk about JobSeeker, which is another important part of the social safety net. I raise Carole and Kay because they are an example of Australians who, like the team at Services Australia at Norwood, care deeply about the welfare of their fellow Australians and who want a better, fairer and more equitable social safety net that provides effective support to people who need it. Carole and Kay understand that, when lightning strikes, a meaningful and accessible social safety net is critical.</para>
<para>In recognition of the fact that lightning sometimes strikes in unpredictable and cruel ways, the changes proposed by this bill also give Services Australia extended powers to waive social security debts that have been incurred because of coercion or financial abuse. What this means is, when considering a debt waiver, a Services Australia official will be able to consider all the circumstances that led to someone knowingly making a false statement to Services Australia or not complying with the law. This includes coercion or financial abuse, which are serious forms of family and domestic violence. This change directly responds to a recommendation of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse and further demonstrates the government's resolve on delivering on its commitment to support victims-survivors under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. It is also an important part of the government's commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government believes in a strong social security system. This government will not disparage people for needing support, but we will make sure that we are achieving value for every dollar of taxpayer money spent. Australia's social safety net should be there for people when they need it, and this bill protects the integrity of Australia's social security system. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Too often in this place we talk about laws in the abstract—about frameworks, definitions and administration. But behind every line of law and, in particular, every line of social security law there's a real person, often someone in crisis: a woman leaving an abusive relationship, a single parent trying to rebuild—someone who has done everything right and is still falling through the cracks. That's why today I rise in support of this bill, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. I do so because, while many of its provisions may be technical, the real-world impacts are really human.</para>
<para>Over the past year I've written to two successive ministers for social services about one particular issue: how the government handles debts raised against victim-survivors of coercive control. Coercive control is a form of abuse that strips people of autonomy, including over their finances. A woman might be forced to sign documents, give false information or relinquish control of her Centrelink account, not by choice but out of fear. Under previous rules, even when Services Australia recognised that abuse had occurred, they often had no legal pathway to waive the resulting debt. It was cruel, it was bureaucratic and it was wrong.</para>
<para>I'm pleased that the government has taken action here and that the legislation takes action to fix that, giving Services Australia the authority to waive debts where false information was provided under coercive control or similar abuse. This change won't make headlines, but for those it effects it could mean everything. It sends a powerful message to victim-survivors: we believe you, we see you and we will not punish you for the harm done to you. I thank the government for listening to advocates, for responding to last year's inquiry into financial abuse and for making this change. This is well supported by many in my electorate, and this change is certainly one I'm very proud to have pushed for.</para>
<para>Another important shift in this legislation is about income apportionment. Again, it's an issue that sounds dry on paper but has a deeply frustrating and unjust impact on people who receive income support. Under the old system, some individuals had their payments reduced due to outdated income rules, even when they no longer had access to that income or it had already been recovered. This caused real stress and hardship. The changes in this bill right that wrong, and I commend the government for correcting it.</para>
<para>I would also like to briefly acknowledge that I'm moving a small amendment to this bill that will focus on improving the family and domestic violence crisis payment. This is a payment designed for moments of real, urgent need, but too many people are missing out on it because they don't tick the right box or they find out too late that they're eligible for it or they're told that their temporary accommodation doesn't qualify as a home. My amendment would extend the claim period, broaden the definition of 'residence' and remove a redundant requirement that makes someone prove that they're establishing a new home. These are all changes aimed at making the payment more accessible, more compassionate and more fit for purpose. This is about making sure that, in a moment of trauma, people are met with help, not hurdles.</para>
<para>We live in a country where the social safety net is a lifeline for millions. That net must be sturdy, it must be just and it must evolve when it falls short. This bill does not overhaul the system, but it does improve it. It strengthens the threads of our safety net. For those few Australians who will be directly impacted by the changes—victim-survivors, single parents, people in crisis—it could be the difference between despair and a path forward. That is why I support the bill, and I commend it to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to contribute to the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. With this bill, the Albanese Labor government is delivering a fairer, more efficient and more compassionate social security system.</para>
<para>This bill builds on what Labor have already delivered to strengthen our social safety net. Since we came to government we have raised JobSeeker by almost $4,000 a year, giving people looking for work a better chance to get by. We have lifted the pension by almost $5,000 a year for a single person, giving older Australians more security in retirement. We have boosted rent assistance by almost 15 per cent to help ease the pressure of rising rents, and we are delivering paid parental leave with super so families are almost $12,000 better off for every child.</para>
<para>This bill is another important step in that record. It shows Labor is building a system that helps people when they need it most. One of these changes, which support Australians, is the end of the use of external debt collection agencies. Many of us here are privileged in that we have never had to experience what it feels like to be chased by a debt collector. We have not had to know that gut-wrenching feeling when the phone rings from a private number—not knowing if it's a debt collector, a job offer or a call from your doctor. You live your life gambling on whether someone will leave a voicemail. That constant fear strips people of their dignity as they try to pick themselves up after the safety net has caught them. On top of that is the stress of having to ask for help in the first place and the crushing worry of not knowing how you'll ever pay that back. The last thing people deserve is to be hounded and shamed by a system that is meant to support them.</para>
<para>This legislation reforms how we manage social security debts, resolves the longstanding issue of income apportionment and makes the system work for people instead of against them. For many of us, at some point in our lives, there will be a need to access the social security system. It might be because of illness, the loss of a job, caring for children or older relatives, or simply trying to get through a tough period. It is unfortunate that there have been times when people who have turned to the system in good faith have been left carrying the stress of debts—debts that were small, accidental or calculated under flawed rules, as we have seen with robodebt.</para>
<para>This bill will wipe almost half of Australia's undetermined social security debt backlog and, importantly, will establish a resolution scheme offering payments of up to $600 for those who were impacted by the historical method known as income apportionment. This is fairness in action, this is efficiency in action, and this is Labor putting people back at the heart of government.</para>
<para>One of the most important changes in this bill is the increase in the threshold for waiving small debts. This is the first increase in more than 30 years. The current threshold is just $50, and it has not changed since the 1990s even though government payments have tripled since then. What we considered small in 1993 is not what small means today. By lifting the waiver threshold to $250 we are ensuring Services Australia does not waste time and money chasing debts that cost more to recover than they are worth. Around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived or never raised in 2025-26 as a result.</para>
<para>There are two important details about this change. First, the new threshold will not just rise once and then fall behind. For the first time, it will be indexed every year in July with inflation to keep pace with the real cost of living. Second, strong safeguards will remain. If someone tries to game the system by deliberately racking up small debts, those debts will not just be wiped away; this is about fairness, not loopholes.</para>
<para>We must never forget the damage of robodebt. Robodebt was unlawful, it was cruel, and it left hundreds of thousands of Australians carrying debts they did not owe. The royal commission exposed just how badly people were treated. Labor has either accepted or accepted in principle all 56 recommendations of that commission; three-quarters of them are already done or well underway. This bill is part of that work. It makes sure debts are handled properly, with fairness, safeguards and humanity. Unlike those opposite, we will never repeat the mistakes of robodebt.</para>
<para>This change will save resources, but, even more importantly, it will spare Australians who are already doing it tough the significant stress of being hounded over tiny accidental debts. I would like to take a moment to speak about what this means for a woman, and in particular women who have been pushed to the margins. When I was the CEO of the Nappy Collective, I saw up close how families—and overwhelmingly women—were making impossible choices. Women escaping family violence would come to us for nappies because they had nothing left after rent, bills and putting food on the table. I will never forget a mother who told me that, to save money, her only option was to change nappies only for number twos and how receiving a Centrelink debt notice on top of that pressure filled her with fear about how she could ever possibly pay it back. This mother was not irresponsible. She was not careless. She was a survivor, trying to hold her family together with whatever she had. This government, by raising the small debt waiver threshold, is sparing women in these situations the unnecessary trauma of being told they owe their government $50 or $100—sums that might mean nappies for the month or groceries for the week.</para>
<para>This bill also makes critical changes to ensure the social security system cannot be weaponised against victims-survivors of coercion and financial abuse. Financial abuse is one of the most menacing forms of family violence. It strips people of their independence. It traps them in unsafe relationships. Imagine a woman being physically abused by her partner and forced to sign forms she does not understand. Imagine that woman taking the brave but difficult decision to escape that violence, only to be faced with a debt in her name. Her partner's control lingers even after the violence has stopped.</para>
<para>For women from migrant and refugee backgrounds, this can be even harder. What happens if you cannot read English and you are too afraid to ask how the system works? You are left relying on someone who can easily take advantage of you. And what if you're afraid of authority? That fear can silence you and leave you carrying debts that were never really yours. Too many women who came here for safety have found themselves trapped again, this time by debts they never chose and cannot pay. When you do not know how you are going to pay for your groceries, it's very hard to think about making a move to safety. You worry about how you will pay the rent and how you can get the support you need, and in those moments even a small debt can feel like a wall you just cannot get past.</para>
<para>That is why this bill is so important. It means Services Australia will be able to wipe debts that come from coercion or abuse so women and children are not punished for the actions of an abuser. Until now, the system has punished victims of that abuse. With this bill, Services Australia will have the power to waive debt where coercion or abuse played a role. That means no-one will be forced to carry a debt because their abuser manipulated them into signing a form or pressured them into providing false information. This responds directly to the recommendations of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse, and it is a critical step under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. This is not just good policy; it's a moral responsibility.</para>
<para>I want to turn to the longstanding issues of income apportionment. From 1991 until 2020, income apportionment was used to calculate debts for people on social security who also earned income from employment. In situations where the exact daily earnings were not clear, income was spread across multiple Centrelink fortnights. We know these practices were inconsistent with the law. While they have never been used by the Albanese Labor government, the fact remains that people were impacted by debt for decades.</para>
<para>The government could attempt to reopen millions of debts, some going back 20 or 30 years, but that would cause untold distress, uncertainty and expense. Many of these debts have been repaid years ago. People have moved on with their lives. Instead we are fixing the law on income apportionment and creating a resolution scheme so people who were affected can be compensated. People with historical debts that happened between 2003 and 2020 will be entitled to a resolution payment of up to $600. If their debt was under $200, they will receive the full amount back; for debts between $200 and $2,000, the payment will be $200; between $2,000 and $5,000, the payment will be $400; and, for debts above $5,000, the payment will be $600. This is a fair and caring way to finally put the issue to rest.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Melbourne, these reforms will make a real difference. Melbourne is a city of creativity, resilience and diversity, but it is also a city where hardship sits alongside wealth. I hear from single parents trying to re-enter the workforce while raising their children. I am reminded of Kathy, a single mum who, like many others, is retraining through TAFE so she can build a more secure future for herself and her children. At the same time, she is holding down casual shifts to make ends meet and to give her kids those small extras that matter so much, like a costume for book week. When working casual hours, income goes up and down, and that can be where debt errors have so often crept in. What should be a step towards stability, studying, working or raising a family can end in an unexpected debt that leaves people with more stress and more uncertainty.</para>
<para>In Carlton and Fitzroy, students juggling study and part-time work tell me how hard it is to keep on top of their obligations when their working hours change without notice. Melbourne has the highest number of people receiving student debt relief through the HECS system, and that is no coincidence. This bill, alongside HECS debt relief, shows the government is serious about removing barriers that hold young people back and about giving them a fair chance to build their future.</para>
<para>I also think of the stories I've heard from migrant support workers of new arrivals trying to get their first job in Australia, often in insecure work like hospitality or cleaning. For them an unexpected Centrelink debt can be overwhelming, especially when they are still learning how our system works and do not have the same networks of support to fall back on. And we know insecure work hits youngest people hardest. The Young Workers Centre in Melbourne has been clear about how casualisation and underemployment leave young workers vulnerable with little financial buffer when mistakes or debt arise. This bill recognises that reality. It acknowledges those struggles, and it changes the system so it supports people instead of punishing them.</para>
<para>Australia deserves a social security system that is fair, efficient and humane—a system that reflects modern realities not outdated thresholds, a system that protects victims-survivors not perpetrators and a system that offers solutions not distress. That is what this bill delivers. In doing so, it shows once again that the government stands with the Australian people who, for whatever reason, rely on social security to live with dignity, security and hope. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today in strong support of the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No.2) Bill 2025. It is a long-overdue reform package that will bring greater fairness, clarity and compassion to the way we manage social security debt in Australia. With this bill the Albanese Labor government is delivering on its commitment to create a fairer and more efficient social security system—one that does not punish people unfairly, one that acknowledges past administrative errors and one that recognises the real-world complexities Australians face in their everyday lives. This bill delivers three reforms: it resolves the longstanding issue of income apportionment, it improves debt management through increased small debt waivers and it strengthens protections for victims-survivors through special circumstances debt waivers, particularly in cases of financial abuse and coercive control.</para>
<para>One of the most significant and longstanding issues this bill addresses is income apportionment. Between 1991 and 2020 Services Australia used a method known as income apportionment to determine eligibility and debt levels for income support recipients who also earn wages. When pay slips did not show clear daily earnings, officials distributed that income across multiple Centrelink fortnights to estimate the entitlement. While this approach may have been well intentioned at the time, the full Federal Court's decision in the Chaplin case made it clear that the practice was inconsistent with the legislation as it stood. It was, simply put, legally flawed. The Albanese Labor government has never used income apportionment, but, as the government responsible for restoring integrity to our social security system, we are taking decisive action to correct this legacy issue fairly, transparently and compassionately.</para>
<para>This bill will retrospectively validate the practice of income apportionment, not to conceal past mistakes but to prevent the reopening of millions of old cases, many of which are decades old and already repaid. Recalculating these debts would cause unnecessary distress, create administrative chaos and divert vital resources away from frontline services that Australians rely on today.</para>
<para>To ensure fairness, the bill also establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme, recognising that some Australians may have repaid debts that were incorrectly calculated and deserve to be compensated. The scheme will cover debts incurred from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020, the period when income apportionment was most clearly inconsistent with the law. Affected individuals will be eligible for a resolution payment of up to $600, depending on the size of their debt. Applications are expected to open from January 2026, once this legislation is passed. To assist people through this process, Economic Justice Australia and ACOSS will each receive $400,000 in funding to provide support and guidance.</para>
<para>The scale of this reform cannot be understated. Around 5.5 million debts, held by approximately three million Australians and valued at $4.4 billion, may have been impacted by income apportionment. Because of limitations in historical records, identifying each case individually would be impossible without immense cost and distress. This legislation provides a fair, practical and compassionate way forward, acknowledging the flaws of the past, offering meaningful redress and ensuring legal certainty into the future.</para>
<para>The second major reform in this bill brings long-overdue common sense and fairness to the way we handle small debts. The current small debt waiver threshold, as low as $50, has not changed since the early 1990s. At that time, social security payments were significantly lower. Since then, those payments have tripled in value, yet the definition of 'small debt' has remained frozen in time. This bill will raise the small debt waiver threshold to $250, establishing a single, standardised limit that replaces the current fragmented range of $50 to $200. Importantly, it will also be indexed annually in July in line with the consumer price index, ensuring that the threshold keeps pace with modern economic realities.</para>
<para>This is not just a technical change; it is a reform that will make a real difference in people's lives. In my community of Dunkley, many constituents have shared their experience of being pursued over small but stressful debts—debts that often arose through honest mistakes and cost more to recover than they were worth. This reform will mean that, in 2025-26, around 1.2 million undetermined debts will be waived or never raised. Nearly half of the existing backlog of undetermined debts will be cleared, and public resources will be redirected to supporting people, not chasing trivial amounts.</para>
<para>We are not abandoning fiscal responsibility; we are strengthening it. Existing fraud safeguards remain firmly in place, but we are also recognising that most Australians engage with the social security system in good faith and that small administrative errors should not result in unnecessary hardship. This reform restores proportion, fairness and dignity to the system.</para>
<para>The third reform is the most personally significant for many Australians. This bill strengthens the special circumstances debt waiver, empowering Services Australia to waive debts incurred as a result of financial abuse, coercion or family and domestic violence—an issue that goes to the heart of some of the experiences of many families, women and children in Dunkley.</para>
<para>Before entering parliament, I worked for 15 years in domestic and family violence services with Anglicare and Family Life in south-east Victoria. I met women who could not leave abusive relationships because they were financially trapped. I met women who stayed because they simply did not have the means to support both themselves and their children. Financial abuse and coercive control are not abstract concepts; they are deliberate, devastating forms of manipulation and control designed to trap, punish and disempower.</para>
<para>In many cases, victims-survivors have been forced to provide false information to Services Australia under threat or intimidation. Until now, they were still held responsible for those debts even though the actions were not truly their own. This bill changes that. It empowers decision-makers to consider the full circumstances that led to a person's situation, including whether they were acting under coercion or control.</para>
<para>This reform delivers on our election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems, implements key recommendations from the 2024 for parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse, and supports the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032. Let me be absolutely clear: victims-survivors should never be held accountable for debts incurred through abuse. This bill enshrines that principle in law. And while this is a major step forward, our work does not end there. The government is continuing to consult on future reforms to ensure that perpetrators, not victims-survivors, are held financially accountable for debts that arise from abuse.</para>
<para>The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 is a landmark reform, one that restores fairness, integrity and compassion to our social service security system. It delivers clarity and compensation through the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme, fairness through a modernised small debt waiver system, and protection and justice for victims-survivors of financial abuse. This bill reflects the values that underpin good government: integrity, fairness, compassion and responsibility. It recognises past mistakes, strengthens future processes and puts people, not bureaucracy, at the heart of social security policy. This is a good policy, it is fair policy and it is the right policy. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I speak to the technical elements of the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, I want to begin by sharing the stories of some of the incredibly brave women I had the privilege of representing in my previous work as a domestic violence lawyer for more than 10 years. These women did not have bruises that were visible to the public. Their injuries were inflicted silently, through control, isolation and economic manipulation. They suffered coercive control and financial abuse in homes that were meant to be their sanctuaries.</para>
<para>One woman I represented lived in a home where every door and cupboard had a lock. Her partner wore the only key around his neck. If she wanted to access food, medicine or her children's clothing, she had to ask permission. Her autonomy was reduced to a request, her life controlled room by room, cupboard by cupboard. Another woman had to survive on a jar of coins. Her partner would give her a weekly allowance of a few coins to feed the family, and if she disobeyed him in any way that jar remained closed.</para>
<para>I also represented a senior executive, a highly accomplished woman, who was forced to deposit her entire salary into her partner's account each and every week. He demanded to see her payslips and receipts. If she failed to provide evidence of her earnings, or spent money without permission, there were consequences. Another woman was tracked electronically in real time. Each time she made a transaction, her partner was notified. If he didn't agree with the purchase, he would demand she return it immediately. That was regardless of whether it was cold goods to feed their family or clothing for their children.</para>
<para>These are not isolated cases. They are part of a pattern of abuse that is sophisticated, sustained and deeply gendered. Too often these forms of control are either misunderstood or invisible, especially within our systems of government. These are all examples of coercive control, domestic violence and financial abuse. These stories are one of the many reasons I rise today to strongly support this bill. This bill is about more than numbers or technicalities. It's about people and it's about providing safety and justice.</para>
<para>This legislation may appear administrative in nature, but make no mistake: its real impact lies in how it will change lives. It recognises that our social security system, while essential, has also at times failed to protect those it was designed to serve. For too long, coercive and controlling partners have weaponised this very system against women, often leaving them with debts they never knew existed or punishing them for seeking help. This bill introduces new powers for Services Australia to take into account coercion and financial abuse when deciding whether a social security debt should be waived.</para>
<para>Financial abuse is one of the most insidious tools used by perpetrators of domestic and family violence. It is used to entrap women and to make them feel that leaving isn't possible, that they can't survive on their own, that the very institutions designed to support them will penalise them if they try. This bill says to survivors: we see you. It says to perpetrators: you will not hide behind government systems to control and cause further harm. It empowers officials to consider all the circumstances of a debt—not just whether a false statement was made, but why it was made—whether it was made under threat, under coercion, under the shadow of control. Crucially, it ensures that survivors like Ashley will finally be eligible for justice.</para>
<para>Ashley was under psychiatric care, navigating the trauma of domestic violence. Her partner, acting as her nominee, falsely declared their income, resulting in a $7,000 debt in Ashley's name. Under current rules, because her partner knowingly underreported the income, Ashley was denied a waiver. This bill changes that. It ensures that officials can look at the broader circumstances, including abuse, and provide justice. That is what safety in legislation looks like.</para>
<para>In my career I have sat across from women who believed they were to blame—women who cried not because they had no money but because they had no control, women who felt invisible to the system—and I've seen how small changes and big changes in law can have a monumental impact on their lives. We have seen this in recent years through the monumental amendments to the Family Law Act and we see it here again today. What we do here in this chamber matters. This bill will offer women like the ones I've described a pathway forward. It restores dignity and it restores justice, and in some cases it may save lives.</para>
<para>Beyond financial abuse, the bill delivers broader reforms that support the integrity and efficiency of our social security system. It raises the debt waiver threshold to $250 for the first time in 30 years. This means 1.2 million small debts, many outdated and uneconomical to pursue, will be wiped. It improves debt waiver rules, ensuring that those engaging in good faith aren't penalised while still preventing exploitation of the system. It also supports the debt resolution scheme, offering up to $600 for those affected by historical income apportionment errors between 2003 and 2020. It also protects frontline services by allowing Services Australia staff to focus on helping those in need, rather than chasing minor or unjust debts. It's a modern, compassionate approach to welfare administration, not a punitive one.</para>
<para>Since coming to office, the Albanese Labor government has made real investments in social security, including raising the rate of Jobseeker and the age pension; expanding Commonwealth rent assistance; increasing paid parental leave to 26 weeks by 2026, with superannuation included; and changing the parenting payment single arrangements to support single parents, the very people who face the most significant financial stress when escaping violence. These reforms have helped thousands of people in my electorate of Bonner and millions more across Australia, and this bill builds on that process.</para>
<para>What is the alternative in this circumstance from those on the other side? Through you, Deputy Speaker Young, I ask those opposite: what would their cuts to 41,000 public servants have meant for the women I just spoke about? Would they have received the help they needed to flee violence, feed their children or access justice? Would Ashley have seen her case reviewed? Would the woman with the locked cupboards have been supported? Or would they have faced longer delays, colder bureaucracy and a system unable or unwilling to understand their trauma, like we saw through robodebt?</para>
<para>This bill is part of a broader, whole-of-government approach to combat violence against women and children, including $4 billion in investments to end gender based violence; 10 days of paid domestic violence leave, and today marks the anniversary of that becoming law; the permanent Leaving Violence Program; funding for housing and legal supports, including our record investment in the National Legal Assistance Partnership, supporting many community legal centres and also our legal aid commissions, who provide services to those seeking to navigate the very complex system that is social security; and a national audit of Commonwealth systems to stop perpetrators from weaponising them. This is what systemic reform looks like.</para>
<para>There is no dignity in being trapped by someone you love. There is no justice in being punished by the very system you turn to for help. This bill is technical in name but transformational in impact. It gives people a fighting chance and says clearly, 'We will no longer allow abusers to use the social security system as another tool of control.' As a former domestic violence lawyer, as a member of parliament and as someone committed to a fair and just society, I will always fight for those who feel unseen, unheard and unsupported. I am proud to share their stories today so that they can be heard by all of Australia. This bill delivers on our promise to do better for the most vulnerable in our community, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to delivering a fairer, more efficient social security system that Australians can trust. After years of neglect from those opposite, it has fallen to this government to take on this important task—repairing a system that has too often failed the people it was meant to support. We believe in a strong and reliable social safety net—a key to Labor's values and a key to a fair society. It is there for all of us at different times in our lives, and its integrity must be protected so it continues to serve Australians who are doing it tough. This bill is a step in rebuilding trust. It reforms the way we manage social security system debts to ensure greater fairness, transparency and accountability. By putting in place a more robust framework, we can restore community confidence in the system and make sure people know it operates with integrity and compassion.</para>
<para>Importantly, this legislation also addresses a deeply troubling issue. As the member for Bonner so eloquently put it, based on her experience as a family violence lawyer, financial abuse that occurs within the contexts of domestic and family violence is a scourge that is too often enacted using our social security system. Too often, perpetrators exploit the payment systems to exert control and harm. These reforms will ensure that our social security system is no longer a tool for abuse but a source of support for those who need it most. This bill reflects our commitment to a social safety net that is fair, humane and worthy of the trust the Australian people place in it.</para>
<para>In my first speech in this place, I spoke about the former coalition government's betrayal of the Australian people through robodebt. Vulnerable Australians were relentlessly harassed by the former government for debts they did not owe—debts that had been inaccurately and illegally calculated. This was not simply a failure of administration; it was a profound moral failure. It showed contempt for vulnerable Australians and revealed the ultimate consequences of a public service that had been hollowed out by years of neoliberal ideology and cronyism. The damage caused by robodebt was clear for all to see. In some heartbreaking cases, the unjust harassment and pressure were so severe that it led to people taking their lives. Families were left grieving. People who turned to the social safety net in their time of need were made to feel like criminals. Its impact on public faith and confidence in our social security system cannot be overstated.</para>
<para>That is why this government has been so committed to rebuilding the system and restoring trust and fairness. We know that a functional social safety net is a cornerstone of a decent and compassionate society. That is why the Albanese Labor government established the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme—to get to the truth of what happened, to give a voice to those harmed and to make sure this never happens again. We have accepted or accepted in principle all 56 recommendations made to government. That work is ongoing. It will continue to drive meaningful changes to how we manage social security payments and debts in Australia. We know that it takes a Labor government to put people back at the centre of our government services. It is what we were elected to do. This legislation demonstrates that commitment clearly, and it builds on the work we did throughout our first term in government to restore integrity to our public services, rebuild capability in the public sector and ensure decisions are made in the public interest.</para>
<para>Recently I had the pleasure of visiting a Services Australia office in Box Hill, in Menzies, with the Assistant Minister for the Public Service, Patrick Gorman. There we met dedicated, expert staff who support the public to gain access to essential government services. As a former public servant, I greatly appreciated the time Assistant Minister Gorman took with the staff, thanking them for their service and recognising the essential work they do. One of these staff members had been working as labour hire but was given a permanent APS job under this government. She spoke about her relief at having secure work—of the certainty, stability and ability to plan for the future that this provided. I was also pleased to see that staff from the NDIS were co-located with Centrelink staff. Often people seeking help from the government will be facing multiple issues. The truth is that government services can be siloed or a bureaucratic labyrinth. Co-location is one way we can not only better use government resources but also create a better experience for those seeking to engage government assistance.</para>
<para>The actions of this government stand in stark contrast to the coalition. Those opposite will always argue for smaller government and outsourcing of critical services. They show their contempt for the Public Service with arbitrary staffing caps and, at the last election, a cut of 41,000 positions. This had nothing to do with the job that needed to be done and everything to do with neoliberal ideology. Outsourcing is not only worse for workers; it is inefficient. It means higher staff turnover, a failure to develop institutional expertise and less secure jobs for those doing essential services.</para>
<para>For Australians, hollowing out the Public Service comes as at a cost. It is a cost borne by the most vulnerable in our communities. This legislation is another step in rebuilding trust, strengthening fairness and ensuring government services are delivered with the dignity and respect that every Australian deserves. This government has made the investments to make sure our service system works for the Australians who need it. We have taken necessary steps to improve the way our social security system functions so that it is fair, efficient and centred on people. This has included recruiting around 3,000 more frontline staff, like the staff that I met at Services Australia in Box Hill, to improve access to services and reduce pressure on existing workers.</para>
<para>We've reduced call wait time at Services Australia so that Australians can reach the help they need faster. We have lifted claims processing rates, which means more money is getting back into families' pockets. We've ended the use of external debt collection agencies by government, bringing this work back under proper oversight. We've engaged community legal services to support vulnerable people who may have debts and need advice and advocacy, and we've increased payments and improved accuracy so that Australians receive the support they are entitled to. These changes have made a real difference. This bill builds on this record and takes the next step in establishing a more efficient social security system.</para>
<para>We know that Australians generally engage with the social security system in good faith. The overwhelming majority of people who rely on this support do the right thing. It should be acknowledged there are significant administrative costs involved in chasing and recovering very small debts, which often outweigh the value of the debts themselves. That is why we are increasing the threshold for small debts for the first time in over 30 years, lifting it from $50 to $250. This change will make a substantial impact. This will waive around 1.2 million debts that would have been raised in the 2025-26 financial year. It's a commonsense reform; it will save time, it will reduce the administrative burden and it will allow Services Australia staff to focus on things that matter most. By increasing this threshold we are making the system more efficient and productive, but we are still maintaining appropriate safeguards to protect against fraudulent activity. The change strikes the right balance between fiscal responsibility and fairness to the people who use the system.</para>
<para>We remain firmly committed to ensuring that our social security services focus on preventing serious systems abuse. Family and domestic violence can be complex and corrosive in the way it is perpetrated. When I was volunteering at community legal centres and working as a judge's associate at the courts, I saw firsthand the epidemic of family violence and systems abuse. As the member for Bonner put it so well, family violence is not just about physical abuse. It is about coercive control. It is about financial abuse. It can be about systems abuse, dragging people through the courts to continue to exert control on them. And it can also be about accruing debts to enact harm on people—harm that lasts for months and years, as people are unable to gain financial independence. This economic abuse plays a major role in the broader picture of abuse, particularly in cases of intimate partner violence.</para>
<para>Sadly, our social services system has not been exempt from being used as a tool of financial abuse. The weaponisation of debt through the payment system is one of those tools perpetrators have used to maintain power and control. This bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems and ensures that our social security system cannot be weaponised against victims-survivors. This legislation will enable Services Australia staff, when considering a debt waiver, to consider all the circumstances that led to someone knowingly making a false statement to the government. This will include consideration of evidence of financial abuse and coercive control. This will help ensure that systems abuse can no longer be used by perpetrators.</para>
<para>While there is still more work to do to make sure all our government service systems act as a firewall against such abuse, this bill is an important step in the right direction. Ending family and domestic violence will mean pulling on every lever available to us to create a culture that promotes safety and financial security for all. It will continue the work of reform, particularly as it relates to the tax and social security systems, so that victims are not responsible for the debts that perpetrators accrue. I am proud to be part of a Labor government that is focused on doing the work of preventing and responding to family violence at every level, including through the introduction of this bill.</para>
<para>Historically, income apportionment has been used to determine social security debts. This is not a practice that the Albanese Labor government has ever used. This bill provides legal clarity around this historical practice and, importantly, establishes the income appropriate resolution scheme. This means that this scheme will offer redress for those who were unfairly affected by this practice. People with historical debts potentially affected by income apportionment between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 will be eligible to apply for a resolution payment of up to $600. These payments recognise that this practice was invalid. They also recognise the need to deal with the legacy of this practice and to create a pathway for people to seek compensation if they were impacted by this practice. This scheme recognises the importance of balancing our support of vulnerable Australians with ensuring taxpayers' money is spent effectively and efficiently. It reaffirms our commitment to a robust social safety net that looks after people and is sustainable for generations to come.</para>
<para>This bill is a significant step in our ongoing work to restore integrity to the social security system, to restore the strength of the Public Service and to protect families from domestic and family violence in the form of financial abuse. It ensures the mistakes of the past are addressed while embedding fairness and accountability in future practice. It is about fairness. It's about humanity and dignity within the practices of our payment arrangements. It is also about rebuilding trust with the Australian people, who rightly expect public services to act in their best interests and in good faith. Restoring that confidence will not happen overnight. It will only happen under a Labor government doing the work to invest back in these frontline services.</para>
<para>These are reforms that will affect millions of Australians. They mean our social security system will work for those who need it most, well into the future. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of this bill, Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025. Like many in the Brisbane community, I had grandparents and, now, another family member who relied on the economic support of the government to survive. They were hardworking. They paid their taxes. They contributed to society and to our economy. They looked after their neighbours. One had a terrible illness in the prime of their life that left them as a paraplegic, amongst other complications. They were a fit, outdoor blue-collar worker. The illness happened through no fault of their own. As for many, sometimes life just happens. They now rely on government payment support because they have to; their ability to work and earn a living is gone.</para>
<para>I tell this story because this is the primary purpose of social security: to provide economic and social wellbeing by creating a safety net for individuals and families who cannot fully support themselves due to age, disability, unemployment or other circumstances. Our social security system is something to be really proud of. It's a system that goes to our values as a government: no-one held back and no-one left behind. It is part of our identity and how we view ourselves as a nation—one that helps those when they need help the most. This is at the heart of why I am in this House. They are the values I live by. These are Labor values.</para>
<para>In Australia, the concept of social security was first introduced in 1908, when the Commonwealth parliament passed the Invalid and Old Age Pension Act. It provided financial support to the elderly and the ill. It followed the economic depression of the early 1890s, when poverty was widespread and the idea of who should support those unable to look after themselves was a big topic of debate. In the 1940s, Labor Prime Minister Curtin announced the development of a national welfare scheme, including sickness and unemployment benefits. Then, building on his legacy, the post-war Chifley government held the social services referendum—again, a Labor government. This allowed a change to the Constitution which granted the Commonwealth power to legislate for a wide range of social services, and these changes laid the foundations for the modern social security system we have in this country today.</para>
<para>This Labor government continues the fundamental principles underpinning social security, providing a safety net when people need it the most. We are also committed to a fairer and more efficient social security system. This bill does just that. This legislation is the government's response to the full Federal Court Chaplin case, which established beyond doubt that income apportionment was unlawful. We've heard a bit about that today. Income apportionment was the method used by Services Australia to calculate social security debts between the early 1990s and 2020. It involved using evidence from the individual, such as payslips, to determine their entitlement to a social security payment. That was also used as part of calculating debt. Where it wasn't clear what a person's exact daily earnings were, the employment income could be apportioned over two or more Centrelink fortnights. This practice is now understood to have been inconsistent with legislative provisions at the time. Just to be clear, this government has never used this practice, but, under the scheme, debt had accrued to some Australians.</para>
<para>If debt is reopened in this fashion, it will cause a number of issues. First, it would cause distress, delay and uncertainty for people with debt. Second, in some cases, debts are decades old and some have been repaid where maybe they might not have been correctly calculated. Third, it would also divert critical government resources from frontline services that help people who need support now. So this legislation avoids the need to recalculate potentially millions of debts, at a significant cost to the Australian social security system. That is why we are legislating also to put the historical practice of income apportionment on clearer legal footing. This bill will wipe out almost half of Australia's undetermined social security debt backlog. It's anticipated that, as a result, around 1.2 million undetermined debts are expected to be waived or not raised in 2025-26. We will establish a scheme also to roll out resolution payments for those impacted by income apportionment.</para>
<para>This bill will also increase the threshold for waiving small debts for the first time in over 30 years. It'll change from $50 to $250. Since 1990, that's a long time for something not to change. That small debt waiver amount has not kept pace with the value of government payments, which have tripled since 1993, and it no longer reflects what a small debt means to many people today. As has been mentioned in this House earlier, often the administrative cost of recouping small debts is higher than the value of the debt itself, making the process of debt recovery uneconomical. The changes in this bill will mean Services Australia does not waste time or resources chasing small debts, and they will spare Australians significant stress, particularly those who have accidental debts. Setting the threshold at $250 recognises people generally engage with the social security system in good faith while continuing to ensure responsible fiscal management.</para>
<para>This bill will also protect Australians who are subject to financial abuse and coercive control, which, as we all know, are predominantly women. As part of our election commitment, we committed to embed safety in Commonwealth systems. The government is legislating changes to better protect victims-survivors and prevent the social security system being weaponised against them. Financial abuse—as we heard from the member for Bonner—and coercive control are serious forms of family and domestic violence. The changes delivered through this bill will give Services Australia extended powers to waive social security debts that have been incurred as a result of coercion or financial abuse. What this means is that, when considering a debt waiver, a Services Australia official will be able to take into account all the circumstances that led to somebody knowingly making false statements to Services Australia or not complying with the law, and this includes coercion or financial abuse. This change directly responds to a recommendation of the 2024 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry into financial abuse. It also demonstrates the government's resolve in delivering on its commitment to support victims-survivors under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032.</para>
<para>But, as I said before, we know this is a first step. The government is doing more to address financial abuse, including consulting on changes to tax and social security laws so perpetrators, not victims-survivors, are accountable for debts they accrue through financial abuse. We know that financial abuse is one of the most powerful tools perpetrators use to trap women and children. That's very sad. These changes are about putting control back in the hands of victims-survivors, removing unnecessary harm and making sure our system supports safety and dignity.</para>
<para>To compensate people with potentially affected debts, the bill establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. Through this scheme, people with historical debts potentially affected by income apportionment from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020 will be eligible to apply for a resolution payment. This is in recognition of the fact that we know this method of calculating entitlement was invalid. To assist those affected to navigate the resolution scheme, Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service will each be given $400,000 in funding. The amount of compensation available will be based on a person's determined debt, with resolution payment amounts up to $600. The Minister for Social Services recently also announced a new $300 million package to support this reform. Further details on how and where to apply for compensation will be available following the passage of the legislation.</para>
<para>This bill really is an important step towards social security debt reform. It's important to note that, when issues are identified within a system, action is taken by this government to ensure that there is public confidence in that system. That's really important given what we've gone through over the last decade. This approach is quite opposite to the recent robodebt scandal, which was overseen by those opposite. Work was recently undertaken by the Attorney-General where an historic agreement to settle the Knox v Commonwealth class action was reached. This was an appeal from the original robodebt class action settlement in 2020. In the Attorney-General's own words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">When the unfairness, the illegality and the cruelty of robodebt became apparent, the approach of those opposite was to double down, to go on the attack against those who complained and to maintain the falsehood that in fact the system had not changed at all. But, when this government—</para></quote>
<para>the Labor government—</para>
<quote><para class="block">came to office, we—</para></quote>
<para>took swift action and—</para>
<quote><para class="block">established a royal commission which heard tragic stories of people being hounded by their own government to repay debts they did not even owe. None of us should forget—</para></quote>
<para>I will never forget—</para>
<quote><para class="block">former minister Alan Tudge saying to vulnerable Australians, 'We'll find you, we'll track you down, you will have to repay those debts, and you may end up in prison.'</para></quote>
<para>Is this how we treat some of the most vulnerable people living in our society? This goes to the true character of those opposite. It is a Labor government that cares about people. The Attorney-General said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The royal commission's findings were damning. Commissioner Holmes found that robodebt was 'a crude and cruel mechanism, neither fair nor legal' and 'a costly failure of public administration, in both human and economic terms'</para></quote>
<para>On this side of the House, we believe in strong social security which helps our fellow Australians, including those in my community in Brisbane, when they need it the most, whether that's a local pensioner who receives the age pension—someone who has worked hard their entire life and has now reached retirement age but cannot fully support themselves financially—or a local student under the age of 25 who might be studying or training at TAFE or university and is receiving youth allowance. Maybe it's a dedicated carer receiving a carers payment and providing critical support to those who cannot support themselves. Maybe it's a single parent who is receiving the single parenting payment and who is the main carer for a young child. Maybe it's simply income support for a jobseeker, for someone who is looking for work, who may be sick or cannot work.</para>
<para>In Australia, our values are based on respect, fairness and equal opportunity, and these values go to the heart of why we have a social security in this country that is designed the way it is. It recognises the inherent human right to a decent standard of living and helps individuals live with dignity, free from excessive hardship. It provides a sense of security and stability, ensuring that people's living standards are not drastically eroded by unpredictable social or economic events.</para>
<para>By providing a safety net, social security aims to prevent social exclusion and promote social inclusion. It enables people to participate in society. Social security not only addresses the needs as they arise but also works to prevent risks and help individuals and families adjust to unavoidable disadvantages. The people in my Brisbane community benefit from social security, as do millions of Australians, and this bill supports and makes our social security system more robust, stronger and fairer. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to speak about this piece of legislation, the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025, that cuts to the very heart of fairness in our social security system. For way too long, the rules that govern how debts are raised and managed have been outdated, inefficient and, at times, downright unfair. This bill before the House finally begins to put that right.</para>
<para>I come to this debate not only as a member for Barton but as someone who spent more than a decade in the law, advocating for people who were often up against systems that were stacked against them. For many people that find themselves relying on social security payments, the system can either be a bridge to a new life and a bright future or a bureaucratic barrier that keeps them trapped. I can tell you, when a person feels like they're being buried in red tape, when they've been hit with a debt they don't understand, when they are made to feel like a criminal for a simple mistake, that is not just a policy failure; that is a failure of justice.</para>
<para>This bill delivers a long-overdue reform. It brings compassion, common sense and accountability back to the way we treat people who rely on our social security system. We want the system to be a bridge, not a barrier. That's why we've introduced this bill into the House. Firstly, this bill amends the small debt waiver threshold. The small debt waiver is a legal mechanism under the Social Security Act that allows the government to forgive certain low-value debts owed by welfare recipients where it's not cost-effective for the Commonwealth to take action to recover them.</para>
<para>For 30 years, the so-called small debt waiver has been frozen. It's current range is $50 to $200—$50, unchanged since the 1990s, when the average cost of rent or a grocery bill looked nothing like it does today. In 2025, a small debt of $50 is insulting. It doesn't reflect the real world. This so-called small debt is no longer a reflection of what 'small debt' means to people today. To put it in plain language: this threshold was set when petrol was under 70c a litre, the median rent in Sydney was around $170 per week, and power prices were half of what they are now. Times have changed. Our welfare system must keep up with them. The administrative costs of chasing a $150 debt often exceeds the debt itself, which means taxpayers lose too. This reform is not about leniency. It's about efficiency, compassion and common sense. This bill increases the waiver threshold to $250. That means approximately 1.2 million debts, many of which would be impossible to recover without spending more taxpayer money in administration than the debts themselves. It will simply not be raised. This is the right outcome.</para>
<para>Economic Justice Australia, the peak advocacy organisation for community legal centres that assists people with Services Australia, calls this reform 'a game changer that removes a lot of unnecessary stress from people's lives'. Indeed, these are people that are already vulnerable and experiencing hardship. People on income support are more likely to live under or near the poverty line. These same people have often accrued debt because of systemic overpayment or miscalculation issues—that is, through no fault of their own. We're talking about young people from rough families, single parents or Australians who have a disability. These are the people most likely to be receiving these payments and thus receiving debts in the first place.</para>
<para>For many of these people, the myGov email landing in their inbox isn't just a notification; it's sometimes a heavy pit in their stomach. That notification of a debt means a complete recalculation of their budget, where their next meal is going to come from or how the already-overdue bill is going to be paid. We also know that Services Australia can be very difficult to navigate for people without in-depth experience of government and its procedures. I'm not saying these procedures are out of place; we should be strict on the paperwork required to receive payments from Services Australia and the checks and balances that come along with it. But, for someone already experiencing disadvantage, with low computer literacy skills, escaping violence without all their relevant documentation or with little time on their hands because they're looking after kids or relatives, it can be really easy to make a mistake when applying for payments. In circumstances like this, we should be giving people a helping hand rather than punishing them for their small mistakes.</para>
<para>Where debts appear to stem from fraud, Services Australia has the power to investigate them more closely. But the majority of those Australians holding these debts have received them through no fault of their own. This impactful reform means Services Australia can focus more on what it should be doing—that is, supporting people who need help, not wasting energy hustling for small debts. It also says to the taxpayer, 'We are spending your money wisely, focusing on serious misconduct and fraud rather than chasing loose change from those doing it tough.'</para>
<para>Another part of this bill I want to highlight is the protection it gives to victims-survivors of family and domestic violence. As many in this chamber will know, financial abuse is one of the most insidious forms of coercive control. It is a way for perpetrators to trap partners and children to keep them dependent and to punish them long after they have escaped. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, one in four women and one in 14 men have experienced violence from an intimate partner since the age of 15. As a community, we now understand what has long been true—that violence extends beyond the physical and appears as emotional and financial coercion too. For many that find themselves in this situation, that looks like credit cards being taken out in their name, the emptying of joint bank accounts and the diversion of welfare moneys to another account. From my time working at the St Vincent de Paul Society in New South Wales, looking after a rather large team covering from Wyong to Helensburgh out to the Blue Mountains, including my own electorate of Barton, the Vinnies team and I saw the terrible impacts of coercive control and financial abuse on the lives of many people, mainly women, escaping domestic violence.</para>
<para>Under our current laws, if a person accrued a debt because they were coerced into signing forms or providing false information they could still be held liable. This debt is yet another burden that hangs over the victim at one of the most difficult times in their life. Think about that for a moment: the victim is punished for their abuser's actions. That is not only cruel; it undermines our commitment to end violence against women and children. This bill changes that. It gives Services Australia the discretion to waive debts in cases where coercion or financial abuse was a factor. It builds on the work of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse and reflects our commitment to entrench protection into every arm of the Commonwealth.</para>
<para>As someone who's worked with vulnerable clients, I cannot overstate the importance of this change. It tells victims-survivors: 'We see you, we believe you and we will not allow the system to be weaponised against you. When you come forward, you do not have to do so with fear of debt or of unjust consequences. Services Australia is here to help you rebuild and move forward, rather than binding you to the violence of your past, because we understand that financial security is a core part of ending domestic violence and that safety is not just physical; it's economic.'</para>
<para>I know that this part of the bill may sound a bit technical, but for thousands of Australians it matters deeply. From 1991 to 2020 a method known as income apportionment was used to calculate debts. The practice was inconsistent with the law at the time. It was unfair. And while it has not been used under this Albanese Labor government, we cannot simply reopen decades worth of historical cases—some of them already repaid, many involving people who've since passed away—without causing fresh uncertainty and distress.</para>
<para>So this bill draws a line in the sand. It clarifies the law to close off the uncertainty. More importantly, it establishes the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. That means that people who have potentially affected debts between 1 September 2003 and 6 December 2020 can apply for a resolution payment of up to $600. It's not perfect justice. Nothing can fully undo the harm caused. But it is recognition. It is a step towards closure. It is an acknowledgement that the system got it wrong. And, at its core, this bill is about respect—respect for the people who use the social security system, most of whom are engaging in good faith, trying to do the right thing, and juggling low incomes, insecure work and the rising cost of living. It's also about making sure people can trust the social security system after the trauma of the robodebt scheme. Australians deserve to know that we have learned from those mistakes and that our systems are transparent, lawful and humane.</para>
<para>When I doorknock in Rockdale, Kingsgrove, Hurstville and across my electorate of Barton I hear the same thing again and again: people just want systems that treat them fairly, clearly and with dignity. They don't want bureaucracy that punishes them for being poor, sick or in a crisis. Moreover, we want to make sure these people can access help to navigate the new resolution scheme. We're equipping Economic Justice Australia and the Australian Council of Social Service with $400,000 each. We want to make sure they have the resources available for those impacted by the scheme.</para>
<para>I know, too, that my team will be ready to help anyone in my electorate of Barton who finds themselves in this situation, who can simply attend my electorate office at Level 2, 24 Montgomery Street, Kogarah or send me an email at ash.ambihaipahar@aph.gov.au. We have a dedicated space for quiet conversations and staff on hand to help you navigate that system. The empathetic and efficient team at Services Australia Rockdale will also be on deck, as they are always there to help a lot of our electorate members.</para>
<para>This bill begins to change the culture of our welfare system. It says: no more chasing debts that cost more to collect than what they're worth; no more punishing women who've already endured abuse; and no more letting historic injustices fester.</para>
<para>We in this chamber have a responsibility to make systems work for people, not against them. We have a duty of service for these people to recognise their hardship, to help lift them up into better lives. We cannot bring fairness to every corner of the social security system overnight, but with this bill we are taking important practical steps in the right direction. As the member for Barton, I welcome these changes. As a lawyer, I know how overdue they are. And as someone who believes in the dignity of every person, I will always stand up for a social security system that reflects compassion, fairness and justice.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today not just to support the Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 but also to affirm this government's commitment to listening to those who are often unheard—often our most vulnerable. This bill is a testament to what happens when we listen, when we hear stories of people navigating complex systems and when we act to make those systems fairer, clearer and more humane. It is practical, it is careful and, above all, it is a compassionate reform.</para>
<para>This bill fixes technical problems that have lingered for years. It clarifies how employment income was treated before 7 December 2020. It values good-faith assessments that used income apportionment. It sets out lawful methods for any decisions to be made about those historic periods. It also improves our approaches to small debts.</para>
<para>I'll start with schedule 1, which inserts a new part into the Social Security Act. It validates the historical use of income apportionment from 1 July 1991 to 6 December 2020. This was a practice which resulted in the spread of known income across the employer's payroll period. Officials then attributed daily amounts to the relevant entitlement periods. It was based on pay slips; it was grounded in real payroll records. It was done in good faith, but at times it did not match the strict letter of the law as it stood then. So this bill validates the method for the past and it preserves general legal rights.</para>
<para>This schedule also gives decision-makers a clear rule book for any new decisions about pre-December-2020 income. There is a strict hierarchy: first, if the evidence shows when the income was earned, allocate it to that entitlement period; second, if the precise days are unknown but the payroll period is known, it is apportioned across that payroll period; third, if neither days nor the payroll period can be identified, take the income into account in the entitlement period in which it was received—evidence first, consistency next and guesswork last. The hierarchy respects real-life circumstances. Pay slips often show a fortnight or a month, not each shift. Rosters rarely line up with Centrelink fortnights. This method turns messy paperwork into fair decisions.</para>
<para>This bill also ensures consistency for youth training allowance decisions and former farm household support. It also makes sure that the old frameworks that referenced social security calculators line up with the same approach.</para>
<para>Let's think about the scale of this issue. Over three decades, there were about 5.5 million debts that were potentially affected, which touched around three million people. The estimation of this debt is around $4.4 billion. Most of these debts are old—on average, 19 years old. About 97 per cent of these have already been paid. Around 148,000 debts were paused while the issue was resolved. Sampling tells us that not every debt used apportionment, and, when it was used, the change in the final amount was usually very modest. On the sample, the median change was under $100, and about two-thirds decreased and one-third increased.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 of this legislation makes debt management fairer. It reforms special circumstance waivers, it lifts and standardises the small debt waiver threshold and it clears a backlog of tiny, undetermined amounts. Under current law, decision-makers cannot waive a debt if a person, or another person, knowingly made a false statement. This was a very hard line, and it does not reflect real stories. It does not reflect the realities of coercion or financial abuse. It does not reflect fear. This bill responds to what we have heard. It lets decision-makers consider the broader context. If conduct occurred, but it was justified by the circumstances, the waiver can be applied. That includes coercion, financial abuse, acute mental ill health, homelessness and serious dependence.</para>
<para>This change is in accordance with recommendation 58 of the 2024 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services inquiry into financial abuse and with the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. Recommendation 58 of the <inline font-style="italic">F</inline><inline font-style="italic">inancial abuse</inline> report called for reforms so that victims-survivors aren't blocked from special circumstances waivers if the perpetrator lies to Services Australia without the debtor's knowledge or if the debtor makes a false statement due to coercion or duress.</para>
<para>I was proud to work with Senator Deborah O'Neill on that inquiry, and I am reminded of the submission from the Council for Single Mothers and their Children: 'We regularly hear from women whose former partners used Services Australia systems to continue financial control. This includes manipulating Centrelink reporting requirements, lodging false claims or deliberately triggering compliance actions that result in payment suspensions. These actions are often taken without the woman's knowledge, leaving her without income and in financial distress.' We listened to some of the hard truths about the government systems, and we are acting. In that inquiry, what we saw was perpetrators using systems, whether it be banking or government systems, to perpetrate violence, abuse and financial coercion against their victims. It's unacceptable, and this government is acting to change our systems.</para>
<para>The explanatory memorandum describes the case of person L, whose then partner lied to them about their earnings. Any rational person would recognise that was not their fault nor their failing; it was coercion and control, and it was wrong. This is similar to other cases that I recall about abuse being enabled by structures long neglected. For too long the law said no because of the word 'knowingly', which left out coercion.</para>
<para>This bill also standardises the small debt waiver. The new threshold is $250 indexed each year to CPI. It removes clunky cost-effectiveness tests. This means fewer low-value debts, less churn and less stress on vulnerable people. There is a one-off clean-up too. If the amount under the threshold in the system at the commencement is not raised as a debt, the right to recover is waived. This clears backlogs created by pauses during COVID and natural disasters.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 of the legislation creates the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. It's simple, optional and time limited. It covers debts affected by income apportionment between 20 September 2003 and 6 December 2020. Eligible people can receive a small, fixed resolution payment—in most cases between $200 and $600. It recognises the modest effect seen in sampling. It gives closure without forcing people to rebuild their work history. It avoids case-by-case recalculation. Why those dates? The daily attribution rules came in from September 2003 and interacted with the apportionment. In 2020 we moved to paid-date attribution, which made apportionment unnecessary.</para>
<para>The scheme will run for approximately 12 months. There will be flexibility for special cases. Some decisions can be made by a computer, where appropriate. There will be internal review for scheme decisions. Payments are tax free, and it is intended that they will be exempt from the social security income test by instrument. If a person accepts a resolution payment, they release the Commonwealth from liability for a claim about the use of apportionment for that debt. If they do not accept, they keep their rights—it's their choice.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 provides a special appropriation. It funds resolution payments and it funds amounts payable when division 3 income is worked out.</para>
<para>Let me be clear on one point: the payment systems at Services Australia may remind members of the public of the trauma of robodebt. This system cannot become robodebt, and it is a direct response designed to prevent it. Robodebt used tax data averaging to fabricate fortnightly income. It punished the vulnerable. It was unlawful. This bill validates a method grounded in evidence—real pay slips and real payroll records. It sets a lawful hierarchy for historical records. It preserves rights and adds safeguards. The bill also includes a full human rights statement. It engages the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living. It expands discretion where justice demands it. It lifts the small debt threshold. It offers a simple resolution payment.</para>
<para>Some will ask: why not recalculate everything? It's because that would take years and we must act now to shore up our social services system. It would force people, employers and banks to dig up ancient records, and it would deliver very small changes in most cases. So it would be a drag on resources and take away from actually servicing people today. Others will ask: why not waive everything? It's because in most cases the debt still exists under the proper method, because many debts were unaffected by the apportionment and because blanket refunds are not fair to others who followed the rules or repaid unrelated debts.</para>
<para>This bill reflects what fairness demands: validate what was done in good faith, fix the waiver rules, raise and index the small debt threshold, clear the old undetermined amounts and offer a modest optional resolution payment. That is guided, as I said, by evidence, order and clarity. Safeguards are built in. Justification must be evidenced for special circumstances waivers. The scheme is optional and time limited. Review rights exist within the scheme. The appropriation is specific. Validation is tightly confined to apportionment of employment income. General laws are preserved. The approach reflects consultation and evidence.</para>
<para>The ombudsman urged prompt, transparent remediation. Sampling showed that the impact of apportionment on the final amount was usually very small. Advocates argued for compassion; administrators argued for practicality. This bill blends both. Behind the scenes everyone is a person. It could be casuals juggling shifts, parents saving every pay slip or people whose payroll cycles never matched up with Centrelink fortnights. They deserve clarity, not years of reconstruction. They deserve decisions that reflect reality.</para>
<para>In passing, let me return to the financial abuse inquiry. Our job was to ensure that our systems do not entrench control. As one recommendation of the financial abuse inquiry said, victims must not be blocked from relief because an abuser compelled a mistake. Schedule 2 delivers that change. That's why I was proud to work with Senator Deborah O'Neill. From listening to the people, the victims-survivors, we were able to shape this reform. A majority female government is shaping systems that used to disempower victims to now disempower abusers, and we're acting on the national plan to prevent violence against women.</para>
<para>I also welcome the government's commitment to clarity for those who need payments. Services Australia will need a plain English guidance, clear tools for staff, letters tested with customer reference groups, outreach to those with paused debts, simple pathways into the scheme and support for people who need help to engage.</para>
<para>Policy choices have consequences. Australians expect systems that are lawful, humane and respectful. Let me address the safeguards in law. The validation is tightly confined to apportionment of employment income. To speak plainly, robodebt was the coalition's scheme. It used tax-year income averaging to invent fortnightly earnings. It ignored warnings. It hurt people. It was unlawful. This bill is part of the government's answer. It validates only assessments grounded in real pay slips and real payroll periods. It draws a bright statutory line that excludes income averaging. It has been scrutinised. It builds safeguards, transparency and a voluntary, time limited resolution scheme. The coalition's record shows that ideology overruled integrity. Our record shows evidence, lawfulness and respect. This bill sits squarely within Labor's social justice agenda, which seeks a fair social security system that is lawful by design, humane in practice and careful with public money and that validates good-faith decisions.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABDO</name>
    <name.id>316915</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians should never be punished for seeking in good faith the help that their government offers them to manage life's challenges. Good government exists to lend a hand, not to turn that hand against the people it serves. Yet, through the bitter experience of robodebt, Australians have seen too clearly what happens when that principle is betrayed. Thousands of people were treated not as citizens entitled to fairness but as suspects to be pursued.</para>
<para>Labor is determined to repair the damage that was done to so many innocent Australians who were hurt by the previous coalition government's cruel and disastrous robodebt scheme, to restore trust, to uphold the law and to rebuild a system that treats people with dignity, because, when government makes an error, it is not a line on a spreadsheet that suffers; it is a person, it is families, it is the parent sitting at the kitchen table staring at a letter from Centrelink—it is the quiet humiliation of being told you owe money you don't have and never should have owed.</para>
<para>These mistakes go to the heart of something bigger than administration; they go to the social contract itself—the promise that our institutions will deal with people fairly and lawfully and that government will take responsibility when it falls short. That is why this bill is so important. It is addressing an issue that is less notorious and without the malice of robodebt but that, nevertheless, has a negative impact on vulnerable people in our community, and that is the longstanding process known as income apportionment.</para>
<para>With income apportionment, imagine your pay slip covers two weeks of work but begins halfway through a Centrelink fortnight. One week falls in the first Centrelink period, the other week in the next. If you work more shifts in one week than the other, your income fluctuates, so your payment should too. But for years Centrelink assumed that income was earned evenly across the whole pay slip period. It spread that pay across both fortnights, even though the law said that income could only be counted in the period it was actually earned. It made an assumption that every income-earning day was the same and that, as a result, recipients had been overpaid when in fact they hadn't. That's income apportionment. It sounds technical, but its consequences were very real.</para>
<para>For some, it meant an underpayment, a smaller payment than they were due. For many more, it meant a letter telling them they owed money to the Commonwealth. Debts were raised—some were repaid, some prosecuted—all based on a practice that was later found to be unlawful. This went on for nearly two decades and, while this was not robodebt—it was not automated, nor was it implemented against legal advice—it shared a troubling trait: a deep-seated presumption of mistrust towards those who rely on government support.</para>
<para>When the system starts from a belief that people on welfare are to be met with distrust, errors multiply and compassion disappears. That attitude costs more than money: it corrodes trust, it hardens the spirit of social safety nets and it leaves a stain that can take generations to remove.</para>
<para>Tammy is a financial counsellor who works with people in my community. She saw firsthand the real-life damage that was done to people who were slugged with a wrongful debt by income apportionment at a time when they were already struggling to stay afloat. Tammy told my office: 'There's this depressing feeling of "I'm being punished again. The government is after me. Oh, my goodness, it's the government. I'm scared and I need this money for my children." They'd often call Centrelink and agree to a payment plan where they'd promise something they couldn't afford. Imagine not having enough money for food because you've overpromised, you've got this debt and the government wants their money back and you feel like you are being punished. There's a sense of shame in not having enough money for food. Nobody ever wants to hear their child say, "I'm hungry, Mum."'</para>
<para>This is the bitter legacy that mechanisms like income apportionment left for far too many Australians. Thankfully, this legislation ends that once and for all. In 2020 a Federal Court decision made it clear beyond doubt that income apportionment was not permitted under the law that then stood. The government changed the legislation that year to fix the issue going forward, but that still left an enormous historical tangle. Decades of debts and decisions had been made using a method now deemed unlawful.</para>
<para>The Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation examined what should happen next and what should have happened much sooner. The Ombudsman found that, since at least 2003, Services Australia and its predecessor agencies had been unlawfully spreading income across multiple fortnights. The effect was that people's payments were often calculated on the wrong evidence at the wrong time and for the wrong amount. The investigation also found that, when doubts were first raised in 2020, the agencies took too long to act. They sought multiple rounds of legal advice, some of it conflicting, but delayed finalising a clear position. They paused around 13,000 debt reviews and identified 87,000 potentially affected cases but failed to alert oversight bodies quickly enough. The Ombudsman made four key recommendations: (1) seek an authoritative legal view from the Solicitor-General or the Federal Court, (2) develop a clear policy on the secretary's power to review historical debts, (3) work with the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to manage the impact on past and future criminal cases and (4) share all relevant legal advice transparently across agencies.</para>
<para>The agencies accepted or partially accepted every one of those recommendations. The Ombudsman's message was plain: the law must be followed even, and especially, when it is inconvenient. This is a very important principle which we must never forget, especially when it's inconvenient. The administration of social security must be transparent, accountable and humane. This bill is the government's comprehensive response—an effective, rational response. It fixes the rules, reforms the debt process and builds in fairness for the future.</para>
<para>For the first time in more than 30 years, the small debt waiver threshold will rise to $250 and will now be indexed annually to CPI. That single change will wipe or prevent about 1.2 million small, undetermined debts in 2025-26—almost half the backlog currently sitting with Services Australia. It makes no sense to spend more money recovering a debt than the debt is worth. This change saves taxpayers money and spares ordinary Australians unnecessary stress. It brings an outdated threshold, unchanged since the 1990s, in line with modern realities.</para>
<para>Importantly, this bill also expands the special circumstances waiver, allowing decision-makers to consider a person's broader life circumstances when deciding whether a debt should be pursued, including extending it to situations of financial abuse or coercive control. If someone's partner controlled their access to income or pressured them to give false information, the system should recognise that. This reform delivers on Labor's 2025 election commitment to embed safety in Commonwealth systems and implement a key recommendation of the 2024 joint parliamentary inquiry into financial abuse. It ensures that our welfare system can never again be weaponised against those already living with abuse. It is practical reform with profound moral importance.</para>
<para>The bill also addresses the long shadow left by the income apportionment practice itself. Between the early nineties and 2020, millions of debts were calculated by using this method. The scale of this legacy is immense: around 5.5 million debts involving three million people and worth approximately $4.4 billion. To manually recalculate them would take years and divert thousands of staff away from their core job of supporting Australians who need help right now. That is why this bill does two things: first, it retrospectively validates the historical use of income apportionment to prevent mass legal uncertainty. Second, it creates a fair and compassionate pathway for those affected through the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. Under the scheme, people with debts from 1 September 2003 to 6 December 2020 will be eligible. They can apply for resolution payments of up to $600, depending on the size of their original debt. Applications open in January of next year.</para>
<para>This is how good governments should act, in terms of admitting where fault lines are in the system, compensating fairly and ensuring that such errors cannot recur, with a response that does not overwhelm the very same system designed to support vulnerable Australians. Others have asked, 'Is this robodebt 2.0?' It's not. Robodebt was a scheme born of deliberate disregard. It was automated and unlawful and was maintained against explicit legal advice. Income apportionment was a human error—manual, mistaken and unchallenged for too long, but never driven by malice. Yet both are linked by a common thread: the need to rebuild trust between citizens and the state. That is what this bill sets out to do. This package is fair, and it is fiscally responsible. It has an indicative cost of $283.7 million over the forward estimates and $41.2 million per year ongoing from 2029-30.</para>
<para>Those numbers matter, but so does what they represent: a system that values fairness, efficiency and humanity in equal measure. For decades, the administrative machinery of welfare debt recovery has been built on the assumption that error and fraud are widespread, but the evidence shows that the overwhelming majority of Australians do the right thing. This legislation recognises that reality and shifts our system from suspicion to support. In electorates like mine, where casual and shift work is common and people juggle multiple jobs to make ends meet, these technical errors are not abstract. They're lived experience. They're the reason someone's rent fell behind or their electricity was disconnected. This bill means those people will not be chased for minimal errors. It means decision-makers can see the full picture, including when coercion or abuse were at play. It means those affected by an unlawful process have a clear and fair path to closure.</para>
<para>The lessons from this saga extend beyond Services Australia and the Department of Social Services. They go to the culture of government itself. The ombudsman called it a lesson in lawfulness and a reminder that good intentions are not enough if the law is not followed and oversight is ignored. Transparency and accountability are not optional extras. They are the conditions of public trust. In government, mistakes will sometimes happen, but integrity is measured by how government responds to them. This bill represents that response. It is grounded in recognition, guided by law and motivated by compassion. This legislation is about more than technical amendments. It's about restoring a simple but vital truth: our social security system exists to support, not to punish. It ensures that people who did nothing wrong are not left carrying the burden of bureaucratic error. It upholds the law, strengthens protections and clears away years of accumulated unfairness. It reflects what Labor stands for: a government that takes responsibility, fixes mistakes and treats every Australian with respect.</para>
<para>I want to acknowledge the Minister for Social Services for her careful and principled work on this issue and on all issues in relation to her portfolio. I thank the community organisations—Economic Justice Australia, ACOSS, Legal Aid and so many others—who have advocated tirelessly on this issue. This is thoughtful, responsible reform. It is about integrity in administration, compassion in government and justice for ordinary Australians who deserve nothing less. I'll leave you with a thought from Tammy, who made it clear that being liberated from a punitive debt can be life altering for people on the margins: 'It means less stress. It means that a parent in crisis can say, "I will be okay; my kids will be okay." It means they've got a fighting chance to keep their heads above water.' When people reach out for help, their government should meet them with a hand, not a demand.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for Calwell for his excellent contribution to the debate, as I thank members on both sides who have contributed to the debate. I particularly want to thank the newly elected members who spoke about what these social security reforms will mean in their local communities. These debt reforms will make a big difference in particular to many women who have suffered or continue to suffer financial coercion and abuse. In wiping 1.2 million underdetermined debts from the backlog in 2025-26 alone, the government is also sparing many thousands of low-income Australian families the stress of being pursued for small debts. We are directing taxpayer money more efficiently to the task of helping people who need it now, focusing compliance action on large and deliberate debts, and moving our social security system a step further away from the shame of robodebt.</para>
<para>This Labor government has shown we are willing to tackle longstanding problems and to do so fairly and in close consultation with the people who have been most affected. Since the introduction of this bill, officials from my department have continued to consult with the agencies who will administer these changes and the representatives of the people who will be most affected. In particular, I want to thank Economic Justice Australia, National Legal Aid and the Australian Council of Social Service, who have dedicated their time to advising the government on this bill. There's always more to do in making our social security system fairer, safer and easier to use. These organisations represent the experiences of so many Australians, and I believe the collaborative approach that we've brought to this legislation lays a foundation for us to achieve further reforms.</para>
<para>The Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee has also inquired into this bill and carried out further consultation. I really want to thank the members of the committee for their considered report and for the support offered for this bill. The committee, too, heard strong advocacy from social security recipients and their representatives. This lived experience is reflected in key parts of the legislation, particularly in the debt reform measures. The CEO of Single Mother Families Australia, Ms Terese Edwards, told the committee:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For many years—in fact, decades—people who rely upon our safety net have been demonised, and when there are cuts they're usually to social security. Where there's more work for people to do, it's in the social security system. This is a cultural statement as well. This is why it is—</para></quote>
<para>an—</para>
<quote><para class="block">administrative outcome, but … also a cultural statement, and this cannot be lost. We're hoping that this will build on the fantastic work of saying to Australians, 'If you are in need of our social security net, you can do that with respect and without feeling like you are not being believed and knowing that you will be safe to do that.'</para></quote>
<para>The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025 is an important step towards a better social security system delivering measures which will produce fairer outcomes for Australians. These measures reform the way we manage social security debts and resolve the longstanding issue of income apportionment. As I said when I introduced this bill, past governments used income apportionment in good faith with a genuinely held but incorrect understanding of the law. The Albanese government has never used income apportionment, but, with this legislation, we are resolving this historic issue in the fairest and most reasonable way possible. By validating the past use of income apportionment we spare taxpayers the cost of having government recalculate millions of debts going back decades. That would be, of course, very stressful for income support recipients who may have incurred a debt decades ago, and it would be both expensive and pointless for taxpayers. This validation also recognises the important fact that, based on Services Australia's sampling, in most cases affected by income apportionment, a debt was still owed but was miscalculated around the edges.</para>
<para>The government's resolution scheme is carefully designed to remedy those mistakes. People with historic debts potentially affected by income apportionment will be eligible to apply for payments of up to $600. Any payment they receive will reflect the size of the debt in question and the most generous interpretation of the possible impact income apportionment had on it. I'll release additional details about the scheme soon. We will continue to work with non-government organisations to monitor people's take-up of the scheme, making sure the process is as simple as possible. I'll just repeat one assurance I've already made: no-one is obliged to participate in this scheme and no-one is prevented from exercising any legal rights to pursue a claim relating to their debt.</para>
<para>The debt reform measures in this bill will bring material changes to many Australians under financial pressure. The bill increases the small debt waiver threshold to $250, to be indexed annually in line with the consumer price index It brings the old thresholds into a single, unified amount, and, through indexation, this amount will maintain its value relative to the broader economy. The 1.2 million undetermined debts that this will wipe from the backlog in 2025-26 alone are 1.2 million debts that Services Australia will not waste time and resources chasing. The government is strengthening compliance measures to ensure this provision is not exploited, but we know the vast majority of people engage with our social security system honestly and in good faith.</para>
<para>The bill also expands access to the special circumstances waiver, to protect victims-survivors of financial abuse and coercion. This is a very important measure. This change provides an explicit recognition of the fact that this abuse can manifest in a victim being coerced into not meeting certain payment requirements. Decision-makers will now be able to take these circumstances into account in considering a special circumstances debt waiver. This provision addresses another point of weaponisation of the social security system, and it responds to calls from stakeholders articulated through both the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children 2022-2032 and the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme. Our implementation of this reform is of keen interest to many advocates in the family, domestic and sexual violence area and advocates for social security reform also. It does bring policy change for Services Australia, and the leadership of Services Australia has assured the parliament through the Senate committee hearings that they are ready to deliver this change across the country.</para>
<para>Someone who has been coerced into taking on a social security debt should not be further victimised and punished by a system that should be offering her support. The Albanese Labor government believes in a strong social security system. Part of that commitment means taking on protracted policy challenges which others have put in the too-hard basket. With the passage of this legislation, our system will be stronger, fairer and more responsive to the needs of the Australian community. It's the end result of a major body of work encompassing some very, very complex and contested legal and policy matters. I want to thank the many officials who've dedicated themselves to this work, and also the Minister for Government Services for her cooperation and support. The government remains committed to implementing the remaining recommendations of the robodebt royal commission. Members should note that three-quarters of these are now implemented or well progressed, and I look forward to getting on with the rest of them. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>165</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<para>That further consideration of the bill be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>165</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7365" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>165</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. The bill amends the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 and the Migration Act 1958 to allow the tribunal to decide certain matters without holding an oral hearing; in other words, the bill allows for certain matters to be heard on the papers. At first glance, this appears to be a technical efficiency measure, but in reality it represents an important turning point for the tribunal. After almost two years of rhetoric and senseless rebranding, the Labor government has finally admitted that the Administrative Appeals Tribunal never needed to be abolished and that fast-track, on-the-papers review is essential to restoring confidence in our administrative law system.</para>
<para>When Labor scrapped the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the AAT, and replaced it with the Administrative Review Tribunal, the ART, they claimed the old system was slow, politicised and unfit for purpose. Yet, one year later, the new ART is slower, more expensive and facing the largest backlog in its history, irrespective of its iteration.</para>
<para>The case load of the tribunal has ballooned from about 67,000 matters when the coalition left office to more than 11,000 today, and the median time to finalise a case has stretched from 30 weeks to 68 weeks. That is not reform; that is regression. Labor has spent millions rebranding a tribunal that already worked, has dismissed experienced members and has left Australians waiting twice as long for justice. It has been nothing more than a political witch-hunt.</para>
<para>When the former Attorney-General announced the new ART in 2022 he promised a body that would restore trust and speed up decisions. Instead we have an institution that is overwhelmed by work and underwhelmed with staff. This bill is Labor's secret confession that their grand plan has been an unmitigated failure. It is an emergency patch to deal with the tens of thousands of unresolved cases that are now choking the tribunal, especially in the student visa stream, where appeals have risen from about 2,000 to more than 40,000.</para>
<para>So, what does this bill do? It has two main elements. First, it makes on-the-papers review mandatory for certain migration cases, starting with student visa refusals and extending by regulation to other temporary visas. Second, it broadens the tribunal's discretion to decide other matters on written material without a hearing where the issues can be adequately determined in the party's absence. Applicants will still have the opportunity to provide written submissions and to comment on any adverse information before a decision is made. It's a backflip from Labor that is worth welcoming: 10 out of 10 from all the diving judges!</para>
<para>Let's be honest: this is a clear reversal of Labor's earlier position. When the coalition introduced fast-track on-the-papers reviews through the Immigration Assessment Authority, Labor condemned the model and pledged to abolish it. Now, under pressure from a stark cold reality, they have quietly adopted the coalition's approach—and that is a good thing. The coalition welcomes these changes, because they mirror what we have long argued for: efficient, proportionate and practical review processes that focus resources where they are most needed. When the system faces an 111,000-case backlog, it makes sense to streamline straightforward cases so that the tribunal can devote time to the complex ones. It's common sense, not politics.</para>
<para>Let me be clear: the coalition supports measures that make our review system fairer, faster and more efficient. Before the 2025 election the coalition called for the reinstatement of fast-track review mechanisms for specific visa cohorts, consistent with recommendation 32 of the Nixon review. The Nixon review made clear that the lengthy processing times in the visa system invite abuse by unscrupulous operators. It recommended that visa and student visa reviews be conducted on the papers within set time frames. And we agree. The coalition's position has always been that fairness and efficiency can coexist. On-the-papers reviews are not about denying justice; they are about delivering it sooner.</para>
<para>So, about this administrative backlog and its consequences: well, for every student awaiting a decision, there is an education provider waiting for certainty, a university planning its intake, and a community relying on international students to sustain local economies. The longer these cases sit unresolved, the more damage is done to the confidence in Australia's migration system and to our reputation as a reliable education destination. Labor's delays are not just about an administrative issue; they have real-world economic and human consequences.</para>
<para>But we do have some concerns about natural justice, and I want to speak about fairness, because that principle of fairness sits at the heart of this bill. The coalition supports the on-the-papers reforms precisely because they preserve procedural fairness, otherwise known as natural justice safeguards, while improving efficiency. The tribunal must still disclose any adverse information and give the applicant a chance to respond. Those who fail to respond will have their case decided on existing material that is entirely appropriate for a system that is drowning in delay.</para>
<para>Some have suggested that moving away from oral hearings will reduce fairness, but the coalition rejects that argument. Written review does not mean unfair review. What matters is that applicants are properly notified and given a reasonable opportunity to respond and that decisions are made impartially on the merits, on a de novo basis, and the bill maintains those safeguards. It simply removes unnecessary formality in cases where the facts are clear, the law is settled and a hearing adds little value. That is the right balance; it is proportionate, responsible reform. Efficiency and fairness are not opposites; they are partners. An overloaded system that leaves people waiting for months or years is not fair; it is failure by delay. As the old adage goes, justice delayed is justice denied.</para>
<para>By embracing the on-the-papers review, the tribunal can direct its limited resources to matters that genuinely need oral examination, while resolving similar disputes promptly. It will lead to greater efficiencies of resources for the ART: in staffing, members, tribunal rooms—the list goes on. It's all about ensuring that those matters that do not require in-person hearings are not delayed when there are more efficient means of dealing with them.</para>
<para>That is how justice systems everywhere should operate: efficient where possible and detailed where necessary. Labor once called this very approach unfair, and now they rely on it to save their own creation. They accused the former coalition government of denying people their day in court, yet this bill implements the same principle on a much larger scale. The difference is that we designed fast-tracked review, with structure, resourcing and transparency. Labor is adopting it out of desperation, not design.</para>
<para>There is a human impact. Behind every tribunal file is a person trying to navigate a complex bureaucracy, a small-business owner appealing a tax ruling, a veteran disputing an entitlement or a student seeking to continue to study in Australia. They all deserve a process that is timely, transparent and consistent. The coalition's support for this bill is about those people. If on-the-papers review means faster, high-quality decisions, that is an outcome worth supporting.</para>
<para>There is a financial and regulatory impact. The government claims the bill has no financial impact and minimal regulatory change. That may be technically true, but only because the tribunal must deliver more with the same resources. Labor should not imagine that these legislative changes are a substitute for proper resourcing. Structural underinvestment has crippled the ART, and unless it is addressed, even the best legislative reforms will struggle to deliver results. The Administrative Review Tribunal itself supports these changes, recognising that mandatory paper based review for relatively simple matters, such as student visa refusals, is essential to clearing the backlog. Some in the legal profession have raised questions about procedural safeguards, and those will be tested through a Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. But the broad direction of reform is sound, and the coalition will engage constructively to ensure it succeeds.</para>
<para>This bill is one symptom of a much larger pattern. Across government, we see delay, duplication and drift. Freedom of information requests are stalling. Visa processing times have blown out. Public confidence in administrative decision-making is falling. Labor promised confidence but has delivered utter confusion. The coalition's vision is clear. First, the review system must be independent and apolitical. Second, it must be accessible and efficient. Third, it must be fair and just, giving every Australian the confidence that decisions are made on merit.</para>
<para>This bill moves us closer to that goal. It adopts a coalition idea to restore speed and focus to an overloaded system. Our task is now to ensure that the government implements it, competently and transparently. The Nixon review into the exploitation of Australia's visa system warned that protracted processing times fuel exploitation and undermine integrity. It recommended on-the-papers review for low-risk, high-volume visa streams—and that is precisely what this bill now does. The coalition welcomes the government's long-overdue acceptance of that recommendation, but we will hold them accountable for delivering results, not rhetoric.</para>
<para>While we support the bill, we remain cautious about its delegation of power to expand on-the-papers reviews by regulation rather than legislation. Any future extension beyond student and temporary visas should be subject to clear consultation, transparency and disallowance. Parliament, not the executive, should decide when the right to an oral hearing is limited, and we trust that the Senate committee will make sensible recommendations on this point.</para>
<para>Labor's approach to reform is familiar. They announce with fanfare, abolish what works and then quietly adjust back to the coalition's policy when their system collapses. They did it with national security, they did it with infrastructure, and now they are doing it with the tribunal system. The coalition will not oppose Labor when they correct course and adopt the coalition's policies, but Australians deserve a government that gets it right the first time.</para>
<para>When the coalition left office, the AAT managed about 67,000 cases efficiently, with clear processes and experienced members. Labor dismantled that framework and replaced it with one that doubled the waiting times and the costs. Now, to repair the damage, they've adopted the very measures they once rejected. That's fine by us because our concern has always been the outcomes, not the ownership. To the government, I say this: stop treating administrative reform as a branding exercise. Australians do not care whether it's called the AAT, the ART or anything else. They care about timely, fair decisions. This bill is a step in that direction, but, without proper leadership and accountability, even the best legislation will fall short.</para>
<para>To conclude, the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 is not revolutionary. It is belated recognition that the coalition was right all along. It concedes that fast-track, on-the-papers review works, it concedes that Labor's abolition of the AAT was unnecessary, and it concedes that efficiency and fairness can and must coexist. The coalition supports this bill because it is practical, proportionate and consistent with our long-held principles. We will continue to work through the Senate inquiry to ensure its implementation strengthens rather than weakens natural justice. Australians deserve a tribunal system that is fair, fast and functional. This bill is a small but important step towards that goal, and I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was very pleased to be here to hear the member for Nicholls, and I just want to clarify some of the things he finished with—the conclusion he drew—that there was no need to change the previous AAT and create the Administrative Review Tribunal. In fact, there was a great need to undertake significant reform of the AAT. One reason is that that tribunal had been stacked with Liberal and Nationals appointments. There were 85 former Liberal MPs, staffers, candidates and mates on the AAT, and that was something that had to change. The AAT was also not properly funded to do the work that it was required to do. Those opposite just saw it as an employment opportunity for failed Liberal and Nationals candidates, hacks, cronies and mates. It is now a fundamentally different process. In order to be appointed to the new Administrative Review Tribunal, the ART, you have to have certain qualifications and standards. It is a merit based appointment, and that is absolutely appropriate for a body that is doing a merit based review of decisions that have been made by government departments and agencies. That was one of the fundamental changes that was made.</para>
<para>As someone who sat on and chaired a committee that reviewed the legislation before it was adopted, I delved deeply into the new legislation for the ART, and I was very privileged to have done that. One of the things that we spent quite a bit of time talking about, which the records of the public hearings will show, was about when you review this tribunal. Do you do a two-year review or a five-year review? In fact, what was embedded in the design of the ART is that you make changes as you notice things happening. This piece of legislation that we have here is an absolute example of why that process is so important to have as part of the ART, and that is that, when we see things that need to be fixed and need to be changed, we can do it. We don't have to wait for some formal review of the legislation for that to happen.</para>
<para>I'm really pleased to be speaking today about these changes to the ART. When I think about the ART, I think about an organisation that makes really big decisions that reflect on the quality of life for people. It might be that people are unhappy with a Centrelink decision that really affects their life, and they may not have felt that the circumstances were fairly looked at. It might be an NDIS decision. There is not a government agency where a decision that's made isn't impactful for someone, so to have a body to do this is important. Notably, the ART is not a court. It's not bound by the same formal rules of procedure and evidence. This is not actually about having your day in court, because it isn't a court; it's a review tribunal, and it's designed to support quick and fair decision-making to provide applicants with outcomes as soon as practicable.</para>
<para>So committed to merits review is the Albanese Labor government that we took the very bold and ambitious step to completely get rid of the AAT. That showed that we didn't think what was left was fixable; we thought that it really needed a total wholesale work-out, and that's what we've had. The new ART came into being in October 2024. What would that be? Oh, that would be a year ago. In that year, we've seen certain things and certain things have changed, and we're responding really promptly to those. The reason behind the ART is to restore public trust and confidence in an independent system of merits review in this country. We know that building trust takes time. I think these changes will be one more step to demonstrate our commitment to that and will be deserving of trust. Governance processes have been significantly improved, with merits based selection determining the appointment of those decision makers. That's a really good first step, and these proposed reforms build on that.</para>
<para>Let's talk about the challenge. One of the most significant challenges that the ART faces is that there is limited flexibility to dispense with matters without an oral hearing. Generally speaking, the tribunal is required to hold an oral hearing to determine a matter even in circumstances where it's not necessary to do so. There are some circumstances where an oral hearing is not necessary, but those circumstances are limited—for example, where the issues in contention could be reviewed in written submissions because they go to objective facts, such as whether an applicant has a certain document or not. It might be things that they're required to have in order to be eligible for a visa. That's a factual evaluation—objective facts. The tribunal reviewing applicants like this without a hearing would therefore save time and money and mean more applicants can have their matters considered.</para>
<para>The current inflexibility, coupled with an unprecedented spike in applications to the tribunal—particularly for the student visa cohort—is putting considerable pressure on the tribunal and demonstrating why there needs to be greater flexibility in the policy around oral hearings. The current model also has the outcome of leading to a system that could inadvertently incentivise non-genuine applicants to seek merits review to extend their stay. That would be to the detriment of genuine applicants. When we see that there is a possibility that non-genuine applicants or the people advising them are being incentivised to use this process, particularly where it is to the detriment of genuine applicants, then we absolutely want to act. These changes will support the ART to be quick, efficient and reliable as an avenue for merits review.</para>
<para>I will talk a bit about the specifics. The bill is seeking to address these challenges through amendments to both the Administrative Review Tribunal Act and the Migration Act. The proposals contained in the bill are informed by both the experience of the tribunal over the last 12 months and the rapid review into exploitation of Australia's visa system, which took place in 2023. These are changes based on inquiry and digging deep into what's going on and listening to what the ART says about what it's seeing now and how things might be dealt with more effectively.</para>
<para>The first point in the changes is around new broad general discretion for the ART, because this bill empowers the tribunal to make more decisions about how best to allocate its resources. In addition to the limited set of circumstances in which the tribunal can currently dispense with oral hearings, the bill provides a new broad discretion for the ART to determine matters using the phrase 'on the papers', so based on the documents that are available. That's allowable if the issues for determination can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties to the proceedings and that it's reasonable to do so in the circumstances.</para>
<para>The legislation constrains the discretion to ensure that the tribunal must give the parties opportunity to make submissions in relation to whether a matter proceeds without an oral hearing, and the tribunal has taken those views into consideration. The change means that ART members will be able to spend more time scrutinising information and making decisions and less time in hearings or case management processes. Overall, what does that mean? It means faster access to review for applicants balanced against appropriate safeguards of reasonableness and the opportunity to put the case, through submissions, on why a matter should instead be considered through a hearing. So there's plenty of opportunity for that process.</para>
<para>I want to talk about 'on the papers' for student visas. Importantly, the bill will require that all student visa refusal matters considered by the tribunal be determined on the papers—that is, without an oral hearing. The tribunal is currently experiencing this unprecedented surge in the number of student visa refusal matters lodged for review. In 2024-25, these applications accounted for almost 40 per cent of all lodgements to the ART. So, 40 per cent student visa lodgements; 60 per cent every other government agency and process. It's disproportionate. Requiring oral hearings for this visa class is simply not sustainable for the ART. The growing backlog in these matters is a symptom of the current inflexibility of the procedures.</para>
<para>I mentioned earlier the rapid review into the exploitation of Australia's visa system, which was done in 2023. It identified that decisions of certain temporary visas, including student visas, are suitable to be reviewed on the papers because it's appropriate for reviews of short-term temporary visas to be proportionate, quick and efficient, and expeditious review procedures reduce delays in decision-making and backlogs and support the overall integrity of Australia's migration system, which is something we worked very hard on in our first term of government, and continue to work hard on in this term. The review procedure included in the bill would enable the tribunal to achieve efficiency in addressing its significant case load while ensuring applicants are still given an opportunity to present their case in writing.</para>
<para>Reviews of decisions to refuse a student visa are well suited to be reviewed on the papers; you take into account the nature of the issues under review, the temporary and short-term nature of a student visa and the low volume and complexity of written materials relevant to those proceedings. However, there will be other things that the tribunal would be required to do. They would need to invite applicants to give the tribunal written submissions and evidence on certain matters relating to it. They'll also be required to continue to give applicants certain adverse information and to invite them to comment on it. They will have that opportunity. They will also be required to continue to request or obtain additional materials by other means, including making requests or orders for the applicant to provide certain documents. The tribunal will also be required to make its decision on the basis of the written materials provided without holding a hearing. Ensuring the tribunal can consider student visa matters quickly will absolutely disincentivise the abuse of merits review by non-genuine applicants who are seeking to prolong their stay here.</para>
<para>We appreciate that some stakeholders may argue that the changes aren't fair, because they effectively deny the applicant their day in court. However, this is a different process. It's a merit review, and nothing in this proposal stops an applicant from putting their best case forward. A genuine applicant would seek the ability to do so, whether the pathway was orally or in writing. That's the advice and the thinking that has gone into making this decision.</para>
<para>Finally, the bill is also going to allow the minister to apply on-the-papers processes together for certain temporary visa decisions prescribed in the regulations. It gives the government flexibility to identify additional cohorts to be brought into the on-the-papers review procedure in future as appropriate. Importantly, this power would not apply to protection visa matters, in clear recognition that these applicants generally involve complex issues and are a much more vulnerable cohort of applicants.</para>
<para>I'm very pleased with the way the ART was established, which allowed there to be ongoing improvement, and I would expect we will see more ongoing improvement as different issues arise and emerge—and the Albanese Labor government will respond to those as they occur. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. The objective of this bill, to improve the efficiency of the tribunal, is one I broadly support, but I also harbour serious concerns about aspects of the government's approach. On balance, I intend to support the bill given the efficiency gains it promises, but I will be proposing an amendment to ensure those gains are not bought at the cost of fairness to international students and other migrants.</para>
<para>Since 14 October 2024, the Administrative Review Tribunal has operated in place of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The ART was established under the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 with the explicit aim of modernising and strengthening the system of merits review across the Commonwealth. In broad terms, the ART is empowered to review administrative decisions made under more than 400 Commonwealth acts and legislative instruments ranging from visas and migration to taxation, social security, NDIS, child support, veterans entitlements, workers compensation and more. Its mission is to provide an independent, accessible, fair and efficient merits review process. The ART can receive new evidence, revisit factual material and assess matters afresh. It may affirm, vary or set aside the original decision or substitute a new decision. Its procedures are meant to be flexible, with the minimum formalism necessary to ensure justice.</para>
<para>The ART's design emphasises merit based appointments of members, enforceable performance standards and a code of conduct to underpin the integrity of the institution. All of this reflects past lessons learned from the operation of the AAT—for example, politicised appointments, insufficient transparency and structural pressures on capacity and case backlogs. In short, the ART is intended to be a more coherent, resilient and trusted tribunal, one that can deliver just outcomes without unnecessary delay.</para>
<para>The principal problem the tribunal faces today is that rising case loads are driving unacceptable delays in decisions. Wait times are growing, which causes hardship to applicants and defeats the aim of the tribunal. One of the drivers of this backlog is student visa refusal appeals, which have surged in number to now make up almost 40 per cent of all lodgements. Because of those backlogs, some applicants wait many months, even more than a year, before they learn whether their case is accepted or how it will be handled. During that time, their lives, studies, families, finances and future plans are in limbo. In some cases, students may lose academic semesters or funding. In migration matters more broadly, long waits undermine certainty and foster anxiety and instability for people and their families. Further, delays also impose costs on government, on legal services and on the administrative system more broadly. The longer cases remain pending the harder they are to manage and the more resources are consumed simply through case management and review. So we do need a way to manage cases, particularly student visa matters, more efficiently.</para>
<para>This bill introduces three central changes designed to bring efficiency to the tribunal and reduce waiting times. Firstly, it mandates that student visa refusal matters be decided on the papers, or without an oral hearing. Secondly, it grants the minister a regulation-making power to require other temporary visa matters to be decided on the papers, although reviewable protection decisions are explicitly excluded. Thirdly, it gives the ART a broad discretion to decide remaining matters on the papers, subject to certain statutory limitations. The core logic is that by shifting more cases from hearings to written processes the tribunal can dispose of more cases faster. Applicants submit documents, arguments and evidence and do not need to attend face-to-face hearings. The government assigns all student visa cases to the paper based stream, gives the minister power to designate further categories and provides the ART with latitude to make on-the-papers determinations in other matters when appropriate.</para>
<para>I support the underlying aim to reduce backlogs, cut waiting times and make the tribunal more responsive, but I have serious reservations about the first two changes in particular. The first change requires all student visa refusal matters to be handled on the papers. The government's justification is that student visa decisions tend to be straightforward, governed by clear criteria and therefore do not require a hearing. It asserts a written process is sufficient in most cases. While I accept that may often be true, it's implausible that it holds all the time. The fact is that, when they're appealed, student visa refusal decisions are set aside or overturned by the tribunal nearly half the time. This shows that, when additional evidence is heard, often during oral hearings, a different conclusion is frequently reached. A shift in process will affect these directly. So, while most student visa decisions may be suitable for on the papers, a blanket ban on all oral hearings for student visa matters seems inappropriate.</para>
<para>There are several reasons why certain student matters may require an oral hearing. The first is discretionary and contextual judgements based on credibility. Many student visa refusals turn on questions of genuine student intention, credibility and personal circumstances. These judgements are hard to capture in writing alone. Hearing evidence, cross-examination and oral explanation often exposes nuances better. The second is youth inexperience and complexity. Many student applicants are young with limited capacity to navigate complex legal and factual materials. Written submissions demand legal precision and sophistication. In an oral hearing, tribunal members can ask clarifying questions, probe credibility and ensure applicants have had the opportunity to present their best case, especially those without legal representation. The third is translation and comprehension issues. At an oral hearing the tribunal provides translation services for applicants with limited English, but no equivalent translation support exists for preparing written submissions. That means applicants may struggle to express themselves clearly in writing, undermining the fairness and persuasiveness of their application. Last is procedural efficiency. In some exceptional cases an oral hearing may actually be more efficient, allowing a tribunal to resolve complexity quickly in person rather than through protracted exchanges of documents.</para>
<para>These are specific and compelling reasons why a blanket requirement for on-the-papers decisions of student visa matters is problematic. The second problematic change is the minister's power to designate other temporary visa categories for paper based review. The power is broad, discretionary and exercisable without meaningful parliamentary oversight. Relying on a ministerial regulation to decide categories risks arbitrary designation, and different temporary visa categories are still likely to have nuances and exceptions that may mean an oral hearing is more efficient or more fair in certain cases. A blanket approach eliminates that flexibility. It precludes the possibility of exceptional or complex cases being heard orally, even where fairness, justice or efficiency would favour this.</para>
<para>For these reasons I will propose an amendment to the bill to afford the tribunal discretion to decline a paper-only pathway and hold an oral hearing in student visa or designated temporary visa cases when the tribunal deems that appropriate. In other words, the tribunal should have the power to opt for a hearing in particular cases.</para>
<para>In its submission to the committee, the Commonwealth Ombudsman supported such an approach, writing:</para>
<quote><para class="block">From a student's perspective, it would be fair and appropriate for the Tribunal to have discretion to have an oral hearing …</para></quote>
<para>That principle should be built into the framework. While the exercise of this discretion by the tribunal may itself be reviewable, in my view the potential delay does not outweigh the value of preserving procedural fairness. On balance, giving the tribunal discretion will enhance both the efficiency and the justice of its decision-making. I'll elaborate on my amendment to that effect during the consideration-in-detail stage.</para>
<para>I also note a number of criticisms raised by stakeholders which are worth drawing attention to, in the hope that they can be addressed in implementation. Some suggest that the student visa surge may be temporary—in which case, sweeping permanent legislative change may be disproportionate. Denial of oral hearings might push more appellants to seek judicial review in courts, which could add pressures to the federal courts and undermine the bill's goals of efficiency. The experience of the former Immigration Assessment Authority showed that reliance on paper based decision-making was often found to deny procedural fairness and produced increased litigation. A trial of on-the-papers decision-making in the NDIS tribunal context with the independent expert review program was terminated after nine months because it failed to deliver sufficient efficiency improvements.</para>
<para>There are other, less drastic alternatives to improve ART efficiency without undermining fairness. First, reducing unnecessary primary refusals could occur via increased use of requests for information. Too often a visa is refused simply because a missing document or clarification was not sought, only to be overturned later at review. Second, strengthening the tribunal's triage registry and support processes, giving more resources to registrars and administrative staff and increasing the number of tribunal members could ensure cases are processed more swiftly and effectively without reducing procedural safeguards.</para>
<para>To summarise, the ART is a freshly established institution intended to revitalise Australia's system of merits review, yet the tribunal now confronts serious pressures from surging case loads, especially from student visa refusal appeals. These delays do cause harm to students, migrants and families, and to the integrity and credibility of the review system. The Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 seeks to confront that problem by shifting many matters to on-the-papers review, mandating this approach for student visa refusals, granting a ministerial designation power over other temporary visas and giving the tribunal discretionary power for the remainder.</para>
<para>I support that ambition and believe that the tribunal must evolve to meet demand. But in its current form the bill overreaches, in removing access to oral hearings for all student visa cases and in giving the minister wide regulatory power over all other visa categories. This risks undermining procedural fairness or denying justice to meritorious applicants. Therefore I will move an amendment, and I would encourage the government to consider it, to ensure the tribunal retains discretion to hear an oral hearing in any case, including student visa reviews, where fairness, complexity or individual circumstances justify it. I believe that amendment balances the twin imperatives of efficiency and justice.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The creation of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in 1975 stands as a significant achievement in Labor's legacy. The Whitlam Labor government recognised the importance of having an impartial institution to oversee the review decisions made by ministers and, indeed, government departments. It was a pioneering development 50 years ago, one that today continues to embody a fundamental principle of democracy: governments must be accountable to the people.</para>
<para>The AAT was designed to empower individuals to question government decisions and ensure that actions taken under Commonwealth law were fair and equitable. This is about accountability, fairness, transparency and processes of review. The AAT evolved over the decades. In July 2015 the former coalition government merged the Migration Review Tribunal, the Refugee Review Tribunal and the Social Security Appeals Tribunal into the AAT. Unfortunately, this consolidation was poorly executed and left behind a problematic legacy, including financial instability. When Labor came into government in 2022, we inherited an AAT that was labouring under a host of serious issues. The coalition left behind a tribunal that was overwhelmed by a massive backlog of cases and outdated digital systems that were ill equipped for modern demands, but these weren't the only changes.</para>
<para>The tribunal was heavily influenced by political appointments. The former government appointed up to 85 individuals with direct ties to the Liberal Party, including former MPs, former candidates, staffers and close affiliates. Research by the Grattan Institute in 2022 revealed that a staggering 20 per cent of the AAT's 320 members had political connections to the appointing government. Worse still, many of these appointments bypassed merit-based selection processes. Some appointees lacked the necessary qualifications or experience. It was obvious that a body structured in this way could not credibly claim to be impartial or competent in reviewing government decisions.</para>
<para>Labor came to government committed to providing the Australian people with an administrative review body that operated independently, free from political interference. After thorough consultation with the public, the Administrative Review Expert Advisory Group and multiple parliamentary committees, the Albanese Labor government legislated to replace the compromised and mismanaged AAT with a new body that Australians could trust: the Administrative Review Tribunal, or the ART.</para>
<para>The important word here is 'trust'. Labor knew it was vital to restore public trust and confidence in our independent merits review system. Accordingly, one of the features of the new ART was a transparent, merit-based appointment process, independent of political influence, because people want to know that the process of merits review is fair and robust. People want to know that the process of merits review works in this country.</para>
<para>The new ART outlined stringent qualification requirements. The President of the Administrative Review Tribunal must be a judge of the Federal Court of Australia, and judicial deputy presidents must be a judge of either the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. Other appointments must be enrolled lawyers with varying degrees of substantial experience, specialised training or experience in relevant subject matter. This is important because the tribunal's work is absolutely vital. Its members are tasked with reviewing decisions made by government agencies, ensuring that laws and policies are applied correctly but also fairly. Every year, tens of thousands of Australians depend on this process to challenge decisions that can profoundly affect their lives, their families' lives and their futures—decisions that determine whether someone receives a permanent visa, qualifies for the pension, secures veterans compensation or obtains essential NDIS support. That is why public trust in the tribunal is a non-negotiable. It's an absolute must. It's fundamental.</para>
<para>In terms of this bill, the ART has been operational since October 2024. During this time it has become apparent that some of its procedures require more flexibility. This bill addresses these matters and will lead to the timely resolution of emerging delays. This is mainly occurring with reviews concerning temporary migration. We don't want applicants left waiting without an answer for months, particularly when an efficient merits review would provide a response. Put simply, people need clarity. People need clarity because clarity allows them to plan their future, plan for their family and plan what they are going to do next.</para>
<para>Currently, oral hearings are required in the majority of circumstances, even when matters could be investigated and resolved through written submissions. Written submissions which rely on objective facts, such as the presentation of a specific document or the eligibility for a visa, demonstrate how a matter can be reviewed efficiently 'on the papers', meaning no oral hearing is required. We're talking about sensible efficiency here—efficiency that can be achieved without sacrificing the robustness of process or procedural fairness that is inherent in the work of the ART.</para>
<para>The measures contained in this bill were informed by the Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia's Visa System in 2023, otherwise known as the Nixon review. As a result, all student visa refusal matters will undergo this new, on-the-papers process. Student visas are appropriate for on-the-papers reviews due to the nature of the issues under review, the temporary nature of the visa and the low volume of relevant documentation. The tribunal will still be required to give applicants the opportunity to make written submissions, as well as giving applicants certain adverse information and requesting return comment. The tribunal can also continue to request additional information regarding the matter at hand. These amendments to the Migration Act 1958 are a reasonable and efficient approach to take with student visas, which are short term and in relatively low volume. These adjustments will help clear the review's backlog, give genuine applicants peace of mind and deter people who aren't genuine from using the system to just stay longer.</para>
<para>It will be possible to add additional temporary visa types to this category in the future, but it is important to note that permanent and protection visas will not be assessed in this way. These matters are inherently more complex and, in the case of protection visas, often concern a more vulnerable cohort.</para>
<para>The bill also amends the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 to give the tribunal more power to choose to make a decision based on written materials rather than an oral hearing on other processes regarding temporary visas. Safeguards in place include that the matter at hand be determinable without an oral hearing, that it is reasonable to rely on written submissions and that all parties to the matter have been able to make submissions as to whether an oral hearing is, indeed, required. These changes to the functions of the ART mean that the highly experienced and expert ART members will be able to spend more of their time assessing the content and circumstances of applications as opposed to sitting in hearings and managing caseload processes. This means faster processing time for applicants, and it means that people who are seeking to make these kinds of applications will have answers more quickly.</para>
<para>Fundamentally, the ART is about ensuring a fair merits review process, with an opportunity to have one's case heard. It is about making sure that people are treated with procedural fairness. An important part of that process is people getting answers within a reasonable amount of time. The efficiencies that are put forward in this bill are all about making sure that people get an answer as soon as possible. Administrative review continues to be an important feature of our legal system. While part of the system, the ART is not a court and does not have the same legal, procedural and evidential rules. It is designed to enable quick and fair decision-making and timely outcomes for applicants.</para>
<para>This bill does not stop applicants from putting a comprehensive case before the ART. What it does do is give the tribunal the tools to process cases efficiently and fairly, and it upholds the merits review system, which is absolutely critical to Australian legal processes. It also bolsters public confidence in the ART and strengthens the integrity of our visa and migration system. Tribunal decisions on the basis of written reviews will increase efficiency and save money, meaning more applicants will be able to have their matters considered. It will also efficiently and reliably address the unprecedented increase in applications for student visas. In 2024-25 student visa refusal matters accounted for almost 40 per cent of all lodgements to the ART.</para>
<para>This bill is an example of responsive and responsible leadership by the Albanese Labor government. It will ensure a fit-for-purpose ART and provide greater efficiency and certainty for applicants. If we go back to 1975, when the AAT was created—by a Labor government—and look at the fundamental principles that sat behind the creation of the original tribunal, that is what this bill is about. The AAT was created to make sure that merits review was fair and that, when it came to decisions of government, people had a place to go to put their case forward for review. This bill upholds those fundamental principles and makes the ART fit for purpose so that we have fairness, transparency and a clear review process that deals with people's issues efficiently every single day. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As the member for Goldstein, it is a great privilege to speak on this legislation. I speak as somebody who supports this legislation because there is no legislation in this parliament that has ever been put forward by the member for Isaacs that has not needed improvement.</para>
<para>The member for Isaacs established the Administrative Review Tribunal in the last parliament. He has a litany of train-wreck legislation that needs constant improvement, like his tenure as a minister in government. I say this with sadness. When he isn't turning up to teal fundraisers and events in Goldstein or sending volunteers to Goldstein to help teal candidates get elected—even though they claim to be independent—he puts train-wreck legislation before the parliament. Of course, this legislation is designed to fix the legacy of the member for Isaacs, who, every time he has tried to put things forward, has gone onto fail and create more problems and more confusion than the problems he sought to solve in the first place. I remember this, well and truly, back in my time as Australia's human rights commissioner, when we were dealing with the legacy of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments and the children who were asylum seekers, locked in detention because of those governments.</para>
<para>During that time, the member for Isaacs, at the latter stage, was Attorney-General. During that period as Attorney-General, he was confronted with a number of choices. Some of those choices could have been to get children out of detention, just like this sort of legislation; review the Administrative Review Tribunal; or review legislation to assess whether people should have pathways to be able to get out—visa or migration pathways. But that wasn't the pathway that the member for Isaacs took. As Attorney-General, his solution was to seek to abolish the office of the Australia's human rights commissioner, the office that was, in part, responsible for oversight of the treatment of those children in detention.</para>
<para>So what do we have? We had children denied education. The solution to that was to abolish the position of the person who had oversight. Children were suffering from mental health conditions. The member for Isaacs's solution was to abolish the position of the person whose responsibility was to have oversight over the mental health deterioration of children in the custodianship of the government. At every single point, what we had was a government—the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government—who was involved in demonisation and humiliation of children and a rapid advancement in the deterioration in their mental health. His only answer to those situations was through a different piece of legislation put forward to abolish the office of Australia's human rights commissioner, which included a pathway to remove any oversight or actually address the problems of how the government was bullying, dehumanising and delegitimising children.</para>
<para>I am not surprised that this legislation had to be put forward by this government to fix the long litany of, once again, the member for Isaacs's problems. He was very vocal about this legislation today in question time, when anyone dared question the correlation and relationship between the Australian Labor Party and the CFMEU, and was outraged that anybody might highlight that the Labor Party received $7 million worth of funding and that the head of the Victorian branch, who's directly connected to figures like Mick Gatto and John Setka, sits on the National Executive of the Australian Labor Party. I think it's the member for Bruce, who's sitting opposite at the table right now, who also sits with the head of the Victorian division of the CFMEU on the National Executive. But, apparently, there's no issue here! Nobody can see any issues or problems, even though they're directly associating with criminals and organised gangs. But, again, no-one from the Labor party seems to care.</para>
<para>Yes, the previous speaker, who spoke before, is right. There are issues around making sure there's transparency, and oversight, and a process that's being followed. But I can well and truly be confident that you're not going to get it from this Labor government. That's why their legislation, which the member for Isaacs introduced in the previous parliament, needs to be fixed—because, despite his promise of a grand future of the Administrative Review Tribunal ushering in a new era of review rights to make sure that there was integrity, trust and transparency sitting behind tribunal hearing processes, it has instead turned into a catastrophe of epic proportions.</para>
<para>The AAT, which was doing its job making sure there were proper review processes of administrative decisions, was replaced by a body stacked with his mates that is now slower, more expensive and facing the largest backlog in its history. The caseload has now increased to 67,000 matters, substantially more than was the case when we were last in office. Median case times have now blown out from 30 weeks to 68 weeks under the member for Isaacs and, of course, the current attorney-general. Student visa appeals have risen from around 2,000 cases to more than 40,000, an extraordinary growth by any measure with which one could count.</para>
<para>Labor's abolition of the AAT was a vindictive, malicious and unnecessary attack solely because they didn't get to appoint every single person who sat on it and they wanted to make sure it was like the Fair Work Commission or another organisation where only their people sat on it—because they want to control every single part of the artifice and control the state. Well, sorry, Deputy Speaker Freelander, but we live in a democracy.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am aware of that, thank you.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There are, of course, a diversity of views that are allowed to be had. There are a diversity of views that are allowed to be spoken. As sure as night follows day, some people are entitled to be part of the artifice of the state that are not members of the Australian Labor Party!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Kennedy</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Shock, horror!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Shocking, I know, Member for Cook, that some people are allowed to serve the Australian community even if they are not signed-up members of the Labor Party! This is not yet Pyongyang yet. When the Prime Minister comes back from one of his international sojourns, as he does, and tries to treat this parliament like the National People's Congress, some of us are still going to be here quite happily asking him questions that are not the questions he wants to have asked of him—not the ones telling him how wonderful he is or how glorious his new regime is or about all of his incredible success stories that he wants to claim and boast about. Some of us are going to ask him difficult questions about the relationships that he has, including why he relies on the votes of the head of the Victorian division of the CFMEU on the national executive of the Labor Party.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I remind the member to be relevant to the legislation.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Absolutely, Deputy Speaker. I'm being 100 per cent relevant to the legislation. We are talking about review rights and review processes, and it's very important to make sure that we're drawing attention very clearly to the issue of transparency, consistency of review rights and, of course, integrity, which goes right to the heart of this government. In fact, that was a key theme of the previous member's speech and that of just about every single member who got up and spoke on this legislation: integrity is at the heart of this legislation and how it speaks to this government, and I agree with them.</para>
<para>We've got the member for Bruce, who's sitting at the table—he was standing only moments ago—and he's directly connected to the head of the Victorian division of the CFMEU.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Minister?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hill</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On relevance and respect for the chair: word association is not relevance. That was an unhinged rant that has nothing to do with a clause in the bill, and he didn't move a second reading amendment.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As I've already mentioned, the member should be relevant to the legislation.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As outlined, the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 goes directly to the process and integrity of the government. All of the other speakers from the government made this point. They used this as the basis to extol the virtues of the government. All I am doing is highlighting and shining a bright light on this.</para>
<para>I realise it's very difficult for the members sitting opposite to have it highlighted to them, because it shows an uncomfortable truth: that if you're going to make your integrity central to the passage of a piece of legislation and have it embodied in the legislation because, as the ministers have said, the foundation of this legislation is transparency of review processes and decision-making, then maybe an association with the head of a criminal enterprise is not a great place to start, just as the conduct of the current member for Isaacs—I know he'll be former one day, but at the moment he's current—and his consistent failure around processes of legislation which led to the need to introduce this bill is also an important part of the conversation.</para>
<para>So, of course, we have a problem with the law as it currently operates. Labor's bill has failed the Australian community. It has delayed decision-making. Australians have been let down, and part of it is because we have a minister who's sitting at the table and ministers who are sitting on government benches over there who are simply not interested in driving legislation which is going to improve the Australian community. They simply have legislation that advances the interests of the people that they seek to represent, which is primarily the patronage and power associated with the Labor Party. And, of course, even when they appoint people to the Administrative Review Tribunal to do exactly that, they're being failed by them. But it's the Australian community that is suffering the consequences of the patronage network of the Labor Party.</para>
<para>So, this legislation is designed as a backflip, acknowledging the simple reality that their legislation has failed. It isn't going to work for the Australian community, so they are having to fix up their administrative mess. Of course, as much as we don't want a backflip, because we'd rather that the law works, we welcome a decision of a backflip from the Labor Party, because it means we might actually see some improvement in decision-making and in the pathway for decision-making—simply to be able to allow the tribunal to make decisions on the papers for significant migration matters, starting with student visa refusals, and give it a broader discretion to decide other matters on written material. Applicants will still be invited to provide written submissions and respond to any adverse information before a decision is made. These reforms are designed to improve efficiency and reduce the record backlog and deliver faster, fairer outcomes.</para>
<para>So yes, we are fixing the problems of the legislation put forward by the Labor Party that has led to a huge backlog for those many Australians—or those who are not even Australians—who rely on the Administrative Review Tribunal as the basis for fair decision-making. I just wish the Labor Party would acknowledge that there is a need for transparent, informed integrity-based decision-making in so many other areas. We don't have it in the context of the Australian construction industry right now, where we know that, because of the failure of the Labor government, there is flagrant abuse of the law, ongoing allegations and whistleblower evidence increasingly coming out and highlighting that the minister has failed and Labor's solution to corruption on Australian worksites has failed. And we have an administration that has become an enabler of corruption.</para>
<para>If they've got that in one area and they've got a failure, as they have with the Administrative Review Tribunal—to their credit, the government eventually acknowledged that yes, the member for Isaacs didn't get it right, and we have to fix up his mess once again—then maybe they could turn around and say, 'The current Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations is failing the Australian community and is an enabler of corruption, and maybe she needs to fix that legislation.'</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I ask that you withdraw that, please.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I withdraw.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister has failed the Australian community, and whistleblowers are saying that corruption is running rife under the solution that is currently legislated, that she is oversighting and that she is backing to the hilt, and is saying the strongest possible course of action is needed. When it comes down to it, when you acknowledge a failure like the failure of the Administrative Review Tribunal and you're prepared to amend the legislation to acknowledge that, maybe it's time to look at other institutions and artifices that you have introduced and try to fix those as well.</para>
<para>So, now this is a teaching moment, not just about the failure of the member for Isaacs but about the legacy of Senator Murray Watt and of course the current operations of the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. But we know full well that there will be no action by this government, for a simple reason: too many people on the other side of this chamber right now are tainted and directly connected to the misconduct that is leading to a situation that they want to perpetuate. There is a real need now for this parliament to stand up and call out the conduct that is leading to corruption on Australian worksites, and we are going to continue to prosecute this argument every step of the way. I hope the Prime Minister and others will call out this conduct and improve the standing for the Australian community.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JORDAN-BAIRD</name>
    <name.id>316021</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, brought forward by the Attorney-General, and I commend her for doing so. Our country's history is one of migration. With the exception of our Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander Australians, every Australian is either a migrant or of migrant descent. I couldn't be prouder to stand in this chamber as a member of the Albanese Labor government, a government committed to strengthening the integrity of our migration system. This bill amends two pieces of legislation to ensure that the Administrative Review Tribunal, the ART, can review migration decisions efficiently and flexibly.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>176</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hinkler Electorate</title>
          <page.no>176</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATT</name>
    <name.id>315478</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My electorate of Hinkler is full of opportunity, new beginnings and wonderful people getting things done. This was on show at the blessing of a new grotto and garden at the Sacred Heart Catholic Parish in Childers recently. The famous Bruce Highway runs through this town and the peaceful space is open to locals and travellers looking for somewhere to take a break. The new Maternal Heart Garden and Grotto was officially blessed and dedicated as a place of fellowship, faith and renewal. I had the privilege of being involved in the opening with Father Jack Ho, members of the parish and the year 1 students from the neighbouring St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, where I presented an Australian flag at an earlier assembly. The students sang, danced and used AUSLAN to celebrate the opening. The generosity of the local O'Brien and La Rocca families made this grotto and garden possible.</para>
<para>I'm proud to have officially opened the new Hinkler electorate satellite office in Hervey Bay, a bustling and booming community that deserve to have their voices heard. Thankyou to the Leader of the Nationals, David Littleproud, for giving his time to celebrate the opening. I've commenced constituent meetings in the office, and on the day of the ribbon cutting I was fortunate enough to spend time with Hervey Bay pharmacist Paul Stanton in the lead up to World Pharmacists Day. Paul shared the challenges and opportunities facing our local pharmacy, and I applaud Paul and all Hinkler pharmacists for their role in keeping my community healthy. I also met with Australian Medical Association of Queensland president and local Hervey Bay GP Dr Nick Yim, who highlighted the need for private practices in Hinkler to be given a fairer go to ensure patients can access more affordable and reliable health care.</para>
<para>I've had the fortune to take my mobile office on the road throughout Hinkler over the past two weeks. My 'Straight off the Batt' office visited 17 locations. My team and I said g'day to locals at the Buxton boat ramp, Childers' main street, the wonderful beachside village of Woodgate, Torbanlea, Aldershot, Toogoom, the beautiful Burrum Heads, various locations around Bundy, Burnett Heads, Bargara, Elliott Heads, Pialba, Urangan and River Heads. The strong themes discussed were aged-care concerns, veterans affairs, telecommunications shortfalls, energy policy, rising electricity prices and the cost of living. I thank my community for attending these mobile office locations. I value their feedback. I will always work hard to find solutions to any matters facing the people of Hinkler and ensure regional Aussies get their fair share.</para>
<para>I highlight two of Hinkler's finest young ambassadors and leaders: Hervey Bay's Maxim Van Wijk and Bundaberg's Emily Cullinan. Max is 15 years old and has been selected to attend a Rotary youth exchange for 12 weeks in Belgium. Max is hoping to hone his French language and immerse himself in the local culture and cuisine. Emily, from Bundaberg, is also 15 years old and will head to Cancun, Mexico for her three-month exchange. These programs build friendships around the world and teach students a new language and culture. I have proudly met with these two youth exchange ambassadors and presented them with an Australian flag, an Australian pin, a copy of our Constitution and other resources to take with them overseas. On behalf of the Hinkler community, I wish Max and Emily safe travels and look forward to catching up with them both on their return.</para>
<para>I wish BUSHkids a happy 90th anniversary. It is a not-for-profit organisation supporting children and families in regional, rural and remote Queensland. Once known as the Royal Queensland Bush Children's Health Scheme, the roots of this organisation are in the electorate of Hinkler, in Hervey Bay. It all started with summer camps for bush children at the QCWA holiday college at Pialba. BUSHkids, as an organisation, has evolved, and it is always about improving the lives of children, particularly those experiencing disadvantage. BUSHkids delivers holistic family centred services in collaboration with local communities, community organisations and health and education providers. In Hinkler, the Early Childhood Approach, or ECA, delivers services in Hervey Bay and Bundaberg, supporting children with disability or developmental delay from birth to age nine. I recently had the privilege of supporting and attending the screening of a film called <inline font-style="italic">SEEN</inline>, presented by BUSHkids, which provides an inspiring insight into the power of positive parenting. In their 90th year, I applaud the work of BUSHkids staff, the Friends of BUSHkids volunteers, CEO Carlton Meyn, president Dr Neil Bartels and the board for all they are doing to give our youngsters the best shot at life. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Childhood Heart Disease, Health Festival of Geelong</title>
          <page.no>177</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Good health is something too often taken for granted, but, for thousands of Australian children and their families, every heartbeat is precious, and every step we take to support them matters. Every day, more than eight children are born with heart disease. That's more than 3,000 children every year, or roughly one child every three hours. Across Australia, it's estimated that 32,000 children are living with childhood heart disease. These are not just numbers. Behind every statistic is a family, a community and a young person with hopes and potential.</para>
<para>The HeartKids foundation is making a real difference in this space, and in my electorate of Corangamite their impact is being felt on the ground. Just last Saturday, I had the privilege of joining Hannah Pearl, her family and her incredible HeartKids team in Connewarre in my electorate for the Two Feet & A Heartbeat Walk. Despite torrential rain, families still turned out in numbers to support this amazing cause. Many of the families have experienced loss or have children who are currently undergoing treatment for a heart condition. Many tears were shed, including mine. I have a nephew who was born with a heart condition which required immediate intensive care. He's doing well now, but it was an extremely difficult period for our family. Across October and November, thousands of Australians are walking side by side as a reminder of why this cause matters.</para>
<para>Families like Xavier's know this too well. We heard this story before the walk on Saturday. At 36 weeks gestation, doctors discovered Xavier had several serious health conditions. Born at 37 weeks via emergency C-section, he was immediately rushed to the Royal Children's Hospital. At only four days old, he required temporary pacing wires. By 11 days, open heart surgery had inserted a shunt and pacemaker. With a blocked shunt, two rounds of ECMO and cardiac arrest, Xavier's brief life was marked by unimaginable challenges. His passing was sudden and devastating. Yet, through the heartbreak, his parents, Angie and Daniel, found support from HeartKids: food and fuel vouchers during hospital stays, ongoing counselling and a community to help navigate life after loss. Their courage in sharing Xavier's story ensures his memory lives on and helps other families walking the same journey.</para>
<para>The federal government recognises the critical importance of supporting families facing childhood heart disease. The Australian National Standards of Care for Childhood-onset Heart Disease, released this year, are the culmination of over a decade of advocacy from HeartKids, patients, families, carers and healthcare providers. The federal government's investment in making these standards a reality has been vital, but there's always much more to be done. This is the kind of work that makes a real difference in people's lives, and it aligns with our broader focus on health in the community.</para>
<para>Another local event on the weekend was the Health Festival of Geelong, an event celebrating health, wellness and preventive care, including initiatives like our government's Medicare urgent care clinics. I'm so proud that we have one of these clinics in Belmont and we're just around the corner from delivering another in Torquay. We're also rolling out Medicare mental ill health prevention hubs, with one set for Torquay, and of course our changes to bulk-billing will come in from 1 November. Together, these initiatives show what's possible when Australians have a government that puts health care front and centre. Events like the HeartKids walk and the Health Festival of Geelong show what's possible when communities, healthcare providers and governments work together. I'd like to take a brief moment to congratulate the organisers from the health festival, including Dr Jenny Huang from Banksia Medical Centre in Torquay. Well done on such a successful event.</para>
<para>Supporting organisations like HeartKids, investing in standards of care and ensuring families have access to the services they need is so important. So I urge all Australians to get involved—to walk, to support, to raise awareness—because no family should face childhood heart disease alone.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment</title>
          <page.no>177</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Environmental law reform is well overdue. We can agree on that. That view is very much shared by those on both sides of the House. So why is it that this Labor government is yet to get the balance right? We've said that from the beginning. We need to ensure that jobs and investment continue whilst minimising the impact on the environment—it's important to note that investment is in decline in this country—so this reform is simply too important to get wrong. In its current form, and from the amount of draft legislation that we've seen, Labor's environmental laws risk being nothing but a gift to our overseas competitors. It will be a blow to Australian industry, business and workers. That's jobs, income, families and communities.</para>
<para>This also risks the government's latest critical minerals deal with the US, and for what? To appease the green groups? To keep the door open for negotiations with the Greens? Or to appease the left faction of the Labor caucus? It seems like a contrast to Labor's so-called productivity agenda because the proposed plan might please the far-left activists, but it seriously risks Australian jobs, projects and prosperity. Australia can protect the environment and still get things built right now. Labor's laws will do neither because every added layer of bureaucracy makes it harder for projects to get off the ground. That makes it easier for investment and jobs to go offshore. Labor's reckless decision to prioritise the interests of green groups over jobs and productivity puts reform on life support.</para>
<para>We suggested a genuine option to fast-track and streamline reforms right now. In the letter that the Leader of the Opposition and I penned to the Prime Minister, we proposed that the bill be split to prioritise and streamline approvals, because that's what is urgent, while dealing with the contentious measures separately. The proposal that we put forward, which the government flat out rejected, will cut sovereign risk and restore business confidence, along with helping to unlock critical minerals and other major projects. The coalition supports genuine environmental reform. Splitting the bill means parliament can move immediately on these reforms. Again, we know they're long overdue and we know that approvals are taking far, far too long. We must ensure jobs and growth without being held hostage by Labor's more controversial proposals.</para>
<para>Despite what those on the other side of the House claim, the coalition supports genuine environmental reform. We strongly believe we need to care for the environment. The coalition's record on the environment, particularly under the Leader of the Opposition's leadership as environment minister, is one we are so very proud of. As the minister, she led the development of reforms to fix the approvals process. In 2022 the coalition announced a $1 billion Great Barrier Reef fund. Our $280 million Recycling Modernisation Fund drove a $1 billion transformation of the waste and recycling sector. We invested billions in threatened species, habitat restoration, marine conservation and environmental projects. And, under the Morrison government, Australia's investment in renewable energy continued to break records. It was an investment that saw renewables ultimately make up almost one-third of our energy mix. We have a proud history of environmental conservation in our party, and they are just some of the many initiatives and investments made by the coalition. So, when we say the government is again rushing through complex, untested legislation, we have the credentials to back that up, going all the way back to Malcolm Fraser, who put protections on the Great Barrier Reef.</para>
<para>When industry backs up these claims, you know there are alarm bells ringing. This legislation will put billions and billions of dollars of investment and thousands of Australian jobs at risk. Instead of speeding up decisions, they're creating a system that will stop projects dead in their tracks. We need certainty and we need balance—certainty for industry and jobs, and balance for the environment and protections. We simply cannot continue to operate with the legislation in its current form. I'll continue to speak with the government to see where we can move amendments, where we can come to the middle or if Labor will split the bill. We cannot wrap industry up in additional red and green tape. We must protect our environment. There is a way forward.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>178</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEESDALE</name>
    <name.id>314526</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tonight I want to celebrate two remarkable young people from my electorate of Bass who have taken part in Raise Our Voice Australia, a national initiative that amplifies the voice of young Australians in our parliaments and in our public life. ROVA gives students a platform to step into our shoes for a moment, to put their ideas on the record and to remind us that policies ultimately are about the future that they will inherit. It is a simple but powerful concept: ask young people what matters, listen carefully and take their contributions seriously. In Bass, and across Australia, we are lucky to have young adults who are thoughtful, curious and brave enough to engage with big questions. They do not all agree, and nor should they. They bring different values and experiences, and that diversity is a strength. Our democracy is healthier when we make room for principled disagreement, for evidence and for respectful debate.</para>
<para>I'm proud of the culture of participation that is growing in northern Tasmania through our schools, community groups and families. It is encouraging young people to write, speak up and lead. Programs like ROVA help turn classroom conversations into civic engagement and turn civic engagement into lifelong public service—in whatever form that takes. I say to the students from Bass who submitted this year: you should be proud. It takes courage to put your words forward and to be judged on your ideas. Thank you for trusting me with your voices. Tonight I will place two of these voices on the parliamentary record. The first is Lucia, who asks us to think beyond electoral cycles and plan for the next century:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Hello. I'm Lucia. I'm 15, and I live in regional Tasmania, an island rich in natural resources. Lately, I've been thinking not just about next year or the next election but the next 100, 200 or even 500 years. Countries like Singapore and Japan already plan that far ahead, and I believe Australia should too. Right now, it feels like every time the government changes, so does the plan. We get short-term fixes instead of long-term vision. But if we thought in centuries, our policies would look very different. We wouldn't keep selling off ports, farms and mines to the highest bidder. We would protect and strengthen our manufacturing sector. We would make sure our natural resources are locally owned. We would also invest properly in education, climate action and mental health, not just because they are popular now, but because they shape the future we want to build. True leadership means asking, "What kind of country will we leave behind?" and then acting on it. I may be young, but I want to grow up in a country that thinks big, builds wisely and plans for generations, not election cycles.</para></quote>
<para>The second is Jessica, age 16, who challenges us to balance government responsibility with individual agency:</para>
<quote><para class="block">These days it's common to look to the government for answers. The first reaction is often, "The government should fix this—that's their job." However, the Government was never intended to manage every part of our lives. Its role is to protect our rights, maintain order, and create conditions where people have the opportunity to succeed. Over time this focus has shifted, and more people expect the government to step in and handle problems that we might solve ourselves. While it's natural to want comfort, something important is lost when we depend too heavily on elected governments. Solving challenges on our own builds resilience, whereas constant reliance and the reduction to self-determine can ultimately lead to disadvantage. Rather than asking for more programs and subsidies we should ask the government to focus on creating an environment where everyone, no matter their circumstances, can build a life based on their own goals and efforts. With the freedom to choose and the opportunity to achieve comes both risk and responsibility. The better question isn't ,"What will government give us?" but, with self-interest in mind, "What will our governments allow us to do for ourselves?" True freedom means having the ability to take care of yourself and shape your future, even when there are challenges. I'm thankful for our Australian government and hope that it always allow the people who elect it to thrive.</para></quote>
<para>I commend both young writers and I thank Raise Our Voice Australia for this opportunity. Thank you so much to Lucia and Jessica.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rural and Regional Health Services</title>
          <page.no>179</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week in Perth I spoke at RMA25, a conference co-hosted by the Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine, and the Rural Doctors Association of Australia. I spent most of the day listening—I think we could do more listening and less talking as members of parliament—to health professionals from across Australia. This is what I delivered as part of my address.</para>
<para>In regional health, good public policy is partnership. And that partnership is really important in the regions. Regional communities are great places to live because people are connected and care for one another. Communities are invested in the health services that they have. Too often those services are very hard won and never taken for granted. But what we do have is workforce challenges. I've observed a consistent shortfall in the health workforce outside metropolitan areas.</para>
<para>It's worth noting at this point that regional, rural and remote areas cannot always be lumped into one category. They have their own individual challenges and idiosyncrasies, and the Modified Monash Model has attempted to put a framework around this in order to prioritise areas of most need. This can work well when governments have the ethos of respecting that, but there have been examples lately where there has been an attempt to pay the Modified Monash Model lip service, and I believe this has led—and will continue to lead—to poorer outcomes for people outside regional areas. An example of this is the distribution priority area classification and the limited number of medical bonded doctors and overseas trained doctors available to be deployed into areas of workforce need. This has significantly shrunk under the Albanese government's changes to the Modified Monash Model. Automatic inclusion of MM2 as a district priority area has made an incentive that was previously exclusive to rural and remote towns available to regional centres and, perversely, to some areas that are on the fringe of major capital cities.</para>
<para>Along with the distribution of medical professionals, there are three main ways we can increase the numbers in areas outside metro areas: we can recruit from overseas, we can recruit from Australian metro areas into the regions, and we can train people in regional areas. Bringing in healthcare professionals from overseas is essential, and this must never be lost in the necessary discussion we should have about migration in Australia. Another way is to attract people from metro areas to regional, rural and remote areas. But then you have to find a way to keep them. I was involved in an effort, before coming into parliament, called the Greater Shepparton Community Connector Program. Working with local government, we were developing a concierge service—it was based on a successful model in Canada—where new employees and their families were connected by a local representative to help them find the schools, housing, interest groups and networks they needed to make their relocation successful.</para>
<para>A third way is to grow our own—that is, train people outside metro areas. The Melbourne University school of rural health at Shepperton is part of the broader Murray-Darling Basin medical school and a fantastic example put together by the previous coalition government whereby students can do an undergraduate Bachelor of Biomedical Sciences in the regions then graduate into a Doctor of Medicine postgraduate degree. In the case of my electorate, this is in the school of rural health at Melbourne University in Shepperton. The first lot of those graduates will graduate at the end of this year, in a few weeks. Those young people are already connected to the community. Many of them have made family connections and bought houses, and they will practise in the regions. It's a great example of moving tertiary access to people in regional, rural and remote areas so that we can grow our own health workforce.</para>
<para>Again, in my electorate, Melbourne University and Goulburn Valley Health have developed this model to extend health education, and I would like to see that not just in medicine and general practice but also moved into other areas of applied health learning and allied health, such as physiotherapy, nursing and midwifery—the list goes on of the number of students that we can train in regional areas. I'd like to also see that training expanded beyond the Murray-Darling medical school and beyond just medicine. There's so much potential in regional areas for us to train our own. We need to move Commonwealth funded places, to not just have them in the sandstone universities of Melbourne, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane but also move them out into the regions.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Box Hill Prostate Cancer Support Group</title>
          <page.no>180</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak about the Box Hill Prostate Cancer Support Group, which does amazing work in my electorate of Menzies providing support to survivors and those living with prostate cancer, as well as raising awareness of prostate cancer. I wear this pin today to show my support for them and to show my solidarity with them.</para>
<para>I first had the privilege of meeting this great group of blokes when I attended their information evening at Box Hill Town Hall in September, which of course was Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. There I heard from survivors and those undertaking treatment, from their families who support them on their journeys and from health practitioners. They shared stories, they shared experiences and they shared practical tips, and they did it all with good humour and a few laughs. It was clear how important this group was for members and their families, because sometimes it's only people who have been through the same experience who can really understand and who you can feel comfortable leaning on.</para>
<para>I will be honest, like a lot of blokes I hadn't given prostate cancer much thought. Thanks to these men, and the health professionals who work alongside them, I now understand that one in five Australian men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in their lifetime. It is the most common cancer among men after non-melanoma skin cancer. Men over 40 with a family history are at greater risk, but early detection can make all the difference. Because it might put a few blokes off being tested, it's important to let people know that the digital rectal exam is no longer needed. A simple blood test from your local GP can detect prostate cancer early.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hill</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's just a little prick!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That's right! Thank you to the member for Bruce! When caught early, 96 per cent of men survive for at least five years after diagnosis.</para>
<para>These last facts were particularly striking for me. Thanks to these men, and because I have a family history of prostate cancer, I prioritised getting a PSA test when I got my over 40s health check. I've caught up with the Box Hill Prostate Cancer Support Group a couple of times since, including at the recent Whitehorse Spring Festival. They were getting out into the community, putting themselves out there to raise awareness. And even though they met resistance from some of the men they approached, they wanted to make sure other men got tested early and were aware of the risks.</para>
<para>As men, we often put our health last. If something isn't falling off or sticking out at a weird angle, we don't worry about it. But we need to talk about our health more and we need to be more proactive in managing it—not just for ourselves but also for our families, for our kids—and because catching problems early lessens their impacts and even prevent deaths. Perhaps for this reason, the awareness of prostate cancer and the importance of catching it early is not where it needs to be. That is why I am proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government, which is standing up for men's health. We're investing more than $32 million in men's health initiatives, including $11.3 million to Movember to provide men's healthcare training to primary healthcare workers. This will mean more than 60,000 doctors and nurses will be able to support men to get the health care they need. Of course, this is on top of our other health initiatives, like our record investment in Medicare, which will mean more Australians can see a GP for free, as well as our increased training and support for new GPs and nurses.</para>
<para>Thank you to the Box Hill Prostate Cancer Support Group for supporting each other, for your advocacy to help me understand how the government can better support you and your families, and for raising awareness throughout our community to save lives and reduce the impacts of prostate cancer.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 19 : 59</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>180</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>180</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Monday, 27 October 2025</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY SPEAKER </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">(</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Ms Mascarenhas</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 10:29.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>182</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>182</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I speak today on behalf of families in my community of Mackellar who are very worried about the transition to the new Thriving Kids which the government plans to roll out from July 2026. The 2023 NDIS review recommended investing in foundational supports outside the NDIS for children aged zero to eight years with mild-to-moderate developmental delay or disability, including autism. The goal is to ensure early identification and support for children while also ensuring the long-term sustainability of the NDIS. These are incredibly important goals; we all want our children to have the best possible start in life and we all want a sustainable NDIS, but in the rush to implement change, our community is already feeling the unintended consequences.</para>
<para>Despite assurances from the government that no child would be removed from the NDIS before foundational supports are in place, I have heard from local providers and families that this is not the case. One local provider, Kids First, has had to advocate for 10 families whose children were exited from the NDIS when their funding expired. These families were left without support for up to five months—months that are critical in a child's development. This has caused immense stress and disrupted care, and has led to setbacks in the children's progress. Another local speech pathologist shared with me that two of his young clients have also already been removed from the NDIS despite no alternative supports being available. The proposed Thriving Kids program is intended to fill this gap, but has not yet been designed or implemented. The children's schools are doing their best, but they are already stretched to capacity and don't have the required expertise. These are not isolated incidents. They reflect a broader experience as children with clear developmental needs are being exited from the scheme before the new supports are in place.</para>
<para>The Thriving Kids program is welcome in principle, but we must ensure that, as government works with families and the sectors to design this program, transitional safeguards are in place. No child in our community should be left without the care and support they need during these early vital years. Our children deserve better, our families deserve certainty, and our community deserves a system that works for everyone.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Australia Post</title>
          <page.no>182</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to again raise the concerns of my community about the imminent closure of Shortland Post Office. Shortland Post Office has been a critical part of the social fabric of this community for decades. It's more than just a place to send letters or collect parcels; it's a lifeline, especially for older residents, people with disabilities and those who don't drive. The message from Shortland residents is loud and clear: 'We want our post office to stay open.' Jennifer told me, 'Shortland is a great post office offering early opening times and a convenient local collection point for parcels.' Francis said, 'I have limited capacity to access postal services, so the impending closure of Shortland Post Office has significant impact on me.' Merryn stressed to me: 'This decision to close post offices is selfish and discriminatory to those in the area who are elderly, don't drive, are disadvantaged or are disabled. They provide vital services to people, such as banking, and not even has access to technologies.'</para>
<para>These are not isolated concerns. They reflect a pattern of disregard from Australia Post for local communities right across Newcastle and the Hunter region. We have seen the same story play out in Elermore Vale, Lambton and Glendale, where local branches have already been shut down. Each time, Australia Post ensures residents that nearby outlets will be able to cope, but the reality is very different. I want to thank the more than 2,000 residents who have signed a petition and contacted me directly, calling on Australia Post to reverse its decision to close the Shortland Post Office. For these residents the efforts to date are simply not good enough. I want to assure Shortland residents that their voice matters. I will continue to fight alongside you to keep the Shortland Post Office open and accessible for all.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the work of the state member for Wallsend, Sonia Hornery MP, who has been standing shoulder to shoulder with me and the Shortland community in our efforts to try and get this decision reversed. This petition represents a community that is angry, frustrated and, frankly, heartbroken at the prospect of losing an essential local service. Australia Post must listen. In the words of my constituent, Sommer: 'Stop closing all the post offices. We need them.' I seek leave to table the petition.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The document will be forwarded to the Standing Committee on Petitions for its consideration. It will be accepted subject to confirmation by the committee that it conforms to the standing orders.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing, Migration</title>
          <page.no>183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When I'm out and about in the great community of Longman that I serve, there are three things that people are most concerned about. Those three things are, first, cost of living—it's becoming unaffordable. They're sick and tired of going to the grocery store—every single time it seems to go up. Their electricity bills continue to rise. I speak to people who are constantly having rent rises, because landlords have to increase the rent to pay for the higher interest rates.</para>
<para>One of the greatest challenges, which brings sadness to my heart when I go out and speak to young people at schools, is that the great Australian dream of homeownership is fast disappearing. When I ask for a show of hands for who thinks they'll own their own home one day, sadly, it's probably one in 20. Nineteen out of 20 don't think they'll ever achieve that dream, which many of us from my generation took as a given. That's what we did in Australia. It's been driven, no question, by outrageous immigration levels.</para>
<para>We need immigration, and, unless you're 100 per cent Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, the news is that we're all descendants of an immigrant or an immigrant ourselves. When we have controlled immigration, then our country is better for it. But, when it's out of control, it puts a great burden on the housing stocks, and housing isn't difficult. It's pretty simple. If you've got more people than you've got houses, the price goes up. If you've got more houses than you have people, the price goes down. That's why, over the last three or four decades, both sides of politics have kept immigration to about 160,000 to 180,000 people. The reality is that we build enough homes on average for about 280,000 people. We grow organically by about 100,000 people. Do the maths. That leaves about 180,000. So that's why it was always at that level. But for some reason this government has tripled immigration over the last three years. That's just driven the price up.</para>
<para>The problem is that it's our people—the Australian people, the citizens—that are suffering. It's our young people. We see these prices exponentially grow and grow and grow. It's crazy, and I'm calling on the government. We need to have a good hard look at this and reduce it and make sure we put the citizens of this country first and foremost. Then we bring in enough people in the areas where we have a shortage—instead of a lot of the unskilled immigration that's coming in at the moment, simply for political reasons. Let's think about our kids and our grandkids and make sure that they've got that dream of owning a home in this great country once again.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hasluck Electorate: Education</title>
          <page.no>183</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We can all remember a great teacher. I went to public schools in Lockridge in York and in Northam, and I'm always grateful for the efforts of teachers. I remember my first class in year 5, when Mrs Carmichael at York District High School had us all lie down on the classroom floor. She drew the curtains, she turned out the lights and, on the record player, she played all six minutes of 'Bohemian Rhapsody'. This was the first time I had ever heard it and it was an unforgettable experience. That is what good teachers do: they open eyes, ears and minds; they expose their students to aspects of culture and examples of greatness; and they plant seeds that allow us to imagine different futures for ourselves and for our world.</para>
<para>It is, as all members know, school graduation season across Australia, and I'm looking forward to visiting many schools upon returning to Hasluck. I have already had the honour of being present at a few celebrations so far. On Friday, I presented flags at Henley Brook Primary School. The students there had a chance to honour their teachers for World Teachers Day. They spoke about how they wanted their teachers to know how much they were appreciated; that they were patient, caring, full of wisdom; and that they helped their students to reach for the stars. One said, 'Thank you for staying up late marking our work, thank you for helping us when we were stuck, and thank you for cheering us on. You make a huge difference in our lives.'</para>
<para>Last Tuesday, I spoke to the graduating class of Morley Senior High School while presenting an award to an extraordinary student, Amelia, for her leadership demonstrated not just within the school but outside the school as well. And I was also honoured last week to attend Cyril Jackson Senior Campus, where hospitality students welcomed successful alumni back to visit. Earlier that day, I also met with play group teachers and parents in Meerilinga.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has come to agreement with every state and territory for raising public school funding to 100 per cent of the school resourcing standard, and I'm happy to be able to say that Western Australia was the first state to strike a deal, and schools across Hasluck are already benefiting from this improvement.</para>
<para>Our educators span across all ages and walks of life. They include the accredited and qualified teachers in our schools, and also people who share their knowledge and experience in many ways—the doctors mentoring young graduates at Midland Hospital, the instructors passing on their wisdom at Smart Martial Arts at Ellenbrook and the older hands at Wally Bates Memorial Boxing Club in Midland, coaching and mentoring their charges.</para>
<para>We honour our teachers every year and everyday by delivering for them where we can do so. I'm proud of our government's achievements on this so far.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forrest Electorate: Sport</title>
          <page.no>184</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SMALL</name>
    <name.id>291406</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to commend an outstanding group of athletes and celebrate their remarkable achievement in my electorate of Forrest. I speak of the Alcoa South West Football League women's team, who recently secured their sixth successive Nutrien Ag Country Championship. To understand the significance of this, we must appreciate the deep roots of this regional competition. The country football championship, now known as the Nutrien Ag Country Championship, holds a long and proud tradition in Western Australia. The core men's and Colts competition is a historic event which has been played for some 59 years as of this year. This history is re-enforced by a very long and enduring 51-year partnership with Nutrien Ag as sponsors, highlighting the powerful link between country footy and our regional businesses.</para>
<para>The growth of the women's game is a source of immense pride in our community. The women's championships are vital, although they are a much more recent addition, having been played for the first time in only 2019. This year, the competition was particularly noteworthy, as it was hosted outside of the Perth metropolitan area for the very first time, taking full advantage of the exceptional facilities at Hans Oval in Bunbury. Before a healthy crowd, the defending champions faced a formidable great northern side. The game was tight and a physical contest. Great Northern showed great intent in the early stages but our south-west team responded with grit and resolve as they had so many times before, with Tanisha Anderson and Rennie Meadmore securing goals in the first term. The great northern side continued to challenge, narrowing the margin to just four points in the third quarter. It took the consistent tenacity of our team, particularly Gemma Hill, who twice restored the advantage, to maintain the lead. The final term was controlled by the south-west team, who ultimately claimed their sixth consecutive championship.</para>
<para>I wish to formally commend the standout performance Ella Smith, who, I'm informed, was a strong performer throughout the entire carnival. She was deservedly named player of the championship and in the grand final itself. Congratulations also to Maddy Obal, who was awarded the prestigious Peter Beattie medal as the best player of the carnival for the south-west football league. I also commend the Nutrien Ag All-Star Team members from the SWFL: Beth Beckett, Rennie Meadmore, Ella Smith, Kloe Bassett, Daisy Rigby and Christie Daniels.</para>
<para>Finally, I also acknowledge the efforts of the team coach, Nathan Smith, for his leadership and the hard work of the organising committee from Country Football WA and the South West Football League, including the general manager, Jason Crowe, and his volunteer league executive, for their hard work in supporting the South West Football League women's team in their incredible achievements. It makes our community a stronger and more resilient place to live.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bennelong Electorate: Environment</title>
          <page.no>184</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Soon this parliament will have an opportunity to consider one of the most important environmental reforms in a generation, legislation to establish Environmental Information Australia and a federal EPA. The choices this parliament makes will decide not just what kind of country our children inherit but what kind of parliament we choose to be.</para>
<para>Australians, and particularly those in Bennelong, care deeply about our natural environment. They expect us to get this reform right. They're paying close attention not only to the laws we will bring before this parliament and the detail within it but also to how we will debate this legislation over the next two to three weeks. This is the third attempt to change these laws after a number of really significant and detailed reviews, and these laws have failed before. People in Bennelong have written to me and have made it very clear that they want this parliament to get reforms through. They don't want them to fail again.</para>
<para>I've spoken about environmental action and climate action before in this place on behalf of Bennelong. It is something the people of Bennelong really care about. Themes of progress, leadership and environmental protection are always at the top of discussions I have in my community. At the Lane Cove Sustainability Festival a few weeks ago, people were actively raising this issue with me. At the Granny Smith Festival, where we celebrate the Granny Smith apple—which was created in Eastwood, in Bennelong—people were talking to me about this legislation. They know about it; they care about it.</para>
<para>On top of an open letter, I received over 100 signatures from Bennelong residents earlier this year who want to see the games end. They don't want this legislation to fail. They want the Senate and the House to work together to get these reforms through. We know that the current laws are simply broken. You don't need to listen to politicians to tell you that these laws are broken; listen to the reviewer, the very eminent Graeme Samuel. He just gave an extraordinary interview a few days ago where he said he was becoming 'frustrated' and 'angry' at the political posturing. For someone like Graeme Samuel, that's a pretty extraordinary thing to say publicly—that he's angry at the political posturing that exists on this at the moment. We need to come together.</para>
<para>Minister Watt has done an extraordinary job in a very short amount of time, not only to get this back on the agenda but to have legislation in place to bring to this parliament before the end of the year. I urge all here in this place, on behalf of Bennelong, to do what's needed to get it through the parliament.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hinkler Electorate: Sport, Shaw, Mrs Estelle, Duncan, Senior Constable Brittany</title>
          <page.no>185</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATT</name>
    <name.id>315478</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week, I had the privilege of personally presenting 17 sporting champions from Hinkler with certificates of recognition for their amazing efforts across a wide range of sports, including Lincoln Davis from Hervey Bay, who represented Australia in Muay Thai. These school-age stars represented our region in sports such as basketball, touch football, squash, golf, rugby league, BMX and many more. These local sporting champions have received much-needed financial support to attend state, national and even international championships, and I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate them all.</para>
<para>You can't get any better than the best in the world. Hinkler is celebrating Hervey Bay's Matthew Hauser becoming the World Triathlon Championship Series 2025 world champion. Only a few days prior to the big race in Wollongong, at my mobile office, I caught up with Matt's very proud grandfather, Syd Dart, in beautiful Burrum Heads. Syd is a well known local and, of course, one of Matty's biggest supporters. The raw emotion as Matt crossed the finish line to secure the world title was something to behold. Matt is the first Aussie since Emma Moffat in 2010 to win a WTCS title. Congratulations to Matt, his family, friends and support team for doing Hervey Bay and Hinkler proud.</para>
<para>Not all Hinkler champions come from the sporting field or the track. Estelle Shaw is a hero who wears fluoro. For 30 years, Estelle has kept children safe crossing the road to and from school. A school crossing supervisor, Estelle—affectionately known, of course, as 'the lollipop lady'—has, for nine years at Branyan school and 21 years at Avoca school, served with care and compassion. It's people like Estelle who form the fabric of our community. It was great to be visiting Avoca State School as Estelle was recognised for her work, which I hope continues for many more years to come.</para>
<para>I'd like to congratulate Senior Constable Brittany Duncan, a valued member of the Queensland Police Service Wide Bay Burnett district, who recently received the Neighbourhood Watch Australasia Police Commissioner's Award. Senior Constable Duncan is a well-known representative of the police service in my community of Hinkler. This award recognises someone from the police force who has demonstrated exceptional commitment to Neighbourhood Watch Australasia by building strong partnerships between police and the community. A district crime-prevention coordinator for Bundaberg district, Brit has been a Neighbourhood Watch liaison officer for over five years. She is widely respected for her dedication and for supporting key community programs, including Youth in Touch, which uses touch football to divert young people from crime; Rise Up, Be Yourself, a domestic violence support program, known as RUBY; and ThinkUKnow, which promotes online safety. I'd like to commend Brit's dedication and professionalism and thank her for making our community a safer place.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Capital Territory: Books and Reading</title>
          <page.no>185</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the words of Groucho Marx: 'Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.' In the past five days, Canberrans have been enjoying the Canberra Writers Festival. The biggest program yet featured the likes of Andy Griffiths, Elizabeth Finkel, Trent Dalton, Virginia Haussegger, Jack Heath and Chris Hammer. My congratulations to festival Chair Jane O'Dwyer and the volunteers for their hard work in pulling the event together.</para>
<para>Many people work to fuel an active book scene in the bush capital. Colin Steele's Meet the Author series, run in collaboration with the <inline font-style="italic">Canberra Times</inline> and the Australian National University, is perhaps the best-attended book-launch series anywhere in Australia. The Indigenous Reading Project, founded by Daniel Billing, is a non-profit company that works to improve the reading ability of First Nations children. At Cafe Stepping Stone Strathnairn, founded by Australian local heroes Vanessa Brettell and Hannah Costello, a monthly silent reading group invites people to come along and read quietly with fellow book lovers.</para>
<para>Canberra hosts a bevy of book clubs, from the Tough Guy Book Club to Mamma Mingle. The Canberra Fantasy Book Club has you set for dragons. The NFSA book club does movie combos. The Gals Evolving Book Club focuses on feminism. And Book Cow's book clubs include queer, translations and OzLit clubs. Libraries ACT makes it easy, lending out book-club sets of up to a dozen copies of a single title.</para>
<para>Canberra has many independent bookstores, including Book Face in Gungahlin; Pulp Book Cafe in Nicholls; Book Passion in Belconnen; Book Lore in Lyneham; Harry Hartog at Woden and ANU—shout out to Katarina Pearson; Peter Arnaudo's Book Cow in Kingston; and Tayanah O'Donnell's Paperchain in Manuka.</para>
<para>For my own part, I do most of my reading through audiobooks and try to dive into the soul-nurturing breadth of fiction as much as possible. This year, I've been devouring Liane Moriarty's wonderfully Australian thrillers, especially <inline font-style="italic">Here One Moment</inline>, and sharing the canine joys of Markus Zusak's <inline font-style="italic">Three Wild Dogs</inline>. I've also enjoyed some near-future novels, including Bruce Holsinger's <inline font-style="italic">Culpability</inline>, Ted Chiang's <inline font-style="italic">Exhalation</inline>, Kaliane Bradley's <inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">he Ministry of </inline><inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">ime</inline>, Laila Lalami's <inline font-style="italic">The Dream Hotel</inline> and Eleanor Catton's <inline font-style="italic">Birnam Wood</inline>. Outside of fiction, I've loved Astrid Jorgensen's memoir, <inline font-style="italic">Average at Best</inline>; Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's <inline font-style="italic">Abundance</inline>; Bent Flyvbjerg's <inline font-style="italic">How Big Things Get Done</inline>; John McWhorter's <inline font-style="italic">Pronoun Trouble</inline>; and Suzanne O'Sullivan's <inline font-style="italic">The Age of Diagnosis</inline>.</para>
<para>Thanks to the writers who inspire us, the readers who sustain us, the booksellers who keep our shelves stocked and the volunteers who make it all possible. In a city built on ideas, our bookshops, festivals and reading groups remind us that the best conversations don't stop when the final page turns.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Volunteering</title>
          <page.no>186</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Volunteers have a strong presence throughout the Gold Coast community, whether it's helping out with local sporting teams or responding to natural disasters or emergencies or helping local charities. Volunteers and volunteering have never been more important than they are today, with so many people who need extra support.</para>
<para>Last Thursday it gave me great pleasure to once again host the Moncrieff Community Volunteer Awards at Merrimac State High School on the Gold Coast. Merrimac State High was very generous in providing the space for me to host these awards for a third year in a row. Thank you to Principal Rachel Cutajar, the whole Merrimac team—her school leaders as well—and the Gold Cost community for their continued support of this event. The awards provide us with the opportunity to recognise our volunteers for the contributions that they make to the central Gold Coast community. We're so lucky to have many volunteers, who do the hard yards in the community and give up their time, their love and their support to provide a helping hand when required. Congratulations to all the recipients at this year's Moncrieff community awards.</para>
<para>I also congratulate our Gladys Moncrieff award recipients. This year I expanded the award from one individual award to four speciality awards. The Gladys Moncrieff Women in Leadership Award was presented to Indiah Collingridge for Little Grubbs Orchard and the work that she does there for children. The Gladys Moncrieff Multicultural Appreciation Award was presented to Pushpinder Oberoi for his dedication to the GOPIO community across the Gold Coast. Our inaugural Gladys Moncrieff Service to Veterans Award went to Mark Swain for the great work that he does with the veterans at the Nerang RSL. The Gladys Moncrieff Community Club Champion Award went to the wonderful Mr Jeff Burchell—you are the glue that holds our community together, and I'm extremely proud to be your member and to represent you in Canberra.</para>
<para>Another example of glue that keeps our community together is Gold Coast Women in Business. This year I was thrilled to be bestowed the honour of national ambassador for the women in business awards for 2025 by founder Karen Phillips. Over the years, I've seen this event grow in numbers and indeed prestige. The Gold Coast region is home to an inspiring calibre of talent, resilience and entrepreneurial spirit. The Gold Coast Women in Business program provides a meaningful opportunity to shine a light on those businesswomen who continue to break new ground. These awards are more than just accolades; they're a testament to the courage, the creativity and the commitment of Gold Coast women. I want to extend my congratulations to all the winners of the 2025 Gold Coast Women in Business Awards and say to them: 'Keep on keeping on; you are the engine room of the Gold Coast economy. You make me very proud.'</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lyons Electorate: My First Speech Competition</title>
          <page.no>186</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WHITE</name>
    <name.id>224102</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to take the opportunity today to speak on behalf of a group of remarkable young people who wrote to me as part of the My First Speech competition. Students from across the Derwent Valley took the time to share their ideas for making our community stronger, fairer and more vibrant. From horseriders to skaters and musicians to future business owners, these young Tasmanians are showing us what it means to dream big for rural and regional Tasmania.</para>
<para>Ella and Sophie raised concerns about litter and pollution along the Derwent river and our bush tracks. They see the beauty of our region and they want to protect it for generations to come. Cooper asked for a bigger skate park in New Norfolk because he knows that, when young people have places to gather safely, communities thrive. Jaidah called for more jobs for young people, not just for spending money but to help her family and learn independence. That's the spirit of regional Tasmania—practical, hardworking and community minded. Olive suggested more after-school programs, from sport to art and sewing, to keep kids active and engaged. Adam and Billy thought big about the future of the Derwent Valley, imagining new industries and workplaces that create jobs locally while protecting the environment. Alex wrote about wanting more opportunities in New Norfolk—new places to work, eat and play and even dirt-bike tracks that could host events and bring people together. Emillia spoke with passion about learning. She wants more teachers and specialists in music, art and languages so kids in regional Tasmania have the same opportunities as kids elsewhere.</para>
<para>These ideas show us that our young people are observant, thoughtful and proud of where they live. They're paying attention and they believe in the power of community to make things better. Their voices remind us that opportunity shouldn't be determined by where you grow up. Whether you live in the heart of Sydney, in Hobart or in the Derwent Valley, every child should be able to learn, work and dream close to home. Their voices remind us of how important it is to listen to these young people. To Ella, Sophie, Cooper, Jaidah, Olive, Adam, Billy, Alex and Emillia: thank you for your honesty, your ideas and your love for your community. You've given us a glimpse of the future of regional Tasmania. It is built on creativity, care and confidence, because, when we uplift young people, we uplift the whole of Tasmania, and I'd like to thank each of them for participating in the speech competition.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>187</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rural and Regional Health Services</title>
          <page.no>187</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) 28 per cent of the Australian population live outside major cities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) people living in rural and remote areas have higher rates of hospitalisations, deaths and injury and also have poorer access to, and use of, primary health care services, than people living in major cities, yet investment in regional and rural health is falling behind, leaving regional communities with outdated facilities, insufficient training places and healthcare students struggling to train locally; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the lack of open, competitive and needs-based hospital infrastructure funds means regional and rural hospitals have no transparent, competitive Commonwealth funding pathways to build critical infrastructure to deliver health services for the growing border population into the future;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that premiers are calling for increased funding from the Commonwealth Government for hospitals, including specifically for infrastructure; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to establish a $2 billion Building Regional and Rural Hospitals Fund to provide competitive and needs-based investment for new buildings, equipment and planning, so health services in regional, rural and remote areas classified as MM2 and higher can apply for hospital infrastructure funding to meet the needs of their communities now and into the future.</para></quote>
<para>Regional and rural Australia is in desperate need for more investment in our health, including in our health infrastructure. The stats don't lie. The National Rural Health Alliance estimates that rural Australians received $8.3 billion less in healthcare funding compared to urban Australians in the 2023-24 financial year. This funding gap has grown by almost $2 billion since 2021-22, and this has consequences. Rural and regional Australians die younger and have longer term, worse chronic disease than their metropolitan counterparts. This data matches stories from my local electorate of Indi. I hear time and time again about health infrastructure failing to meet the needs of communities right across Indi. When it fails, rural Australians endure unnecessary suffering and trauma.</para>
<para>Elise, whose father lives on the border, recently wrote to me concerned about a four-day delay in her father's surgery at Albury Wodonga Health. The delay led to serious complications, including a gangrenous gall bladder, sepsis and her father being placed in an intensive care unit on a ventilator. Thankfully he survived. This was not caused by a lack of will or expertise on behalf of the incredible staff at Albury Wodonga Health. The family were told the delay in treatment was due to there being only seven operating theatres between Albury and Wodonga hospitals—an absolutely appalling situation when we know that we need 13 new additional operating theatres. This region has a population of over 100,000 residents, and it's one of Australia's largest and busiest regional health centres.</para>
<para>The New South Wales and Victorian state governments are investing more than half a billion dollars in redevelopment of the Albury hospital; however, the upgrade is not fit for purpose. NSW Health expects the scope of the project to include new surgical and operating theatres. I'm pleased to hear that, but it came to light—and the ABC's <inline font-style="italic">7.30</inline> recently showed—that they will be constructed not as operating theatres but as empty shells without the internal fit-out and equipment required to make them operational. Can you believe it? When the two state health ministers wrote to the federal health minister seeking additional funding for Albury Wodonga Health, they were told there was not a Commonwealth grant available for this purpose. Health facilities need to be built to meet our region's growing health needs now and into the future—not with corners cut, not scaled back to retrofit a budget.</para>
<para>I've done the work to address this and give rural hospitals a pathway to seek additional funding from the Commonwealth to deliver the care their communities so desperately need and deserve. My proposed $2 billion Building Regional and Rural Hospitals Fund offers a vital funding lifeline for regional and rural health hospitals right across Australia. Through this fund, regional health services like Albury Wodonga Health will have the opportunity to apply for open, competitive and needs based funding to deliver health infrastructure in partnership with the states that meets the community's needs. In Indi, this would also mean places like Bright district hospital, Mansfield hospital and health precincts right across rural and regional Australia would have a pathway to seek legitimate, fair and transparent funding from the Commonwealth. This policy puts transparency back into health funding and addresses the dire underfunding in rural Australian hospitals.</para>
<para>The federal government has a clear role in funding health infrastructure because—you know what—they already do it. The problem is that it's often not transparent, competitive or needs based spending of taxpayer dollars. In the last election, both major parties were guilty of pork-barrelling promises for health and hospital infrastructure. Both major parties promised $200 million for a hospital in the seat of Hasluck. They promised $120 million for a Rouse Hill hospital on the border of the electorates of Greenway and Mitchell. And $150 million was promised to Flinders medical centre, which is on top of Labor's 2022 election commitment of $200 million at the same hospital in the seat of Hindmarsh. Labor promised $80 million to Fairfield hospital bordering the electorates of Fairfield and McMahon. I have no doubt these health services need this money to meet their community needs, but the real problem here is a lack of transparency. There is no open, fair process to assess need; there is no opportunity for other hospitals facing equally urgent pressures to apply for funding. I call on this government to close the stark gap in regional health funding and adopt my proposal for a $2 billion 'building regional and rural hospitals' fund.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I call for a seconder for the motion.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Wilkie</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion by the member for Indi, and I reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to speak on the motion from the member for Indi and thank her for bringing this critical issue for rural health to the floor of the House. For my constituents in the rural portion of the seat of Bullwinkel, this isn't a theoretical debate; it is a matter of daily importance. It's about ensuring our families can get a doctor's appointment when they're sick. It's about having the confidence of quality care, knowing that it is available locally without a long drive to the city. It's about supporting our dedicated local clinics and hospital staff, who do such a fantastic job in the rural communities.</para>
<para>As a former rural and remote area nurse myself and a general practice nurse, I know that our rural communities deserve to be able to get the care they need, when they need it and close to home. The Albanese Labor government understands this, and we understand that a strong Medicare supports people. It eases cost-of-living pressures, and it takes pressure off our hardworking hospital staff. That is why we're getting on with the job of strengthening Medicare for all Australians, especially those who live in regional and rural communities. Through the 2025-26 budget, we're investing $7.9 billion to strengthen Medicare. This includes $644 million for more Medicare urgent care clinics and $660 million to build upon our health workforce.</para>
<para>You can't have a strong health system without a strong health workforce. For too long, communities across Bullwinkel have struggled to attract and retain doctors and health professionals when they need it. That's why I'm proud of our government's work in formally recognising rural generalism. It's a new specialty field within general practice, and this is a game changer. We aren't just training more doctors; we're training the right doctors for our communities—doctors with specific advanced skills where they're needed in primary care, in emergency medicine and often in obstetrics and mental health. This year, Australia will see the largest cohort of future GPs in our history. More than 1,800 doctors are commencing training. And, crucially, at least a quarter of these doctors are GPs in training in that new specialty of rural generalism. These are the doctors who will staff our local clinics and hospitals for years to come, and our government is funding their training.</para>
<para>And, of course, finding a doctor is only half the battle—affording one is the other. Our $7.9 billion is designed to make it easier for people in Bullwinkel to see a bulk-billing doctor. For the first time, from 1 November, we're expanding bulk-billing incentives to all Australians and creating an incentive for practices that bulk-bill every single patient. Here is the crucial part for my community: those incentives are higher in the regional and rural areas. This means any Medicare-eligible patient in Bullwinkel bulk-billed for a standard consult will attract a higher Medicare payment for their GP than a patient in the city would. A GP at a rural practice that bulk-bills every visit is expected to earn $24,000 more than a mixed-billing practice that provides the same services. So this is the direct, practical and funded incentive to make bulk-billing more viable for our local clinics. And we're already seeing the results. Since Labor tripled the bulk-billing incentive for our children and concession card holders last November, Australians in regional and remote areas have had nearly 2.5 million additional bulk-billed visits to the GP.</para>
<para>We are delivering a record $1.8 billion for our public hospitals on top of the workforce incentives, and we're committed to finalising the new five-year National Health Reform Agreement to give our hospitals long-term funding certainty. This is in stark contrast to the cuts and neglect of those opposite when they were in government. For the people of Bullwinkel, this means more doctors, lower costs and a stronger public health system, because, in Australia, your health care should be determined by your Medicare card, not your postcode.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm delighted to second the member for Indi's motion because it hinges on equity, access and dignity for every Australian. Healthcare facilities in rural and regional areas have long been neglected, leading to an urgent need for dedicated federal funding. Of course it's unacceptable that, in a country as rich as Australia, rural Australians receive $1,090 less healthcare funding per person each year than city residents. Indeed, according to the National Rural Health Alliance, that shortfall now amounts to over $8 billion annually, resulting in longer wait times, a lack of specialist services, staff shortages and, of course, outdated infrastructure.</para>
<para>In Tasmania, where most of the state is classified rural and remote, the impact is especially acute, because, while Tasmania's four major public hospitals provide vital services, they're also supported by13 district hospitals, from King Island to New Norfolk, from Smithton to St Marys. These facilities are the backbone of their communities. But, when you talk to families or health workers across Tasmania, you hear the same concerns: facilities are outdated, emergency departments are cramped or overflowing, diagnostics are limited, and, too often, care is delayed. Remember—in places like St Helens or Ouse, where private providers have withdrawn services or closed, the public system is not the safety net; it's the only net. We must be honest about the problem here: federal funding has not kept pace with the realities on the ground.</para>
<para>In February this year, Australian governments did extend the National Health Reform Agreement by one year. Under this agreement, Tasmania will receive $754 million in federal health funding this financial year. But, when you consider that Tasmania's public hospitals are said to cost over $3 billion annually and that our hospital costs are growing at nearly three times the national average, it becomes clear that this agreement does not go far enough. Clearly, a renewed multi-year NHRA agreement must remain a priority. But let's not pretend such funding absolves the federal government of responsibility to those living in regional and rural areas of Australia.</para>
<para>The fund the member for Indi is proposing, however, would allow for targeted, needs based investment that lifts up rural and regional communities. Let me be clear: this is not about asking for more than our fair share; it's about fairness. Quite simply, it costs more to build and maintain healthcare infrastructure in regional and remote areas. Moreover, workforce shortages and geographic isolation can also create real barriers to effective care. For example, as of September, over 9,000 Tasmanians were on the elective surgery waitlist, and only 63 per cent were seen on time. Another 10,700 Tasmanians are waiting for public oral health care. At the Royal Hobart Hospital in particular, bed block has led to major surgery cancellations, and ambulance ramping continues. Adding to the pain, in August, Royal Hobart Hospital staff were informed that a planned $130 million redevelopment of the emergency department was being shelved due to budgetary issues, replaced instead with a 'lower scope design' that management itself acknowledged is not fit for purpose. There's also the closure of the St Helens hospital and the broken-down BreastScreen Tasmania bus, which leaves women in remote areas without access to vital early detection services.</para>
<para>With private health services in Hobart in trouble, including the collapse of smaller GP clinics and storm clouds over the Hobart clinic and Hobart private hospital, we're only going to see more pressure build on the public health system. Again, that comes with painful human impacts—for example, the heartbreaking case of a Hobart child that suffered devastating burns as a baby. He is only two years old now and in a critical recovery phase. His parents have fought for laser therapy that could drastically improve his lifelong recovery, only to be told that the laser machine at the Royal Hobart Hospital had broken down, and would not be replaced due to cost.</para>
<para>Sadly, while other states have invested in new health infrastructure, the Tasmanian government is still patching up what should have been replaced a decade ago. It's a false economy, and it's hurting people.</para>
<para>Clearly, we need a dedicated rural health infrastructure funding arrangement and commitments to upgrade or rebuild our district hospitals. We also need fit-for-purpose facilities that can recruit and retain staff and deliver timely care as well as support modern services. This is not about politics; it's about people. Governments owe it to them to deliver a system that works, no matter where they live in this country.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The allotted time 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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>189</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move the motion relating to first home buyers in the terms which it appears on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government's commitment to help first home buyers realise their dream of ownership by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) bringing forward the launch of the 5 per cent deposits scheme for all first home buyers to 1 October 2025, instead of next year;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) expanding the 5 per cent deposits scheme with unlimited places and increased property price caps;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) guaranteeing a portion of a first home buyer's home loan through the 5 per cent deposits scheme, so they can purchase with a lower deposit and avoid lenders' mortgage insurance; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) offering eligible single parent families with a saved 2 per cent deposit access to the Family Home Guarantee; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that 180,000 Australians have already been helped into home ownership through the Government's housing policies.</para></quote>
<para>In the thousands of conversations that I had with the wonderful people of Macnamara leading up to the election, I often asked them a pretty simple question: 'What do you care about? What's important to you?' and, time and time again, what people in my electorate came back to me with was: 'We'd like to buy our own home; we'd like to be able to purchase our own home, get out of the rental market and set up our lives so that we're accumulating an asset and paying off our own mortgage and not someone else's.' This is a trend and a sentiment that is expressed by not just the wonderful people of Macnamara but also people right around our country.</para>
<para>People know that to be able to get into the housing market means being able to work overtime to pay off a mortgage, to build up an asset, and to potentially retire with their own home—to have their own house as a place of safety and security. But we also know that, as a long-term trend in this country, the cost of housing, in proportion to one's own salary, has gone up dramatically and that what used to be affordable 30 or 40 years ago, at around three or four times one's average salary, is now way, way higher. The cost of homes is just so much higher than it used to be. So people are being locked out of the housing market. When people are locked out of the housing market, more and more people are in the rental market. With more and more people in the rental market, rental prices are going up, and it is harder for people to be able to save up for that deposit to get in. That, we know, is one of the fundamental barriers to people being able to access the housing market.</para>
<para>Our policy that was announced before the election was that we were going to allow people to get into the housing market and purchase a home with a deposit of five per cent, or two per cent for single parents. I can't tell you, Deputy Speaker Mascarenhas, how many times the response to, 'What's important to you?' was, 'We'd like to buy our own home,' and I'd say, 'Well, have you heard about our five per cent deposits?' and the response was, 'Actually, yes; we've done our research, and that's one of the things we're thinking about right now.' So, when our incredible and hardworking housing minister announced that we were bringing forward the five per cent home deposits to start on 1 October, it was for the people that I had spoken to in the line; it was for the people in our communities—the hardworking people in Macnamara and right across the country—who just want to be able to buy their own home.</para>
<para>I can tell you that there have been thousands of people across the country beginning the process of accessing the five per cent deposits. There has been such a big interest in this program because we know that, for those people who are unable to build up their deposit because of all of the expensive things that are going on in their world, this will make it possible. It's not easy, but it, hopefully, will be possible for thousands of Australians.</para>
<para>Already, our Home Guarantee Scheme has helped more than 185,000 Australians into homeownership, and this is simply because the average Australian is able to get into the housing market with a lower deposit and they don't have to pay lenders mortgage insurance, which, for many households around the country, means savings in the $30,000 range. This is a massive saving for families and for hardworking Australians. When you think about the sort of response that we've seen from the coalition about how this program is somehow benefiting the kids of billionaires, you really have to ask yourself: What planet are they living on? Have they spoken to anyone outside of their own echo chamber? I know they like to talk about themselves a lot in this place and around the country. They like doing media conferences about the inner sanctum of the Liberal Party and the National Party and whatever's happening in there, but what Australians actually care about is their own home—having a safe place to live in and potentially owning and paying off their own home. Instead of talking down to Australians, like the Liberal Party is doing, we want to lift Australians up. We want Australians to have the aspiration of owning their own home and we want to make it possible, and that is exactly what our five per cent deposit scheme is all about. It's about making it possible for hardworking Australians to own their own home. I couldn't be prouder of this policy.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I call for a seconder for the motion.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burnell</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Labor government has commenced its five percent home deposit scheme, which should really be called the 'larger loans for longer' scheme, because that's exactly what this policy does. It drives up house prices, leaving first home buyers paying massive loans for the rest of their lives. But don't take my word for it. Treasury modelling, property experts and economists alike are all sounding the alarm on this reckless scheme. Yet the government has put its blinkers on and dressed up this scheme as a win for first home buyers, but the only winners are the banks. You don't need an economics degree to understand the flaw of this scheme. It's the first economics principle that I learned in university—a concept understood by many Australians, but clearly not by Labor. I seek leave to table this document.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is leave granted?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burnell</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Leave is not granted.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Supply and demand. Have you ever heard of it? When the demand of a good increases and the supply is not matched, the outcome is higher prices. And it's the same for supply. If you increase supply, the prices go down. All this scheme achieves is an increase in house prices. It allows first home buyers to take one step towards homeownership, while homeownership takes two steps away from them. There will always be winners from this scheme, but it won't be first home buyers; it'll be investors, it'll be the banks and it'll be older Australians who already own their own property. I find it extraordinary that this government has put together a policy for first home buyers that is benefiting everyone except first home buyers. It is simply astonishing.</para>
<para>Encouraging first home buyers to borrow 95 per cent of the home value is not a cause for celebration. It's a fundamental failure. It is a failure from all levels of government, current and former, that we've got to this situation where young Australians must plunge themselves into a lifetime of debt just to own a place of their own. This Labor government talks a massive game on housing, but it has nothing to show for it. Instead of helping Australians into homes, it has buried the housing sector under 5,000 new regulations and delivered a $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund boondoggle that's fuelling the housing crisis by outbidding Australians for their own homes.</para>
<para>The only way to address a housing shortage is to create supply. But since this government hasn't yet grappled with the concept of supply-side economics, I'd like to demonstrate. I'd like to acknowledge my high school economics teacher, Mr McGuire. He would say, 'Increase right, increase right, increase right.' When you increase supply to the right, prices go down. When you increase demand to the right, prices go up. Labor's first home flop is a nightmare that's leaving younger Australians paying larger loans for longer. It's time for this government to do its economic homework and get on with the job of restoring the dream of homeownership.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COMER</name>
    <name.id>316551</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Housing is one of the biggest challenges facing Australians today. People are doing everything right, working hard and saving what they can, and yet they still feel that the dream of owning a home is slipping further out of reach. That's why the Albanese Labor government is taking real action that brings that dream back within grasp. Today's motion reaffirms Labor's commitment to help first home buyers. Through our five per cent home deposit scheme, we are helping Australians across the country get into their own home sooner. Under Labor, if you worked hard and have saved up, the government should have your back, not hold you back.</para>
<para>We brought forward the launch of the five per cent home deposit scheme for all first home buyers to 1 October 2025, months ahead of schedule. That means that every Australian first home buyer will be able to buy their first home with just a deposit of five per cent. We're also expanding that scheme. There are no income limits or limits on places, because your chance of owning a home shouldn't depend on being lucky enough to grab a limited number of spots. And, for single parents, we're continuing the Family Home Guarantee, which helps you buy a home with only a two per cent deposit. We're also increasing the property price caps to better reflect the reality of the housing costs in every part of Australia. This is about supporting an entire generation of people who feel locked out of the market.</para>
<para>Our five per cent deposits are already cutting years off the time it takes to save for a home. For a typical first home buyer, it can take up to eight years off the time needed to save for a deposit on a medium-price home, and that saves around $34,000 in mortgage insurance along the way. That's eight years less paying rent and watching prices increase. That's eight years sooner you can start paying off your own mortgage instead of someone else's. And the results are already showing. More than 185,000 Australians have achieved their dream of homeownership through Labor's housing policies, including over 800 people right across my electorate. That's 185,000 families who no longer have to worry about the next rent hike or the next lease ending. As a renter myself, I look forward to the day where I put down a deposit on my own first home, and I'm so glad that the dream has become a reality for so many across my community. I'm grateful that everyday working people in my community now have a fair go.</para>
<para>This challenge didn't appear overnight. For too long, the government has simply tapped out of housing. For most of their nine years in power, the coalition didn't even have a housing minister. They let the problem grow, and now, when Labor is finally taking real action, they're opposing it every step of the way. Australians know they can't trust the coalition on housing. They had nine years to act, and they didn't. In contrast, Labor has already delivered the most ambitious housing agenda in generations. Our $43 billion housing agenda is tackling this challenge from every angle. We're building more homes because more supply means more affordable housing for everyone, whether you're renting or buying. We're also backing the workforce that makes housing possible. Almost 300 construction trade workers in my community are now in training, supported by the increased incentive payments to upskill the next generation of tradies. We're cutting the red tape, training more tradies and investing in the infrastructure needed to unlock more housing.</para>
<para>We're also directly delivering 55,000 new social and affordable homes so that the people who need it most—our essential workers, older women and people doing it tough—have a safe, secure place to call home. The Housing Australia Future Fund is delivering those homes right now—housing for teachers, nurses, cleaners and carers who do the vital work to keep our communities going. In my electorate, 250 new social and affordable homes are opening up in Carseldine, Margate and Deception Bay thanks to our Housing Australia Future Fund. Just last week, I opened 82 new social and affordable homes right in Redcliffe. This was a collaboration between all three levels of government. We must continue to work together to build the homes that our community needs. These beautiful apartments will be the home for older locals who are downsizing or struggling with housing. The downsizing is freeing up larger homes for vulnerable families at risk of or facing homelessness. I met some of the new residents, who are very excited to be moving into their new accommodation—their new home, I should say.</para>
<para>This is what it means to govern for the many and not just the few, to look out for Australians who need a fair go and to make sure the next generation has the same opportunities as the last. We know housing is a big challenge. We know it won't be solved overnight. We also know that real, lasting change comes from government stepping up and not stepping away. In the end, that's what good government is about—helping people to build a better future for themselves and their families.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is already enormous concern that the government's first home buyer scheme is causing house prices to artificially increase. To recap, the government has created what I and many economists see as a subprime mortgage policy ticking time bomb, where first home buyers can buy a home with a five per cent deposit—and, for single parents, just two per cent. The mortgage insurance for that purchase, between 15 per cent and 18 per cent, is on the hook of the taxpayer should the home buyer default. We don't want anyone to default on their mortgage, but it is a sad reality, and that is why we have mortgage insurance. Mortgage insurance is there, ultimately, to protect the banks. Now it's the taxpayers that are going to be protecting the banks. A Sydney buyer can buy a home of up to $1.5 million with a deposit of $30,000 if they're a single parent. The balance of that mortgage—$270,000—will be covered by the taxpayer. With absolutely no caps on the number of first home buyers that could enter this scheme, and record migration over recent years—for several years now there has been incredibly high migration—we have created an unbelievable set of demands on housing. Yet, despite this, Treasury estimates that this program will increase house prices by only 0.5 per cent.</para>
<para>Domain real estate gurus say that the Sydney median house price grew by 3.5 per cent across the quarter from June to September 2025, with expectations that it will accelerate further in this final quarter of the year. Who in Treasury is accountable for the fact that they come up with these statistics, these calculations, of just 0.5 per cent? What I'm seeing and what many economists are seeing is the pouring of kerosene on a bin fire. The <inline font-style="italic">Australian Financial Review</inline> reported unprecedented demand on day one of the first home buyer scheme. What does an unprecedented demand do? With anything—bananas, coal, whatever you're selling—unprecedented demand increases the price of the good. According to economist Leith van Onselen from MacroBusiness, the five-city aggregate level saw levels rise by 0.9 of a percent—nearly one per cent in the last 28 days. That's the strongest growth since October 2023. A Lateral Economics report for the Insurance Council of Australia warns that the home guarantee scheme could potentially increase prices from between 3.5 per cent and 6.6 per cent in 2026, with increases to continue for several years afterwards.</para>
<para>The deep concern that I have is that in segments targeted by first home buyers—which are properties defined as those below the individual house caps in every single state and in different regions—the impact is expected to be even greater, with house prices tipped to increase from between 5.3 per cent and 9.9 per cent in one year. This is also causing a distortion in the market. Because this scheme was so rushed and arbitrary decisions were made on what house cap prices are where, in my electorate in the area of Victor Harbor, we're not going to have any first home buyers because the median house price is $740,000. However, they're under the cap of $500,000 for the first home buyer scheme. In Mt Compass, just over 50 kilometres from Adelaide CBD, the median house price is $851,000. It would be under the metro cap if it were applied, but it's not—the country caps applied. However, also just over 50 ks from Adelaide is Sellicks Beach. That does have a median house price that's less than in Mt Compass, but now they have the $900,000 house cap. If you're in Sellicks Beach you're going to see massive increases in house prices. It's distorting the market.</para>
<para>If the government want to fix housing in Australia, they have to look at the demand side and the supply side. What they're doing at the moment is increasing the demand side exponentially. I think we're creating not a dream of home ownership but a nightmare of home ownership for first home buyers. We need to look at who is buying the homes. We need to make sure that it's an 'Australia first' policy—that's what many nations have. We need to look at reducing migration while at the same time increasing our supply.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am so proud that the Albanese Labor government has delivered five per cent first-home deposits for every first home buyer from 1 October this year. This change will cut years off the time it takes to save for a first home deposit. It will help Australians into their own home sooner, and, because the government will stand behind these loans, first home buyers will no longer be forced to pay tens of thousands of dollars in lenders mortgage insurance. That is real relief, and it is making a real difference to first home buyers in my electorate of Bonner and right across the country.</para>
<para>I have previously spoken in this place about doorknocking in Wishart during the election campaign. I met a young tradie who had just finished his apprenticeship. He told me, with some despair, that he could not see how he would ever be able to afford a home. He said he had a regular savings plan but he was still only halfway to what he needed for a deposit. I told him about Labor's plan for a five per cent deposit, but, at that time, it was still to come into effect. Today, I am proud to say to him and to so many others like him in my community of Bonner that support is now in place. It means that he and thousands of others like him will be able to buy their first home sooner. They'll be able to begin building equity, and they'll have the security and pride that comes from a home of their own.</para>
<para>Before the election, Labor promised to make it easier for Australians to buy their first home, with a deposit of just five per cent. We have delivered on that promise, and we have delivered ahead of schedule. Already, Labor's expanded home guarantee scheme has helped more than 185,000 Australians into home ownership, including 391 people in Bonner. That's 391 individuals and families who will now have a place to call their own, a place to build their lives, raise their children and put down roots in the communities that they love. This program is transformative. For single parents, Labor continues the Family Home Guarantee scheme, allowing them to purchase a home with as little as a two per cent deposit. This is life-changing support and giving single parents—so often mothers—the chance to build stability and security for their children.</para>
<para>We will help more Australians into homeownership, but we must also support those who are renting or facing housing insecurity. That is why Labor has delivered rent relief for those doing it tough. Since coming to government, we have delivered back-to-back increases to the maximum rates of Commonwealth rent assistance—an increase of almost 50 per cent. Today, 6,785 people in Bonner receive Commonwealth rent assistance. That is real help for local families, pensioners and students who are struggling with the cost of rent. We've also taken action for those facing the most serious housing challenges—women and children escaping domestic and family violence. Through the Albanese government's crisis accommodation programs, we are delivering 24 new homes in Wynnum Manly and Mount Gravatt in my electorate of Bonner. These homes are being built under the Safe Places Emergency Accommodation Program and the Crisis and Transitional Accommodation Program, giving families somewhere safe to stay when they need it most. Every Australian deserves a safe place to call home.</para>
<para>We are also building 100,000 homes exclusively for first home buyers to give them a fair chance in what can be a competitive market. Step by step, Labor is delivering. We know that Australia's housing challenge was decades in the making, and we will not solve it overnight. But we are acting with determination and with purpose. This government made a promise to make the dream of homeownership more achievable, and we are delivering on that promise. We are cutting the time it takes to save for a deposit. We are saving first home buyers thousands of dollars in their mortgage insurance payments. We are providing rent relief for those who need it most. We are building homes for women and children escaping violence. And we are also training the next generation of builders and tradies who will help our housing industry stay strong. Housing is not just about bricks and mortar; it's about security, and it is about dignity. It's about opportunity, and it's about giving every Australian the chance to build a future, to raise a family and to know that their hard work will be rewarded.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to talk today about what Labor's housing policy really means for everyday Australians: $24 billion in profit for the banks. That's what Labor's latest housing policy is really about. Let's break down the details of how Labor is forcing first home buyers to risk their financial future to enrich the big banks. The current median house price in Australia is around $860,000. That's up by almost $20,000 in the September quarter. Before the introduction of this new policy, by the way, assuming a standard mortgage rate and a five per cent deposit, a first home buyer will pay an additional $140,000 in interest. In total, first home buyers will pay banks an extra $24 billion in interest during the first five years of this policy alone. The same modelling suggests Labor's five per cent deposit scheme could increase house prices by 10 per cent in the first year.</para>
<para>This policy doesn't address any of the issues that have caused the housing crisis. It doesn't address negative gearing or capital gains tax discounts for property investors, it doesn't build public housing and it doesn't help first home buyers because it was never designed to. This policy does one thing: it transfers wealth from everyday Australians to massive corporations. Every time we Greens get up here and say, 'Maybe we should actually build public housing,' we get told, 'Don't be so ridiculous; don't be silly; it's so expensive. How can the government possibly build something at that scale?' Putting aside the fact that governments used to build masses of public housing—around 25 per cent of all new stock post-World War II—it's also a matter of priorities: what the government is willing to spend money on and what it's not, like the AUKUS agreement, where we're handing billions and billions of dollars over to the United States for submarines that might never be delivered, as well as—get this—public housing for US troops and private defence contractors. Unbelievable!</para>
<para>Let's do a little thought experiment. How many submarines would $368 billion buy us? How many houses would $368 billion build? Under the AUKUS deal, we're paying $368 billion for submarines that may not happen. That's right, AUKUS is going to cost Australians $36 million every day for 25 years. Now, the ABS has the average cost to build a house at a bit under $400,000. If the government were to build public housing like we used to, we could do it much, much cheaper, but let's assume $400,000. This $368 billion could purchase one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight submarines. Or $368 billion could build one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, 965,000 homes. That's right, we could clear the entire waiting list for social housing and take huge steps towards solving the housing crisis.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, in capital cities around Australia, median house prices have increased by $35,000 in the last three months. They increased by $26,000 in the three months before that. Labor and the LNP would clearly rather give billions of dollars to US weapons manufacturers than deal with the housing crisis they created.</para>
<para>Now, let's be very clear, a policy that accelerates house price growth is not a housing policy; it is an enrichment policy for Labor's donors in the property development and banking industries. First home buyers are going to be stuck paying higher prices with incredibly high repayments and, should the worst happen and they're unable to meet those repayments, it will be the Australian taxpayers picking up the bill, not the banks.</para>
<para>The Greens and I will continue to push for real solutions to this crisis, such as scrapping the tax handouts for property investors that help them outcompete first home buyers—those tax handouts actually help property investors outcompete first home buyers—along with a mass build of housing that people can actually afford.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Timber industry</title>
          <page.no>194</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) some of Australia's leading forest scientists have acknowledged we have the knowledge, practical skills and regulatory framework to sustainably manage our native forests, including for timber harvesting on small, carefully targeted areas;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) we have a world-class and sustainable native hardwood timber industry in Australia which delivers social, economic, cultural and environmental benefits for our nation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) timber industry workers provide invaluable skills and practical support to their communities during times of natural disasters, particularly bushfires;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) banning native timber harvesting in Australia will result in more imported timber products, often sourced from countries with poorer environmental protocols; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) a sustainable native hardwood timber industry is part of the answer to reducing Australia's carbon emissions as timber products sequester carbon in our floorboards, furniture and other timber products;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the Victorian and New South Wales state governments have made illogical decisions to ban native hardwood timber harvesting which is based on political science, not environmental science; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) urges the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) recognise that the sovereign capability to maintain a sustainable native hardwood timber industry is an issue of national importance because of the impact on house prices, supply chain considerations, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and community safety;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) support a taxpayer-funded public information campaign to explain the importance of the native hardwood timber industry and dispel the myths perpetuated by environmental activists; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) resist any further attempts to ban the sustainable harvesting of native hardwood timber.</para></quote>
<para>I must confess to a sense of deja vu here if not complete futility in bringing this motion to the attention of the House, because those opposite have demonstrated complete and utter contempt for the forest industry in Australia over the past 20 years. Driven by their desperate need to secure Green preferences in the city they have sold out blue-collar workers in regional communities, thousands of jobs have been lost, communities have been destroyed and the regions are less safe because we have lost the equipment and the skilled workforce which we've always relied on during major bushfire events. Labor governments in Western Australia, in Victoria and in New South Wales have either completely banned the native hardwood timber industry or decimated it to the point that it will struggle to remain viable. This is all in the name of political science. This has nothing to do with the environment. I've said many times in this place that you have two choices when it comes to timber: either you use your own in an environmentally sustainable way or you use someone else's.</para>
<para>Our nation already has a multibillion-dollar trade deficit in timber products. We have states like Victoria taking hardwood from other areas. Think of St Kilda pier, the West Gate Tunnel artwork project, Gippsland Lakes jetties in my electorate—all that timber came from other states. How is it a positive environmental outcome to be shipping and trucking timber thousands of kilometres to Victoria because the Victorian government banned the native hardwood timber industry in its own state? We have some of the strict environmental standards in the world, and when we ban harvesting of timber in Australia it's a very bad day for orangutans, because we just import more timber from developing nations. We have a world-class sustainable native hardwood timber industry in Australia which delivers social, economic, cultural and environmental benefits for our nation, and those timberworkers provide invaluable skills and practical support to their communities during times of natural disasters, particularly bushfires. I'd also add the sustainable native hub timber industry is part of the answer to reducing Australia's carbon emissions, as timber products actually sequester carbon in our floorboards, furniture and other products.</para>
<para>As the motion indicates, some of Australia's leading forest scientists have acknowledged we have the knowledge, the practical skills and the regulatory framework to sustainable manage our native forest, including for timber harvesting in small, carefully targeted areas. This is not dodgy science from environmental activists who they buy to get a compliant voice and mouthpiece to trump up their unfounded claims; these are real scientists with peer reviewed papers and years of practical experience. I refer to an article in particular, published earlier this year by four leading scientists, which called out the misinformation in the forest debate. Dr John Raison and Dr Sadanandan Nambiar are both former CSIRO chief research scientists, Dr Glen Kile is a former chief of the CSIRO division of forestry and Dr Tony Bartlett has extensive experience in managing native forests and is a leading expert in forest fire management and suppression. The article I refer to is worth reading for anyone with actual interest in the facts when it comes to forestry and the threat to biodiversity from wildfires in poorly managed forests. At a time when we are trying to build more homes, harvesting cutbacks by state governments have led to more imports and we are fed the lies that harvesting equals deforestation. Under our laws, harvested areas must be regenerated. Timber is the ultimate renewable resource. I will quote from their conclusions:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The public, policy makers and politicians should be wary of the increasing selective and unbalanced use of science wrapped in ideology to promote anti-forestry views.</para></quote>
<para>They go on:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Rural communities and the nation can benefit in a number of ways by adopting science-based policies and management practices.</para></quote>
<para>They go on:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… 'theoretical' claims that timber harvesting increases the intensity of wildfire, leads to greater net C emissions, reduces catchment water yields and threatens koalas have all been discredited in several detailed scientific analyses during the last few years.</para></quote>
<para>I urge those opposite: read more about the native forestry debate. Don't rely on your pet scientists. Don't rely on the best money science can buy, like Professor David Lindenmayer. Trust the science from people have not been bought off to promote this religious ideology that all timber harvesting is bad. Ignore the zealots in this debate. This is dangerous for our communities. People and native animals die because of poorly managed forests, and the Labor Greens aren't just killing industry; they are killing regional communities. I urge the Labor Party to stop selling out blue collar jobs in the regions for Greens preferences in the city and support the Australian native hardwood timber industry.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hogan</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COMER</name>
    <name.id>316551</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia's forests are part of who we are. They tell a story of our continent—ancient, resilient, and rich in life. They sustain our wildlife, our soils and our water. They sustain communities right across regional Australia. A healthy forest means a healthy nation. That's why the Albanese Labor government stands unequivocally for a sustainable and innovative Australian forestry industry—one that protects our environment, strengthens our economy and provides secure, skilled jobs for regional Australians.</para>
<para>We don't see forestry as a choice between jobs and the environment; we see it as a partnership between people, science and the land itself. Australia's forestry sector is a pillar of the regional economy, supporting over 51,000 direct jobs and contributing billions to the economy every single year. Our government is steadfast in its support for a sustainable and innovative Australian forestry industry, which includes both native forestry and plantations. Our approach is about balance: protecting the forests while managing the industry responsibly so they continue to provide the essential renewable materials Australians rely on every day. Because, when forestry is managed with care, when it is guided by evidence and long-term vision, it becomes one of the most powerful tools in regional prosperity and in environmental protection.</para>
<para>This government has a clear, forward-looking plan for the future of forestry. We are backing the industry with record investment, supporting innovation, new skills and modern manufacturing that adds value right here at home. We're investing in the next generation of foresters, engineers and researchers through the National Institute for Forest Products Innovation, ensuring Australia remains at the forefront of sustainable timber science. This includes a landmark investment of $300 million to improve capacity, drive innovation and secure the jobs of the future in the forestry industry.</para>
<para>We are building a workforce for the future through the Forestry Workforce Training Program, because the people working in our forests are the backbone of regional economies and the custodians of these landscapes. We're partnering with industry through programs that modernise processing, improve efficiency and create low-carbon materials that will help Australia build the homes and infrastructure for the future.</para>
<para>We also recognise that forestry is more than just timber; it's about country. Over half of Australia's forested land lies on the Indigenous estate, a living testament to tens of thousands of years of stewardship. We are committed to working in partnership with First Nations peoples, learning from cultural knowledge that has sustained these ecosystems and prevented catastrophic fires for thousands of years. We continue to work closely with states, territories and industry through the Forestry Ministers' Meeting to ensure a stable and sustainable national framework that gives certainty to workers, businesses and communities alike.</para>
<para>Australia's forestry sector supports thousands of jobs and contributes billions to our national economy, but, beyond these figures, it supports communities, towns and families that depend on the land and who understand the importance of caring for it. Our latest <inline font-style="italic">State of the forests report</inline> shows that the total area of Australia's forests continues to grow, proof that sustainable management and environmental protection go hand in hand.</para>
<para>Forestry also plays a vital role in keeping our community safe. The industry's equipment, skills and experience are essential to fire management, from hazard reduction burns and firefighting to recovery after disasters. Our approach to forestry is rooted in balance—balancing conservation with jobs, sustainability with growth and tradition with innovation. We're investing in forest restoration, supporting new plantation projects and backing advanced manufacturing that adds value right here in Australia.</para>
<para>A strong forestry sector doesn't just mean strong exports; it means strong regional communities, good local jobs and a healthy environment for generations to come. Working together with industry, workers and First Nations custodians, we can ensure that Australia's forests remain a source of pride well into the future. The Albanese Labor government is proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with the forestry sector because this is an industry that doesn't look backwards. It grows forward, it grows jobs, it grows innovation and it grows hope—hope for a future where sustainability and prosperity walk hand in hand.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we believe that the best way to protect our forests is to value them, not just as resources but as living systems that sustain our planet and our people. Through record investment, genuine collaboration and a deep respect for nature, we are ensuring that the forests we pass on to our children will be stronger, healthier and more resilient than the ones we inherited. That is Labor's vision: a sustainable, thriving forestry industry built on science, shaped by partnership and guided by the care of the land that sustains us all.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If only what the previous member said was true. What she said actually sounded quite reasonable to the naked ear if you were just listening to that debate. But what she was remiss in saying was that the state Labor governments and what they're doing here—it's exactly the opposite of what the previous member just said. I commend the member for Gippsland for bringing this debate on.</para>
<para>Firstly, I think we need to get clear—for people who may not know—the distinction between what a plantation is and what hardwood-selective harvesting is. Many people would have driven through the most common of pine plantations. You drive past them. They're planted. They're not biodiverse; they're literally planted for the timber that they produce. They grow for the next 20 or 30 years—however long it takes—and then they are just harvested. You'll drive past them, and they're flawed. You'll see hundreds of acres where that plantation has been cleared.</para>
<para>That's the difference between what you call plantations and what we're talking about here—hardwood harvesting. And what that is is that they're going into more diverse areas and biodiverse areas. In Australia, the forestry industry with departments have done this exceptionally well—world-leading, environmental best-standard. A logger can't just go in and start randomly cutting down hardwood. These trees are identified, they're selected in advance, and it's done in a very scientific, very environmental, best-science way. It's been going on for a long time. The foresters themselves—believe me—know that they need this industry to be sustainable. The type of timber that they get from this is very different from that from plantations. Everything the previous speaker said about sustainability, about enhancing the industry, is true. But what the state governments have done is exactly the opposite of that.</para>
<para>Now, there are the other perverse effects of this, because what the state governments are doing is locking it up. They're saying to loggers and harvesters, 'You can't go into these areas and you can't selectively harvest hardwood timber.' What does that mean? That means they're not going in there and doing this. So the result of that is that it's not kept. I've got many areas in my regions. I invite anyone opposite who speaks against this private member's motion to come and I'll show you exact examples in my patch. It's not kept. So what happens to it straight away? Weeds start to grow. We have a weed in our area called lantana. It takes over. There's actually scientific proof of this. What happens to koalas? They leave the national parks because they can't get around anymore because it's not kept. When they come down a tree, they can't go around the ground and go up another tree, so they actually leave the area. The numbers of koalas in that area—I'll show a report I saw just last week from the New South Wales government which supported that. So the desire of what they're trying to achieve is perverse to what they're getting.</para>
<para>The other thing that harvesters do, when they go and maintain fire trails, is maintain a system whereby, when there are fires, it's easy to manage and to do that. Of course, now what happens within national parks—what they're doing in New South Wales—is that those fire trails aren't kept up. Those companies would often, too, donate and give their equipment when there's a fire on to help fight fires and to go in and do management of that. That all disappears. So you can't get access to these places when you're trying to do firebreaks or you're trying to contain a fire outbreak. You can't get access to them. Of course, what you've also done is—our Indigenous brothers and sisters were mentioned earlier—the things that our Indigenous brothers and sisters would do all the time, what we call cultural burns. All Captain Cook, as he was sailing up the coast, was talking about was the fires he saw. They were doing that as a land-management process, which we do. When you lock up a national park, you pervert that, because you can't do the firebreaks that you used to do and, of course, there's more fuel and these things become a huge tinderbox as well.</para>
<para>The other thing—okay, you want to be righteous, and you still think that's a good idea—is that we still need the hardwood. Our demand—we want to build more houses, we want more furniture, you want to build some bridges and you want to do that carbon friendly. Guess what the most carbon-friendly way to do that is? Not concrete, not steel—it's actually timber, which sequesters carbon, as we know.</para>
<para>So what are we going to be doing now as Australia? The states who pre-led this and banned hardwood timber harvesting in the states have had to go to other states to get it. Now there will be less, so you know where we'll go now? Overseas. So we are now going to be importing hardwood timber into this country from countries who don't do it in the sustainable, environmental way we do this. I commend the member for bringing on this motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government is unequivocal in its support for a sustainable and innovative Australian forestry industry. This means both native forestry and plantations. We recognise that native forests are a crucial and complementary source of wood products that plantations cannot supply. This reduces our reliance on importing this timber from countries that have weaker environmental standards.</para>
<para>I recently visited Britton Timbers in Smithton in the Circular Head region on the far north-west coast of Tasmania. Britton Timbers celebrated its centenary in 2007. Britton Timbers has been a provider of quality Tasmanian timber—timber like blackwood, Tasmanian hardwood and other timbers—for over 100 years, providing good jobs for locals. Around one-third of the employees have been with Britton's for more than 10 years, and 17 per cent have been with the company for over 20 years. Britton Timbers have invested significantly in new technology to provide for more product flexibility to meet their customer requirements. The imported timber that they use is sourced from suppliers who identify environmental sustainability as a principal factor. Their timbers are also sourced principally from forests with international certification. Sitting down and talking with Shawn Britton was not only educational but also refreshing—hearing about how they care about their resource and also about their environment.</para>
<para>The forest industry, like all our resource based industries, have long value chains. The Tasmanian forestry industry's value chain is made up of forest managers, harvesting contractors, log-truck drivers, sawmill operators and timber wholesalers and retailers. This flows through to house builders and furniture makers—and we have some wonderful specialty furniture makers in Tasmania, who use some of the most stunning timber that we grow. And, of course, we have many craft product makers, who sell their products in the boutique galleries that support our tourism and visitor economy. Annually, in Tasmania, we have the wonderful Australian Wooden Boat Festival, which has grown to become the largest single regular event on the Tasmanian tourism and events calendar. These beautiful boats are built from timbers that the Tasmanian timber industry is famous for. The native hardwood timber sector alone contributed $278 million to the national economy in 2022-23. This very much outlines its ongoing importance to our regional communities, providing jobs with wages that are often spent in the local economy and in our regional communities.</para>
<para>In Somerset, a small town in Braddon, Forico have their plant nursery, which I recently visited with Minister Julie Collins. Forico is the largest private forestry management company in Tasmania and the largest hardwood replanting program in Australia. They currently breed and deploy species such as blue gum, shining gum and radiata pine. The nursery has capacity beyond Forico's internal needs and grows commercial seedlings for external clients both in Tasmania and on the south-east mainland of Australia.</para>
<para>Decisions about the day-to-day management of native forests are ultimately a matter for the state governments, and our government is committed to providing a stable national framework, like the Regional Forest Agreements, that allows for sustainable native forestry to continue to occur. This government has a positive, forward-looking plan for the entire forestry and wood product sector. Through record investment, genuine partnership and a commitment to innovation, we are ensuring a strong, sustainable and prosperous future for the industry—and also, more importantly, the regional communities that depend so heavily on it.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is backing the forestry industry with a landmark investment of $300 million to improve capacity, to drive innovation and to secure those jobs of the future. We're delivering where the previous government failed; while they promised a billion trees and delivered only one per cent, our $73.8 million Support Plantation Establishment program has already awarded funding for 25,000 hectares of new plantations. Through the Accelerated Option of Wood Processing Innovative Program, $89.49 million in grants has been provided to 30 projects to modernise manufacturing infrastructure and ensure our local processors remain at the cutting edge. There is a lot more that I could talk about in this. I am running out of time, but I do want to say that we are doing a lot more work within this area around forestry.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a pleasure to support my friend and good colleague the member for Gippsland on this motion because I know how passionate he is about the timber industry, timber workers and regions like ours that grow, make and manufacture things. We have incredibly talented people that make world-leading products. The people that make them are world-beating people.</para>
<para>I am incredibly concerned about where our timber industry is headed Australia-wide, no more so than in our shared region of Gippsland. I'm proud to represent blue-collar workers. I look at the Victorian state Labor government. They have waged an absolute battle against regional communities, against blue-collar workers and particularly against our timber industry. Our entire forest estate in Victoria is about six per cent—sorry, of what we harvest—on 80-year rotation for the hardwood industry, which the Victorian state government has absolutely decimated. If you are going to harvest hardwood in Victoria, it is basically 1/80th of six per cent. That is the entire forest estate that was being harvested.</para>
<para>The ramifications of the closure of the hardwood industry in Victoria are absolutely profound. Don't even get me started on the fire risk as we approach a very hot, dry summer. Many farmers in Gippsland and my electorate of Monash are still drought-impacted—right now—so, heading into summer, we are heading into extreme fire danger. A lot of those timber workers are CFA volunteers. A lot of the harvesters use their harvesting equipment to be able to maintain a lot of that forest estate in a way that prevents and mitigates significant fire risk.</para>
<para>I'm proud to have had an association, prior to coming to this place, with Australian Sustainable Hardwoods, which is in the electorate of my good friend and colleague the member for Gippsland. They made a variety of incredible products using Victorian hardwood—Vic Ash—but now, because of the state Labor government's policies, that timber mill, like many timber mills in Victoria, is having to import timber and wood products from other areas, such as jarrah from WA and glacial oak from the United States. You will see a timber truck coming up the Monash Freeway with a trailer load of Tasmanian hardwood products, taking it to a manufacturing business like Australian Sustainable Hardwoods, and it will come back in the opposite direction with finished products. Now, that is just a crime against good economic management. It's a crime against good environmental stewardship as well.</para>
<para>I have real concerns for the communities and the blue-collar workers that are being left behind. This doesn't protect the environment, and it does nothing to advance blue-collar workers. Often one partner might work in a mill, and the other might be a teacher at the local school or a nurse at the local hospital. If you take that timber job out of a regional community, that whole family will go somewhere else. We have seen that in small rural communities Australia-wide, where those little communities have just been left to wither on the vine because of really poor decisions made in Melbourne or Canberra with no regard to regional communities. Those employers do so much good work in supporting the local Lions and Probus clubs. They are really good corporate community citizens in the towns in which they operate.</para>
<para>I have huge concern about where the future of our timber industry is heading under state and federal Labor governments. We need to make sure that we've got a manufacturing future in this country. Timber products are in high demand. They're in increasing demand for construction, for homes. If we want to build more homes and more buildings, we need timber and wood as a good renewable product. We replant in Victoria—or we did, with the hardwood industry—everything that was harvested. It is the ultimate renewable asset. I really condemn the direction that Labor and the Greens are taking the industry at a state and federal level, and I support wholeheartedly the motion of my friend and colleague the member for Gippsland on this issue.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm particularly proud to stand here on behalf of the Albanese government and talk about its unwavering and strong support for sustainable and innovative forestry industries in Australia—an industry that is vital not only to our national economy but to the lifeblood of regional communities like the one that I represent in Paterson. In fact, in Heddon Greta, the Cox Bros Timber mill has supplied and is today supplying timber. In fact, in my home I've got the receipts from the house that my grandfather built. He got the timber from that mill in Heddon Greta.</para>
<para>As member of the Parliamentary Friends of Forestry, Timber and Paper Products, I take personal interest in the vibrancy of this sector. In fact, it probably runs a little bit closer to the core than that, because, two years ago, my wonderful husband, Nick, gave up a 33-year career in business to go back to his roots. He started his own rural fencing contract business. He and his young offsider have been out in the heat and the wet and all the conditions for the last two years building rural fences. Let me tell you, I know more about iron bark, stringy bark, white mahogany, tallowwood—all of the hardwoods—because you need that to build rural fences. It is absolutely important to have a good and reliable hardwood supply. We've heard a lot about furniture. We've heard a lot about homes. But please don't underestimate the humble fence. Whether you're trying to keep them out or keep them in, it's very important. Fencing—don't let that go unnoticed.</para>
<para>This government recognises both native forestry and plantation timber. Native forests provide high-grade products such as flooring and furniture and structural timber—and the fencing, don't forget about that! Without access to these resources, we risk relying on imports from other countries. They have got less environmental control and less stringency in their controls often. It's not just a number; it is so important that we keep this $278 million sector alive in our economy. It sustains communities. It also plays such a role in those other businesses that are reliant on it. Let me be clear, the day-to-day management of native forests is the responsibility of state and territory governments, and it's a big responsibility. But, at the federal level, we provide a stable national framework, including the regional forest agreements, which balance environmental protection with industry certainty, ensuring our forestry sectors can thrive for generations to come.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is investing in the future of forestry with a landmark $300 million package to improve capacity, drive innovation and secure jobs in the long-term. That is very important. There is $10 million alone in forestry workforce training and $8.6 million to extend the national network of regional forestry hubs. These are all really important initiatives. We want to keep our forestry going. We're also working hand in hand with forestry through initiatives like the Timber Fibre Strategy, linking forestry to national priorities such as housing and ensuring collaboration with state and territories governments, and we've taken a firm stand against illegal logging, with world-leading laws that give Australians confidence in the legality and sustainability of the timbers they buy.</para>
<para>Australia's forestry sector is a living legacy supporting over 51,000 direct jobs, contributing billions to the economy and safeguarding forests of over 134 million hectares. And—let me just say—it is also in very important to our Indigenous estates. More than half of this forest land sits on those Indigenous estates. Let me tell you, our First Nations people were the first foresters of this country. They involved themselves in clearing and cultural burning, and, from some of the research I've done and things I've seen over the years, our bush was better maintained then than this wild greenie theory of just letting it be bush. That doesn't work and, let me tell you, you've only got to stare down a bushfire to understand that. We need forestry. We need to manage our bush. It is vitally important. This government understands the balance between environmentally responsible and sustainable forestry and being able to keep this vital industry going on many levels.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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 day of sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>199</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government will make available an initial $12 billion towards the Henderson Defence Precinct to deliver continuous naval shipbuilding and an AUKUS presence in Western Australia, meaning:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) record investments across shipbuilding and in AUKUS in the west;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) support for approximately 10,000 direct jobs over the next two decades;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) opportunities for small and medium sized businesses across the state and Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) certainty for industry that will partner on the construction of infrastructure and facilities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the Government continues to increase defence spending to record levels to deliver the capabilities Australia needs through measures like:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the arrival of the first two of 29 Apache attack helicopters;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) $1.7 billion for a new fleet of autonomous maritime vehicles including Ghost Shark for the navy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) selection of the Mogami-class frigate as our new general purpose frigates;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) boosting Australia's long-range strike capability with the Precision Strike Missiles and $2.12 billion in additional stocks of advanced medium-range missiles to strengthen Australia's air defence and aerial strike capability; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) $1.3 billion investment over the next ten years in counter-drone capabilities and technologies.</para></quote>
<para>I'm pleased to address the development of the Henderson defence precinct in Western Australia and the broader context of the build-up and the strategic repositioning of Australia's Defence capability under the Albanese government. We are living in a moment of profound strategic change. Australia's security environment is more complex, more contested and more demanding than at any time since the Second World War. This is why our government has put capability, people and funding at the centre of our defence agenda. We have ended the underfunding and have ended the chaos—I've spoken these words before—and we have ended the dysfunction of the coalition through providing stability and continuity. We can now focus on what matters: equipping our Defence Force, supporting local industry and delivering for communities.</para>
<para>In Western Australia the government is committing an initial $12 billion towards the Henderson defence precinct to deliver continuous naval shipbuilding in the west—this means supporting approximately 10,000 direct jobs over the next two decades and opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises right across the state and, of course, our country. Industry has welcomed this announcement. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia described the funding boost as 'significant' and said it will bolster WA's economy. In August Darian Macey of DECnet said that, under this plan, Henderson 'will become the beating heart of naval capability on the west coast'.</para>
<para>The Henderson defence precinct will play a critical role in our continuous naval shipbuilding enterprise, from constructing the army landing craft and future general-purpose frigates to sustaining surface vessels and providing contingency docking and depot-level maintenance for our future conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines. It entails, as Alex Luck and Naval News noted in September, a significant expansion and investment into the future. The government's focus on Henderson aligns with the view by the Australian Submarine Agency and the 2023 Defence Strategic Review, which identified Henderson as central to Australia's deterrence posture. The strategic review called for state and federal intervention in Henderson to give it the requisite critical mass for shipbuilding, fearing the loss of skilled workers if a pipeline of projects was not maintained. Our government responded by announcing continuous naval shipbuilding in Henderson in October 2024.</para>
<para>Beyond the strategic imperative, there are economic consequences. The precinct will diversify WA's economy beyond mining and resources, linking our skills base to high-tech manufacturing, engineering, logistics and global supply chains. The CCIWA noted that many of the skills developed in WA's mining sector are directly transferable to defence manufacturing. Local businesses, such as Birdon and Civmec, have already welcomed the announcement. Civmec's executive chairman, Jim Fitzgerald, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The sheer scale of the proposed infrastructure investment … is potentially a game changer … for our business.</para></quote>
<para>The government's commitments will provide opportunities for small and medium-sized businesses too. This is critical in order to be able to meet demands that are needed for the Defence sector. Encouraging small and medium businesses that may not already be operating in the Defence sector to start to pivot to include that as well is critical.</para>
<para>The truth is this is going to be tripling the size of defence manufacturing in Western Australia. It'll be second only to our mining sector, which underpins our national economy. To achieve that now we need to encourage all students to consider manufacturing and Defence where they may not have previously considered such pathways. The Defence Industry Pathways Program at the South Metropolitan TAFE is an example of the sort of bridging that's required and is part of the Defence Industry Skills Centre of Excellence, which the state and the Commonwealth governments have established with a joint investment of $14.6 million. The government's budget commitments provide that certainty, obviously, for investors but also for families with skilled workers looking to relocate either to Perth or within WA.</para>
<para>I'm lucky in my seat of Hasluck to have many defence sustainment sectors operating within my electorate but also young people who are keen to work within drone technology, sonar and space. All these things are connected to our broader defence picture but critically to the defence infrastructure needed within Western Australia. Also it must sit well within our communities, and to this end Henderson and the broader Rockingham region have thoughtful transitional planning to ensure that not just the shipyards are considered but the amenities, housing and environmental concerns are addressed too. I look forward to the ongoing engagement with all the stakeholders across the Henderson defence precinct and many of those beyond it as well.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Clutterham</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll begin my contribution to this debate by congratulating the member for Hasluck for drafting this motion. You've got to give it to those opposite—when it comes to drafting motions and media releases, they've really got some talent. Unfortunately, that record for making announcements isn't matched by delivery.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You had your go; thank you, Member for Hasluck. Nowhere is that clearer than in the much-lauded announcement of a $12 billion investment in the Henderson precinct. I want to be clear. The coalition supports the vision for Henderson. As a proud Western Australian, I am incredibly proud of Henderson and its shipbuilding industry. We support a sovereign industrial hub capable of continuous shipbuilding and the maintenance of our future nuclear powered submarines. It isn't just essential for our sovereign capability and the future of AUKUS. It also represents a massive economic opportunity for my home state of Western Australia, with the potential to create over 10,000 skilled jobs.</para>
<para>Given the importance of this project, particularly to the AUKUS agreement, I was pleased to see the Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence and also the Premier of Western Australia finally put on their Austral hats and get down to Henderson and commit new money to the development of the precinct—four years too late, I would say, but better late than never! However, it quickly became apparent that this announcement was not reflective of a real plan to urgently move ahead. While we know the Prime Minister has promised this $12 billion towards the precinct's redevelopment, the total figure required, by his government's own admission, is likely to be $25 billion. The government can't even answer basic questions on when and over what period their commitment will be spent. But that's not all; the boundaries and the definition of the actual Henderson precinct haven't even been finalised, and the planning work won't be complete until 2027. It's nearly the end of 2025. Let's get a wriggle on!</para>
<para>The reality is that, under Labor, Henderson is not being accelerated. Sadly, it's being delayed. Without real funding, we risk a shrinking navy, idle shipyards and lost AUKUS opportunities for the people of Western Australia. We risk losing skilled workers and investment at the very time we should be growing them. During the last round of Senate estimates, Defence officials outlined that Australia faces the most dangerous strategic environment we have seen since the Second World War. The threat of conflict breaking out in our region in the next decade is no longer a remote possibility. What we need is a government to be honest about these risks and to prepare us for what may lie ahead. I'm not chest-beating for conflict. I'm not being hawkish. But the truth is that reviews and multiple media announcements do not deter aggression. What deters aggression is readiness. What we need is peace through strength, and Australia has an important role to play in collective deterrence.</para>
<para>I note that, since this motion was drafted, the Prime Minster has been to Washington, and I welcome the confirmation from President Trump that AUKUS has survived his administration's review. AUKUS was a good deal when Prime Minister Morrison announced it in 2021, and in 2025 it remains a good deal. The fact that it has now endured two Australian prime ministers, four UK prime ministers and two US presidents is testament to that. But the reality is that AUKUS too has been underfunded from the start. The government has promised the most ambitious industrial build in our history without allocating the money to make it real. Key AUKUS decisions including the east coast base, the full Adelaide build schedule and the skills pipeline remain unfunded and unconfirmed. In my short term back in the defence industry portfolio, I've also heard major concerns about progress on AUKUS Pillar II, and, because the government has failed to lift defence spending, AUKUS is cannibalising the rest of the defence budget—robbing Peter to pay Paul—and that's why the coalition has been clear: the government must set a credible, costed path to at least three per cent of GDP for defence. That is what it is going to take to deliver real capability, not just press releases. The coalition is committed to spending at least three per cent of GDP on defence, which will back our Defence Force with a budget, give our men and women in uniform what they need in order to defend our home, support our industry and also show urgency to make sure we keep Australia safe. The coalition will always choose readiness over rhetoric and, under us, Henderson, AUKUS and the Australian Defence Force will have the funding, focus and future that they deserve.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like my home state of South Australia, Western Australia plays and will continue to play a critical role in Australia's defence manufacturing and in shoring up Australia's defence capability. The Albanese Labor government does have a laser sharp focus on delivery, particularly with respect to the delivery of the deterrence capability that this country needs. Home of Australia's defence manufacturing and world-class precincts that drive innovation and strategic defence projects, South Australia is a central player in this delivery, a role that I will always proudly champion.</para>
<para>In Western Australia this laser sharp focus has been demonstrated by the commitment to and investment in the Henderson defence precinct, a part of this country that I had the privilege to spend time at in my pre-politics role working for ASC, Australia's sovereign submarine partner. At Henderson I saw the drive and motivation of my colleagues as they worked on the midcycle docking of Australia's six Collins class submarines, which will remain a vital part of our nation's defence capability for several years to come.</para>
<para>The focus on investment in the Henderson defence precinct is designed to ensure that, in this strategic moment, our Defence Force has the equipment, capability, the people and the funding it needs to keep Australians safe. We can do that successfully if there is stability and continuity in the Defence portfolio so that we can undertake foundational strategic thinking, whether that be through the 2023 Defence Strategic Review our national defence strategy for 2024. The DSR placed emphasis on the need to deliver capability that not only allows us to defend but also allows us to effectively deter, and, in an era of rapid geopolitical change and uncertainty, a meaningful and genuine deterrence capability is critical. The object of deterrence is to decisively influence an adversary's decision-making process to prevent hostile action against Australia. Deterrence succeeds when a potential adversary refrains from acting based on an assessment that the likelihood of achieving an outcome is too low and the costs of acting are too high. This additional $12 billion investment in the defence precinct in Henderson in WA is a key pillar in this strategy to defend and deter. Delivering this is fundamental in his term of government.</para>
<para>The Henderson defence precinct will be home to world-class shipbuilding and sustainment and will deliver continuous naval shipbuilding in WA. It is also an eye to the future, representing a major milestone in the AUKUS pathway as Australia develops the capability to safely and securely own, operate and sustain conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines. As well as providing certainty to workers, certainty to industry and certainty to the Australian people, this $12 billion will contribute to the construction of surface vessels for the ADF, starting with the Army's landing craft and, pending successful consolidation, the domestic build element of Australia's future general-purpose frigates. It will provide facilities to support the sustainment of Australia's surface vessels. It will provide contingency docking capabilities for Australia's future conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarine fleet from the early 2030s. Importantly, for working people ,investment will not only support defence capability but will support 10,000 well-paid, high-skilled, long-term and secure jobs.</para>
<para>The investment also allows us to forge deeper partnerships with our key allies. The first three Mogami class frigates will be built in Japan, but it is anticipated that the remaining eight will be built in the Henderson defence precinct. Australia is an island continent, and it is vital that our maritime trade routes are secured. The general purpose Mogami class frigates are critical to this. The Henderson defence precinct will be critical for this, and its importance is underpinned by the fact that the development of the Mogami class frigates is one of the most significant capability decisions the Australian government has made since the commencement of the AUKUS optimal pathway in 2023.</para>
<para>Australia's naval capability will also be greatly enhanced by the investment in the Ghost Shark. This $1.7 billion contract with Anduril Australia means the delivery, maintenance and continual development of the Ghost Shark, which is a fleet of extra-large autonomous undersea vehicles designed and built in Australia.</para>
<para>Shoring up Australia's defence capability is not only a national imperative; it is an economic opportunity—and the Albanese Labor government is firmly focused on delivering both.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Hasluck has moved a private member's motion acknowledging the government is going to make available an initial $12 billion towards the Henderson defence precinct to deliver continuous naval shipbuilding and an AUKUS presence in Western Australia—thank you, former coalition government; thank you, former member for Cook Scott Morrison. In the motion, she notes that there will be a record investment across shipbuilding and in AUKUS in the west—thank you, former coalition government; thank you, former member for Cook Scott Morrison. She notes 'support for approximately 10,000 direct jobs over the next two decades'—thank you, former coalition government; thank you, former member for Cook Scott Morrison. She notes 'opportunities for small and medium sized businesses across the state and Australia'—thank you, former coalition government; thank you, former member for Cook Scott Morrison. And 'certainty for industry that will partner on the construction of infrastructure and facilities'—you know where I'm going to go with this, don't you?—former coalition government, thank you very, very much; thank you, former member for Cook Scott Morrison.</para>
<para>In times of volatility—and our geopolitical situation has never been more precarious since World War II—what we need is to know who our friends are. Indeed, we saw at the White House just last week two friends making a pact, strengthening an alliance, and I acknowledge that. I acknowledge the coming together of Prime Minister Albanese and President Trump to say yes to AUKUS, and again I say, 'Thank you, former coalition government, for coming to the table, for having that vision,' knowing that, in the United States of America and the United Kingdom, we have two firm friends—friends for decades. We've fought alongside one another, we've bled beside one another, and we're going to go forward with one another to ensure that the rights of democracy are upheld, and national security is absolutely paramount.</para>
<para>But, a warning—not long after that important White House get-together, the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> reported:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Defence is being ordered to delay projects, slash maintenance costs and cut workforce spending in a severe austerity drive, as the soaring costs of nuclear submarines and new shipbuilding programs undermine the nation's readiness for conflict.</para></quote>
<para>What Defence cannot do is cut the cloth to fit the tailor, to suit the tailor. What Defence needs to do is absolutely make sure that it lobbies government through the right channels for more money. The pie is only so big, and we need to acknowledge, as a government, as a parliament, what is critical at the moment: national security. Don't just take my word for it; you only have to look at what is happening in our Pacific Rim to see that there is trouble afoot and that we need to absolutely make sure that AUKUS is solid—and also that all the other spending that we're doing on defence is being kept up.</para>
<para>I had the acting prime minister—the member for Corio, the Defence minister—in Wagga Wagga last week. He visited the Air Force base at Forest Hill and he visited Blamey Barracks at Kapooka, where soldiering begins. That's where they do the recruit training for our nation, for our Army. He was very pleased to see the almost $1½ billion being spent on infrastructure at those two bases—funding that I acquired when I was in the position to do so as assistant minister for defence. Again I say, 'Thank you, former coalition government,' because it is vital that we not only spend money on those regional bases where so much of the training and so much of the strategy are being done and acquired but, indeed, continue to spend the money that we need not just on AUKUS but on Defence as a whole.</para>
<para>That report in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> is disturbing:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Days after Donald Trump declared "full steam ahead" for the AUKUS pact, the Australian can reveal the Chief of the Air Force, Stephen Chappell, has initiated reviews of capability and sustainment costs as part of a service-wide push to "mitigate overspending" and "address budget challenges".</para></quote>
<para>That report from Ben Packham on 22 October is worrying, because we need to make sure that we maintain the spending—indeed, increase the spending—as we've been asked to do to meet our commitments in a difficult international situation and for the national security of our nation.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Building and Construction Industry</title>
          <page.no>203</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the National Centre for Vocational Education Research advises that there are 320,830 active apprentices and trainees in training, representing a drop of 107,320 apprentices and trainees in training compared to when the Opposition was last in office;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that new data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics released in September 2025 shows Australia's building approvals are collapsing, with total dwelling approvals down by 8.2 per cent and private sector apartment approvals down by 22 per cent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the critical link between the collapse in apprentice and trainee numbers and the shortage of skilled workers needed to address Australia's growing housing crisis, with fewer tradespeople available to build the homes Australians desperately need;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that the housing crisis is being compounded by this failure in skills and training, leading to higher costs, longer delays, and fewer Australians able to achieve the dream of home ownership;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) condemns the Government for failing to ensure an adequate pipeline of skilled workers to meet Australia's needs, and for overseeing a collapse in both apprentice numbers and housing approvals at a time when the nation can least afford it; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Government to take immediate and urgent action to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) rebuild apprentice and trainee numbers across the economy, particularly in construction and housing trades;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) work with industry and employers to support real pathways into skills and training; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) develop a credible strategy to ensure Australia has the skilled workforce required to meet current and future housing demand.</para></quote>
<para>I move this motion out of deep, deep concern for the sector, deep concern for our young people, concern for our tradies, concern for the employers and concern for the future of the skills pipeline for this country, because, under this government, we're watching a collapse of Australian apprenticeships and trainees that we have never seen in our history. It's having a devastating consequence for our economy and the workplace and, more particularly, the housing market.</para>
<para>The national pre-eminent body, the National Centre for Vocational Education Research—they're the pre-eminent body that capture the data. You will hear those on the other side of this chamber come in and make these flippant allegations that, when they took over in government four years ago, the economy was terrible and everything was upside down. But, I can tell you, these numbers from the pre-eminent independent body do not lie. When we left office—when we left government—the sector was healthy. We had over 428,000 apprentices and trainees in the sector working and contributing to our country. Today, after four years under this leadership, we have 107,000 fewer. Let me repeat that: there are 107,000 fewer apprentices—fewer younger Australians getting the training they need for skills, fewer jobs and fewer decent careers. How can that be? This is not a statistic; this is a Labor failure. This is a homegrown crisis, either intentionally or unintentionally grown by the policy failings of this Labor government—a failure of policy, a failure of leadership and a failure of vision.</para>
<para>I've been on the road right across our country from Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth to Darwin. I've been meet being employers, apprentices and training providers all around the country, and, everywhere I go, they're telling me the same thing. They are desperate for skilled workers. Builders can't find enough tradies. Civil contractors can't find enough plant operators. Electricians, plumbers and mechanics are stretched thin. In the regions, it's amplified. It's even worse. We're facing a skills drought, and this is a direct result of this government's neglect. At the very same time, Australia's housing approvals have collapsed.</para>
<para>We have seen Labor make some attempts to put some incentive programs in for apprentices. But they're very narrow; they're not for all apprentices. As Labor pursues their net zero targets, they'll give it to the apprentices that might be involved with building solar panels or windmills in that sector. Or they might give it to the affordable housing sector. But, when I was in Western Australia and I spoke with those from the resources sector, those looking for fitters, mechanics, diesel fitters—there was no support from Labor for those; zero. When I speak to the hospitality sector—the chefs, the caterers, the bakers, the sous-chefs, the apprentices—there was no support for those. When I talk to the car manufacturing sector, when I talk to the car dealerships—there's no support for the mechanics apprenticeships. There's no support for those that we need to train to accommodate the next wave of electric car fleet.</para>
<para>The recent ABS data in September shows total dwellings approvals are down 8.2 per cent and private apartment approvals have fallen by a staggering 22 per cent. All of this is under the new Labor government—a nation in the grip of a housing crisis while the pipeline of skilled workers to build the homes we need is drying up. It's little wonder Australians are waiting longer, paying more and losing hope of ever owning their own home. Labor will talk a big talk, but, when it comes to delivering, they'll always be found wandering. My motion today is not about politics; it's about the people. It's about the young apprentices that we need to employ in this country who can't get a start. It's the civil contractor in Darwin who can't find the tradies. It's time to get Australia building again. It's time to get Australia training again, and it's time to get Australia working again.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McKenzie</name>
    <name.id>124514</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is seconded, and I reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRENCH</name>
    <name.id>316550</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak against this motion moved by the member for Wright. I do so not only as a parliamentarian but as someone who spent years on the tools as an electrician. What the member for Wright is attempting today is pretty straightforward—to pretend the challenges in skills and housing began the moment the Labor government was elected. That takes a level of imagination reserved for fantasy novels or coalition budgets. The truth is this: when Labor came to office, we inherited the worst skills shortage in half a century. After nearly a decade of neglect, apprentice commencements had fallen from over 220,000 in 2014 to less than 135,000 in 2019. Completion rates cratered, billions had been ripped from TAFE, pathways were hollowed out, and skills policy was reduced to handing public money to fast food chains for traineeships that never led to real qualifications. So let's not take lectures from those who drove the car into the ditch and now want to yell at us for calling the tow truck.</para>
<para>The motion claims apprenticeship numbers are collapsing. That is wrong. As of 31 March 2025, more than 320,000 apprentices are in training, up 15 per cent on pre-COVID levels, and trade completion rates are 34 per cent higher than in 2019. Apprentices are training in the trades this country actually needs—electricians, plumbers and carpenters. Since 2023, over 650,000 Australians have enrolled in free TAFE, with more than 170,000 completions. We've locked free TAFE in as a permanent feature under the free TAFE act 2025, guaranteeing at least 100,000 places a year from 2027. And we're backing apprentices with real practical support. From July, new apprentices in housing construction can receive up to $10,000 in direct incentives. In the first three months, 4,700 apprentices have taken up that opportunity—real people starting real careers. We've lifted the living-away-from-home allowance for the first time in over two decades, now $120 a week for first-year apprentices, easing the pressure for those who move from home to train. We've doubled wage support for apprentices with a disability to $216 a week, indexed for the first time since 1998. We've also extended incentive payments for employers and apprentices in priority trades, with up to $5,000 in direct support.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Moore, we are fortunate to have two north metropolitan TAFE campuses. Their staff train nurses, cybersecurity experts, community workers and tradies that keep our regions running. Those campuses connect to construction training at Clarkson and Balga, a pipeline of skilled workers ready to build the homes Perth's north needs.</para>
<para>The member for Wright says housing approvals are collapsing—again, misleading at best. The slowdown began under the coalition, driven by the unwinding of their HomeBuilder stimulus and their failure to plan for materials and workforce shortages. This government has faced those pressures head-on. We're targeting 1.2 million new homes through the National Housing Accord, supported by the $32 billion Homes for Australia plan—the largest investment in housing in decades. We are cutting red tape, streamlining approvals and ensuring a skilled workforce to build those homes. That alignment between housing and skills is deliberate. It's the centrepiece of Labor's plan to build more homes and create secure jobs. When I was on the tools, TAFE fees had climbed to over $3,000. What many in this chamber don't realise is that, for some trades, many of those fees are paid for by the employer, so, every time those opposite hiked TAFE costs, they hurt not just the apprentices but also the small businesses that were training them. They made it harder for young people to start a trade and harder for employers to take them on. That's the record we inherited. They failed, and now they want to pretend this mess that they left never happened.</para>
<para>Australians deserve better than this kind of politics. We will keep investing in TAFE, we'll keep driving apprentices into critical trades, and we'll make sure every young person in Moore, in Western Australia and across our nation can build a skilled, secure future. I reject the motion.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:47 to 12:58</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this important motion moved by the Member for Wright. Last week, the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline><inline font-style="italic">Financial Review</inline> reported that, at the current rate, every state in this country will fail to meet its housing target, with my state of New South Wales amongst the furthest behind. This comes as median house prices hit record highs across every major city. In Sydney, the median price has reached $1.7 million—19 times the median full-time salary. In 2003, John Howard famously said that he didn't have people stopping him in the street to complain that house prices had gone up—well, I do. It's clear we've reached a tipping point with fewer and fewer young Australians believing homeownership is within their reach.</para>
<para>As the member for Wright highlights, enabling pathways into trades and apprenticeships is part of the solution. While I agree that the skills shortage is a major barrier to new construction, the problem runs much deeper than the recent decline in apprenticeship commencements. According to Jobs and Skills Australia, our construction sector is in a persistent shortage. The Master Builders association estimates that Australia will need half a million additional construction workers by 2029. If we assume a similar growth in apprenticeship completions over the next five years, we will barely make 20 per cent of this target.</para>
<para>The industry already relies on migrant workers, and one in four were born overseas. So, if we're serious about addressing our shortage, we must lift skilled migration and do so urgently. That starts with a designated construction skills visa, like those of the UK, New Zealand and Canada—countries facing similar housing affordability issues. Instead, construction workers seeking to come here face delays of up to 18 months and high application costs. The government had a chance to act last year, but, inexplicably, chose to vote against my amendment to include trades workers for the specialist skilled visa pathway.</para>
<para>The government must also deliver on its promise to tackle occupational licensing barriers between states and from approved overseas jurisdictions. I recently spoke to a UK citizen who is a fully qualified electrician but has now been forced to retrain because his UK qualifications weren't fully accepted here. The government's national licensing for electrical trades is a good start but still won't help my constituent fast enough.</para>
<para>Even if we fix migration and training, it will take far more than skills to solve this crisis. Firstly, the crossbench has long called for the government to restructure state incentives to help clear the capacity and bureaucratic bottlenecks holding back housing supply. This approach is backed by the sector itself—the people navigating the red tape every day.</para>
<para>Secondly, we need to prioritise infrastructure projects that enable housing. If the Commonwealth invests heavily in transport, that investment should be tied to appropriate zoning and development around new transport corridors. In addition, we need to make sure that, when we are investing in infrastructure, that is doing things like enabling the sewerage and other treatments that are needed for housing.</para>
<para>Thirdly, we need to stop demand-side interventions like the five per cent deposit scheme that the government has recently brought into being, which has absolutely no friends among people who know how house prices are driven—economists and housing experts. We know these don't work. We know that these have made things worse for young home buyers. But still we are seeing a government introducing pieces of legislation that just make it harder for young Australians to buy their own homes, rather than easier.</para>
<para>Fourthly, the government must deal with the CFMEU once and for all, appointing a genuine industry regulator with teeth. Despite the appointment of an administrator, which I supported, we still see appalling conduct from self-interested actors undermining trust in this critical sector and holding back the house-building and other building that we need in this country.</para>
<para>Finally, we need to improve the allocation of existing housing. Too many young families are squeezed into two-bedroom apartments while empty-nesters remain in large, mostly unused, homes. The key reform here is a transition from stamp duty to land tax, unlocking mobility and better using our existing housing stock. It is fairer, it is the appropriate thing to do, and the federal government needs to work with the states to enable this to happen.</para>
<para>Our generation of parliamentarians will be judged on whether we fix housing affordability, and it is time to pull all the levers that we possibly can. Too often, both of the major parties pull one lever or another that they think is politically convenient for their side of politics, rather than deal with the overarching needs across the whole of the economy.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome this opportunity to speak in the Australian parliament on apprenticeships and skills and to make one thing clear: when it comes to rebuilding our TAFE system, backing apprentices and setting Australia up for the future, Labor delivers. Every Australian deserves the chance to learn a trade, build a career and shape the future of our country. Apprentices are the backbone of our workforce, from the homes we live in to the infrastructure that connects us and to the industries that power our economy. Under Labor, apprentices are getting the support they need, not just to start but also to finish their training. We know times are tough and cost-of-living pressures are real.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:04 to 13:17</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We know times are tough and cost-of-living pressures are real and that is why the Albanese Labor government is helping more Australians take up apprenticeships and stick with them, particularly in the housing and construction sector where the demand for skilled workers has never been greater. From 1 July 2025 we expanded the Key Apprenticeship Program to include a housing construction apprenticeship stream, offering up to $10,000 in incentive payments to eligible new apprentices, and already more than 4,700 have commenced in trades like plumbing, carpentry and electrical work. In the first month of the incentives for housing construction apprentices, 1,250 apprentices have signed up, and I am very pleased to advise the House that 475 of those were from my electorate of Newcastle. If ever you wanted to understand a community that prides itself on the benefits of a trades education, you need look no further than Newcastle. We have increased the living away from home allowance for the first time in 20 years and we have lifted the disability Australian apprenticeship wage support payments for the first time since 1998 because we want cost-of-living support to match the value of the work that apprentices do.</para>
<para>Across the country we partnered with states and territories to deliver $1.5 billion for over 500,000 free TAFE and VET places and we made free TAFE permanent, locking in 100,000 places every year from 2027 under the new free TAFE act of 2025. Already more than 650,000 Australians have enrolled in free TAFE and over 170,000 have completed a course, 48,000 of those in construction alone. That is 170,000 people saving thousands of dollars and setting themselves up for secure well-paid work.</para>
<para>In Newcastle we're seeing this investment transform our region. At TAFE NSW, on the Tighes Hill campus, Labor is investing or delivering a $60 million net zero manufacturing centre of excellence. It's a partnership between the Albanese and Minns Labor governments that links our clean energy goals with real training and real jobs. It's making sure local people—</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:20 to 13:30</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It being 1.30, the Federation Chamber will suspend until the chair is resumed at 4 pm.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:30 to 16:00</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>206</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>206</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm delighted to amplify Juliette's voice today as part of our Raise our Voice in Parliament program for 2025:</para>
<quote><para class="block">By the end of 2050, up to 70% of the world's infectious diseases are predicted to become untreatable due to antimicrobial resistance. Treatment for pneumonia is proven to become ineffective by 2040.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Penicillin and numerous other first line antibiotics are already ineffective against staph and skin infections. With increased immigration and travel it is of the utmost importance to protect future generations from a problem that only the government can control: antimicrobial resistance.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This looming crisis is not a distant threat, it is being accelerated by a number of urgent and preventable factors. From the overuse of antibiotics in agriculture, such as in salmon farming, to poor infection control in healthcare settings, the forces driving antimicrobial resistance are multifaceted and deeply entrenched.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Without immediate intervention, including improved diagnostics and increased investment in research, future generations will be left vulnerable to infections we once easily cured.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Just recently, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has significantly reduced research into new antibiotics. While this development may not affect him as much as coming generations, to protect the future of the human race, antimicrobial resistance must be treated as a credible threat.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is vital that the government addresses this danger for the health and safety of humanity.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Thank you.</para></quote>
<para>Thank you, Juliette.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Peter Moyes Anglican Community School</title>
          <page.no>207</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Peter Moyes Anglican Community School in Mindarie celebrates 25 years this year. As the proud foundation registrar, I've seen this community grow with care, vision and faith. When we began building this school in 1999, our goal was not just about the buildings. It was about creating a welcoming place where every student felt supported to learn, grow and become a strong leader. Mr Peter Moyes, an exemplary Australian educator, showed great leadership and commitment to education, and the school continues to honour his legacy. I want to especially thank Mr Allan Shaw, the school's foundation principal. His guidance in those early years helped shaped the positive culture and strong academic program that the school is known for today.</para>
<para>Over 25 years, this school has grown into more than just a place of learning. It is a caring community that supports every student through challenges and celebrations. This milestone is thanks to the commitment and dedication of the principal, Mr Ben Lomas; the staff; the support of families; and the energy of all the students. Thank you to everyone who has helped make this story so special. As the school moves forward, I am confident that it will continue to inspire and empower many more students into the future. Congratulations to the whole Peter Moyes community on 25 wonderful years.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Royal Australian Navy</title>
          <page.no>207</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Our Navy is essential to Australia's national security and defence sovereign capability and industrial strength. Last week, I had the privilege of visiting HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Waterhen</inline> and HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Penguin</inline>, both based in Warringah. It was an incredible opportunity to see firsthand the Royal Australian Navy's vital contribution to our national defence, our sovereign capability and to the science and technology that underpin it. As an island nation, Australia's prosperity and security rely heavily on open and secure sea lanes. A strong, agile and well-resourced navy is essential to protecting our national interests and ensuring our sovereignty. At <inline font-style="italic">Waterhen</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">Penguin</inline>, the teams of the Mine Warfare, Clearance Diving and Geospatial Force demonstrate extraordinary professionalism, skill and dedication. From mine countermeasures and clearance diving to hydrographic surveying and disaster response, their work safeguards not just defence operations but the very lifelines of our economy and our regional partnerships.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the Navy Clearance Diver Trust, a not-for-profit organisation that supports current and former clearance divers and their families. These men and women perform some of the most demanding roles in the Navy and too many face injury and mental health challenges after service. It's essential that as a nation we better support our veterans to ensure they receive the care, respect and support they deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>207</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to read the winning entry from Raise Our Voice. It's from 11-year-old Arianna, who goes to St Rita's College in Brisbane in my electorate. Arianna says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I want to see a future where every person in my community and across Australia feels safe, valued, and respected, no matter their background, appearance, beliefs, or lifestyle.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I imagine communities that are more united, that genuinely celebrate diversity and promote understanding.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I want to see schools that are truly safe spaces, where bullying and harassment are taken seriously and actively decreased.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To support this vision, Parliament can take real action, they can fund nationwide anti-bullying programs in schools and make them mandatory for students, work with tech companies to stop cyberbullying and online abuse, provide more school counsellors and mental health services for students.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Most importantly, guarantee that Parliament itself promotes respectful debate and has zero tolerance for bullying in public life because leaders should lead by example.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This goal is so important because bullying does not just hurt in the moment; it can stay with a person for life.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Many people in our community have experienced bullying, whether at school or online, and we must stop our young Australians from carrying that pain inside because it can lead to serious mental health issues, even suicide.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ending bullying will help create a peaceful, loving, and safe Australia for everyone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Together, we have the power to create a future where everyone feels safe, respected, and included.</para></quote>
<para>With leadership like yours, Arianna, our future is in good hands.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>208</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's one rule for lobbyists and another rule for the rest of us. Under Labor's proposed laws you're going to be increasingly kept in the dark about government decisions—shut out. Meanwhile they're letting cashed-up corporate lobbyists buy access to senior ministers. Under Labor's proposed changes to freedom of information, if ministers have so much as glanced at a document, you won't be able to see it, yet, if you're a billion-dollar corporation, you can sling Labor $15,000 or so and get a private meeting with a minister.</para>
<para>Prime Minister Albanese promised a more transparent government. Now we know what he meant: a more transparent government for corporations and lobbyists, not more transparent for the Australian public. Prime Minister Albanese's government is now less transparent than Scott Morrison's coalition government. Shameful! It doesn't take a genius to connect the dots here to work out who the government is listening to and to work out whose interests government decisions ultimately serve. I'll give you a clue: it's not the Australian public. No wonder corporations can pay no tax when you can't afford to buy a home. No wonder we give special deals to coal and gas corporations while your cost of living skyrockets.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petrie Electorate: Volunteering</title>
          <page.no>208</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COMER</name>
    <name.id>316551</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to take a moment to recognise the incredible work of the Redcliffe Hospital Auxiliary, which is a group of dedicated volunteers who have been the quiet heroes of our hospital community for decades. Last financial year the volunteers clocked up 1,596 volunteer hours at the gift shop, where they sell handmade goods, and almost 2,000 hours in the workroom undertaking various tasks to support the wards. These tireless volunteers have raised over $1 million under the dedicated leadership of President Liz Hancock. These funds go directly towards improving the care of hospital patients. Whether it's fundraising for vital equipment, supporting patients and families or bringing a friendly face to the wards, the auxiliary reminds me that the community spirit is alive and well in my community. Their generosity and hard work make a real, tangible difference in the lives of patients and staff every single day.</para>
<para>At the recent Redcliffe Hospital Auxiliary AGM we heard from Kerry and the incredible team at Bright Bags. Bright Bags supports vulnerable children and young people in the Moreton Bay region and surrounds. They link with schools and child safety and foster care services to provide a range of bags filled with essential items and goodies to children in need. The way that Kerry speaks about spoiling these children simply because they deserve to be spoiled and loved is heartwarming. In one year alone Bright Bags delivered almost 4,000 bags to children in need. With Christmas around the corner Bright Bags is on track to deliver the much needed, much loved Christmas bags to even more children. I'm proud to support these incredible organisations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bowman Electorate: Sport</title>
          <page.no>208</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In just a couple of short weeks two of the biggest sporting clubs in my electorate each took home the ultimate prize. On 6 September the Redlands Tigers Cricket Club, of which I'm a proud patron, clinched the 2025 Queensland Cricket KFC T20 Max title. Jimmy Peirson's colossal innings of 102 not out off 50 balls and Marnus Labuschagne's hat-trick sealed the Redlands commanding 41-run win over Valley. My apologies to the member for Brisbane. Congratulations to Jimmy, Marnus, Sam Heazlett, Mac Wright, James Bazley, Lachlan Bangs, Leigh Drennan, Lachlan McClure, Connor O'Riordan, James Pullar, Jack Sinfield, Jack Wildermuth, Charlie Thomas, Benji Floros, Cameron Boyce, Tighe Morris, Tom Hallion, Hugh Weibgen and, of course, their coaches and managers.</para>
<para>Just two weeks later, we saw a commanding performance by the Redlands-Victoria Point Sharks Football Club, winning the QAFL senior premiers title, 95-57, over Surfers Paradise. My commiserations to the Gold Coast member to the left of me. Congratulations to the coach, Phil Carse; to the captain, Mitch Stallard, to Cooper Anderson; and to all the other players. Our local teams keep getting the job done and bringing home the silverware to the Redlands. I could not be prouder to represent my community and the wonderful sporting clubs that represent our wonderful sporting culture.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women's Health</title>
          <page.no>209</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FRANCE</name>
    <name.id>270198</name.id>
    <electorate>Dickson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For decades, women's health has been ignored or belittled. I was told in my late 40s that my tiredness was probably diet related and that I should increase my iron intake. I was told my migraines, which I had never had before, were probably the result of stress. Looking back, I was in perimenopause. I'm now aged 52. I am in my menopause era, and I am one of the tens of thousands of women who are benefiting from the Albanese Labor government's record women's health package. I am taking all of the things available to mitigate the symptoms and live a productive, happy life. Getting the diagnosis and initial treatment cost me over $1,000. I've been paying about $800 a year for medications over the past few years. Now, as a result of Albanese Labor government's $800 million women's health package, the annual cost has halved for me.</para>
<para>Today, I was proud to join my Labor caucus colleagues to announce that another contraceptive has been added to the PBS. From November 1, the NuvaRing will cost just $31.60 per script or $7.70 for concessional patients. From January, that cost drops even further to $25. What once cost $270 a year will now cost just $25. I'm proud to be part of a government that listens, acts and delivers for Australian women.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hello Honey</title>
          <page.no>209</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LLEW O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
    <electorate>Wide Bay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Nestled in the heart of Kin Kin, Hello Honey is a shining example of how passion and perseverance can create something extraordinary. Founded in 2017 by Judy Scrase, Hello Honey began as a humble stall at the Noosa and Eumundi markets, while Judy was a stay-at-home mum raising two boys. Driven by a love for 100 per cent organic Australian honey, especially Manuka, Judy has worked with beekeepers along Australia's east coast for nearly two decades, sourcing pure honey, pollen, beeswax and propolis from hives surrounded by native wildflowers. Propolis, or bee glue, has powerful antibacterial and antioxidant properties and features in two Hello Honey products: soothing Propolis & Honey Candy Drops and 10 gram Honey Sticks for honey on the go. Since 2017, Hello Honey has exported these to South Korea, with its soothing candies recently showcased in the Parliament House gift shop, representing Queensland producers.</para>
<para>Visit hellohoney.com.au to taste the difference. Recognised with the Slow Food Noosa's 'Snail of Approval' and a finalist in the 2021 Sunshine Coast Business Awards, Hello Honey is a registered trademark in Australia and South Korea and continues to thrive with recent exports to Vietnam—100 per cent Australian made, 100 per cent natural, and proudly supporting Australian beekeepers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Motor Neurone Disease</title>
          <page.no>209</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LIM</name>
    <name.id>300130</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I first met Lindsay, David and Trevor when I was out doorknocking. These three longtime friends all live on the same street. They get together every week to talk about everything from their families to the issues that mean the most to them. I call them the three amigos. And when they invited me to join them at their local pub, I couldn't say no.</para>
<para>I was very sad to learn that Lindsay had been diagnosed with motor neurone disease. There is no recovery from this horrible disease. As Lindsay told me, for many people, two to four years is what you've got.</para>
<para>One day they were walking to the pub and they noticed a change in Lindsay's steps. Then came tests and appointments with specialists, and then the eventual diagnosis of MND.</para>
<para>A little while ago, the three amigos moved their catch-up to Lindsay's verandah. I saw the three amigos last week before I headed to Canberra. Lindsay is as sharp and funny as ever, even as his muscles are weakening and his health is declining. I want to acknowledge Lindsay's wife of over 50 years and the love and care she provides Lindsay.</para>
<para>Many people know very little about MND. Thank you, Lindsay, for letting me share your story here.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Beached @ Burleigh</title>
          <page.no>209</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier this month I held my inaugural McPherson Honours, a celebration of locals who give so much to our community. One of this year's remarkable finalists was Beached @ Burleigh, at Burleigh Heads Church of Christ. After learning about their incredible work, I was honoured to join one of their outreach Fridays and see it all in action. What I witnessed was truly inspiring—not only the practical support they provide, but the powerful sense of belonging they create for people doing it tough.</para>
<para>Each Friday, Beached @ Burleigh offers free food parcels, basic groceries, a laundry service in partnership with Orange Sky, and op shop vouchers to locals in need. But what makes them special is the community they have built. People might come for the support, but they stay for the connection. From the local band that performs each week to the free coffee and barbecue that bring everyone together, these Fridays are clearly a highlight for many.</para>
<para>It also means the world to its volunteers. While volunteerism has declined nationally since COVID, Beached @ Burleigh has seen its volunteer numbers grow—a testament to the strength, compassion and community spirit that defines this remarkable group. Congratulations and thank you to Beached @ Burleigh and your incredible volunteers for all you do to lift up our community each and every week.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>210</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Through Raise Our Voice Australia, it is now my honour to read out a speech from 14-year-old Reyhaan, an outstanding young leader in my electorate of Aston. Reyhaan wrote about education equity:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Imagine two students. One has access to every learning resource—stable internet, tutoring, a quiet space to study. The other wants to succeed just as much but has none of those things. Which one do you think gets left behind?</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If we want a better tomorrow for young Australians, we must make education equity a priority today. It's not just about funding, it's about access, support, and fairness. We need stronger support systems in public schools, and targeted programs for students in rural, low-income, and multicultural communities. Talent is everywhere, but opportunity isn't.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">As a young person on my local council's Youth Advisory Committee, I see how deeply young people care about their future. Hence, I'm asking the government to continue to partner with us, invest in schools, mental health services, digital infrastructure, and youth leadership. Let's also invest in sustainability and STEM … education so students are ready for jobs in clean energy, climate innovation, and the industries of tomorrow.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">That's how we create a smarter, fairer, and greener Australia, not just in one neighbourhood or state, but right across the country.</para></quote>
<para>Thank you, Reyhaan, for your advocacy and your excellent speech.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Loxton's Longest Brunch</title>
          <page.no>210</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to acknowledge the success of Loxton's Longest Brunch. The event brought together 160 farmers, volunteers and local families for a long-table-style brunch, held on the main street of Loxton. Last Sunday morning, Loxton was transformed into a space of solidarity and support. Attendees took their seats shoulder to shoulder with primary producers whose work underpins the region, and they enjoyed some local food and drinks.</para>
<para>This fundraising event was structured in a way to ensure that all funds stayed in the community, via gift cards that were provided to primary producers for local stores—an acknowledgement that retail businesses also do it tough during drought. Together, the Loxton community raised an incredible $11,000 for primary producers who are living through the severest drought in living memory.</para>
<para>These events remind me, and should remind all of us, of what makes regional South Australia so special: strong communities, connected and resilient, punching on through tough times, with a deep pride in the land and the people that sustain us. So I congratulate the organisers, the volunteers and every attendee for making Loxton's Longest Brunch not just a meal but a meaningful expression of community strength in the Riverland region. I was shattered I couldn't be there. I love a brunch of any type, but I'm grateful my donation facilitated for five farmers to attend that meaningful event.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macquarie Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>210</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recent warm and windy weather was a reminder for all of us that bushfire season is here. Hawkesbury RFS members showed they are ready when they displayed their skills at the weekend district championships held on the sixth anniversary of the start of the 2019-20 Gospers Mountain fire. Crews were challenged in things like pumps and pumping, tank inspections, problem-solving and fireground fundamentals. The Yarramundi crew took out first place in the station-readiness category, with their improved station looking beautiful. The overall championship winner was Oakville RFS, followed by Wilberforce and Blaxlands Ridge. There was a proud mum moment when Councillor Danielle Wheeler, herself a brigade member, presented the outstanding crew leader award to her son Patrick.</para>
<para>Two new heavy bush firefighting tankers and the first firefighting boat for the Hawkesbury RFS were handed over by the New South Wales government, which we always love to see. Brigades are ready. The national aerial firefighting fleet based at the Richmond RAAF base is also there to back them up. It was great to visit last week with the emergency management minister.</para>
<para>I want to finish with a special shout-out to cadets who graduated at Hawkesbury, Windsor, Colo, Armidale and Richmond high schools. I was honoured to attended many of those ceremonies. Thanks to Deputy Group Officer Phil Hurst who conducts that program.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>210</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SMALL</name>
    <name.id>291406</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on behalf of 14-year-old Kyran Bacon of Carey Park in Bunbury. He was part of the raise your voice competition and was asked, 'What steps should government take today to build a better tomorrow young Australians?' Here's what he had to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">As a young Australian I care about mental health.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's a big issue for kids my age. Too many of us feel stressed, sad or even alone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We need help but sometimes it's hard to find or too expensive.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The government should act now.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">They should put more money into school counsellors and youth programs.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">They should make sure help is easy to get and free for everyone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We need safe spaces to talk and be heard. Mental health matters because it affects everything in school like friendships and our future. If we feel better, we do better.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">People should care because strong minds build strong communities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If the government acts today Australia will be a kinder and healthier place.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Young people will grow up feeling supported and ready to take on the world. We'll have less crime, better schools and happier families.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Let's build a future where no one feels alone so let's start now.</para></quote>
<para>Because Kyran felt so passionate about that and, I think, that spoke to a sentiment we can all share in—wanting Australia to do better—I was very pleased to read that out.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bower, Mr Dave</title>
          <page.no>211</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Cast your mind back 30 years. The year is 1995. Paul Keating is prime minister. The PlayStation just hit our shelves. <inline font-style="italic">Toy Story</inline> was lighting up our cinemas. And, on 9 August, an 18-year-old bloke named Dave Bower started working at the newly opened Hunter Valley Cheese Factory in Pokolbin. Dave began on the retail side, cutting his teeth before cutting the cheese—before making the gouda move into manufacturing where he found his passion. He studied cheesemaking through the Gilbert Chandler College of Dairy Technology, showing early that he wasn't just a big cheese but a bloke ready to milk every opportunity. Thirty years and more than 55,000 hours later, Dave became one of Australia's most experienced cheesemakers. Every wheel, every wedge and every block has been made by hand, not by machine. That's 'brie-lliant' dedication.</para>
<para>His talent hasn't gone unnoticed. In 2000 he was named a rising food star by the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline>, proving that he's the cream of the crop. Dave has also been a mentor to the next generation, always happy to share his knowledge and spread love not just the camembert. Today Dave and the Hunter Valley Cheese Factory for 30 years—congratulations. Mate, you've done an edam good job, and that has truly aged to perfection. Some may say this is a little cheesy, but congratulations, Dave, and keep up the good work.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lilli Pilli Football Club, Caringbah Redbacks Football Club</title>
          <page.no>211</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to congratulate two outstanding local football teams that have done my electorate proud. The Lilli Pilli Under 16 Girls, who were crowned Football NSW's champion of champions. They won their local comp and the state cup too. I like to congratulate Carla Sparkes, Isabella Paterson, Isabel Adams, Zara Tindall, Caris Troy, Kayla Babington, Juliet Allsopp Lander, Emeline Bourke, Ruby Street, Scarlett Hoerr, Poppy Hulbert, Laura Sutherland, Scarlett Macartney, Ava Degnan, Haylee Hanly and Shaleah Field. Congratulations also to coaches Brad Penfold and Kory Babington and team manager Kane Bourke.</para>
<para>I would also like to acknowledge the under-13 boys from Lilli Pilli, who, heartbreakingly, went down in extra time 2-1. Well done boys. I also acknowledge the Caringbah Redbacks Football Club, who claimed the under-21 men's champion of champions crown. Well done Liam Page, Jackson Greck, Jackson Fox, Aiden Fielder, Mitchell Backhouse, Jordan McAllister, Luca Alegria Ferreria, captain Luke Cutcliffe, Luca Stonestreet, Andreas Panas, George Michael, Cody Beak, Nicholas Plakias, James Riach, Tyler Slattery, Cooper Higgens, Thomas McLachlan and Luka Oliveri, coach Scott Greck and team manager Steven Backhouse. You are champions in every sense of the word. Congratulations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Diwali</title>
          <page.no>211</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Since being elected, I've had the privilege of getting to know the Indian community in my electorate better and learning about the faiths and traditions that bring people together. Last Tuesday, I visited the Blackburn Gurdwara to celebrate Bandi Chhor Divas, also known sometimes as Diwali and Deepavali, joining the prayers, sharing food and experiencing the community's warmth. I also took part in the turban wrapping, guided by Bir Singh from the Melbourne Sikhs. He explained that the turban is not just a piece of cloth but a sacred symbol of discipline, honour and duty to serve others.</para>
<para>I wish to express my appreciation to Sumeet and Gurmeet from the Blackburn Gurdwara for their generosity and hospitality. I thank them and all for gurdwara for their invitation and for always welcoming others into their place of worship with open hearts. Moments like these remind us that Australia's story is ever growing and ever changing. Our diversity is not to be managed or tolerated but something to be celebrated. Sadly some choose to divide rather than unite. We believe inclusion is strength and that every culture and every faith enriches Australia's story.</para>
<para>To all members of the Indian community in Menzies, I hope your Diwali, Deepavali and Bandi Chhor Divas were filled with joy, peace and time shared with loved ones.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wannon Electorate: Early Pregnancy Loss Memorial</title>
          <page.no>212</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Monday, I had the great honour of joining with my community in the south-west to put in place an early pregnancy loss memorial. This was one of those wonderful community events where the community came together to recognise a need. It was led by the Rotary club and by Janet Blackley, in particular, and I commend her for the way the that Rotary dealt with this very, very sensitive subject. I also commend Karen Johnson from the Warrnambool Cemetery trust.</para>
<para>Those two organisations and others recognised the need in the community for people to be able to grieve early pregnancy loss. Local tradespeople put a memorial in the Tooram cemetery, where grieving parents can come and pay their respects. It's a beautiful, sculpture of a tree. You can even place a butterfly or a leaf on this memorial. To everyone that was there who had suffered early pregnancy loss and wanted to be able to, in one way or another, deal with their loss, it was a very, very special occasion.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>212</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():</para>
<quote><para class="block">When I think about 'building a better tomorrow', I think about what young people need. We need action on mental health: more school counsellors, youth mental health hubs, and accessible help.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Education is another place where we need change. We are told to dream big, but sometimes it feels like we are being prepared for a world that no longer exists.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schools should teach us skills for the future and provide pathways into trades, STEM, aviation, technology and healthcare.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We need programs that connect first-time job seekers with real opportunities and paid internships.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Every young person should graduate feeling capable and confident that there is a place for them in the workforce.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's hard to imagine a future where we can be independent when even renting is becoming impossible. Young people deserve affordable housing, rental security, and fair chances to buy homes one day.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To build a future where young people thrive, we need a government that invites us into the decision-making process, and shows us that our voices truly matter.</para></quote>
<para>These are not my words today. They're the words of 19-year-old Sahar from Moreton. Sahar participated in the Raise Our Voice in Parliament program. As part of that program, young people have a platform to share their ideas. I'm so proud and privileged to be able to share Sahar's ideas with you today.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government: Veterans</title>
          <page.no>212</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Anzac Day, Labor politicians will run to any veteran wearing medals, or any Defence Force member in uniform, to get a photo to place on their social media and say things like, 'Lest we forget,' and, 'We'll be there to help you in your time of need.'</para>
<para>Well, when it comes to action, this Labor government has failed. They have failed the people of Townsville with our veterans' hub, the Oasis. The Oasis supports thousands of veterans throughout Townsville. It was one of the first hubs that was established and, for the last several months, John Caligari has been writing to Minister Matt Keogh, asking for support. Yet this has fallen on deaf ears. Now, the Oasis has said they may have to close, or they will be closing, at the end of the year. That's going to put veterans and veterans' families who work there out of a job. It's also going to create a hole and a gap in services for veterans and those that serve and their families in their time of need. This simply isn't good enough.</para>
<para>The Labor government can find money for anything and everything, but when it comes to Defence and our veterans, they are missing in action. First it was the Sallyman; that now no longer exists. Now it's going to be the Oasis Townsville. The Oasis has saved lives. We need the service to be sustainable for our veterans. The Oasis should be working closely with this government to make sure that there a sustainability model, not for my generation but for many to come.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Unconformity</title>
          <page.no>212</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>An unconformity is a buried erosion surface separating two rock masses, or, as it happens on the west coast of Tasmania, it's a contemporary arts festival exploring the unique paradoxes of Queenstown—a four-day biennial festival, where you can walk the landscape, meet the people, be provoked by the different art, learn and be taught, or just have a damn good time enjoying art and all of the different iterations.</para>
<para>This year I had the honour of being joined by the federal arts minister, Tony Burke. I proudly escorted him around Queenstown, through many of the festival's venues, and introduced him to a wide range of artists. It was a fantastic opportunity to showcase our local arts community. There's something truly special about meeting artists in their element, seeing their work, hearing their stories. Whether you were sitting on Crib Road enjoying the music, sampling food from the local vendors or browsing artworks in pop-up galleries, Queenstown was really alive with creativity.</para>
<para>Spiderbait, the legendary Aussie rock band, headlined the music program and brought an incredible energy to the weekend. Their performance drew crowds from across the region and was a highlight for many, myself included. I've been to every Unconformity since the festival's inception and I can say, without hesitation, that they just get better and better. Thank you to everyone who makes this festival possible: the artists, the organisers, the volunteers, the local businesses and the community of Queenstown. You continue to produce a top-tier festival.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Olsen, Mr Jarrad</title>
          <page.no>213</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to acknowledge an exceptional athlete from my electorate of Grey—Jarrad Olsen. Jarrad from the Balaklava Bowling Club is an intellectually disabled bowler whose talent and determination are truly worthy of recognition. Jarrad has won the state ID singles titles four years in a row. What makes this so remarkable are the barriers that ID bowlers like Jarrad constantly face. Not only does Jarrad face limited opportunities due to his disability; like for many regional athletes, there is significant financial cost.</para>
<para>Sport in regional SA isn't merely a dash up the road. There are road trips that often feel longer than the season itself. It is disappointing that support for regional athletes remains limited and, in Jarrad's case, virtually not existent. A postcode shouldn't define opportunities. That is why it is important to raise awareness of these barriers, not just for Jarrad but for thousands of athletes across my electorate who deserve the same opportunities as those in our capital cities.</para>
<para>On a final note, I want to briefly highlight the Bowls for Brisbane 2032 campaign. If brought to fruition, bowlers like Jarrad could be competing at the Olympics and Paralympic Games for the first time since 1996. How good would that be?</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bonner Electorate: World Mental Health Day</title>
          <page.no>213</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On World Mental Health Day, I had the pleasure of joining the Wynnum Manly and Districts Men's Shed to celebrate 33 years of the Men's Shed movement across Australia. The Shedder's Big BBQ Breakfast and expo brought our community together over coffee, breakfast and good conversation—a simple but powerful reminder that connection underpins our wellbeing. The event showcased the strength of local partnerships with many community organisations in attendance including the Cancer Council Queensland, Jeff Horn and Bullyproof Australia, Repair Cafe Bayside, It's a Bloke Thing, the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia, OzFish and Circle of Men. Each plays an important role in promoting health, resilience and belonging within our communities. The Men's Shed movement has long stood as a beacon for men's mental health, a place where men can connect, share skills and support one another.</para>
<para>Recently, I also met with the team at TIACS, who are doing incredible work in Brisbane, providing free mental health support for tradies, truckies and blue-collar workers—over 11,000 supports each and every year. Their iconic 'This is a Conversation Starter' shirt has become a symbol of openness and connection, reminding us that starting a simple chat can change and, most certainly, save a life. On World Mental Health Day, it is important that we are reminded of these important community organisations and supports in our local community, and I thank them for all that they do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Casey Electorate: Nangana Landcare Network</title>
          <page.no>213</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In case you need more convincing that Casey is the best part of Australia, our community is the only place in the world you can find the helmeted honeyeater and the Leadbeater's possum in the wild, and that is because we are dedicated teams of environmental volunteers who work tirelessly to save habitats and increase biodiversity in Yellingbo and across our region.</para>
<para>Today I want to congratulate the Nangana Landcare Network, which was recently awarded silver for their work saving Victoria's faunal emblems at the Australian Geographical Society's award night. The network was one of 70 applicants across the country. They made it through the shortlist of 21 groups and were named just one of five winning groups across the country. Their winning project was a long-term environmental initiative spanning 128,000 hectares of the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges. Throughout the years, the group has contributed to the quadrupling of the helmeted honeyeater population and saving the habitat of the Leadbeater's possum. I met with Nangana's vice president and secretary, Jenny Lyndon, earlier this year, and it is amazing to see the network round the year out with his well-deserved recognition. Congratulations, and thank you to all our local environmental volunteers who have been involved in protecting our faunal emblems and making sure that in the Yarra Ranges agriculture and nature work side-by-side.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>214</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week is youth week and the Raise Our Voice in Parliament 2025 campaign, now in its fifth year, is an incredible opportunity to amplify the voices of young Australians aged six to 25 by reading a 90-second speech in parliament. Cameron, 21, from my electorate of Sturt spoke about resilience opportunity in action. In Cameron's words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I want a future when no young person is left behind. I've experienced times when having a stable home wasn't guaranteed. I faced challenges that no-one should have to face. But I've also seen the strength that comes from community, compassion and opportunity lessons I carry from my mother, a strong independent woman who taught me resilience.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">To build a better tomorrow for young Australians, the government must act today. They should invest in affordable housing so no young person sleeps rough, provide accessible timely mental health support, ensure quality education and training programs, prepare us for the jobs of the future, commit to meaningful climate action to protect our planet, and design policies that promote fairness, inclusion and opportunity so all young Australians can thrive. This isn't just about my story; it is about thousands of young Australians who deserve to be heard, respected and empowered to shape our country's direction. We are the next generation of leaders. Let's build a future where every voice counts, where every young person has a chance and where today's action create a tomorrow we all want to see.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications: 3G Network Shutdown</title>
          <page.no>214</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to call out this government's abysmal failure to address the fallout of the 3G shutdown 12 months ago, despite a Senate inquiry and two reports about a multitude of issues. When I'm travelling regional Australia, one of the first things people want to discuss is how their mobile phone reception has deteriorated since the shutdown, and that is deterioration from a very low bar. The 3G network was shut down by telecommunications carriers for commercial reasons, yet the Albanese government relied on the assurances of these same commercial operators that they would ensure equivalent mobile coverage post shutdown. The Labor government's response to the final report of the inquiry into the 3G shutdown, released under the cover of Senate estimates, was lazy and noncommittal, failing to acknowledge the issues or agree to any new actions. We still don't know how many new mobile-phone black spots were created by the botched shutdown.</para>
<para>Regional Australians are sick of being left behind. While the Prime Minister's favourite line is 'nobody held back, no-one left behind', every regional Australian knows he doesn't mean it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>214</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to be able to bring the words of a young constituent to the attention of the House. Sofea is 12 years old, and, through the Raise Our Voice initiative, submitted this excellent speech on a critical issue. Here is Sofea's speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">To build a better tomorrow for young Australians, the government must take urgent and meaningful action to reduce plastic pollution in our oceans.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Each year, vast amounts of plastic enter the sea, causing severe harm to marine life such as turtles, dolphins and seabirds. This is not simply an environmental concern, it is a growing crisis that threatens biodiversity, food security, and the health of our planet.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">My name is Sofea. I am 12 years old, and I'm a student at Charles Weston School Coombs. I'm passionate about protecting ocean environments and speaking up for the animals who cannot speak for themselves.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I respectfully urge the government to implement a ban on single-use plastics, support innovation in sustainable packaging, and improve public access to recycling. Education is also vital, young Australians should be taught the importance of ocean conservation and the long-term impact of plastic waste. The ocean sustains life on Earth. It provides oxygen, regulates our climate, and supports countless species.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The action we take today will shape the kind of Australia we grow up in.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I believe we all deserve a cleaner, safer, and more responsible future, especially … the sea creatures who depend on us.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youth Voice in Parliament</title>
          <page.no>214</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As part of our Raise Our Voice campaign, I'm proud to share the words of Wiremu from Proserpine State High School. He states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Education should be a doorway—a way forward for every young person in this country.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But for students in regional communities, that door often feels locked.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Each day we wake up before sunrise, travelling for hours to reach school.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Every wet season, flooded roads block our way and we wait to hear if school will even open.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The constant uncertainty, that our education depends on things outside of our control is a barrier to our futures.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Many of us study without the subjects that city students take for granted—ancient history, languages, physics—because there aren't enough teachers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Some of us study alone, online, without the support that face-to-face learning brings.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's isolating.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's frustrating.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And it chips away at our confidence and our dreams.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Unfortunately, we don't have multi-million-dollar research centres, nor do we have access to world-class tutors.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">What we do have is determination—a will, to extend beyond our boundaries and defy limitations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But we can't do that alone.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We are grateful to live where we live.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But gratitude shouldn't equate to limitation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's time to open the doors to equal education … because a nation that abandons its youth abandons its future.</para></quote>
<para>Wise words, Wiremu.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Southern Highlands Community Hospice</title>
          <page.no>215</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BERRY</name>
    <name.id>23497</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to recognise the Southern Highlands Community Hospice, a charitable organisation that provides hospice and palliative care services for the Southern Highlands community. The volunteers who deliver these services on behalf on the Southern Highlands Community Hospice do so with great care and compassion.</para>
<para>Last month I was lucky enough to meet many of these volunteers and hear firsthand about the wonderful work they do. Southern Highlands Community Hospice provides funding for accommodation and medical costs for end-of-life patients without private health care; additional palliative care nursing, carer support and associated equipment hire costs for those choosing to die at home; one-off payments to fund medical equipment for palliative care patients to optimise their quality of life; and additional palliative care nursing at two aged-care facilities. The hospice also provides funding for palliative medications; specially trained palliative care volunteers to support residents in aged-care facilities; a free biography service which documents a person's memories, which is a beautiful service; and end-of-life planning and bereavement counselling services.</para>
<para>These services are highly valued by the community. The sense of care and concern for people at what is often a vulnerable or lonely time of life is an incredibly generous gesture on the part of volunteers. I sincerely thank all those associated with the Southern Highlands Community Hospice for the extremely valuable and important work they do for the community.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>215</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>215</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Casey to condemn this government's reckless and out-of-control spending. This government's economic philosophy more closely resembles that of a gambler on a losing streak than a prudent steward of our nation's finances.</para>
<para>Government spending must be targeted, effective and efficient. Labor continues to act entirely out of self-interest, piling on debt with no regard for the generations to come, who will ultimately foot the bill. Under Labor, spending has blown out from 24 per cent to 27 per cent of GDP, the highest level outside a recession in nearly 40 years. Labor has taken a blowtorch to the fiscal guardrails that every responsible government of either persuasion has used and respected for decades. Treasury officials have confirmed there are no quantifiable fiscal rules guiding Labor's budgets—no speed limit; no seatbelts; just a blank cheque and a Treasurer who thinks budgetary discipline is optional.</para>
<para>Since coming to office, Labor has added $100 billion to the national debt, on track to breach $1 trillion this financial year and $1.2 trillion by the time of the next election. Every minute, $50,000 of taxpayers' money is burnt just on interest. That's $72 million every single day that isn't being spent on essential services. Labor's spending binge has worked against the RBA, kept inflation sticky and rendered rate cuts impossible. Markets now fear it may be 'one and done' on cuts, with rates remaining elevated for longer. When Labor spends, Australians pay.</para>
<para>First, they ditched the rule book and reached for your wallet when they floated their tax on unrealised gains in super, opening the door to taxing theoretical profits because they're desperate to feed their spending habit. This wasn't just poor policy; it crossed a line and set a dangerous precedent that spooked savers and retirees. A government that cannot live within its means will always go looking for new ways to live within yours.</para>
<para>It's not just the size of spending; it's the quality. Despite the splurge, growth hasn't improved. My constituents in McPherson feel no better off, and Australia has endured multiple quarters of per capita recession. In failing to rein in its spending, Labor is betraying the young Australians who will be left to service an ever-expanding debt. On behalf of my community, I plead with the government to restore the quantifiable fiscal rules that every government of either persuasion has adopted and heed the warnings of leading economists. Their track record should be an indication that clear rules and real restraint are critical, now more than ever. Stop the waste, curb the debt, and ease cost-of-living pressures. But fiscal rules are only half the job. We must start growing the economic pie and Australians' slice. That means a pro-productivity agenda; cutting red tape that is smothering builders, innovators and exporters; restoring ambition to business; and delivering permanent income tax relief so that work is rewarded. In short, get government out of the way so that Australians can get ahead. That is the coalition's instinct and record.</para>
<para>Australians know the difference between a government that manages and a government that spends. They also know there is nothing compassionate about policies that keep rates higher for longer, hollow out savings and leave the bill for the next generation. I support this motion because when Labor spends, you pay. The coalition will deliver discipline, lower taxes and stronger growth so that Australians can thrive. That is our promise, and that should be the government's promise as well.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Those opposite want to come here and talk about spending, but they don't want to talk about results. With motions like this, they want to keep on coming into this place, feigning that they're the great economic managers of Australian politics. They're still trying to ride the coat-tails of Howard and Costello. They're still trying to hoodwink to Australians that they've still got it. They don't got it! They're not the great economic managers that they believe they are. They're not it. And that's not subjective; that's fact. There's only one major party in this place at the moment that has the runs on the board when it comes to responsible economic management—and it's not them. While they just keep on talking about it, we deliver.</para>
<para>In our three years in government, Labor has delivered two consecutive surpluses, the first back-to-back surpluses in almost 20 years; we've had the biggest nominal budget improvement in Australian history, a $209 billion turnaround; and we've got record low historical unemployment rates—all while delivering real cost-of-living relief for Australian families. They call that cost-of-living relief wasteful spending. We call it backing Aussie families. That's a record that we can be proud of. That's responsible fiscal management, making tough decisions and making savings while also spending to help Australians. We're helping people earn more and keep more of what they earn. We're not bringing out these black mugs saying, 'We're back in black.' We've delivered results.</para>
<para>Let's not forget their record. Nine years of government; nine surpluses promised. Do we know how many they delivered? None! Not one surplus delivered. And then they come in here talking about how we've got wasteful spending. They didn't deliver one surplus in their nine years, and we delivered two. They doubled the debt before the pandemic. They left a trillion dollar tab and riddled the budget with waste and rorts. They promised fiscal rules. I mean, I don't know what those rules were worth. They weren't worth the paper they were written on, because they made those rules but never followed them. Was one of the rules that you were going to keep delivering deficits? It should have been, because that's what happened. You promised nine surpluses; you delivered none. They promised discipline, but they delivered deficits. They promised restraint, but they spent without purpose. While they want to talk about responsibility, we actually deliver it.</para>
<para>In just our first term, we've delivered the largest turnaround in history, $209 billion better than forecast. But we've also made tough decisions—$100 billion in savings and reprioritisations, with spending growth held at 1.7 per cent, which is less than half the average of the Liberal Party. We've banked 70 per cent of revenue upgrades and reduced debt by $188 billion. The last time I checked, I think the Morrison government only banked 40 per cent of revenue upgrades and the Howard government about 30 per cent. So we banked 70 per cent of revenue upgrades, which has helped reduce our debt, because that's what responsible management looks like. They call our spending wasteful; we call it targeted.</para>
<para>Cheaper child care is one of our spending measures. Would those on the other side say that's a waste? I certainly wouldn't. You can come into my electorate and tell hardworking mums and dads that their child care shouldn't be cheaper. We've got better wages for early educators. We initiated that spending. Do you think they need to be paid better? We've got better wages for aged-care workers. We've got cheaper medicines. We've got energy bill relief. We know that they don't support energy bill relief because they voted against it. We've delivered tax cuts for every taxpayer, including tax cuts in the last financial year legislated—and we know they don't support that either, because they went to the last election promising to increase taxes.</para>
<para>We've delivered 1.1 million new jobs since coming to office. Women's workforce participation is at a record high, with the gender pay gap at a record low. They call all these measures wasteful spending. I won't have a bar of that and neither will Australia, it seems, because they returned us to office with this record, and we'll keep on delivering. Inflation is at the lowest rate in four years, within the RBA target band for nine months. Their alternative was $600 billion on a nuclear fantasy, nine years of rorts, waste and robodebt. It's a fantasy that you guys think you're the better economic managers, because the facts don't show that you are.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind all members to direct their comments through the chair.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It doesn't take an economics degree to see that the socialist Labor government is addicted to spending taxpayer money—spending your money. They're running up the credit card for our kids to pay off. Right now they're spending $50,000 every minute just on the interest on the debt. They've added an extra $100 billion to the national debt since they took office. That debt is heading to be an eye-watering $1.2 trillion by the next election. This year we reached a milestone in South Australia—of course the 'People's Republic of Victoria' got there only two years ago. Every South Australian worker owes their government over $100,000, and that's not including local government debt. That's just state and federal. Let me say that again: every South Australian worker owes their government over $100,000, because government debt is not paid off by the government. It's not paid off by someone on welfare. It's paid off by the police officer, the school teacher, the farmer and the local retailer.</para>
<para>This city focused socialist Labor government is pouring money down the drain as farmers in South Australia reel from generational drought, as residents in Coober Pedy struggle to get the most basic of human needs and as fishers impacted by the algal bloom are on their knees. Regional South Australia is missing out. Labor make promises to the regions, but what do we see? We see 130,000 more Australians in the dole queue. We see electricity up 39 per cent. We see rent up 21 per cent. We see food costs up 16 per cent. We see average mortgages up $1,800 a month. We see spending up to 27 per cent of GDP and we see workers with only 30 bucks left each week. The only thing we don't see is where the money has gone. Where is it? Has it vanished? It's not in my electorate; I can tell you that for free. You cannot trust Labor with money.</para>
<para>Let's break it down roughly. We are paying $50,000 in interest per minute on Labor's debt. That's $72 million in interest per day. Now, $72 million could go a long way in regional South Australia. It could make a real difference such as by upgrading the Wallaroo Hospital, fixing the childcare desert and incentivising GPs to work regionally and remotely. It could provide funding to fix the Augusta Highway and finish the Strzelecki Track—in fact any rural or remote road in South Australia—and provide support for community housing in Port Pirie. It could provide funding to fix and reopen the jetty in Port Augusta and help businesses crippled by the algal bloom. These all seem like good projects. But what does Labor do? Where do they spend the money? They spend it on bailouts, handouts and vanity projects.</para>
<para>This isn't about policy; this is about trust. Labor promised stability before the election, and they've delivered nothing but chaos afterwards. They can't manage their own budget and they can't manage money, so they come after yours. We saw it with their chaotic attempts at fixing superannuation. Firstly they proposed an unworkable half-baked tax on unrealised gains—a move that would hit farmers hard. Then a backflip—a massive, embarrassing and messy reversal that the Prime Minister threw at the feet of his Treasurer to clean up in his absence. This isn't about policy; this is about trust. Labor's obsession with inner-city spending and confusing taxes is why cost of living is so high, why jobs are disappearing and why places like Grey—my electorate—are being left behind. They are leaving a $1.2 trillion debt bomb for the next generation.</para>
<para>There's an old saying: if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Well, we are broke—flat broke—and the Australian economy does need fixing. But this big-spending, tax-happy government seems incapable of making the hard decisions needed. Labor must act now to stop the endless taxfest and hollow promises. It's time for them, like every other Australian right now, to live within their means. We need a government that believes in lower and simpler taxes, not a government that takes away from your nest egg or your right to work on the family farm. We need a government that delivers fiscal discipline and prepares for the future, not one that mortgages away, desperately trying to win inner-city votes. Simply, Labor must stop its reckless spending.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We've heard a lot of noise today from those opposite about fiscal responsibility, but let's be real. One side of this place talks about fiscal responsibility and the other side actually delivers on it.</para>
<para>When those opposite were in charge, they set fiscal rules and broke every single one of them. They said they would balance the budget. They said they would offset new spending. They said they would bank revenue upgrades. They said they would reduce debt. And they failed on every count. They racked up deficit after deficit, piled on debt and left behind a budget riddled with waste and rorts. They even printed mugs that said 'back in black' but never printed a surplus.</para>
<para>Under this Labor government, we have done what they never could. We have delivered the largest nominal improvement to the budget in a parliamentary term, a $209 billion turnaround in our first term. We have delivered the first back-to-back surplus in almost two decades. And, in our third year, the deficit is around one-fifth of what we inherited. Those opposite like to talk about spending caps, but, under them, real spending grew by 4.1 per cent on average. Under us, it's at 1.7 per cent. That is discipline and extremely good management.</para>
<para>They did not deliver a saving in their last budget. We have found more than $100 billion since coming into government. They spent most of their revenue upgrades; we have banked almost 70 per cent. That's why the budget is stronger, not weaker. And let's remember that those opposite went to the last election with bigger deficits, bigger debt and a $600 billion nuclear fantasy. They would have driven up power prices, through the roof. Then they promoted the mastermind of that meltdown to now be the shadow treasurer. So forgive us if we do not take fiscal lectures from the mob who doubled the debt before the pandemic and left the country with nothing to show for it.</para>
<para>We have turned Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses, driven down debt and shown spending restraint that would be unrecognisable to those opposite. We have done it all while investing in things that matter, like Medicare, aged care, clean jobs—jobs!—and cost-of-living relief for thousands and thousands of Australians doing it tough. That is what good, responsible Labor economic management looks like—delivering for working people, not just talking about it, like those opposite.</para>
<para>Standard & Poor's has reaffirmed Australia's AAA credit rating, a vote of confidence in Labor's responsible budget management and the stability in this government. Their so-called fiscal rules were not worth the paper they were written on. They promised us surpluses but went zero from nine. They promised to offset spending but made negative net decisions four out of five times. They promised to bank receipts upgrades but only kept 40 per cent of that. They promised to reduce payments as a share of GDP, but it all went up. They promised to stabilise debt but almost doubled it. We have a clear fiscal strategy, and we are delivering on that. Our rules are in our budget: improve the budget position, reduce debt, limit real spending and bank revenue upgrades. We have improved the budget by $209 billion, reduced gross debt to a peak around 37 per cent of GDP compared to 45 per cent that was left to us by those opposite, and cut interest costs by $60 billion.</para>
<para>When we came to office, inflation was higher and rising, real wages were falling and deficits stretched as far as the eye could see. Now inflation is at a four-year low, real wages have been growing for seven quarters, more than 1.1 million jobs have been created, unemployment is at record lows, and we are delivering cost-of-living relief for people that really need it—child care, cheaper medicines, energy bill relief and three rounds of tax cuts for every Australian worker.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are here to consider the real cost of this Labor government's reckless spending, not just in abstract numbers but in the lives of everyday Australians. Reckless spending isn't just bad economics; it's a tax on hope, a tax on ambition and a tax on every family trying to get ahead. Since the Albanese Labor government came to office, it has added $100 billion to the national debt, a figure set to breach $1.2 trillion by the next election. That is not just a number on a page; it's a burden that will be forced upon our children and grandchildren to carry. On the cost of interest alone, Labor are now spending $50,000 every single minute—money that can't go to hospitals, schools, infrastructure or frontline services. Yet, despite this ballooning debt, the government has committed $22 billion in new decisions.</para>
<para>We all know that Labor cannot manage money, and, when they run out of their money, they come after yours. Australians are left to pay the price in higher taxes, higher bills and higher debt. This government's reckless pursuit of net zero at all costs has become a blank cheque for wasteful spending. Billions of taxpayer dollars are being poured into tokenistic gestures that will not make a measurable dent in global admissions yet they are driving up costs for everyday Australian households and businesses.</para>
<para>Labor is shackling our energy security to weather-dependent sources while ignoring the smarter baseload power options that keep factories running, farms producing, and families' lights on. The government's heavy-handed intervention in the gas sector has strangled investment, pushing us to the brink of energy shortages and even higher prices. Instead of lowering emissions in a practical technological way, Labor is importing solar panels and wind turbines built with foreign materials, eroding our sovereign manufacturing capability and exporting Australian jobs.</para>
<para>The truth is simple: every dollar of reckless green spending that fails to deliver cheaper, reliable power is another dollar added to inflation, another rise in power bills, and another blow to the cost of living. It is time the government stopped chasing headlines and started chasing outcomes by a cost-of-living target not an emissions target.</para>
<para>Consider young Australians trying to enter the housing market. Average mortgage repayments are set to remain $1,700 higher per month under this government than they would have previously. The government's solution ignores basic economics. Economics warns that the government's approach could push housing prices even higher, worsen affordability and leave buyers saddled with higher debt, especially in a market with limited supply. There is a real risk of negative equity, leaving first home buyers trapped in a price fall, and all because this government refuses to manage its spending responsibly.</para>
<para>This reckless spending is felt across every corner of Australia, with families working extra shifts just to make ends meet, small businesses facing increasing energy costs while trying to keep staff employed, pensioners deciding to go without meals so they can afford their electricity, and, all the while, the government pours more money into programs with no economic return, creating temporary fixes while the underlying problems—debt, inflation, cost-of-living pressures—continue to grow. Australians continue to pay more every month—not because of their choices, but because of this government's fiscal bad management. The result is falling real incomes, record insolvencies and a cost-of-living crisis unlike anything that has ever been seen before.</para>
<para>I'm supporting this motion because it is restoring common sense, accountability and fiscal responsibility. It is about protecting Australians from the consequences of unchecked reckless government spending. It is about ensuring that taxpayers' hard-earned money is directed towards priorities that actually matter—health, education, national security and infrastructure—and is not squandered politically. Time and time again, Labor has proven that, when they run out of money, they come after yours. Australians cannot continue to fund this spending spree.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MONCRIEFF</name>
    <name.id>316540</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The late, great Meat Loaf used to say that two out of three ain't bad, but what do you think he would have said about zero for nine? Those opposite spent nine years in government, and they spent that time praising their own fiscal responsibility, but how many surpluses did they deliver in that time? A goose egg: zero. And now they come in here and howl about fiscal responsibility. One side of this place likes to talk about fiscal responsibility. We've had lectures about fiscal responsibility from a side that never delivers it.</para>
<para>On the other side, the side of the Albanese Labor government, we really deliver it. In its first budgets after coming to office, the Albanese Labor government delivered the first back-to-back surpluses in almost two decades and restored confidence in our nation's finances. This side of the House cares about fiscal responsibility, because of the assistance that it provides to working families in Australia.</para>
<para>The other side only cares about fiscal responsibility so that they can have something to print on their mugs. They like to forget about the 'Back in Black' mugs that they printed to celebrate the surplus that they promised but never delivered. Those opposite racked up deficit after deficit, missed every one of their fiscal targets and left Australians with trillions of dollars of Liberal debt. They printed the mugs, they printed the debt instruments, but they could never print the word 'surplus' honestly.</para>
<para>In contrast, this government has delivered the largest nominal improvement to the budget in a parliamentary term, a $209 billion turnaround in its first term. We've turned Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses, we've driven down debt by $188 billion and we've found over $100 billion in savings since coming to government. These are savings that keep inflation under control, reduce interest payments and deliver more responsible spending for the future. While those opposite delivered 4.1 per cent spending growth, we have kept it down to 1.7 per cent, showing real restraint. That is the difference between talk and delivery.</para>
<para>This discipline matters for communities like mine in Hughes, because sound economic management is what has allowed us to deliver real support for local families, small businesses and pensioners, not slogans or scare campaigns. Across my community in Hughes, residents are feeling the benefits of Labor's responsible approach, and it has meant that we've been able to deliver tax cuts for every single taxpayer, putting more money back into the pockets of the people of Australia. We are doing it while building the infrastructure of Australia's future, and we're creating jobs in southern and south-western Sydney. That's what responsible fiscal management looks like: investing where it counts and keeping the budget sustainable.</para>
<para>Now, the member wants to reintroduce so-called quantifiable fiscal rules. These are the same rules that his own party invented and then ignored. Those opposite believe that rules are only for other people.</para>
<para>We do have fiscal rules, and they are set out in our budget. They include improving the budget position, which we have done by delivering two surpluses and improving the budget position by $209 billion, compared to what we inherited in our first term.</para>
<para>But those weren't the only rules they ignored. They also ignored their own promises. They promised to get the budget back into surplus; they went none for nine. They promised to offset new spending; four out of five times their decisions were negative. They promised to bank revenue upgrades, but they only returned around 40 per cent. They promised to reduce payments to GDP, but they grew instead, even before the pandemic. And they promised to stabilise debt, and yet they almost doubled it, even before COVID. So you'll forgive us if we don't take lectures from the people who failed every one of their own rules.</para>
<para>This government does have clear fiscal rules, and we are meeting them. We've delivered two surpluses, we've reduced gross debt as a share of the economy, we've banked almost 70 per cent of revenue upgrades and we've kept spending growth under control. While those opposite like to talk politics, we're focused on the economy. When we came to government, inflation was higher and rising, interest rates were rising, real wages were falling and living standards were going backwards. Since then, we've made strong progress. Inflation figures are now at four-year lows. Wages have grown in real terms for seven consecutive quarters. Over 1.1 million jobs have been created, a record for any government in a single term. Just last month, a AAA credit rating was reaffirmed by S&P. Debt is falling as a share of GDP.</para>
<para>The difference could not be more stark. Those opposite talk about fiscal discipline; we deliver it. They print surplus mugs; we deliver surplus budgets. They talk about savings; we make them. They talk about responsibility; we live it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>By the time I finish this speech, the government will have spent $250,000 on interest. That's $50,000 every minute. When you look at what this Labor government spends its money on—actually, what it spends taxpayer dollars on—it is quite astonishing.</para>
<para>This Labor government sends $50 million to Afghanistan. The Taliban hate us, and they should be able to hate us for free. We shouldn't be wasting money sending taxpayer dollars to Afghanistan, where the terrorist organisation of the Taliban, who have been fighting Australians—soldiers have been killed in action—are sitting there counting their millions from the Australian taxpayer. Labor's priorities are all wrong. This is a kick in the guts to our Defence Force personnel, our veterans and their families.</para>
<para>Because the Labor government can't manage money, they come after yours or they cut projects. We hear a lot from the Labor government, talking about everything they're spending taxpayer dollars on, but, when you look at the numbers—Land 400, which is for infantry fighting vehicles that our Australian Defence Force members, our soldiers, will use not just in training but in combat, went from 450 vehicles down to 129. This wasn't at the recommendation of the Army; the Chief of Army actually came out at Land Forces and said that it should all be included and that we should have the full amount. But, because the government can't manage their budget, they slash where they find it easy, and it's sad to say that the Labor government find it easy to take funding away from the Australian Defence Force and the veterans.</para>
<para>The Salvation Army provides a service called the Sallyman. The Sallyman will go outfield on operations, travel around and offer not just a coffee, a cordial or something to eat but a listening ear. Soldiers have told me that, without the Sallyman, they wouldn't be here today. But, once again, because of the fiscal irresponsibility of the Labor government, they have decided to cut the funding for the Sallyman.</para>
<para>Look at another service that provides lifesaving, job-creating opportunities for our Defence Force members and their families: the Oasis Townsville, one of the first veteran hubs in the country. It has done great work. Yes, they need a sustainability model, but they should be working closely with government. But, once again, there's no support, and funding is not there.</para>
<para>This government spends a lot and goes into debt a lot but doesn't put funding where it should. Every Labor speaker who's stood up said, 'When you were in government, Opposition, you did blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and you should have been better.' You have to take an inward vision of yourself and go, 'We are not an opposition in government,' which is the Labor Party. You are the government. You sit in the big office. You have many staff and departments. Your job is to serve the Australian people.</para>
<para>If we're paying $50,000 in interest every minute—it's not your money; it's taxpayer money. Those who work hard every day—it's their money, and the government is supposed to spend it responsibly. I don't think there's any way you can cut this as this government spending it responsibly.</para>
<para>There are people in this parliament who believe taxing unrealised gains is a good idea. We heard speeches from Labor government members saying it is a good idea, and now there has been a change. I have no problem when a government reflects and changes, but not owning up to the mistake of announcing this is something that I take issue with. Our farmers are already hurting. They put food on all our plates, so when the government announces something like this, it hurts them. Changing it is a good idea; owning up to it is a better one. But good ideas don't come from politicians; they come from the experts in the regions. We need the Treasurer and the Labor Party to get out of the Canberra bubble and go out and speak to those on the ground.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When the member for Herbert opened his speech today he said, 'Let's look at what this government spends money on,' because he believed that it was quite astonishing. He said it was quite astonishing, and I want to have a look at what this government spends money on. Let's find out what the members opposite think is quite astonishing. First, the Albanese government has its eye firmly fixed on health care—on investing in urgent care clinics that make health care more accessible and more affordable in our suburbs; on bulk billing—making sure bulk-billing doctors are everywhere across our nation; and on women's health—making the biggest investment into women's health that this country has ever seen.</para>
<para>Where else do the LNP think the Albanese Labor government's spending, which is prioritised on the things that matter to people most, is astonishing? Second, we've spent money on housing, with five per cent deposits, and on making sure this government is investing in building houses so our young people and people trying to get into the market for the very first time have the ability to have a house when it matters most. Third is the cost of living. This is astonishing, particularly when you look at the LNP's track record on the investment that this government has sought to make into costs of living, with 20 per cent off student debt, much cheaper medicines and free TAFE.</para>
<para>When I came here today, I expected a debate on what is important to the Australian people when it comes to spending. But after listening to speaker after speaker from the coalition, I have found that this debate is not about that. This debate is a stalking horse for the coalition's priorities right now and those priorities are themselves. Because while Labor is focused on delivering for everyday Australians, the coalition is focused on infighting, on chaos and on themselves.</para>
<para>What have we heard from the LNP, from the opposition people who have been speaking on this debate today? We have heard a lot about the denial of climate change. We've heard a lot about how they don't believe net zero should be a policy. We've heard a lot about what shouldn't be spent. When the LNP and opposition talk about what shouldn't be spent, that is a cover for what they would cut. We know what they cut because they've told us. They would cut free TAFE. They would cut health investment, and we have seen them do that again and again. It's absolutely a stalking horse to hide their track record when it comes to the budget because we know what they did when they were in government. Budget deficits are the hallmarks of an LNP government. When it comes to this government, not only are we undoing what they did in when they were in government but we are also investing in everyday Australians.</para>
<para>We have heard from four members of the opposition on this topic this afternoon and they have complicated what is in essence a very simple conversation about contrast. On the one hand you have proven fiscal record—unfortunately, one of deficit for the coalition honed over nine years of economic mismanagement—and contrasting that, on the other hand, you have the achievements of the Albanese Labor government. Let's take a closer look at those achievements.</para>
<para>When Labor came to government in May 2022 the Australian economy was under severe strain, and the economic outlook was bleak. Inflation had surged to 6.1 per cent and was continuing to rise. Thanks to years of policy confusion and inaction, everyday Australians were left with a severe housing shortage and limited access to vital healthcare services. Wage growth was stagnant, and there was instability in the energy sector. The coalition's report card for their years in government included a litany of broken promises and failures, and they said that they'd offset spending, but net decisions were negative for four in five of their budget updates.</para>
<para>In contrast the final budget outcome from 2024-25 confirms that the Albanese Labor government has delivered the largest nominal budget improvement ever achieved in a single term. The work to repair the budget started on day one, and since then Labor's responsible economic management has turned two Liberal deficits into two Labor surpluses. In our third year, we have substantially reduced the deficit and have been committed to paying down debt. While the opposition only care about themselves, Labor is focused every day on delivering a responsible budget and spending that supports Australians.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of debate will be made in order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Artificial Intelligence</title>
          <page.no>222</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the enormous changes that artificial intelligence (AI) will create for Australia and Australians;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) welcomes the Government's commitment to ensuring that AI:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) contributes positively to a Future Made in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) delivers benefits to all Australians, not just a small number of individuals and businesses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) is developed, deployed and used in a way that keeps Australians safe; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises the work being led by the Government to ensure that Australians are ready to take advantage of AI, including, more than:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) $47 million for the Next Generation Graduate program;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) one million free 'introduction to AI' scholarships delivered from TAFE NSW to give Australians the fundamental skills to adopt and use AI; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) $17 million to create four AI Adopt Centres, which are supporting businesses across the country to use responsible AI enabled services to enhance their businesses.</para></quote>
<para>Artificial intelligence is changing the way we communicate, work and live. Just as with every major shift in our economy—from the industrial age to the digital one—how we manage this change will determine who it works for. Handled well, AI can lift productivity, open new markets and make work safer and more rewarding. Handled poorly, it can leave small businesses struggling to keep up and working people without a fair say in their future. That's why the Albanese Labor government is determined that Australia's AI future will have people, particularly workers, front and centre. If technology is going to transform our society, it must do so in a way that strengthens it not undermines it. AI could add over $100 billion a year to our economy and create tens of thousands of jobs by 2030, but those gains must be shared fairly between workers, small business and the communities that power our nation. Labor is backing the opportunities through the $15 million National Reconstruction Fund, including $1 billion for critical technologies like AI, and a new network of AI adopt centres to help small businesses innovate responsibly, ensuring that benefits reach everyone, not just big tech.</para>
<para>We're also working with the unions through the AI employment and workplace relations working group, to make sure technology involves workers and evolves with them not against them. Unions like the Finance Sector Union and the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance are leading the way, partnering with employers that address AI safety with consultation, transparency and upskilling. This collaboration is already delivering real results. Just today, the Attorney-General announced that our government will protect Australia's creative industries by ruling out any carve-outs for the tech sector when it comes to applying copyright laws to training AI. That's how progress should happen—through partnership, not imposition.</para>
<para>Last sitting week, I met with Safe Steps, Victoria's family and domestic violence support service. They spoke about how new technologies could help frontline workers respond faster and more effectively to women and families in crisis while keeping empathy at the heart of every response. They spoke of Kids Help Phone in Toronto, Canada's national youth mental health helpline, where AI is already being used to save lives. Their system triages messages, identifying high-risk cases, such as when a young person expresses suicidal thoughts, and moving them up the queue. It automatically transcribes and summarises notes, cutting hours of admin and allowing counsellors to focus on care. Importantly it learns from the caller's own words, allowing responders to use language that feels familiar and respectful. It's not replacing people; it's empowering them to do their work better. That's the model we should strive for: technology that strengthens human connection, not replaces it.</para>
<para>The potential for AI to transform our society and economy cannot be understated. Already 68 per cent of Australian businesses use AI, yet we still lag behind the United States and China in training employees and employing skilled AI workers. If we don't understand the technology shaping our economy, we can't chart our own course as a sovereign nation. That's why Labor is building capability at home and strengthening cooperation abroad, developing skills locally while ensuring AI serves people, not power. Australia must shape its own future, not be swept up in an AI arms race.</para>
<para>Through one million free TAFE and university places and $47 million for the next-generation AI graduates, we're giving Australians the skills to guide this technology responsibility. Through the Industry Growth Program, we're helping small businesses innovate safely with strong data and privacy protections, because technology without trust won't succeed. Australians deserve confidence that their information is secure, their rights are protected and AI is used fairly and transparently.</para>
<para>When Labor talks about technology, we don't talk about disruption for its own sake. We talk about progress, the kind that lifts people up and doesn't leave people behind. AI isn't the future; it's here now. The question isn't whether it will reshape our economy but whether working people and small businesses will have the power and protection within it. With experts leading, workers trained, small businesses supported and a government that puts fairness first, Australia can make AI a tool for good—one that builds opportunity, strengthens work and delivers a fairer, smarter future for us all.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do I have a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Lawrence</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Artificial intelligence—specifically, generative artificial intelligence—presents an enormous challenge for businesses, students, families, governments and departments. We welcome the notion that AI should contribute to the future of Australia's economy and that it should be deployed safely and for the benefit of all, but small funding announcements are not enough. Labor is failing to manage the transition to AI effectively. They are behind the curve. Their complacency is putting our security, our economy and our children at risk. Before entering public life, I wore two hats. I was a farmer, but I was also a strategy consultant. Working at NAB, I helped roll out their generative AI programs. I saw its power firsthand, and I learned how efficient it can be, but this experience also taught me something else. AI is a double-edged sword and a sword that can easily cut into cybersecurity.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Annual cyber threat report 2024-2025</inline> from the Australian Signals Directorate should be a wake-up call for this government. In FY24-25, under Labor, the Australian Cyber Security Hotline received over 42,500 calls, a 16 per cent increase from the previous year. The Australian Cyber Security Centre also responded to over 1,200 cybersecurity incidents, an 11 per cent increase. During FY24-25, ASD notified entities more than 1,700 times about malicious cyber activity, an 83 per cent increase from last year. Australians are being relentlessly targeted by sophisticated internet scams, and AI is now the weapon of choice for online criminals. Less than two weeks ago, we saw the Prime Minister's phone number amongst many others skimmed by AI. This government has left the door open.</para>
<para>The technologies that I saw drive productivity at NAB that can free up humans for complex tasks requires a workforce ready to harness them, which is why the coalition is right to call for a stronger focus on back to basics and foundational knowledge in our schools. NAPLAN results have shown roughly one-third of students are not meeting expectations in literacy and numeracy. We are setting them up to fail in an AI economy. You can't be a prompt engineer if you don't have the skills of logic, critical thinking and communication. The $47 million for the Next Generation Graduates Program and the TAFE NSW 'Introduction to AI' scholarships are a fine starting point, but they are token gestures compared to the challenges ahead for the next generation.</para>
<para>Finally, let's turn to the growing challenge that threatens to undermine Labor's own climate agenda: the levels of energy required to power AI. The very engines of the AI revolution will put pressure on Labor's reckless renewables rollout and stifle its already impossible emissions targets. The government's response is an unfunded hope that our 'advantage in renewable energy' will solve the problem. Hope is not a strategy. There also exists a significant opportunity with respect to data centres as a growth industry. Industry leaders won't just give us contracts because we want them. We will get data centres if, as a nation, we deliver energy that's cheaper than other places. It's as simple as that. Organisations looking to operate at scale are going to be looking at a competitive advantage, not emissions targets or where the power comes from. Australia risks missing out on this next big boom, and I would argue we're missing out on it already.</para>
<para>A cybersecurity failure has made Australians soft targets for AI powered crime. An education failure is leaving our children unprepared for the job of tomorrow and an energy infrastructure failure risks turning the AI boom into a renewables crisis. Opportunity knocks, but will this government answer? Australia needs a serious and strategic plan for artificial intelligence—specifically generative artificial intelligence—that is built on foundations of cybersecurity and educational excellence. If not, we leave Australians dangerously exposed and ill equipped for the future. The AI future is here. It's powerful and it's exciting, but, under this Labor government, it's also unmanaged, unsecured and fundamentally at risk.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Maribyrnong for this timely motion, because the minister for science, technology and the digital economy—Tim Ayres and his assistant minister, Andrew Charlton, will be delivering the government's National AI Capability Plan before the end of this year. The plan will encompass three overarching goals: capturing the economic opportunity of AI, spreading the benefits of AI and keeping Australians safe. Realising the benefits of AI will require a commitment to the common good that I hope will be shared across the parliament.</para>
<para>AI is not merely another app or tool that will change work around the edges. Rather it's a revolutionary change. AI is expected to contribute up to $116 billion a year to Australia's GDP, to create an additional 150,000 jobs by 2030 and to increase annual labour productivity growth by over four per cent across the next decade. As a result the Albanese Labor government is making AI a national priority by supporting Australian AI companies through the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund—which has $1 billion set aside specifically for critical technologies, which, of course, includes AI; through the $392 million in the Industry Growth Program to support innovative SMEs; through the research and development tax incentive—which supported $980 million in business R&D expenditure on activities associated with AI, machine learning and robotics, which is a 50 per cent increase on the previous year; and through the Medical Research Future Fund, which is a $24.5 billion ongoing fund with 'artificial intelligence and digital health' being one of the funding principles.</para>
<para>The OECD envisages AI transforming whole industries such as with transport and autonomous vehicles—already we can see that at the cutting-edge in Western Australia in the mining sector; with optimisation in agriculture where, again, Western Australia is leading the way with farmers embracing the technology and with its connectivity to space and satellites; with automation in financial services; with enabling better fraud detection; with marketing and advertising; with science and technology; and, of course, with health research. Natasha Banks of Day of AI suggests that in the near future most jobs will be augmented by AI and that there'll be new jobs arising such as an AI engineer, but there'll be many more hybrid occupations where technical expertise is combined with background experience in areas such as health care, education, energy or public policy. She foresees a great need for upskilling across the workforce.</para>
<para>Last month the ACTU called for AI agreements, including for guarantees around job security and skills development and retraining. Assistant Secretary Joseph Mitchell quite rightly stated that we want to see good AI and that it's something not merely efficient but that serves people's real interests. This approach is already being adopted in the European Union under their AI act. I note that Minister Rishworth, who is alive to the skills challenges referred to above, stated in September, in an interview with the <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline>, that it makes commercial sense—if you want to get the job right and if you want to have the best adoption of AI—to consult with the people doing the job.</para>
<para>Just this month I heard from Gerard Dwyer, national secretary of the SDA, on this topic, where he addressed the national conference delegation of that union. He foreshadowed the work that is before us and before every government in the world at the same time. He asked, 'Will we build an AI ecosystem that has humans at the centre, or will we just allow one to evolve that has a small number of wealthy tech bros hoodwinking us into believing that their interests are our interests? Those who promote a light touch on AI are actually out of touch. People, workers and our communities need to be protected by strong AI guidelines. The argument that we have to choose between productivity gains or protections is a false frame. We can have both, and we have achieved both with previous technological advances. Our lawmakers need to put their citizens at the heart of their decision-making.'</para>
<para>I want Dwyer's question and his answer to guide our work here as we consider the necessary legislation that will allow us to benefit from AI while avoiding the pitfalls that the application of any new technology can bring. As the Treasurer stated, we want to make Australian workers, businesses and investors beneficiaries, not victims, of that change. We have already seen examples of that today with our attorney-general making clear the protection of copyright laws, so we know we can do it, and we will continue to work in the interests of Australians with AI to support our efforts and endeavours.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PENFOLD</name>
    <name.id>248895</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Artificial intelligence is well and truly here. It's reshaping the world we live in, but Australians are worried. People in my electorate are worried. Trust in AI is low. With all due respect to the mover of this motion in lauding how the Albanese government is preparing the community and business and government officials to utilise and take advantage of AI, the Albanese government has not stepped up to protect vulnerable people and our institutions from its use. It's being happily used in health care, finance, defence, logistics, construction, retail and government, but the crims, the con artists and the foreign actors have it too. And big tech isn't necessarily playing with a straight bat either.</para>
<para>I'm pleased to note the government's decision to enshrine crucial copyright protections for musicians, writers, journalists and artists, which were threatened by big tech and their AI systems. I'd particularly like to acknowledge and thank Holly Rankin from my electorate, known to many as ARIA Award nominated Jack River, for her advocacy and leadership on this issue.</para>
<para>In researching this topic, I came across numerous detailed papers and submissions to parliamentary inquiries published by Good Ancestors, a forward-thinking charity organisation which believes that AI is not just another technology but one that could change almost every aspect of our lives. It proposes some sensible reforms to address AI harm, including the introduction of an AI act and the launch of an AI safety institute. In its submission to a New South Wales upper house inquiry, it noted that there are numerous threats and recommended that government should list and restrict toxic AI products, like undress AIs, unpredictable AIs, autonomous AIs and rogue AIs. It also suggested AI developers should be liable if their AIs engage in harmful, unpredicted behaviours. For example, AI technology has not just advised but instructed people on how to commit suicide. This is surely one example where an Australian developer of AI that enabled this response should be severely held accountable.</para>
<para>I do see, however, the many benefits of AI but also the risks and how government may check it. In essence, we need to consider how this all-encompassing technology is safely accommodated into our lives, including ensuring that we have a choice as to whether we use it or not. While AI can be used to put finishing touches to a person's letter, a proposal, a project, a policy or a body of work, it's really a matter for each person to develop their own position on their AI use. Ideally, in a liberal democracy, that is not an area for government to regulate. But then there is the use of AI for villainous, deplorable or senseless purposes.</para>
<para>This is where the government must step in. The dissenting report from senators McGrath and Reynolds, the coalition members of the Select Committee on Adopting Artificial Intelligence, makes for chilling reading: AI presents an unprecedented threat to Australian cybersecurity and privacy; due to the recent exponential improvements in AI capability and the unprecedented level of publicly available personal information, foreign actors can now target our networks, systems and people; and existing laws do not adequately prevent AI-facilitated harms before they occur, nor provide an adequate response after they do. It concluded, in part:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Federal Government—</para></quote>
<para>the Albanese government—</para>
<quote><para class="block">has neglected its responsibility to deal with any of the threats that the exponential growth of the AI industry poses to the Australian people and their entities.</para></quote>
<para>I want to note, however, that the Department of Industry, Science and Resources has done some good work in its <inline font-style="italic">Voluntary AI </inline><inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">afety </inline><inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">tandard</inline>, which gives guidance on how to safely and responsibly use AI and outlines what legislation may look like to manage its improper use. The department has identified areas for mandatory treatment, including how to manage data quality, identify and mitigate risks, ensure regulatory compliance, enable human intervention and respond to people impacted by AI harm. It's a massive body of work, but government needs to be ahead of the game not behind it.</para>
<para>While the Albanese government is providing some means to upskill people in the use of AI, it has done nowhere near enough to protect those people too. This motion suggests that the government is more focused on its PR than protecting the public. Big tech and AI developers also need to step up. If business wants to use AI at scale, it needs to go beyond any regulatory responsibility in AI development; it must obtain society's explicit approval to deploy it. That means AI needs to earn its social licence—and fast.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>225</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program</title>
          <page.no>225</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a Royal Automobile Club of Victoria 'My Country Road' survey in July 2024 of over 7,000 Victorians saw 64 per cent of respondents identify potholes and poor road conditions as their top safety issue, up from 46 per cent in 2021;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) a National Transport Research Organisation survey found 91 per cent of Victoria's 8,400 kilometre road network is rated poor or very poor;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Audit Office of New South Wales identified in November 2024 that in the last available reporting year the estimated total replacement cost of council road assets across New South Wales was around $102 billion but in the same year local councils reported collective road asset maintenance expenditure of around $1 billion;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) according to the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA), local roads make up 77 per cent of Australia's road network by length, with 678,000 kilometres managed by local governments, only 39 per cent of which are sealed roads;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) ALGA president Matt Burnett described the former Government's $3.25 billion Local Roads and Community Infrastructure (LRCI) program as a 'game-changer', adding that 'reinstating the LRCI Program will support every council, and more importantly, provide tangible benefits to every Australian community';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) former ALGA president Linda Scott said in 2023, 'making the LRCI permanent would be an investment in Australia's future productivity';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) Local Government Association of South Australia CEO Clinton Jury said the LRCI program 'made a significant, positive impact on our neighbourhoods by uplifting our regional roads, making them safer for everyone'; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) despite the very strong endorsements of LRCI and the road maintenance burden on local governments across regional Australia, the Government axed LRCI with final payments due this financial year and have not provided an alternative to make our roads safer and improve regional productivity; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls upon the Government to outline how it will fund local roads to improve road safety and productivity for regional Australians.</para></quote>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is holding back and leaving behind regional Australians—this time by the underfunding of local road improvement and maintenance. Local governments are responsible for local roads in our towns, suburbs and rural areas, with council managed roads making up 77 per cent of Australia's road network by length—that's 678,000 kilometres.</para>
<para>In Victoria, local roads make up 87 per cent of the state's road network, and 53 per cent are unsealed. Eighty-seven per cent of respondents to a 2025 survey for local governments in Victoria rated the maintenance of sealed roads in their area as either 'extremely important' or 'very important', and 86 per cent said the same for unsealed roads. Victorian local governments' performance against a measure of maintenance of unsealed roads has been steadily failing since 2016. Forty-seven per cent of respondents rated the condition of unsealed roads as either 'poor' or 'very poor' in 2025.</para>
<para>As shadow minister for local government, I am sticking up for them not having a go at them. Regional councils and shires face chronic underfunding, limiting maintenance and upgrades of local roads. Financial sustainability issues are worst in small rural councils due to a limited ability to generate revenue, cost shifting from state and federal governments, the huge infrastructure base that councils have to maintain, limited economies of scale and challenges in winning competitive grants.</para>
<para>The state of our roads is inextricably linked to road deaths. The rate of annual road deaths per 100,000 population declined over the five years to 2020, but since that low it has increased at an average of three per cent per year, reaching 4.78 per 100,000 population in 2024. In 2023, the per capita fatality rate, based on the location of a road traffic accident, increased dramatically with geographic remoteness from two per 100,000 in major cities to 22.2 per 100,000 in very remote areas. Rates in inner and outer regional areas were four to five times higher than in major cities, and rates in remote and very remote areas were 10 to 15 times higher than in major cities.</para>
<para>Research consistently shows that poor road conditions like inadequate lane widths, unsealed shoulders, lack of barriers, poor signage and degraded pavement contribute significantly to road fatalities, particularly to single vehicle and head-on crashes. These crashes are exacerbated in rural and remote areas, where higher speeds intercept with substandard infrastructure. Yet the Albanese Labor government's solution is to slash the default speed limit from 100 kilometres per hour to as low as 70 kilometres per hour. A shorter than usual consultation merely published on the departmental website was not announced by the minister by press release like other consultations are. The coalition has today embarrassed the government into a two-week extension of time, but this feels like a Clayton's consultation.</para>
<para>When it comes to regional Australia, Labor's minds are made up and their priorities are cuts, neglect and shutting regions down. In 2020, the then coalition government introduced the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, an uncontested and untied grant program that every council received. This was an important mechanism to increase road funding. Despite this being an overwhelmingly popular program as the 2025-26 federal budget shows, the program is winding down, with no new allocations after June 2026. It was confirmed during supplementary Senate estimates earlier in October that there is no new untied, non-competitive grant funding for roads and local infrastructure in the works to replace this program.</para>
<para>In contrast, the coalition pledged a $1 billion extension to the program in the lead-up to the 2025 selection, including $500 million for roads. I absolutely want to see us work hard to reduce the road toll in regional Australia but this government would rather put the brakes on drivers. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Chaffey</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I am seconding the motion.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Just a week ago I was standing at the Jervis Bay Road turn off marvelling at the deck of the new flyover where 11 massive super T girders had been installed. It was an awesome sight to see the 28-metre long concrete girders, each weighing 47 tonne, that had been transported from Newcastle and craned into place during a week of night works. The bridge deck marks an exciting milestone for this intersection, which sees the highest volume of traffic on the Princes Highway between Nowra and the Victorian border. The intersection upgrade and overpass will transform travel along the New South Wales South Coast and provide a key link to Huskisson and surrounding villages. The milestone installation will allow the construction of the bridge to take shape with a mid-2026 completion target, and the project is on track for completion in 2027.</para>
<para>I pounded the pavement with local residents, petitioned, lobbied and worked with Vincentia Matters and I am proud to have delivered $100 million for this important infrastructure project. I have also secured $400 million to continue the Princes Highway upgrade to dual lanes from Jervis Bay Road South to Tomerong. I drive country roads every day as I travel the length and breadth of my electorate. It takes me over four hours to drive the hundreds of kilometres from one end of Gilmore to the other, with dozens of long winding local roads into 180 odd coastal and inland villages across the three local council areas of Kiama, Shoalhaven and the Eurobodalla. I know how important regional roads are, and I know the Albanese Labor government is committed to working with state and local governments to build and maintain them.</para>
<para>Building better roads takes time, and work on our rural and regional roads is never really complete. Just as one project is finished, another one gets underway. In my electorate, I was pleased to secure a special $40 million Shoalhaven local roads package to upgrade six key local roads in the region. That was in October 2022, three years ago, but still not a sod has been turned on any of these road projects. When it comes to fixing local roads, filling the potholes, repairing land strips and making them more resilient against future natural disaster, this government is handing out the money for local councils, and it's up to our councils to get the job done.</para>
<para>However, I am disappointingly finding it's impossible to get updates from the Shoalhaven mayor about the $40 million package I delivered three years ago, and the community is asking: when will our roads be fixed? Governments at every level need to invest in safety improvements and upgrades to keep up with growing communities. We're doubling the Roads to Recovery funding, money that goes straight to local councils to help fix local roads. As the Chair of the New South Wales Black Spot Consultative Panel, I'm so proud that the Albanese Labor government has significantly increased funding to the black spot program from $100 million to $150 million per year. I know how much this will help fix dangerous roads in our communities. We've also established the Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, which is addressing current and emerging priorities in road infrastructure needs.</para>
<para>I drive rural roads every day, and I understand how important it is that they're maintained and upgraded to ensure we all get home safe every day. Living on the south coast, which has been hit hard by fire, floods and storms, I know firsthand how regional roads are impacted by natural disasters. Road safety is a top priority for people in my electorate, and that's why I have fought so hard to deliver more than $1 billion to get important road projects off the ground. When I drive around Gilmore, I'm immensely proud to see roadworks that I have championed completed or underway—major infrastructure projects like the Far North Collector Road, which was completed thanks to $35 million in federal funding, the Nowra bypass, moving forward with $97 million in federal funding, and the Milton Ulladulla bypass, which has $752 million in federal funding. These are some of Gilmore's big-ticket items, but just as important are the smaller road projects that are happening across my electorate thanks to federal funds. I'm deeply committed to addressing longstanding problems on local roads caused by extreme weather events and also future-proofing the local road network for expected population growth in the region. I will always fight for and deliver the road safety projects Gilmore locals want to see.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Most Australians have travelled on regional roads. These roads are not only the network that links cities and takes our goods to the rest of Australia and to the ports for export; they are the tracks that link regional communities together. They link families to health services, supermarkets, sport and friends. They are the routes travelled by emergency services to save lives. They are critical in the production of food, fibre and minerals. They are critical and they are crumbling.</para>
<para>As the devoted member for Mallee just said in trying to bring this situation to the Labor government's attention, local roads make up 77 per cent of Australia's road network, and 678,000 kilometres are managed by local government. We hear all the time that there is a growing disconnect between funds needed and safe roads. The statistics show that people have good reason to be concerned. Regional road funding under the Albanese government is going backwards despite increasing costs and challenges. Councils, such as the 20 councils within my electorate, the electorate of Parkes, simply do not have the funds to keep this unwieldy burden afloat. They alone cannot wear the costs of keeping Australia connected. I look at the data from NRMA, and it shows that the road infrastructure backlog for the 20 councils in the Parkes electorate between 2017 and 2020 in the last four years of the coalition government averaged $86.2 million. Road funding grants over the seven years averaged $102.4 million. The end result is that road funding under the Nationals and Liberals was there, ready to meet the needs to ensure safer roads in our communities.</para>
<para>For the past three years of Labor governments, the backlog figure has blown out to an average of $236.7 million a year. This means now councils only receive 43 per cent of the funds they need to address that backlog in the Parkes electorate. This is an increase of more than 250 per cent in the Parkes electorate alone in the years of the Albanese Labor government.</para>
<para>To dig a little deeper into what's happening on the ground, let's take a look at disaster relief funding arrangements. All of the councils in the Parkes electorate have suffered from some sort of natural disaster in the past three to four years, with the exception of Broken Hill. This means councils have been at the mercy of government to provide funding for massive recovery works. There is no luxury in this; this is purely and simply getting the road network back into working order after a flooding event or another natural disaster.</para>
<para>I asked the question of my councils and found that, between June 2021 and June 2024, Labor governments knocked back in the order of $150 million to fix road damage through the disaster in the Parkes electorate alone. That means only 64 per cent of the claims from councils were approved. The Lachlan shire alone—including the town of Condoblin in New South Wales—was severely impacted by flooding events. Only $25.9 million was approved out of an application of $54.9 million needed to fix the roads. That's a $25.9 million shortfall in one shire alone. Narrabri Shire Council had only $8.5 million approved out of $30 million needed to fix their roads. I ask Labor: where can Narrabri community find $21.5 million to fix the roads? Council are not receiving the money they need to return roads back to pre-flooding events, let alone flood-proofing them so that they are built back better, ready to stand strong for the next event. Gilgandra shire was left with a $9 million shortfall, Bourke with a $14.9 million shortfall and Dubbo with a $20.6 million shortfall. These are councils that must face the questions about road closures, delayed roadworks and potholes every single day. They've been left to deal with the frustrations of people who can't use these roads each and every day.</para>
<para>A thin strip of bitumen cannot last forever and the investment to maintain and improve our roads is just not happening. Councils are forced to consider building or rebuilding roads for a price instead of a standard. But don't worry, the Albanese government found a solution. They're now asking rural regional people to drive more slowly—70 kilometres an hour, we've just heard. All of our problems can be solved by driving around potholes and natural disaster damage. We can just move more and more slowly as road funding dries up and roads fall into disrepair until eventually there will be no roads at all.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to talk about something fundamental to the lives of regional Australians: the roads that connect us. For a decade under the former coalition government, our regional roads were neglected and regional people are rightly unhappy. The Albanese Labor government has been working hard to fix this mess. We are now delivering record investment in our regional infrastructure. Our investment means safer roads, more efficient freight routes and stronger local economies, all under funding programs that are open, fair and properly costed. We've committed a 10-year infrastructure investment pipeline exceeding $120 billion. It's the largest and most sustainable investor investment in our nation's history. In my great state of Western Australia, that includes $432 million for the Tanami Road, $304 million for Karratha-Tom Price road and $220 million for the Great Northern Highway Bindoon Bypass.</para>
<para>But, of course, we know that it's the local roads that matter every single day in our regional communities. That's why part of our plan is doubling the funding for the local roads through the Roads to Recovery program. This program is about directly funding our local councils to fix the roads that they know matter the most. It gives them stable long-term funding to plan with confidence. Over the next five years this means $643 million for WA councils. That's a massive increase of $278 million, and we're seeing that investment right in my electorate of Bullwinkel. In Bakers Hill we're funding a $470,000 upgrade for Sims Road, and in Northam we have $3.6 million rolling out across nine active projects, all chosen by the local Northam shire council. This is direct, tangible investment in our regional communities.</para>
<para>But our plan isn't just about maintenance; it's about saving lives. We have increased the annual funding for the Black Spot Program from $110 million to $150 million. This program, of course, targets those dangerous sections of roads that we all know about, delivering practical safety upgrades, like traffic signals, roundabouts and better signage. I'm incredibly proud to say that the Black Spot Program funding is making a real difference in Bullwinkel. We've secured $46,000 to fix the dangerous Lilydale Road and Northcote Street intersection in Chidlow, and we're delivering almost $300,000 for the Avon Terrace and Spencers Brook-York Road intersection in York. These are fixes that locals have been calling for for years, and it's our government that's delivering them.</para>
<para>We've also created the new Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, called SLRIP. That's $200 million per year nationally, which is $50 million more than the two programs that it is replacing. In my electorate of Bullwinkel, this program is funding the $1.5 million extension of Brooking Road in Parkerville, a huge bushfire-risk area. That's a huge win for our local community.</para>
<para>You might want to know what happened to the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program—the LRCI, as it was called. That was a temporary COVID program. The Liberals and Nationals set it to expire, and now they're complaining about their own decision. What did we do? We backed it with completion. We extended that timeline for councils and we committed an additional $250 million for regional and outer suburban councils. If the Nationals had their way, our regional councils would have $250 million less than they do today. When you add it all up, just this financial year our government is delivering $4.1 million for upgrades, in my electorate, across 25 different projects in Beverley, Kalamunda, Mundaring, York and Northam.</para>
<para>The choice is clear. The coalition left a multibillion-dollar black hole and froze funding for our councils, and the Albanese Labor government is making record investments. We are doubling Roads to Recovery, we are boosting the Black Spot Program, and we're delivering funding that is open, fair and properly costed. Labor now represents more seats in regional areas than the Liberals and Nationals combined. Regional areas have chosen a government that delivers for them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to strongly support this motion. I was in Portland last week, in my electorate, and I say this to the Labor Party, both federal and state: there is growing anger about the state of the roads in regional Victoria, and they want to you to do something. I can tell you that people are going to take matters into their own hands if you don't start lifting your game, because they want action. And I can tell you why. It's because potholes are popping up everywhere.</para>
<para>It's not just on local roads; we're talking about main, arterial roads like the Princes Highway—50 per cent, now, is funded by the federal government and 50 per cent by the state. We used to fund 80 per cent, and then it was 20 per cent, but you cut that. People are starting to calculate how many potholes there are on these roads, because the situation has got so bad. We're not talking about 10 or 20; they are counting hundreds upon hundreds of potholes. The sides of the roads are deteriorating, and all they get is, 'We've got it under control, but, because things have got so bad, we might have to cut the speed limit.' They have to cut the speed limit! Rather than fix the roads, you're going to start cutting the speed limit? That shows you how badly you've handled this. The deterioration since you have been in government, and since the Victorian state government has been in charge in Victoria, sadly, for far too long, has seen the investment in our roads just deteriorate over time. People are saying, enough is enough. They're saying it in Bendigo, they're saying it in Ballarat, they're saying it in Geelong, they're saying in north-east Victoria and they're saying it in western Victoria: you are derelict in your duty to provide a road which is safe for them to be able to get their kids to school, to go to sport on the weekend and to practice their livelihoods.</para>
<para>I'm telling you, the community anger is continuing to rise because they also see billions upon billions of dollars going to major infrastructure projects in Melbourne, like the Suburban Rail Loop, which are over-time and over-budget and which have the CFMEU involved in them—and we all know what's happening there. And what does that mean? We continue to miss out. People have had enough. They want to feel safe taking their kids to school, they want to feel safe going to and from work and they want a government which can actually say, 'We get it, we care and we're going to take action.'</para>
<para>If any of you want an example, just go for a drive along the Princes Highway. No-one will come down and do it. Minister Bowen flew down to make an announcement. I said to him, 'Drive along the road.' He just jumped back on his plane and away he went, after announcing an offshore wind farm in the wrong area. This is how out of touch you are with what is happening on the ground. So it's time you got real investment into our roads so it will start right here and now because they are deteriorating beyond belief. In Victoria, what is happening to the road infrastructure there is a national disgrace—an absolute national disgrace. If you don't believe it, go and have a look. Once you'd had a look, you would say, 'No, that is not safe for people to have to drive on.' They wouldn't. Seriously!</para>
<para>This motion is about trying to get real action because, if we don't—people are sick of it. They're getting their tyres blown out, they're getting their rims broken. Their shock absorbers are getting damaged. These are daily occurrences. Cost-of-living is hurting families, and this is the financial pain that they're having to deal with.</para>
<para>Now we see the solution being put forward is, oh, we're going to make it 70 kays for you to drive, so that hurts your productivity even more. It doesn't fix the roads; all it does is say you that you're a second-class citizens. It's time you acted.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATT SMITH</name>
    <name.id>312393</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I rise to speak on this motion from the member for Mallee, I'm really excited that we get to speak about the regions, because it is one of my favourite things. Don't let how quickly I speak fool you. I am a country boy. I drive country roads. Often they take me home, to a place—I'm going to stop there.</para>
<para>In the far north, I have roads like you would not believe. I have the PDR, the Bloomfield Track, the Daintree River ferry, the Jardine River ferry: places that people want to spend their entire lives thinking about driving. They come to the far north to do that.</para>
<para>I know that a lot of our local councils have been hurting from the natural disasters, particularly Cyclone Jasper, hurting our road infrastructure, making things harder. I say to those opposite, climate change is real. Climate change is impacting our road infrastructure. It's why things have been damaged more often. The substrate is going. The Port Douglas Road and the Kuranda Range road are still being repaired. The slips, the washaways, will not be finished for another year. We've invested extra money into this to build back better, to improve the drainage so the next time that we are faced with a climate change-induced disaster, our roads stay safe.</para>
<para>Our roads, our councils deserve better. Those of us in the Albanese Labor government are committed to investing in our regional areas. So after a decade of neglect from the former coalition government, denial on climate action which has been hurting our road infrastructure, the Albanese Labor government is delivering record investment into regional infrastructure and our regional roads. Our investment means improved safety on our roads; across the country, more efficient freight rates, stronger local economies under funding programs that are open, fair and properly costed.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to a 10-year infrastructure investment pipeline exceeding $120 billion that will support a sustainable program of nationally significant transport infrastructure projects across Australia including the Bruce Highway, the artery of the great state of Queensland. This the largest and most sustainable infrastructure investment in our nation's history and it builds on the foundations laid by the Albanese Labor government in its first term, and it builds on the work done by our Prime Minister when he was infrastructure minister—the man loves roads!</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is doubling the funding going to our local roads through the Roads to Recovery Program, something that's very important in my area. Over the period 2024-25 to 2028-29 the Albanese Labor government will invest $4.4 billion through the program. In Queensland, this will mean $895 million over five years for Queensland councils, an increase of $353 million. The government has increased annual funding for the Black Spot Program from $110 million to $150 million supporting more life-saving road improvements across the country. We have allocated at least $200 million per unit for improved safety and productivity of our local roads under the Safer Local Roads and Infrastructure Program, an increase of over $50 million over our previous programs, and we have increased financial assistance grants to local governments each year. This is $3.4 billion tied to the funding of grants.</para>
<para>For Leichhardt, my community, I'm happy to tell you—brace yourself because there is a lot of numbers here—we are delivering $245 million towards replacing the Barron River bridge on Kennedy Highway; $24 million for the Cairns Western Arterial Road; $210 million for the Kuranda Range Road upgrades; $38 million for Cape York community access roads; $180 million for the Bruce Highway Cairns southern access stage 5; $5.8 million for the Bruce Highway Babinda intersection upgrade; $850,000 for the major events precinct master plan in Cairns; $101,000 in Black Spot funding for the Kenny Road and Dutton Street intersections of Fort Smith; $150,000 for Black Spot funding treatments in the Barrier Street and Reef Street intersections in Port Douglas; an additional $24.6 million over five years under the Roads to Recovery Program.</para>
<para>I know that, as long as I'm in this place, I will fight for my region and for its roads, because you can for drive three days across my electorate on all sorts of roads to get to all sorts of places, and I thoroughly recommend you do it because Far North Queensland is the best place in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to address a crisis that is putting the lives of regional South Australians at risk—the terrible state of our country roads. I begin by acknowledging the important work of my colleague Dr Anne Webster and her motion regarding the dire state of roads in regional Victoria. It's a sad reality that, like Victoria, South Australia is a city centric state, where the government's focus is almost entirely confined to Adelaide and surrounds. In fact, the government's priorities are so skewed I have often thought we should save ourselves the hassle and change our state's name to simply 'the state of Adelaide'.</para>
<para>Statistically, South Australia receives the lowest amount of federal road funding of any state, both on a per capita basis and a per kilometre of road basis, and it shows. But this isn't just about statistics; it is about lives. Here are a few stories from my electorate that serve to highlight how dangerous and poorly maintained the South Australian regional road network really is. Tony, a prominent and well-respected pastoralist in northern South Australia, said, 'Ten years ago five gangs of two graders were operating on the outback road network and now there is only one grade crew consisting of two graders to service 10,000 kilometres of outback roads.' This is ludicrous.</para>
<para>From a constituent in Clare: 'We came over from Clare today to do some shopping in Port Pirie, and to say the cattle track to Crystal Brook needs major repairs is beyond a joke. You even have to drive on the wrong side of the road to avoid the dozens of deep potholes.' From Robin, a fellow truckie from Booleroo Centre, talking about the recently upgraded Augusta Highway, 'As a road train operator that uses this road multiple times a week, I am disgusted that this section of road has only been open for six months and it is already falling apart.' There are safety concerns around Snowtown, Two Wells intersections and complaints about the condition of the Strzelecki Track, a vital road for our resources sector—it's been four years. I could go on and on and on. These are not just potholes. These are examples of fundamental failures in planning and construction. Many that I speak to feel like the roads we built in the 1980s and 1990s under the old highways department were better quality than the roads we build today. That is a damning indictment.</para>
<para>The answer to this failure is clear. We need to introduce performance based contracts. Let me explain. For argument's sake, if we spend $1 million per kilometre to build a road and that road fails in two years, that is not an investment. It is a waste of taxpayer money. In the case of Augusta Highway, it failed after two weeks. A performance based contract would require the builder to guarantee the road's quality for a set period. If it fails, they would fix it at their own cost, or, indeed, if it maintains standards, they would get a performance pay-out. This puts the onus on the contractor to build it right the first time. It's not rocket science, but it seems governments are currently obsessed with mega projects in the cities rather than basic road safety projects that could easily be delivered.</para>
<para>How does Labor propose to fix this critically failing road network? How do you think they address the safety issues at hand? Well, the solution is an absolute cracker, even by Labor's standards. They suggest we reduce the speed limit on regional roads to 80 kilometres an hour. Well, I'll one-up them. Let's reduce the speed of all roads to just five kilometres an hour, then our road toll would go to zero. Rather than investing to make roads safer, they say 'stuff you' and reduce the speed limit to 80—unbelievable, unrealistic, out of touch.</para>
<para>The state government has the empirical evidence of our roads' poor quality. They have this information, but they are not willing to share it. Why? Because that would be inconvenient for their constant pork-barrelling purposes. My commonsense approach would be simple: take the quality of the road network, the data they are hiding, and combine it with the grading of that road—how busy it is. Put those two together and now you have the funding for our road network. But don't talk common sense to our socialist Labor government. They cringe at the thought of it—and don't get me started on the teals. We need a government that is serious about regional safety, serious about smart investment and serious about building roads that last. The people of regional South Australia deserve better than a government whose priority is the next tram stop in metropolitan Adelaide.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion to correct a bit of the mis- and disinformation that has been put forward by members of the opposition. I do so with a heavy heart because, when we talk about roads funding, it's an issue that shouldn't be politicised. It should be an issue that we can find common ground on because, without maintaining a good road system, we know the consequences of what happens on our roads. Far too many lives are lost in Australia due to road accident or injury, so this is an issue that should be above politics. This is an issue where we should be finding common ground.</para>
<para>A few facts to remind those opposite. It was a former coalition government that froze roads maintenance funding for our national highways at $350 million per year for over nearly a decade. That caused a deterioration of our freight roads. They are in here talking about how they were going to put a billion dollars in. On my calculation, that's still $2 billion short of what they ripped out of our national roads program for key freight roads. That's just key freight roads. They also froze the indexation to local governments' financial assistance grants. That's a billion dollars taken away from local councils, permanently lowering their funding base from the federal government, capping their ability to apply for roads programs, like Black Spots funding, Road to Recovery funding.</para>
<para>I used to chair the Victorian Black Spot Program, which is federally funded, delivered through the state government of Victoria. The biggest feedback that we got from local small shires is they didn't have the staff to do the paperwork required to apply for this competitive grant. That directly goes back to one of the former government did by freezing the grants for the financial assistance. The Liberals and Nationals also come in here and rant and complain about our decision to extend their program, the LCR program, until June 2025. If they had been re-elected that would have ended in 2023-24. It is just crocodile tears from those opposite, who are taking no responsibility for what they did in government.</para>
<para>I was here when the current PM, the then shadow minister for transport and regional development, fixed the debacle of those opposite over fuel excise. The government of those opposite started to collect it before it had gone through the parliament. This was when they chose to increase fuel excise, not when they chose to freeze it. Then what were we to do with all this money they never should have collected? It was our side that suggested to them to put it into the Roads to Recovery funding program, welcomed by local government, which fixed more roads. We didn't stop there.</para>
<para>In government we have more than doubled the Roads to Recovery Program. It means that, for my electorate, a rural electorate, we are seeing our Roads to Recovery funding go from $22 million under those opposite to $52 million. That is the difference that we have made to local councils fixing local roads in my electorate, and it does not stop there. The road that connects Mildura in the member for Mallee's electorate to Melbourne via my electorate, the Calder Highway, is receiving $12.5 million to improve overtaking lanes. That's just one of the many projects being funded along the Calder. There is also $300 million to upgrade Calder Park Drive, which is not in my electorate but is the gateway to Melbourne, the main access point for people in Bendigo accessing Melbourne via road; $5 million for pedestrians and safer roads; $4.4 for project development and preconstruction—more work on the Calder Melbourne to Mildura; more funding through rPPP for Mount Alexander to redevelop Frederick Lane and Mechanics Lane; funding through the Black Spot Program and others.</para>
<para>I speak to this motion with a heavy heart and frustration. On Friday a school in my electorate closed to remember the tragic death and passing of a young Tom Hoskings, who was another victim of road trauma. He was trying to cross the road, was hit by a truck and died. I say to those opposite: every death, we remember. Every death is one too many on our roads. Do not politicise this issue. Work to find constructive solutions because there is a real consequence of not taking this issue seriously.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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.*</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change</title>
          <page.no>232</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Government has accepted the Climate Change Authority's independent advice and has set Australia's climate change target at a range of between 62 to 70 per cent on 2005 emissions;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) release of the National Climate Risk Assessment, which found that no Australian community will be immune from climate risks that will be cascading, compounding and concurrent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) release of the Department of the Treasury's modelling on 18 September, which found Australia's ambitious and achievable plan to reduce emissions will support continued economic growth, higher living standards and employment, including 2.3 million more people being employed by 2035, and Australia's economy being up to $2 trillion worse off cumulatively by 2050 compared to a disorderly transition scenario;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the Government is delivering on its promises which Australians voted for to act on climate change, upgrade our energy system and seize the economic opportunity before our nation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Opposition to leave the climate wars in the past, solve its internal divisions and join the rest of the Parliament in taking meaningful action on climate change.</para></quote>
<para>My electorate of Griffith is a diverse one—young families alongside older Australians, university students, thriving culturally and linguistically diverse communities, small business owners, healthcare workers, people getting by on a little and people with much more—and while this diversity leads to a range of views on many issues it became clear through my door knocking on the lead-up to the last election of almost 15,000 homes in my electorate that there is one issue most people and Griffith agree on—that is, that climate change is a real and clear and absolutely present danger for us globally, across Australia and locally in my community of Griffith.</para>
<para>The people in my community didn't need to wait to read the recently released national climate risk assessments to see the risks that climate change poses to our community. They've shovelled sand into countless sandbags at depots while exhausted and shovelled mud out of their homes after floods in 2011 and again in 2022 with broken hearts. Both flood events were meant to be one-in-100-year events. They occurred just 11 short years apart. Large parts of my community, in suburbs like South Brisbane, West End and Woolloongabba, were inundated in these devastating floods, with people losing so much.</para>
<para>The National Climate Risk Assessment was a grim confirmation of what we already know. No Australian community will be immune from climate risks, which will be cascading, compounding and concurrent. Lee, a constituent from my community of Camp Hill, recently shared with me:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It was really not until nine years ago, as our grandchildren started to arrive—we have seven of them now—that I started to read seriously about climate science and began to appreciate the existential crisis that we are … facing.</para></quote>
<para>Sophie, another constituent, from Greenslopes, who is worried about our shared future, noted: 'Climate change is already reshaping our lives with more extreme heatwaves, bushfires, floods and storms, and it's only getting worse.'</para>
<para>While we can no longer avoid climate impacts, every action we take today towards our climate goal of net zero by 2050 can help avoid the worst impacts on Australians. I'm proud to be part of a government that knows climate change is real. This government doesn't ignore the experts. We listen to the science and we act in Australia's best national interests. That's why we've acted on the advice of the Climate Change Authority. Recently we announced that we have accepted the Climate Change Authority's advice that Australia's 2035 emissions target be 62 to 70 per cent, a target that is responsible, responsive to the science, backed by a practical plan to get there and built on proven technology. Since May 2022, we've added over 18 gigawatts of renewables, wind and solar, to the grid. Wind and solar capacity is up 45 per cent since we came in to government. That's more than four times the capacity of the Snowy hydro scheme. As for our cheaper home battery policy, over 100,000 batteries have now been installed across the country, with more on the way.</para>
<para>Australia has everything we need to succeed to get to net zero: the resources, the technology, the people and the will. But we need leadership, not political games. While this government gets on with the job of fighting for Australia's future, the opposition continues to fight with itself. I knew, coming in to this parliament, that there would be many debates and differences of opinion, but I never imagined we would still see arguments about the validity of climate change. We have a Leader of the Opposition vowing to oppose any attempt to legislate Australia's climate targets. Before that, she said the coalition doesn't believe in setting targets at all, in government or in opposition. That's not leadership; that's abandoning responsibility. We have the member for Hume describing emissions targets as 'a wrecking ball through the economy', even as independent modelling shows the exact opposite. That's not leadership; that's fearmongering in defiance of the facts. The member for New England dismisses the science outright, calling climate action 'a ludicrous proposition with net zero effect'. That's not leadership; that is wilful ignorance.</para>
<para>Australians deserve better. They deserve a parliament that treats their future with seriousness, not slogans. They deserve a plan that creates good, secure jobs, lowers energy bills and ensures our kids and our grandkids inherit a liveable planet. The Albanese Labor government is delivering exactly that. We're listening to the science, investing in people and acting in the national interest. We are determined to leave the climate wars in the past and to build a clean, reliable and affordable energy future for all Australians.</para>
<para>So I call on those opposite: leave behind the denial, the delay and the division and join with us in taking meaningful action on climate change, because the cost of inaction is too great and the opportunity before us is too important to waste another decade, because the science is clear, the economics are clear and the Australian people are clear—they want progress, not politics.</para>
<para>The choice before us is simple. We can lead the world in the clean energy future, or be left behind by it. The Albanese Labor government chooses leadership for our communities, for our economy and for the generations ahead.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Ambihaipahar</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is much in the motion moved by the member for Griffith that I support. I commend the government on its commitment to a 2035 emissions reduction target, and I hope that the government will legislate that target soon to provide some policy certainty. But much more needs to be done beyond setting targets. There's a worrying contradiction in the government speaking about climate action successes while simultaneously forgoing billions of dollars in tax revenue from bigger emitters to effectively make fossil fuels cheaper.</para>
<para>Today I'm calling for reform to the diesel fuel tax credit scheme. The diesel fuel tax credit scheme allows large mining companies to claim a rebate for their use of diesel in mining vehicles and equipment. This scheme incentivises major mining companies to keep burning fossil fuels instead of decarbonising. In FY 2024, $2.9 billion in diesel fuel tax credits was paid to 15 mining and freight companies, and the diesel that was rebated produced more than 16 million tonnes of CO2. That's huge. More emissions come from this diesel that we're effectively subsidising than from all our planes, buses and trains combined. We're trying to drive the energy transition with our foot on both the accelerator and the brake.</para>
<para>There's an increasing chorus of voices calling for a fix to this contradiction. Recently, the head of the Climate Change Authority, Matt Kean, joined this chorus. The safeguard mechanism, which is designed to push heavy industry to reduce its emissions, effectively charges companies $35 per tonne of CO2 when they emit too much, but the diesel fuel tax credits provide a subsidy of approximately $190 for every tonne of CO2. So, if you are a large mining company, the subsidy that you get when you stick with diesel is five times the size of the penalty that you pay for emitting too much. Why would you decarbonise? This crazy policy means companies are having to choose between the right thing for the country and better returns for shareholders. We need to line those incentives up so companies can make the best decisions for shareholders and the country.</para>
<para>As a Western Australian, I know the importance of the mining industry and I know mining companies are not a bottomless pit of money. Government should be supporting them through the energy transition so they can continue to drive Australian prosperity as the world changes, but propping up fossil fuel use is not the best way to do this. Weaning them off diesel subsidies and incentivising them to decarbonise is the best way to meet the expectations of the millions of Australians who are committed to climate action and ensure a smoother transition for the mining industry. That's why I support the clean energy finance reform proposal, which is to introduce a $50 million cap on the diesel fuel tax credit paid. Above that cap, any credits would be retained by the company, but only if they are reinvested in decarbonisation. In other words, we can convert a fossil fuel subsidy into a clean tech investment incentive. On last year's numbers, this affects only 15 companies. No farmers or small businesses would be impacted. The credits given to big mining companies would be invested in futureproofing these companies by breaking their reliance on fossil fuels.</para>
<para>Some will say we should get rid of this effective subsidy altogether, but, for now, this model presents a sensible step that creates the right incentives without driving up the cost of food or transport. Some will say that fuel tax shouldn't be paid on diesel used off road because the tax pays for the roads, but that hasn't been the case for decades. The hypothecation of fuel taxes for road funding was abolished in 1959, and, since 1992, there's been no formal link between fuel excise and road funding. Today the fuel excise is simply a revenue measure, and spending on roads is a completely separate expenditure. We will need to rethink whether we ask users to pay for roads as transport goes electric, but that work could be done in parallel.</para>
<para>Some will say that the tech to replace diesel isn't ready. Yes, some tech is at an early stage, but investment from our mining majors will bring these technologies down the cost curve. Importantly, this simply isn't a good reason to keep a policy that means taxpayers forgo $3 billion a year to help our large mining companies keep burning fossil fuels. If we want to hit our 2035 and 2050 targets, if we want a strong, sustainable mining sector in WA and around Australia and if we want taxpayers' money working for the future rather than the past, we must align our fiscal settings with our climate ambitions. Let's convert this support for fossil fuels into a clean tech investment incentive so every dollar invested pushes us forward.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion moved by the wonderful member for Griffith. It's a very important motion for my community in Barton as well. It outlines the Albanese government's commitment to both recognising and responding to climate change. Recognising and responding are two separate things. The first, recognition, was delivered by the Labor Party way back in 2007 when the wonderful Kevin Rudd—Kevin 07—called climate change 'the great moral challenge of our generation' and warned that delaying action would be 'reckless and irresponsible'. It's now 2025, and the National and Liberal parties still can't get their head around it at all. Climate change is real, and we're feeling the impacts right now: more floods, more fires, more extreme heat and more violent storms. This is the reality for communities across Australia, yet the opposition are still in denial. Maybe they're too busy fighting themselves in some back room of parliament to step outside and actually see it. Whatever it is, they have their heads in the sand and we don't have time to wait for the tide to come in. As Rudd said, that would be reckless and irresponsible, and we must act now.</para>
<para>The government accepts the Climate Change Authority's recently published national climate risk assessment. Every action we take today towards our climate goal of net zero by 2050 can help avoid the worst impacts on Australians. Following the authority's advice, we've set an emissions reduction target of between 62 and 70 per cent by 2035. And emissions are coming down. Our most recent data shows that emissions fell by 6.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in the year to March 2025. This is a result of our work in slashing waiting times for renewable projects, incentivising home batteries and expanding clean fuel use. This is just the beginning, and we know there is much more work to be done. Our biggest sources of emissions are electricity, transport and industry, and we have a plan for each of them.</para>
<para>On electricity, we are upgrading our energy systems so that we can deliver more renewable energy from remote areas to our cities and towns. We have already added over 18 gigawatts of wind and solar to the grid by undertaking this task. These upgrades also help balance the variability of renewables, ensuring homes have reliable, clean power, no matter the weather. On industry, we've announced a new net zero stream in the National Reconstruction Fund. The $5 billion in this particular fund will help large industry decarbonise whilst helping renewable and low-emission manufacturers scale up.</para>
<para>On transport, we've expanded the use of electric vehicles, brought in a new vehicle efficiency standard and invested in more kerbside charging facilities. This is all on top of the work regular Australians are already doing, because they understand climate change and its risks as well. Around 1,000 batteries are being installed across the country every day, with home solar panel uptake being quite literally through the roof. So, as the motion says, the government is delivering on its promises, which Australians voted for this year, to act on climate change. Whether the opposition will leave the climate wars in the past—well, I'm not holding my breath.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I commend the member for Griffith for staying in the chamber at least for her matter of private members' business, but I do take umbrage with some of the issues taken up in this particular report. Let's just go through a few of the issues in the National Climate Risk Assessment, particularly as, when asked in Senate estimates, officials from the department actually said that cold deaths were out of the scope of investigation for the assessment. Now, heat deaths were considered, but cold deaths—and there are far more cold deaths than there are heat deaths—were not considered as part of this report.</para>
<para>United Nations climate chief Simon Stiell, who is considered quite an authority on climate action, said that, without more ambitious climate action, Australia could face megadroughts. But, wait for this, he said that this would make fresh fruit and vegetables a once-in-a-year treat. That is catastrophising. This particular report also said that once-in-a-century events would become once-in-a-fortnight events. That is just catastrophising. If our children are being taught that once-in-a-century events are going to become once-in-a-fortnight events, that is just unnecessarily alarmist.</para>
<para>I hear the member for Richmond say they could become so. It would not be once-in-a-century events becoming once-in-a-fortnight events, Member for Richmond. That is just alarmist. It is placing unnecessary pressure indeed on schoolchildren who are being taught this stuff. It's got to be put into balance. When we talk about climate action, the balance is certainly not being met between Binalong and Bowning in my electorate, where they want to put up 90 wind towers that are 260 metres high. In neighbouring Upper Lachlan Shire, there is even a green energy project where they are taking the subsidies and want to take the subsidies, but it's not even going to be connected to the grid. It's no wonder that these farmers and these residents are pushing back. It's no wonder. When ENGIE pulled back a project—I'll give this French owned company its due. That fact they actually withdrew the project was absolutely met with approval. It was going to be a solar factory right next door to Yass which was—wait for it—going to be bigger than Yass itself! Country communities can't keep carrying the can. They cannot, and they are being asked to because of reports such as this, which are only sending the energy costs for ordinary, everyday Australians through the roof. Reports such as this are dividing communities, because we've got largely foreign owned superannuation companies coming into regional Australia. They're dividing families, dividing generational friendships and pitting farmers against their next-door neighbours. It is just a bridge too far.</para>
<para>We then have the battery energy storage systems. They are going to carpet-bomb our electorates as well. You've got volunteer firefighters, who, as they say, are not equipped to deal with the toxicity of the flames from these battery energy storage systems and who are absolutely worried that, if these battery energy storage systems catch fire, they are going to be asked to go and put them out. We know that these fires always seem to start on Christmas Eve, New Year's Eve or whenever people should be rightly celebrating with family. These brave volunteers, many of whom are well beyond the age of 65, let me tell you—they're older, not younger—have given of their own and given selflessly for many, many years. They go out, attend crashes and the like and rescue people in country Australia. But why should they be expected to go out and put their own lives at risk when they are very worried—they are not trained or equipped to put out these flames from these fires, which could well have a large effect on their own wellbeing and their own health. This climate risk assessment might pay the energy minister's dues, where he is catastrophising and saying that country Australia can indeed have this reckless rollout of renewables. The fact is country people are pushing back, and rightly so. They've had enough of this nonsense, and it's going to cost this country trillions of dollars.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the motion by the member for Griffith. I am proud to be part of a government that is taking real, ambitious action to address climate change. Those in the coalition are imploding about whether or not they believe in human driven climate change, let alone whether or not they want to do anything about it. Nine years of Coalition government—almost a decade of delay and denial. We accept the science, and we're committed to playing our part to address this global challenge and to seize the opportunity to be at the forefront of innovation and the renewable energy transition. Many of the residents of the electorate I'm fortunate to represent, Menzies, care deeply about climate change. They raise it when I'm doorknocking and they raise it when I'm making phone calls. They call my office. They send us emails—young people who are worried about their future; and parents and grandparents who are worried about the future for themselves, their children and their grandchildren. As a parent of young children, I share their concerns.</para>
<para>I've met multiple times with the climate groups that are active in my area—Menzies for Climate, Australian Conservation Foundation Community Eastern Rosellas, and Baby Boomers for Climate Change Action. In the case of Menzies for Climate, they were present throughout the election campaign. They ran a local candidates forum and handed out climate scorecards at every pre-poll. It will surprise no-one that we rated much better than the coalition. I appreciate the constructive and respectful way these groups have always engaged. We don't necessarily agree on everything, but we can agree on the necessity and urgency of climate action. The Albanese Labor government understands this also. That is why we have accepted the advice of the Climate Change Authority and set a 2035 emissions reduction target of 62 to 70 per cent. As required by the Climate Change Act 2022, the government must consider independent expert advice from the authority before setting a target. This ensures our decisions are grounded in science and reflect international best practice.</para>
<para>There will be some who say the target is too high. Again, those in the coalition are in a civil war over whether or not to abandon net zero. The Liberals and Nationals haven't learned anything from the election, haven't moved on from their three years in opposition and haven't moved on from nine years in government, when they had a ridiculous 20 climate policies—none of which were serious about reducing emissions.</para>
<para>There will also be some who say the target is too low. We know there are other bodies that suggest higher targets. Higher targets will always sound good to those who accept we're in a climate crisis. But our targets don't just consider where we need to get to; they consider how we're going to get there. As has been said before, they're ambitious and achievable. The authority has its own internal expertise but also relies on the expertise of bodies like the CSIRO and Treasury. Unlike those on the other side, this government does not ignore experts; we listen and we act.</para>
<para>We have a clear road map regarding how we will not just lower emissions but seize upon the opportunities the global energy transition presents to become a renewable energy superpower. Key to this is our continuing transition to an 82 per cent renewables energy grid by 2030. Since May 2022 we have added over 18 gigawatts of wind and solar to the grid—a 45 per cent increase since we came to government. Along with our climate targets we announced $2 billion for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to continue driving downward pressure on electricity prices and to help accelerate long-term renewables projects right across our nation.</para>
<para>Lowering transport emissions is another key part of our plan. We've introduced vehicle efficiency standards, provided incentives to increase uptake of electric vehicles and invested in more kerbside-charging facilities. To reach our targets we're committing a further $40 million for charging infrastructure across our suburbs and regions, and we'll invest $1.1 billion to boost Australia's clean energy fuel production. At a local level we're delivering $85 million to develop households and businesses improve energy performance, and we have our Cheaper Home Batteries Program, which has now installed more than 100,000 batteries nationwide. This is significant progress and it's popular with the residents of Menzies. I commend this motion to the chamber.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Griffith for the opportunity to speak to this important issue. Last month Australia's first <inline font-style="italic">N</inline><inline font-style="italic">ational climate </inline><inline font-style="italic">risk </inline><inline font-style="italic">assessment</inline> report found that every aspect of our nation will be affected by climate change—the economy, food systems in communities, health, national security, transport, energy and, perhaps most of all, our natural environment.</para>
<para>We are already paying the cost of climate change. According to the Actuaries Institute, more than 1.6 million Australians are spending more than a month's income every year on insurance premiums. With even a moderate emissions reduction scenario, the cost of recovering from floods, bushfires, storm surges and tropical cyclones could be more than $40 billion every year within 25 years. Australian property values could decrease in value by over $600 billion by 2050. Lost labour productivity could reduce our economic output by hundreds of billions of dollars, and disruptions in global supply chains due to extreme weather events could affect import and export markets. Government budgets will be eroded by the loss of our tax base and by increased spending on disaster recovery and human welfare. The report's implicit message is that we need to cut our emissions faster and more effectively. In that context, the government's 2035 emissions reduction target of 62 to 70 per cent by 2030 is inadequate.</para>
<para>Australia has much to gain from the clean energy transition. Our world-class sun and wind resources can underpin new export industries and manufacturing in energy intensive commodities like iron and steel. Deloitte modelling found that, in a competitive global environment, a 65 per cent target is actually unlikely to drive the capital, innovation and jobs expenditure required for us to build those new export industries. It suggested that a more ambitious emissions reduction target of 75 per cent by 2035 could yield $227 billion in additional GDP over 10 years, growing to $490 billion within 25 years.</para>
<para>The Investor Group on Climate Change also found that Australia could lead in the global energy transition, but, without clear policy signals and adequate capital deployment, we risk being left behind. We risk missing out on huge economic opportunities.</para>
<para>It's clear that it's not going to be a straightforward transition. To date, we've already been focusing on the low-hanging fruit: rooftop solar and subsidies for large-scale renewable projects. But even that rollout is facing mounting obstacles: delays; rising costs; infrastructure bottlenecks; and localised opposition to the transition lines, which are required to connect new wind and new solar farms to the grid.</para>
<para>The uncertainty of sector pathways to net zero emission technologies in some hard-to-abate sectors adds another layer of challenge. We can argue about how to deal with those challenges, but what is beyond doubt is the need to urgently accelerate our climate action. While the transition to renewables is complex, any backward steps—whether they be weak climate targets, pauses in government support for renewable projects or the approval of new fossil fuel projects—all of these fly in the face of science, reason and our future prosperity.</para>
<para>Ambitious climate targets provide businesses with the clarity and the confidence to deploy the capital and workers we will need to actually make the net zero transition happen. They're also crucial to attracting international investment and talent. With nuclear being too slow, coal-fired power stations too unreliable and the cost of gas just too much, clear policy settings are critical to enable investment in renewable energy. Our 2035 climate targets matter not only to Australia but internationally as well. Countries can slow global warming only by working together. What we do here sends a clear signal to our trading partners and to our international peers.</para>
<para>Australia has more to lose than most countries from climate change but more to gain in leading the effort to combat it. The future for climate action is here. That means delivering more ambitious climate action now.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRENCH</name>
    <name.id>316550</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise proudly to support the motion moved by the member for Griffith. As a member of the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water, I know how critical this decade is. As the dad of two young boys, I know exactly who will live with the consequences if we fail to act.</para>
<para>We've accepted the independent advice of the Climate Change Authority and set a responsible, science-backed 2035 target to reduce emissions by 62 to 70 per cent below the 2005 levels. That is the right call, the call demanded by Australians who understand what is at stake, and who want us to seize the economic opportunities ahead of us.</para>
<para>Our government is grounded in reality. The national climate risk assessment spells it out. Climate change risks are cascading, compounded and concurrent. No community, not one, is immune. From heatwaves to coastal erosion, from bushfire threats to biodiversity loss, we are already seeing the impacts in Western Australia and across the country.</para>
<para>Treasury's modelling reinforces this message. If we delay, or we adopt a disorderly transition, our economy could be up to $2 trillion worse off by 2050. That's lower wages, higher power bills, fewer jobs—a profound failure to plan. The global shift to clean energy is the biggest economic transformation since the Industrial Revolution, and Australia is uniquely placed to win. We have the sun, the wind and the minerals to turn those natural advantages into prosperity. Our plan is to do exactly that.</para>
<para>I am a former electrician, so indulge me while I run through the technical numbers. Since May 2022 we've added over 18 gigawatts of wind and solar to the grid, a 45 per cent increase in capacity. That's enough to power six million homes. We've helped drive the installation of over 100,000 home batteries, helping households cut bills and strengthen our grid. We're backing renewables not only with storage but with firming capacity so that, when the wind drops or the sun sets, the supply keeps flowing and our families' bills don't spike. We are decarbonising transport with the first-ever New Vehicle Efficiency Standard. We're helping industry do the heavy lifting, including through the $5 billion Net Zero Fund and the strengthened Safeguard Mechanism. We are positioning Australia not just to reduce emissions but to export clean energy, clean technologies and clean jobs to the world. Crucially, we're adapting to existing climate impacts. That means investing in resilience, securing water supply, protecting critical infrastructure and supporting communities out on the front line.</para>
<para>This motion asks the opposition to join us, to leave the climate wars behind and to stop treating the future of our children like a factional football. It asks the opposition to recognise that leadership is not saying no loudly; it's building something better, because out in the real world—outside the echo chambers of the climate culture wars—Australians are getting on with it. In my electorate of Moore, we are blessed with natural environmental treasures: the Yellagonga wetlands, our magnificent coastline and the biodiversity of our local bushlands. The Friends of Yellagonga Regional Park dedicate countless volunteer hours to restoring our precious wetlands. Parents for Climate, including passionate advocates like Emma Coupland and Sonya Elek, organise locally because they understand that protecting the planet is about protecting our kids.</para>
<para>This motion does exactly what responsible parliamentarians should do: it listens to experts, aligns ambition with action and keeps Australia economically competitive. The alternative—we know it too well—is years of denial and delay and 23 energy policies from those opposite with zero actually delivered, and they're still talking about a $600 billion nuclear mirage. The Australian people rejected that approach at the last election. They want action now.</para>
<para>Climate change is the defining test of our generation. History will not forgive cowardice, nor will it reward complacency, but it will remember courage. It will remember those who chose to build, not block. For my boys and for the families of Moore and Griffith, and for families right across the country, we must get this right. I commend the motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We're hearing lectures about the climate wars. Labor wants to lecture us about the climate while congratulating themselves on what they're doing. Climate wars—Labor is actually waging war on the climate. Every time Labor opens a new coalmine, you wage war on the climate. Every time Labor opens a new gas project and every time Labor lets Santos pay no tax, you wage war on the climate. You are waging war on our planet's future.</para>
<para>So what is Labor's record on climate? Its record includes opening 30 new coal and gas mines in the last term of parliament; abandoning reforms under the previous environment minister, under pressure from big corporations; and, 15 days after being sworn in this term, approving an extension to Woodside's North West Shelf, the largest fossil fuel project in the Southern Hemisphere. It's a cruel joke to pretend that Labor is acting on climate. They're actively acting to make climate change worse. They're actively working to make climate disasters, bushfires, heatwaves and floods worse. They are gaslighting the Australian people who do want action on climate, who do want their homes to be safe—</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">A government member interjecting</inline>—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, don't open new coalmines. You've abrogated that trust—who do want their homes to be safe from fires and floods, who don't want thousands of extra deaths in our cities from heatwaves and who do want to preserve our natural wonders like the Great Barrier Reef. This is what people want, so Labor are employing a deliberate strategy to gaslight the Australian people.</para>
<para>Here's Labor's strategy: what do we need to do to look like we're doing something about climate while protecting the interests of the coal and gas corporations? The government have an intentional strategy to lie to you about climate, Australians, to distract you from what they're actually doing. Labor wants you to focus on the coalition's implosion over net zero and away from the big coal and gas corporations pretty much screwing over everyday Australians while Labor does everything to protect them.</para>
<para>The Labor government doesn't want you to know that many huge mining corporations are not paying any corporate tax—zilch; zero. Labor doesn't want you to know that gas corporations are giving our offshore gas away for free and making massive profits but not paying any royalties. Labor really doesn't really want you to know that our fossil fuel exports contribute far more to climate change than domestic emissions—4.5 times more. That's the exports. Big coal and gas corporations love this focus on domestic emissions because it means you're not looking at them wrecking our climate and environment and making huge profits while they dodge taxes. And it's a Labor government who are protecting these corporations at your expense, Australians. Don't let them fool you.</para>
<para>Some conspiracy theories are actually real. Here's one you'll want to hear: big corporations really do control our government. And here's the story.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor promised environmental law reform—the truth hurts sometimes, doesn't it?—when they came into government in 2022. The Greens said we were happy to work with them—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>this is what happened—to protect nature and the climate. We came to a deal with then environment minister Tanya Plibersek, but the mining industry—companies like Woodside, Santos and BHP—were not happy. They got on the phone to Western Australian premier Roger Cook—this is all fact—who then personally called the Prime Minister to tell him to kill the deal, and he did at the eleventh hour.</para>
<para>Then, under pressure from the same big corporations, in February this year—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You say it's fact, but then you don't have facts.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was fact; we were told.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>How do you know it's fact?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We were told—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You were told.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by the former environment minister, who had signed the letter. Let's continue. In February this year, the bill was withdrawn from parliament altogether. This is all fact.</para>
<para>Now, the new environment minister—one of the first things he did was fly to Perth to consult with mining companies on the new version of the laws, his No. 1 priority to speed up approvals so big corporations can wreck the environment even faster. BHP have said they welcome the 'strong signals' from the government. I'm sure they and the other mining companies are very happy they can keep making megaprofits and paying minimal tax and get their approvals fast tracked now without worrying about that pesky environment or the climate.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pregnancy and Infant Loss</title>
          <page.no>238</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) October is Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month and that Wednesday, 15 October 2025 marks Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) this day acknowledges the shared loss experienced by parents, friends, and healthcare workers of babies lost through miscarriage, stillbirth and neonatal death;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) that there is a significant impact on families who have lost a baby;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) that every year 110,000 Australians experience a miscarriage, more than 2,000 experience stillbirth, and almost 700 lose a baby within the first 28 days;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) that stillbirth occurrence is higher in Aboriginal and culturally diverse communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) all families who have experienced loss, either recently or over time; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) commends the Government for providing more than $40 million to organisations to support women and families following stillbirth, neonatal death or miscarriage.</para></quote>
<para>Over the last almost 40 years since I lost my child Michael in the neonatal period, little has changed regarding the number of families that are affected by pregnancy loss. In 2023, out of the 285,305 babies born in Australia, there were 3,128 perinatal deaths, or one per cent of all babies born. Seventy-nine per cent of those babies were stillborn, and 21 per cent died soon after birth. It is estimated that one in five pregnancies, or 110,000 pregnancies, will end in miscarriage each year and that one per cent to two per cent of those women will experience a loss of more than three babies by miscarriage. These statistics are significantly higher for Indigenous women and women who come from CALD backgrounds.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has been working for some years to provide support for families who experience this loss. Last sitting fortnight, the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations introduced the Fair Work Amendment (Baby Priya's) Bill 2025, which introduces a new principle into the Fair Work Act that, unless employers and employees have expressly agreed otherwise, employer funded paid parental leave must not be cancelled because a child is stillborn or dies. This brings it into line with government paid parental leave and further supports parents at the worst time in their lives. When my third baby died, I received flowers from my employer at the funeral and, the next day, a letter saying my maternity leave had been cancelled and I should provide a doctor's certificate or return to work within seven days. This was less than three weeks after my baby was born and died. This has to change.</para>
<para>Over the period of 2022 to 2028, the government will have invested $62.7 million in measures to support healthy pregnancies, reduce stillbirths and preterm birth, improve national data collection and support families impacted by perinatal loss. Rigorous data collection provides researchers with clear targets of what to improve and then how to improve these statistics, because, for families, those losses are not numbers but little people who would have made their family whole.</para>
<para>In the budget 2024-25, the government announced $15.9 million for miscarriage education, awareness and support, funding for preterm-birth prevention strategies, monitoring and evaluation of the national stillbirth action plan and an additional $7.1 million to extend existing education and awareness for groups who are at a higher risk of stillbirth. Further, there was $5.3 million over four years to increase the specialised services to bereaved families. Services like Red Nose, Miracle Babies in my electorate, SANDS and others can be the lifeline for families experiencing these situations. They certainly were for me and my family in the early months after our children died. The support of organisations like this helped us talk and negotiate with doctors and other appointments. Every time we had another appointment in those early days, I had to relive the trauma and the anguish of what had happened. Having someone to talk to who had also been through a similar circumstance was important and helpful. It was wonderful to know our family was not alone.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has committed $23 million over four years to increase support for women and families experiencing stillbirth and miscarriage, supporting the Hospital to Home program, and bereavement care for the higher-risk population. As part of this, $13.9 million has been set aside to increase the number of autopsies with the aim to better understand and therefore reduce the rates of stillbirth, preterm birth and miscarriage. Recently, I was at a doctor's appointment where I was asked by the specialist how many children I had. This is a question that, even after all this time, I find hard to answer. I have five children, three wonderful healthy boys, aged 38 and 31, and Michael and Megan, who died 39 and 32 years ago. I still feel their loss keenly, and sometimes it's not easy to talk about. Old taboos still apply, but, with the support and recognition of organisations, like Red Nose and Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness, and significant funding and other supports by our government, I hope in the future it will be easier for anyone experiencing these tragedies.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Werriwa. I'm sorry for your loss. Do we have a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Repacholi</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my friend and colleague the member for Werriwa for raising this very important issue in the house and for discussing it with such generosity. Australia is one of the safest countries in the world in which to become pregnant and give birth, but there are still risks and losses associated with that process. One in four women—I'm one of them—loses a pregnancy to miscarriage. That is more than 100,000 Australian women every year. Every day, six Australian babies are stillborn. As many as a thousand babies die every year in the first 28 days of life. The loss of a baby, any baby, is a devastating outcome with far-reaching impacts on individuals, families and communities. In the past, as we've heard, these losses were often discounted or diminished, shrouded in silence. Families were told to move on, to try again. But every loss, whether through miscarriage, stillbirth or neonatal death, is a personal tragedy. So this month, and especially on 15 October, we remember those babies who are no longer with us. Every baby matters, and every baby deserves to be remembered.</para>
<para>As a paediatric neurologist, I know that compassionate care, timely support and open conversations are so important to help parents and children recover from this loss. So I commend organisations like Red Nose, SANDS and the Stillbirth Centre of Research Excellence that act to lead the way in advocacy support and education. Their work is vital, and it deserves our full backing.</para>
<para>It's absolutely vital that we ensure appropriate access to bereavement counselling, that we improve hospital protocols for miscarriage and stillbirth and that we recognise the emotional toll of these experiences on mothers and fathers. We have to ensure that we always provide best practice bereavement and mental health care for all parents, including those who have subsequent pregnancies, which can be really difficult after such losses. It's also important that we acknowledge that our Aboriginal and culturally diverse communities face disproportionately higher rates of stillbirth and that they often lack culturally safe care. Australia's National Stillbirth Action and Implementation Plan was launched in 2020 after a 2018 Senate inquiry which established a lack of improvement in our rate of stillbirths. It's really important that we continue to support research into this area as part of our efforts towards public health monitoring and continuous improvement.</para>
<para>While every woman has the right to choose her preferred model of maternity care and place of birth, there are risks associated with some forms of birth, such as freebirth, which can result in poor outcomes for mothers and for babies. All deliveries should be attended by trained professionals able to provide medical support when needed to always ensure the best possible outcomes for mums and for babies. The recent evidence of better outcomes in private obstetrics in Australia suggests that we really need greater continuity of care in our public system. Many women experience fragmented care models with mixed medical and midwifery care or GP shared care when they would prefer a continuity-of-care model. This might include continuity of midwifery care in the public system, private obstetric care or care from a privately practising midwife in the private system.</para>
<para>Continuity of care is particularly important for high-risk populations such as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, migrants and refugees, and remote and rural women. However, it is not available to or accessible for many. At least 14 private maternity units around the country have closed in the last five years alone. It's absolutely vital that we maintain local services to provide patients with the choice, to reduce the travel burden, to manage obstetric emergencies and to ensure equitable care. It's very important that women have a choice in how they give birth and for that choice to be informed and supported. It's absolutely vital that we provide the very best possible support for those parents who do experience miscarriages, stillbirths or neonatal death. So, again, I thank my friend and colleague the member for Werriwa for raising such an important issue in the House this evening.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'It's better this happens now than later. We can always try again.' These are things that were said to me when I experienced the devastating loss of yet another baby before they had the chance to take their first breath. Words meant to comfort instead cut deeply into my grief. At the time, I felt angry and a pain at how misunderstood I was, but over the years that anger slowly transformed into something else: gratitude. Strange, I know. As much as their words hurt, I came to realise they were spoken from a place of not knowing. They didn't understand the depth of this kind of loss, and in a strange way I was glad they didn't—gratitude. If they had truly known the pain of pregnancy loss, they would never have said those things to someone hurting like I was. If the people that were closest to me were unable to understand the extent of my loss, how could I expect others to know what I was going through? I couldn't.</para>
<para>Losing a child at any stage is profoundly painful, yet babies lost before they are even able to breathe are often met with silence, discomfort or avoidance. October is Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month—a time to recognise thousands of families across Australia who have experienced the heartbreak of losing a pregnancy, a baby or a young infant. For too long, these experiences have been endured in silence. I know I did. This month provides a moment for our nation to pause, acknowledge the grief of families and recommit to supporting them with compassion, understanding and care.</para>
<para>The loss of a baby is a profound and life-altering event. The hopes and dreams of a future are suddenly replaced with deep sorrow. Did you know that every year 2,200 babies are stillborn and more than 700 newborns die before their first birthday? The Public Health Association estimates that around 100,000 pregnancies end in miscarriage. At the time of my miscarriage, my first miscarriage, it was one in four pregnancies. At that time, it was me, my sister and two friends all pregnant at the same time. It was my baby that was lost. It was my husband and I who watched those kids grow and reach those wonderful milestones in life—first birthdays, first steps, first days at school. As those wonderful kids face the end of their school life and wonder what to do next, it's important to remember that pregnancy and infant loss affect not only parents but also siblings, grandparents, extended families, friends and workplaces. It touches every part of our community.</para>
<para>As a society we have become better at speaking openly about many forms of grief, but pregnancy loss and infant loss are still often spoken about in hushed tones or not at all. Many parents say what hurts most is when their baby's life goes unacknowledged and when others do not know what to say. But, by having conversations like this one here in the parliament, we can help break that silence, validate that grief, honour the lives lost and ensure that families feel seen and supported. Awareness must always be matched with action. That includes ensuring bereavement leave and workplace supports are fit for purpose, that parents have access to counselling and culturally-safe services and that health systems are responsive to the needs of families in their care.</para>
<para>Community groups, peer networks and charities also play an essential role, providing understanding, remembrance events and practical support during the darkest moments. Their work deserves recognition and sustained support.</para>
<para>Tonight, as, around the country, homes light up a candle to mark Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month, we remember all the little lives gone too soon. We stand with families who carry their memories every day and we recommit to creating a society where their grief is acknowledged, their babies are remembered and they are supported with love and dignity.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Melbourne, and, again, I'm really sorry. These are really deeply personal experiences that everyone is sharing, and it's tough, and I really respect that you have committed to doing so.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Melbourne, thank you for sharing that deeply personal story. Absolutely, condolences go out to you, and it brings home the fact that it doesn't matter the years that pass, it still cuts deep; the loss is still deeply felt.</para>
<para>My late mother, Eileen, carried a baby to full term, a beautiful little boy, and lost him the night before she was due to give birth. His little grave marker in the Wagga Wagga lawn cemetery simply has on it 'Baby McCormack 15.7.72', the date he was born, the day he obviously didn't make it. Mum carried that pain for all of her life. It actually changed her. My mum was a good person; unlike me, she was a really, really good person. I know how deeply it cut into her. She had two other children following this little boy, but my three sisters and I never forget 15 July. We always text each other, message each other, on that day because it is a special day in our family.</para>
<para>Thank you to the member for Werriwa for bringing forward this important discussion, and it is important. October is Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month, and no-one feels this more than the mums who've lost bubs. It is deeply tragic. It is deeply personal. As a bloke, I want to say that we share your pain too, but no-one knows how profound is the loss in a woman who has indeed gone through that experience.</para>
<para>I want to also share with the House a couple I know well—they're only young—Sam and Maddy Armstrong. They live near Marrar, where I come from, and they lost a little girl in January 2024, Joy. They were supported through this loss by an organisation called Vilomah Community. This organisation provides help and wraparound services that assist particularly mums but also parents through the loss, healing and recovery—not that you ever recover, not that you ever properly heal. I would really like to see this organisation, which is under the umbrella of the Murrumbidgee local health district, properly funded so that it can enable referrals to become compulsory after a stillbirth, should the parents need it, want it and expect it, so that every family that suffers grief and loss has the opportunity to access a 12-month support program. It would be really good for mums right across the Riverina district.</para>
<para>Before Joy was born, Vilomah, knowing that they were going to go through this experience, reached out, talked about the services offered and explained in a very deeply personal and emotional way what was going to happen and what to expect. It didn't take, as Sam and Maddy explained, long to realise stillbirth is common in the Riverina, and we've heard it's common right throughout Australia. It's all too common. Sam and Maddy were shocked by the amount of people they knew who told them that they'd lost a baby through stillbirth. When you do talk about this thing—the member for Melbourne is right—it wasn't always talked about. Back in the early 1970s, it probably wasn't talked about at all. We're much more open now as a society. But people still find it hard—choking back tears—to even tell these sorts of stories, particularly in the federal parliament but also even to their own family members. I do commend you for your bravery and courage. Thank you for sharing that story.</para>
<para>As Maddy and Sam explained, a lot of these people have no support, no opportunity to grieve properly and no memory making. That's important, too. They are still babies. They are still parts of your family. Even though they don't make it, they're still very much part and parcel of your family. Also, mental health issues come as a result of this, as Maddy and Sam explained to me. Thank you, member for Werriwa, for bringing this important motion. Again, member for Melbourne, all our love and support to the important motion and again members of Melbourne, all our love and support go out to you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In October, we mark Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month, and we do so to acknowledge the shared loss experienced by parents, friends, healthcare workers and community when babies are lost through miscarriage, stillbirth and neonatal death. I have spoken on this in previous years not because of lived experience but because, in my early years in this place, there hadn't been a lot of discussion about these matters, and I commend the efforts of the member for Werriwa to share her story and highlight the issue. And I commend those who have shared such personal stories tonight, like the member of Melbourne.</para>
<para>I'm really heartened that, when we speak about this now, we do it not only to acknowledge the grief and the loss; we can share some of the many practical supports the Albanese government has put in place, because that's a start. Around six babies are stillborn each day in Australia, and an estimated one-in-four pregnancies results in miscarriage. Each year in Australia, more than 110,000 families experience stillbirth or miscarriage. That is a lot of heartbreak and grief for many people.</para>
<para>So what are we doing to support these people? We've invested more than $62 million over five years in measures to support healthy pregnancies, reduce stillbirth and preterm birth, improve national data collection and support families impacted by perinatal loss. There are many actions within that funding envelope, from a national audit of early pregnancy assessment service clinics across Australia so that women and families can access appropriate services in their local area for treatment and follow-up care, through to a miscarriage data scoping study to establish existing and potential data sources and options for the national collection of miscarriage data, which we need.</para>
<para>I want to focus on a couple of our most recent announcements. We've provided $3.2 million over four years to Red Nose Australia to deliver the Healing Through Community projects, supporting families through stillbirth and miscarriage. Healing Through Community resources support stillbirth and miscarriage bereavement care services for First Nations families, refugee and migrant communities, women and families living in rural and remote areas, and women under 20 years of age. While any pregnancy can result in stillbirth or miscarriage, rates remain high for women in these communities. It was co-designed because we really need to listen to the women involved, and to the healthcare professionals, to get this right.</para>
<para>Another initiative is research into a simple blood test that could save the lives of hundreds of babies each year. It's the focus of new medical research funding, with $25 million for research into infertility, pregnancy loss and stillbirth.</para>
<para>The TIM TAMs study, led by Professor Stephen Tong from the University of Melbourne, received $2 million. His work aims to validate the first placental health test across Australia. The research team believes that a simple blood test could help health professionals better work out which pregnancies are at risk of stillbirth. These pregnancies could then be closely watched, and births scheduled to prevent stillbirth or other health problems. By better understanding the risk factors and causes, researchers believe more stillbirths could be prevented.</para>
<para>The third practical measure I want to speak of is a new law working its way through the parliament. The bill is named after baby Priya, who heartbreakingly died when she was just 42 days old. After informing her employer that her child had passed away, Priya's mum was faced with negotiating with her employer a return to work she hadn't planned for, at the same time as grieving the loss of her child. The new bill ensures that, unless employers and employees have expressly agreed otherwise, employer funded paid parental leave must not be cancelled because a child is stillborn. This brings it into line with our government paid parental leave, and I hope that will bring certainty to grieving parents.</para>
<para>I want to take just a moment to acknowledge loss experienced by some people going through the IVF journey. It's a newer experience, but I've seen sadness when another round of eggs has failed to fertilise, or when embryos haven't successfully transferred. I think, as science provides more hope for people, along the way there can be many disappointments, and we grieve all of those.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. Given the sensitivity of the information and the stories shared tonight, I do encourage anyone listening who has suffered or been affected by pregnancy loss, stillbirth, baby or child death to consider contacting Red Nose Grief and Loss Support. You can call them 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on 1300308307. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:33</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>