2026-03-11 3 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Wednesday, 11 March 2026

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS 1 STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS International Women's Day 1 Reference to Federation Chamber 4 09:22 Ms WHITE 224102 Lyons I move: That further statements on International Women's Day be permitted in the Federation Chamber. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 4 COMMITTEES Selection Committee 4 Report 4 09:23 The SPEAKER 53517 I present report No. 8 of the Selection Committee, relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and private members' business on Monday 23 March 2026. The report will be printed in the Hansard for today, and the committee's determinations will appear on tomorrow's Notice Paper. Copies of the report have been placed on the table. BILLS 4 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026, Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026 4

Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026

Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026

Returned from Senate 4 Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026 4

Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026

First Reading 4 Second Reading 4 09:24 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026 supports the effective administration of government by updating and improving key pieces of crimes-related legislation. Modernising and clarifying this legislation is critical to ensuring law enforcement and related agencies are effective and efficient in performing their important functions, while maintaining appropriate safeguards. This is critical to supporting these agencies to keep the community safe. Schedule 1: p olice p owers and w arrants Firstly, the bill will modernise law enforcement powers and procedures to allow our agencies to operate more efficiently, without reducing important safeguards on the use of these powers. The bill will amend the Crimes Act to: enable the Australian Federal Police (AFP) to exercise critical powers at the new Western Sydney International Airport, ensuring a consistent policing and security framework at major airports nationwide, and modernise the way law enforcement agencies can apply for search warrants and assistance orders, to better align with today's digital operating environment, without affecting the substantive thresholds and safeguards around these processes. The bill will also amend the Crimes Act and the Surveillance Devices Act to ensure the AFP and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) can continue to access powers that the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor considered 'effective', 'critical' and 'powerful' capabilities to identify and disrupt serious technology enabled criminal activity. Extending these powers to 4 September 2029 will allow for substantive reforms to be considered in line with the recommendations of the monitor's review as part of broader electronic surveillance reform. In line with the monitor's recommendations, the amendments will also remove the ACIC's ability to obtain data disruption warrants to better align with its functions as a criminal intelligence agency. Amendments to the Measures to Combat Serious and Organised Crime Act will ensure Australian Capital Territory police can continue to access the Commonwealth's pre-charge detention and investigation scheme. Schedule 2: Criminal Code a mendments Secondly, the bill will make critical amendments to support efficient and effective prosecutions of serious drug offences by streamlining key processes and enhancing consistency across criminal justice systems, while maintaining appropriate safeguards and ensuring procedural fairness. These amendments will: enable prosecutions of serious drug offences to be conducted more efficiently by providing evidence that is often unchallenged and uncontroversial by way of an evidentiary certificate, while retaining the ability for the defence to challenge that evidence, and modernise the way in which drug threshold quantities are measured, by replacing the current purity approach with mixture quantity requirements, reflecting that illicit drugs and precursors are rarely trafficked in their pure form. This will better align the Commonwealth's approach with the approach taken by states, territories and overseas partners. Schedule 3: Director of Public Prosecutions a mendments Thirdly, the bill enhances the efficient running of Australia's federal prosecution agency by clarifying and modernising the Director of Public Prosecutions Act,including by streamlining the process for managing an actual, perceived or potential conflict of interest identified by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The amendments will enable the Attorney-General to authorise a sufficiently senior person to exercise powers and functions ordinarily exercised by the director, where it is not appropriate for the director to do so because of the conflict of interest. Schedule 4: e xtradition a mendments Fourthly, the bill clarifies and modernises the Extradition Actto streamline processes and ensure law enforcement officers are equipped with appropriate powers to effectively perform their functions. Amendments to the Extradition Act will: clarify that, once a person waives extradition, they are to remain in custody until they are physically surrendered to the requesting country, or released under an appropriate order, and provide police officers with the power to enter premises and use reasonable force when executing an extradition arrest warrant, consistent with equivalent powers under the Crimes Act in relation to executing arrest warrants, reducing operational risks to police and the community. These amendments will improve both the efficiency and safety of extradition processes. Schedule 5: t elecommunications a mendments Finally, the bill will amend the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act to update terminology to reflect changes in Victorian legislation in relation to Integrity Oversight Victoria. Conclusion It is vital we keep our crimes legislation under constant review and update it when required to support the efficient and effective operation of the criminal justice system. The Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026 does just that. It modernises, streamlines and clarifies important provisions, ensuring law enforcement and related agencies can efficiently and effectively perform their critical functions. I commend the bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 6

Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026

Consideration in Detail 6 09:30 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin by leave—I move: (1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 23 to 32), omit paragraph 84B(2)(b), substitute: (b) if the event or circumstance had occurred, or had been occurring, at the time non-citizens of a kind to whom the determination is to apply were to make an application for a temporary visa, the visa may not have been granted; and (2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (lines 8 to 13), omit subsection 84B(13). (3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (after line 13), at the end of section 84B, add: (14) In this section: event or circumstance means a conflict, natural disaster or significant emergency which increases or is likely to increase the risk that certain classes of temporary visa holders will not depart Australia when their visas cease to be in effect. (4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (line 6), after "de facto partner", insert ", parent, sibling or step equivalent". (5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 8 (lines 18 to 21), omit subsection 84D(8). (6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (lines 21 and 22), omit "at a particular time during the visa period for the visa if, at that time", substitute "if". (7) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (after line 28), after subsection 84E(2), insert: (2A) If a temporary visa held by a non-citizen comes into effect again because of subsection (2), the visa is extended by a period equal to the period for which it ceased to be in effect under subsection (1). I rise to speak on the Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill. I acknowledge the intent behind it. We all want a migration system that's sustainable, responsive to global events and respectful of human rights. But, while the objective may be sound, the drafting of this bill has been rushed, has avoided scrutiny and carries a real risk of unintended consequences. Powers of this magnitude need careful calibration, not sweeping discretions that may undermine fairness or trust in the system. In the 24 hours since I first saw this bill, I've prepared a series of amendments to tighten safeguards and improve accountability, and I'll address each of these in turn. Firstly, as drafted, the bill allows the minister to restrict arrivals based on nothing more than a risk that a visa holder might overstay. This is an extremely low bar. Almost any unpredictable overseas development could be framed as an overstay risk, creating the potential for travel bans with little concrete evidence. My amendment removes this speculative limb and retains only the stronger, more principled threshold: would the visa have been granted had the current circumstances been known at the time? This is a more defensible standard. It ensures the power is used in genuine cases where the event is significant enough to change our temporary visa decisions. Broad overstay risk predictions are notoriously unreliable and can easily become a pretext for restricting travel from particular regions. A higher bar protects against this. Secondly, the bill removes parliamentary disallowance for arrival control determinations. This means parliament would have no capacity to overturn an instrument that effectively suspends the rights of thousands of visa holders. That represents a profound concentration of executive power. These determinations operate as legislative instruments with the full force of the law. The idea that such decisions should be entirely insulated from parliamentary scrutiny is inconsistent with the basic principles of responsible government. My amendment restores disallowance. This does not impede swift action. Determinations take effect immediately, but it ensures parliament retains the ability to review and, if necessary, overturn them after the fact. That's entirely appropriate for powers of this scale. Thirdly, the phrase 'event or circumstance' is the legal trigger for one of the most coercive powers in the migration system—the power to suspend visas on a broad class basis—yet the bill offers no definition of this phrase. As drafted, the trigger could encompass almost anything: diplomatic tensions, economic instability or foreign policy shifts. This is far too open ended. My amendment narrows the definition to the scenarios the provision is plainly designed for: conflicts, natural disasters and major global events that genuinely threaten the integrity of Australia's migration system. This introduces a necessary and proportionate boundary, ensuring the power is not invoked on an excessively broad or subjective basis. Fourthly, the bill exempts spouses, de facto partners and dependent children from arrival control determinations but stops there. This creates a troubling gap. Consider a person whose elderly parent depends on them for care, or an adult sibling who is the sole remaining family connection in a crisis situation. Under the bill as drafted, these people are not exempt, and their visas can be suspended, stranding them abroad despite being part of an applicant's immediate family structure. My amendment expands the exemption to parents, siblings and step equivalents, aligning it with family definitions used in refugee, humanitarian and protection visa pathways, where we recognise that families are not always confined to the nuclear model. Fifthly, section 84D(8) is an extraordinary provision. It states explicitly that the minister has no duty to even consider whether to issue a permitted travel certificate, even when someone has formally applied. This doesn't merely preserve discretion; it nullifies the right to apply altogether. My amendment removes this clause. It does not limit the minister's ability to refuse a certificate; it simply requires the minister to turn their mind to a request when one is formally made. This is a basic requirement of procedural fairness in the rule of law. Lastly, under the bill, when a determination is lifted a visa comes back into effect, yet it may already have expired during the suspension period. My amendment would effectively pause the visa clock for the duration of the determination. In closing, these amendments do not undermine the purpose of the bill. They strengthen it by ensuring that any extraordinary powers are exercised with fairness. I urge the government to adopt these improvements. 09:36 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I do appreciate the intent, but the government won't be supporting the amendments, and I'll touch on a few of the reasons in summary form. The change to the threshold that you outlined at the start would, in the government's view, render the provision practically unworkable. And I'd make the point that the entire visa system—every day, the judgements that the Department of Home Affairs make when issuing temporary visas or refusing them—rests on risk based judgements. You can never know things with certainty in advance. That's the operation of the entire visa system. With respect to the question of safeguards, the government's view remains that the safeguards that are provided for in the bill are appropriate. I'd restate that the bill doesn't affect or restrict the ability of a permanent visa holder of any kind to travel to Australia. It exempts very explicitly people who are already in Australia within the migration zone, their immediate family and any holder of a temporary humanitarian visa or a bridging visa associated with those temporary humanitarian visa classes. There are additional safeguards such that the exercise of the power by way of legislative instrument requires the written agreement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister and therefore the involvement and scrutiny of their officials in those ministries. It also requires, with respect to parliamentary scrutiny, that the instrument and the associated reasons be tabled in both houses of parliament, which provides, in the government's view—given that this is a rarely used power for significant events—the appropriate level of parliamentary scrutiny. It provides for a maximum of six months, following which there is the ability to remake but not to extend or vary a previously made determination, and it would need to be remade at the point in time based on new facts and circumstances. It also provides the power for the minister to exempt individuals from the arrival control determination. Finally, with respect to the definition of families, the bill's definition of immediate family members aligns with common and well-established practice in such situations. It provides for the spouse or de facto partner and their dependent children or for the parents where the children may be Australians but the children are under 18. So, they are well-established definitions. Those you mentioned—the broader definitions—are not considered immediate family under the well-established rules; they're close family or extended family members. So these are the very common practices. The final point I'd make is that extending visas in the way proposed would undermine the integrity of the visa system. 09:38 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin In relation to the safeguards the minister has put forward, I don't think the safeguards listed address any of the issues I've raised. A number of them relate to a different class of people, people who are in Australia. We're talking about people who are actually not in Australia and safeguards for that group. You mentioned that the determination should be tabled, but it's not disallowable, so there's no actual scrutiny that comes with its being tabled. Requiring that the order be remade after six months is effectively the same as extending it. And saying that exemptions may be made for individuals because there is a provision in there that says the minister doesn't have to consider any applications for those exemptions doesn't create a right or a safeguard. So I would say that none of these safeguards listed affect the class of people we're concerned about in this case. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Curtin be agreed to.  

The House divided. [09:44]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 9 AYES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. (Teller) Le, D. T. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. (Teller) Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 103 NOES Abdo, B. J. Aldred, M. R. Ambihaipahar, A. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Briskey, J. L. Buchholz, S. Burnell, M. P. Byrnes, A. J. Caldwell, C. M. Campbell, J. P. Chaffey, J. L. Charlton, A. H. G. Chester, D. J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Conaghan, P. J. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. France, A. A. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Hill, J. C. Hogan, K. J. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Katter, R. C. Kennedy, S. P. Khalil, P. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Penfold, A. L. Phillips, F. E. Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sharkie, R. C. C. Sitou, S. Small, B. J. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Tehan, D. T. Templeman, S. R. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. Webster, A. E. White, R. P. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, J. H. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Witty, S. J. Wood, J. P. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

09:56 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong by leave—I move amendments (1) to (3) as circulated in my name: (1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (line 23), omit "one or". (2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (line 25), omit "may", substitute "would". (3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (line 31), omit "may", substitute "would". The crossbench received this bill, the Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, five minutes before the government briefed us yesterday morning—five minutes! The government introduced this legislation to the House one hour later. Members of the crossbench sought the call during the second reading to raise our significant concerns about it, but the government denied us the opportunity to speak. This bill was drafted for introduction only 10 days after the war began in Iran. The explanatory memorandum claims that this bill is designed to maintain the integrity of our migration system. Integrity requires proper consultation, transparency and debate, none of which have occurred on this bill. If the government is serious about integrity, it should start by upholding the integrity of this parliament and of our legislative processes. This bill seeks to introduce significant changes to Australia's migration regime. It empowers the minister to suspend classes of temporary visas held by people offshore through so-called arrival control determinations. This is a sweeping power, one which could affect thousands of people who have already followed our migration rules in good faith and who have already obtained temporary visas in good faith. The amendments I have circulated in my name seek to strengthen the test for making these arrival control determinations to ensure that the minister will satisfy a higher and more proportionate threshold before exercising this extraordinary power. My amendments will ensure that determinations meet both limbs of the test under section 84B, ensuring that there is a reasonable probability that a controlled determination is actually necessary. There are still significant issues with the drafting of this legislation. I'm concerned that the government's arrival control determinations are not disallowable instruments; they should be. They will not be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny; they should be. I'm concerned that the minister can re-issue control determinations seemingly indefinitely. That is wrong. There is no upper limit on the number of times a class of temporary visitors might have their visas suspended. That shows contempt to people who have legally obtained temporary visas to visit this country. It means that those offshore who already have a valid visa may be deprived of any possibility of ever entering this country. Just think about the individuals affected by that. And there's no sunset clause on this bill, which would be a very appropriate parliamentary safeguard for legislation which has been rushed through to this extent. We know what has prompted this legislation. Today there are more than 7,000 Iranians holding visitor visas. Many of them cannot safely return or remain home due to ongoing conflict and instability in their country—conflict and instability to which we are potentially contributing. Under this bill, their temporary visas, which they have obtained validly, often at considerable personal cost, could be suspended overnight. These are people who have already spent years waiting for the chance to visit family or to reunite with their loved ones, yet this temporary visa subclass 449 followed by a temporary humanitarian concern visa subclass 786 approach has removed the dignity and integrity from our migration regime. Instead, today, thousands of people who are overseas face the prospect that their already granted visas may be rendered unusable overnight, sometimes in circumstances where they don't feel that they can safely return home. If the government is committed to integrity in our migration regime, it should commit to special migration arrangements to those who are affected by this bill. 10:01 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I'll just address the new issues raised, because some of it goes to matters which I've addressed on the previous amendment, and we don't want to become the goldfish going round in the bowl, repeating ourselves all morning. I'll just address one procedural point. I wrote down the words; I think I got them right. The member indicated that the crossbench had been 'denied the call' yesterday. I'll just make the point that I don't think that's fair or accurate. There was none of the crossbench in the chamber when the bill was debated. No-one was denied the call; it moved on. Honourable members interjecting— Mr HILL 86256 Well, I make the point: we could've moved the third reading yesterday, and the bill would've been in the Senate by now. We're here debating it in good faith, but I just need to correct the record: no-one was denied the call. You were not in the chamber. I do appreciate the genuine concern and intent, and I'll just address the new issue raised. The first amendment would require the minister to be reasonably satisfied of both criteria in b(i) and b(ii). By itself, that would require the minister to be reasonably satisfied both that a noncitizen of the kind specified and an instrument may overstay and, if the event had been occurring when the visa application was made, the visa may not have been granted. But, when coupled with the next two amendments, it would render the provision practically and likely unworkable. Changing 'may' to 'would' in (i) and (ii) would lift the threshold for the test to a definitive view—that is, the noncitizen would overstay and the visa would not have been granted. At the very best you could say that would require a high degree of fact finding and evidence re individuals to be put to the minister. But, in practical terms, as I made the point in the previous amendment commentary, that's a threshold which is rarely if ever passed in any visa grant. Every visa that the Department of Home Affairs grants—literally millions and millions a year for people to come and go in a globalised economy and society—relies on a risk based judgement about the likelihood of someone overstaying. I'll finish on this point. Despite some of the hyperbole in the media commentary by others outside this chamber, this bill is a sensible step. It's necessary to maintain the integrity of the visa system. It's not a radical proposition. It's core to the entire operation of the migration system that, when someone is granted a temporary visa to Australia and they come to Australia on a temporary visa, the Australian community is confident that they intend a temporary visit. A temporary visa means a temporary visit. In circumstances where it becomes manifestly obvious that large numbers of people would not or may not intend a temporary visit, then the government needs the ability to respond, and currently the minister has the power to respond visa by visa, individually reviewing or cancelling individual visas. The government maintains that this is a sensible, necessary measure and, frankly, it avoids the cancellation en masse of large numbers of visas by simply suspending the ability of the visa holder to enter Australia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER F2S Member for Clark. Mr Wilkie C2T I'm sure the minister wasn't deliberately misleading the House, but I just would remind the minister that I was present for the debate yesterday. 10:04 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan We have to really ask the question, as we're debating this migration amendment bill: who is really benefiting from the war in Iran? It's not you or me or working Australians. It's not the Australian military personnel who will be deployed to the UAE. And it's certainly not the people of Iran. It's indefensible that Australia will help extend this war by sending military personnel and weapons of war to the Middle East, while simultaneously closing the door to anyone left stranded as a result. While the young women from the Iranian soccer team are safe and will be able to stay in Australia, any other Iranian who currently holds a visa to enter Australia will now be denied access. That is the effect of this bill that is being rammed through this House with barely hours' notice, with the two major parties teaming up for cruelty. These are folks who've already been vetted, and approved to travel to Australia for a range of reasons: for work, for weddings, for funerals. Many of these people are on their way right now, only to be turned back at the airport when they land. My heart goes out to the Australian military personnel who'll be deployed in the UAE. My heart goes out to every person left stranded, and abandoned, by the Australian government. And my heart goes out to the people of Iran, who are paying the cost of this war. If you thought this war was about protecting the people of Iran, here is the clearest example that that is a lie. Labor is actively working against the safety of people from Iran. The cost of this war is not borne by the people who started it. It's not borne by politicians. It's not borne by corporations, billionaires and weapons manufacturers, who will actually profit from it. It's borne by everyday working people. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Kooyong be agreed to.  

The House divided. [10:10]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

7 AYES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. (Teller) 84 NOES Abdo, B. J. Aldred, M. R. Aly, A. Ambihaipahar, A. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Buchholz, S. Burnell, M. P. Byrnes, A. J. Caldwell, C. M. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. France, A. A. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Gregg, M. J. Hamilton, G. R. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Kearney, G. M. Kennedy, S. P. Khalil, P. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBride, E. M. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Moncrieff, D. S. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Brien, E. L. Pasin, A. Phillips, F. E. Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Small, B. J. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. Wilson, R. J. Witty, S. J. Wood, J. P. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 10:15 Ms BOELE 26417 Bradfield I move the amendment as circulated in my name: (1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (after line 35), after section 84E, insert: 84EA Issue of additional humanitarian visas (1) Each year, the Minister must issue an additional number of humanitarian visas that is equal to the number of visas affected by an arrival control determination in the previous year. (2) In this section, humanitarian visa means: (a) a global special humanitarian visa (subclass 202); or (b) a refugee visa (subclass 200, 201, 203 or 204). Here we are again, debating an urgent bill that this government wants to introduce and pass through this place the day after introducing it. This government's track record on ramming migration amendments through parliament with no proper debate and no parliamentary scrutiny is very disappointing. It's true that sometimes there are circumstances which require urgent action. This is not one of them. Passing legislation in haste with no consultation, a curtailment of debate and a complete lack of committee scrutiny makes a mockery of our parliamentary, and therefore our democratic, processes. My amendment to this bill does something very simple. It responds to the basic intent of the bill, which is to suspend temporary visas already issued to people from certain identified inconvenient locations. My amendment requires that, once the immigration minister takes that step, the same number of additional humanitarian visas be issued the following year as the number cancelled the previous year—that is, humanitarian visas additional to the usual number issued annually in a number corresponding to the number suspended under this bill. For this purpose, in my amendment, 'humanitarian visa' means a global special humanitarian visa, subclass 202, or a refugee visa, subclass 200, 201, 203 or 204. Since 1947, in the aftermath of World War II, Australia has a mostly proud history of accepting refugees in times of crisis. It would behove this government to reflect on the achievement of the Chifley Labor government after World War I when, over two years, we welcomed 82,532 refugees—and that at a time when our population was a mere 7.5 million people. Compare that to the average intake in the decade prior to 2022 of 18,000 a year. Numbers of humanitarian arrivals also increased substantially after the Hungarian Revolution in 1956 and the Warsaw Pact countries' invasion of then-Czechoslovakia in 1968. In the two decades following the Vietnam War, Australia resettled more than 100,000 Vietnamese refugees from various Asian countries—for the Hansard, I'm giving a nod right now to the member for Fowler in recognition of that. Following the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, Prime Minister Bob Hawke effectively gave 25,000 people—students who were already here, along with their spouses and dependents—permanent residency in Australia. That was on top of any humanitarian intake. But these are just numbers. There is absolutely no doubt that the one million refugees that we have welcomed to this country since the end of World War II have made an enormous positive contribution. If you think hard enough about it, it's probably true to say that almost every Australian would know, has gone to school with, has worked with or is neighbours with a refugee. We know from experience that they are hardworking, kind, loyal, decent, wonderful contributors to this country. We are all better for knowing them, and Australia is a better place for having welcomed them. But this government this week—the same week that it has announced that Australia will join the war by sending an E-7A Wedgetail aircraft, medium-range air-to-air missiles and 85 precious souls to the UAE—has introduced to this place not legislation to help people impacted by the illegal war in the Middle East but legislation to block people coming here who have already been granted a temporary visa to this country. The changes that the government is making today are allegedly intended not to manage national security but to safeguard the humanitarian program. But there's another way of sorting that out, and it doesn't have to be a demand response; it can be a supply one. Make no change to those who currently have temporary visas to enter Australian territories, and then, still within the law, allow these people to apply for protections as they would if they found themselves unable to return to their place of origin. In this time, more than likely, that will be Iran or other targeted places. If we are going to stop people already approved to come to Australia from making that trip, we should make a corresponding increase to the number of humanitarian visas we offer and approve. There is a geopolitical and humanitarian crisis facing the world, and Australia must respond commensurate with the challenge that that is. I know many in my electorate of Bradfield would feel pride in our nation for standing unwaveringly alongside the people of Iran, who are vulnerable to an oppressive regime. Australia needs to play its fair share in this. 10:20 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce The amendment is well intentioned but frankly unworkable. It provides an open ended, unquantified suggestion that executive government would be compelled to issue a number of humanitarian visas linked to a random number of people from a given country who'd received temporary visas. The number of humanitarian entrants remains a matter for executive government. It's set thoughtfully and carefully through the budget process published in the budget papers. The government increased for four years the number of places to 20,000 per annum, up from 2022-23. In particular, as the member well knows, that was to accommodate people who'd worked for the Australian government for DFAT or served with Defence in Afghanistan, and we're more than honouring that commitment. We've committed to a minimum 26,500 places over four years. We've already exceeded 30,000 places. My electorate is home to the largest community of Australians born in Afghanistan of any in this parliament. It's budgeted in advance and, importantly, it's linked to planning and service provision, to ensure that vulnerable people settle into Australia well. I'll choose my words carefully in observing that humanitarian migrants, at the kind of scale you're talking about, don't settle in your electorate. They settle in communities like mine. And it means an enormous amount to the people I and many of my colleagues represent that the humanitarian program is done in an orderly way, where the settlement infrastructure, schools, language schools and trauma support services can keep pace. With respect, the proposition that you're putting forward completely destroys the ability of the settlement services sector to do that. It's well meaning. It might get you in the newspaper. But, in effect, it could be a giant spending measure. It's unreasonable, which restricts the ability of the minister to exercise these powers without a new appropriation of potentially billions and billions of dollars. The core point remains. The government's view is that this is necessary to protect the integrity of the visa system. I restate in closing: it's not a controversial proposition that, when someone receives a temporary visa to come to Australia, the Australian people remain confident that they are coming for a temporary purpose, not for another purpose. Question negatived. 10:23 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I ask leave of the House to move amendment 1 and amendments 3 to 10 as circulated in my name together: (1) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (after line 22), after paragraph 84B(2)(a), insert: (aa) the event or circumstance is an armed conflict; and (ab) Australia has not caused or contributed to, and is not causing or contributing to, the event or circumstance; and (2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (lines 26 and 27), omit subsection 84B(8). (3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 5 (line 32) to page 6 (line 2), omit subsection 84B(10), substitute: (10) The Minister may exercise the power in subsection (1) only once in relation to: (a) a particular event or circumstances; or (b) a particular class of non-citizens. (4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 6 (lines 8 to 13), omit subsection 84B(13). (5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (after line 20), after subsection 84C(4), insert: (4A) An arrival control determination does not apply in relation to a non-citizen at a particular time if, at that time, the non-citizen is currently in transit travelling to Australia under a temporary or visitor visa. (6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (line 21), omit "(3) and (4)", substitute "(3), (4) and (4A)". (7) Schedule 1, item 6, page 7 (line 25), after "may", insert ", by legislative instrument,". (8) Schedule 1, item 6, page 8 (line 9), omit "in writing", substitute "by legislative instrument" (9) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (after line 28), after subsection 84E(2), insert: (2A) If a temporary visa held by a non-citizen comes into effect again because of subsection (2): (a) the visa is extended by a period equal to the period for which it was not in effect because of the relevant arrival control determination; and (b) the Minister must seek advice as to what compensation should be paid to the non-citizen. (10) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (before line 29), before subsection 84E(3), insert: (2B) If an arrival control determination applies to a non-citizen, the Commonwealth must compensate the non-citizen in full for any travel, visa processing and other reasonable related costs incurred by the non-citizen because of the determination. Let's be really clear. This legislation is hypocritical and deeply concerning. This is Trump politics. Of course, what we're clearly seeing from this government is that, if you're a high-profile person and a minister from the government can get a photo opportunity, then we will show some leniency, thoughtfulness and compassion. To everybody else, we're shutting the gate and acting in a way that is, I can only say, despicable. This legislation is so hypocritical, it gives sweeping new powers to suspend the use of valid temporary visas for entire groups of people based on changing global circumstances. I want to be really clear. The legislation does not define 'event'. This can be, in this instance, a military conflict. In future it could be a natural disaster. It could be a famine. It could be a political policy or a government inclination that the government of the day does not like. This event is not defined. So one of my first amendments is to define this event to be limited to military conflict because, we know, this can be used in so many ways. We have to be really clear, when the assistant minister talks about how Australia wants to reserve the right of who comes and who stays, about how we don't want people overstaying, that people have already jumped through hoops to get these temporary and visitor visas. These are students or people who are coming for specific events to visit relatives—not direct relatives but relatives. It might be for funerals or weddings. These are significant events that people have absolutely jumped through procedural hoops to attend. Let's be really clear, to get a visitor visa from Iran is not easy. The government makes it hard already, and this bill suggests that now all that effort could simply be for nothing, at the stroke of a pen from the minister. This amendment would allow the government to designate whole cohorts of visa holders from particular countries and prevent them from using lawfully granted visas. Let's be really clear to call this what this is. It is racist policy. Any future government will have access to this legislation. This is not temporary legislation put in place with the current conflict. These measures will be ongoing and can be used in so many ways. While clearly targeted at Iranians today, in the future it can be unfairly applied to any nationality such as Lebanese or Palestinian temporary visa holders caught up in the current Middle East conflict. There's nothing restricting these unprecedented powers just to this conflict, so I'm shocked at the hypocrisy that is being shown by the government and so many of its members. It shows how much our system is simply broken. Why are we not hearing from Labor backbenchers speaking up about this legislation? How are you representing your multicultural communities? How are you giving them a vote, a voice? You are incapable of properly representing your communities. These amendments make sure that we restrict what kind of event can be contemplated for this. Of course, they also ensure that this is not indefinite. In the legislation there are no guardrails. The hypocrisy of the briefing I received with my colleagues in relation to there being guardrails was staggering. There are no limitations on how many periods of six months can be instigated, which says it is an indefinite power to block people from coming on valid visas, with no thought of compensation or anything. The rushed nature of the process speaks for itself. Surely you wouldn't want too much scrutiny when you're putting in place policies like this that are just copying Trump. This legislation was debated with less than one hour's notice and with no indication that there would be a rush through of the second debate. This legislation is just simply wrong. Your communities know this and so many members of this House know that this legislation is wrong. We know that ministers being granted indefinite discretionary power is dangerous, so the amendments that I'm moving are to make sure that they are done by disallowable instruments to ensure that we have clear parliamentary scrutiny over these decisions. We need to have a review mechanism for affected individuals. There is no sunset clause to this legislation for how long this extraordinary power could remain in place. It is such a dangerous precedent, and it is shameful that members in this place are not speaking up against this legislation. The fact that you can pause these visas indefinitely, even though someone might be in transit, without any thought of compensation— The DEPUTY SPEAKER F2S Minister, I'll call you in a minute. I'll just get the member for Warringah to clarify, because there's some contradiction between the amendments that you moved and what we have. Can you clarify the amendment that you had put forward. Ms STEGGALL 175696 I moved amendments (1) to (9) under the amended list circulated. 10:29 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce Just to clarify the paperwork: I've got circulated (1) to (10). You moved (1) to (9). So, you're moving the compensation scheme separately. Is that correct? Yes? Fine. I'll be very brief. I've responded, I think, to all the arguments you put with previous amendments. I'll make two points. Just to confirm, at the end of the crossbench briefing, we were very clear that we were moving the bill in all stages through the House yesterday. That actually hasn't happened, because here we are this morning, with the opportunity to put amendments, to debate amendments and to comment on the bill. I maintain the point. Having said that we were moving it through the House, people were not in the chamber yesterday, with the exception of the member for Clark, who did not seek the call. But here we are, talking about the bill. I'll respond to one point very briefly. You made a number of colourful remarks about government members and multicultural communities. I represent the most multicultural part of Australia, actually, the City of Greater Dandenong. I'll be very, very clear: I am absolutely confident that people in my community and people in the Attorney-General's community and people in the member for Holt's community and the member for Parramatta's community will, when we sit down and explain the practical consequences of this bill, overwhelmingly support it. The proposition that's being put, behind the nice, well-meaning sentiment and words from the crossbench amendments, is that a random group of people from a given country who happen to have a temporary visa to Australia at this point in time—granted, before major events changed or conflicts broke out—and who might be coming for business, tourism or a whole range of other temporary reasons and may have no familial connection to Australia whatsoever somehow get privileged in the humanitarian program and given the precious right to seek asylum onshore in Australia over people in my community and government members' communities who've been waiting one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or 10 years trying to save their families. So I'm just not going to take the moral superiority, frankly, from people who overwhelmingly represent electorates with good Australians in them but are overwhelmingly not electorates where humanitarian migrants settle, whose community services don't get overwhelmed if we accept the kinds of propositions you're putting forward. I'm absolutely confident—and I'm just responding to the point you made in the debate—that the people I represent and that government members represent would support this legislation when they understand the practical consequences for their families and an orderly humanitarian migration program where our country is generous and we reserve the right to offer protection to the most vulnerable people out of an overwhelming case load with the strongest connection to Australia. 10:32 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah In relation to the comments by the member for Bruce, I'd ask: has the minister or members of the government indicated to their communities that, after going to great lengths and cost to have, for example, relatives come on visitor visas or seeking to come on tourist visas or student visas, at the stroke of a pen, from actions occurring outside of Australia—not always linked to military conflict; there is no limitation in the legislation limiting it to military conflict—all those efforts to obtain visas will be for nothing? Are your multicultural communities aware that the government of the day can determine that a group of people is not welcome here, to take effect for their visitor visas, their tourist visas, their student visas or their attendance here for work or funerals or other events? I think we have to be really clear about what the effect of this legislation is. This is not temporary legislation. This has no guardrails and no sunset clause. This is an indefinite opportunity for the government of the day to nominate an event occurring and then determine that anyone with a valid temporary visa for tourism, for study or for business will not be able to exercise the right that they have paid for with that visa and come to their communities. So many people in multicultural communities know how important and hard it is for these temporary visitor visas to be obtained. To impugn on them an assumption that they will automatically overstay or no longer return, when they have already jumped through hoops to show their intention to return, that this is temporary—the government is absolutely conflating the issue of humanitarian visas, conflating that with temporary visas and this absolutely Trumpian amendment that has had no consultation. And, with respect, if you really want to stand by this legislation, let it be tested in your communities with the full explanation and not just the gaslighting that we're seeing in this place. 10:35 Ms LE 295676 Fowler I stand in support of the member for Warringah's amendments. But also I say this to the assistant minister, as, I think, at the moment, the only refugee—somebody who's escaped a war-torn country—here— Ms Fernando 299964 My family escaped civil war. Ms LE 295676 You have too; I do know that you have as well; thank you—and lived in refugee camps. And I represent a very diverse and multicultural community in Fowler. Our community has a lot of temporary-visa visitors—people who come to speak and to engage with our communities; students; relatives—coming. Instead of giving this bill the scrutiny it deserves, the government has really used its numbers to shut down any discussion and has silenced us here. I'm sure lawyers in the House would question it, as to the natural justice and the rule of law that are, basically, missing in this piece of legislation. When legislation has consequences as far-reaching as this—legalising mass suspension of travel rights—Australians expect their representatives to debate, question and examine every detail, not to be forced into silence. We all want a secure border and a migration system with integrity. But this bill isn't just about security; it's about an unprecedented grab for executive power. At its core, this bill grants the Minister for Home Affairs extraordinary ministerial powers to suspend the travel rights of entire classes of people. It is not based on what an individual has done; it is not based on the risk a specific person poses; it is simply because they belong to a category the minister chooses to switch off, as the member of Warringah says, with the stroke of a pen. This moves us away from a robust visa system with integrity and towards at-scale exclusion. The architecture of this bill is designed to be opaque and unaccountable. There's no parliamentary veto. These determinations are not subject to disallowance. Once the minister signs, this House and the Senate are effectively locked out. There's no natural justice. This bill explicitly states that the rules of natural justice do not apply to the making of these determinations. Those affected have no right to be heard before their lives are up-ended—no recourse. While the bill mentions a permitted travel certificate, the minister has no duty to even consider an application for one. It is entirely discretionary and non-appellable. There's no access to courts. By designating these as privative clause decisions, the government is pushing legal challenges solely to the High Court, making justice too expensive for almost anyone to reach. Consider the unintended consequences of this rushed job. Imagine a skilled worker or a student—and, as I mentioned before, I have a lot of those, on visitor visas, coming to Fowler. They board a flight to Australia with a valid visa, but, while they're in mid-flight, the minister signs a determination. When they land, they're no longer a welcome guest; they're an unlawful non-citizen. The bill itself admits these people could be hauled off to mandatory immigration detention—not for any crime, but because the rules changed while they were in mid-air! And what signal does this send to the rest of the world? This legislation signals a shift towards a closed-door policy that undermines our reputation as a reliable partner. It tells the world that visa security is illusory and that a validly-granted visa can be suspended at any moment, based on political discretion. It suggests that executive whim now overrules the rule of law. I understand the intent of this legislation, but consider all of the visitors from Iran and Iraq. There are many coming to my community. This will have unintended consequences for those visitors. Like your electorate, Minister, mine is very multicultural. And my migrant and refugee communities would question: How could their relatives not join them? How could their relative's visa have been cancelled? As the member for Warringah just mentioned, the process to apply for a temporary visa is so complex. It's not easy. It's not easy at all. So any legislation meant to protect our nation must be done in a transparent, accountable and fair way. Integrity does not come from concentrating power in the hands of the executive. It comes from the light of parliamentary scrutiny—something that the Albanese government has desperately tried to avoid today. We should be extremely cautious about handing any minister powers that are this broad, this discriminatory and this difficult to reverse. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The question is that the amendments moved by the member for Warringah be agreed to.  

The House divided. [10:44]
(The Deputy Speaker—Dr Freelander)

 8 AYES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. Le, D. T. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Steggall, Z. (Teller) Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 85 NOES Abdo, B. J. Aldred, M. R. Ambihaipahar, A. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Buchholz, S. Burnell, M. P. Caldwell, C. M. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hamilton, G. R. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBride, E. M. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Brien, E. L. Pasin, A. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Small, B. J. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Tehan, D. T. Templeman, S. R. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Wilson, R. J. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

10:50 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I have a statement to make from the chair. The statement is about Ms Steggall's proposed amendment to Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026. Amendment (10) circulated in the name of the member for Warringah, which appears to make the Commonwealth liable for compensation, would require the appropriation of revenue, thereby being contrary to the constitutional and parliamentary principle of the financial initiative of the Crown and contravening standing order 180. The amendment is therefore out of order and cannot be moved by the member. 10:52 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah In this alternative circumstance, I have a question for the Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs and member for Bruce and for the government in relation to the situation caused by these amendments to our immigration law and temporary visas. A significant number of people will be caught in transit or having already made significant arrangements in reliance upon a validly obtained visitor visa, student visa or skilled work visa. In fact, to obtain these visas, a number of Australian businesses incur considerable cost to be able to sponsor skilled visas to come and assist them with their productivity and engagement. A number of those businesses—and I meet with them regularly—go to significant expense. With the stroke of a pen, the minister and the government will now be able to say that all that expense is for nothing. I ask the government: What consideration, undertaking or assurance is the government prepared to provide businesses, individuals and families within multicultural Australia that have gone to great expense to obtain validly visitor visas, student visas or skilled visas that are now, by the stroke of a pen, going to be invalid for periods of six months essentially indefinitely? What assurance does the government make to Australian businesses to recoup that lost expense? For all of those finding themselves in transit, what assistance and compensation will the government make to those people? 10:53 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I'll be very brief. The government's view remains that the amendments in the bill demonstrate the government's commitment to protecting the integrity and sustainability of the migration system. The arrival control determination legislation is an important addition to the government's ability to regulate travel to Australia. I make the point again—and we've covered this repeatedly, so we are going to need to finish this debate and move on—that, currently, this can be achieved only through individually assessing each visa to determine whether there are grounds to cancel the visa. This is a task that the department does in all manner of visa categories and for individual visas every day, but it does take time and it's not appropriate for circumstances where there's an urgent response, at scale, that is required. In the circumstances where individual visas are cancelled, which is a far more draconian measure—the alternative to the measure in this bill to suspend the travel ability to Australia—then there is no compensation scheme that applies. I don't know what else we can say except I'll finish on this point: the minister retains the power and the ability to exempt certain individuals in appropriate circumstances and still allow them, by issuing a certificate to come to Australia. That's a power that does not rest with the minister personally. It doesn't have to be exercised with the minister. It's not one or two a week in between other things. It's a power that can be given and will be given to the department, administered in the normal way for those kinds of circumstances which a number of members have outlined in the debate. We do need to move on, so I'll leave it there. 10:55 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax The conflict in Iran has inspired the government to bring forward this legislation. When it comes to that conflict, what we have seen in Australia is a very high degree of bipartisanship. In backing the actions of the United States and Israel we have seen bipartisan support. In the deployment of ADF assets and resources, we have seen bipartisan support. When it comes to the issuing of humanitarian visas for members of the Iranian women's football team, we have seen bipartisan support. In the amendments to the migration laws of this country, being put forward today by virtue of this legislation, again, we see bipartisan support. With that said, the legislation before the House, while inspired by the conflict in Iran, is not contained and relevant only to the conflict in Iran. Thus, let me make a few broad comments about immigration policy and then ask the minister at the table some questions. Firstly, when it comes to Australia's immigration system, you see an enormous difference between the coalition's and Labor's approach. Under this government we have seen, unfortunately, the numbers of people coming to Australia being too high, the standards too low and a failure to shut the door to people who do not share Australian values. It's also conspicuous that legislation of this sort was not brought forward at an earlier date in response to another conflict, again in the Middle East—that is, of Gaza following the Hamas-led attacks on 7 October 2023. This leads me to these questions. One, at Senate estimates last month, officials confirmed that 6,957 visa grants were made to Palestinian nationals between November 2023 and November 2025. Given that volume of visa grants during a period of international conflict, can the government explain why it did not seek legislative powers of the kind contained in this bill earlier? Two, given the government now believes it requires a mechanism to suspend the effect of offshore visas during international crises, why was such a mechanism not pursued when thousands of visas were being granted during the Gaza conflict? Three, officials also confirmed that more than 2,300 Palestinian visa holders were present in Australia at various points in 2025, including 2,306 at the end of November. Did the government conduct any risk assessment regarding visa compliance outcomes for that cohort? Four, did the department advise the government at any stage that additional powers, such as those now proposed in this bill, might be required to manage the migration risks arising from that conflict? Five, evidence from estimates also confirmed that 26 visas granted to Palestinian nationals were cancelled during the same period, with 18 cancellations involving an element of national security concern, although some were later revoked. Can the government explain how those cases were identified and managed? Six, given it is likely that these laws, if introduced earlier, may have prevented thousands of Gazans entering Australia over the last 2½ years, what action is the government taking where these Gazans have either sought to overstay their visas or attempted to change their visa arrangements? Seven, can the government confirm whether the visa integrity risks it now seeks to mitigate by way of this bill were risks to which Australia has been exposed since the September 7 October 2023, with the arrival of thousands of Gazans? Eight, how would the powers contained in this bill have provided additional safeguards in managing risks that the large influx of people from Gaza over recent years may have given rise to? Again, the coalition is supporting the government in the passage of this legislation through the House. However, this legislation does give rise to at least those eight questions, on which I look forward to hearing the minister's response. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I thank the shadow minister for immigration. I call the minister. 11:00 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce Are you the shadow minister for immigration? Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 Foreign minister. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Foreign minister. Sorry, my mistake. Mr HILL 86256 Okay. It's hard to tell. You move around a lot. But the Nats will be changing soon. That's alright. I'll sum up. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I did not intend to lead that response. Mr HILL 86256 No, I was genuinely confused. Mr HILL 86256 No, that was a genuine confusion. Mr HILL 86256 It's a nice try. It's not question time and, as you well know— Mr HILL 86256 As you well know—this is not question time—there are other forms of the House, including questions on notice. I'm sure the Senate would be flattered at the attention you just paid to Senate estimates, but I thank the opposition for your support of the bill. 11:01 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax I wish to note for the House that the coalition, despite supporting the government in the passage of this bill through the House, has put forward eight questions to the minister, and the minister has chosen to not answer any of those questions. I think that is notable. I ask the minister if he will be prepared to commit to respond to me in writing at a later date in response to those eight questions. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Would the minister like to respond to that? He would not. 11:02 Ms LE 295676 Fowler I speak on this issue not as a member of parliament but as someone whose life story was shaped by war. As people know, my family fled Vietnam after the fall of Saigon. We were civilians caught in a conflict we did not start and could not control. Australia could have chosen to close its door, but under the former prime minister Malcolm Fraser, this country made a decision that changed the lives of thousands of families like mine. Australia chose compassion. Because of that decision, a refugee child who arrived here with nothing now stands in this parliament representing her community. That history matters. It reminds us that migration policy is not about systems and powers; it's about human lives. So, when we talk about our migration policy, know that behind the numbers and the policies we talk about are the individuals and the civilians who actually are the most impacted by the wars that are happening across the world. I could quote the amazing poet, Paul Valery, who talks about war as 'a massacre of people who don't know each other for the profit of people who know each other but don't massacre each other'. As people who make decisions and policies that impact the lives of civilians out there, we need to be careful when it comes to war. If we are going to participate in any wars, we have to be ready to take up the responsibility and deal with the consequences. And one of the consequences of that is people movement. There will be refugees. There will be people seeking safe haven, because these people, like my family, have no control over the war. We had no control over the decisions made by the government of the day to get into war, so we had to flee. When we fled, we needed a place of safe haven. Australia provided us with safe haven. We cannot now, sitting in here and seeing the wars happening, not step up and say: 'We participated in that war in some capacity. We must provide a safe haven for those people'—because, by God, there will be refugees seeking asylum to this safe haven—'because we are part of that war.' The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the bill be agreed to.  

The House divided. [11:09]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

95 AYES Abdo, B. J. Aldred, M. R. Ambihaipahar, A. Bell, A. M. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Buchholz, S. Burnell, M. P. Byrnes, A. J. Caldwell, C. M. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chester, D. J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hamilton, G. R. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Joyce, B. T. G. Kennedy, S. P. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leeser, J. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBride, E. M. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Brien, E. L. Pasin, A. Phillips, F. E. Pike, H. J. Price, M. L. Rebello, L. S. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sharkie, R. C. C. Sitou, S. Small, B. J. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Tehan, D. T. Templeman, S. R. Thompson, P. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Watts, T. G. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 8 NOES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. Le, D. T. (Teller) Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Steggall, Z. (Teller) Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Bill agreed to.

Third Reading 19 11:14 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026 20

Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026

Report from Federation Chamber 20 Third Reading 20 11:15 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. COMMITTEES 20 COMMITTEES National Disability Insurance Scheme Joint Committee 20 Report 20 11:16 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, I present the committee's report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled Annual report No. 1 of the 48th Parliament. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with order 39(e). Ms COKER 263547 by leave—Deputy Speaker, the NDIS changes lives, it is a transformative reform—but we know it can always be better. That is the message at the heart of this report. It reflects the experiences of people with disability and their families from right across the country. Their insights, their challenges, and their aspirations have guided the committee's work and shaped the recommendations we put forward today. This report also demonstrates something important: a committee united in its commitment to deliver strong oversight of the scheme, and to workconstructively towards outcomes that improve the lives of people with disability. I'd like to thank all members of the committee who contributed to this Annual Report. In particular, I thank the deputy chair, Senator Kovacic, for her support and collaboration. And of course, I want to acknowledge our secretariat—Dr Jane Thompson, Sarah Redden and Emma Wannell. The committee greatly appreciates the work you do. Deputy Speaker, over the past year the committee has continued to engage closely with the disability community. We held two public hearings, in Canberra and Sydney, and received 23 public submissions. This builds on the significant evidence gathered through the committee's previous Inquiry into Rural, Regional and Remote community access to the NDIS. On behalf of the committee, I thank everyone who appeared before us and who took the time to make submissions. Your lived experience of the Scheme is invaluable, and it has directly informed the recommendations in this report. The evidence we received makes one thing clear -the NDIS remains a world-leading initiative. It is built on the principles of choice and control for participants, genuine co-design, and long-term sustainability. This first Annual Report of this Parliament outlines a number of recent legislative and policy developments within the Scheme. It also summarises the evidence the committee has received so far in the 48th Parliament through hearings and submissions. Across this evidence, a consistent theme emerged from Participants, carers, and representative organisations. The need for clear and constant communication and support for all those navigating the scheme. For that reason, the committee emphasises the importance of maintaining public confidence in the scheme and ensuring that reforms continue to reflect the NDIS's founding principles. Deputy Speaker—in staying true to those principles, this report makes eight recommendations. That is in addition to the more than 400 recommendations the committee has made since it first commenced its work. So, to strengthen accountability and transparency, the committee recommends the National Disability Insurance Agency and the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission provide annual updates on the progress made in responding to the committee's recommendations since the 45th Parliament. The committee also recommends extensive consultation and testing of the I-CAN assessment tool across a broad range of people with disability. It is important that participants and those who support them understand how this tool works and how it will inform the participant's budget. Clear public information should be provided by the NDIA, and participants should have the opportunity to review a draft plan before it is finalised. The committee also notes that the NDIA has previously commenced work on a gender strategy. We encourage the agency to continue this important work, to make information about the strategy publicly available, and to include a clear data strategy within it. Finally, the committee makes recommendations aimed at strengthening safety within the scheme, including improving safe and confidential processes for victims-survivors of domestic and family violence who interact with the NDIS. The NDIS represents a profound commitment by our nation and this government to support people with disability to live with dignity, independence and opportunity. The committee's work—and the recommendations in this report—are intended to ensure the scheme continues to deliver on that promise. I commend the report to the House. BILLS 21 BILLS Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 21

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025

Second Reading 21 11:21 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan I rise to speak to the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. For too long, Australians, including in my electorate, have put up with dreadful and patchy phone service due to privatisation, cost cutting and government neglect. Both Labor and Liberal governments have not addressed the inevitable failures resulting from Telstra's privatisation, and my constituents are paying the price. This bill updates the relevant legislation to better reflect modern technology but doesn't address the real issue at its heart: privatisation of what should be public services does not work. The Greens will support this bill in the House and reserve our position in the Senate. In 2026, access to phone and internet reception is an essential service. A phone call in an emergency can be the difference between life and death. In the case of a fall or a heart attack, or during one of the extreme weather events we've experienced so often in my electorate lately, people need to be able to reach out for help, but in my electorate—the vast majority of which is less than 20 kilometres from the Brisbane CBD—people are left without basic phone and internet access. In a wealthy country like Australia, this is absolutely unacceptable. It's particularly bad in areas in my electorate like Brookfield, Upper Brookfield and Kenmore Hills, where recent power outages due to summer storms exacerbated the issue. With roads cut off, some parts of those communities have had absolutely no way whatsoever to communicate with the outside world—in 2026. One of my constituents, from Kenmore Hills, wrote to me about the shockingly bad phone and internet reception he experiences at home. He tells me his area receives negligible Telstra mobile reception, frequently not even enough to load a webpage or just place a phone call. He says this becomes critical during severe weather and power outages, including one example when they were left without electricity, internet or phone signal for three days following storms. He rightly points out the safety implications for elderly residents, for stranded motorists and for people experiencing power outages. As my constituent put it, 'We are not seeking special treatment, only a basic level of reliable service that supports emergency communication and community safety.' Another constituent, from Brookfield, told me their poor mobile service means they cannot reliably make phone calls from inside the house. They said the Telstra map shows they should receive 5G, but it simply doesn't happen. They're not even covered by the Optus map, so they're looking at spending thousands of dollars to install a repeater. That should not be necessary, especially in a suburb just 12 kays out from the CBD. Down in Moggill, again in my electorate, locals also report frequent issues. For example, even the local shopping complex doesn't have reception inside. A large commercial complex 20 kays from the CBD having no reception is just not good enough. This is not only a safety issue but also an economic policy failure. We know what it's called when one corporation has control over the entire market. It's called a monopoly. In areas where Telstra is the only provider, it is operating a monopoly over phone and internet services. This is bad news for consumers like my constituents, who suffer as a result of no competition to lower prices or to improve customer service. But this failure is not just an accident. It's not just an aberration. This is a direct result of decisions made by the federal government. The government did a deal with Telstra in 2012 whereby Telstra received a plum 20-year exclusive contract worth $297 million every year. That's nearly $300 million paid annually by the taxpayer to Telstra in exchange for providing theoretically universal coverage, though, as my constituents know all too well, the coverage Telstra provides is nowhere near universal. You might think that, given we're already paying for this coverage in our taxes, consumers could access Telstra's phone and internet services for free or at the very least have a provider be a public service owned by the Commonwealth. Certainly, you wouldn't expect that such a deal could be allowed to benefit a private corporation's profit line. But no. Telstra was privatised by the Howard government and has stayed privatised under every Labor and Liberal government since. So Telstra, a private corporation, not only receives $300 million a year from the taxpayer but also gets to charge consumers what they damn well like for what should be a government owned and run public service. For people like my constituents, for whom Telstra is the only available provider, the government has effectively chosen to set up a private, for-profit monopoly, and taxpayers are paying for the privilege. Essential services, especially utilities like service providers, who can easily form monopolies, should be in public hands. They should never have been sold off in the first place. Running these services for profit means they are not being run for public good. Private providers are not incentivised to provide universal quality service if it's not profitable. So, rather than making small tweaks around the edges, the government has an opportunity here—a good opportunity—to demonstrate some courage. I call on the government to bring phone and internet provision back into public hands and finally guarantee decent coverage for all Australians. 11:28 Mr HOLZBERGER 88411 Forde I rise to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. There has been a break in the debate from the last sitting, and I reference the contribution made by, I think, the member for Parkes, who was critical of this bill because he thought that it didn't go far enough. My question really is: what is the alternative? This is a chance either to do something or to do nothing. While it's quite an amazing statistic that something like 99 per cent of Australians are covered at the moment by mobile phone coverage, that also means that two-thirds of the Australian landmass is not covered. And so we need a practical solution that doesn't technically exist yet but we're working towards. At least this legislation does set down those guidelines clearly for industry to follow, and it does lead the way. It does focus the attention of industry to solve this problem. But, like the member for Parkes, who does represent an area where I grew up—in the town of Broken Hill—I share that frustration of being a member of an outer metropolitan seat. I know the frustration of having poor mobile phone coverage. Even though the community that I represent today and the community that I grew up in might be separated by geography, they are certainly not separated by demography. The communities that I represent are hardworking working-class Australians, committed to their families and their communities. And they have one other thing in common as well, which is poor mobile phone reception. There are many suburbs that I could mention. I was in Upper Coomera the other day, and I couldn't get connection to Maps. In the relatively new suburbs of Holmview and Waterford, there's appalling mobile phone reception; people are forced to go out onto their driveway and wave their mobile phone around in the hope that they get reception. So I understand the frustration that's felt in the bush where there is zero reception. I understand that frustration because of the area that I represent and live in today, but I also understand that frustration because it is an area that, as I say, I grew up in and worked in. The time that I spent on sheep and cattle stations between Broken Hill and Bourke really brought home to me the isolation that exists out there, and the importance of communication—or, I should say, what it means to not have that communication. There's an interesting memory that I have, from the time that I came out to work on a property in my late 20s. As it was, I probably didn't know one end of a sheep from the other; I'd never been on a motorbike before; I didn't know my north from my south. I'm sure that one of the reasons that they employed me was for the comic value! They told me that I'd need to fall off my bike at least a hundred times before I'd be a good rider; I certainly fell off a hundred times, and I wouldn't say that I was ever a great rider at the end of it. As I said, I barely knew my north from my south. In the middle of summer, by the way, north is there, somehow, if you follow the sun, but it's very difficult when you're trying to follow a mob of sheep through the thick scrub. So I had a GPS. In the early 2000s, here we were, in the bush, using GPS. This was no communication device with the sonorous sounds of Siri; this was a rubber-coated device about half the size of my hand that was cable-tied to my bike. You'd put little waypoints in there—the homestead, or some waters—and you'd navigate. It would have a little arrow on its green-and-black screen, and it would point to where the waypoint was and tell you how many kilometres you were from it. I think it's an interesting fact that we were using that out in the bush in the early 2000s, at the same time that people in the city wouldn't have known what a GPS was, but people in the city were using mobile phones, whereas out in the bush in the early 2000s nobody had a clue what a mobile phone was. It is literally a matter of life and death—communications. There are two experiences that come to mind—two stories that I knew of, which happened before my time out there but which I think illustrate the importance of having adequate communications. One was of a young guy, at the time, about my age, who'd had a motorbike accident. I can't quite remember the detail; he'd hit a kangaroo or a tree or something. Because we relied on UHF technology—and UHF is notoriously unreliable; it works over only a very limited range—he didn't have communication with his homestead. He somehow managed to get himself back home, where he was able to get treatment, but he ended up with a lifelong and debilitating brain injury. And it just makes me wonder: what would it have been like if he'd actually had a mobile phone to be able to call for emergency services at the time? There was another incident—and I'm reluctant to call them 'incidents', because fundamentally they are workplace injuries. But another, even more serious, occasion was when somebody called Skeet had had a heart attack and collapsed, and, tragically, his wife found him, sometime later. Again, it makes me wonder whether or not having mobile phone coverage for Skeet would have meant that he could have survived, so these are genuinely matters of life and death. Communications—it's trite to say—are not just a luxury; they are a necessity. My mum used to live in the Brisbane suburb of Oxley, which was badly flooded in 2010. In many ways it was a later flood in 2022 which was probably much more emotionally damaging than the one in 2010. But I only say that because the one in 2010 was the first of what has been a series of natural disasters in south-east Queensland that people have had to contend with. So that was the first natural disaster where mobile phone coverage and electricity went down for a long period for a lot of people. With not being able to contact my mum, family members not being able to contact each other, people worried about being able to ask for help, there was really a sense that the difference between civilisation and barbarism are electricity and communications. I have a friend who was a refugee from Bosnia, from the Yugoslav War, war of the 1990s. She said to me that to be disconnected through your communications was exactly what it felt like in war, so that really illustrated to me how important it is to have that coverage. They're all the sorts of problems that come about from not having those communications. Ultimately, there are so many opportunities available out in the bush with proper communications. As the statistics show, more than two-thirds of Australia is currently not covered by mobile phone at all. And while this legislation is not about getting it to the point where people in the bush have the same coverage which you might expect, even though we don't receive it in metropolitan areas, it is the beginning of a process which really does begin to unlock that economic potential of the Australian bush. Just to record on Hansard, 'Nugget' Brown, who has sadly passed away, was one of the most decent human beings I've ever met, one of the smartest people I've ever met. Just by the way, he was somebody who couldn't read or write, couldn't sign his name to a cheque, but put him in his environment and he was just an absolute legend. You could spin him around 20 times blindfolded and he'd know what direction to go in. He knew where the calf's mother was, who the calf's mother's mother was. This guy was a genius, and I do want to give him a shout-out today. Also, Simon Brown and Lionel Brown were two people I worked very closely with, who really taught me the value of having a go and hard work, but they used to have a bit of a chuckle with me at some of my some of my crazy ideas. One idea back in the 2000s was that maybe you could chuck a camera on a drone and muster sheep. Unfortunately, Nugget's not around to see that actually happening, but that is something which you can do in areas where there is appropriate technology. That technology doesn't really exist in the outback. If you were to try and use it, it would be horribly expensive. But communications really is one of those essential services that, provided properly and equitably across our vast nation, could really unlock our nation's potential and open it up. Finally, I'd just like to say that this is not about letting the telecommunications companies get off scot-free. In fact, the Minister for Communications said recently at the CommsDay Regional and Policy Forum, which I mention as an example of where the industry is letting the community down: The Triple Zero failures last year shook public confidence. Frankly, they exposed elements of a system that relied on a best efforts approach, and sadly, in some instances, those efforts were far from the best. At a deeper level, it exposed a discordance between how the industry is regulated, and perhaps how it sees itself, versus how the public expects it to operate. We have to face reality. At the end of 2025, public opinion of the communications sector was very low. And I think, at the beginning of 2026, it hasn't improved a hell of a lot. It is important that legislation like this does show the way for telecommunications to behave when it comes to providing that universal outdoor mobile obligation. It does set some expectations on what government expects of these corporations which are providing what is an essential service. It does show that this government is not just going to wait around for the perfect solution, but, as always, this government is pragmatic in its approach and is getting ahead of the curve. Ultimately, whether you've had an accident out bush, whether you've broken down, whether you need to communicate with your homestead or whether it's somebody from my electorate driving out to see a family member or a friend or going across Australia, this is the typical Australian way. This is also the typical Albanese government way. This is about making sure that nobody is left behind. Even if, fundamentally, this striking statistic we're talking about is where just one per cent of Australians live, this is about making sure that that one per cent, who deserve the same access, have access to those services that people in the city have. The frustration that my community feels and that I feel by having substandard telecommunications in the 21st century means that the industry needs to do better. The government is making sure that they are accountable. This bill goes towards that, and works in a constructive way to make sure that all Australians have access to the services that are essential in the 21st century. I commend the bill to the House. 11:42 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra For too many Australians, the promise of modern telecommunications has not been made good. They pay modern prices for outdated services. They live in metropolitan Sydney and still have to walk to the end of the driveway to make a call. On a good day it's infuriating; on a bad day it's dangerous. In a fire, flood or medical emergency it can be the difference between life and death. Anybody who has looked at my record in this place will know that better telecommunications for the people that I represent has been a constant focus of mine. I've fought for and achieved better signal outcomes including mobile towers in places like Dangar Island, Sackville North, Hornsby Heights, Arcadia, Annangrove, Glenorie, Glenhaven and Dural and elsewhere across my electorate. I campaigned hard to make sure that peri-urban communities like mine were not forgotten in the national conversation, and that campaigning helped drive the creation of the Peri-Urban Mobile Program. It was a step forward, but there's much more to do. That's why this Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 matters. The current universal service settings belong to a different era. They were built for the age of the copper line, the payphone and the assumption that the mobile phone was just a useful extra. Well, that's not the world we live in now. The mobile phone is now the ordinary phone. The Parliamentary Library notes that landline use by Australian adults fell from 54 per cent in 2017 to just 15 per cent in 2024, while mobile phone use rose from 95 to 98 per cent. Australians have already moved on, and now the law has to catch up. In practical terms, this bill would amend the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act to create a universal outdoor mobile obligation. It would initially require Telstra, Optus and TPG to ensure that voice and SMS are 'reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis.' The extra coverage is expected to come largely through low Earth orbit satellites and direct-to-device technology. This bill also gives the minister broad powers by legislative instrument to determine coverage areas, providers, standards, benchmarks and rules. It creates further powers to set standards and benchmarks for mobile services more generally before the new obligation begins, and the default commencement date is 1 December 2027. The purpose is sound, but purpose does not equate with performance. Announcements don't create signals. Parliament shouldn't just wave through a broad framework with the critical details left for later if there's no certainty as to whether those details will make families safer, ensure that businesses can trade, and determine whether emergency calls can get through. My approach is straightforward. I support the objective of better mobile services. I support dragging telcos into a position where they meet the expectations of ordinary Australian families who do the right thing and pay their bills month in and month out. That's why this bill needs to be closely scrutinised by the Senate committee, because there are serious questions about this legislation—about whether it works in practice for communities like mine. I want to encourage everyone in my community who's had a mobile phone issue to make a submission to the Senate committee, to put your issues and challenges on the record so we can ensure that this bill is fit for purpose. I want to take this opportunity to make a series of points. The first is that poor connectivity is not just a regional problem, not just a remote problem; it's also a peri-urban and outer-metropolitan problem. It's a Berowra problem. Too often policy in this area has fallen into a false binary: If you live in the cities, the assumption is that you're covered. If you live in the bush, at least the system admits you might need help. But if you live on the outer metropolitan areas, on the urban fringes—on the Hawkesbury, in some of our steep valleys and even in some of our wonderful suburbs—you need help, too. It's extraordinary that in the third decade of the 21st century these places, only a short drive from the Sydney CBD, are mobile blackspots. Too many families in my electorate have ended up with the worst of both worlds: forgotten by metropolitan assumptions and overlooked by regional programs. That's why the lived experience of my electorate needs to be heard in this debate—the experiences of people like Brendan from Cattai, who runs a small business and relies on Telstra. He reports that poor and deteriorating reception has left him unable to make outgoing calls for extended periods. It's affected his business communications and even his onsite security systems. He says he's made complaints and is still paying for a service that's often unusable. Then there is Eric from Epping. Eric says that the signal from all major carriers is so weak that his household relies on wi-fi calling over the NBN just to make or receive calls and that usable coverage returns only when he walks to nearby streets. And there is Christine, from Berowra Waters. She recently experienced a complete loss of both mobile and fixed internet services after more than a decade of regular bill paying. Shockingly, it took intervention from my office to even get proper communication from the telco about restoration. Rebekah from Glenhaven says she has no decent phone coverage at home, even when she walks onto the street. She's not living in a remote station; she's living in town, in a city suburb. But, for her, the coverage map says one thing and the reality says another. And don't get me started on Telstra and its deceptive coverage maps. Then there is Wendy, from West Pennant Hills. She reported a lengthy outage that disrupted her work as a medical specialist working from home, with consequences not only for her but for her patients as well. Rhonda from Berrilee remains on ageing infrastructure and has been told that the viable alternative is to pay for more satellite internet, despite living roughly an hour from the Sydney CBD. But it's not just individuals; it's businesses, too. In my electorate, local businesses in Brooklyn have reported serious disruption during rail shutdowns when phone and internet services fail. The consequences are immediate and they're financial: EFTPOS goes down, bookings are lost, and safety and communication systems can be compromised. These types of impacts have a direct hit on small businesses, their confidence and their viability. It's a direct hit to the bottom line. It's a direct hit to the pay that those business owners take home in order to put food on the tables of their families and to pay their mortgages. These stories matter because this bill will succeed or fail not on a press release, a coverage map or a departmental diagram but on the lived experience of households, small businesses, commuters, carers, volunteers and emergency services. The second issue is the bill's core language. What does it actually mean for coverage to be 'reasonably available outdoors'? That phrase sits at the centre of the bill. It's not defined, but it's doing an enormous amount of work. Consumer groups have warned that it might create uncertainty, inconsistent application and scope for providers to interpret their obligations too narrowly. That's not a drafting quibble. That's the difference between being able to make a call or not. If a person has to stand at a particular corner of a paddock or walk down a driveway or leave a house to stand on the verge or climb onto a hill or wait for the weather to clear, is that really service that's reasonably available? If a call drops out repeatedly but a text somehow gets through, is that reasonable? If coverage exists on a map but not in real conditions, is that reasonable? If the service works outdoors but not inside a family home, a shopfront, a vehicle or a train platform, is that good enough for a country that says that this will be universal? When I listen to the experiences of people in my community and I compare them to the text of the bill, these are the questions that come to mind, because Australians don't live their lives in perfect test conditions. Real life happens inside homes, inside workplaces and inside vehicles during emergencies. In 2021, I put forward an exposure draft of a telecommunications reform proposal that was deliberately broader. It aimed to ensure people could use a mobile phone inside a home or a workplace, not just outside and under ideal conditions. It's regrettable that this bill doesn't go that far. The third issue is the term 'equitable basis'. This bill is designed to ensure that mobile coverage is reasonably available outdoors on an equitable basis. What does that mean? Again, the phrase is undefined, but it's doing a lot of work. Does it mean that people will actually be able to afford the service? Does it mean the service must be available on ordinary retail terms? Does it imply that telcos have an obligation to ensure access is not tied to the newest devices and handsets? What is the delivery mechanism? Is it low-Earth-orbit satellite and direct-to-device technology? That technology is promising—it may well be part of the answer. For some people who gave up on legacy broadband, satellite has already been a lifeline, but promising technology is not the same as affordable technology. Consumer groups have warned that these types of solutions will simply be out of reach for too many. And, of course, there's the question of who bears the cost. It is the serious question of who pays. Is it the telco, the taxpayer, the industry levy or is it the consumer—quietly, every month on a larger and larger bill? Will people in my electorate be left cross-subsidising a more expensive service model that still leaves them behind? This leads directly to a further point. If this reform only works for people with newer phones, then it will not be a universal obligation on the telcos in any meaningful sense. If the quid pro quo is that the telcos provide universal outdoor access, but only if you stump up for a new handset, then there are deep issues within this bill. It will be a premium, niche service dressed up in universal language. No Australian should have to buy a new, expensive handset just to send a text from a black spot or to make a basic emergency call. The fourth issue is safety, resilience and emergency access. Berowra is a beautiful electorate—the most beautiful electorate in the country—but it's also disaster prone, such as the Hawkesbury floods that we've had repeatedly since 2020. There is bushfire risk. We know that because of the 26 Rural Fire Service stations that exist in my electorate. There is steep terrain. There are river communities, isolated pockets and areas of heavy tree cover—and communities that depend on volunteers who turn out in moments of danger. In that context, telecommunications is not a convenience; it is critical infrastructure. COVID exposed some of the weaknesses in our telco settings. Floods exposed them again. Every major outage does the same. The stories from my electorate keep piling up. Peter from Mount Colah reported losing landline and internet services for nearly a month. Joseph, from Epping, says his NBN service has repeatedly failed, despite years and years of complaints. When services collapse, people don't just lose entertainment; they lose the ability to call family, receive alerts, process payments, work remotely, access telehealth, open security gates, coordinate local response and, in the worst cases, reach help. This bill is meant to support voice and SMS. Low-Earth-orbit direct device technologies based on satellites support only SMS functionality, but in Australia emergency services can only be directly contacted via voice calls. Stakeholders have already made the case for the text to triple zero and emergency roaming or camp-on arrangements, where a user on one type of plan can access another network. That's exactly the kind of issue that a Senate inquiry should test. In an emergency, a citizen does not care about the contractual relationship between a terrestrial carrier and a satellite operator. They care whether the call or text goes through. They care whether triple zero works. They care whether the phone in a vehicle works. They care whether it works in a storm, when the carrier is down or when their family needs to be contacted. This isn't something to treat casually. In an emergency, 'outdoors' is not a neat legal category. People are in houses. People are in cars. People are on roads, trapped by floodwaters, evacuating with children and trying to pass on a message. The expectation created by a universal outdoor mobile obligation is that the call will get through. The question is whether it actually will. The final issue to raise is about competition, accountability and market structure. One of the enduring frustrations in my electorate has been that, for too much of Berowra, Telstra has been the monopoly or near monopoly provider. I've made no secret of my frustration with Telstra. I believe in competition. It disciplines market behaviour, and lack of competition breeds complacency. When coverage is weak and customer service is poor, consumers need alternatives. Too often they don't have them. This bill creates obligations on Telstra, Optus and TPG. But, if the practical path to meeting those obligations depends heavily on a small number of global satellite operators which become price takers in that market, what are the consequences? Will this bill increase competition or entrench it in a different layer? Are we expanding choice or merely changing the form of dependency? There's also the broader accountability issue. This bill gives the minister wide powers to determine standards, benchmarks, rules, coverage areas, exemptions and even timing through legislative instruments. I understand why the government says flexibility is needed in a developing technology market, but flexibility without guardrails creates uncertainty for consumers and industry alike. Australians are entitled to know what standards will be used, what success will look like, what redress consumers will receive when service is sold and service isn't delivered, and what independent oversight there will be of ministerial decisions. A universal obligation shouldn't be measured by optimism. It should be measured by objective outcomes: whether calls connect, texts send, outages fall, emergency access improves, prices remain fair, competition strengthens and communities like mine actually notice the difference. A serious parliament doesn't write a broad, blank cheque just because the headline sounds good. Flexibility isn't a substitute for clarity, and delegation is not a substitute for design. A law that's insufficiently clear or reliant on delegation demands scrutiny. That's why I welcome this bill going to the Senate committee. It creates a proper opportunity to test the bill's underlying assumptions. It allows us to examine costs, competition impacts, emergency access, device compatibility, affordability, implementation and the real meaning of core terms like 'reasonably available' and 'equitable'. I say to the people in my electorate who've endured these problems for years: make a submission. Put your experience on the record. Tell the committee what the coverage maps say and what your phone actually does. Tell them about the dropped calls, the outages, the lack of accountability, the confusion between carriers, the poor complaint handling and the safety implications. This isn't just a policy debate for experts in Canberra. It's a practical question about whether families and businesses in Berowra get the service they pay for and the service they need. I want to see the telcos held to account. I want to see the law catch up with the reality that mobile service is now an essential service. I want to see real competition, real standards and real consequence for failure, and I want to see my community treated seriously, not as an afterthought. The people of Berowra don't want slogans; they want signal. They don't want excuses; they want service. They don't want a legal fiction that says coverage exists while they stand outside searching for a bar on a screen. They want a system that works when it matters. That's the test the parliament should apply to this bill, and that's not too much to ask for in modern Australia. We shouldn't settle for less. 11:57 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Metcalfe, Axe Creek, Faraday, Walmer, Eppalock, Lockwood, Maiden Gully, Marong, Axedale, Mosquito Creek and Raywood are just a number of the communities that have contacted me since I was elected as a federal member for Bendigo, back in 2013, complaining about basic mobile phone coverage—the ability to make phone calls or text—simply disappearing. They have coverage one minute and not the next. There are a variety of excuses that they've been given over the years to explain why they've lost their coverage: more people moving into an area, like Maiden Gully, the weather on days and the topography—the challenges that you have when you live at the edge of these coverage maps. But what we had from those opposite when they were in government was nothing but excuses. It has taken our government to put forward for the first time a universal obligation for mobile phone coverage. You would think from the complaints from those opposite that it was their idea and they were waiting for us to implement it, but it's not. It is our idea. We are drawing a baseline and saying to every Australian that, if you can see the sky, your mobile phone will be able to do the basic functions. That is what we're talking about here. We are not pretending that this will give every Australian access to the download and upload speeds. That's separate legislation and a separate program. What we're saying in the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 is that this reform is not about replacing traditional mobile phone coverage. It's about expanding access. It's about making sure that for areas where we haven't had the investment from industry and government to co-invest in building the technology, where it hasn't been feasible, we will find another way and use other technologies to make sure that all Australians, if they can see the sky, will have access to basic telecommunications. For many in the cities and even in some regional centres, this is a problem of the past. It is not something that they have experienced. You may argue that that's competition and that's just the way the market works, but that's the very problem. When we leave all of our challenges up to the market, regional areas like my own miss out. We miss out on the basics, on the fundamentals—the ability to make phone calls and to send text messages when we're needed. In this debate, we've heard about the importance of this during natural disasters and when somebody has an accident on a farm or are caught on a road—the ability to connect when required. And it is very true that we need that basic function in an emergency. Far too often, I've been talking to colleagues—safely, of course—on my mobile phone, and I'll warn them: 'Hold on. I'm getting to a black spot. I'll call you back.' The phone drops out on sections of the Calder and the Midland Highway. It is a common occurrence. All locals know those black spots. You make the call before you get to the black spot. You make the call after you've passed through the black spot, or you simply wait until you're home. This is a regular occurrence for people in regional centres, so the ability to have a universal obligation, a guarantee that people can do the basics—phone calls and texts—is a game changer for regional Australia. What we saw from those opposite when they were in government was a very clunky black spots program, which was aimed to help expand the coverage for mobile phones and connectivity in the regions. What I ended up getting in my electorate was roughly one tower per election cycle, and quite often it was in an area which didn't improve coverage. We know that because that's what the Auditor-General told us, but that's also what locals told us. It relied upon nomination from local MPs. It was a points based system. The MP could put forward a project. Local council could put forward a project. The telco had to say, yes, they'd invest in the project. Federal government would put some money in. Quite often the state would put some money in. You might also get industry putting money in. It was clunky. It didn't actually deliver the broad-span coverage that this bill is trying to do. The fact is that we're trying to draw a line and say that we're not going to leave it up to the market and clunky grants based systems or point systems. We're going to start with a baseline of having a universal obligation to mobile phone coverage. That gives us hope in the regions that we are moving forward. We're not leaving it up to the market. We're not leaving it up to a clunky, subsidised, weird point system like we saw from those opposite. Instead, we're going to start with a baseline where we say to all Australians, 'If you can see the sky, you will have access to baseline mobile and tech services.' In some of our regions, that is a great foundation and starting point. I think about all of our CFAs in the towns that I've listed, and it's often the No. 1 issue that CFA volunteer services raise with me, or it's a very close second. It's what the SES raise with me—the ability to get to accident sites quicker and sooner because somebody's been able to have access, the ability to communicate with each other, helping people to have access and communicate through. In Metcalfe, sometimes they feel like they're stuck in another era where they literally still have a phone tree that they activate on their catastrophic fire days or on days where they're worried, where they're phoning people on the landline to say, 'You have to get out now,' because they cannot rely upon text messages and mobile phones. They simply don't have the coverage. The hope for them in this bill, by establishing this baseline, is that they will be able to join the rest of us when we have those challenging days and that they'll be able to receive the same notifications as others. This legislation brings mobile services into the longstanding universal services regime, which we've had in this country for other telecommunications services—landline and Australia Post, just to name a few—which previously only covered copper based voice services: the landline. By doing so, we are creating a framework that can protect consumers and ensure mobile services if the industry does not deliver in the national interest. That is the difference between us and those opposites. We openly acknowledge to industry, particularly to these privately listed companies, that we get that your shareholders may not want to build a tower in towns like Metcalfe and Axe Creek. We get that. There's no money to be made there. There are literally not enough service providers. However, it is in our nation's interest that all of these users and anybody visiting these areas can access their mobile phones, and that's where we step in. This is what is different about this bill: for the first time in our country's history, we are drawing a line and saying that everybody should have access. I've heard from people who live in outer metro areas where this is a challenge. Welcome to our world. It's been a challenge for us for a long time, so it is welcome to see more and more people realising the opportunity that comes with this bill. The changes in technology are going to be what makes this bill become a reality. The ability to use new technology as it develops to help people access the very basics will help change things here in Australia. The timing, whilst challenging, will create a clear signal to the markets of the importance of making sure that people can have access, and equitable access, to outdoor mobile phone coverage in areas in our regions. We aren't sitting around and waiting for the issue to fix itself. We're not waiting for the market. Our government is acting and sending a clear message to the industry: let's work together to solve this one. Far too often we've heard excuses. Now we're actually making change. That is why this bill should be supported by all in this place and in the other place. It is creating a baseline, an opportunity for all of us to have access to the very basics of mobile phone text and voice. The proposal that is before us is a critical part of our government's comprehensive work to make sure we reduce the digital divide that exists in our country. It's critical to improving productivity. It's critical to supporting economic growth. But it's making sure that we support people when they need it. It's making sure that people can access support services in case of an emergency or are able to get the information that they need. Once this is successfully introduced, it will also allow us to continue to build on bridging the gap when it comes to other needs—for example, data. I talk about data because I want to talk about the NBN rollout and how disappointed we in our part of the world were when those opposite took over and formed government and by the way in which they blew up our plan—they literally destroyed our plan—with the NBN rollout. We had a series of mobile phone fixed wireless towers being built in our part of the world. Bendigo is a unique regional centre. Whilst in the town there is fibre to the premises or fibre to the node, now fibre to the kerb, our town and our smaller towns and Greater Bendigo itself has a large fixed wireless footprint. One of the towers within that plan wasn't built. It was knocked back for planning reasons. That tower went into the too-hard basket when those opposite were in government. That particular tower in Ladys Pass, near Mount Camel, was actually going to be the relay tower for four others. This meant that those other four towers, which were built in the north part of my electorate, around Greater Bendigo, weren't switched on. For the longest period, those residents and businesses in that outer part had people willing to sell them access to the NBN. They had people willing to sell them access to data plans, and they were signing up to them, but, when the technician would come out to connect them, they couldn't get connected. They couldn't work out why. After question after question, even in this place, after email, after protests and after petitions, we finally found out that it was because the relay tower had not been built. In the end, the solution after many years was to connect them to the south. It meant that, for the towers at the end, like tower No. 10, the coverage was incredibly low. Even though they finally did get access to the NBN via the fixed wireless, the signal was so low that it was almost not worth it. It took a Labor government's election. In the last term, when Minister Rowlands was the minister for communication, she basically reviewed all of the fixed wireless towers and turned them up, upping what could be transmitted from those towers, allowing more people to be able to access the spectrum that they needed. It's another demonstration of how those opposite didn't really understand what was going on in the regions. What they did to the NBN is just one example of how they basically dropped the ball in terms of universal coverage with quick fixes to be able to say, 'Job done; move on.' That is how telecommunication has been dealt with in this country, and it's clearly not done, judging by the interest that we have seen in this bill. As I have said, this bill that's before us should be embraced by all in this place, particularly regional members. It establishes for the first time in our history a universal outdoor mobile obligation. It says that, in our country, if you can see the sky, you should be able to access voice and mobile phones. For many in my part of the world, that is a game changer. The idea that you can drive throughout the region—my own region—and not get the SOS is something that many would welcome, knowing that on those catastrophic days you'll still be able to receive text messages and the early warning. That you'll still be able to receive voice calls is a game changer. Knowing that, if your daughter or son is driving home via Eppalock and something happens, they'll be able contact you—these things make a difference. They will ensure that all of us have the same opportunity as others in other parts of the country. I commend the bill and the reforms to the House. 12:12 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I rise to speak on the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 and I do so as someone who has spent years in this place fighting for my constituents to have access to something that Australians in our major cities take entirely for granted: a reliable mobile phone service. My wife and I raised our daughters in the Fisher hinterland, in the valleys and ranges that stretch from Beerburrum through to Cambroon, from Glasshouse Mountains to Conondale. These are close-knit communities of farmers, small-business owners and young families who have chosen to live in our beautiful rural region. For far too long, they've been connected to the rest of Australia by a telecommunications thread. Since becoming the federal member for Fisher, I have personally secured mobile phone services for communities across Fisher in Conondale, Glasshouse Mountains, Peachester, Beerburrum, Beerwah, Glenview, Caloundra South and Caloundra West. I've met with network planners. I've sat with developers. I've negotiated with councils and telcos. I've argued the case community by community, tower by tower, for my constituents to be brought into the modern age. So, when a bill arrives in this place that promises universal outdoor mobile connectivity to all Australians, including to the people of Fisher, I want to believe in it. I really do. But wanting is not enough, and belief absent evidence is not policy; it's aspiration dressed up as legislation. Let me acknowledge what this bill is trying to do, because at least the ambition deserves recognition. The universal outdoor mobile obligation—the UOMO—would, for the first time, extend Australia's universal service framework to mobile telecommunications. It would place a legal obligation on Telstra, Optus and TPG Telecom to ensure that baseline mobile coverage, voice calls and SMS are reasonably available outdoors to all Australians on an equitable basis. That is a worthy goal. The principle that every Australian, regardless of postcode, should be able to make a phone call or send a text message from outside is not a radical proposition. It is, frankly, a minimum standard of civilised life in the 21st century. The coalition doesn't oppose this principle. What we cannot support is a bill that makes big promises, yet relies on technology that does not currently exist—and still leaves consumers with no real protections. The centrepiece of this legislation is the obligation it places on mobile network operators. But what precisely is that obligation? The bill says that mobile coverage must be 'reasonably available' outdoors to all Australians on 'an equitable basis'. Those two phrases, 'reasonably available' and 'an equitable basis', do almost no work in this legislation. They are, in effect, escape hatches. The bill explicitly allows the minister to exempt providers by legislative instrument. This means the minister can split the obligation, treating voice calls differently from SMS. And, although the obligation is meant to commence on 1 December 2027, the minister can delay it up to three times, for a 12-month period each time, potentially pushing the start date out to December 2030. What does 'reasonably available' mean for a farmer in Conondale who can't get help when a piece of machinery falls on him? What does 'an equitable basis' mean for a parent in Glass House who can't reach an ambulance when his or her child is choking? This bill, as drafted, provides them with no meaningful reassurance whatsoever. The government's own explanatory memorandum concedes that direct-to-device satellite technology is still evolving, with the required infrastructure still being deployed. It notes that SMS services are available in some countries on certain handsets, but that voice services are 'expected to follow'—not guaranteed; not scheduled; not contracted; 'expected'. The bill legislates a framework for a technology that does not yet exist at commercial scale in Australia. It sets a commencement date for services that, as of today, are not available on most handsets in Australia, are not fully covered by our spectrum licensing framework and depend on wholesale satellite infrastructure, over which Australian carriers exercise no direct control. I support the deployment of low earth orbit satellite technology. I've backed greater use of satellite solutions for years. But there is a profound difference between supporting technological innovation and legislating a consumer entitlement contingent on that innovation proceeding on schedule, at scale and on commercially viable terms. This bill guarantees none of these things. The people of Glass House Mountains and Peachester deserve more than a 'maybe'—more than a 'probable'. In November last year, TPG Telecom reported that a person had died after triple-zero calls failed. The cause was handset incompatibility. Samsung devices were rendered incompatible with emergency call networks, following the government's closure of the 3G network. Around 50,000 Australians believed their phones would work in an emergency. For at least one of them, that misplaced trust was fatal. The government's response was, by any measure, inadequate. ACMA and the telcos sent text messages to people whose phones could not make emergency calls. The UOMO is designed to be delivered, in significant part, through direct-to-device satellite technology. That technology requires handsets that support it. The vast majority of devices currently available in Australia, including many recently purchased high-quality devices, do not support direct-to-device connectivity. The bill contains no obligation to address this compatibility gap, no consumer education and no handset transition program—not even an acknowledgement of the problem. How can we legislate a universal outdoor mobile obligation when the obligation cannot be accessed by the majority of devices currently in use? Perhaps the most extraordinary omission in this bill is its complete silence on emergency communications. The government argues that triple zero obligations are already covered by the Telecommunications (Emergency Call Service) Determination 2019 and that voice services under the UOMO will be captured by that determination. With respect, that is a circular argument that fails the basic test of legislative integrity. The UOMO is a new framework. It will apply to new technologies, including direct-to-device satellite services, whose interaction with existing emergency call determinations has not been tested, has not been adjudicated and may give rise to technical and legal ambiguity at precisely the moment when ambiguity is most dangerous. Many of my constituents have long been unable to call triple zero from outside their homes. The entire purpose of extending coverage to those areas is, at least in part, to enable them to call for help in an emergency, yet the bill does not say so explicitly. It does not guarantee it. It does not mandate it. That is not good enough. An obligation that is meant to save lives should say so in those terms. Let me speak plainly about the political context of this bill, because context matters. The previous coalition government committed $811.8 million to connect regional Australia through the Mobile Black Spot Program, the STAND program and the Regional Connectivity Program. We helped build towers. We provided an infrastructure. We provided funding. We delivered services to communities that had been waiting for connectivity for decades—communities like those in my electorate of Fisher. And to this day, I'm still advocating for better mobile phone reception in rapid growth areas like Banya and Nirimba. Carl from Banya can only get one bar of service. He has to drive to the Stockland Sales Centre to make or receive calls. Adam and Michelle in Landers Shoot tell me that, since 3G cessation, their phone connection frequently drops out; text messages can't be sent. This has serious impacts on my constituents—constituents like Carl from Eudlo. The Albanese government cut the Mobile Black Spot Program in the 2024-25 budget. It's cutting the better regional connectivity programs from 2027, and in the most recent round of mobile service upgrades, 75 per cent of funded projects were delivered in Labor electorates. Three in four upgrades went to Labor held seats. This government cut these programs, botched the 3G shutdown, left 50,000 Australians with phones that could not call triple zero, and now asks us to trust it with legislation built on technology that does not yet exist. At some point, incompetence has consequences. In this portfolio those consequences are measured in lives. The coalition is not calling for this bill to be defeated; we're calling for it to be done properly. I am tired, after 10 years of being in this place, of rushed, panicked bills with minimal consultation and inadequate technical expertise. This approach is hurting Australians. This is the approach that the Albanese government has taken over the last four years. A Senate inquiry through the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee would allow farmers, small businesses, local governments, emergency services, telecommunications engineers and consumer advocates to put on the public record what they need from this legislation and what, in its current form, it fails to deliver. We need submissions from regional communities about what connectivity means to them in practice. We need evidence from technical experts about the realistic deployment timeline for direct-to-device satellite services. We need clarity about handset compatibility, about the interaction between the UOMO and existing emergency call frameworks, and about the enforceability of an obligation couched in the vague language of 'reasonableness' and 'equity'. These are the minimum requirements of sound public policy; they should not be sacrificed for a political headline. The people of Fisher have waited long enough for reliable mobile coverage. They've waited while technology evolved and commercial incentives pointed elsewhere. They've waited while city commuters checked emails on the trains while families in the hinterland couldn't call a doctor, an ambulance or even a friend. I want this bill to succeed, but wanting is not governing. Connectivity is not a luxury; it is a lifeline. The people of regional Australia deserve more than an ambitious headline. They deserve a framework that actually works for them. I support the reasoned amendment moved by the member for Lindsay. I call on the government to refer this bill to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, and I call on the government in the strongest possible terms to come back to this House with a bill that is worthy of the obligation it claims to create. Australians deserve nothing less. It doesn't matter whether you live in the bush or you live in the cities. Australians deserve to be in a modern day world—in the 21st century. They deserve to be able to pick up one of these phones that is their lifeline to the world and expect that it is going to work—not only if the weather's fine and if they hold up their hand and left foot, but always and at all times, because their lives sometimes depend on it. (Time expired) 12:27 Ms TEESDALE 314526 Bass In this place we pass many bills. Each one matters. Each one has purpose. Some will adjust regulatory settings. Some will refine systems. Some improve programs in ways that are important but not always immediately visible to the public. Occasionally, legislation comes before us that will be felt in a very direct way. This is one of those bills, because the ability to make a call or send a text anywhere in Australia—anywhere that you can see the sky—is something that people will notice, something that families will rely on and something that could save lives. I know that personally. Many years ago, as a teacher, I was travelling along the Arnhem Highway to Darwin for a professional development weekend. It was early in the season. The road had only just reopened. Crossings like Blyth River Crossing and Cahills Crossing had to be timed really carefully. You watched the tide, you checked the depth and you made sure that your vehicle was ready, that the car was serviced, that there was food and water, and that the satellite phone was charged. But on the return trip to Ramingining, about halfway between Gunbalanya and Maningrida, the car broke down—not in a river, and thankfully not in a tidal river, but on a bend in the road. In remote Australia, this is never a good thing. Still, we were calm. We had supplies. We had a satphone; we would call for help—except the credit had expired the day before. At that time, you actually could not recharge your credit from the handset itself—unbelievable. There was no mobile coverage, no satellite credit and no way to call. In remote Australia, you plan carefully, because help is often very far away. You tell people when you expect to arrive. You map out your route. And you think ahead. You assume somebody will come along eventually. You assume that, when you do not arrive, somebody will raise the alarm. But assumptions do not shorten distances. It was three days before someone found us—three days. We were lucky: it was not a crash, we had food and water and the weather held. But I often think about how different that story could have been if a simple text message had been possible; if one call could have been made; if reassurance could have been given to my family. And that is why this bill matters: because, when something goes wrong in remote Australia, every minute matters, and no Australian should be placed at greater risk because they happen to be outside terrestrial mobile coverage. Access to telecommunications is no longer optional. It underpins public safety, it underpins participation in our economy and it underpins connection to family, services and community. Yet our universal services framework still reflects a different era. For decades, the universal service obligation has focused on fixed voice services and payphones. That made sense when landlines were the dominant form of communication, but Australia has changed. Mobile phones are now the primary device for communication for most Australians. In many households, particularly in regional and remote communities, they are actually the only device. So this bill modernises our universal services framework to reflect that reality. It establishes a universal outdoor mobile obligation, the UOMO. It brings mobile voice and SMS services into the public interest telecommunications services framework by amending the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999, with supporting amendments to the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. But, at its core, the UOMO requires that designated mobile telecommunications services—initially, starting with voice and SMS—are reasonably available outdoors to all people in Australia on an equitable basis. This bill designates that Telstra, Optus and TPG will be the initial primary universal outdoor mobile providers. They will carry that obligation from day one. The regulator, ACMA, will be responsible for ensuring compliance and taking enforcement action where necessary. The bill also explains what we mean by 'coverage'. Coverage is about whether an end-user who is outdoors at a particular location can use that service, and 'the outdoors' does have to be defined carefully. It is 'outdoors' as we would understand it: not inside buildings; not underground; certainly not underwater. At this stage, it does not assume service inside vehicles or aircraft, because current direct-to-device technology depends on line of sight to the sky. But that clarity is important. It sets honest expectations and keeps the obligation focused on what is achievable as that technology matures. 'Reasonably available' is a practical test. It recognises that there will be technical limitations, temporary outages and consumer choices about whether they have a compatible handset or plan. But it also sets a clear expectation that basic services should work outdoors, in places where it is reasonable to expect them to work. 'On an equitable basis' matters too, because equity is not just about geography; it's about who can access the service. Stakeholders have raised concerns that new satellite-enabled services could cost more and that affordability could become a barrier for regional and remote Australians and for vulnerable consumers. This bill gives the government tools to actually address that. It provides for standards and benchmarks that providers must meet, including the ability to deal with the terms and conditions of supply, including matters related to price. And this is a crucial safeguard. It means universality can be made real in practice, and not just on a coverage map. The bill has one schedule in two parts. Part 1 inserts the UOMO into the existing universal services regime and creates the supporting powers to set UOMO-specific standards, benchmarks and rules. Part 2 will help to create a separate framework for standards, benchmarks and rules for mobile telecommunications services more broadly, even before the UOMO starts. And that second part really does matter. It means we are not powerless between now and the commencement date. If there are problems with mobile service quality, accessibility or consumer outcomes, the framework allows standards to be developed and enforced ahead of the default start date. The UOMO has the default start date of 1 December 2027. It's a clear signal to industry and a clear promise to the public. The bill also includes flexibility, so the obligation can be adapted as the market develops. The start date can be brought forward when the market is ready. It can also be postponed in 12-month steps up to three times if there are genuine readiness constraints. It means that we're not moving forward if it is not ready. The obligation itself can be divided. For example, voice and SMS can be separated if that is required to get services working sooner and more reliably. I understand scrutiny concerns about delegated powers, but parliament always should watch closely when substantial detail is set through these sorts of instruments. There's an area of fast changing technology. The bill puts core obligation in primary law then allows technical detail to be adjusted transparently and over time with consultation and with parliamentary oversight through disallowance. The reforming technology is neutral. It does not dictate the network architecture. It expects providers to use their existing terrestrial infrastructure where it exists and to use direct-to-device satellite connectivity outside that terrestrial coverage. Direct to device means a mobile phone potentially communicating directly with low Earth orbit satellites. It is not a replacement for towers. It is a complement and a potential way to fill the gaps, and those gaps at the moment are enormous. If this policy delivers what it is designed to deliver, it will extend basic outdoor voice and SMS coverage across huge areas of Australia that have never had it. This is also about emergency readiness. We are living through more frequent and more intense natural disasters—floods, bushfires, cyclones, severe storms. In those moments, communications becomes critical infrastructure. People need warnings. They need to contact emergency services, they need to reach loved ones, and they need to ask for help. The bill does not rewrite the emergency recall rules, because those rules already exist. Providers of public mobile telecommunications services must provide access to triple zero under the Emergency Call Service Determination. As voice becomes available outdoors under the UOMO, that emergency framework will still apply. The principle is simple. Baseline outdoor connectivity expands the footprints of safety. It increases resilience. It gives Australians another way to reach help when they are outside tower coverage. Regional telecommunications have been a recurring focus of this parliament for a reason. We know the business case is harder when population density is low. We know market forces alone do not always deliver equity, and that is another reason this bill matters. It makes baseline outdoor connectivity a matter of national expectation. It modernises an outdated framework to match the way Australians actually communicate. And it does it with enforceable obligations, with standards and benchmarks and with the ability to adapt as that technology evolves. I also want to note that the framework is designed to evolve. While the designated services at commencement are voice and SMS, the legislation allows additional kinds of designated mobile telecommunications services to be added over time, following consultation and consideration of technical readiness, market conditions and consumer impacts. That matters because what Australians need from mobile connectivity will continue to change, and we cannot lock ourselves into a model that cannot adapt. The bill also allows the minister to specify circumstances where it is not reasonable to make that coverage available and to identify matters that must or must not be considered when assessing reasonableness. That power does need to be used carefully and transparently, because exemptions that are too broad would undermine the entire purpose of this reform. But, done properly, it provides a practical way to deal with genuinely exceptional situations without abandoning the national objective. Finally, this bill did not appear overnight. It followed consultation with industry, consumer groups and regional stakeholders, and it sits in a longer story of reviews calling for the universal service framework to be updated and made technology neutral. It is a response to what Australians have been telling us for years—that mobile is the real lifeline now, particularly outside the major cities, and that government has a responsibility to ensure baseline access is delivered fairly. When I return to the story I began with, I think about the waiting, the uncertainty—that distance between need and help. A simple text could have changed that experience for me completely. Being able to make a call when you need to is not a luxury anymore. It is a baseline expectation in a modern nation. This bill updates our laws to reflect that expectation. I commend this bill to the House. 12:39 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson I rise today to support the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. Let me say from the outset, the coalition took a telecommunications universal service obligation to the last election. Essentially, that means that the service for telecommunications and data would be the same for city people as what's delivered to country people. That seems pretty fair and reasonable, particularly given what rural and regional Australia contributes to the overall economy, doesn't it? Let's look at what they do contribute. All the food and fibre is grown out in rural and regional Australia, all the mining royalties are generated in regional Australia and over $1 billion in coalmining is generated out in the regions, so it should be pretty fair for the regional and rural areas to get the same amount of telecommunications as the city. It is the same with our little towns. Young ladies like the member opposite might not know what a home phone is because they're lucky to be young enough to know that everyone carries around a mobile. Whereas in the little town of Bowen that I live in, a lot of people still rely on the old home phone but all the networks just do not work, so they're forced to go to mobile phones. But unfortunately, again, because it's a small town, they just don't have the reception. I hear people in the cities talk about black spots, saying, 'Oh, there are black spots. You know, I was driving along and I came to a traffic light and then I couldn't get service.' Well, here's a news flash: in places like where I live, we don't worry about black spots; we have no spots at all. People in my area haven't gone mad. A person would be driving along when, all of a sudden, they pull up, jump out and they're on the front of their car or on their bull bar, looking for a signal, or jumping up on the back of the ute, looking around, just to try to ring somebody. It's absolutely ridiculous. That's why we need to have a universal service obligation and provide the same level of service to the bush. On our dirt roads a little bit further off the highway, you see a similar thing. You see people in a cloud of dust pull over off the highway and take off into the scrub. They haven't got caught short and are off to the bathroom; they're racing to get on top of a pile of deco or to climb a tree or to find any little hill they can just to look for a phone service. To highlight this, where I live in Bowen, my electoral office is about 2½ hours' drive away. On the trip from Bowen to Mackay my phone drops out seven times. When you spend a lot of time in the car like I do—I do about 60,000km a year—driving is unproductive, so it's always good to be on the phone and doing some work as I go. We really need to improve that. If there was an accident, if something was to happen, the fact that you can't dial triple zero when it suits is a safety issue. But this isn't just in the rural areas. My biggest area is Mackay, a city of over 100,000 people. A suburb of Mackay called Slade Point is very close to the city but has very poor mobile phone coverage. If you have a look at a little seaside community like Cungulla, there's absolutely no coverage there at all. Some of our telcos say, 'Well, you know, put in some satellites, put some extra things in,' but that's all money, and people just don't have the money in this current cost-of-living crisis. My electorate of Dawson is massive. It's a sprawling powerhouse of our national economy. It stretches over 400km from the heart of Mackay through to the sugar heartlands of the Burdekin, right through to the southern reaches of Townsville. But in the 21st century, it's a disgrace that travelling this region is like navigating a cosmic void. When I drive the 400-kilometre stretch, which I do very regularly, I can tell you there are more black holes in the mobile coverage around Dawson than there are holes in a pincushion. Alarmingly, along the Bruce Highway—the main arterial route, I might add, the very spine of the great state of Queensland—there are regular and dangerous black spots. This isn't the remote outback we're talking about; this is the national land transportation network. This is how our kids get to school. This is how our farmers get their produce to market. This is how people get their supplies up from the city. This is how families take their kids to sport on weekends. This is how our patients go to hospital. It's a must, but then they don't have any phone reception, or they have sparse phone reception, as they drive that highway. As a result of this government's negligence on any meaningful Bruce Highway investment, combined with a total lack of foresight on our telecommunications network, we're then left with a recipe for disaster. What happens when there's a serious accident on a stretch of the Bruce where there is net zero coverage? The answer is simple, but it's brutal: you have deaths. There is an ultimate human cost to this lack of investment. When a family is trapped in a car or a truckie is in a critical state in his cabin and there is no service on the phone to call for help, minutes turn into tragedies. That is the reality for regional Queensland under this government. While the inner-city elites worry about a dropped call being a minor inconvenience, to my constituents it can be a matter of life and death. We're here today to discuss the universal mobile obligation. The coalition supports the goal of extending voice and text coverage outdoors across more of the country. Improved connectivity for regional Australians is critical and very, very important. However, the credibility of any reform rests not on the lofty aspirations of the minister proclaiming what he does in a press release. It needs to be on the detail, the realism and the actual implications on the ground. This bill must be deeply scrutinised, because if there's one thing we know about this government it's that they're the masters of the headline but they're not very good on the delivery. In 21st century Australia, reliable phone coverage is not a lifestyle extra or a consumer perk; it's a foundational national need. It underpins our relationships, our economic activity and, most importantly, our safety. For the small businesses, the farmers and the freight operators in Dawson, reliable mobile coverage is essential to the running of their day-to-day operations. It's how they coordinate their logistics. It's how they respond to changing conditions in the paddock. It's how they keep their workers safe. For families separated by the vast distances of our region, it's the only way they can stay connected. Australia's geography makes connectivity both more challenging and also more important. New technologies provide an exciting opportunity to bridge these gaps, but they must be matched by a framework that delivers genuine reliability, not just hollow promises. The objective of this bill must be to actually deliver. Measures claimed to improve connectivity must work in the real world. We need a framework that is practical, reliable and affordable. An obligation must be clearly defined so that carriers understand what is required of them and consumers in places like Kelsey Creek or Gumlu understand exactly what they're getting for their money. Terms like 'reasonably available' or 'equitable access' are lawyer speak. They must be translated into measurable, enforceable standards. Without clarity and a strong compliance framework there is a massive risk that this obligation will be impossible to monitor or even harder to enforce. Australians deserve more than an ambitious headline. They deserve a framework that stands up under the harsh light of regional reality. This bill leans heavily on direct-to-device satellite technology. This is an exciting development. It has the potential to reduce longstanding coverage gaps across the vast regions of Australia. But let's be very clear: it remains developing technology. Global rollout is still underway, and significant technical and commercial variabilities are yet to be settled. Accelerating the rollout is essential, but legislating an outcome does not magically deliver it. You can't simply wave a magic wand in Canberra and expect the satellite to fix a black spot on a Whitsunday island tomorrow. The legislation leaves a trail of unanswered questions. Our domestic carriers may bear the primary regulatory burden, but they will depend heavily on international satellite providers, whose pricing models and deployment schedules are outside Australia's control. We must ensure that any new obligation strengthens market competition rather than inadvertently handing monopoly to a few global giants. Even more concerning is the issue of device capability. An outdoor coverage obligation is only meaningful if the phone in your pocket can actually connect to the service. Many of the handsets currently in use were never designed with satellite connectivity in mind. Regional Australians, older Australians and our small-business owners often keep their devices for longer periods of time. They don't want to run out and buy the latest $2,000 smartphone every 12 months. A reform that functions only on the latest high-end handsets would undermine the very principle of equitable access that this bill claims to advance. Emergency triple zero access, in particular, must never be contingent on owning a premium handset. We've learnt the hard lessons from the government's failed—botched—rollback of the 3G set-up. The 3G set-up was cut off. How the set-up worked from your tower was that 3G would project a long way so you would get a lot of coverage in the distance between your tower and where you were, but the service wasn't quite as good. When you go to 4G, it won't project as far, but the service and the quality is better—and 5G doesn't project as far but is very, very high quality. What needs to happen, until the satellite service becomes available, is that more towers need to be built. That is because, even though there's higher quality of service if you're close to a tower, if you're not, your service is vastly diminished or not available at all. That was a foreseeable transaction that required meticulous coordination and instead was characterised by confusion, technical glitches and total incompetence. Hundreds of device models were found to be incompatible, and many Australians only discovered the problem when their service simply stopped working. Consumers were forced into unplanned, expensive upgrades. That wasn't an unforeseeable event; it was a management failure. We cannot repeat the performance with our satellite network. Communications policy is not a theoretical exercise for academics in Canberra. It has direct consequences for the wellbeing of every Australian. Australians expect and deserve that, when they dial triple zero, their call will connect without hesitation or any technical complications. The recent history of triple zero outages and device compatibility issues have shaken public confidence in the system. Senate inquiries have exposed troubling governance shortcomings and massive gaps in oversight. The tragic loss of two Australians following device incompatibility issues underscores a sobering fact: communications failures are not merely technical glitches; they are matters of life and death. There is absolutely zero tolerance for error when it comes to emergency services connectivity. We need ironclad assurance that the systems put in place by this bill will not leave Australians with older handsets vulnerable and left behind. We cannot afford another botched rollout. Then there is the issue of affordability. Telecommunications costs are a critical issue. If compliance with this new obligation significantly increases costs, then that is not a good outcome. We want to have communications for every Australian. 12:54 Ms URQUHART 231199 Braddon Deputy Speaker Chesters, as you know, I take every opportunity to sing the praises of the electorate of Braddon. It's my home, I was born there, and I love it. One of the remarkable things about Braddon is its rugged natural environment. Much of the electorate is remote, and some parts of it are very remote. The wilderness areas right across the electorate are spectacular: trees, mountains—everything that gets in the way of technology. But isolation is something that the remote communities that make up the north-west and west coast and King Island understand, and it's no surprise that the west coast of Tasmania, down around Queenstown and other areas, was chosen not once but twice as the location for the TV show Alone—well worth watching, for those of you who haven't, if only for the spectacular scenery. Its remoteness, the vast areas of wilderness and the difficult landscapes have all meant that the west coast of Tasmania particularly has experienced poor-quality connectivity and mobile services. They have above average rainfall. It's a rainforest area. It's spectacular. But, again, all that impacts on technology and connectivity. It's very frustrating for the people who live, work and study in or visit that region. I regularly meet with the telco carriers right across the electorate, because there are pockets of service that is not up to speed, and I want to make them aware of it. But this is something that hasn't happened overnight. There's been a litany of upgrades not being done over a long period of time, by various governments. I want to make sure that the people of my electorate have their voices heard. I also make the telcos meet with the people of our community. A couple of weeks ago I had Telstra come out to a community meeting at Port Sorell, which is a really heavy growing area, with lots of visitors and tourists during the summer, when the population explodes to about three or four times the normal population size. And those people there can't get connectivity in their homes. So Telstra were asked to come and address a community meeting. I've got to say, they came along and they did a fantastic job of listening to concerns and listening to the issues that were raised. They took them on board, and now they're going back out to actually work with people right across that place to see what they need to do. On the long stretches of highway and roads on the north-west and west coast, poor connectivity is a safety issue for residents and visitors and for the truck and delivery drivers, the tradies and health workers who travel right across our electorate to deliver their absolutely essential services. In the winter particularly, when we have lots of periods of snow, it's even more dangerous out on those roads. Even though I might say that the solitude and peace of not having that mobile phone ringing while you're travelling down that highway is sometimes welcoming, it is an essential service that we need to make sure people can have if they choose to. Labor believes that the west coast and other areas right across my electorate deserve connectivity that is fast, reliable and affordable. That's why, during the 2025 election, the Albanese government announced a new investment of $9.8 million to boost mobile coverage and tower capacity. This federal co-investment will leverage investments by carriers to upgrade traditional technology and improve reliability. Even with significant investment by government and industry, the provision of traditional mobile coverage to 100 per cent of our vast continent is still not possible. And we are vast, and we have regions, as I said, like areas of Braddon, where normal connectivity is difficult to achieve. Traditional mobile coverage is currently provided in areas where about 99 per cent of Australians work and live but covers only one third of the Australian landmass. In those areas without coverage, it's not possible to make a triple zero call by using traditional mobile services. Reliable connectivity is an essential service that every Australian deserves, regardless of where they live, be it on the mainland or on Tasmania's beautiful west coast. It is exciting that new technology now makes this possible, and we know that new technology is emerging regularly. Low Earth orbit satellite direct-to-device technology enables standard, unmodified modern smartphones to connect directly to satellites for SMS, voice and data in remote areas, bypassing traditional cell towers. It's Labor that is taking this initiative to introduce the most significant reform to regional connectivity through a new universal outdoor mobile obligation. Labor's universal outdoor mobile obligation will require mobile carriers, like Telstra, Optus and TPG, to provide access to mobile, voice and SMS almost everywhere across Australia. Satellite to mobile offers a future where outdoor connectivity for basic services is possible in some of the furthest reaches across the country. With this bill, Labor is adding up to five million square kilometres of new mobile coverage across the country, including more than 37,000 kilometres of regional roads. This will add up to 12,000 square kilometres of new outdoor voice and SMS mobile coverage across my electorate of Braddon. Outdoor SMS and voice are expected to be available on 1 December 2027, which is when all three operators—Telstra, Optus and TPG—will be required to ensure that baseline mobile coverage is available outdoors throughout Australia. Importantly, the universal outdoor mobile obligation will also expand connectivity options for Australians during natural disasters, which frequently impact land based mobile networks. This bill looks to the future by creating the flexibility to adjust the scope and timing of the universal outdoor mobile obligation as the market develops and satellite technologies evolve. It's really important that we have a number of people right across the country—organisations, groups—who back our policy. Some of those are the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, the National Farmers' Federation, the New South Wales RFS, the Regional Telecommunications Independent Review Committee, and regional councils, who usually are at the forefront of making sure people within their electorates have coverage. The Albanese Labor government is delivering a better and more connected future, not just for regional and remote Tasmania but for all of Australia. Labor's vision is clear: we want Australia to be the most connected continent in the world so that, no matter where you live or what you do, you can connect. I commend the bill to the House. 13:03 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey I acknowledge the previous speaker's comments: vision is one thing, but actions are another thing. I rise today to address a matter of profound significance to the people of rural, regional and remote South Australia and indeed every Australian who lives, works or travels beyond the suburban fringes of our major cities. The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 is a piece of legislation with a title that promises much but, as is so often the case with this government, carries a risk of delivering very little. The minister has repeatedly promised regional South Australians equivalent coverage. It's a lovely word, isn't it, 'equivalent'? It sounds reassuring in a briefing note or a departmental press release. But I invite the minister to come to Weetulta, Tarcowie, all of the Eyre Peninsula or even parts of Wallaroo and North Moonta. I received an exciting letter from Minister Wells last week in relation to the Mobile Black Spot Program. Now, the electorate of Grey is vast and has a lot of industry—oil and gas in the north-east, mining throughout. Agriculture is the biggest industry. Port Lincoln has the biggest fishing fleet in the Southern Hemisphere. We have 28 councils. That's 28 CEOs and 28 mayors. So you'd think in an electorate which represents 92.3 per cent of South Australia—bigger than New South Wales—that we would have a lot of new mobile cell towers going in the electorate of Grey. One was announced in Grey—one. If I look at the nine years of the coalition government, 56 new towers were put in the electorate of Grey, and Minister Anika Wells can give us just the one. That is how much this Labor government cares about regional, rural and remote South Australia and their access to telecommunications—or lack thereof. Let's tell the small-business owners, who are losing thousands of dollars because they can't process a payment or take an order, that their experience is equivalent to the speeds enjoyed in the city. The reality is that for people in regional SA connectivity is not a luxury; it is a fading pulse. This bill, while noble in its stated objective, needs to be dragged out into the light and interrogated. In 21st century Australia, reliable mobile phone coverage is not a lifestyle. It is not some consumer perk like getting a free coffee on a loyalty card or a discount on a streaming subscription. It is just as vital as the roads we drive on, the electricity grids that power our homes, and the water pipes that sustain our towns. It is the digital asphalt of the modern era, underpinning our social relationships, our economic activity and, most importantly, our safety. For a grain producer on the Eyre Peninsula or a livestock farmer in the mid-north, reliable mobile coverage is like oxygen. For any Australian who hitches up a caravan or loads up a four-wheel drive to explore this magnificent country—a lot of them are in regional South Australia right now—mobile coverage is first and foremost a safety mechanism. It provides the essential reassurance that if the car breaks down, if a medical emergency strikes or if the weather turns dangerous, help can be called. In an inner-city suburb, a dropped call is an annoyance, a reason to grumble at the dinner table or send a frustrated text later on, but on a remote highway, hundreds of kilometres from the nearest town, a dropped call could be life or death. Australia's geography makes connectivity more challenging than almost anywhere on Earth, but that very same geography makes it more vital. As we move through 2026, we see technologies emerging that offer exciting opportunities to bridge these gaps. We see the potential for direct-to-device satellite communication to finally put an end to silent zones that have plagued the bush for decades. But an opportunity is only as good as the framework that supports it. We need a system that delivers genuine reliability, not just political promises that fall apart the moment they are put to the test. The coalition supports the goal of extending voice and text coverage outdoors across more of the country, because we believe that improved connectivity for regional Australians is simply the fair thing to do. It is a matter of basic equity. Why should a citizen in Peterborough have a lower standard of safety and economic opportunity than a citizen in Melbourne or Brisbane? However, the credibility of any reform rests not on what it aims to do but on the detail. It contains the realism of its implementation. That is why this bill must be deeply scrutinised. Any measure to improve connectivity must work in the paddock, in the truck cabin and on the shop floor. The legislative framework must genuinely expand coverage in a practical, reliable and affordable way. 'Obligation' is a very serious word in law, and it must be clearly defined so that carriers understand precisely what is expected of them and, more importantly, so consumers understand. Terms like 'reasonably available equitable access' are dangerous if they are left as broad, sweeping concepts open to interpretation. They must be translated into measurable, enforceable standards. Without clarity and a strong compliance framework, there is a risk that this obligation will be impossible to monitor and even harder to enforce. Australians deserve more than an ambitious headline; they deserve a framework that stands up under pressure and delivers tangible outcomes. Let's talk about this emerging technology, particularly direct-to-device satellite technology. It represents an exciting development that could close longstanding coverage gaps, but we must be honest with the public. It is still a developing technology. This global rollout is still is still in its relatively early stages, and there are significant technical and commercial variables. For those at home, I want to expand on the direct-to-satellite technologies. Here in Australia and around the world we have Starlink, a constellation of low-Earth-orbit satellites. You can get great speeds with this technology today—I certainly have it on my vehicle when I'm driving around the countryside because, of course, I don't get mobile phone reception. It is a powered antenna on the top of your car or on the top of your home, and it's a different technology than we're proposing for data and voice technologies. For the government to enable a universal mobile service obligation on data and voice—it cannot be done with the current constellation. What we're seeing now is companies like Amazon releasing more LEOs into the atmosphere for data and voice—and we're a long way away from that. You can consider it like a constellation of 5G mobile cell towers, which is very different to the constellation that Starlink has in our skies today. While we want to accelerate the rollout, we must recognise that legislating an outcome doesn't magically make the technology appear or work perfectly. Business builds and does things, not government. This test isn't whether the headline sounds good in a 6 pm news grab; it's whether the framework delivers for the people of Tarcowie or Streaky Bay. The bill as it stands leaves so many questions unanswered. Domestic carriers may bear the primary regulatory burden, but they are going to be heavily dependent on international satellite-providing companies whose pricing models and deployment schedules are entirely outside Australia's direct control, like Starlink and Amazon. We must ensure that the new obligation strengthens competition rather than inadvertently handing the entire market over to one or two global giants. Telecommunications policy must anticipate these impacts rather than just reacting to them after damage is done and competition has been crushed. What about device compatibility? This is a massive issue that the government seems to want to brush under the carpet. An outdoor coverage obligation is meaningless if the phone in the Australian's pocket cannot connect to this new service. Many of the handsets currently in circulation in my electorate were not designed with satellite connectivity in mind. Enabling that compatibility requires hardware and software capabilities that older devices simply do not possess. In regional Australia, people often hold on to their phones much longer than the tech-savvy crowd in the cities—sometimes because of financial necessity, but mostly because they just want a tool that works and they don't need those flashy features. A reform that only functions for someone carrying the latest high-end smartphone is not 'universal'. It is elitist and it is city-centric—but that is not new. It undermines the very principle of equitable access that this bill claims to advance. Emergency triple zero access must never ever be contingent on owning a recently released, premium handset. We have already seen hard lessons on the government's failed management of the 3G network shutdown. That transition showed us that device compatibility cannot be treated as a secondary issue or left to chance; it is a core issue. We had three deaths in my electorate in recent times, and the coroner has stated that the lack of cell service reception had a 'significant impact'. Again, imagine if this happened in Adelaide. There would be absolute outcry—but not for us in regional, rural and remote South Australia. Again, as another example, when we had the Optus triple zero outage, there was a death in Gawler just outside my electorate because they could not contact triple zero. So whenever we discuss new obligations, we must look at them through the lens of this government's track record and, frankly, that record is appalling. The 3G shutdown was a foreseeable failure, and Minister Wells' handling of the triple zero failure was equally appalling. The 3G shutdown was a planned change that required meticulous coordination between the carriers and manufacturers, the government and the emergency services. Instead, what did we get? We got a process characterised by confusion, the late identification of thousands of incompatible devices and completely inadequate communication to the public. Hundreds of device models were found to be incompatible, with many Australians only discovering this problem when their device suddenly stopped working. And this did not just affect mobile phones. Farms, farmers, fishers, miners, winemakers, those who work out in the elements have many IoT connected devices. We certainly do on our farm. Well, the cost to replace all of these antennas from 3G antennas to 4G antennas was significant thousands of dollars on our farm alone. This was another consequence of the failed 3G shutdown. When it comes to mobile service, my constituents are paying what can only be described as a tax on their postcode. Because the 4G rollout wasn't finished before the 3G was unplugged, families have been forced to fork out thousands of dollars for Starlink set-ups or expensive boosters just to get the basic signal they used to have for free. This government treats connectivity as a data point on a spreadsheet, but, in the electorate of Grey, connectivity is the lifeblood of our communities. Let me tell you about some of the people I represent. Craig, a farmer on the Eyre Peninsula, is trying to run a productive livestock business, but he told me he's basically had to give up on ordering transport to move loads of sheep because he simply cannot get a signal. My good friend Lucas Bagshaw, who faced every country person's absolute nightmare of a fire on his property, grabbed his phone to call for help, but there was nothing—no signal, no bars. He knew better than to rely on triple zero because, in regional South Australia right now, that's a roll of the dice. I think of an elderly primary producer in my electorate who recently crashed his quad bike. He lay there in the dirt for hours. He wasn't saved by a 4G network or a government safeguard; he was saved because he had an old radio and someone happened to hear his call for help on the good old UHF radio. I spoke with David, a senior, whose wife was forced to buy a new phone because her two-year-old Samsung, a perfectly good device, could no longer access triple zero after the shutdown. These are pensioners. They can't just nip out and drop two grand on a new phone. Rebecca, from Streaky Bay, had been calling my office because, during a severe heatwave with fire warnings, the internet and mobile coverage for the whole town just dropped out for three days. Think about that: a heatwave, a fire threat and a total communications blackout. (Time expired) 13:18 Ms CLUTTERHAM 316101 Sturt Mobile phones are everywhere. They are an integrated part of society, and most adults in Australia and around the world have one. Many people believe that mobile phones are an essential part of modern day life that benefit us in a variety of ways, such as allowing us to communicate anywhere and any time. You can order food; do your banking; check the weather; track your sleep, health and fitness; navigate your way around; and stay in touch with family and friends on your mobile phone. Mobile phones really are an indispensable part of our daily lives, but, with the rapid advancement of technology, mobile phones have evolved from simple devices used for making calls and sending texts to sophisticated smartphones that can perform a wide range of sometimes critical tasks. So access to telecommunications is not a 'nice to have' or a so-called 'first world service'; it's an essential service that is foundational for public health and safety. Australia's universal service obligation is a longstanding consumer protection that supports access to phone services and payphones and is underpinned by the notion that, wherever people live or work, they must have reasonable and equal access to these services. As Australia's service provider, Telstra delivers the universal service obligation. As part of this, they have to provide standard telephone services and access to payphones. Standard telephone services include a number of features, including access to local, national and international calls; untimed local calls; 24-hour free access to emergency service numbers; priority assistance for those with a life-threatening medical condition; a customer service guarantee, which is an acceptable connection and repair timeframe; a unique telephone number, with or without a directory listing; preselection, which allows the user to preselect another provider for long-distance, fixed-to-mobile and international calls where the standard telephone service is provided over Telstra's copper network; calling-line identification; operator and directory assistance; and itemised billing. The USO was originally introduced in the late 1980s, during a period of economic reform, as the Australian government sought to introduce competition into network industries that were previously government owned. To prevent a scenario where regional consumers were left unserved or underserved, the USO was established to ensure that Telstra would continue to provide affordable standard telephone services in these areas. Initially introduced as the community service obligation in 1989, it was renamed the universal service obligation two years later and was followed by the introduction of a telecommunications industry levy intended to recognise the net costs of delivery of services in some loss-making areas. Over time, however, multiple reviews have recommended reform, arguing that the current USO arrangements are outdated. They are outdated because of the development of technology. Mobile phone services are available in urban areas, many regional areas and along national and regional highways. Mobile phone services currently reach 99 per cent of the Australian population. To say that Australians rely on mobile phones for their connectivity more than ever is to state the obvious. But, despite the breadth of coverage, Australia's longstanding USO does not include mobile services. This bill, which creates the universal outdoor mobile obligation, will change that by establishing a framework to create this obligation, which complements the existing USO. In short, this is a significant and important reform that will bring mobile services within the universal services framework. It is being implemented following a period of extensive public consultation on options to modernise the USO and consideration of current arrangements via the independent 2024 Regional Telecommunications Review. With respect to this consultation, the government has also consulted widely, and feedback from a range of stakeholders was considered in drafting the bill. An exposure draft of the bill was issued in September 2025, and 88 submissions were received from industry, individuals, consumer representatives, state government agencies and local governments. The Regional Telecommunications Review takes place every three years and it presents an opportunity to examine the existing and future telecommunications needs in regional, rural and remote communities across Australia. The 2024 review was themed 'Connecting communities, reaching every region'. It acknowledged that the USO must be modernised to reflect today's digital realities. It also acknowledged that many rural and remote residents, especially those who live where there is no mobile coverage, value their landline phone services delivered over copper and other legacy technologies, but that legacy voice services are ageing and becoming increasingly expensive to maintain and operate as the technology is phased out globally. The review also acknowledged that Australians without mobile coverage and other vulnerable groups will need additional support when legacy voice networks are decommissioned. In doing so, the review recommended a unified service obligation that is technology neutral and has a mandate that voice-capable broadband services be available to all, and with the default provider being required to ensure these services meet minimum quality and speed standards, particularly in remote areas. The review also noted that the transition from copper and other legacy networks needed to be carefully managed, ensuring reliable alternatives are in place before any legacy infrastructure is retired. Mobile telecommunications are essential to people in Australia, especially in regional, rural and remote areas. Stakeholders have longstanding concerns for public safety, given gaps in terrestrial mobile coverage, including on many regional and remote roads. In response, the universal outdoor mobile obligation will require major mobile network operators Telstra, Optus and TPG Telecom and any other providers designated in the future to provide outdoor baseline mobile coverage across Australia on an equitable basis. This reform will benefit all Australians, particularly remote and regional communities, by expanding baseline mobile coverage, which will in turn improve public safety by enabling connectivity to essential services and triple zero. In terms of the structure of the bill, there is one schedule comprising two parts. The first part amends existing part 2 of the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act to incorporate the universal outdoor mobile obligation into the existing universal service regime. It also provides for a range of new ministerial powers, including to set standards, rules and benchmarks for mobile service quality and reliability in connection with the new obligation. It also sets the default designation of Telstra Ltd, Optus Mobile Pty Ltd and TPG Telecom Ltd as primary universal outdoor mobile providers from 1 December 2027. These entities will for the first time be obligated to provide reasonable access to outdoor baseline mobile coverage across Australia on an equitable basis. Part 2 of schedule 1 inserts the new part 5a into the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act to give the minister for communications new powers to make standards, rules and benchmarks that need to be complied with by carriers and carriage service providers in relation to mobile telecommunications services. It goes without saying that some sectors of the community thought that the delivery of mobile coverage across Australia's vast inland areas would not be possible, but technology has intervened. In particular, the growth and development of new low-Earth-orbit satellite direct-to-device technology will make it possible. This direct-to-device technology is incredible. It's a satellite communication technology that allows conventional devices such as mobile phones or IOT sensors to connect directly to satellites in low Earth orbit, bypassing traditional cellular networks and ground based infrastructure. This means a device can send and receive data from virtually anywhere on the planet, even in areas without mobile coverage or network infrastructure. Low Earth orbit is the region of space closest to Earth, typically extending from an altitude of between 500 and 2,000 kilometres, reducing latency and improving signal quality. Unlike cellular networks, where devices connect to ground towers, direct-to-device systems use satellites as network nodes in the sky, receiving and transmitting data directly. Low Earth orbit direct-to-device technology has enormous potential across multiple sectors, including emergency and disaster response, because it enables the transmission of messages or alerts when terrestrial networks are down or unavailable. Then, of course, it provides much needed connectivity in rural and remote areas without cellular coverage, improving access to digital services, education and health care. Australia's investment in building sovereign satellites will underpin the growth of not only our domestic space capability but a range of other capabilities and will also promote partnerships between government and the private sector as investment in projects and missions and procurement from Australian companies take on much greater importance. Investment in sovereign space capability is critically important for Australian industry, science and skills formation. It will help commercialise innovation and translate the skills and capabilities developed in the space sector more broadly to the benefit of all Australian industry and society. Supported by this investment, one day Australia will also be able to send our Australian of the Year, astronaut Kathryn Bennell-Pegg, to space to further signal our commitment to space as a critical domain. This bill, which is a nod to space and the role of LEO direct-to-device satellites, will modernise Australia's universal service arrangements to provide equitable access to basic mobile coverage outdoors— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed, if she requires it. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 40 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Fuel 40 13:30 Mr GEE 261393 Calare In the Central West of New South Wales and around our country, there is a major fuel crisis unfolding before our eyes. Farmers are ringing the alarm bells as they're not able to secure the diesel needed to sow their crops. Fuel deliveries aren't turning up at service stations, and rationing in some areas has commenced. Cudal farmer Rob Cook wrote to me and said: 'Right on the cusp of planting season, it is critical that we are assured of both availability and supply and a reasonable price. This will become a food security issue if action is not taken now.' Mudgee area grazier Tim Rohar says: 'After recent rain, we prepared some land for sowing oats for winter feed. I rang our supplier for a delivery of diesel to replenish our supplies. I was informed that they were not able to deliver, as they are not able to access any diesel for on-farm delivery.' Another local farmer, Malcolm Crockett, wrote to me and said: 'We ordered diesel and petrol for our farm a week ago, and nothing has arrived. I've ordered seed to sow crops and fodder for livestock, and now I can't get hold of the diesel we need to commence sowing. Our business will grind to a halt if timely delivery of fuel doesn't occur. Time is a critical issue in our work to produce food for this nation.' This fuel crisis will very quickly become a food security crisis if immediate action is not taken. I call on the government to take urgent action to guarantee our farmers the fuel supply they need to feed the nation and our businesses the fuel they need to keep— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Macquarie has the call. Great Western Highway: Victoria Pass 41 13:31 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie People who travel the Great Western Highway across the Blue Mountains are facing a terrible situation, with the highway closed and a detour in place because of defects at the historic Victoria Pass convict bridge. Safety comes first, and the New South Wales government is working quickly to identify the issues. They're diligently working through the problem, looking for potential solutions. This is difficult terrain. If the fix was easy, it would have been done long ago. That's why I think everyone's priority is getting the existing convict era bridge reopened as soon as it's safe to do so. At a federal level, we've made investments in this vital road corridor with improvements, most recently at Little Hartley and Medlow Bath, but all of us know there is significant and difficult work to be done to improve the Great Western Highway, especially between Katoomba and Mount Victoria—and urgently now down the Victoria Pass. My state colleague Trish Doyle and I are determined to see ongoing improvements to the Great Western Highway. The federal government provides funding for projects following requests from state governments. The state government is then responsible for planning and delivering these projects. We have a budget coming up. If Minister Aitchison in New South Wales puts a budget request on this to Minister King, I'll be backing that investment and backing my community. Tolano, Mr Joe 41 13:33 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Last week the Sunshine Coast surf lifesaving community lost one of its own, 18-year-old Metropolitan Caloundra Surf Life Saving Club member, Joe Tolano. Joe disappeared in the surf at Buddina beach while in the water with friends before a training session on Wednesday 4 March. What followed was an enormous search effort involving police divers, rescue helicopters, jet skis, coastguard vessels and surf lifesavers from across the region. Tragically, Joe's body was found two days later. He was a passionate young surf lifesaver and a clubbie who had grown up through the Nippers program and was chasing his dream of becoming an ironman. For the Sunshine Coast surf lifesaving community, this loss has been deeply personal. Joe was one of our own. I speak about this not only as the federal member for Fisher but as someone who has served in surf lifesaving for 18 years. Conditions can change in minutes. Even strong swimmers and experienced surfers can get into trouble. That's why the red and yellow flags matter so much. My thoughts are with Joe's family, his friends and the entire surf lifesaving community. Joe loved the ocean. He served his community, and he'll never be forgotten. Indigenous Australians 41 13:34 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari I want to acknowledge Wanyubi Marika and Deputy Chair Brenda Marika as well as many others who have travelled from north-east Arnhem Land. The Yolngu people of north-east Arnhem Land are a strong people and they have a proud history of championing Aboriginal land rights and self-determination. It is a great pleasure to welcome a delegation of Rirratjingu leaders here today to this parliament. The Rirratjingu, along with the Gumatj, are the authors of the Yirrkala bark petition, a powerful statement which was the catalyst of the land rights movement. The bark petition protested the Menzies government's decision to forcibly excise land from the Arnhem Land reserve for a bauxite mine. The Yolngu had no say in this. They were not consulted and they didn't consent. The bark petitions and the pushback from the Gumatj and the Rirratjingu helped build momentum for the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, which was passed by this federal parliament in 1976. This year we celebrate 50 years of Aboriginal land rights, a proud and momentous achievement. The mine on the Gove Peninsula is now coming to a close, and the Rirratjingu delegation are here advocating for their future. This needs to be a future based on economic empowerment and self-determination, and I look forward to working with the Rirratjingu and everyone regarding the important future of the Gove Peninsula and the surrounding communities. Curtin Electorate: Environment 41 13:36 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin The Northern Jarrah Forest is one of WA's most precious landscapes. It supports threatened species and significant waterways and holds deep cultural significance for Aboriginal communities. Its economic, cultural, social and environmental value cannot be overstated. Alcoa has mined bauxite here for more than 60 years, but recent developments deserve scrutiny. The government's announcement that Alcoa will pay $55 million for habitat clearing between 2019 and 2025 may sound significant, but it equates to just $27,000 per hectare, well below comparable undertakings for similar harm. Equally concerning is that no remediation order was imposed, despite findings that Alcoa unlawfully destroyed protected habitat over years. When I met with Minister Watt last week, I did not receive a clear explanation for this omission. At the same time, the government granted Alcoa a national interest exemption from federal environmental laws allowing clearing for a further 18 months. Historically, this power has only been used for emergency safety works or urgent species protection, not commercial considerations, and this sets a troubling precedent. We've seen too often in WA how legacy mining approvals fail to keep pace with modern environmental standards. The reality is that jarrah ecosystems have never been successfully rehabilitated after mining. I urge the government to take a rigorous, transparent approach to the strategic assessment process. Before any approvals are granted, we must show that Alcoa's operations can be properly prevented— (Time expired) Maribyrnong Electorate: International Women's Day Young Leaders Breakfast 42 13:37 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong Last Friday I had the honour of hosting a room filled with bright and formidable young women who will lead our community into the future. My inaugural International Women's Day Young Leaders Breakfast brought together students and teachers from across my community to reflect on what it means to balance the scales. We were joined by three extraordinary women who have spent their careers doing exactly that, breaking glass ceilings and reclaiming space in traditionally male-dominated industries. I want to thank Bonnie Toogood and Steph Wales from the Essendon Football Club's AFLW team and the Hon. Jill Hennessy, former Victorian attorney-general and minister for health. We had a refreshingly open and practical discussion. We spoke about the advice we wished we had received when we were 17, the resilience required to thrive where you aren't always expected to and the importance of women supporting women. It was fantastic to see such strong representation from Kensington Community High School, Lowther Hall Anglican Grammar School, Mount Alexander College and Rosehill Secondary College. The energy these students brought to the room was infectious. To all the students who attended: your conversations were sharp, your passion for equity was clear and your leadership is already making a mark. Finally, my big thanks to Jill and the team at Windy Hill for their warm hospitality and for providing a perfect backdrop for such an inspiring morning. These young women aren't just future leaders; they are leading our schools and suburbs right now. My job and our job in this place is to make sure we're clearing the hurdles out of their way so they can get on with it. National Party of Australia 42 13:39 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland Today the Nationals parliamentary party room voted for a new leadership team after the decision by the former leader, the member for Maranoa, David Littleproud, to stand down. And, refreshingly, there was no plot. There was no undermining of David Littleproud. David made the decision himself to stand down as leader. So I want to thank him for his humility and the authenticity he showed throughout his time in the role and thank him for his dedication to a difficult task. In that same vein, I want to recognise the member for Page, Kevin Hogan, who served as deputy leader and didn't contest the deputy's position this morning. Thank you, Kevin, for your service to our party, and I'm sure you'll continue to make a major contribution to the Nationals. After 18 years in this place, I am now an overnight success as the new deputy leader of the Nationals. But this is not about me in any way, shape or form. This is about the people who send us here to represent them and achieve good outcomes on their behalf. And I'm concerned that, after almost four years of this prime minister, Australians are worse off and too many people have been left behind by a prime minister who promised to govern for all Australians. The clear message I'm getting from voters in regional Australia is that they are angry, they are frustrated and they want our mob on this side to do a better job too. And we stand ready to do that. Under the new leadership of the Liberal Party and the new leadership of the National Party, I'm sure we will be able to hold this government to account and continue to deliver on behalf of regional Australians. I'm honoured to be given the opportunity. I want to thank my staff, thank my family and thank my colleagues for showing their support today. Thank you. Qantas 42 13:41 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean Qantas was recently held accountable by the union movement—in particular, the TWU—for its inadequate payment of international staff at the Jetstar Singapore international cabin crew base. This is just months after Qantas was fined $90 million for its illegal outsourcing of 1,800 ground staff and $120 million paid to those workers in compensation. But what has Qantas announced now? That Qantas themselves will open a new international base in Singapore. Constituents have directly raised to me the concerns they have for their jobs and that this risks further entrenching long-term offshoring of Australian jobs. Under previous management, staff at Qantas went from being fully directly employed to being scattered across 38 different wholly owned subsidiaries and labour hire companies to drive down pay and conditions. With recent news around the closure of domestic cabin crew bases in Canberra, as well as Hobart and Mildura, there are major concerns about how Qantas is choosing to operate and restructure. Too often Canberra is overlooked and taken for granted by our national carrier. These global decisions have local consequences. Qantas should reconsider this move so that our local workers and economy are not negatively impacted. Show more of that spirit of Australia that they market themselves on so heavily. Fuel Security 43 13:42 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey I call on the government to commence action to bolster sovereign fuel and fertiliser production in this country. The businesses, families, fishers and farmers in my electorate demand it. With the Strait of Hormuz compromised, surging prices and rationing are worsening our cost-of-living crisis and putting primary production at risk. Suppliers are being told to prioritise retail stations over farms, and many regional pumps are already completely dry. In Port Lincoln, fleet sales have stopped. Fishers await a fuel ship, worried it might be diverted, as tens of millions of dollars worth of tuna lie waiting in pens offshore. Primary industries like seafood and ag need to be prioritised. Ninety per cent of tuna are penned. These fish must be fed, or businesses risk massive losses. Road trains face extra weekly costs of $1,300, surviving on retail fuel because yard deliveries have ceased. Furthermore, Australia relies on the Middle East for almost half of its urea imports. Urea usage peaks in April prior to seeding. NeuRizer was incredibly close to domestic production in Leigh Creek before red tape and green tape made approvals impossible. Thanks, Minister Koutsantonis and Minister Watt. We must move towards domestic production to stop being price takers and stop being vulnerable in an increasingly unstable global environment. Minister Bowen needs to pull his finger out and get fuel moving. Textile, Clothing and Footwear Industry 43 13:44 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Being from the northern suburbs of Adelaide, it is no secret that I'm a strong supporter of RM Williams and the contribution it makes to my community. The brand is an Australian icon, but more importantly it is a real manufacturing success story, with skilled workers in my electorate continuing to craft boots that are worn around the world. This industry contributes more than $27 billion to our economy and employs almost half a million Australians, many of them women working in skilled manufacturing roles across the country. Yet, despite that strength, 97 per cent of the clothing and textiles that we wear are made offshore. That is why the upcoming national manufacturing strategy for fashion and textiles is so important. As co-chair of the group Parliamentary Friends of Australian Fashion and Textiles, I am committed to supporting this sector and the people behind it—and I want to thank my co-chairs, the member for Flinders, Zoe McKenzie, and the member for Fowler, Dai Le, for their continued support and friendship in launching this group—and to supporting Australian fashion, because, when we support Australian manufacturing in fashion and textiles, we are supporting skilled jobs, regional communities and the future of making things in this country. I'm incredibly excited for the launch of this strategy and what it means for the long-term strength and longevity of the industry. To those that are attending tomorrow morning: you will enjoy a fantastic display of what Australia has got to offer in the way of Australian fashion. Cost of Living 43 13:45 Mr CALDWELL 306489 Fadden In the last couple of days we've heard a lot about the haves and the have-nots—about who has fuel and who doesn't. And it seems that our farmers, our fishers and our friends in the bush don't have fuel. But I'll tell you what we will all have shortly: higher prices. As was reported in the Australian Financial Review today, under the heading 'RBA deputy issues new inflation and rates warning', Deputy Governor Andrew Hauser said that inflation was expected to rise above the forecast 4.2 per cent but stop short of five per cent. He said: … failing to raise rates to the level they need to be and allowing inflation to get out of control is a clear problem. So not only are we seeing the cost of everything going up; we are now expecting that the result will be higher interest rates. This is a cost-of-living crisis that's already biting. Mark from Helensvale said, when he emailed me over the weekend: 'I just ducked out to buy some milk that four days ago was $4.50 per two litres and is now $4.70. Milk, up until approximately five months ago, was trading at $4 for the same product. I'm due to go shopping with my wife tomorrow, and I'm quite frankly scared at what it will cost.' The Treasurer had told us that we'd turned the corner on inflation, but he's been exposed for his mismanagement of the economy. Only the coalition will restore Australia's— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Swan has the call. Domestic and Family Violence: Financial Abuse 44 13:47 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan Financial abuse is insidious and it is persistent. Often, when a woman leaves a physically violent home, the abuse doesn't stop; financial abuse continues to occur. It has a long tail, and it affects women and children predominantly. What's fascinating is that financial abuse does not stop in death, and so what we've seen happen is that perpetrators have been able to access the superannuation benefits of dead victims. This flaw was exposed in the financial abuse inquiry which I helped instigate and was chaired by the fearless Senator O'Neill. Thanks to Julie Adams for her advocacy and strength in sharing her beautiful daughter Molly Wilkes's story. We are now one step closer to closing that loophole. Just last week, I stood shoulder to shoulder with the Assistant Treasurer, the Minister for Social Services and the Assistant Minister for the Prevention of Family Violence. This government has begun public consultation to stop perpetrators profiting from victims' deaths. It is not a coincidence that this is one step closer to justice. We are a government that listens and acts. I encourage community groups, frontline workers and members of the public to make a submission before 15 April. This is one step closer to a safer, more inclusive Australia. Economy 44 13:48 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey Leadership is about understanding that you can't control events; however, you can control how you prepare, and how you respond to events. And this government has failed to prepare Australians and the Australian economy for the cost, price, increases in fuel that we are seeing, with reports today of over $3 a litre for petrol in some outlets. Inflation is above the band, at 3.8 per cent. There are no shock-absorbers in the Australian economy to deal with the challenges we face, and this sits firmly as a failure of Anthony Albanese, the Prime Minister of this country, and the Treasurer. They have failed to prepare us for the challenges we have. But understand this: it is going to get worse. Every part of the supply chain for food in this country requires diesel—for the supplies to get to the food manufacturer, for the manufacturer to make the product, and for the product to go from the manufacturer, to the distribution centre, to the supermarket that sells it. Everything in this country, unfortunately, will get more expensive. And what do we get from this government? Silence. We get one letter to the ACCC from the Treasurer of this country. That is the sum total effort of this government to help the Australian people as it gets worse, and it continues to get worse. As prices go up at home, understand this: the failure is with the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. They have let you down. It is their responsibility. They have failed. Macarthur Electorate: St Gregory's College 44 13:50 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I'd like to congratulate St Gregory's College Campbelltown as it celebrates its centenary this year. St Greg's opened during the difficult years of the Great Depression, with just three Marist Brothers as teachers and 10 students. The college was established on land generously donated by local landowner Thomas Donovan, whose vision to support the education of boys from rural areas was great. Mr Donovan's generosity extended beyond the land itself. He provided the classrooms, the chapel and the first dormitory—facilities which established a strong foundation for the school. That dormitory proved particularly important during the Second World War, when enrolments grew as families sent their sons to board while parents served our nation. Today, St Greg's has grown into a renowned and respected K-to-12, co-educational school with more than 1,500 students and over 200 staff across teaching, administration and support roles. It's a cornerstone of education in our region and an icon of Campbelltown. The college is known for its proud agricultural and sporting traditions and for producing remarkable alumni, including NRL players James Tedesco and Alex McKinnon, former chief of the defence force General Angus Campbell and my colleague in this House the member for Clark, Andrew Wilkie. As someone who firmly believes in the power of education, I thank St Greg's and the teachers and staff for a century of service to our community and congratulate the entire St Greg's family on this extraordinary milestone. Fuel Security 44 13:51 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee This government is failing the people of Australia. There is no question about that. There's a cost-of-living crisis, and now we have a fuel crisis, which is not being managed, as we've just heard from the member for Casey—it's not being managed at all. A letter was sent by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. We need far more than that. I have farmers in my electorate—Trevor and Dave come to my mind. Horsham, Rainbow—out there in the bush, they can't get fuel. They're trying to spray their crops. They're trying to seed crops. I also have horticulturalists, almond growers, who are absolutely stressed by the fact that they cannot get fuel, and they don't know when they're going to be able to get fuel. This is an absolute shame on the Albanese Labor government—that the people of Australia, particularly regional Australia, are bearing the cost of the failures of this government. There is no excuse. We hear from the government every day '10 years of neglect'—no, four years in government. What have they got to show for it? The fact is that the farmers out in my electorate are suffering, and the people of Australia will not be able to get the food that they need on supermarket shelves if this continues. Local Women of the Year Awards 45 13:53 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore Today, I'm proud to cast a spotlight on four wonderful members of our community who are doing incredible things to make our world brighter, happier and more inclusive. Firstly, a huge congratulations to the amazing Dr Tina Broad of Mollymook on being named the 2026 International Women's Day Local Woman of the Year for the South Coast. A teacher, mentor and researcher, Tina encourages others to share a love of music through Sing Express and the Glorious MUDSingers choir. She also leads the Chorus 4 Kindness to raise funds for antibullying programs for young people. Two selfless, generous women—Irene Birks and Suzanne Eggins—shared the Local Woman of the Year title for Kiama. For almost 20 years, Irene has changed lives as a volunteer with the Red Cross, Meals on Wheels and Shoalhaven palliative care. She has also spent 10 years as a Lifeline counsellor and supported many local aged-care organisations. Suzanne is transforming the way Kiama celebrates and preserves its cultural heritage, having headed up the Kiama Historical Society since the 1980s. She oversees the Pilot's Cottage Museum and has helped enrich the town's cultural identity. Finally, a shout-out to 11-year-old Piper Clarke from Kangaroo Valley, who was recognised for supporting the Smith Family, Shoalhaven homelessness services and children's charities. Well done, Piper. The world needs more people like you. Fuel 45 13:54 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson The bowser is the new barometer of Labor's failure, and right now the needle is screaming the red, with fuel hitting $3 a litre. The lucky country is staring down the inflation inferno that experts warn will soon exceed five per cent. Instead of real action, this government has issued an impotent instruction to the ACCC that hasn't saved one single cent at the pump. But the carnage doesn't stop there. The government says there isn't a supply chain issue. I want to know who this government has been talking to. In Dawson the tanks are already running dry. Businesses like anything environmental normally receive 20,000 litres overnight. Now, owner Jason told me he has been waiting nine days. He's also been told he can only get half of his usual delivery, and it still hasn't arrived. When the diesel stops, the regions stop. We've heard in this chamber many times that the Albanese Labor government has been pouring fuel on the inflation fire. Now that the fuel is running low and the Australian dream is being reduced to ash, this government must end the economic arson, prevent the profiteering at the pump and stop torching the nation's economic future. Schools 45 13:56 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid This month marks an important milestone for public education in Australia. To mark the occasion, I have a pop quiz for the House. Colleagues, are you ready? Question 1: which government is delivering full and fair funding for all public schools in Australia? It's the Albanese Labor government. We worked with every state and territory government to get this great result. Question 2: when did we finally secure the agreements to fully fund our public schools? It was one year ago. This time last year, the New South Wales government signed their agreement, and, shortly after, Queensland signed on as the final jurisdiction. These agreements will deliver $16.5 billion in additional Commonwealth funding to public schools over the next decade. Question 3: what happens when a government properly funds public education? You get more support for students, more teachers in classrooms and more resources for schools so that every child in this country can reach their full potential, no matter their background. My last question: who neglected and underfunded Australia's public schools for a decade? It was those opposite. They refused to back our public schools, and I'm so proud that we are finally fixing that. Fuel Security 45 13:57 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Yesterday we found out a few home truths about the ineptitude of the Minister for Energy and Climate Change. Firstly, he has no idea that Australia runs on diesel—and I'm glad he's come in, because, Minister, you need to learn Australia runs on diesel. The second thing we learned is that, when you are a part-time minister, you don't have your mind on the job. You're more worried about what's happening at COP than you are about Australians. So, Minister, forget being part time. Get your mind on the job. We also heard this from him: Australia's fuel security is good. That's what we heard. Yet what did we hear from Transwest Fuels? What did we hear from United Petroleum? What did we hear from Nick Emin? Chris Bowen was saying there was still no issue, and the next phone call I got was from our fuel supply, saying there were no orders available. Minister, there is a real discrepancy between what you're saying in here versus what is happening out in the street. You need to start listening to the Australian people. They're hurting because fuel prices are going up and supply isn't where it needs to be. Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence 46 13:59 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner This week the Albanese Labor government has again demonstrated its commitment to improving outcomes for victims and survivors of sexual violence, with the expansion of specialised trauma informed sexual violence legal service pilots in New South Wales and Queensland. The pilots are a critical part of the government's $21.4 million response to the Australian Law Reform Commission's report into sexual violence. In Queensland, this investment will support a state-wide legal advice service delivered by Caxton Legal Centre, ensuring victims and survivors, particularly young people, can access clear legal information and advice when they need it most. During my career as a lawyer, I had the privilege of volunteering at the Caxton Legal Centre. I saw firsthand the extraordinary work that they do providing compassionate, practical support to people navigating complex legal issues often at times of crisis. We know how dedicated their staff and volunteers are, and I cannot think of a better organisation to lead this important work in Queensland. It is no coincidence that these issues are prioritised by our government with a majority women caucus. We must make our systems work better for women and survivors. I say to all victims-survivors: the Albanese Labor government sees you, we believe you, and we stand with you always. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. MINISTRY 46 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 46 14:00 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I inform the House that the Deputy Prime Minister will be absent from question time today and tomorrow. He's travelling to Indonesia for meetings with his counterparts. The Minister for Defence Industry will answer questions on his behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 46 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Economy 46 14:01 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Prime Minister, last year the Treasurer told us he had beaten inflation. Yet, even before the fuel crisis, inflation had beaten the Treasurer. Now the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has been caught unprepared for Australia's energy shortages, further punishing Australian households at the bowser and at the supermarket. Will the Prime Minister confirm that Australia's living standards have fallen under Labor? 14:02 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The Leader of the Opposition appears to want to just completely dismiss the fact that there is a war going on— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Prime Minister is 10 seconds into his answer. He's said about five words. I just ask the house to return to order so we can hear the Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 The conflict in the Middle East impacts the region. It also impacts the global economy. Australia is not immune to that, and Australians are concerned. Our government is dealing with it in an orderly, constructive way, and those opposite continue to want to pretend that none of that is happening. But actually what we have done, of course, is put Australia in a much stronger position to respond to these difficult issues. The best— Dr Chalmers 37998 You had it at 6.1 per cent, you fool! The SPEAKER 53517 Order! We're not going to have the Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition bantering. The Prime Minister is giving information to the House about a pretty important issue. We're just going to ask the House to settle, to reset, so the Prime Minister can be heard with respect. Mr ALBANESE R36 At a time like this, what we're doing is working with industry. Indeed, the president of the National Farmers' Federation said: Now is the time for calm, considered and sensible actions … Don't panic buy. He's been very clear about that. It stands in stark contrast to the behaviour of those opposite. I would have thought that the last few months might have taught the Liberal Party and the coalition that trying to turn everything into a political opportunity doesn't end well. It didn't end well for the former leader of the Liberal Party. It didn't end well for the former leader of the National Party. The surest— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! When the house comes to order, we'll hear from the manager. Mr Tehan 210911 It goes to direct relevance. There was— Honourable members interjecting— Mr Tehan 210911 No, this is serious. He was asked about a very serious issue; he wasn't asked about policies on our side. He was asked about what the government is— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. Resume your seat. I think it would be fair to say this question is quite loaded with the commentary that the Leader of the Opposition mentioned at the beginning of the question. It wasn't a straightforward 'please provide an answer' sort of question. So if there is quite a lot of politics in the question, there is going to be quite a lot of politics in the answer. Mr ALBANESE R36 I would have thought that they would have learnt something, but apparently not. No matter how big an issue is, they show how small they are and how small their vision is. Right now it is a fact that we have as much fuel coming through our ports now as we did before the war began. It's as simple as that. And for the opposition to whip up panic about this does not serve Australians; it only lets people off who want to rip people off at this time. They come in here and they practice, 'How can we divide and how can we create a political advantage out of what is a difficult situation that the Australian government is dealing with?' This is from a bloke who thought the fuel reserves for Australia should be kept in Texas. Australia: Floods 47 14:06 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister update the House on flooding events and extreme weather affecting communities in parts of the Northern Territory and Queensland? How is the Commonwealth working with the Northern Territory and Queensland governments to provide assistance to Australians impacted? 14:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler We on this side of the House are focused on the issues that Australians are facing, and one of those is the floods. Opposition members interjecting— Mr ALBANESE R36 The interjections say it all about those opposite and their focus. Not all of the LNP are like this though. I spoke this morning and had contact yesterday with Premier David Crisafulli, who was visiting Bundaberg. Bundaberg residents are under immediate threat of flood. Floodwaters are impacting the Wide Bay region, and will do for several more days. We say to the people of those electorates, prioritise your safety and the safety of loved ones. Follow advice about warnings. Remember: if it's flooded, forget it. In the Northern Territory, a large monsoon trough remains over the Big Rivers region. Minister McCarthy has visited evacuation centres in Katherine, including the evacuation centre at Katherine High School. I hear from the minister that the principal there, Nick Lovering, spent 77 hours straight on duty at the school supporting his community. That is the sort of thing that we see: at the worst of times we see the best of the Australian character, and that's a good thing. The Commonwealth, of course, is providing assistance wherever it can. In the Northern Territory we have deployed staff, through NEMA, who are active on the ground coordinating assistance, including with evacuations. The Commonwealth and Northern Territory governments have activated joint disaster recovery funding in Katherine. That includes support for clean-up efforts, immediate relief payments and short-term accommodation payments. We're in regular contact with the Northern Territory and Queensland governments, and, as always, we stand ready to respond to any further requests for help. This will be a hard time for Australians who are facing these threats, the aftermath of flooding and the uncertainty of the weather over the next few days. Every level of government will keep working together to help those affected get through this time, through the clean-up and through the recovery. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Chifley will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Chifley then left the chamber . The SPEAKER 53517 We're not having people interject as they approach the despatch box. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The minister for infrastructure will follow the member for Chifley if she's not careful. People need to be able to ask their questions in silence. Cost of Living 48 14:10 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein My question is to the Treasurer. After 13 interest rate rises under Labor, the average Australian mortgage holder is paying more than $23,000 more a year in interest than when the coalition left office. With National Australia Bank now predicting the 14th rate rise under Labor next week and the 15th when they meet again in May, will the Treasurer apologise to struggling mortgage holders for the pressures he is imposing on them? 14:10 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I wondered if he was still here; I'm pleased to learn that he is. He's got a lot of nerve asking about interest rates when, only a couple of days into his pretty disastrous stint as shadow Treasurer, he called for the end of the Reserve Bank's dual mandate. When he called for the end of the Reserve Bank's dual mandate, what he was calling for was higher interest rates and higher unemployment. He made that call within only a matter of days of being appointed the shadow Treasurer. Even by the standards of this shadow Treasurer, that is a pretty appalling stuff-up. If he wants to ask me about interest rates then he should fess up and tell the Australian people he wants higher interest rates and higher unemployment at the same time. That would be the effect— The SPEAKER 53517 I think the Treasurer was just saying, 'If he wants to ask me a question about interest rates'—it's difficult, but, as we've done before on a point of order, I'll give the member for Goldstein a fair go. Mr Tim Wilson IMW Point of order—relevance. We're now a minute into the answer, and he hasn't addressed the subject. The SPEAKER 53517 Well, yes, but that's not the point of that point of order. He's got three minutes to answer your question. You can't get up and ask about relevance just because he hasn't answered a question in a minute; that's not really the point of that point of order. It's about explaining if he was talking about something else. If the Treasurer is getting up and saying, 'He asked me a question about interest rates,' and he's answering it, then it's hard to use that point of order. Get it? Good. Dr CHALMERS 37998 That would be the effect of the shadow Treasurer's call becoming a reality—higher interest rates and higher unemployment. The second point I would make is that no responsible treasurer comments on or feeds speculation about future movements in interest rates. There are good reasons why treasurers don't do that. If only the shadow Treasurer was as responsible to stick to the convention, which has applied to economic spokespeople from both sides of the parliament over a long period of time. The third thing I would say is that he has conveniently left out from his question the fact that, in the course of the last year, we also saw three interest rate cuts. When interest rates were coming down, I don't remember the shadow treasurer saying it was all about the government. I respect the independence of the Reserve Bank, and that extends to not commenting on the future movement in rates. I also think that the Reserve Bank's dual mandate is very important because it means that the Reserve Bank is focused on jobs—the impact on real people and real communities—at the same time as they engage in this fight against inflation. When it comes to inflation—I have acknowledged on a number of occasions that we had an inflation challenge before the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East, but the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East, as the Prime Minister has pointed out earlier in question time, makes that challenge harder rather than easier. When it comes to fighting inflation, those opposite had it north of 6 per cent and rising. We've had it much lower. We know that it's still a challenge in our economy, and that's why we're focused on it. Iranian Women's National Football Team 48 14:14 Mr GREGG 315154 Deakin My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. What action has the Albanese Labor government taken to support the women from the Iranian women's soccer team? 14:14 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I want to thank the member for Deakin for the question, acknowledge his advocacy for the Iranian Australian community in his electorate and also acknowledge the support of all members of the House in solidarity, in particular, with the Iranian women's soccer team. Last night, I travelled to Brisbane and Sydney to make sure that, if anybody from the team were considering taking up the government's offer to remain in Australia, I would be able to meet with them so they weren't in a situation where officials had to answer some of their questions by saying, 'That's a matter for the minister.' I would be there in person to be able to answer those questions. Before I left, two people from the team—one team member and one support person—had made contact with my officials, saying that they did want to stay in Australia. At that point, they were separated from the rest of the group. When I arrived at Brisbane Airport, they'd been taken to the AFP centre, which is not far from there, to be able to meet with me. I took them through what their options were. They both indicated that they would like to stay in Australia. I told them on behalf of all of us that they would be safe here, they were welcome here and they would be at home here, and I issued them with humanitarian visas. I then travelled to Sydney. While I travelled to Sydney, those two were reunited with the other five who'd already made that decision. When I travelled to Sydney—and we would have seen the scenes of the team being moved towards an international flight—we wanted to make sure that every individual had a chance to talk to my officials without anyone else from the group with them. There was a small number of people who we had no intention of making an offer to. For the remaining people, we took them individually. If they wanted to contact family, they could contact family, and we made sure that did happen. There was actually some assistance with phone numbers across the aisle, which I want to acknowledge as well. Nobody in Sydney took up that offer but, importantly, all of them were without the pressure of other people watching them while making that decision. Now, I'm not naive. Nothing we did could take away the pressure of the context in which they were making that decision. Today, shortly after 10 o'clock, I was advised that one of the two who had made the decision to stay last night had spoken to some of their team mates who had left and had changed her mind. In Australia, people are able to change their minds, people are able to travel, so we respect the context in which she has made that decision. Unfortunately, in making that decision, she'd been advised by her team mates and coach to contact the Iranian embassy to get collected. My officials made sure that this was her decision, and every question you would want asked was asked. As a result, it meant that the Iranian embassy now knew the location of where everybody was. I immediately gave the instruction for people to be moved, and that was dealt with immediately. Can I simply say, and I know I'm out of time, that every member of this delegation has been shown a respect by Australia that would be unfamiliar to them in Iran. They have been shown a country that is willing to say the choice is theirs. And I think we can all be very proud of the Australian Federal Police, of my Home Affairs officials, of everybody who's been involved in this to make sure that Australia is a country where they can see there is freedom of choice for women as well, and a country where those who have made the decision to stay will be very welcome, and that very much the rest of the Australian people will be wrapping them in our arms. The SPEAKER 53517 To associate his remarks to support the minister, the Leader of the Opposition. 14:19 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I do associate the opposition with the remarks made by the minister. I support the decisions and the work of the minister on this important issue. As I said yesterday, these women have captured the hearts of so many Australians with the stand they have taken against a despotic regime and it's been an incredibly difficult time for them. I thank the minister for the work he's done. As the minister knows, there are a number on this side of the House who have been working hard to try to achieve this outcome as well. I do wish all the soccer players, whatever their choice was, the very, very best. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 49 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Acknowledgement 49 14:19 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to advise the House that in the northern gallery today is Councillor Matt Burnett, the Mayor of Gladstone and the President of the Australian Local Government Association. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 49 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Fuel 49 14:19 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. There's a run on fuel across Mayo. Despite fuel distributors working around the clock, many service stations are needing to restrict sales. Demand is expected to further increase as Vintage steps up for our grape growers. What action is the government taking to stabilise domestic supply chains in regional communities like Mayo so that we're not left with empty bowsers? 14:20 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question and the spirit in which she asked it. She is right, of course; across regional Australia, we have seen real pressures on the supply chain as demand has increased. I can tell the honourable member that demand in the Adelaide terminal has increased by 139 per cent, for example, and that is putting pressure on supply chains. It is important for all honourable members, I think, to be clear with Australians that supplies to Australia continue strongly and that we continue to have our minimum stock obligation, which has not been accessed. In addition, I can say to the House, in direct answer to the honourable member, that the Treasurer and I have worked closely together today to ensure that we are working with the industry and that any necessary ACCC exemptions are granted—it's an independent matter for the ACCC, of course, but we are working to facilitate that conversation with the ACCC—which would allow the companies to ensure that they are working together appropriately, not inappropriately, to ensure supplies to regional areas. We have also, the Treasurer and I, worked together to announce the doubling of penalties for false and misleading conduct and for cartel behaviour to a maximum of $100 million per offence, and we're asking the ACCC to ramp up fuel price monitoring and to report in weekly with a focus on unusual price spikes. In addition, I've asked the secretary of my department over the last 24 hours to exercise the powers available to him under section 13E of the Petroleum and Other Fuels Reporting Act to seek additional information about supply and demand at the fuel distribution terminals around Australia. I've asked the secretary, of course, to balance carefully the compliance burden on small business, which I would have thought honourable members opposite would have thought of as well—to ensure that any changes that are made balance the need for improved information at the regional level with any compliance burden on small business. In addition, today I've spoken to a number of CEOs of fuel companies, of large distribution and small, and service stations. They've advised me that supply continues to flow, as would be expected. I can tell the House that ships continue to arrive in Australia, but they are experiencing those localised disruptions because of that very elevated demand. We'll continue to work with them in the terms which I've outlined. Agriculture Industry 50 14:22 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. How is the Albanese Labor government working closely with Australian farmers and producers to support them during the conflict in the Middle East? 14:23 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I want to thank our terrific member for Bendigo. I know she's got some fine farmers and producers in her electorate, and it was great to be with her just a few weeks ago to meet with many of them. Our government understands the importance of keeping our farmers farming during this difficult time. We know that every community across Australia and, indeed, countries across the globe including our near neighbours rely on our world-class food and fibre. We're working day and night, as I said yesterday, with our farmers and producers to assist them with the immediate challenges from the current conflict in the Middle East, which we continue to monitor. Of course, front of mind for our farmers and producers right now at this point in time is the supply of fuel and fertiliser, which underpins everything they do, including, of course, our food production. We know that demand for fuel in some parts of the country is higher than normal, as the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has indicated, particularly in our regional and rural communities. We're hearing from our farmers, our producers and, indeed, our fishers that there are some challenges right now, which the minister outlined along with how we're responding. It's why our government yesterday held the roundtable with the National Farmers' Federation, Fertilizer Australia, the Australian Institute of Petroleum and the Australian Trucking Association. We all reaffirmed yesterday that this conflict in the Middle East is not and should not be an opportunity for commercial opportunity for people. We discussed yesterday the importance of the fuel industry delivering fuel across our economy, including to our regions. The minister has outlined the actions that we are taking. After this meeting yesterday, the President of the National Farmers' Federation, Hamish McIntyre, said: Now is the time for calm, considered and sensible actions … In fact, the leader—the former leader—of the Nationals rightly backed this message on Monday on Sky, where he said: … the big message for every Australian is, don't panic. The supplies are there. Regrettably, Mr Speaker, not everybody is getting the message. There is a responsibility on all of us in this place to act in the national interest, and I call on everybody to do that. All of us in this place need to reassure all Australians that fuel is continuing to arrive in Australia in normal volumes. People should go about their usual business in their usual way with confidence. The fuel supply coming into the country is in addition to the strategic fuel reserve that has not yet been drawn on. And let me be very clear about that. That reserve is larger than what we had when those opposite were in government. On fertiliser, for the upcoming planting season, the fertiliser that is required is already on the water or in the country. That is the advice that we are receiving clearly—that the fertiliser is already on the water or in the country. On this side of the House, we're going to continue to work with our farmers, our primary producers and our fishers in the national interest, and I call on everybody else in this place to do the same. Fuel Security 51 14:26 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Minister, yesterday you insisted that there is no fuel supply shortage. Today on the front page of the Australian Financial Review, Western Australian farmer Nick Emin said: Chris Bowen— the Minister for Climate Change and Energy— was saying there's still no issues, and the next phone call I get is from our fuel supply saying there's no orders available. Minister, why are Australians like Nick running out of fuel? 14:26 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon Not only did I say and do I say that Australia's fuel supply is secure; every honourable member should say that, because that's the truth. The responsible truth to tell the Australian people is that we continue to receive fuel supplies as expected. In the last 10 days, fuel supplies have arrived in Australia in Townsville, Brisbane, Cairns, Broome, Geelong, Gore Bay, Kwinana, Gladstone and Mackay. Those fuel supplies have been coming in as expected. At least 16 vessels have already arrived this month, and there are many more on the way, with 25 to 30 more vessels expected this month. The chief executives I've spoken to today have told me that there are no indications that that fuel won't arrive. In addition, we have the minimum stock obligation fuel supplies, which, contrary to what the Deputy Premier of Queensland so irresponsibly told Queenslanders and Australians yesterday, have not been accessed and are still there to be called upon if and when necessary. So it is the responsible thing to do to say to Australians that our fuel supplies are secure. At the same time, we have acknowledged that we are facing supply chain issues in regional Australia in particular and that we've seen demand for the Perth terminal, for example, increase by 165 per cent. Regardless of who is in office, regardless of what petrol companies are doing, that will put pressure on, and we should be honest about that. That will put pressure on supply, and we will see localised shortages, and we are. But we should also reassure Australians that industry and government working together can ensure that the supply of fuel to Australians is secure and there is no need for panic buying. We've paid our thanks to the member for Maranoa, who has said something very similar, and he has behaved responsibly. Not every honourable member opposite has taken the same approach. When honourable members opposite question whether Australia's supply of fuel is secure, they are undermining the national interest, because our fuel supply is secure. Mr Tehan 210911 My point of order goes to direct relevance. The minister was asked: why are Australians like Nick running out of fuel? I'd like you to come back and answer that question. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister has been providing a lot of information regarding the direct question that he was asked, including the amount of fuel, the terminals, where it's— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! If you want me to deal with a point of order, it's not going to help if everyone's yelling at me. If the minister is providing direct information about how much and where it's arrived—and I've listened carefully to what he is saying—he is being directly relevant. Maybe you want more information. I can't make him provide more information to you. I wish I could, but I don't have that magic power. I only have the power that the standing orders allow me. He is being directly relevant and I'm going to ask him to remain directly relevant for the remaining 27 seconds. Mr BOWEN DZS Thank you, Mr Speaker. When we're faced with an international crisis, it is not an economic opportunity or a business opportunity, and nor is it a political opportunity. It is a responsibility to work together—government and industry and, where possible, government and opposition. As I've said before, if the opposition has a constructive suggestion to make, I'll listen to it with open ears. The SPEAKER 53517 The Manager of Opposition Business is seeking to raise a point of order. It had better not be a frivolous point of order— Mr Tehan 210911 It's not. The SPEAKER 53517 I remind the manager that he's also got the matter of public importance today. Mr Tehan 210911 Speaker, I seek leave to table the front page of the Australian Financial Review, which has— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 That's fine. Of course. That's why I like to check everything and make sure we're doing it properly. The manager is not to hold the newspaper up and use it as a prop, which he did then to try and get a photograph taken of himself, which is highly disorderly. The Leader of the House? Mr Burke DYW Leave is not granted. The SPEAKER 53517 I remind the Manager of Opposition Business one more time that he has the MPI today, and I'm sure he wants to be here to discuss it. Fuel Security 52 14:32 Ms DOYLE 299962 Aston My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Can the minister update the House on Australia's fuel supply? What actions pose a risk to Australia's fuel security? 14:32 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank my honourable friend for the question. I can inform the member for Aston and the House that our fuel supplies remain in a good position, with 1.56 billion litres of petrol in our minimum stock obligation, three billion litres of diesel and 800 million litres of jet fuel, and also that fuel continues to arrive in Australia in the predicted way and at the predicted level, and that supply to Australia remains good. I can also report to the House that our two refineries are working well. They are responsible for around 20 per cent of the country's fuel demand, and, while it would have been better if we had six, we do have two and they are providing a very valuable role as we supply fuel across the country. As the government have always said, we are not discounting the risks in the market internationally, but we enter this crisis very well prepared, and that is what Australians can be reassured of. We are seeing very big increases in demand, particularly in regional areas. Let me make it very clear: I understand why Australians would be concerned, particularly if they see misinformation online, and I understand why they may be tempted to buy extra fuel. That is very understandable. But our message to Australians is: buy as much fuel as you need—not less, not more. That is an important and responsible message that any member of parliament, I think, would be encouraged to deliver. What is not understandable is any Australian who seeks to capitalise on this—and I've seen on Facebook Marketplace people selling jerry cans of fuel at inflated prices. I've seen people— The SPEAKER 53517 I'm going to take action against the member for Herbert, who continues to interject nonstop. He will leave the chamber under standing order 94(a). The member for Herbert then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister is now going to be heard in silence. There's far too much noise in the chamber. Mr BOWEN DZS I've seen people who can access fuel buying way too much fuel and selling it on Facebook Marketplace and other places, no doubt. I'm sure that is dangerous. As I said yesterday, it is not without risk to fill up jerry cans and sell them online. It is a risk to fuel security as well. As I said, it's incumbent on all honourable members across the board to send that responsible message. I have seen that the South Australian Liberal leader, whose name is Ashton Hurn, has been heard saying, 'If I could give you two bits of advice, No. 1 would be "vote Liberal" and No. 2 would be "fill up your tank sooner rather than later."' I think both of those bits of advice are bad, but the second one is dangerous and irresponsible. If anybody thinks they want to hold high office in Australia, whether it be at this level of government or at the state level, giving advice to panic buy should disqualify them from office in Australia. It is irresponsible, it is wrong and it is factually incorrect. Fuel 52 14:35 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Yesterday the minister insisted that there is no fuel supply shortage. The Dorney family in Bulahdelah run two timber mills, multiple hauling and felling crews, and a fleet of logging and freight trucks. In one week alone, their daily fuel costs have increased by $7,800. Their supplier says the problem is not panic buying but fuel shortages at terminals and rationing between customers. Minister, under your watch, why are Australians like the Dorney family, and their business, running out of fuel? 14:36 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon As we've said consistently this week, we recognise fully that, in regional areas in particular, there are shortages and that the supply chain is under huge pressure, as we've seen a massive increase in demand. That has been our consistent position. It remains our consistent position. We've been very clear that no-one in the fuel supply chain should seek business or economic benefit out of that. Today the Treasurer and I have worked very closely together with the ACCC to ensure that ACCC penalties are increased for the sorts of behaviour that see people—if anyone is—trying to exploit that situation for their own financial gain. The ACCC will deal with it. In relation to the honourable member's question, it's also necessary—and, I would have thought, it's in the interests of the honourable member's community—for all of us to point out that fuel continues to come into Australia at the expected level and that our fuel supply stockholdings are good, which they weren't previously. Before 2023, when we instituted the minimum stock obligation, whatever holdings we held were in Texas, and we would be in a very difficult position if that was the case. We would be in a difficult position if that was still the case. Mr Taylor 231027 Why don't you do your job? Mr BOWEN DZS The Leader of the Opposition—the member for Hume—says absolute nonsense. It's a fact. They were held in Texas while you were the minister. While the member for Hume was the minister, our fuel supplies were held in Texas. You know that they hold records. You know that they keep records of these things. The records also show that we now keep the minimum stock obligation in Geelong and Brisbane. It is accessible if we need to access it, which it wasn't when the member for Hume held my position. Fuel Security, Fuel 53 14:38 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How is the Albanese government securing national fuel supplies? Why is working with the transport industry so important at this time? What can all members of this House do to encourage Australians to use our fuel supplies as they normally would? 14:38 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I thank the member for Bonner for her question. Her electorate, of course, includes the Lytton Refinery, which is doing a lot of heavy lifting to ensure our country is fuel secure. I want to echo the minister for climate change's words: Australia is fuel secure because of the actions of this government. We take fuel security very seriously, and we also take seriously how critical fuel is in keeping regional communities and the transport sector moving. It's why we have made important decisions that have better prepared us for fuel shock, including the minimum stockholding obligation back in 2022 and ensuring that our two refineries remain open. I also want to be very clear that every scheduled delivery of fuel in Australia has arrived here as planned. I know, however, that Australians are concerned that a significant increase in demand for diesel has seen shortages, particularly in some regional communities. We are seeing some regional service stations struggling to replenish fuel supplies, with demand doubling and even tripling in some areas. I, along with Minister Collins, Minister Ayres and Minister Bowen, met yesterday with both the fuel suppliers and the peak of the transport industry to discuss these issues and to ensure that the key players are working together. I in fact met with Centurion, the largest WA transport provider, this morning. We'll continue to work with industry on how best to manage this, including our meeting with other transport providers tomorrow to ensure continued visibility of this issue. We do continue to have adequate supply of jet fuel, but we do expect that there will be some increase in relation to airfares. We do understand that this is challenging for many people and that people are feeling the impact of higher prices at the bowser. It's why we're taking immediate action to ensure fuel providers aren't taking advantage of the current conflict, and we've charged the ACCC with ensuring there is no price gouging at fuel stations. The ACCC also already monitors airfares and will continue to do this to ensure that airlines don't unfairly raise their prices. Now, just as this is not a commercial opportunity, it should also not be a political opportunity either. I would ask—and I do so, frankly, more in hope than in expectation given what we have seen from those opposite—that we all be responsible for helping our constituents to recognise that consistent supply means we should all continue to purchase fuel and use fuel in a measured and consistent way. When elected members and commentators intentionally spread fear in the community, that contributes to panic buying. Those opposite's irresponsibility in this case is there for everybody to see. Fuel 53 14:41 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to his previous answer and what he said about fuel supply flowing to Kwinana. Kylie, from Cataby, runs an earth-moving business and emailed me saying: 'My fuel supplier, FueleX, has informed me that they are blocked from accessing fuel out of Kwinana and cannot tell me when they will get more.' Minister, can you advise how long will Kylie be waiting until to get fuel? 14:42 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I did refer to fuel being delivered to Kwinana because there has been. But the honourable member raises a question on behalf of a business. If the honourable member wants to provide me with the details of that, I will make inquiries on behalf of that business, see what can be arranged for that business and check the situation with her fuel supplier. Honourable members should know I invited honourable members opposite to come and see me yesterday with any issues they wanted to discuss. One did. I welcomed their visit, and we had a good, confidential discussion about the issues, and I'm happy to do that with any honourable member. One member visited me to discuss the issues in their region, and I very much welcomed their visit. Any honourable member is welcome to raise issues with me in good faith, and they will be dealt with in good faith. We'll continue to work with the industry. An opposition member interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS The honourable member has asked what's going on. I refer honourable members to a statement by the Australian Institute of Petroleum just before question time, which said: Over the last week, AIP member companies have been hit by a sudden rush to buy fuel. In some cases, suppliers have seen bulk fuel customers buying four times their usual volume of fuel. The rush to buy fuel has been unprecedented, outstripping the surge seen at the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian war in 2022. They're just the facts. But what we'll continue to do is work with all the necessary parties across the board. We yesterday held a roundtable for relevant senior ministers with the key groups, including the National Farmers' Federation, the National Farmers' Federation, who very genuinely represent the interests of farmers. The President of the National Farmers' Federation, Hamish McIntyre, has said there's been an increased demand by around 40 per cent right across the nation. 'The stock of fuel is still flowing. We're comfortable with that. As Minister Bowen has advised us, we just have to slow down demand across Australia.' He went on to say, I feel obliged to tell the House, 'It's great to see that the minister's taken this initiative with all the sectors involved right across the transport industry. We're working together to make sure there's a fair and even distribution of it.' An opposition member interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The minister is reading a quote. He is being directly relevant. This is highly risky for the manager—on a point of order? Mr Tehan 210911 Relevance, Speaker— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. You can't use that standing order simply to interrupt. The minister was reading a quote in response to a question he was asked. Mr Pasin 240756 Quotation time, not question time. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! That is highly disorderly. The minister will be heard in silence. Mr BOWEN DZS We're quoting the National Farmers' Federation and the work we're doing for people represented by the honourable member and people right across rural Australia, because that's the approach this government takes. Dealing with a difficult situation, dealing with an international crisis and dealing with a huge spike in demand, we are working together across the sectors to take whatever action is necessary. That's what we'll continue to do. If those opposite choose to use an international crisis as a political opportunity, it says more about them than us. Superannuation 54 14:46 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid My question is to the Treasurer. How will the Albanese Labor government's new legislation make Australia's superannuation system fairer and more sustainable? How does this compare to other approaches? 14:46 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I thank the member for Reid for her question but also for the really important role that she has played in ensuring that thousands of workers in her community will get more superannuation because of this government. That's because our plan to make superannuation fairer from top to bottom is now law. It passed the Senate last night. Super is a force for good in our economy. It's an important source of security for the working people of this country, and last night this government made it stronger and fairer. Already we've delivered the 12 per cent super guarantee, and we're now paying it on paid parental leave. And now we're delivering more super for people with the lowest balances and more sustainable tax breaks for people with the biggest balances. This is an important economic reform with an intergenerational dividend. It means 1.3 million Australians will have more super because of our boost to the low-income super tax offset. It means more super for 100,000 sales assistants, more super for 50,000 aged-care workers, more super for 7½ thousand workers in Hume, more super for 7,000 workers in Goldstein, more super for 7½ thousand workers in Gippsland and more super for 8½ thousand workers in New England. These workers are getting more super despite their local member and not because of him. That's because the Liberals, Nationals and One Nation all voted for less super for workers, bigger tax breaks for the wealthiest Australians and bigger deficits. All three right-wing parties in this place do what the billionaires tell them to do, not what working people need them to do—and we saw that in the Senate again last night. Superannuation is not safe under those opposite. The new Leader of the Nationals, just last year— Mr Pasin 240756 We're living rent free in your head. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Barker is warned. Dr CHALMERS 37998 spoke about taking the super guarantee back down from 12 to nine per cent. The shadow treasurer wrote about dismantling compulsory super for lower and middle-income earners. This Labor government is delivering more super and more sustainable tax breaks. They are the same old Liberals—peddling their extreme right-wing ideology, hacking at wages and hacking at retirement incomes of the working people of this country—and now with a shadow treasurer who wants to dismantle super, privatise Medicare, end work from home and ditch the dual mandate that asks the RBA to consider its impact on employment. This side of the House is proud of superannuation. We built the thing. We are doing more than protect it from those opposite; we are making it stronger, we are making it fairer and that's what the new laws deliver. Fuel 55 14:49 Mr JOYCE e5d New England My question is to the Treasurer. We have been approached so many times in our offices about what is happening with this fuel issue. It's ridiculous to say that there is not an issue out there—it's patently absurd. What has been asked of me to ask you is: how quickly can we organise a meeting between the independent distributors, the ACCC and you—I'm happy to take the Minister for Climate Change and Energy as well if you wish—to address these issues so you can hear from the ground up? They're watching this. They really want to know what your answer is going to be. 14:49 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I don't need the member for New England's invitation to consult with the ACCC; we've been doing it through the course of today. The government has made it very clear through the good work of ministers right across our frontbench that we are prepared to engage with industry, with regulators and with everyone who has an interest in making sure that we can continue to supply petrol and diesel at fair prices right around the country. In the last hour or so, Minister Bowen, Assistant Minister Leigh and I have made some important announcements about additional steps that we will be taking in this regard. We are taking additional action to help consumers get a fair go at the pump, with more scrutiny and surveillance of the fuel sector, bigger penalties for misconduct and action to shore up fuel supply. We have acknowledged that, even though there is enough fuel supply in this country, there are pressures in particular areas, and we've demonstrated a willingness to work with the industry, with the regulators and with others to ensure that we fix those issues in the supply chain. We've also made it clear that the conflict— The SPEAKER 53517 Treasurer will pause. The member for New England was asked about a meeting, and the Treasurer has indicated exactly to that part of the question that he's answered. I'm not going to just entertain points of order because people don't like the answer. Mr Joyce e5d The point of order is on relevance. They're listening, wanting to know when they can have this meeting with you. The SPEAKER 53517 I think the Treasurer is providing information regarding that timing. At the beginning of his answer, he indicated who he'd been meeting with. Dr CHALMERS 37998 I also inform the House that the minister for energy has been talking with the independent suppliers even today—potentially multiple times today—for the work that we have done and the announcements that we have made today. The announcements have three important parts: working with industry to increase fuel supply to service stations, including by helping the fuel sector secure ACCC authorisation to coordinate supply and unlock bottlenecks; tasking the ACCC to ramp up its surveillance, particularly of unusual price spikes; and doubling the penalties for false or misleading conduct and cartel behaviour to a maximum of $100 million per offence across the economy. So, the point that I'm making—and I say this respectfully to the member for New England—is that we don't need his invitation to engage with the industry. We've been doing that all along. We've been engaging with the ACCC as well, and that's why we've been able to make this announcement in the last hour or so. As I said before and as the others have said, including the minister, the conflict overseas can't be seen as an excuse to profit off Australians. We are putting the petrol companies on notice. We won't cop big corporates treating Australian consumers like mugs. The steps we're taking today, in addition to the steps we have already taken, are all about getting fairer petrol prices for Australian motorists and more fuel supply at service stations, particularly in regional areas. We have spent a lot of time—I pay tribute to my ministerial colleagues for the work that we have put into this issue—and have been working through these issues in a methodical and considered way. And, as the transport minister made clear before, if those opposite really cared about fuel security, they wouldn't be engaged in the kind of scaremongering which makes things worse rather than better. Telecommunications 56 14:53 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter My question is to the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories. How is the Albanese Labor government improving connectivity for people living in regional, rural and remote Australia? What other approaches has the government been asked to consider? 14:53 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I thank the member for Hunter for his question. He knows the importance of connectivity across regional communities. Whether you're in the outback, on the coast or in our mountains, it's completely frustrating when your phone drops out even doing the most basic of tasks. Improved connectivity not only keeps people in touch with one another it means safer roads, stronger businesses and access to key services. That's why our government is committed to improving communications in the bush. We're delivering the better connectivity plan, investing $1.1 billion in rural and regional communities. And we're delivering a $3 billion injection to upgrade Australia's remaining fibre-to-the-node network, because we recognise that fast, reliable, affordable internet is an essential building block of any modern economy. We also want to ensure that the NBN stays in public hands, where it belongs. This government is boosting mobile connectivity through round 8 of the Mobile Black Spot Program, including in Cessnock and Cooma in New South Wales, Townsville in Queensland and Mount Barker in South Australia. These upgrades improve connectivity for regional areas that are at risk of natural disasters, and we aren't relying on a colour-coded spreadsheet, unlike those opposite when they were in government. Of course, just last month, we announced that we're rolling out AusAlert. AusAlert uses cell-broadcast technology to enable authorities to send targeted emergency messages to all compatible mobile devices within a 160-metre radius of an incident, moving Australia to international best practice for emergency warning communications adopted by more than 35 countries across the world. We are improving connectivity through our universal outdoor mobile obligation as well. It is a significant and important reform to bring mobile services within the universal services framework. Whether in national parks, on hiking trails or out on the farm, we want your connectivity to be accessible. Our Labor government is building the infrastructure and services regional communities rely on, and the biggest risk to this progress is a Liberal-National coalition always inventing new ways to take Australia backwards, as they did with a copper broadband. Our vision is clear. We want a connected Australia. No matter where you live or what you do, you deserve the ability to connect. I know that yesterday the former leader of the Nationals, the member for Maranoa, resigned saying he was 'buggered'. Buggered is exactly what those opposite did when they stuffed the NBN, inland rail, the infrastructure investment pipeline, regional grants, the North Sydney "regional" pool—the list goes on. Unlike those opposite, we are energised, and we are excited to be delivering for regional Australia. The SPEAKER 53517 Just before the minister resumes her seat. I don't like and appreciate that sort of language used in the House. Order! An honourable member: He did say that. The SPEAKER 53517 Outside the House—but inside the House. Middle East 56 14:57 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. The Strait of Hormuz has been closed to shipping since the start of the war in the Middle East. Given that 20 per cent of the world's oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, alongside LNG and alumina, can the minister advise how long he expects military efforts will take until this critical choke point is reopened? 14:57 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I thank the member for his question, although I'd point out that he's probably directing the question at the wrong person. He's effectively asking me to predict when the conflict between Iran and the United States and Israel will end. I would submit that's a question best directed to President Trump, the rulers of Iran and the Prime Minister of Israel. In terms of what the broader question went to, which was the potential interruption to our supplies, I can report to the House that, as a response to a recommendation of the Defence Strategic Review, we doubled the fuel holdings for the Australian Defence Force. That's something that should have happened under your watch, which you failed to do. The latest advice from the Chief of the Defence Force is that our fuel supplies to the ADF, including from the Middle East, are uninterrupted. So instead of scaremongering, they should ask constructive questions to the people who have responsibility for these interruptions. Rural, Regional and Remote Australia 57 14:58 Mr MATT SMITH 312393 Leichhardt My question is to the Minister for Resources in Northern Australia. How has the Albanese Labor government building a future made in Australia to create new jobs and boost regional economies? How does this compare to other approaches? 14:59 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I want to thank the member for Leichhardt for his question. He knows that a strong north means a strong Australia. The Albanese Labor government is committed to developing northern Australia, because the Labor Party is the only party in this House that truly represents the interests of northern Australians and, indeed, the interests of all regional communities right around the country. Twenty-four members of this government, 24 members behind me here today, directly represent regional and remote communities around the country. That's many more than the 14 Nationals that we have in this chamber today. I might, to inform the House, take this opportunity to remind everyone that only one member of the Nationals today spoke in favour of the NAIF legislation before the parliament, and that is the former leader of the Nationals—well, one of the three former leaders of the Nationals in this House today. The conflict in the Middle East has shown why it's important to build a future made in Australia, to support local industries, to strengthen our national resilience and our supply chains. From day one, the Albanese Labor government has been bolstering Australia's sovereign capability so that the nation can weather these international disruptions. One of the best examples is this government's support for the Perdaman urea project in Karratha through the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility. Urea is the N, the nitrogen, in the famous fertiliser made of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. This project is due to start production next year and, in the meantime, as the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and the    Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry has explained, Australia is well supplied for urea. Very importantly, the Perdaman project will ensure our farmers have a secure supply of fertiliser to strengthen Australia's food security and the food security of the region. Then there are the jobs—2,000 jobs in construction for the Perdaman project and 200 ongoing jobs. The NAIF has provided about $475 million to this project—to Perdaman itself, $220 million; to the Pilbara Ports Authority, $160 million; and to the Water Corporation as well. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Durack is warned! Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 It is the largest project of its kind in the country and the largest manufacturing investment in Australia's history. I'm asked about other alternatives, and I'm asked about the issues that may arise. The answer is that the threats to regional Australia are those opposite. As I mentioned before, only one member of the Nationals spoke on the NAIF bill. Another former leader of the National Party—again, there are three of them here—was the member for New England. He urged the new Leader of the Nationals, Senator Canavan, to push out the member for Capricornia so he could take up his rightful place as the Deputy Prime Minister in this chamber. Have you ever seen such entitlement from a bunch of agrarian socialists? Well, here they all are—three of the former leaders are sitting here. We'll get on with the job. (Time expired) Fuel 57 15:02 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy Treasurer, one 10th of our entire export earnings, $62,000 million, boomerangs offshore to buy fuel. Since our question to the Prime Minister last week, truckies, tourism operators, farmers and families are now paying 25c a litre more at the bowser. Since 2005, we've repeatedly moved that 32 per cent of our fuel requirements be met from our own offshore oil reserves. This is without even tapping our oil shale. Brazil, America and Europe all have ethanol, whilst China and India have announced ethanol. Will the budget continue to say no to ethanol for another 30 years? 15:03 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks to the honourable member for his question. For as long as I've known the member for Kennedy, or known of the member for Kennedy, he has had an interest in fuel security and particularly biofuels, so I want to acknowledge that at the outset. I also want to assure him that we're not waiting for the next budget to take action on fuel security. The government's taken a number of important steps, including when it comes to our Cleaner Fuels Program, to address some of the issues that he raises in his question. Just today, as we've said in earlier answers, we've taken some additional important steps to address fuel security, particularly in regional areas. We do acknowledge that even though there is certainly enough fuel overall, there's pressure in some areas, so we're working closely with industry, the regulators and others to make sure that where there's pressure on supply chains, we're working as hard as we can to address them. Just today, we're doubling the penalties for retailers doing the wrong thing and others doing the wrong thing. We've got the fuel price monitoring being ramped up for price spikes. We're working with industry to increase fuel supply to service stations, including— Mr Katter HX4 Mr Speaker, a point of order. The question was: why aren't we using our own resources— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. Mr Katter HX4 to meet the problem? That's not the answer I'm getting. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Resume your seat, Member for Kennedy. You simply can't get up and say you don't like the answer. You've got to state the point of order. Dr CHALMERS 37998 What should be of particular interest to the member for Kennedy is that these three sets of initiatives that we're taking today are on top of a number of fuel security initiatives that we already have in place. For example—and this goes right to the member for Kennedy's question—on 17 September 2025 the energy minister and I, in Brisbane, announced the $1.1 billion Cleaner Fuels Program to kickstart low-carbon liquid fuel production in Australia, which is all about using our know-how here and our resources here to contribute to fuel security. The Cleaner Fuels Program is all about low-carbon liquid fuels, along some of the lines that the member for Kennedy has talked about before. We've also got the domestic reserves through the minimum stockholding obligation that commenced in July 2023. We're maintaining our domestic refining capability through the fuel security services payment, which again goes directly to the member for Kennedy's question. Remember that we had six refineries at the start of the member for Hume's time as energy minister. We've now got two, but we've taken steps to secure our supply. We're reviewing the relevant legislation. We passed legislation in December to strengthen our response capabilities as well. So this government understands the pressures on fuel security. We've taken a number of steps, including trying to rebuild and build our own local supply capacity and manufacturing capacity when it comes to low-carbon liquid fuels. If other steps are required, obviously we'll consider them in the usual responsible way. Women's Health 58 15:06 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How is the Albanese Labor government working to deliver better health outcomes for Australian women? Why is the government so committed to investing in the health of Australia's women after a decade of cuts and neglect? 15:06 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Thank you to the member for Chisholm. She is one of 69 women who sit in the government party room and one of 50 women who sit on this side of the House of Representatives, compared to five Liberal Party women who sit on that side of the House of Reps. There are twice as many women who sit on this side whose names start with A as there are Liberal Party women on that side of the House overall. And I can tell you that every single one of my female colleagues reminds me regularly that you cannot be serious about strengthening Medicare without strengthening women's health. Women consume about 60 per cent of the nation's health services, often not because they're sick but because they're women taking responsibility for their own and their family's reproductive health and reproductive planning or because they're going through menopause or perimenopause. The truth is that women have not been getting the support from our healthcare system for decades that they deserve and they need. This morning, I want to pay tribute to the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care, who made a statement to update the House on our progress in this area and other areas relevant to her responsibilities in the women's portfolio, and I thank her for her tireless work in this area. Last year, the government added the first new contraceptive pills, the first new menopause hormone treatments and the first new endometriosis medicines to the PBS for literally decades. Since then, almost 400,000 women have been able to access their menopause hormone treatments at affordable PBS prices instead of having to pay top dollar. One of those women, Anne, recently messaged me and told me that she was saving more than $600 a year because of that listing. More than 300,000 women are accessing their oral contraceptive pills at PBS prices. We didn't just modernise the PBS in this respect. We've added new MBS or Medicare entitlements as well. Almost 80,000 women just since July have accessed the new comprehensive menopause health assessment. Women are benefiting from higher rebates for complex gynaecological care. Larger Medicare payments now mean that women can access implants and contraceptive IUDs free of charge instead of paying up to $400, which is what they were doing before last year. This package is focused on providing women with more choice, with lower costs and with better care, and it is already making a huge difference, righting the wrongs of decades—frankly—in too many areas, and is delivering a stronger Medicare for Australia's women. Fuel Security 59 15:10 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Fuel supplier Transwest has told the CourierMail, 'We currently have zero petrol supply at Newcastle and Brisbane. This means that, once our servos run out of petrol, that's it. There's no more.' Can the minister assure Transwest that there are no fuel supply shortages in Australia? 15:10 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I can certainly assure Transwest and ensure the House and ensure every Australian that our fuel supplies are secure, with more fuel coming to Australia every day. I can assure Transwest and assure the member for Groom that 18 vessels have arrived this month to unload fuel and crude oil in Australia, and 33 more vessels are on the water and scheduled for the rest of the month. The chief executives I've spoken to have assured me that there is absolutely no reason to suspect that they won't arrive on time and as expected. I can also inform Transwest and the House that our minimum stock obligation, which this government put in place to be held in Australia for Australians at times of crisis, is in place with three billion litres of diesel and 1½ billion litres of petrol in place that will be called upon as necessary. I can also inform Transwest and the House that we are seeing increased demand. I think the honourable member referred to the Newcastle and Brisbane terminals. Demand at the Newcastle terminal is up 136 per cent and demand at the Brisbane terminal is up 115 per cent. That will put pressure on supply. It will when that happens. It doesn't matter, to be fair, who's in office at that time. When you see doubling of demand, it's going to cause some pressures on supply in the short-term. But, nationally, our stocks are good. We are working cooperatively with the industry to ensure that it is delivered to the regions that are experiencing shortages as quickly and as efficiently as possible, with the supply chain constraints that are in place, with the transport restrictions, natural restrictions of the size of the transport industry that are in place, and that work will continue. We'll work with anybody of good faith with any good ideas. I'm yet to hear one from the opposition. Albanese Government 59 15:12 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government supporting Australians, and how does the government's leadership differ from that of others? And, Prime Minister, why is consistency of leadership so important? 15:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Paterson for her very good question. The government is strengthening Medicare. We're building homes, we're cutting taxes and we're supporting jobs. We're dealing with A Future Made in Australia, which is one of the reasons why we've secured greater fuel reserves than were secured by those opposite, and they are secured here in Australia. Now, the surest sign that something important is happening in Australia or in the world is that those opposite turn the spotlight on themselves. On the national day of mourning for victims of the antisemitic Bondi terrorist attack, they announced they were splitting the coalition—again. On the day of the funeral of the former member for Higgins, the members for Hume and Canning publicly plotted against their leader. On the day that Israel's president was in Canberra to support grieving members of the Jewish community, the member for Hume resigned and called for a spill. Now, with Australians feeling the impact of the war in the Middle East, the Nationals have elbowed their way to centre stage. We're focusing on fuel security for regional communities; they're focused on their front bench security. They have only two settings—talking Australia down and tearing each other down. Tonight Australians will be focused on a certain dinner party on Married at First Sight and they'll experience a bit of deja vu because there's a range of quotes that Australia has about MAFS, but is it about them or the coalition? The fights are explosive. The relationships can be toxic. It's typically maintained a certain level of drama that feels catastrophic. And, my favourite—it is a bit of a mystery in some ways as to why people are so open and honest on such a public platform, but we're very grateful they are. We see them on Sky News talking about themselves. Then they come in here and they try to engage in political opportunism no matter what the crisis is that Australians are facing. The fact is we will continue to govern in the national interest. For those opposite, there'll be a different frontbench when we get back here tomorrow, maybe—who knows! Maybe by the time we come back in a week's time it'll be different again. But one thing will remain the same: same old Liberals, same old Nats, same old One Nation, just three right-wing parties not standing up for Australia. On that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS 59 STATEMENTS Personal Explanation 59 15:15 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 53517 Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented? Mr TIM WILSON IMW Yes. Once again the Treasurer has repeated a misleading statement about my views of the Reserve Bank and the dual mandate. I have never said this. The only person who has said this is him. Today, in addition, he made a remark about not supporting work from home. This has never been said and I'm afraid the only person who said it is him. DOCUMENTS 60 DOCUMENTS Presentation 60 15:16 Mr BURKE DYW Watson These documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 60 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Fuel Security 60 15:16 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable the Manager of Opposition Business proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government's failure on fuel prices and fuel distribution. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:17 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Sadly, Australians should be very concerned today, because the person in charge of trying to make sure that fuel is distributed across this country has one of the worst ministerial track records this country has ever seen. You have only to go back to his period of time as immigration minister, when we saw more deaths at sea and more people arrive on this shore than nearly any other Labor minister has ever achieved. Go back to his time when he was assistant Treasurer, when he was actually encouraging bigger deficits and higher taxes. Go back to his record when it comes to grocery watch and fuel watch. Remember that? Remember fuel watch? He doesn't seem to be using it now. I wonder why. Then, of course, there was the promise of $275 off your power bill. How did that go? I think we're all still waiting. I think all the Australian people are waiting. But it gets better. In the House today he said that his door is open and if you've got a problem, if anyone in industry has got an issue then you just give him a call and he'll make sure that he'll talk to you, he'll deal with the issue and there's no problem. So one of our MPs, who will remain nameless—he can out himself, but I was happy to keep it quiet. I'm happy for him to out himself. He actually has requested to go and see the minister about one of his constituents on the Mooloolaba wharf that has no diesel. So we're not going to get tuna. We're not going to get tuna. Guess what the response was? 'The minister is unfortunately unable to meet with individual requests due to a high number of requests.' It reminds me of Corporal Jones of Dad's Army—don't panic, don't panic, don't panic! So you want us to legitimately put requests to you about people who are hurting in our electorates because of higher fuel prices and because they can't get fuel, and you won't even take those requests because of the high number that are coming in your door. What this points me to is another big problem that this minister has. Mr Venning 315434 He's part time. Mr TEHAN 210911 He's part time. You are absolutely right, Member for Grey. This is what happens when you are a part-time minister and your focus is on the United Nations and on being part-time 'el presidente'—remember he has to share it; remember he had to compete to share it. This is the problem. While Australians suffer with higher fuel prices and not being able to get fuel, his mind is elsewhere. If you want to get a sense of why this minister has his mind elsewhere—we saw it today. I wish I hadn't taken a point of order on this, but I had to on behalf of the constituent who'd raised the question. We had the minister quoting the minister on the minister. Doesn't that say it all? No wonder he wants to be over at COP being 'el presidente'. That's where his ego wants to take him. What we're saying to the minister is it's time to put all that aside. Forget about quoting yourself on yourself and start getting back to the Australian people. The Australian people are doing it tough at the moment. In some instances they've seen a 40 per cent increase in the price at the bowser. Can you imagine? You're struggling with the cost of living, and you turn up to the bowser and there's a 40 per cent increase in fuel. You have to start thinking, when you're driving the kids home from school, 'Does that mean I don't stop at the shop for a snack?' Does that mean, when your son or daughter comes and says, 'I wouldn't mind a new pair of soccer boots, because I put a hole in them,' you think to yourself, 'Sadly, that money's now going into my fuel tank rather than providing my kids with that new pair of soccer boots'? Does that mean that those who are struggling to pay the bills to feed their families now have more costs and have to start rationing their food even further or they have to start thinking about rationing their fuel? This should not be the case in this country at the moment. We have a distribution issue. The minister is not delivering the fuel where it needs to go, and we've pointed out to him how he could do this: be on top of your game, don't be a part-time minister, call the independent distributors in, call the fuel companies in and use the information that you have available from the mechanisms that we put in place to deliver that fuel where it needs to go. It does seem like the minister today, following the absolute towelling he got in question time yesterday, has decided to act and it sounds like he's starting to make some decisions which might see some of the shortages ameliorate. But the problem is that—and we saw it on the front page of the Fin Review today—in some instances it's too late. With regard to the example on the front page of the AFR today, that farmer who is wanting to put a crop in cannot get the fuel to put his crop in. The more farmers that happens to, the less food security this nation has. What will that ultimately lead to? It will lead to supermarket price rises. This is the incompetence of the minister for energy. Not only are people paying more at the bowser but they're going to be paying more at the supermarket. Put that on top of what is happening with inflation in this nation, and this is a serious cause for concern. We had the NAB out today saying it's highly likely we'll get an interest rate rise next week. And guess how much the average Australian is paying on their mortgage? An additional $23,000, as a result of the economic mismanagement of the Labor government—$23,000. I look forward to hearing what the assistant minister has to say about this when he gets up to speak, because not only are we paying more at the petrol pump, not only are we paying more at the supermarket, but, since you've come to office, those people with a mortgage are paying $23,000 more on their mortgage repayments. So we have a serious cost-of-living crisis in this country. Our standard of living is declining daily. And yet that hapless lot over there can do nothing to turn around this standard-of-living decline. As a matter of fact, what we've seen this week is that the Minister for Climate Change and Energy is making it worse. So I say this to the Prime Minister. He concluded today—when Australians are doing it tough, when Australians are doing it hard—by turning his attention to us. Yet you know what the Prime Minister said, when he was in opposition? He complained, every single time we turned attention onto them. So I'd say to the Prime Minister: Stop being a hypocrite, and focus on the Australian people. Focus on getting your ministers to do their job. Get your minister for energy to do his job. Get your Treasurer to do his job. Make sure that you help and assist Australians with this standard-of-living crisis, because everything your government is doing is making it worse. I'll finish on this note. I'll say this to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy: Your track record as a minister means you should not be sitting in that seat. And what you are doing to the Australian people, through your incompetence on fuel price rises and fuel shortages, should absolutely be damned. 15:27 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner At the beginning of 2022, after claiming that only the coalition could be trusted to keep petrol prices low, the Morrison government saw petrol prices hit 216c a litre in Sydney and 212c a litre in Melbourne. What did fuel companies face if they were engaged in a breach of the competition law? They faced not a serious penalty but a slap on the wrist—a $10 million penalty, that really wasn't a penalty; it was the entrance fee to the bad behaviour club. The fuel industry is one of our more concentrated industries. The big four have more than two-thirds of the market, compared to just a fifth for the big four fuel retailers in the United States. And so, when we came to office, we raised the penalties for anticompetitive conduct. We raised that maximum dollar figure from $10 million to $50 million—a five-fold increase—because, under Labor, penalties will not be a cost of doing business. Today, the Treasurer, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and I have announced that a Labor government will double penalties for false or misleading conduct and cartel behaviour, up to $100 million per offence, across the economy. This very clearly demonstrates that only Labor can be trusted when it comes to looking after consumers and ensuring we have a more competitive and dynamic economy. Under the coalition, we saw a rise in market concentration, an increase in mark-ups and a decrease in the small-business-creation rate, and we saw significant signs that the Australian economy wasn't as dynamic. Under Labor, we've set about putting in place a strong competition agenda. We've reformed Australia's merger laws—the biggest overhaul of our merger laws in 50 years—to ensure that the competition watchdog is able to properly scrutinise mergers and keep a lid on excessive market concentration in the economy. We've got national competition policy going again, with a $900 million productivity fund, working with the states and territories to try and get those sorts of productivity-boosting competition reforms that turbocharged productivity and boosted household living standards to the tune of some $5,000 a household in the 1990s. Reflecting that 1990s experience, we've refreshed the National Competition Council, now chaired by Marcus Bezzi, and we're working collaboratively with states and territories on a robust competition agenda. Labor knows that if we are to get productivity going again after it languished for the nine years in which the coalition was in office, we need competition reforms that'll work for Australians. Today the Treasurer, the energy minister and I announced that we will task the ACCC to ramp up fuel price monitoring, reporting weekly, with a focus on unusual price spikes. We'll work with industry to increase fuel supply to service stations, including by helping the fuel sector secure ACCC authorisation to coordinate supply and unlock bottlenecks. This follows the Treasurer having written to the ACCC last week asking them to ensure that motorists aren't being taken for mugs. The ACCC has issued their own statement to retailers. Labor has convened relevant forums: the National Coordination Mechanism to respond to emerging supply chain issues, the Trusted Information Sharing Network and the National Oil Supplies Emergency Committee. We've seen very volatile global oil prices. They jumped over the last few days to over $120 a barrel, falling back to $80 a barrel and then rising to $90 a barrel over a matter of hours. Australia is not immune to the uncertainty and volatility in the global economy, but our measures are about ensuring that petrol suppliers are doing the right thing and ensuring that the small minority of bad actors can't hurt regional Australians or farmers. We need to be clear: Australia is not experiencing a fuel shortage. We're seeing localised disruptions due to significant spikes in demand. We have not had a single ship carrying oil to Australia that has been unable to get through. As the energy minister told the House during question time, 18 vessels have arrived this month. We are seeing spikes in demand, not any disruptions to supply. What can political leaders do? Well, it's incumbent on all of us not to be fanning the flames but to be very clear with Australians that this is not the time for panic buying. We've seen that from some of those on the other side of the House, to their credit—the former leader of the Nationals, the member for Maranoa—but we have not seen it from every coalition state member or federal member around the country. Labor have worked strongly to ensure that Australia's fuel reserves are healthy. Australia's fuel reserves are now healthier than they have been at any time in the last 15 years. Under the coalition, Australian fuel reserves were kept in the Northern Hemisphere—kind of a strange definition of 'Australian fuel security', you might think! It might have been very handy for the United States to have a bit more Australian fuel sitting in Texas and Louisiana, but it's an odd place to keep your fuel safety net—on the other side of the Pacific. Under the coalition we saw six of Australia's eight refineries close. If refinery closures were an Olympic sport, they would have swept the podium! Labor have worked to boost the minimum stock obligation. We have on hand some three billion litres of diesel and some 1½ billion litres of petrol. The energy minister has issued an instruction that the minimum stock obligation should now be updated weekly, not quarterly, and that's in addition to the further reporting obligations that he put in place when we came into office in 2022. We're also taking pressure off those fuel reserves by increasing the share of Australia's vehicle fleet that are electrified. When we came to office, some two per cent of cars sold were electric. That's now up to 14 per cent. That means there are fewer motorists placing demand on those fuel supplies. We've also seen changes within the electricity grid. Gas usage in the electricity grid in summer 2025 was about half what it had been in summer 2022. Global gas prices often follow global oil prices. This means the Australian electricity sector is less subject to those pressures. The previous speaker, the member for Wannon, spoke about cost of living in general. I'm very happy to take on the member for Wannon on cost of living any day of the week. He is, after all, part of a party that went to the last election promising to raise income taxes for every Australian. Australian taxpayers are due to receive two further rounds of personal income tax cuts, which will add to the first round of tax cuts that commenced in July 2024. We're putting in place a new thousand-dollar instant tax deduction from 2026-27, which will reduce paperwork and provide tax breaks. We've cut student debts. We've provided cheaper medicines. We're making it easier to see a bulk-billing doctor. We've backed increases to minimum and award wages—something the coalition never did. We're helping Australians get a better deal on their energy bills. We're helping Australians get a better deal at the checkout. Labor has a broad agenda for supermarket competition. Whether through ensuring that farmers get a fairer deal through our new mandatory Food and Grocery Code of Conduct—which every member of the coalition in the House voted against—or whether through Choice's quarterly grocery price monitoring or whether through our first-in-16-years ACCC review of supermarket competition, Labor has provided an additional $30 million to the competition watchdog in order to crack down on misbehaviour by supermarkets. On top of that, we will soon be bringing to parliament measures to ban unfair trading practices, subscription traps and drip pricing. As Matthew Cranston from the Australian reported at the beginning of the week, Australians lose some $46 million a year to subscription traps. Labor is putting an end to that—a cost-of-living measure and a fairness measure, because good businesses offering fair exits from subscriptions shouldn't be competing with dodgy players who are making it hard to get out of subscriptions. Only Labor prioritises consumers. Only Labor is passionate about competition reform. Only Labor will deliver on putting downward pressure on prices, putting upward pressure on wages and improving the living standards of all Australians. 15:37 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay If Hollywood made a sequel to How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days—I love that movie—it wouldn't be a romantic comedy; it would be a disaster movie called 'How to Lose a Small Business in 10 Days', written and directed by and starring the Albanese Labor government. The hero up against it all would be Australian small businesses—hardworking tradies, transport operators, family businesses. They get up before dawn and keep our communities going. And the villain in this story? I'll give you a hint. He had the top billing in question time today. But, as with any good blockbuster, we need a story, so let's walk through the plot. Day one: make fuel so expensive that running a small business becomes a gamble. In Western Sydney, fuel isn't optional; it is the engine of the economy. Tradies rely on it. Transport companies rely on it. Small businesses rely on it. Families rely on it. When fuel prices spike, everything else follows. The groceries on supermarket shelves cost more to transport. Building materials for homes become more expensive. The price of a plumber turning up at your door goes up. In my electorate of Lindsay I spoke with Aaron, a local plumber who runs three trucks across our region. Like many small trades, his business used to offer free call-outs and investigations, because he wants to help his customers. But he simply can't afford to do that anymore. Fuel costs have forced him to take one of those trucks off the road. When the price at the bowser rises, the service van disappears. When the service van disappears, the customer pays more. And that's just day one. Fast-forward to day three: let fuel supply uncertainty creep into the system, because the problem isn't just price; it is supply. Despite claims that there is plenty of fuel in the country, we are hearing reports of wholesalers rationing petrol and diesel. Transport operators are being told they cannot access their normal bulk fuel supplies. Some have been forced to buy fuel at retail prices instead. Regional petrol stations, relied upon by transporters and farmers, have reportedly run dry in recent days. In Western Sydney, I've heard from a local transport company operating around 20 trucks, 12 hours per day, on major infrastructure projects right across Sydney. Their fuel supplier has introduced rationing. If they need 10,000 litres of diesel, they may be able to access only two. Imagine trying to run a fleet of trucks when you don't know whether you'll have the fuel needed to keep them on the road. How can you run major infrastructure projects when there is so much uncertainty? No fuel means no deliveries, and no deliveries means no business, and no business means no jobs. Day five: add an hour to every job, because traffic is crawling and fuel stations are running dry. Time is money, and, for small businesses, every extra kilometre driven and every extra minute spent on the road adds to the cost of doing business. In my electorate of Lindsay, Gina runs Nepean Regional Security with a fleet of 14 patrol vehicles. Around 70 per cent of her services depend on those vehicles being on the road, responding to alarms, patrolling public amenities and recreational spaces, and protecting businesses across the community. When fuel prices spike and supply becomes uncertain, the pressure compounds. Drivers spend longer on the road, navigating congestion, detouring between service stations and trying to secure fuel to keep their patrols running. What should be a quick response to an alarm call-out becomes a longer, more expensive trip. When you multiply that across 14 vehicles, operating night after night, the costs and the delays add up quickly. For businesses like Gina's, that lost time means higher operating costs, tighter margins and harder choices about how many vehicles can remain on the road. When fuel becomes expensive and difficult to secure, every extra hour on the road becomes another hit to the bottom line. Day seven: crush margins, until small businesses have nowhere left to turn. When fuel costs surge businesses try to absorb the shock, but they can only absorb so much. Suppliers start passing on higher delivery costs. One local supplier doubled its delivery fee overnight from $15 to $30. Materials become more expensive. And, by day 10, the ending writes itself. You've lost another small business—not because they lacked grit, not because they lacked customers and not because they lacked determination, but because they were trying to operate in an environment where prices are so volatile, supply is uncertain and government leadership is missing. That is why fuel security matters. And it stops with the Albanese government. Western Sydney businesses do not need another disaster movie. They need a government that understands that fuel is not just about transport; it's about tradies getting to work, it's about trucks delivering materials and it's about families. It keeps our economy moving. And, right now, too many businesses in Lindsay feel like the government has left them completely stranded at the bowser. 15:42 Mr MATT SMITH 312393 Leichhardt It is a demand issue, unfortunately. The world has changed a little bit in the last six or seven weeks. But I want the constituents of Leichhardt, and the people of Australia, to be reassured. The ships are still arriving. The oil is still here. There are three billion litres of diesel, 1.5 billion litres of petrol and 800 million litres of jet fuel—not needed yet, because the supplies are still coming. Demand has spiked, and it is creating supply-chain issues. We know this; we are working on this. It is unacceptable to profit off Australians using the excuse of an international crisis—unacceptable. The Treasurer has made that very clear. The people of Australia are making that very clear. This side of the House makes it very clear. I've written, on behalf of my constituents, to the ACCC, to make sure that the Far North is included in any investigations into price-gouging. It is making it harder for our primary producers—particularly in an electorate like mine, which is enormous. But I am confident that we will get through this and we will get through this together. The cost of living was brought up multiple times—which is ironic, given those opposite have opposed just about every single cost-of-living measure that has been placed before this House, leaving Australian families worse off. They go to an election promising higher taxes and higher deficits, yet then come in here with the gall to say that not enough is being done. We work with Australia. We work with the suppliers. We work with the fuel companies. We get solutions. What we don't have is $600-billion nuclear dreams. Practicality is the answer here: working with the people on the ground, figuring out where the supply lines are choked and working our way through and around that. When I came to this House, I was excited for my election, excited for what I might be able to achieve for my community, excited to be able to join a place of like-minded people whose ultimate goal is seeing Australia be the absolute best version of itself. I tried to reflect on that yesterday in the Federation Chamber through the words of a young girl, who wrote a speech for me as part of her work experience, pointing to the sacrifice and the dedication, what it takes and what it means to be a representative in this place, a representative of your community, a representative of Australia. Using fear for political gain is beneath us. We are better than that. Australia is better than that. Our farmers deserve better than that. People in the street deserve better than that. It is absolutely disgraceful. It's beyond countenance. Why spread fear to create a problem that you cannot solve? You're part of it. Now, instead of creating fear, instead of spreading misinformation right across the country and letting things run like wildfire on social media, the option is clear: tell people we have the supplies because it's the truth, not because it helps the political narrative but because it's the truth. Tell them that the fuel is in Australia, because it's the truth. Everything's bigger in Texas, but it doesn't help you from there. It's a long way away. The fuel is here now. Eighteen ships have arrived in the last month and 35 are on their way. The amount of fuel that was here in January is here now. This is not a supply issue. The sooner we get that message out, the demand will begin to reduce and prices will begin to reduce as well. We are in a world where the order is changing. We know that there are now pressures because of the conflict in the Middle East that are beyond our control. What we can control is the narrative. What we can control is the truth. And when we decide not to do that, we let down our constituents, we let down the honour of this chamber and we let down Australia. Every single person in this country deserves better than that. Fear is not a weapon to be used for politics. 15:47 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor In the deep south of my electorate, in the southern forests around Manjimup and Pemberton, our potato farmers are working flat out at the moment. The Della-Vedovas, the Bendottis, the Omodeis, the De Campos and many, many other families are busy harvesting potatoes, which are on a very finely tuned supply chain. They start harvesting in January and they generally go through until about June. Those potatoes end up on the shelves in our major supermarkets within days of them coming out of the ground. Now, yesterday I asked a question of the minister on behalf of one of those farmers, Dom Della-Vedova, who had been told that he had 10 days fuel supply and that it would be three weeks before he would get any more. I asked the minister if he could guarantee that Dom will get the fuel that he needs. The minister obfuscated for three minutes. He gave some very vague assurances that there was enough fuel in Australia, but he couldn't give the guarantee that those potato farmers in the south of my electorate in WA will get the fuel that they need. Now, we heard today that the Kwinana storage tanks have had a block put on them and that distributors are not allowing fuel to leave those tanks. The minister says in the Dad's Army style of Corporal Jones, 'Don't panic, don't panic.' But these farmers aren't panicking. They're just being prudent and they are being told that the fuel that they need to get those potatoes out of the ground and get them onto the supermarket shelves is not going to be available. That's not panicking; that's responding to something that you've been told by your supplier. Going more broadly than my potato farmers, Western Australia just produced 27.2 million tonnes of grain in the last harvest. Those farmers have just come off a record season and are busy preparing for the next season. There's a lot going on out on the broadacre wheat belt farms that requires a lot of diesel: they're spreading lime; doing summer spraying; there's stubble rolling going on; and, by the end of the month, they will start dry sowing. If they're not able to start sowing at the correct time, it will have a catastrophic impact on the yield come the end of the year. When they ring up their fuel suppliers and say they need 25,000 or 50,000 litres, which is a big dump—that's the two tankers you see on the road, in one hit—and they are told that the fuel is not available, they're not panicking but are concerned about that, and they want answers from the minister. The minister says we've got plenty of fuel on hand here and there are ships on the water; it's all good. But anybody looking a bit beyond that, like a farmer who might need fuel at end of March into April and through May for their seeding program would be thinking that the conflict in the Middle East has been going for about eight or nine days now, which is about the shipping time either from the Middle East or a little bit less out of Singapore, where a lot of our fuel is refined, but a lot of that crude does come out of the Middle East. Twenty per cent of the world's oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, and we haven't yet seen the impact of the fact that that strait has now been closed for nine days. So, if I'm a wheat belt farmer and I'm thinking I'm going to need a considerable amount of diesel in the next two to three months and we haven't really seen the impact of the conflict on fuel supply yet, then I'd be very concerned. I wouldn't necessarily be panicking, but I would be very concerned. I'd be very concerned that the minister can't give us any assurances and doesn't seem to have taken this issue seriously until the last couple of days. Now he's holding meetings with the various regulatory bodies and so on. It is of enormous concern to the people of my electorate. Going beyond our farmers, we're seeing roadhouses across the electorate running out of fuel. We've seen prices spike. I've seen up to $2.27 for unleaded 91 across my electorate. Flicking through the responses to my Facebook post from yesterday's question, I saw someone had posted a historical post from the Prime Minister in 2021 where he'd posted a fuel station sign showing petrol at $1.79. He said, 'I bet Scott Morrison hasn't been out looking at petrol prices recently.' Well, isn't karma beautiful? At the moment we are seeing petrol prices under this Prime Minister rocket through $2.20, and we'll see them hit $2.50 if they don't get the Strait of Hormuz cleared shortly. 15:52 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck The uncertainty that faces the world today, particularly with the conflict between the USA, Iran and Israel, inevitably has an effect on us here, back at home. The best way to deal with this is to have a solid, practical government that concerns itself with good evidence based policy: a government that deals with short-term problems and at the same time works towards long-term solutions to the overarching challenges that are confronting us, then works to permanently reduce energy costs. The member for Wannon's party is from time to time in coalition with the National Party—and members of that party have just today elected a climate denier to lead them. Senator Canavan is, of all members of this parliament, one of the least acquainted with evidence based policy. It's all very well for the member for Wannon to want to talk about fuel prices. When this government capped gas prices, the member for Wannon and Senator Canavan voted against it. When this government takes measures to reduce energy bills, to encourage the take up of renewables and EVs, or for tax cuts that help Australian workers with the cost of living, the member for Wannon and Senator Canavan vote against it. Voters deserve a Liberal Party and a National Party that offer real alternatives and not just a policy-free zone, ongoing infighting and heads in the sand. Nevertheless, global events remind us how interconnected the world's energy markets have become. I'm sure all members would wish, as I do, that the conflict in the Middle East might come to an end soon. It is, however, outside our control, and while it continues it carries risk both to global inflation and growth. We are not immune to that, but we are well positioned to weather it. We are fuel secure. We are above our minimum petrol stockholding obligations, and fuel does continue to arrive. Now, the price of fuel, of course, is fluctuating. The volatility sees the price of fuel barrels fluctuating on a daily basis anywhere from $80 to $120. So I call on constituents in my electorate of Hasluck to keep an eye on our WA FuelWatch. This helps us identify which fuel stations are offering petrol and diesel at what prices. And in my electorate—in Ellenbrook, Midland and Noranda—there is a 40 cent price difference across the fuel station offerings, so please do check in there. In the meantime, we've written to the ACCC to ensure that fuel retailers are not using the conflict in the Middle East to price gouge and profiteer, to see this as a commercial opportunity for profit. They're on notice. The government has already increased the penalties available to the ACCC by five times, up to $50 million, and there are on-the-spot fines. What we see now is not just the management of short-term pressures on global energy markets, which is obviously critical; our government is also focused on doing something equally important, which is driving down energy costs permanently for Australian households and businesses. One of the most powerful ways that we can do this is by accessing the technology that's already available on the market. It is for Australians to be generating and storing cheaper power at home. Households in Hasluck across the suburbs of Midland, Bassendean and Ellenbrook. We're already embracing this with rooftop solar at remarkable rates. Western Australians are, in fact, leading the nation in the rate of household solar uptake. And then we have our Cheaper Home Batteries Program, where the government is investing around $2.3 billion to reduce the upfront costs of household batteries by around 30 per cent, or roughly $4,000 off a purchase price for battery set-up. This combination of solar and then the battery storage can save as much as $2,300 on an electricity bill, and it dramatically reduces reliance on the grid, I'm happy to report, in fact, that our household bill has gone to zero thanks to the installation of the battery system. Thanks to the government grants, we now have now 250,000 installations, and, at last count in WA, Tangney leads the pack, with over 2,300 installations; Bullwinkel is second, with just under 2,300; and Hasluck is not far behind, with 2,100. While people like the member for Canning spend a fair bit of time awkwardly perched on the bonnet of a car and hysterically trying to suggest that net zero is killing industry, the good people of Canning know otherwise and, in fact, have installed over 2,000 batteries under the scheme. Home batteries allows families to store their own power, reduce reliance on the grid at peak times and cut their bills. (Time expired) 15:57 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Today's matter of public importance debate is about the government's failure on fuel prices and fuel distribution, moved by the member for Wannon, the Manager of Opposition Business. He comes from a regional electorate and he would, as I have and as many other regional members should, talk to his farmers, talk to his growers, who at the moment are at the start of sowing season. And it's not just farmers; it's also those wonderful truckies and trucking transport operators, many of them family owned, who are really desperately worried at the moment. They're not getting the answers they seek from the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and they are desperately seeking solutions. Now, one of those solutions would be to ensure that we have distribution and supply. It's all well and good for the minister to come to the dispatch box and talk and talk and talk, but it's another thing when the reality on the ground is that, out in regional Australia, they cannot get the supplies and the distribution that they so desperately need. One of those is Paul Lawton. He's got 12 trucks. He's running out of Gunning and he has operations in Young, Goulburn and Wagga Wagga as well. He is buying 236,000 litres every fortnight. That's a lot of fuel. The last time he fuelled up, it was $1.60 a litre for diesel. Next time he fears it will be $2.60 per litre, and he is very concerned. He employs 15 locals. His wife, Kristen, and his mother, Marilyn, are part of this family owned business. But he is desperately worried about supply, and he is just one person—the face, if you like, of the concern in regional Australia. At 5.13 pm on Sunday, I went to fill up to come to Canberra. There was the sleeve on the diesel bowser—'temporarily out of order'—at the petrol station I usually fuel up at on Lake Albert Road in Wagga Wagga. I didn't fill up, because obviously there was no diesel available. So I got home and phoned up, and they said, 'We're right; it's all good.' As I returned there the red Ron Finemore Transport tanker had just finished fuelling up. That's all well and good. That supply would have run out, and I would urge and encourage people not to panic buy. I would urge and encourage people to use the NRMA Fuel Finder app to find the cheapest fuel. But there is a concern out there about distribution. There is a concern about supply, and the government has to explain better what it is doing to allay those concerns in regional Australia, particularly for the growers who are about to embark on sowing season. If they can't get the fuel from their distributors, they can't grow the food. And if they can't grow the food, the price is going to go up and up and up. That will produce all sorts of issues. Even if trucks could get to the supermarkets at the moment, they're not going to have any food to distribute to supermarkets, and it will be a problem in and of itself that will manifest in higher prices at the checkout. Of course, people are already facing higher prices at the bowser, and the issue is supply. The issue is distribution. If these trucking companies cannot get the fuel, then the nation stops, because trucking companies run this nation. Without them, the nation grinds to a halt. The minister is not giving convincing enough answers as to what he's doing. The ACCC needs to be involved. Our distribution companies need to be involved. It's all well and good for the minister to say his door is always open, but we've heard from the member for Wannon that it is not. Please, Minister, be truthful. Come clean about what the government is doing about this critical issue, because if our trucking companies can't get the supply—if they can't get the distribution—then this nation will be in awful strife. Our farmers, who are at the moment embarking on sowing season, will be in all sorts of trouble. We don't need higher prices; we just need answers. We need them from the minister. He's the one in charge. Where is he on this? 16:02 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong It is extraordinary that the Leader of Opposition Business, a senior member of the opposition who has been in this place for more than 15 years and has served as a cabinet minister, would choose to use his time in this chamber to fearmonger and to attempt to scare the Australian people. At a time of global uncertainty, Australians deserve facts and leadership. What they do not need is an opposition once again choosing to amplify anxiety during a crisis for their own political gain. I do acknowledge the member for Riverina on his message not to panic buy. It was good to see that. I'm glad to hear that. But those opposite know, and many of them saw it firsthand when they were in government during a pandemic, that when global events create uncertainty, the role of members in this place is to reassure Australians and provide clarity. It is not to serve their own political interests at the expense of the national interest. This type of behaviour is not only dangerous; it is unhelpful and it is dishonest. Australians have every right to be concerned when major international events threaten global supply chains. The escalation of conflict in the Middle East is serious, and it has implications for energy markets around the world. Australia is not alone in this challenge. But let's be absolutely clear about the facts when it comes to Australia's fuel supply. Our nation is fuel secure. In fact, we are above our minimum petrol stock obligations. As the minister confirmed in question time today, this stock has not yet been accessed, because the supply to Australia continues strongly. We are in a stable position because this Labor government acted. From the moment we came to office, we took practical steps to strengthen Australia's fuel security and ensure our systems were resilient in the face of global shocks. In case those opposite have lost sight of it in their political games, there is a war happening in the Middle East. It is an international crisis. People are being displaced, our allies are being attacked, and Australian lives are at risk. This is not a commercial opportunity for retailers, and it's certainly not a political opportunity for those opposite. While the opposition is busy stoking and spreading fear, the Treasurer and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy have asked the ACCC to ensure that fuel retailers do not use the events in the Middle East as an excuse to price-gouge Australian motorists. They have also flagged that any necessary ACCC exemptions are granted, and the doubling of penalties for false and misleading conduct. Because of the proactive actions of this government, fuel retailers have been put on notice. The ACCC has made it clear it will not hesitate to act if businesses break the law. Importantly, we have given the ACCC the powers it needs to do the job properly. We have increased the maximum penalty for serious breaches fivefold to $50 million. We've extended the ACCC's petrol price monitoring powers for another five years and ensured it can issue on-the-spot fines if it suspects false or misleading statements. These measures are about protecting Australian consumers, but industry also has an important role to play. We've asked fuel companies to work closely with farmers and small businesses to ensure that they can access the fuel that they need to keep their businesses functioning. We know Australia is not immune to these global shocks. The conflict in the Middle East compounds uncertainty for global growth and inflation. But our economy is built on a foundation of resilience, not rhetoric. It remains strong and it is well placed to get through this latest global upheaval. Of course, we understand that Australians are feeling the pinch. That is why our focus remains steadfast, on meaningful relief, whilst those opposite talk down the economy and focus on their own importance. We have delivered tax cuts for every taxpayer, pay rises for low-income workers, cheaper medicines and a stronger Medicare with more bulk-billing so Australians can see their GP for free. The escalation in the Middle East is a sobering reminder of why a responsible, measured approach is important. While those opposite seek to politicise a global crisis for their own political gain, this government will continue doing the work Australians actually expect of us: securing fuel supply, working with industry, protecting consumers, strengthening our economy and delivering real cost-of-living relief, because Australians deserve a government that steadies the ship, not an opposition that is desperately trying to sink it. 16:07 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey I rise today to give a voice to the businesses, the families, the fishers and the farmers in my electorate who are bearing the brunt of this fuel and fertiliser crisis, because Labor is not listening. Surging fuel prices and rationing are aggressively exacerbating Labor's cost-of-living crisis and putting our primary producers at extreme risk. The government claims that there is plenty of supply in the country, but, on the ground, the reality is starkly different. Wholesalers have begun rationing petrol and diesel. Transport companies are being cut off from bulk supplies and forced to purchase retail fuel. Suppliers are being told to prioritise retail stations over farms and fishers. Many regional pumps, relied upon by our communities, have already run dry. John Horgan, a constituent from Wudinna, has informed my office that Mogas in Wudinna have stated that they are not delivering to farmers. Robin Hughes of R&L Hughes Transport tells me: I can't get fuel delivered on site. Normally, he fills up his trucks every two days. Now, he's filling up at the end of every day in case he is forced to wear the cost of another price increase. A fill-up that normally costs 800 bucks cost 1,200 bucks only yesterday. As Robin warned me, 'We may not see the repercussions yet, but maintenance on trucks will be the first to go.' He was blunt: This government is not working for the people. People do not trust the government, and that is why they're panic buying. I understand why farmers are panic buying. Their livelihoods depend on it. I do not blame Robin for his statement. I do not blame some Aussie punters for buying more fuel than they need, because no-one trusts this minister and this government. Let's remind ourselves that Minister Bowen and the now Prime Minister said on 97 occasions that your power bill will reduce by $275. Minister Bowen said, 'This is the most comprehensive modelling ever.' Well, what happened? Prices did not go down. In fact, they went up—now over 40 per cent. No wonder no-one trusts you to manage this crisis. This vulnerability extends to fertiliser. We rely on the Middle East for almost half of our urea imports, with usage peaking in April prior to seeding—as we are about to get ready for on our farm. NeuRizer was incredibly close to domestic production in Leigh Creek before stifling red and green tape made approvals impossible. Without reliable urea supply, we are facing a disastrous food security crisis—not just a farming crisis. But it is not just businesses. My office has received messages today from struggling and desperate South Australians. Lisa Lemon from Two Wells has reached out and shared her story, and I think it hits home: 'In two weeks, the price at Angle Vale OTR has gone from $1.75 on 26 February to today's price of $2.40, a difference of 64c a litre. I'm a solo mum with a toddler and a fuel tank of 80 litres. I'm also on a very tight budget until I return to work. I must go to suburbia from Two Wells a few times a week, at a minimum, for education, medical, shopping or other things we can't get. At 64c a litre more, it now costs our little family $50 more a tank. I'll be returning to work soon, and I fear the costs I'll face then—if it's even financially viable for me to do so. Governments push to get mums back to work, but this may be just another barrier in our path.' The Leader of the Opposition wrote to the Prime Minister to form a bipartisan taskforce to reduce government spending and fix the cost-of-living crisis so people like Lisa and Robin can get on with living their lives the Australian way. But there has been no response. Labor's economic failures mean the consequences of this Middle East conflict will be far worse for everyday Australians. Minister Bowen and the Treasurer keep telling us they've met with this group and with that group. 'Let's form a roundtable.' What? But listening only gets you so far. As a minister of the Crown, action is more important. My farmers and fishers are rightly nervous. Get the damn fuel moving around this country. We are here to work for the Australian people. Do it. 16:12 Ms CAMPBELL 312823 Moreton The member for Grey has said that action is more important. The question that I have for him is: what action did he take when that mother called him? What action did he take when his constituent said to him, 'I'm worried about the cost of living. I'm worried about the money that I'm paying when I'm at the bowser'. Did the member for Grey tell her that he was here fuelling the fire? Did the member for Grey tell her that he and his party are here taking political opportunity from a crisis, and that she is the ultimate victim of that irresponsibility? It is downright dangerous, and the member for Grey should reach out and let her know that when he gets home. We know that people are doing it tough. They're doing it really tough. And, when you drive up to the servo, when you saddle up and pick up the pump, when you watch the numbers tick over as you're filling up, of course you are watching your hip pocket. We know that cost of living is the most important thing to Australians right now, and it's not limited to the bowser. Australians are feeling it when it comes to their hip pocket and when it comes to housing and paying their rent. They're feeling it when they pay their bills; they're feeling it at the checkout. That's the landscape that our nation is in right now. When you couple that with a devastating conflict in the Middle East, we have to think how we approach this situation for the betterment of all Australians. The opposition didn't ask themselves, 'How do we help Australians at a difficult time?' The opposition asked themselves, 'How do we drive fear?' The opposition asked themselves, 'How do we eke every single political opportunity out of this?' The opposition asked themselves, 'How do we exploit an international crisis for our own personal advantage?' I believe that when you sit on that green leather, you form a compact. It's a compact with the Australian people, and it's a compact of responsibility. It's a compact of a promise that you have to ensure that you are acting in the national interest. Today, with this MPI, that compact is in tatters. It's in tatters and it is in absolute stark contrast to the approach and the action that this Albanese Labor government has taken on such an important issue. I want to take you through just three things when it comes to that approach. Firstly, we've secured an Australian based fuel reserve, a fuel reserve close to home, unlike what we saw from the now leader of the opposition, who thought that that fuel reserve should be in Texas. Now, if you're a Queenslander, you might think to yourself, 'Well, that's not too far away; Texas, Queensland is pretty close.' But it wasn't Texas, Queensland; it was Texas in the United States. On this side of the chamber, we believe that fuel reserves should be held here in this country. We believe, if you're a Queenslander, that there should be a bit of it in Brisbane too. Secondly, we've bolstered the ACCC to stop gouging. We've increased the maximum penalties, we've extended their powers and we've allowed for on-the-spot fines to make sure that, unlike the opposition, others are not also taking advantage of a crisis in the Middle East. Thirdly, we're working with experts, we're working with the Farmers Federation, we're working with truckies, we're working with stakeholders across the deck. What do they say? They say that when demand is up by 40 per cent because of pressure, we need responsible communication. We need to talk to the Australian people responsibly and we need to make sure that they understand that not only has that stockpile not been touched but fuel is arriving on time. There is one thing that is clear about this opposition: in relation to fuel, they are the villain. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 This discussion has now concluded. BILLS 69 BILLS Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 69

Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026

Report from Federation Chamber 69 16:23 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Ryan be agreed to.  

The House divided. [16:23]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

7 AYES Boele, N. Ryan, M. M. (Teller) Scamps, S. A. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Watson-Brown, E. (Teller) Wilkie, A. D. 71 NOES Abdo, B. J. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Burnell, M. P. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chester, D. J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Katter, R. C. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. Phillips, F. E. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Watts, T. G. White, R. P. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Bill agreed to.

 Consideration in Detail 70 16:29 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah () (): I move: That the bill be reconsidered in detail. The SPEAKER 53517 No problem. We just needed to get through that. I'll just explain to the House what's happening—what has occurred and what will happen now. Standing order 154 states: Before the third reading of a bill is moved, a Member may move without notice that a bill be reconsidered in detail, in whole or in part, by the House. That is what the member for Warringah has now done. I'll put that question. Question agreed to. Ms STEGGALL 175696 by leave—I move: (1) Schedule 1, page 3 (before line 4), before item 1, insert: 1A After section 7 Insert: 7AA Climate change considerations (1) The Facility must not provide a grant of financial assistance unless doing so is consistent with: (a) the Climate Change Act 2022; and (b) the objective of reducing Australia's net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050. (2) The Facility must not provide a grant of financial assistance to any gas facility. (3) In subsection (2), gas facility includes a pipeline. 7AB First Nations consultation In deciding whether to provide a grant of financial assistance, the Facility must consult with First Nations Australians. As I indicated in my second reading speech, whilst I very much support the purpose of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 and its extension and it is essential that northern Australia have access to finance beneficial finance capacity to do a very important projects, it is nevertheless important that any spending that we do in such significant spending be consistent with all of our legislations and commitments, in particular commitments from the Albanese government. The amendments circulated seek to make clear the prohibition of the funding of fossil fuel facilities, including gas, via the NAIF. Let's be really clear. Prohibiting the funding of fossil fuel facilities, including gas pipelines, through the NAIF is important. Why? Because taxpayer backed finance should not be socialising the risk of projects that worsen the climate crisis while privatising the returns, because we know that the gas industry are highly profitable sectors, they are making superprofits. They do not need beneficial financing assistance or public funding when it comes to infrastructure investment, especially when they do not then share the windfalls with the Australian people. I've had this battle before. In 2021 my amendment expressly sought to stop the NAIF funding fossil fuel based infrastructure, including natural gas infrastructure. The principle was right then, and it is right now. We also know this is not abstract. The NAIF has previously supported gas link projects, including the Hudson Creek Power Station, a 12-megawatt gas power plant backed by a $37 million NAIF loan, and hybrid solar gas projects in the Pilbara. So, when the government says, 'Trust us,' the answer is, 'The record does not justify blind trust.' If a project is commercially sound with such advanced and mature industries as the gas industry, let it stand on its own balance sheet and obtain its own finance without dipping in to the public purse. If it requires public subsidy to proceed, parliament is entitled—indeed obliged—to ask whether that subsidy is in the public interest. In 2026 subsidising new fossil fuel infrastructure, in particular gas and gas pipelines, is not in the public interest. My other amendment is to ensure that the NAIF funding is consistent with commitment to net zero by 2050 and the Climate Change Act 2022. The second amendment will require those funding decisions to be consistent with those legislated climate frameworks. The Climate Change Act 2022 puts into law Australia's targets of 43 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and net zero by 2050. These are essential commitments to make sure we protect and preserve the Australian way of life and the safety of so many Australians. If a project locks in emissions, delays transition or creates infrastructure that depends on decades of fossil fuel use, then parliament should not pretend that this is neutral. If the NAIF is to run to 2036, it must be anchored to the legal and economic reality of Australia's net zero transition. These are all mature technologies that make superprofits; they do not need further subsidies by the government. Thirdly, my amendment seeks to make consultation with First Nations Australians during funding decision-making processes mandatory. This amendment requires mandatory consultation with First Nations Australians during funding decision-making. The NAIF currently requires only an Indigenous engagement strategy as part of mandatory eligibility criteria. What's been reported to me is that too often that is a tick-a-box exercise; it is not genuine community consultation. Whilst it's good that there is something, it is not enough. The current framework is better than nothing, but it's not the standard that this parliament should settle for. I would argue for the government to have a very clear requirement for consultation with First Nations Australians, whose lands too often are the ones impacted by the very projects that are seeking funding under the NAIF. This is the bare minimum that should be done by this government. I commend these amendments to the House to improve the NAIF and make sure it is robust funding into the future that serves all Australians and is consistent with our public interest. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Is there a seconder for this amendment? Ms CHANEY 300006 I second the amendment. 16:35 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I thank the member for Warringah for her participation in this debate and the amendments she's proposed. I will address the second amendment first. The NAIF Investment Mandate contains six mandatory criteria that proponents are required to meet to achieve NAIF finance. Supporting economic empowerment and meaningful engagement with First Nations Australians is a priority shared by the government, and the amendment which the member proposes that the NAIF must first consult First Nations Australians when considering financial assistance is already part of the operation of the NAIF. The NAIF has robust and mandatory mechanisms to achieve this. Under the NAIF's governance framework, all proponents are required to develop and implement an Indigenous engagement strategy as a condition of financial assistance. The proposed amendment requires NAIF to consult First Nations Australians before providing financial assistance. In practice, NAIF's current requirements already go further than that, because engagement occurs by project proponents, where it can be most effective and specific. Project proponents must demonstrate alignment with community expectations and outcomes before NAIF will consider investment approval, and the Investment Mandate and statement of expectations already require it to support key government priorities, including materially improving the lives of First Nations peoples and communities in northern Australia. While the government respects the intent behind the amendment, it will not be supporting changes that duplicate or complicate an already effective and well-established framework. The government will continue to ensure that NAIF maintains high standards of Indigenous engagement, supports opportunities for Indigenous economic development and works collaboratively with First Nations organisations, including traditional owners, local Indigenous businesses and land councils. I'll reflect briefly on the small loans program of the NAIF. It is indeed designed with First Nations communities in mind to make sure they are enabled to get this concessional finance for important projects in their communities. I return now to the first amendment. The government will be opposing that amendment. In 2024, the government updated the NAIF Investment Mandate to ensure that potential projects aligned with a number of policy priorities. The ones relevant here are sustainability, climate change and circular economy principles and solutions in northern Australia, and materially improving the lives of Indigenous peoples and communities. That refers to your second amendment. The bill strengthens the board's accountability to this investment mandate by requiring that the board notify the responsible ministers if the NAIF fails to comply with that mandate so we can take corrective action. The statement of expectations, which I provided in December 2022, noted the government's priority to transition Australia's energy sector to net zero emissions by 2050 and that the NAIF has a key role in contributing to this in northern Australia. The NAIF has supported multiple renewable energy projects, as well as including critical minerals projects that are vital for renewable technologies and for national security. The Climate Change Act 2022 introduced changes to the NAIF Act to ensure alignment with Australia's national greenhouse gas emissions targets. Energy projects are designed to support and strengthen the electricity system on the way to net zero, not as a long-term replacement for renewables but as a stabilising force during the all-important transition, which we support and have legislated. Investment in energy projects assists in supplying electricity to communities where there are shortfalls in renewable generation and prices spike in consequence of that. It's important that any energy transition provides for firming capacity to complement renewables. Grid stability is critical for all communities. Whilst renewable generation batteries and pumped hydro are progressively built right across the country, firming capacity and grid stability help to contain price spikes for households and industry and, of course, make sure people have lights in those communities. So we don't support the amendments, but I do thank the member for her thoughtfulness in this debate. 16:40 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy The last thing in the world we want in this country is for people in Sydney to be telling us what we should and shouldn't do on the land where we live. We live there because we love the land. That's why we live there, right? People who are living in Sydney obviously don't love the natural wonderland of Australia. I can't see how that is compatible with you living in Sydney. Your stupidity and irresponsibility means it will be on my watch that the cassowaries of Australia vanish. I will be remembered in history as the member of parliament for the area where the cassowaries vanished. The reason they're vanishing is that there's an estimated three million pigs in national parks in North Queensland—which I think is exaggerated, but there's no doubt that you can't go into the national parks without seeing wild pigs—and the pigs have nothing to eat except the cassowary eggs. The pig numbers are exploding because there are no natural predators for the pigs in the jungles of North Queensland. I'm sitting here watching the cassowaries being wiped out because of the stupidity of so-called greenies in this place. That's the cassowaries. The pigs also eat the turtle eggs, so the North Queensland turtle is also doomed. You protected the crocodiles. Well, there were little children of Bamaga—one was seen to be torn to pieces by a crocodile, and another little children two vanished at exactly the same spot. Maybe you like little children being torn to pieces by crocodiles, I don't know, but for your stupidity—the crocodile lays 60 eggs— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 I just remind the honourable member that when you're making the reference 'your stupidity' you're referring to the chair. So I would just ask you to rephrase that to 'the honourable member', please. And I would ask you just to stay relevant to the amendment, if I could, honourable member for Kennedy. Mr KATTER HX4 Yes. With all due respect, Deputy Speaker Buchholz, I most certainly wouldn't accuse you of these shortcomings, but it is playing big on my mind that the cassowary is going to be no more. The cassowary bird is actually the crest for most of our local government areas in Far North Queensland. Now with respect to crocodiles, I don't know whether these things are true, but people that know a lot more than I do and that live in these areas and know all about it are saying that crocodiles have eaten all the gropers. The gropers used to eat the starfish. The starfish numbers are now exploding on the reef and destroying the Great Barrier Reef. If you start fooling around with nature, you really want to know where it will end up. You've got to think. It's not simple; it's complicated. There are 23,000 square kilometres of natural grasslands—Mitchell and Flinders grasses—in the natural grasslands in North Queensland that have vanished under the prickly acacia tree, which was brought in to provide stock feed. Actually it only has leaves on it for about three months of the year, but I'm not blaming the greenies or anyone for that one. That was the scientists' stupidity and ignorance. We've got 23,000 square kilometres where all native flora and fauna has been destroyed by prickly acacia tree. We've got the jungles where the pigs have taken over, and there's nothing being done about the pigs. When I say that—they are setting traps. How would you set traps for three million pigs? Honestly! But, if you let in the hoon class—of which I was a member when I was a young bloke—with our dogs and our guns, we'll take out the pigs for you. And we won't shoot other things. There's an assumption that because we own a gun—but we're the people that love nature. That's why we've got a gun. We go out there in nature and we live with nature as we have done for 40,000 years. You don't come up here and tell that to my brother-cousins. I most certainly am related to a lot of First Australian families. I might have some in the family tree—I don't know. But you don't come here and tell us what we're going to do or not do after we've been doing it for 40,000 years. You come here and tell us that our kids are going to be eaten by crocodiles, when we used to take the crocodile eggs as part of our feed. But, there again, you took out the biggest predator of crocodiles—humans. They took the crocodile eggs. You also took out the dingoes, who took crocodile eggs, and goannas, because you brought in a bug, and then to get rid of the bug you had to bring in the toads. You started fooling around with nature, you don't know what you're doing, and the results have been absolutely catastrophic. (Time expired) 16:45 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand Very briefly—thank you, Deputy Speaker— Mr Katter HX4 You've got five minutes to address the issue of cassowaries. Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Indeed, I will. I thank the member for Kennedy for his question, and I have seen the cassowaries of Queensland, up near Cairns. I've kayaked on the Copperlode Falls Dam at Lake Morris there. There are only a few there, I admit, and it is a treasured species—no doubt about it. On what you say about wild pigs, I've been to orchards in Far North Queensland, a great fruit-growing area, and spoken to farmers that have lost their dogs to these pigs, actually. It's terrible circumstances when your pets are taken by wild pigs. We appreciate the problem that is there. But I would also acknowledge the member for Kennedy's passion for Northern Australia and in particular northern Queensland. Thank you for all that you have done in your vast experience here in the House. I think you well know the Prime Minister is well aware of that, as am I, and we've met to discuss many things. I would just comment, though, that I do think it is a good thing that MPs from across the country take an interest in Northern Australia and speak on this debate in this House. Whilst they might not see the day-to-day operation of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, knowing that it has supported nearly 37 extraordinarily community-changing projects right across the north—across the north-western Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland—is a very important thing. I'm really glad that there are members from inner-city Sydney or Perth or otherwise contributing to this debate; that is a good thing. I would note that there was only one Queensland LNP member that spoke on the NAIF bill earlier today, which I think is disappointing, given this is a very important piece of legislation for the progress of northern Queensland. 16:47 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin I just have a question for the minister about the investment mandate and return expectations for the NAIF and other SIVs. The NAIF plays a really important part in our decarbonisation journey, and I support it. I've heard some concerns from the clean energy industry about the risk appetite built into the investment mandate and that return expectations that are set near commercial levels can cause SIVs like the NAIF to compete with private capital for low-risk projects rather than catalysing investment in high-public-benefit, long-term decarbonisation projects. If public money is replacing private capital, then it's not a good use of public money, and SIVs should operate where there's market failure, not where markets could efficiently deliver the same result. My question is, how is the minister ensuring that public money will be used in the NAIF early enough to crowd in public private funds rather than replace them? 16:49 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I thank the member for Curtin for her question. It's true—public money must be used wisely. It's taxpayers' money. Earlier a comment was made about the NAIF being a method of subsidy. It's an enabler, but it is a concessional loan scheme. The idea and intent, and indeed what it does, is crowding in that money. It is an important principle that it shouldn't compete and seek to exclude any private capital. Private capital is really important in the projects that the NAIF seeks to enable. What we have found through working with the staff at the NAIF and its CEO and board is that they often redirect a lot of inquiries for projects to other providers of capital, and some of them may be Commonwealth specialist investment vehicles or just private capital groupings. In renewables, the NAIF has supported about three different projects and a number of projects in critical minerals, and they are almost like an anchor that brings in that other piece of capital to make the whole thing work. It's an important part of how the NAIF works. So I do understand your concerns. How we monitor that is through the NAIF reporting to the board. The board is a very competent board, and I acknowledge the chair of the board and the whole team for the work they do. They report regularly to me, and, of course, we monitor all the projects. All the projects come before us for us to have a look at, and we're well aware of the concern that we don't use public money unwisely and make sure that we do get in that private capital as well as this public capital. Thanks so much for your question. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is the amendment moved by the honourable member for Warringah be agreed to.  

The House divided. [16:55]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 7 AYES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Steggall, Z. (Teller) Watson-Brown, E. (Teller) Wilkie, A. D. 68 NOES Abdo, B. J. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Burnell, M. P. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Comer, E. L. Conaghan, P. J. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Joyce, B. T. G. Katter, R. C. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. Phillips, F. E. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thwaites, K. L. Urquhart, A. E. Watts, T. G. White, R. P. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Bill agreed to.

16:58 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand on indulgence—I want to clarify one figure I mentioned in my previous contribution. The NAIF has made 37 investment decisions and progressed 32 projects. Thank you. Third Reading 74 16:58 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 74

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025

Second Reading 74 16:59 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne It's a privilege to have the opportunity to speak on the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025, which is legislation on a topic that is of great import to the constituents of the Lyne electorate. For many of us in regional Australia, one of the issues that is raised quite often—in fact, I think every day my office receives calls from constituents with issues and concerns about this—is access to telecommunications. It's clear that the universal service obligation, created in the wake of the privatisation of Telstra some 30 years ago, is no longer a relevant consumer protection in this day and age. As a national carrier, Telstra was charged as responsible for delivering the USO, which obliged them to ensure every customer had and still has access to landline telephones and payphones regardless of where they live or work. But, in a world that has become increasingly mobile, it is obvious that consumer protections mandating delivery of payphones and fixed telephone service have for many become redundant—sadly so, in the regions. As such, there is a need to update the USO to ensure that it safeguards broader voice services and broadband. The bill attempts to do this. The bill adds to the universal service obligation, which has traditionally only been binding for Telstra, by adding a universal outdoor mobile obligation, UOMO, on Telstra, Optus and TPG by 1 December 2027, mandating reasonable access to telecommunications while outdoors, excluding in vehicles or vessels. This bill attempts to deliver a modern and more fit-for-purpose USO in light of available technologies and consumer preferences, but unfortunately it falls short of its intentions. Labor's bill proposes exemption powers that were not in the bill's consultation draft, arguably allowing the minister to limit how the USO terminology 'reasonably accessible to all people in Australia on an equitable basis' applies under the UOMO, setting up what we might like to call SOMO—sometimes outdoor mobile obligation. The bill excludes use from vehicles and vessels from UOMO, even though the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman expects using satellite while driving to become possible and ought to be included. Farming bodies have expressed concern that affordability is not in the universal outdoor mobile obligation. Expensive satellite technology might see telcos pass the cost onto consumers unless there are consumer protections. After significant recent debate on triple zero connectivity failures, the NFF and NSW Farmers query why emergency services connectivity is not required under the UOMO. The government says that existing emergency call service determinations suffice. Consumer body ACCAN says that, until voice to satellite works, texts to triple zero should be mandated. Telstra says that there is insufficient spectrum for UOMO, which might in turn force a choice between 5G and 4G and thereby the closure of 4G, which could repeat the travesty of the botched 3D shutdown. A Nationals consumer protections amendment would prevent adverse consequences. Mandatory domestic roaming should be part of the UOMO and indeed a future USO. If a call fails on one service, such as Optus, and another service is available, such as Telstra, the call could automatically connect to the other service. Telcos could resolve the commercial impact between themselves, just like banks did when customers could withdraw cash from ATMs of other banks. A fee was imposed, but, in the mandatory domestic roaming context, that fee might be instead built into business models and ultimately pricing, subject to consumer protections. The Nationals support the goal of extending voice and text coverage outdoors across more of the country, because improved connectivity for regional Australians is a necessity. In cities and towns, a call dropout is an inconvenience. On a farm, in a forest or at a mine in a remote location, it's much more than that. However, the credibility of any government measure rests not on its aspiration but on its detail and reality. The telcos must also be able to understand precisely what is required of them, and consumers must be able to understand what they are entitled to expect. Nice phrases such as 'reasonably available' and 'equitable access' need to be measurable and enforceable standards. Clarity and a compliance framework is required to avoid risks that the obligation will be difficult to monitor and even harder to enforce. We do not need aspirational headlines. In other words, the system actually has to work and be practical, reliable and affordable. This is why this bill must be deeply scrutinised. There is little point in proceeding down a path of promising something better when there are numerous issues still to solve with the existing telecommunications network. Unfortunately this bill will do little, if anything, to address the issues that my constituents have been increasingly facing. I am receiving inquiries from constituents across the Lyne electorate—from Failford, Vacy, Wauchope and Elands—who have been contacted by their landline telephone providers about changes to their service or who have unreliable landline and mobile telephone services. Providers such as Dodo and Southern Phone have recently advised their customers that they will soon be ceasing their support of landline phones and that customers will need to transfer their number to a provider that does support PSTN technology, which is the public switched telephone network—that is, the traditional copper-wire telephone network, or landlines. To complicate matters, these customers are also being told that (1) they will not be able to retain their telephone number, which in most cases they've had for decades, (2) they can switch over to the mobile telephone or NBN network, which in rural areas in my electorate varies from less-than-reliable to non-existent, (3) they can utilise a satellite based service such as Starlink, which in many cases they cannot afford and hence do not want to have to do, or (4) they can wait for the low Earth orbit satellite to become a reality. All they really need is to be able to continue to have a reliable, secure and affordable landline phone that the USO requires. Remember, in rural areas the landline system provides far more reliability in times of medical emergencies, bushfires, floods and blackouts. I recall a meeting at the Lansdowne Hall where there were issues with the local Telstra service. The community actually asked Telstra to put in more payphones so that, in the case of an emergency, they could go to a payphone, because they knew that they couldn't rely on their mobile service. Clearly this scenario is causing considerable anxiety, which is being compounded by the fact that customers have not been provided with a clear or satisfactory reason as to why their service cannot be converted back to Telstra or why they cannot keep their existing number. When these customers changed from Telstra to another provider it was a simple process and did not require a number change. Furthermore, in some cases where constituents have been proactive and contacted Telstra direct they've received email replies that are vague, incoherent and challenging. I'm increasingly concerned that Telstra's planned exit from the copper network and preference to transition customers to the mobile, wireless or NBN network is not consistent with Telstra's universal service obligation for which it is funded $297 million per annum by the federal government. Then there is the issue of battery storage capacity at local rural telephone exchanges and mobile phone towers. Just recently, around midday on Saturday 28 February, both the landlines and mobile service at Elands went out following a power outage. This was the third phone network outage in one month in the area. Only people with satellite internet could communicate and seek Telstra's assistance. How is it that the tower's battery storage capacity is insufficient to run the tower for a period after the electricity network power goes down? Surely that's the purpose for which the battery was installed. Even the existing universal service obligation is fraught with problems. As other coastal electorates also experience at school holiday time, the large influx of visitors can and does overwhelm the mobile phone towers so they just cease to function. The community of Harrington, where I used to live, knows that all too well. If we do move towards having an outdoor coverage obligation, it will be meaningful only if Australians' devices can actually connect to the services being promised. Yet many mobile phones are not designed for satellite connectivity. Regional Australians, older Australians and small businesses often retain devices for longer periods. A reform that functions only for the latest high-end smartphones is contrary to the principle of equitable access. The lessons of the 3G network rollback show how important it is to have products that can actually use a new technology. Consumers and businesses were forced into unplanned handset upgrades and faced disruption to their lives and operations. There can be no tolerance for problems or errors when it comes to emergency services connectivity. Australians expect that when they dial triple zero their call for help will be received. The recent history of triple zero outages and device incompatibility has shaken public confidence in the system. Technical glitches will never stand scrutiny when it comes to safety and emergency assistance. Emergency triple zero access must not be contingent on owning a new phone. I've already mentioned that telecommunications affordability is a critical issue, particularly for households and businesses in my electorate. If compliance with a new obligation significantly increases infrastructure costs, that will be reflected in retail prices. Regional consumers already face higher service costs and fewer competitive options than their metropolitan counterparts. A universal obligation must not translate into higher bills for those it is intended to support. It is very true that new and emerging technologies will always be coming at us, and we will have to adopt and adapt. Direct-to-device satellite technology will be an exciting development in telecommunications, with the potential to reduce longstanding coverage gaps across vast regions of Australia. Yet it remains a developing technology, with global rollout still underway and significant technical and commercial aspects to be settled. Domestic carriers will depend on international satellite providers, whose pricing models and deployment schedules are outside Australia's direct control. The satellite rollout will occur in time, but legislating a universal outdoor mobile obligation will not magically deliver it, make it work and make it affordable. The legislation leaves many issues in doubt and numerous questions unanswered. The stark reality is that in many regional and rural areas like mine the existing universal service obligation is falling short. I cannot see how the government can rightly and honestly proceed to a new, bigger commitment without ensuring that the current one is fixed first and without ensuring that the new technology to do it actually exists and is workable, reliable and affordable. With all these considerations, the government's bill might be better to call it a 'sometimes outdoor mobile obligation'—and 'sometimes' is not good enough when we're talking about critical infrastructure that underpins our personal lives, our businesses, our sources of information, and our safety and security. Australia's geography makes connectivity both challenging and critical. While new technologies provide an opportunity to ensure that our regions have access to telecommunications services, they must be matched by genuine reliability, not just promises. So, in conclusion, I support further scrutiny of this bill by referral to a Senate committee. Such diligence is essential for essential infrastructure such as this bill proposes. 17:13 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025 seeks to establish a universal outdoor mobile obligation for three national operators. It's going to require Optus, Telstra and TPG to provide reasonable and equitable access to outdoor mobile, voice and text services across Australia. There will be benefits for regional and remote Australia, where we've been promised benefits, and certainly my community very much needs those promises. We're told that it will improve competition in the market. The scope and timing can be adjusted by the minister by instrument as market and technology evolve, such as emerging low-level satellite technology, which I personally think will be a complete game changer if we can ever get it truly off the ground. So while I welcome the introduction of this bill to create the universal outdoor mobile obligation, we must remember that this is just a framework that may lack the teeth needed to ensure that all Australians, not just those that live in metropolitan Australia, have guaranteed universal outdoor mobile connectivity. I do note that it will only cover voice and text to begin with. Telcos are working towards this now, but it is experimental and aspirational, let alone satellite. At least it will prevent telcos from having a monopoly in an area. They must share networks and that is critical in my community. If I look at Kangaroo Island, we have huge stretches where there's one telco and absolutely no coverage if you're with the other. Even though the universal outdoor mobile obligation is coming, this is not a substitute for continued investment in towers. I can't say that enough: this cannot be a substitute for continuing to invest in towers. In my electorate, on any drive that I do between my electorate office in Mount Barker and my satellite office in Victor Harbor, no matter which road I take to get to the other office, which are about an hour and 15 minutes away from each other, I will go through significant patches where there is no coverage at all. We're talking about an area that's a high-risk bushfire area. We're talking about an area where there's a high propensity of crashes. So there is a real vulnerability that exists for regional Australians that doesn't exist for metropolitan Australia. If I look across Kangaroo Island, it's about 150 kilometres wide, about 50 kilometres in depth. There are vast patches that have very poor mobile telecommunications. If we look at the rest of regional Australia, at areas such as the member for Grey's electorate or at western New South Wales, you can drive for hours at a time with no coverage at all. Certainly, since the 3G system has been turned off, that coverage has diminished across regional Australia. I do support the amendments drafted by the member for Indi. I believe that they've been tabled. I will be moving those amendments on behalf of the member for Indi. The member for Indi has, during her whole time in this place, very much championed investment in and forward thinking about regional telecommunications. While I support the introduction of this universal outdoor mobile service, I share the member's concerns that its benefits may not be equally shared across regional, rural and remote Australia. Her amendments seek to address this by explicitly including affordability and availability as aspects of a service being available on an equitable basis, requiring the minister to have regard to fault rectification timelines when setting performance benchmarks—that's going to be critical—and giving the minister an explicit power to make rules requiring temporary disaster roaming during emergencies. In my electorate, when we had the fires, the minister was required to provide a statement explaining the reasons for a determination that the UOMO did not apply in particular circumstances. Let's look at the regional telecommunications review of 2024. The Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman, the TIO, review of regional telecommunications showed regional, rural and remote customers experience limited or no access to telco services—for example, limited, unreliable and poor mobile coverage—no recourse to alternative tech providers, and service faults take longer to resolve. It found that telco regulatory frameworks, including the universal service obligation scheme, need to be modernised to ensure regional consumers' reliable access to telco services. Regional consumers complained of service being unavailable, expensive and/or delayed; limited choice of retailers or technologies; and that sometimes services are discontinued, replaced or no longer supported. Realistically, often the only phone service is a mobile service in regional and remote areas. In some instances, telcos misrepresent mobile coverage as available in areas when it is very clearly not. Mobile coverage maps should be standardised, with information regarding location, quality and speed, and accessibility, to enable informed consumer choice. The review found that landlines should be useable and reliable, and redress easy to secure. If mobile service problems exist, consumers may not be able to afford satellite service and there may not be alternative carriers. And modern minimum service obligations are needed, for voice and internet, in regional and rural areas. We deserve the same level of telecommunications that they have in the city. Regional Australia is what's feeding Australia. It's what's clothing Australia. And yet it is very clear that we do have a second-class system when it comes to telecommunications. When we look at natural disaster coverage, there are complaints re telcos' dealings with natural disasters in regional Australia, in relation to disasters and mass outages. This bushfire season, Mayo residents had to navigate bushfires—including a large one, that was uncontrolled for several days, in Deep Creek; it destroyed a number of homes and outbuildings, and, at one point, threatened the ferry infrastructure at Cape Jervis. A lack of coverage creates safety risks during bushfires and other emergencies, due to the service across our topography. Mayo residents need to be able to rely on telco services for timely and accurate information, but weather events commonly damage consumer lines or telco equipment, with a wait of several weeks for repairs and replacement. Similarly, weather related power outages can result in telco services no longer working, including if the outage has affected a local mobile tower. Now, that will affect an entire community, when we lose a tower, until it's repaired. Consumers are understandably concerned that they cannot make or receive calls or emails during such outages. And then, of course, we all rely so heavily on apps to find out where a fire is coming from and what weather is coming towards us. So we're losing capacity to work or it's contributing to safety concerns. This is a real issue in regional Australia. Aside from the 2023 and recent triple-zero outages, regional, major and mass outages were also a source of complaints other than those caused by natural disasters. There are local telecommunications issues in my electorate, as I mentioned previously. In Mayo, shutting down 3G has absolutely reduced our coverage, because you can no longer make calls in those areas where previously you could. When they turned off 3G, and we had 5G, it really limited us, in very many areas, to just the immediate town. Now I know that the government and telcos have said, 'No, no, we've been able to upgrade and expand.' I can tell you right now, as someone who does a huge amount of driving, it had a very real negative impact across my community, and still does. I would say our blackspots have got wider, and that really impacts our safety. And, as I said, as to Deep Creek, where we had a bushfire in recent weeks, there are still black spots in that community. Areas of known black spots or insufficient mobile coverage that could benefit from a tower in my community include Gumeracha, Montacute, Charleston, Brukunga, Wistow, Dawesley, Flaxley, Harrogate, Chapel Hill, Bull Creek, Nangkita, Woodchester, Currency Creek, Waitpinga, Lower Inman Valley and Deep Creek; and, on Kangaroo Island, Vivonne Bay, D'Estrees Bay and Karatta. Now I know that, in my time as the member, we have been able to get—and lobbied very, very hard to get—more mobile coverage across our area. But, truly, regional Australia deserves the same equitable mobile phone coverage—I mean, we've all had mobiles now for decades. It's hard to believe that so much of Australia is still left with absolutely no service at all. I do support this bill, but I do support it very cautiously. 17:25 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman I rise to speak on the amendments to the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Universal Outdoor Mobile Obligation) Bill 2025. It's hard to believe that in 2026 we're talking about mobile connectivity in this country, a first world country, but, anyway, we are. This has been one of Longman's biggest issues since I was elected in 2019. Longman is one of those unique communities that was once upon a time, when I was growing up anyway, very much a farming community and it slowly has become part of the Brisbane sprawl. A lot of the places where I used to ride a motorbike or where there were dairy farms and things like that are now housing estates, with 300- or 400-square-metre blocks. One of the challenges that that creates, of course, is mobile connectivity. As the member for Longman, when I first met with the telcos, I said to them, 'Well, what does council say about this?' And to my surprise they said, 'We've never met with council.' I said, 'Well, that sounds a bit ridiculous to me,' so I got on to the local councillor and the town planner and got them in the same room. The town planner went through all the future estates and things. The telco said, 'This is terrific. We should do this more often.' I said, 'Well, there's a new concept—maybe use a bit of common sense. That'd be awesome.' Now they meet reasonably regularly. I have to say, coming from the private sector, I just cannot understand how these meetings weren't taking place previous to me being the member. I also made sure that the telcos and developers got in the same room because, one of the challenges is when these farms are cut up into these residential blocks. Obviously, there were only six people, a couple of cattle dogs and that's about it that needed a mobile phone and then, all of a sudden, a thousand people are living in that same area. Well, that puts much more of a drain on the system. When they go to build these towers later on, everyone wants a tower but they don't want it next to their house, so people raise all these demands and the council gets all the complaints about it. Of course it's not a council issue; it's a federal issue, so they don't give a toss. They send them over to us and then we have to try and deal with it retrospectively. When we were in government, I worked hard with the member for Berowra and also the member for Canning, who were in the same boat, being near to Sydney and Perth respectively, on the edge of the urban sprawl and experiencing the same issues. We know that mobile phones and towers are now privatised in this country. One of the issues with privatisation of critical infrastructure is that the companies that take it on have to make a profit because they answer to shareholders first, unfortunately, before customers. One of the challenges that we have is a telco is not going to build a tower because it probably takes them around about 400 or 500 subscribers in an area to make it worthwhile to build. So in their wisdom, the previous government brought out the Mobile Black Spot Program to help people in regional communities, where they didn't have the population density to make it financially viable for these telcos to build the towers, get towers built. At the end of the day, as governments, we need to make sure that people in the bush are being looked after as much as people in the cities. That's only fair and just. Unfortunately, this government got rid of that Mobile Black Spot Program. The Peri-Urban Mobile Program—the PUMP as we came to know it—was a bit of a hybrid because these were areas that did have more population than, say, Thargomindah or somewhere like that but they still didn't have enough to warrant the expenditure of a tower for the telcos. So what they did was partially subsidise it. I was able to get three or four towers under the Morrison government. It was an application process and we were able to get four of those. Three of them have been built and there's one more on the go. The amendments in this bill miss the entire issue of making sure that these towers get built. When a developer buys one of these farms and they put in a development application to change it into a residential community, they cover electricity, they cover roads, they cover sewerage and they cover everything else except for telecommunications. My solution, and I've been advocating for this for many years now, has always been to make telecommunications part of the DA process, so that when someone comes in to look at a plan of a new housing estate and they're excited—they're normally young couples buying their first home—they look at it and say, 'Yes, we'll take that block there.' If they had the option of knowing that there was going to be a mobile tower built within 100 metres, they could make a decision on whether to buy. They would be fully aware. So, to me, there should be a process in place. We need to make sure that state governments and local governments are including this in the DA process. I support the intent of the bill, because I want mobile connectivity, but I sincerely doubt we will see any change. I think this will just be another Labor headline and it won't have any substance. But we live in hope. I've been talking to the telcos and the space industry in this country for years about why we aren't using satellite technology. Now, I'm a layman. I'm not someone who's involved in electronic engineering or telecommunications in a technical way, but I've got eyes and I've got ears. We've got these satellites buzzing around up top, and it made a lot of sense to me, rather than running all these cables and building these towers that are expensive infrastructure and an eyesore. They run into problems where they're knocked over, particularly when there are power outages and when we have natural disasters. All this mobile connectivity goes down because they need power to run these towers. The problem is that the technology is just not there yet. That was the answer I got from the telcos and the space industry. I was excited, last year, to go to a Telstra event held right here in Parliament House where they talked about satellite connectivity for mobiles. They explained at this event that it was at very, very early stages. It was quite ironic: it was the same week that I had a freak storm go through my electorate. It pretty well wiped out most of Bribie, Toorbul, Beachmere and Donnybrook. The storm affected most of the electorate, but they were the worst hit. Woodford, in particular, was hit hard, because the power that powered the mobile tower had been knocked out. They had no mobile coverage at all for two or three days, which was a real problem. Had we had that satellite technology, they would have at least been able to text. The telcos are saying that the first lot of technology is going to be simply that: text only. Then, of course, the technology will move on. The second generation will be text and voice, and the last will be when we have the full gambit—when we have text, voice calls, data and internet connectivity. That is probably five to seven years away. One of the challenges that I see with this is that it could give a government that's looking for an excuse not to invest in mobile towers an excuse to say, 'We have this new technology coming,' and then use that as an excuse not to invest in anything at the moment. Well, people need connectivity now. I have a lot of retirement villages and over-50s lifestyle villages in my electorate, and they're some of the ones that are worst affected, because typically these villages are built out of materials that aren't very good. They actually suppress mobile connectivity, particularly when people put up illegal transmitters, which they do because they want to get transmission. It works fine for them but blocks out their neighbours, so that's a real problem. A lot of these people have these medical pendants that connect to the mobile network and, if they're having a heart attack or a medical emergency, they push this button. Without any mobile coverage, these pendants don't work. In one case at Living Gems down on Torrens Road in Caboolture, a lady said that she crawled on her hands and knees into the back courtyard so that she could actually use this pendant to get the ambulance. It turns out she was suffering a heart attack. This is 2026; it's mental that people have to go through this stuff. Again, if it was in the DA process when this retirement village was built that the developer had to put in a mini tower or some sort of mobile tower that would service that community, all this could be abated. All these issues could be gotten rid of. It's about being proactive rather than reactive, which is unusual for government. The other issue you're going to have is the handset issue we saw when 3G was turned off, which affected so many people. My mum and dad are serial offenders. Dad's 89 and Mum's 84. They've got a phone that Noah used on the ark, and it's useless. It's not a smartphone, but, at the end of the day, they know how to use it. They don't like learning how to use new things, because they're older and they haven't got the time or the patience to do that sort of thing—and that's their right. They had to get rid of their phone because, in the area they were in, sometimes they only had 3G, and—man alive!—my son and my two brothers will testify to the fact that the phone calls we got for the next month while we were trying to help mum figure out her new phone were pretty substantial. That's going to be one of the problems that we have when this new technology comes in. These satellite phones are going to work only with the latest and greatest handsets, and there's nothing in this bill that talks about assistance to help people who might be on an older handset to upgrade to a new one. Of course, the people who are going to have these older handsets are either the elderly who don't like change or the most vulnerable, who are financially unable to buy the latest and greatest phone for $1,500. So we're actually hurting the most disadvantaged by not having something in this legislation to help these people with this new satellite technology. Also, the legislation is a little bit ambiguous. It says the telcos must ensure coverage is reasonably available on an equitable basis. You could interpret that in any way you want. That looks like a get-out-of-jail-free card to me. It sounds fair in a free market, but don't make out you're waving a big stick when it's really just a toothpick. There is a really easy way for the telcos to get around this. I support the intent of the bill and of the amendments moved by the member for Lindsay, and I commend them to the House. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026 80

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

Second Reading 80 17:37 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong I rise today with a profound sense of purpose, because what we are delivering as a Labor government is not an abstraction; it's a statement of values, a declaration of the kind of country we are choosing to build and a reflection of who we are as a people. When I first stood in this place, I spoke about the community that sent me here—about Flemington, where migrant and refugee families are writing new chapters of the Australian story; about Moonee Ponds where pensioners and uni students share the same footpaths and the same hopes, and where a Puckle Street cafe is as likely to host a first date as it is a retirement lunch; about Airport West and Gladstone Park, where working families get up early, work hard and ask fairly that their effort be rewarded and that the economy be on their side, not working against them. My electorate is not a postcode; it is a living, breathing argument for what Australia can be at its best: diverse, aspirational and fundamentally kind. Every decision that I make in this place I make with those streets and those people in mind. When I go doorknocking, the conversations are almost always the same: the cost of living, access to health care, education and decent jobs. They are not political talking points but the lived daily reality. It is the single mum in Avondale Heights wondering whether to fill the prescription or to fill the fridge. It is the young couple in Flemington doing the maths on a mortgage and quietly deciding not to bother, not because of lack of ambition but because the numbers just don't add up. It is the pensioner in Moonee Ponds rationing medication across the fortnight because the pension doesn't stretch as far as it used to. These are not edge cases. They are the stories that sit with me long after the conversation has ended. They represent the central moral test of our time, a test that demands a government capable of being both focused and compassionate—not one or the other but both. That is what this government is delivering, and I am proud to play my part. To understand where we are going, we must first be honest about where we started. In 2022 we did not inherit a strong economy. We inherited a decade of drift, of denial and delay and of hollowed-out services that were quietly degraded while the government of the day congratulated itself on management it never actually delivered. We walked into a huge housing crisis left entirely unaddressed, a national debt approaching $1 trillion and inflation with a six in front of it and climbing. We inherited the legacy of a government that promised a surplus every single year and failed every single time. The 'back in black' mugs became a symbol not of competence but of delusion, and Australians knew it. It fell to Labor to do the work of repair. It took a Labor treasurer and a Labor minister for finance to deliver back-to-back surpluses for the first time in nearly two decades. But we did not pursue these surpluses as a mug to be displayed. We did it to give us the capacity to invest in Medicare, housing and education. Responsible management is not the opposite of compassion; it is what makes compassion sustainable. Every single Australian taxpayer is receiving a tax cut, with further rounds coming this July and the one next. For the workers at the distribution centres in Tullamarine, the healthcare workers at Western Health and the teachers in our local schools, this means real money back in their pockets—not a promise, but real relief in real pay packets. The contrast with what came before us is worth reflecting on. The previous government's approach to tax relief was an ideological choice: concentrating benefits at the top, rewarding those who needed it least and dressing it up as economic reform. Labor made a different choice. Our cuts are weighted toward the cleaners and carers, the nurses and the teachers, the logistics workers and tradies who keep this country running. We believe the people who build Australia should be the ones who benefit from its growth. That is not radical; it's simply fair. Health care is one of the most important, powerful and personal conversations that I have in my electorate. Almost every time I hold a mobile office or knock on a door, someone raises it, not in the context of policy, but in the context of their own life: a parent who delayed going to the doctor because they couldn't afford the gap, a pensioner splitting tablets to make a script last longer, an older resident who stopped seeing the specialist because the out-of-pocket costs had become impossible to justify. For a decade, the coalition conducted an ideological war of attrition against Medicare. They froze rebates. Bulk-billing rates fell. Out-of-pocket costs climbed. And there are those who still sit opposite who would genuinely prefer an Americanised health system, one where access to care is determined by your credit card rather than your Medicare card. They tried hard to get us there, but Australians understand that there is nothing more quintessentially Aussie than a universal healthcare system underpinned by that green and gold Medicare card. Labor is restoring that promise. We have delivered the largest investment into Medicare in its history, tripling the bulk-billing incentive, which means, in Maribyrnong alone, we have doubled the number of fully bulk-billing GP practices in just over three months. We've capped the PBS scripts at $25—the lowest it's been in two decades—and frozen prescription costs entirely for pensioners because dignity in retirement should not come with financial penalty. For families in my community, this means no longer choosing between a doctor's visit and putting food on the table. It means a healthcare system that lives up to the values it was built on. On housing, the record of the previous government is one of total abdication. Year after year, as a generation of young Australians were locked out of the market and renters were pushed to the edge, those opposite offered thought bubbles and slogans without even appointing a minister responsible. They proposed letting young people raid their superannuation—not a solution to the housing crisis but a way of making it worse while pretending to care. Labor is actually building. I was recently at the Swift Walk redevelopment in Kensington—the largest project completed under the Housing Australia Future Fund to date—where a total of 272 social and affordable homes now stand where there were once only a waiting list and a sense of despair. I walked through these homes and met residents who had spent years in insecure rentals, unable to put down roots or make plans. What struck me was not the buildings themselves, impressive as they are, but the quiet relief on people's faces—that sense that finally, after years of uncertainty, they had somewhere to call home, somewhere to raise a family. That is what government is for. But bricks alone are not enough. At Essendon Fields, companies like Modscape + Modbotics are pioneering modular construction that can help us build faster and smarter. Through fee-free TAFE and $10,000 apprentice support payments, we are training the plumbers, electricians and carpenters who will deliver the 1.2 million homes we have committed to, creating lasting careers in the process. This is how you solve a housing crisis: with investment, workforce development and the political will to follow through. The most enduring investment we can make against the cost of living, against inequality, against the idea that your postcode determines your destiny is to invest in our people—in education. The coalition treated early childhood education as babysitting. We treat it as the economic and social infrastructure it is. Our 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators was long overdue and long overdue recognition for the professionals that are shaping the minds of our youngest Australians, including the remarkable educators I've had the pleasure of meeting at Goodstart Moonee Ponds and Goodstart in Flemington, who bring genuine skill, dedication and love to the work that they do every day. For those carrying a student debt, we heard you. That debt had become an anchor on life, on buying a first car, starting a family, saving for a deposit. We wiped 20 per cent off student debt, directly benefiting over 25,000 people in Maribyrnong and three million Australians nationally. The message is clear: your ambition should not be limited by your bank balance. The fair go extended to generations before you belongs to you as well. Beyond the national agenda, I'm proud to be delivering on the commitments I made to the people who sent me here. There is $3.7 million in sporting facility upgrades: a new pavilion at Walter Street Reserve, a scoreboard at Boeing Reserve, a bowls superhub at Cooper Street, new greens and a shade at Gladstone Park Bowls Club and upgrades at Maribyrnong Park. These are the places where our community comes together across the generations. They deserve to be world class. There is the Commonwealth prac payment for trainee nurses and carers at Kangan Institute Essendon because no-one training to care for others should have to choose between rent and dinner whilst they're trying to get the skills that they need for the work that we desperately need in our communities. There is a new headspace youth mental health service here in Moonee Valley, to be operated by Orygen, a global leader in the field, because the mental wellbeing of our young people is not a secondary concern; it is foundational. The divide in this House has rarely been starker. On one side sits a coalition that voted against tax cuts for working Australians, against cheaper medicines, against social housing, against a future it seemed either unable or unwilling to imagine. A party that once claimed to champion Menzies's forgotten Australians has spent years chasing the extremes, trading vision for grievance and offering nothing to the people actually doing it. On this side sits a Labor government with a plan, a record and a deep sense of responsibility to the people we serve. We came to office to repair what had been broken, and we're doing that. We came to office to ease the cost of living for working families, and we're doing that. And we came to office with a vision of a country where hard work is rewarded, health care is universal, housing is within reach and every child, regardless of postcode or background, has a chance to succeed and thrive. This is the Australia I see every day in Flemington and Moonee Ponds and Airport West and Gladstone Park. It is the Australia these communities deserve and it is Australia that we're building. 17:49 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson An appropriations bill is about where government spends the money, and let me tell you from the outset that they're not spending it very wisely. This government's priorities are all wrong. The No. 1 priority for any government should be to keep the people safe and their border secure. Well, clearly the Albanese Labor government is failing on that. But let's move on to the No. 2 priority, nation building: building dams, building roads—building infrastructure that everybody can use to then make a quid out of. What are the government doing? They're not nation building; they are bureaucracy building. One of the very first things that the Albanese Labor government did on coming to office was to slash all the funding for the dams. There was a project just near me called the Urannah Dam. The money was in the budget. It was also matched by private equity money. But, no, that money was then withdrawn by the government. Urannah Dam was obviously going to be a dam for water. Newsflash: we have a dry continent, so building dams should be very high on the list of priorities. Urannah Dam would have provided water for mining; it would have provided water for urban use; it would have provided water for tourism. There was a way to have a pipeline that would've gone from Urannah Dam into Peter Faust Dam, near Proserpine, to make sure that that dam never ran dry. There was also going to be capability for putting a hydro component on the dam. But, no, that was scrapped. And, while we're talking about infrastructure, let's talk about the Bruce Highway debacle. That has been mentioned many times in this place. Prime Minister Albanese stood up before the election and committed $7.2 billion to go towards the Bruce Highway, and I thanked him for that. That was really good. Unfortunately, Minister Gallagher jumped up and said, 'The money's not there.' That was a bit of a problem. We looked a bit further into this, and Senate estimates then revealed that there was only $432 million available over the next three years—only. That's far different. When you're talking about $7.2 billion—and a billion is 1,000 million—$432 million is less than 10 per cent, so let's not get too carried away. What's happening with the Bruce Highway in my neck of the woods? The Bruce Highway is starting to crumble, because it just hasn't had the maintenance and the infrastructure. But that money could have been used towards overtaking lanes or some separation within the middle section; it could have been used to fix the many potholes that we seem to have and that are getting worse, as, in the wet season we're currently experiencing, the pavement is starting to fail. The member for Forde is not here, but I listened to his speech in the Federation Chamber the other day where he said, 'Energy is the economy,' and I couldn't agree more. Well done for that. Energy is certainly the economy. However, the $9 trillion failed energy plan of those opposite is nothing more than a pipedream. I need to explain exactly why that is. It's all to do with capex—capital expenditure. When you've got the premises and you've got your solar panels, you've spent your capital on the solar panels. But then, as we know, when clouds come over or it's night time, solar panels don't work. In order to firm the solar panels, those opposite say, 'Okay, we'll get some wind turbines.' Righto; say we get the wind turbines. You have to pay for them as well, so that's more capital expenditure. And then, when the wind doesn't blow, they think: 'The sun's not shining; the wind isn't blowing; we've still got no power. What do we do? I know. We'll add some hydro to it.' Again, that's more capital expenditure on the hydro. But, as we know, sometimes that can be weather dependent as well, if the dam's not full and you can't release water. So what's the next thing? Gas—and gas has only been mentioned lately, I might add, as a way of firming the power. But, again, that's more capital expenditure. While all that is going on, once you've got the solar arrays and the wind turbines you actually need to connect those to the grid somehow so that people can use the power. What are we doing there? The proposal of those opposite is to have 28,000 kilometres of poles and wires. It's absolutely crazy. So let's have a look at this. Everyone gets their power bill. When you have a look at your power bill—let's talk about generation and network charges. Let's talk about generation. That's one component. It's about fifty-fifty. So what do you think is going to happen with the bill when you add 28,000 kilometres of poles and wires that then have to be maintained forever? It's just crazy, and it can't work. And for what—to lower emissions? We're supportive of lowering emissions. That's why the people on this side of the House have got a cheaper, better, fairer plan for energy use. So we will do that, but it'll be cheaper because we'll use the existing assets we've got. We won't have to use all this new capex that we spoke about—multiple capexes to try to get reliable power. And it'll be fairer because we all will share the burden. We'll share the same amount of burden as all the other OECD countries. Currently, we're going way above those. Currently, for the emissions, how those opposite have created 90 per cent of their emissions is by locking up farming land, land that should be used for growing the food and fibre of this country. But, no, it's being locked up. What do you think happens when it gets locked up? When it gets locked up, it breeds pests and diseases. All the weeds stay in that ground that's been locked up because farmers aren't coming in, killing the weeds and looking after it. All the pigs, all the feral animals, are all in that locked-up area, and they don't get the memo. They don't stay on their side of the fence. So what they do is then come in to the farmer's paddock, wreck all their fruit and veggies and destroy everything. And the pests and the weeds? The weeds seed and then blow all the seeds into the farmer's paddock. They actually have to then eradicate those weeds, because as we know—I'm a farmer myself—one year's weeds ends up seven years seeds. So then you have to go and actually kill all those weeds. It's an absolute nightmare. What will this mean for the average Australian? It will increase their prices at the check-out. So then, every time they go there, fruit and veggies and all the agricultural commodities are going to get more expensive. The Australian dream is rapidly becoming an Australian nightmare, and the fingerprints of this Labor government are all over the crime scene. Every morning, families in my electorate of Dawson wake up and have a kitchen table conversation that no-one should have in a country as rich as ours. They're sitting there with their bank apps open, looking at mortgages that have just been hiked up 13 times, looking at grocery bills that have jumped up 16 per cent and looking at insurance premiums that have skyrocketed 39 per cent. And they're looking for someone to blame, and they don't have to look much further than the Treasury benches in this place. We're talking about these appropriation bills today, a request for another $12.7 billion in taxpayer funds, because this government has a serious spending problem. It would actually make a five-year-old in a lolly shop look disciplined. They are spending money they don't have to fund programs we don't need and to satisfy inner-city ideology that the average Australian just can't afford. The Treasurer likes to stand up and talk about restraint. What restraint? This is the highest-spending government outside of a pandemic in 40 years. They are outstripping record levels of revenue with record levels of waste. In 2025, this Commonwealth raised $717 billion in receipts, the highest in 25 years. They are swimming in taxpayer cash like Scrooge McDuck. Yet those opposites are still running deficits. They're like a household that gets a massive pay increase but still manage to max out the credit card. Every dollar they print and every dollar they borrow is a bucket of debt petrol poured onto the inflation fire. While the rest of the world is seeing inflation fall, Australia is seeing inflation take off. Our inflation is higher than the UK, higher than the US, higher than Canada and nearly double that of Japan. This isn't a global phenomenon. It is an Australian, Albanese Labor government failure. It is a failure made right here in Canberra by this government, which has let the fiscal guardrails fall off. Let's look at where the actual money is going. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water is set to receive over $2.9 billion in this round of appropriations. A massive chunk of that is earmarked for the Cheaper Home Batteries Program, and we've certainly heard a lot about that. $2.9 billion is a staggering amount of money to throw at a net zero fantasy while ignoring the fundamental bread and butter of affordable, reliable baseload power. This government's answer to the energy crisis is to subsidise a luxury battery that only the wealthy can afford in the first place. In my electorate of Dawson, to buy one of these batteries, a family is looking at out-of-pocket expenses of around $15,000. I have to tell the minister, in the suburbs of Mackay, in the streets of Bowen or out in Townsville, there aren't many families with a lazy 15 grand just sitting around. This policy is reverse Robin Hood. It takes tax dollars from the battlers who are struggling to pay their quarterly power bill—which has already gone up by close to 40 per cent—and then hands them to higher income earners who cannot afford the upfront costs. It's a shocking way to run an energy policy. If you can't afford the 15 grand, you're left paying higher prices for a grid that is becoming increasingly more unstable. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy has an ideological obsession. He wants to reach net zero by 2050 at an estimated cost of $9 trillion. But he won't actually tell the people of regional Australia what that looks like on the ground. Well, I'll tell you what it looks like. It looks like 60 million solar panels and 20,000 wind turbines. The minister for energy stands up in this place and says, 'Renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy.' Well, my question to the minister is, 'Why are electricity prices going through the roof?' That to me does not make sense. As I said before, he's ignoring the 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines that are required because of this government's obsession with building generation where there are no poles or wires. The delivery costs, like I said before, make up 50 per cent of the bill. And what about manufacturing? These are our heavy industries—the smelters, the refineries, the lifeblood of our industrial base. They're crying out for help. They are energy intensive. They need consistent power to keep the furnaces burning. Instead of providing baseload security, this government is forcing them to pause operation or beg for subsidies just to survive. We see it in the copper industry, the zinc industry and the steelworks. All of them are saying they need government assistance to keep going. Why? It's because of the government's obsession with emissions reduction at any cost. It's just a blank cheque. We are leading the world in the race to the bottom while China, India and the United States watch from the sidelines. China's emissions go up every single year. We make just over one per cent of global emissions. Nothing we do will change the temperature of the globe. We should all do our fair share, but we shouldn't commit economic suicide to satisfy an inner-city ideology. Energy policy we see in this place hits the kitchen table every single day. Those opposite need to do better, spend the money in the right place and get Australia back on track. 18:04 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth I am proudly the member for Perth. I'm proudly a Western Australian. I am proudly a federationist. I believe that secession is false hope. It's a fringe idea with real-world costs. And, as we read in the Australian this week, we're seeing in Western Australia a new generation of secessionists launching a 400-page, 15-chapter book entitled Secession by Western Australia. Now, that sounds like a very painful read for anyone—but, I'll tell you, nothing compared with the pain of separating Western Australia from the federation. As you look around the world in 2026, now is not the time for idiotic ideas like secession. Global conflict is a sobering reminder that Australia is stronger together. One hundred and twenty-five years ago this year, we federated to make sure we were better off together than we were as separate colonies. Back then, our trains didn't connect, it was very hard to post a letter from one side of the country to the other, and we clearly were not reaching our economic potential. I don't want to see my constituents left worse off through these nutty ideas of secession, and I look forward to the fight against them. Those on the side of federation have won these fights many times over the years. I note that it was the Liberal Party in Western Australia who in 2017 passed motions urging that Western Australia leave the Commonwealth. That wouldn't have set Western Australia up for the sort of success we're seeing today. In my remarks on this bill I want to talk about what the Commonwealth is delivering for Perth, in my electorate. I was there at the WA Cricket Association grounds just the other week, opening the significant redevelopment of the WACA grounds, giving a new community centre for my community in East Perth, along with a fantastic waterslide, buckets to tip water on the kids, a fabulous swimming pool and a new home for cricket in the west. I'm so proud the Albanese government has supported that. I also went to the welcoming of the students at ECU's City Campus on top of the Perth City Link, a project the Prime Minister himself championed, making sure we now have some 10,000 students and education staff in the heart of Perth, revitalising our city, giving young Australians those benefits of education that come from further education. I was proudly there at the Angela Wright Bennett Centre, celebrating their first year of operation—again, something that was funded by the Commonwealth, investing in support for women and children leaving violent partners. I'm really proud of the work we've done. I want to commend the now Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and former Minister for Social Services for her championing of that project. Similarly, in the Perth electorate we have a massive investment from the Commonwealth in Leederville Oval, some $1.5 million to make sure that women and girls who play AFL there can get the changing facilities they need so we can use that oval to its full potential. In the next decade, Leederville is going to pop, because we're going to see thousands and thousands of new homes built thanks to the planning money we've provided to the city of Vincent. I want to make sure there's a good oval with good changing facilities for the young people who want to play there. As a former—I'm still coming to terms with that!—Auskick coach, I know how great footy is for young people in recognising all their skills and building up not just their sporting skills but their self-confidence. I want to make sure that's available to every young person in my electorate. And I want to thank Mayor Alison Zamon for championing that project and making it possible. If, like me, you realise early in life that maybe footy isn't your thing and your skills maybe aren't going to get you to the top grade, there are outstanding STEM careers in Western Australia. We understand that there are some 247,000 STEM workers in Western Australia, contributing some $87 billion to our local economy. It's one of the driving reasons that this Albanese Labor government is investing in the next generation of STEM workers with a significant investment in Scitech, Western Australia's science education centre. One in three of those STEM workers attribute Scitech as having influenced them to choose a STEM career. We need those workers, and we need people to see the opportunities that are there for the future. That's why we're spending $100 million, working with the WA state government, to build a new forever home for Scitech, making sure the next generation of young scientists and mathematicians can see the amazing careers in the west and experience the joy of understanding a little bit more about how our universe works. If you're more into natural beauty, then come and join me at Hyde Park in the months ahead as we do replanting of our islands and of the banks of the beautiful Hyde Park lakes. People in my community were devastated when the shot-hole borer meant that we had to tear down hundreds of trees in Hyde Park, but I'm pleased to have announced, alongside the member for Sydney, significant investment in Hyde Park, some half a million dollars to help with the replanting of Hyde Park to make sure that it can be a venue for weddings, birthdays and family celebrations for many years to come. Similarly, if you love the outdoors and you love public transport and you want to bring those two loves together, then we've got significant investments that this appropriation bill will support in supporting expansion of the Perth ferry network. We've done the METRONET train line. It's now time for 'metro wet', the ferry service that will ensure that people can get around Perth, including to the electorate of my good colleague the member for Tangney. We've committed some $60 million to make sure that we can get those ferries on the Swan River, and part of that will contribute $10 million to stage 2 to plan the future expansion of the network, hopefully up to Optus Stadium, Maylands, Bayswater and beyond. So that's a little bit about the benefits we have of this federation, where we can do real-world things that make a difference for people every day, and it comes on top of all of those things that you'd lose if you took away the federation agreement and you left the states on their own—or, in the case of Western Australia, left Western Australia on its own. Not only do you lose all of the trade negotiations and all of the defence services, but you lose all those things that people rely on every day. You lose Medicare. You lose the PBS. You lose free TAFE. You lose the school funding deals. And, ultimately, if the secessionists win, Western Australia loses. But I think in this place we can be fortunate that very few people buy into those ideas these days. There have been people of this place in the past who've championed them. Thankfully, we're in a different era, and these views can stay on the fringe, where they belong. I'm proud to be in a government focused on delivery, a government that is focused on delivering for the Australian people and supporting them in practical ways with everything from their household budgets to getting the jobs and opportunities that they want. But it couldn't be lost on me, as I'm sure it's not lost on anyone else in this chamber, that it was at this very dispatch box that a very important document was tabled to the parliament, and I rushed to the table office. They do very efficient work. I got my copy from the table office of tabled parliamentary papers of the parliament, which was the review of the campaign run by the Liberal Party of Australia in 2025. This is a review that the Liberal Party never wanted their own people to see. It tells a story of, in their own words, 'policy failures' and 'lack of a values statement and a comprehensive policy package'. The submissions received were clearly desperate, having experienced such an awful campaign where those submissions 'urged a more empathetic and modern presentation of leadership'. Having received the review for a more empathetic and more modern presentation of leadership, what was the first thing that the Liberal Party did on receiving this review? Naturally, they rolled their leader. I think a word that you see a few times in this review is the word 'incoherent'. That is how they describe their own policy agenda at the last election. It's also how I would describe some of their actions over the last few weeks—and even they themselves. Pretty much every person who still sits opposite put out flyers in their electorates and put out social media that said, 'Here's the nuclear plan, and here's the plan to end work from home.' They all campaigned on it. What did their own review tell them about that? It was 'politically mistimed or alienating'. They would often tell us about just how good they were when it came to economic management, and you'd see it again on the flyers that the Liberal Party put out in my electorate and other electorates, telling us how they had this great economic plan. What does their own review say about their economic plan? It describes it as 'confused and short term'. So, having had that confused, short-term economic plan, what is the solution that the Liberal Party of Australia come up with? They make the architect of that plan their leader. We now see huge confusion about what it is that the Liberal Party stand for. We know that they stood for higher taxes. We know that the tax cut that's coming in, in just a few months, is a tax cut that they didn't want Australians to have in their pocket. In fact, the Liberal Party were so mean that they didn't want Australians to have a tax cut in their pocket this year and they didn't want them to have a tax cut in their pocket next year. It's no wonder that their standing with so many Australians has fallen—as the review itself says, 'persistent concern over the party's standing with young people, women and multicultural Australians'. When it comes to the proposal from the person they've now made their deputy leader, Senator Jane Hume—architect of a policy to end work from home—their own review said it was 'so deeply unpopular' that they had to can it within weeks. There've been a lot of challenges in the Liberal Party and even in the National Party over the last few weeks, but every now and then I give credit to those opposite. Sometimes you get someone who actually talks the truth about how they feel about their colleagues. I am, of course, talking about the member for Canning. Now, I have many policy disagreements with the member for Canning. I think he was treated appallingly in some of the backgrounding by the now leader of the opposition's supporters in their trying to push him out of the race. But I would give advice to the member for Canning that, as much as I enjoy him being honest about his colleagues, it might not be a great vote-winning strategy. When you call your own coalition colleagues cowards—they're not my words; this is a comment that the member for Canning posted on his social media, which he spends a lot of time on. He called his own coalition colleagues cowards. And then, in case they didn't quite get the message that he wasn't particularly happy with them, he also went on to call them muppets. I think that calling them muppets was what I actually found the most offensive of all, because I was in this place when then prime minister Scott Morrison assured us the 'muppet show' was over. Clearly, the muppet show is still going on the other side. But I do give the member for Canning serious credit for being absolutely upfront with the Australian people about what he thinks of his own colleagues. Of course, clearly, some of those comments might have upset others. We did see comments from a former member of this place, Mr Peter Dutton, who accused the member for Canning of 'going on strike' during the campaign. I'd note that, actually, industrial disputes are down under this government compared to under the previous government, but there are still some industrial disputes happening in the coalition party room. I think it's a fascinating read, but, having quoted from it extensively, I do think it's appropriate that I recognise that others, including Mr Dutton, said that this is a gratuitous and personal hit job—but it's not a hit job from anyone outside of the Liberal Party. This is a blue-on-blue attack. This is a Liberal-on-Liberal attack. I think it says a lot as well that it did leak out within moments of the attempts from the new leader of the opposition to keep it secret. I think that tells you a lot about where we are when it comes to the sad state of some parts of those who, I think, in other times, we would have to rely upon to defend the federation from the lunatic secessionists that exist within the fringes of Western Australia, including in the Western Australian Liberal Party, as I said earlier. It was the WA Liberals who put this through as a policy motion at their conference. I'm happy to fight the Liberals against secession, I'm happy to fight the authors of this tortuous 400-page book about secession, and I'm happy to fight to make sure that we have a government focused on the Australian people, focused on delivering for the Australian people and focused on building Australia's future. 18:19 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls These are appropriation bills, and I think it's interesting to think about one of the things I think we all enjoy in parliament, and that's when the grade 6s come from our electorates. They come here to the home of democracy in Australia and they ask us what we do, and we talk about what we do. It's good to talk to the grade 6s because you can distil what we're here for. Essentially, we're here to represent our areas, and we're here to make rules, pass laws. Probably the most important law that we make is the appropriation of money. Fifty years ago, when I was born, a government tried to govern without the ability to appropriate money, but that's a historical debate that we can have. The appropriation of money is a very important role of this parliament because it leads on to everything else that we do. We can't make the laws and the regulations we make without the ability to put the resources behind them to enact them, whether it's building things or paying people or paying for defence or whatever it is. The appropriation bill gives us an opportunity. It gives me an opportunity, and what I'd like to do is reflect on the time that I've been here. I had the great honour of being elected to this place in the 2022 election. Before, as a representative in agricultural science, and then serving as the CEO of the Committee for Greater Shepparton, I was advocating to the then coalition government for support for our regional community in Nicholls. I found that support to be very forthcoming and very constructive. I thought people were doing quite well under that government, which is why I was very proud to run as the National Party candidate for Nicholls, succeeding Damian Drum. On the first day of August in 2022, I had the great honour of giving my first speech, as those opposite have recently given their first speeches. It's a great moment in your career, and it's also an opportunity to set out some parameters of what you believe. So I'm going back to my maiden speech a little bit, in the context of appropriations, to see how we're doing now, how we were doing then and how we could have done. One word I used all through my maiden speech, my first speech, was 'opportunity'. I wanted to see opportunity for regional people. I talked about my grandparents, who didn't have as much opportunity in regional Australia because of when they were born and the things they went through—the war, the Depression. They worked hard to make sure my parents had the opportunity for tertiary education. My parents had that tertiary education opportunity in the late sixties, which was when there was a coalition government. I talked about what they then did for us. I did talk a lot about regional education, which is something I'm really passionate about; I have the great honour of having the shadow portfolio in regional education. A couple of things have happened very recently which relate to appropriations that were made not in this parliament but quite a few parliaments ago. One of them was the upgrade of the La Trobe University campus in Shepparton. I was a proud MBA student who studied at La Trobe University Shepparton. I go to Latrobe University Shepparton and I see so many people who, if they'd had to go to the big cities for university, just wouldn't do university. I'm very proud of what the coalition government was able to do in supporting that upgrade. The other thing that's happened recently is the graduation of a number of regional medical students with medical degrees from a combined degree, a Bachelor of Biomedical Science and a postgraduate Doctor of Medicine at the Shepparton campus of the Department of Rural Health. That was put in place by the previous coalition government in 2018, and now we're starting to see the graduates come through. I think that will do more than almost anything else to improve the doctor shortage that we've had. So regional education is important. Are we better off in terms of regional education than we were? I think we are, but I think it's because of those initiatives that I advocated for and that came together in that previous coalition government. I also said in my maiden speech that I love agriculture, because I studied agricultural science at the Dookie Campus of University of Melbourne. I worked as an agronomist. I worked with people in agriculture. I worked for an Israeli firm that had great water-saving technology. I've worked in horticulture, and I've always been very interested and concerned about whether we make enough irrigation water available to grow the great horticultural crops that we have in this region. So I came in here and I wanted to talk about the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, what had happened and the way it could have been rolled out. I couldn't be more disappointed in what the Labor government has done in relation to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. It's not based on science. It's not based on an understanding of the economic activity and the power of irrigated agriculture in the Murray-Darling Basin. It's based on an ideology. When you get the people who use the environmental water saying that they can't use what they've got and asking why you are buying more—and this is the catchment management authorities; people who know what they're doing—why would the government go and buy more? That's having a real effect on confidence and investment in my electorate. I gave that speech on 1 August 2022. It's very disappointing to see where we've now got to in 2026. In relation to that policy, the restoring our rivers bill is the worst bill I've seen go through this place, and the damage will only continue. In that maiden speech, I also talked about the fantastic infrastructure that had been funded by the federal coalition government. I thought: 'This is a government that understands that building infrastructure is important. It understands the productivity dividend of building infrastructure, and it wants to do it in the regions, where a lot of the wealth is created.' One of those infrastructure projects was really driven by the now new deputy leader of the Nationals, the member for Gippsland, when he was in that portfolio. It's the Echuca-Moama bridge, which was opened with great pride. I haven't seen as much productivity-enabling infrastructure funding for regional areas since the Albanese government came to power in 2022. What we were able to do—this is before I came into parliament—was access to Building Better Regions Fund. Now the Labor government has got rid of the Building Better Regions Fund and they've created their own fund. They call it by a different name. That's okay. I don't mind the government coming in and saying, 'We want to change the name of the fund.' What I do mind is when they fail in successive budgets to put any money into it, because local councils come to me and say, 'We've got nowhere to go.' One example of this is a piece of infrastructure called Kirwans bridge, which was damaged in the 2022 floods. It was something I had to deal with very early on in my career as an MP. A key bridge was damaged and had to be shut down to traffic at the end of 2022. I have tried three times to find a way to get the funding—and it's not a huge amount of money in the scheme of things—to enable that bridge to be reopened, and everywhere I go I get duckshoved. They say, 'Go here. Go there.' I do as I'm told—I go here; I go there—and every time the answer is no. It's emblematic of a government that's not really serious about building infrastructure. While he's one of those opposite, I'll give a shout-out to the member for Riverina, because the member for Riverina, as the Deputy Prime Minister, worked constructively with the Victorian government to fund 80 per cent of an infrastructure project, the Shepparton to Melbourne rail upgrade. What that means is that, due to all of the signalling upgrades and the passing lanes and all of that infrastructure—and it's big money; I think the Commonwealth contribution was $320 million—there will now be nine return services between Shepparton and Melbourne. I can't tell you what that means for people who live in the city of Shepparton and want to get to the metropolitan area of Melbourne. I talked in my maiden speech back in 2022 about us having to have a big conversation in this country about population rebalance. I used the example of Germany. I talked about the population of Germany being 80 million people. The population of the biggest city in Germany, Berlin, is only about three million. It is a really good, interconnected hub of cities, all with industry—although energy policy is threatening that, and I'll come to that in a second—that is connected by high-speed rail. This element of what the then deputy prime minister did, funding this Shepparton-to-Melbourne rail, is enabling that population rebalance. That's important for housing, and it's important for regional industry. But we've got to make sure that regional industry can thrive. We had conversations today about those regional industries struggling with fuel. I thought we asked a lot of reasonable questions of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. And I do take the Minister for Climate Change and Energy at his word when he's saying that there's enough fuel in Australia, and we don't want to be scaremongering for panic buying. I accept that, but we're coming up with real-life examples of people in our regions who are not getting the fuel they need to run their businesses. I think the minister's got to come clean and say, 'I know this is a problem, and this is what we're doing about it.' That brings me to energy. I did talk about climate change being a real challenge. It's a challenge we can't run away from or pretend is not happening. We do have to act. But, as I said at the time, it's not about if we act but how we act. If we act in a really reckless way, with reckless timelines, and we don't do it in a measured way, we could see business and, therefore, emissions move offshore. As someone who cares about global emissions, I worry that policies that move business offshore move emissions offshore. That's a real issue. I do think that the better, fairer plan that we've come up with—where we tie our emissions to comparative nations, and we use a suite of technologies and be technology agnostic—is a really good plan, and I implore everyone to look through it. It does advocate for emissions reduction, and I believe in emissions reduction. But, as I've studied a lot of the literature and what's happened overseas, I do see an overreliance on intermittent power generation—that is, wind and solar. I'm not going to demonise those technologies, because, in the right place and in the right percentage of the grid, they're actually pretty good. But I think that the policy that the Labor government are embarking on will lead us to an overreliance on that. One last thing: I said that Shepparton—the town I grew up in, the town I live in and the town I love—is the greatest example of successful multiculturalism in Australia. I do worry about where social cohesion is going in this country. We've seen some tragic things happen. I want to reiterate what I said at the time, not as a point scoring thing but as a genuine contribution to the debate that I think we need to have about us all living together in this beautiful country. My observation, as a member of the Greater Shepparton community, as to why multiculturalism works was: … we seem to do better when we celebrate each other's different cultural identity but moreover embrace each other's humanity, the humanity being a stronger bond between us than any divisions that tend to be amplified by race, gender, sexual orientation or religious view. I stand by that, and I'll continue to say that. It is a great honour to represent all of the people of Nicholls. In the context of appropriation, we are appropriating money to help people right across the country, and we should do it in regions as well as cities to make our country as great as it can be. 18:34 Ms COFFEY 312323 Griffith While we can discuss appropriation bills in terms of numbers, line items and balance sheets, at the heart they're about our national priorities. They tell us what we value, what we are prepared to build and what kind of country we want to be. For me, one of the clearest tests of any spending is whether it strengthens the foundations of our democracy. Democracy itself is not self-sustaining. It does not run on inertia nor does it endure simply because we inherited it. It depends on people understanding it, trusting in it and believing that they have a place in it. In Griffith, we see that every day. We see it in our schools, in our community halls, in the questions people ask at local forums and in the care people take before they cast a vote. We see it in the pride young people feel when they first learn how a bill becomes law, and we see it when local families want their children to know not just what Australia is but how Australia works. That's why I want to speak today about civics education, media literacy and democratic participation. If we want a stronger democracy, we must invest in people's capacity to take part in it. In my first speech to this place, I spoke about the importance of civics education and media literacy in upholding our democracy. Australia is rightly proud of our compulsory voting. It is one of the great strengths of our democratic system. But compulsory voting on its own is not enough. Asking people to vote is not the same as equipping them to participate fully, confidently and critically. As the chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, the member for Bennelong said when releasing the From Classroom to Community report that all Australians need to be informed to participate in our democracy and elections, particularly at a time of rising disengagement, distrust and misinformation.' That same report found that the quality of formal civics education varies considerably across jurisdictions and across schools, and the warning signs are clear. The 2024 national assessment program report from the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, ACARA, showed that 43 per cent of year 6 students and 28 per cent of year 10 students reached the proficient standards in civics and citizenship. That's down from 53 per cent and 38 per cent respectively in 2019, and the results were described as the lowest since the assessment began in 2004. The report also showed a decline in participation in school based civics activities, especially at year 10 level, with the largest drop in excursions to parliaments and law courts. That should concern all of us, and it is not because young people don't care. The same ACARA material makes it clear that students continue to value learning about our civics and their institutions. The problem is the gap between interest and access, between concern and understanding, and between wanting to participate and being shown how. An important scheme in place to support this work is the Parliament and Civics Education Rebate, PACER. The PACER program provides financial assistance to support students' on-site learning about national, democratic, historical and cultural institutions here in Canberra. That matters, because educational opportunity should not depend on a school's postcode or budget. In 2023, rebates for students from disadvantaged areas increased significantly, with rebates of up to $1,275 per student available depending on the distance travelled. That increased support has also been extended through 2026 and 2027. Programs like PACER help more young Australians experience our national institutions first-hand, and that kind of access can leave a lasting impression. If we want stronger democratic engagement, we cannot stop at classroom learning. Participation also has to be practised. Young people need to build confidence in democracy, and they do that when they are given genuine opportunities to take part, to speak, to contribute and to be taken seriously. That's why the National Youth Parliament is so important and such a fantastic new initiative that will be run for the first time later this year. Bringing together one person from each electorate across Australia to take part in a hands-on parliamentary program is exactly the kind of investment we should be making. It will gives young Australians a chance to experience the processes of parliament directly, to see how ideas are debated, how legislation is considered and how representation works in practice. Just as importantly, it will show them that democracy is not something done to them; it is something that they can help shape. Programs like this can be life-changing. They can open the door for future leadership, community advocacy, public service or simply a deeper sense of civic confidence. Constituents often ask me when I first imagined that I might one day represent our community here in Canberra. The truth is I had not really thought about it until I visited this place as a school student in 1999 and had a chance to meet one of my absolute heroes, former Democrat Senator Natasha Stott Despoja. Experiences like that stay with you. They can turn parliament from something distant and abstract into something real, human and possible. The National Youth Forum is another important part of this work. Held for the first time last year by the Minister for Youth, the forum creates space for young people to engage directly with government policy questions and decision-makers. It sends a simple but powerful message: young Australians are not just the subjects of policies; they are stakeholders in it. I am proud that the Albanese Labor government reinstated funding for this program after it was discontinued under the previous coalition government. If we are serious about participation, access has to be broad and inclusive. Democracy is its healthiest when pathways into public life are open to young people from all backgrounds, all communities and all parts of this wonderful country. That's why the Work Exposure in Government program, the WEX program, matters. Initiated by a former Labor government and the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation in 2010, the WEX program provides Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with a hands-on experience and knowledge about career pathways in the Australian government. It helps young people see that there is a place for them in public institutions, in policy, in leadership and in service. That is powerful, because representation is not only about who sits in this chamber but also about who can imagine themselves contributing to the institutions that shape our country. Programs like WEX help make that possible. They widen the pipeline, broaden aspiration, create opportunity and strengthen democracy by ensuring more young Australians can see themselves reflected in the systems that govern them. It was great to meet students Bridget and Harmony from Townsville late last year and answer their questions about being in parliament, and also to catch up with Dwayne, one of the organisers, and Uncle Benny, who has been a mentor in the program for so many years. I was so proud to have been involved with the first WEX program and it is great to now be involved as a parliamentarian. But civics education is not only about bringing students to Canberra; it's also about bringing parliament to students. It is strongest when it is practical, when students can see institutions up close, ask questions directly and understand that democracy is not remote or inaccessible. That's why the Parliament in Schools program, run by the Speaker of the House alongside the APH Flag Roadshow, is such an important initiative. Across these programs, the Speaker works with local members to visit schools and make civics education accessible to more students, especially those who cannot visit Canberra. Since February last year, the program has already reached more than 145 schools across Australia, including regional and remote schools. The member for Riverina was just discussing how much he enjoyed the visit by the Speaker to a school in his electorate. If a young person cannot get to Canberra, then taking parliament into schools and communities is a practical and meaningful way to close that gap. Last September I was proud also to host the Parliament in Schools and APH Flag Roadshow at Cooperoo State School with the Speaker of the House. It was a terrific opportunity for local students to engage directly with our democracy in a way that was hands-on, tangible and memorable. Students learned about Federation, the parliament and the democratic process, not in the abstract but in their own school community. They had a chance to ask questions, to take part directly and to connect those lessons to the symbols and institutions that shape our national life. That is what good civics education should do. It should not leave students feeling that parliament is a faraway building occupied by other people; it should help them see that our democracy belongs to them too. When a student can ask the Speaker a question in their own classroom and when the Australian Parliament House flag is brought onto their school oval for us as the starting point for broader conversations about citizenship, something shifts. Parliament becomes less distant, politics becomes less intimidating, and public life becomes something that they can imagine themselves participating in. Programs like these help young people understand that democracy is not only about election day; it's about participation, responsibility, respect and shared ownership of our public life. They create moments that can begin a much deeper connection to civic life. I also want to acknowledge the extraordinary passion and commitment of the Speaker of the House that he has shown in delivering these programs in electorates right across the country, and to thank him for his tireless work in ensuring our next generation has the skills, tools and knowledge to lead us through the challenges ahead. In Griffith, we have a strong example of what democratic education can look like when it's practical, engaging and built for the real world. Squiz Kids is a homegrown Griffith story and one I am so proud to talk about. It's smart, accessible, age-appropriate journalism for young people. It takes the news seriously, and it takes children seriously too. If we want the next generation to value democracy, we need to invite them into it early. We need to help them build the habit of asking questions and teach them how to sort fact from spin, evidence from assertion and reporting from rumour. Programs like Squiz Kids and their Newshounds podcast do exactly that. They make big national and global events understandable without talking down to children. They foster curiosity, build context and show young people that being informed is not intimidating but empowering. Squiz Kids is also running a 'PM for a Day' competition right now, which asks Australian children aged seven to 13 to consider what would be the one thing they would do to make Australia a better place. The winning student and their parent or guardian will travel to Canberra later this month, which will include a visit here to question time and a visit to Government House hosted by the Governor-General herself. Applications close this Friday, so I encourage any young people out there listening to get their applications in before it closes. I want to acknowledge the incredible work of Bryce Corbett and the entire team behind this project. Bryce completed his fellowship with the Winston Churchill Trust in 2025, and his work on international best practice in teaching media literacy to primary school children is a valuable contribution to the national conversation. Today, civics education cannot be separated from media literacy and digital literacy. That's why it matters that the Australian curriculum includes civics and citizenship across years 3 to 10, supported by the government's Civics and Citizenship Education Hub. In 2026, being an informed citizen means more than knowing the three levels of government or understanding how a bill becomes law. It means also knowing how information reaches you, questioning what you see online, recognising manipulation, checking sources and understanding the difference between reporting, commentary and misinformation. Strengthening democracy also means supporting informed choice. At the last election, when I was out doorknocking across Griffith, there were times people told me they were still unsure, still weighing things up or did not know where they stood. In these conversations I often encourage people to take the time to read widely, compare policies and use trusted public information, including tools like ABC's Vote Compass, to help them think through the issues before casting their vote. Democracy is strongest when people vote with confidence and understanding. An informed vote is not about following habit or noise. It's about taking the time to weigh the facts, consider the choices before you and decide what matters most to you and your community. When we debate appropriations, we should understand that this is not only about funding services in the narrow sense; it is about whether we are properly funding the habits, institutions and pathways that keep our democratic life healthy. That means backing teachers with resources and professional development. It means making sure civics learning is not left to chance or postcode, and it means supporting school visits, outreach programs and practical democratic experiences. In Griffith, we know that strong communities are built when we feel informed, included and heard. The same is true for our nation. A healthy democracy needs more than just laws and institutions. It needs citizens who understand those laws, trust those institutions enough to engage with them and feel confident that their voice matters. That confidence does not appear by accident. We build it, we teach it, we model it, and, yes, we fund it. As we consider these appropriations, I support the investments that strengthen civics education, democratic participation and media literacy across the country, because every time we help a child understand parliament, every time we give a young person a meaningful say and every time we teach someone how to test what they are being told online, we do more than fund a program. We strengthen the democratic fabric of Australia, and that is good investment, indeed. I am so proud of the work that is happening across the country to strengthen our civics education, our media literacy and ultimately our democracy. I am incredibly passionate about so much of that happening in my community of Griffith. 18:49 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I'm very pleased to rise to speak on the appropriation bill. For those who are listening or watching, this is an opportunity for us to talk about how the government is spending your money—not its money, your money—where it's spending it and whether it's being spent properly. It's also about where it's not being spent, which most of my speech will be about. But I'm going to do something quite unorthodox. I'm going to start by complimenting somebody from the other side. That is the Minister for Health and Ageing, and it is in relation to the decision by the minister to backflip on a proposal to stop intravitreal eye injections from being claimable under private health insurance. I have no doubt that you're aware of that, Deputy Speaker, with your— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Very important in my electorate. Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Absolutely. Tens of thousands of people around Australia were facing the prospect of either going blind or going broke. That was because, if the decision to remove it from private health had proceeded, it would have cost them anywhere between $600 and $800 a month for the eye injections. People simply can't afford that. They can afford their private insurance, which is nowhere near that. It was some 18 months ago that people in my electorate came to me and raised the issue. I raised it with the minister, we worked together and the minister deferred it for 12 months, which was very well received. And then, leading up to the end of last year—so six months ago—we recommenced negotiations with the minister. To his credit, he consulted with the industry and he consulted with his own constituents and came to the decision only this week that the government would not proceed with that. So there are tens of thousands of people out there who now have the relief of knowing that they won't go broke or won't go blind. In his absence, I thank the minister through you, Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Or through the assistant minister. Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Or through the assistant minister as well. Thank you. That's where the thanks ends! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 They're often elderly people as well. Mr CONAGHAN 279991 The public know—the Australian people know—that this government is about to rack up $1.2 trillion in debt, and that amounts to $67 million a day in interest. That's $160 billion higher than when this government first came into power. Now, I've been listening to a number of these speeches—I was here for an hour on table duty earlier—and I heard countless stories from the other side that I would love to be able to tell about my electorate: sports stadiums and infrastructure and funding for roads— Mr McCormack 219646 Mobile towers! Mr CONAGHAN 279991 and mobile towers. Thank you, Member for Riverina. There were all these projects that have happened in their electorates not just over the first four years but even over the last year. I sat here with great envy. I just thought, 'If only I could get for my electorate just a smidgen of that.' And I thought back to all those years ago when we were in government and to the small projects that we delivered into Cowper, into Riverina, that were then described as pork-barrelling by the other side. But, when they do it, it's delivering for their communities. I just want to highlight a few of the issues in my electorate that not only haven't been funded but had funding taken away from them when this government came into power in 2022. I want to start with something that's very close to my heart, and that is veterans. In Cowper we have one of the largest cohorts of veterans in New South Wales—around 9,000 veterans, compared to other places, let's say, further north in Richmond, where they have only 4½ thousand. In 2022 we had earmarked $5 million for a veterans centre, which was a hub-and-spoke model. The other models are just $5 million for one centre. This would have provided four centres throughout the electorate, so people weren't driving two hours from Coffs Harbour down to Port Macquarie, if that were the case, or vice versa—wherever it was going to be located. There would have been four. We know that the hardest part of getting veterans into care is for them to actually attend. It's so hard, and we rely heavily on the veterans' families. After we lost the election in 2022, that $5 million was ripped away and given to the electorate of Richmond, where there's half the number of veterans. The panel that I worked with and the veterans that I worked with were literally heartbroken. I mean that. They had worked so hard, and we had celebrated the fact that there was going to be this hub-and-spoke model. Those people that they were working for—hundreds of files—would not get the attention that they deserved. Fortunately, I have great constituents and great businesses in Cowper, including the Coffs Harbour C.ex, the ex-servicemen's club. They pooled together the money for a veterans centre in Coffs Harbour. There was not one federal dollar that went in there. But for the generosity of our locals, we wouldn't have any veterans centre at all. That doesn't fix the problem down in Port Macquarie or Kempsey or Nambucca. But I'm so grateful to the C.ex and those local business people that have supported this for our veterans. Then the next issue is probably the No. 1 issue that people approach me about. That is the state of our roads—the fact that they are falling apart. The councils can't afford to put them back together. When you look at the density in a city and the rates that they pay, it's no wonder that their roads are of a fairly satisfactory condition. Then you look at the tens of thousands of kilometres of road network just in Cowper alone and the pittance that the council gets to maintain those roads. Time after time, people walk up to me and say, 'Can't you fix those damn roads?' But you can replace the word 'damn' with a lot of other expletives that we can't use here. One road springs to mind, and that is Waterfall Way. Waterfall Way runs from Coffs Harbour to Bellingen and then up to Dorrigo. It's about 140 kilometres. We have had a number of slips there, but recently there has been a significant one that is now stopping the freight, businesses and workers from getting up or down the hill to go and do their daily business. We are seeing farmers pour their milk out on a daily basis because they can't access the road network. Now, this government has provided $3.2 million for two bridges on a very unsafe alternative way. But in 2022 we had the money set aside for an upgrade of Summervilles Road, which was an alternative route in the event that we had further spills. I've had people on the phone crying that they now have a three-hour round trip, one way, to go to work and back down to Coffs Harbour. I met up with the school students at the Steiner school. It's adding an extra two to three hours in a bus every single day—because this government won't listen to their pleas for funding to fix this road. On another road topic—Wrights Road in Port Macquarie. If you live in Port Macquarie, Wauchope or anywhere near there, you'll know what I'm talking about when I say that it's not only a significant congestion spot but it will extend your drive into work or out from work by at least 30 minutes a day. Now, I appreciate the minister has already said that it's not a priority, but this congestion spot is right smack-bang in the middle of the health precinct. It stops ambulances and health professionals from getting in and out of that precinct quickly and efficiently. I've heard stories of nurses finishing their shift, going out to the roundabout and constantly driving around the roundabout to let their colleagues get out of the hospital. That's how bad it is. And sooner or later—and I'm not being melodramatic—a patient will die because that ambulance cannot get through that traffic quick enough. This government needs to look at its priorities for where it wants to spend money. We hear the other side talk about child care, that it's subsidised and you can earn up to $530,000 as a couple, but that's no good if you can't access it. Prior to this last election, we put in a plea for government funding to help Kempsey Children's Services purchase a building. It was about $600,000—not much; a drop in the bucket—and it would have provided child care for at least 60 or 70 children. There is a waiting list of 280 children for that particular child care while this government says, 'We're doing everything we can to make sure people get access to child care.' I know of police officers who arrange their shifts so they can look after each other's children because they can't get into child care. That's disgraceful. We should be looking at these examples on the ground, but we don't. I'll now go to telecommunications. The last round, or it might have been the round before, of the black spot telecommunications program was a disaster funding round. Cowper's had plenty of disasters, but I can tell you now that 28 of the 28 towers in that funding round went to Labor seats—not to Liberal seats, not to National seats—and some of them were in seats that haven't seen any disasters for years. Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Thank you for your contribution, Member for Riverina! It is serious. This is not just convenience. When we have disasters, we need to be able to communicate with the people who live in the area, with the frontline workers, with the SES, with the RFS. The fact that 28 out of 28 towers went to Labor seats is just a disgrace. Even more disgraceful was that five of them were deemed inappropriate for the areas they went to. I would like to see more decent funding in our regions. I would like to see equitable funding in our regions. And I would like to see the other side, when we work with you, to compliment our side, just the way I complimented your side when I started my speech. 19:04 Ms JORDAN-BAIRD 316021 Gorton I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, brought forward by the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services, and I commend him for doing so. These bills underpin our government's expenditure decisions made since the 2025-26 budget, the commitments that we took to the 2025 election and that we have been able to deliver in my home in Melbourne's western suburbs, in Sydenham, as well as for Australians right across the country. We introduced a number of really important reforms that are already making a difference in the lives of everyday Australians. Australians didn't vote just for a Labor government. They voted for a government with priorities in health care, education and infrastructure. They voted for a government with a clear economic plan. But, most importantly, they voted for a government that puts the Australian people first, because that's what a Labor government does. Australians have been doing it tough. Household budgets are tight, and many families are working harder than ever just to get by. There have been devastating global events, which have a hand in current economic tides. But there's also the role of governments. In times like these, people look to their government for support, and they expect us to make change, not just in words but in action. When we got elected, that's exactly what we did. When Labor first came to government after the coalition's Morrison era, the inflation rate had a six in front of it; now it has just a three in front of it. That's because of everything this Labor government has done to improve Australia's economic environment to make life easier for everyday Aussies. We have delivered real cost-of-living relief. But, more than that, we're laying the groundwork for a stronger and fairer future by investing in the services people rely on every day and in the local infrastructure that keeps our communities moving—in health care, education, energy, workforce skills, and local communities like mine, in Melbourne's western suburbs. And we are building for the next generation of Australians. I'm so proud to represent such a beautiful, diverse community in the west. We are one of the youngest electorates in the country, with a median age of just 35. In the city of Melton alone, nearly 80 babies are born every week. It's full of young families, setting up their futures in the western suburbs, and they've chosen our community to call home. The Albanese Labor government is doing everything it can to support young families in the west. We are rolling out real cost-of-living relief, help that makes a difference at the checkout and to power bills, at doctor's appointments, in rent and in mortgage payments. I've fought really hard to make sure our community receives its fair share—every announcement, every dollar, every project. We push for Gorton because I know how much it mattered, and I'm really proud of what we will be delivering. We're installing a new roundabout at the intersection of Mount Cottrell Road and Greigs Road. We're upgrading the Caroline Springs Recreation Reserve, Keilor Recreation Reserve and Lionheart Reserve. We're helping the Sri Durga Temple build a new community and education centre. We've opened a new childcare centre in Brimbank, in Kings Park. We're helping the St Michael Ethiopian church expand programs for language assistance and youth outreach. And we are providing important infrastructure upgrades to strengthen community safety right across Gorton. These are the places where our kids play sport and learn, where families gather, where communities come together. These upgrades really matter, and this is what delivering for our community looks like. Infrastructure is really important. It matters because in my electorate, in the western suburbs, we are seeing so much growth in our community. That's a good thing, but it comes with its own set of challenges. A growing community means things like more people in more cars on our roads—roads like the Western Freeway and the Calder Freeway. The Western Freeway is a critical transport route for passengers and freight. It links in with major freight routes throughout our state, including the Midland, Sunraysia, Pyrenees, Henty and Wimmera highways. Approximately 86,000 vehicles travel on the Western Freeway stretch between Melton and Caroline Springs every day, and we're expecting that figure to rise to about 113,000 by 2031. That's why we've invested $1 billion to upgrade the Western Freeway between Melton and Caroline Springs, all towards improving capacity and safety along the freeway for our community in the west. Then there's Calder Park drive. If you're a westie like me, regularly driving these roads, you already know that the Calder Freeway has a really dangerous intersection at Calder Park Drive. That is exactly why, in March last year, we announced $300 million to upgrade this interchange on the Calder Freeway. This diamond interchange will make things a lot safer for my community. Early planning stages are underway with the department, and they're currently refining the interchange design scope. They're speaking to stakeholders about how the works may impact them and what this might look like. This project is about improving access between our roads and about community safety. Better planning means getting the basics right: building roads to withstand the tens of thousands of cars driving on them day and night. And our westies—our locals—travel on them every single day. They spend more hours of the day away from their families, sitting in traffic—more hours at risk of road accidents. And westies deserve better than that. We deserve to get home safely and efficiently. That's why I'm advocating for these changes, which will mean less time on the road and more time at home with our families. And we're making those changes. Around 26,000 people in my electorate have student debt. They're the same people who are trying to save for a deposit to get into the housing market, or paying a mortgage; they're paying bills; they're starting their own families; they're working hard, trying to get ahead. But many people still face barriers to education and training—barriers that the generations before us simply didn't face. I hear it from young people in the families in my community all the time. I speak regularly with so many young people in the west: students at uni or TAFE or in schools, all across my community, and they keep telling me the same thing. They're facing cost-of-living pressures that their parents' generation simply didn't have. It's not fair, and the younger generations of Aussies deserve better. That's why we've made HECS fairer. It's why we've cut 20 per cent off student debt for young people pursuing an education, whether it's at uni or TAFE, in VET or apprenticeships. Wiping 20 per cent off every student's debt was the first piece of legislation this Labor government introduced to parliament after we came in last year. By Christmas, millions of Australians had seen that reduction for themselves the next time they'd logged into their myGov account. Those with an average debt of $27,600 have seen a reduction of $5,520 in their outstanding debt. This means that students can keep more of what they earn. There are no applications and no forms, just real cost-of-living relief. We've capped the interest, so that young people's student debt doesn't spiral out of control, and we've raised the minimum repayment threshold, so students aren't forced to pay back more than they can afford. This means that, for example, if you earn $27,000 a year, you'll save over $1,000 a year in repayments. You can still pay off more if you want to. But this makes the system fairer for everyone, no matter what their income is. This 20 per cent cut will be especially important for VET students. It applies to more than 280,000 VET student loans and Australian Apprenticeship Support Loan accounts, and it will remove $500 million from those balances. That's a huge boost for apprentices and trainees starting out in the workforce. But this isn't a one-off change. It's about making the whole system fairer for the students who'll study tomorrow as well. It's about long-term structural change. Reducing student-debt burden helps graduates build a better future for themselves and for their families. It's about intergenerational fairness, because getting an education here in Australia should not leave young people with a lifetime of debt. For the more than 26,000 people in Gorton who currently have student debt, this is real change, real cost-of-living relief and real fairness. And that's what this Labor government is delivering. A young community like mine means a community building their futures, starting families and buying their first homes. Right now, Australia is facing a housing challenge that has been a generation in the making. When the coalition were in government for almost a decade, they were negligent when it came to housing. They didn't take responsibility. They didn't step in. They didn't deliver. This problem can't be tackled overnight. But, unlike previous coalition governments, we are addressing this issue. We're not leaving the struggle for homeownership to an entire generation. We're not leaving it to the states. We're taking a hand in it. We have brought the federal government back to the table, where it always should have been. That's why I'm so proud to report on the success of the Albanese Labor government's five per cent deposit scheme. My electorate of Gorton has one of the highest uptakes in the country. Since we came to government, more than 3,000 people in Gorton have bought their first homes with just a five per cent deposit. And this scheme is simple: no income limits, no limits on places, no house price caps. It's just real help for real people. But helping people into a home is just one part. We also need to build more homes. In Labor's last term, we built 500,000 homes across the country. Right now, 28,000 social and affordable homes, funded by our government, are in planning and construction. And we are aiming even higher. This term, we are working towards a bold national goal: 1.2 million new homes in five years. We are also building the workforce to deliver them. In Gorton, more than 400 construction apprentices are getting $5,000 incentive payments to train in the trades. These young workers will help build the homes that our community so desperately needs. This just shows that the contrast between us could not be clearer. The Liberals wanted young people to raid their super. They voted against Help to Buy. They voted against building 100,000 homes for first home buyers. Labor is delivering, Labor is building and Labor is giving young Australians a fair shot at homeownership. The Albanese Labor government is laser focused on the health care of all Australians. We've introduced a suite of reforms to strengthen Medicare, boost our healthcare workforce and make health care more readily accessible to all Australians. When it comes to securing affordable and accessible health care, we're making sure that no Australian is left behind. We have made record investments in Medicare, like our landmark agreement to deliver record funding to state and territory hospitals, with $25 billion in additional funding for public hospitals. That is three times more additional funding for public hospitals than under the last five-year agreement. There are now 23 Medicare bulk-billing clinics in my electorate of Gorton in Melbourne's west. Seventy per cent of GP clinics in Gorton are fully bulk-billed. I visited some of these clinics, including Our Medical Caroline Springs and the Taylors Hill Medical Clinic. We also have two urgent care clinics nearby in our community, in Melton and in Sunshine. They're amongst the 90 urgent care clinics Labor has opened across the country, with another 50 still coming. We've cut the cost of PBS listed medicines at just $25. We've done so much in women's health. We've added new contraceptives to the PBS for the first time in 30 years—Yaz, Yasmin and Slinda—we've introduced the first new menopause treatments on the PBS for the first time in 20 years, and we're ensuring there's better access to IUDs and birth control implants as well. We've opened endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics across the country. Let me be clear: this does not happen by accident. It happens because we have a Labor government with a majority female Labor caucus, unlike those opposite, who fail to elect enough women and who then undermine the ones who are elected and do manage to break the glass ceiling. We are a government who understands the challenges faced by Australian women because that's who we are. For that reason, we make changes for women right across the country, like expanding paid parental leave to 26 weeks so that Australian women are supported in getting back into the workforce. We're also paying super on paid parental leave. We've brought in cheaper child care and the three-day childcare guarantee, and we've secured a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators. This is about closing the gender super gap so that Australian women can retire with more super. When we were elected, we committed to delivering on the issues that matter to Australians, like better infrastructure, health and education outcomes. I am proud that we are delivering real changes and real cost-of-living relief for Australians in my community in the west and for those right around the country. On doing so, I commend this bill to the House. 19:18 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, the Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026 and the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026. The Albanese government has made history as the highest spending government outside of the pandemic in 40 years. In coming years, it is projected, they will break their own record. I've said it many times, and I'll keep saying it: this Labor government is run by politics, not by policy, and they have no respect for the taxpayer. They answer only to their union boss. They have no respect for the small-business owner. The national accounts show this. The government debt shows this. Our inflation shows this—it's the highest in the OECD. Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, and then, one day, the next Liberal-National government will fix it. Spending as a percentage of GDP is predicted to reach 26.9 per cent at the end of this financial year. More than a quarter of all dollars in our economy is spent by this government. That is ridiculous, and it is not good enough. This is big government territory. This government is running deficits because record levels of revenue are being outstripped by record levels of spending and record levels of spending growth. This socialist Labor government is breaking records all around at the cost of Australians. These spending habits do not reflect the restraint that the Treasurer so often speaks about. This restraint is setting up the next generation to pay off even more Labor debt—$1.2 trillion of debt. That's $1,200 billion. It's $1,200,000 million. That's how much money this is. That's a lot of money, but it's hard to comprehend what that means on a per-worker basis. If I combine the South Australian Labor government debt and the Australian Labor government debt and I divide it by the workforce, we reached a milestone in 2025 in South Australia. There is over $100,000 per worker on their individual government debt credit card. Every South Australian worker now owes their government more than $100,000 in debt. That is significant, and that will be paid off by their children and their children's children. Until Pyro Jim gets spending under control, Australians will keep paying through higher prices, higher mortgages and weaker living standards. This is the first generation in Australian history where your children will be poorer than you, and that is unacceptable. Labor's reckless spending habits are also part of the reason the RBA have raised interest rates again. The Treasurer has got his foot on the gas of government spending. The RBA have their foot on the brake, raising interest rates. If you press the gas and the brake too hard, what do you do? You do a burnout. Maybe we should start calling our Treasurer Burnout Jim. The RBA raised interest rates in February by 25 basis points, making it now sit at 3.85 per cent. Pundits predict the RBA will increase rates again when they next meet and even again when they next meet after that, putting more pressure on your mortgage repayments and more pressure on the cost of everything. At the House Economics Committee on 6 February, the RBA governor said: … to the extent that aggregate demand is above aggregate supply, which we think it is, that's contributing to inflationary pressures. She also said: Mathematically, you're right; public demand expenditure and private sector—all of that—adds to demand. The government cannot escape the laws of economics. Higher government spending always results in higher inflation. Higher inflation demands higher interest rates. I always come back to my high school economics teacher—economics 101; thank you, Mr Maguire—who said that governments act in a countercyclical fashion to the private sector. When the private sector is doing poorly, government spends more. When the private sector is doing well, government restrains itself. What have we seen with this government? We've seen it spend, spend, spend, spend, spend. We've seen inflation and debt go through the roof. It is as simple as that. After nearly four years of Labor, Australians are paying more for everything because of Labor's reckless spending, which is fuelling the inflation fire. Insurance is up 39 per cent. Energy is up 40 per cent. Mind you, the $275 reduction in our power bills never came. Rent is up 22 per cent. Health is up 18 per cent. Education is up 17 per cent. Food is up 16 per cent. Throw in the recent floods in outback South Australia, which is causing some councils to estimate $10 million in damages, with no support announced at the state or federal level. Or how about the recent fuel shortages, which are causing transport operators to pay more than $1,350 on fuel? That is a 38 per cent increase on what they were paying just last week. These figures add up when Australians are being forced to pay more for essentials because of this government's spending habits. You only have to look at Labor's upgrade to the BOM website to see how they manage their money. That was $96.5 million for a website upgrade. My fiance builds websites. The cheapest website is about $2,000. A Rolls-Royce website is about $40,000. How on earth did the Bureau of Meteorology spend $96.5 million on a website that no-one asked for? Indeed, there was clearly no user acceptance testing, because the farmers that I speak to don't use it. They don't like it. We've had to reinstate the old one and share that link with all of my community. This waste of taxpayer money has resulted in our primary producers, the backbone of our economy, having an important resource taken away. That mistake was a completely unacceptable use of taxpayer money by Labor, and it's just one example. I've been fighting for a Doppler radar on the lower Eyre Peninsula. Minister Watt told me there is 'no capacity'. To be frank, 'no capacity' is political speak for 'no cash'. How is it that this government can spend so much money yet not spend any of it where it is actually needed on physical infrastructure like Doppler radar as opposed to an expensive website? Labor's out-of-control spending is hurting all Australians by fuelling higher inflation and higher interest rates. Australia's inflation rate is now higher than the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Japan, Germany and so many other countries. This is a problem specific to Australia, fuelled by government spending being the highest in 40 years outside of a recession. Why is it that we are the only country with this problem? The worst part is that Labor have been warned by industry experts. This is not new news. AMP chief economist Diana Mousina confirmed it when she said: So it appears that directly, the government has been adding to inflation in recent years, as you would expect in an environment of public spending lifting to a record high. AMP chief economist Shane Oliver only last week said, 'A lot of factors driving (inflation) relate to government spending.' IFM Investors' chief economist Alex Joiner said: We already have fiscal policy getting looser, but it could be even looser than we expect. The fiscal guard rails have come off. And HSBC chief economist Paul Bloxham said: … the primary driver of the pick-up in inflation is not strong demand. To the extent that demand is playing much of a role, it is that public demand growth has been strong, due to government spending. The government has lost support from its friends in the industry super sector. Spending growth is running at four times the rate of growth in the economy, and debt under the Albanese government is set to reach $1.2 trillion. Spending is now $160 billion higher than when this government came to office. That is $16,000 for every household in Australia. Since coming to office, the Albanese government has added $100 billion to the national debt. That is impacting Australians. We saw some news come out last week that Australia has the highest rates of bureaucrats per capita—another interesting point. Australians are spending $50,000 a minute on the interest of Labor's debt alone—$50,000 a minute—and I'm sure that's increasing as well. Under Labor, Australians are worse off. Under Labor, living standards have declined. Australia has the biggest fall in living standards in the developed world. As Liberals, we stand for lower inflation, lower interest rates and lower taxes. You will always get that from the Liberal Party. It is clear Labor's reckless spending is keeping inflation higher for longer. We will fight for lower costs and for disciplined economic management. We must unapologetic, unapologetic—I can't even say it, Deputy Speaker Freelander. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Unapologetically. Mr VENNING 315434 We must defend Australian values. Speaker Freelander, it's getting late in the day. We want our country once again to be one of opportunity and aspiration. All Australians, especially young Australians, deserve the stability that comes from owning a home. They deserve the opportunity it provides. They cannot do that under Labor with its reckless spending habits. We will reduce financial pressures for families, expand childcare choice and give children the best start in life, not force every family into a universal system. We will fix Labor's bad taxes, including a tax on your home, a tax on your super, and a tax on you and your children's future. We'll get rid of Labor's carbon taxes that are pushing up the costs of food, cars and housing. We know the government must live within its means so Australians have the means to live. Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 97 ADJOURNMENT Public Sector Governance 97 19:30 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Today the findings of the investigation by the National Anti-Corruption Commission into the robodebt referrals were released. It found that two public officials engaged in serious corrupt conduct, while four others, including former prime minister Scott Morrison, were cleared. But today's findings leave major unfinished business. The robodebt scheme was not a minor policy mistake. It was an illegal automated debt collection system that wrongly pursued hundreds of thousands of Australians for debts they did not owe. More than 443,000 people received false debt notices, often demanding thousands of dollars. For many, the consequences were devastating: financial hardship, fear, mental distress and, in some tragic cases, suicides. This program destroyed lives. The system treated people not as citizens and people deserving fairness and dignity but as data in a cruel, automated process. The National Anti-Corruption Commission may have handed down its findings, but, for many Australians, serious questions remain. How did a scheme that was known to be legally flawed continue for so long? How did warnings go unheeded? And why, after the royal commission referred multiple individuals for investigation, have Australians been left in the dark about how those referrals were assessed? When the final report of the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme was published in July 2023, one part was sealed. It contains the names of people the commissioner believed may have engaged in wrongdoing, and evidence supporting those referrals. The public deserves to know what was in that sealed section. The NACC investigated several referrals, and today we learnt the outcome: very little. But much of the investigation has taken place behind closed doors, with only limited public explanation about how the findings were reached, and still the original referral matter remains confidential. That means we don't know, for example, whether any members of the previous coalition government, aside from Scott Morrison, were referred for assessment. There is no reason why those details continue to be kept secret. The Albanese government, with the NACC that it created, which fails the pub test in terms of providing public scrutiny, has—this process has failed the Australian people. Transparency matters in cases like this, not only for public confidence but for the victims of robodebt, who deserve clarity about what happened, why and who was responsible. It raises two important issues: first, reforming the NACC, the National Anti-Corruption Commission, to ensure public accountability by defaulting to public hearings rather than closed-door hearings—the public deserves to know what accountability is being required—and, second, the danger of continuing to roll out automated assessment tools. Robodebt exposed more than just policy failure; it exposed failures in accountability, culture and government oversight. Public servants must feel empowered to speak up when something is unlawful or unethical, ministers must ask hard questions about the advice they receive, and, importantly, whistleblowers must be protected, and our institutions must ensure that Australians are never again subjected to automated systems that disregard basic principles of fairness or legality. Worryingly, my office has recently received reports of automated systems now being used under the Albanese government to determine what aged-care services are provided to elderly people. It means vital decisions affecting highly vulnerable individuals are being made by a rigid algorithm with limited human oversight. And we know that some types of automation are still being used when it comes to the welfare system, as well as the ATO. Given the robodebt disasters, Australians have every right to ask: what has actually changed since then? Robodebt was one of the darkest chapters in Australian public administration. The real test now for the Albanese government is whether we are going to close those transparency gaps, put meaningful safeguards in place—when automation is used, make sure there is oversight by people to make sure these challenges or automated decisions can be overruled—and make absolutely certain that nothing like robodebt can ever happen again. I know there are many people in my community and other communities around the country who are seriously concerned around the use of automation when it comes to the aged-care system. Brisbane Electorate: Sport 98 19:35 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane Sport is a powerful tool for building community, reducing loneliness and enabling social cohesion. It creates a sense of belonging and helps foster relationships across different social, cultural and age groups. Sport promotes core values, such as fair play, teamwork, respect and tolerance. Through sport we learn confidence, strength, leadership and, importantly, resilience. I was an avid sportsperson growing up; in fact, I still am—I have the proof of that at the moment. The pool, the police club, the park and the school, with its athletics and swimming sessions, were my hangout places. As a swimmer and a lifesaver who trained five days a week, I slept in sandy beach beds and rejoiced at states and nationals—boy, did I learn a lot! In less than a decade, Brisbane will host the biggest sporting event in the world: the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. Queensland has a really proud sporting history. We've produced the King, Madam Butterfly and Cathy, the Golden Girl—three greats from my era. But the games are more than a sporting contest. They will provide many opportunities to enrich and strengthen our community. As are other electorates around the country, Brisbane, luckily, is home to many amazing sports clubs, such as the Valley District Cricket Club in Ashgrove. Valley District Cricket Club was established in 1897 and is one of Queensland's oldest clubs and one of the largest cricket clubs in Australia, boasting 1,600 players. Alongside Senator Chisholm, it was great to make an announcement last year committing $2.7 million towards the indoor facilities as the club looks to cater to more young players, men and women, across Brisbane. I recently had the pleasure of joining Dan and Carl from the club onsite for a tour of the grounds and a look at the proposed plans. I really do acknowledge the great work the club does for the community and its players, and I look forward to seeing how the project progresses. Brisbane City Football Club in Newmarket is one of the fastest growing soccer clubs in Brisbane. With Amelia, Joe and Michael at the helm and with a very impressive academy development program—not to mention a great pizza oven!—Brisbane City Football Club is not only producing champions but is a natural place for locals to come together and enjoy the community. Labor recently committed funding for a female change facility at this large local Brisbane football club. Finally, the girls will have the same facilities as the boys. This is more than just a building; it's recognition that women in sports matter, and sports matter for women. The 50 or so players that joined me the morning that we made the announcement were so excited. They told me that this means more girls will join their community and it will grow. You never know, there might be a future Matilda or two in the making. Then there's Norths hockey club at Dorrington Park in Ashgrove. I recently joined local state member Jonty Bush there for the 2026 sign-on day. Alongside Adam and the team, we worked the barbecue, cooking the snags and preparing the sausage sangers. It's a social, inclusive and family oriented club that has teams for boys, girls, women and men of all ages, skill levels and experience. If you're looking for a sport to maybe help you keep fit or make friends for life, this could be one. There's Gibson Park in Stafford. Gibson Park is under the steady leadership of Steve and Tony. They host Stafford District Cricket Club and Brothers Leagues Club, alongside other teams across Brisbane. These grounds are important because they provide a safe space to play and for players to meet up with their mates. During the election I committed $350,000 for the installation of new lights, which will improve the conditions for players and other participants, as well as improving safety while training and for competition. It will enable a wider variety of sports to be played on the field, opening up the facilities to potentially more activities and to a much more diverse group of participants. This commitment will also support the park's water infrastructure. It will double its capacity, reducing operating costs and saving water, which is very important to our environment, as well as helping to improve the playing surface. Everyone needs their group—their peeps, people they can count on, people who inspire them and people they can learn from. Sport provides one avenue for this. Our government is proud to support sporting clubs across the Brisbane electorate. When we invest in sport not only do we inspire the next generation of leaders, teammates and champions but we strengthen the social fabric that holds our community together. Beef Australia 99 19:40 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I rise today to celebrate the incredible success of Beef2024 and to look forward with great anticipation to Beef2027, which will once again put my electorate of Capricornia, and specifically the great city of Rockhampton, under the international spotlight. Beef Australia is more than just an event; it's a world-class organisation dedicated to promoting, advancing and celebrating a sustainable beef industry. What started as a one-off event for the 1988 bicentenary has grown into the premier cattle industry exhibition in the Southern Hemisphere. The numbers from Beef2024 are simply staggering and speak to the vital importance of this industry to our national economy. We saw a record attendance of 125,576 people descend on the beef capital of Australia. These weren't just locals; we had visitors from 39 different countries and over 1,200 international delegates. The economic impact for Central Queensland was massive, with a total direct and incremental expenditure of $102 million, supporting 721 full-time jobs. This is a win for our hotels, our small businesses and our hardworking producers. During that week we served up 37.5 tonnes of beef across 276 ticketed events, including the new M'Eat Street dining precinct. But Beef Australia isn't just about the numbers; it's about the people. It brings together producers, scientists, chefs and exhibitors. It's also about the next generation. I was proud to see over 5,100 school students participate in the 2024 program. Applications for the Graeme Acton Beef Connections Program opened last month and close at the end of the week. This program runs for 14 months and will ensure the beef community stays strong for decades to come by continuing to mentor our future industry leaders. Our industry is also leading the way in innovation and sustainability. Beef2024 featured 65 industry based seminars and tech talks, proving that our producers are at the cutting edge of global agricultural technology. The success of this event has been recognised nationally, with Beef Australia taking out gold at the Australian Tourism Awards in 2024 in two major categories—major festivals and events, and excellence in food tourism. This is a testament to the hard work of the board, the team and the hundreds of volunteers who make it happen. We aren't resting on our laurels, and the plans for Beef2027 are already taking this event to the next level. With 417 days to go, the countdown to Beef2027 has already begun. From 2 to 8 May 2027, Rockhampton will once again host this week-long celebration. Nominations are already open for the 2027 national carcass competition, and the team is busy implementing their new strategic plan. We are going to see a bigger and better Beef TV, with a massive push towards our international beef community, building on the 79,000 global viewers who tuned in to see the action from Rockhampton last time. We're also going to have an even greater focus on tech in agriculture, ensuring our producers have access to the latest innovations and the kinds of industry-leading seminars and tech talks that made the 2024 event such a runaway success. Of course, we're making sure that there are more opportunities than ever to sample great Australian beef, because we want every visitor to taste why our product is the envy of the world and we want to well and truly surpass the 37.5 tonnes we served up at the last event. So I invite the Prime Minister; the Premier of Queensland; you, Mr Speaker; and every member of this House to join us in Rockhampton in 2027. Come and see firsthand why the beef industry is the backbone of our regional communities. Central Queensland is ready, our producers are ready and I can guarantee that the steaks will be world class. Gas Industry 100 19:44 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley As a result of the awful conflict in the Middle East, we are once again witnessing how quickly shock waves can travel in a globalised world. My thoughts are always firmly with innocent civilians directly impacted, with recent events having completely devastating consequences, especially for children. The sooner hostilities cease, the better for all across the region. These days, distance from a conflict in another part of the world is hardly a guarantee that countries will be shielded from aftershock. If a nation relies on another for the supply of a critical good, like oil or gas, and that supply is disrupted, predictably, the upward price movements can be brutal. Australia possesses some of the biggest reserves of gas on the planet. With this supply, we should be better positioned than most to insulate ourselves from price shocks, securing our gas at our prices, or so you'd think. Let me quickly focus on fuel prices because I want to congratulate the Treasurer for the swift action he's taken, instructing the ACCC to monitor petrol prices closely and act where necessary. His actions have put petrol companies on notice: don't use this conflict as an excuse for price hikes or profiteering. I wrote to the Treasurer today urging him to build on his good work, empower the ACCC to monitor gas prices weekly and let multinational companies know they cannot rip off this nation as they rip our gas out of the country. Based on recent experience, we have every reason to be concerned. Power bills shot up when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, as gas companies exploited the crisis to ramp up prices and profits. Australia's east coast has been forced to accept globally indexed pricing for gas because these companies are focused more on the export market, where they can make the most money. This has seen our domestic wholesale gas prices tripling in the last decade. Get this: because of their profiteering obsession, in the past five years, those gas companies have shipped away enough gas to supply our nation for two decades at current usage levels. Despite this, Australians are repeatedly told supply is tight. We had the ACCC tell us in December that the east coast gas market is facing a projected shortfall in the second quarter of the year. But, with so much gas in this country, we don't have a shortage of supply; we have a glut of greed. How can it possibly be that Australia doesn't have enough of our own gas for our own needs, bearing in mind that the amount of Australian gas that Japan onsells in a year is nearly double what we use on the east coast annually? This is astounding. We may be told that supply is limited because so much gas is locked in under long-term contracts, but this argument ignores a crucial fact. According to the Australia Institute, around 30 per cent of all gas exported from Australia is not needed to meet contract commitments. Instead, that surplus is sold on the spot market for higher profit. This excess capacity dramatically exceeds any domestic supply risk. According to AEMO, in a hypothetical worst-case scenario, the east coast might face a shortfall of 153 petajoules, yet exporters send overseas eight times that volume in uncontracted gas each year. These facts will stun Australians. The facts point to the reality that this is a broken market. The only winners are profiteers. Australian politics has got to acknowledge the red-hot anger that exists about the greed of gas companies felt by voters of all political persuasions. That's why Australians were such strong supporters of our government's actions in 2022 to cap gas prices after they shot through the roof as gas companies raced to make 'Putin profits' off the back of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. In my letter to the Treasurer, I've urged him to send an unambiguous signal that, if gas companies seek to profiteer off what's happening in the Middle East, the government is prepared to cap prices again. I also reckon we have to seriously consider the proposal to tax gas exports. Australians are rightly angry that most exported gas attracts zero royalties and that the economic return from this national resource is disproportionately captured by foreign shareholders. Advocates of this proposal believe it can protect uncontracted gas from being shipped off in the blink of an eye by gas firms, prioritising supply to all Australians. It's also got the potential to raise billions in revenue annually for the government. While I think the east coast gas reservation plan is massively important, it's going to take time to set up. We can't stand by and let profiteering run wild. We must act now. We can't be timid. We can't be meek about our national interest. These are our resources—our gas at our prices. Western Australia: Agriculture Industry 101 19:49 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise today to condemn the Cook and Albanese Labor governments for their treatment of Western Australia's primary industries. A common theme amongst all Labor governments seems to be their lack of care and respect for primary producers. In regional WA, our primary producers are being treated with open contempt. Recently, I spoke in parliament on how the WA state government demersal fishing ban is impacting fisher men and women across the state, particularly from Kalbarri to Augusta, where commercial fishing for demersal species is now banned and recreational fishing is banned for a further 21 months. I want to remind the House of the disrespect shown by both the WA Cook Labor government and the Albanese Labor government. The ban I'm referring to was implemented less than one month from the date of announcement. They made the announcement and said 'in a month's time', giving no warning to those in the industry to prepare for life after fishing. Honestly, it is unbelievable. Further to this and despite being the richest state in Australia, the WA government could only manage a paltry $29 million compensation package. That is so disrespectful to an industry that has worked hard to keep itself thriving while maintaining a manageable and sustainable level of growth. In comparison, the federal and Queensland governments have committed more than $160 million to phase out gillnet fishing. Why is it that Western Australian men and women fishers have drawn the short straw? Despite efforts from me and my WA colleagues, the federal fisheries minister refuses to support those WA fishing families. In fact, the minister doesn't even have the decency to travel to Western Australia and meet with our fishers. The other week, fisher men and women from all over the state gathered on the steps of the state parliament to rally against the ban. Amongst the crowd were multiple multigenerational fishing families now selling their boats and also selling their nets and wondering how they're going to pay their mortgages without an income. All those who gathered were simply asking for a conversation and basic support from the WA minister. Instead, they have been ignored, dismissed and left feeling completely unheard by yet another arrogant Labor government. In my electorate of Durack, fishing families are being pushed to the brink and risk being wiped out entirely. This is no exaggeration. Bait shops are closing. Seafood shops have got no fish to sell. Boat ramps are empty, and boats are sitting in sheds. A petition signed by over 27,000 Western Australians has been tabled by the opposition in state parliament, calling for a pause on the bans until a parliamentary inquiry is held and the need for emergency financial relief for affected fishers is agreed to. Sadly, Labor's contempt extends to the WA agricultural industry, with the banning of the live sheep export trade. After nearly two years of uncertainty, the first live sheep export trade transition dollars are finally being rolled out. This is simply too little, too late. In that time, our state flock numbers have tumbled. First, the Albanese government announced an insultingly low support package, an amount which was never going to be enough compared to the revenue loss. They then made the application for the support package near-on impossible to complete. Many in the industry haven't even bothered applying, because the process is so daunting, drawn-out and, quite frankly, just tiring. Families and communities are still hurting from the initial announcement. The government has done next to nothing to support them or ease the burden. To add insult to injury, of the recent $20 million grant application, there is over $16 million that's shared amongst five abattoir processing plants. You can't make this stuff up. When our state flock has now dwindled to an estimated six million, down from 12.7 million in 2022, it's difficult to see how we can have a sustainable processing sector, regardless of government grants. This government has ripped away regional livelihoods and failed to stand by key industries. And, when those affected have sought support, they have been met with indifference from arrogant and out-of-touch Labor governments. Remember that the banning of the live sheep trade was never about animal welfare. It was only ever about winning votes in inner-city seats in Sydney and Melbourne. I say shame on Labor. It's time state and federal Labor governments showed respect to regional Western Australians keeping our economy strong, growing our food and fibre and making daily sacrifices for us. Housing 101 19:54 Mr HOLZBERGER 88411 Forde I campaigned on three priorities, and I've come into this place to talk about those three priorities, and, as long as I'm here and I'm talking about them, I think I'm doing the job I was elected to do. Two of those are what I think of as my 'head' priorities, and those are housing affordability and energy affordability. One of them is my 'heart' priority, which is health care and disability care. Of course, sometimes it's hard to know really which one is necessarily the 'head' one and which one is the 'heart' one, because affordable health care is also a core economic need—not just in the home, where being able to see a doctor who bulk-bills is good for the back pocket; it's also good for the economy if people are able to get the health care that they need when they need it, as it saves money later down the track. But the priority, and it is one of my heart priorities, that I want to talk about tonight is housing. It's probably my No. 1 priority. It is certainly true that, over the last 40 years, Australia has not built enough houses. It's no coincidence, I think, that the Liberal Party—the coalition—was in government for most of those 40 years, federally, and completely vacated the field when it came to building public housing. There's one couple that I want to talk about tonight, and that's Scott and Ann-Marie of Bethania. When I called them earlier and I said, 'How's it going?' she said, 'What—the house hunt, the mental health or the stress?' She is, at the moment, facing eviction in the next couple of months and desperately looking for somewhere to live. She told me that that she and Scott are on the disability support pension and the carer's pension. Amazingly—and in an economic policy like housing, this shows how heartless the LNP government is in Queensland—the LNP state government has changed the rules so that they are now facing homelessness, and, if they become homeless, they won't be able to access the emergency support that has been there in the past. That's because—and you will never believe this—even though they are on the DSP, they no longer qualify for public housing in Queensland. That means that, if they end up sleeping in a car, they're not going to be able to get emergency support to be able to stay in a motel while that house is found. Unless they can get on to the public housing waiting list—and, by the way, I think it's false advertising to call it a 'waiting list', because the idea is that, if you wait long enough, you'll get public housing, but that's not going to happen; you can be on that list for ages. But, unless they get themselves on that list, they're not going to be able to get the help that they need if they become homeless, as happens to so many people in my community. I've got more stories like that which I've told, and more, unfortunately, I can continue to tell. So it is no coincidence that, after almost 30 years of federal Liberal governments, we have this housing crisis. That is because—I think, for an ideological reason—they absented themselves from the field. One of the most striking figures is that, over their nine or 10 years in government, across the whole of Australia, they built 373 public housing dwellings—373. They just completely dropped the ball. In fact, they didn't even have a minister for housing for a large part of their tenure. In contrast, the Albanese Labor government is picking up the pieces, and right now we're building 206 houses in Logan Reserve alone—in one suburb in Forde alone, 206. So, effectively, we're building half as many public housing dwellings in Forde, in one term, as the previous government built across the whole of the country, over nine years. Finally, why I think this is fundamentally an economic issue is that it was definitely the post-war Australian experience that governments built public housing—not out of the goodness of their heart, but because, if you build public housing, if you can keep the cost of living down and if you can keep the cost of rents down, then that actually helps the economy as a whole. It was the secret. In fact, in South Australia at the high point, of all the rental dwellings in South Australia something like 40 per cent was public housing. And public housing wasn't just there for the people that desperately needed it; it was there for car workers and railway workers and teachers. In fact, it was written in to the South Australian Housing Trust that it was there to assist in the economic development of the state—just as public housing should be now, too. House adjourned at 20 : 00 The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Lawrence ) took the chair at 09:30.

Wednesday, 11 March 2026

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Lawrence ) took the chair at 09:30.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 103 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Eisemann, Ms Thelma 103 09:30 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I rise today to celebrate a life that is, quite literally, unforgettable. Last week I had the profound honour of joining Thelma Eisemann to celebrate her 108th birthday, a milestone that very few humans ever reach. Surrounded by her family and friends and along with my state colleague Nigel Hutton, the member for Keppel, we didn't just witness a birthday; we witnessed a living map of the last century. The highlight of the morning was a moment I will never forget. Along with the guests, Thelma, with a sparkle still bright in her eyes, quietly sang for us her favourite song, 'Unforgettable'. The Nat King Cole song's lyrics perfectly captured the essence of this incredible woman. Born in Emerald on 4 March 1918, Thelma has lived through sweeping tides of history. She remembers when talkies, movies with sound, were the most impressive invention on Earth. She recalls the excitement of her family being the first in Emerald to own a television and the pride of owning one of the first Holdens, a 'tonal green' model that she still remembers with a smile. But Thelma was never just a spectator of history; she was a creator. Taught the art of dressmaking by her mother, Elizabeth, she built a life of fierce independence. She became a celebrated seamstress, crafting stunning bridal gowns and ball dresses that were the talk of the region. In a time when women were often defined by their husbands, Thelma chose a different path. She never married, famously saying she enjoyed her independence far too much and was far too busy making her own money to be tied down. She was once even named belle of the ball while wearing one of her own beautiful creations. Her life has been defined by grace, humour and a deep love for her family. From school holidays spent splashing in the water at Emu Park with the Presentation nuns to caring for her parents with her sister, Dorothy, in Gladstone, her heart has always been rooted in her community. Thelma lived in Gladstone independently after the death of her sister up until she was 101, when a small stroke made it impossible. She moved to Yeppoon to live with her niece, Helen, and Helen's husband, Rodney, where she enjoyed the sea views and still played the organ, until she moved into an aged-care facility in Yeppoon in 2023. Thelma Eisemann is a treasure to our community and an inspiration to us all. She reminds us that a life well lived is filled with wholesome food and, most importantly, a passion for living. Happy 108th birthday, Thelma. You are and always will be truly unforgettable. Health Care, Medicare 103 09:32 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland After support for cost-of-living relief, delivering more affordable and accessible high-quality health care is my No.1 priority, and it's a challenge I'm tackling head-on from every angle. On the Central Coast, the Gwandalan Summerland Medical Centre services an area consisting of more than 7,000 people. For years, it's managed to do this with just one full-time GP and one part-time GP. I worked with the practice to secure another full-time GP from the United Kingdom through the expedited specialist pathway that we've introduced, and I'm pleased to report that Dr Fam Ho joined us in November and is looking after locals every week. I had the pleasure of personally welcoming him to the area, and I wasn't the only one welcoming his arrival in what is a truly appreciative community. When it comes to bulk-billing, there's no easy solution to undoing the decade of cuts and neglect by the previous Liberal government. Year after year, leader after leader, they decimated Medicare. But seeing a GP shouldn't be a struggle; it should be free, and that's why we've tripled the bulk-billing incentive with the $8.5 billion package for more doctors and more bulk-billing. It's meant Cardiff General Practice has become a 100 per cent bulk-billing practice, and other practices are working through the process right now. I'll continue working with my Hunter colleagues and our excellent health minister to deliver more bulk-billing GPs across our community. No matter where you live in our community, I'm pleased to say there's a free Medicare urgent care clinic nearby. In Charlestown, not only have we delivered an urgent care clinic and then extended its hours; we've now funded more doctors and nurses so you can get the care you need faster and for free. It's one of the busiest urgent care clinics in the country. In the four weeks following Australia Day it had 1,485 presentations, an average of 53 a day. At Lake Haven we're making the urgent care clinic even better too, and very soon I'll have more to say about delivering our promise to boost its capacity with more doctors and nurses. With 1,283 presentations in the four weeks since Australia Day and a huge 78 per cent of patients indicating they would've gone to the emergency department if the clinic wasn't there, we know it's a community asset that's taking pressure off our local hospitals, which are under strain right now. From delivering more doctors and more bulk-billing GPS to delivering even better urgent care clinics—as a dad, as the husband of a nurse and as your federal representative, I'll continue working every day to deliver for Lake Macquarie and the Central Coast. Renewable Energy 104 09:35 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah The ongoing conflict involving Iran has now triggered oil price spikes and renewed volatility in global energy markets. It's a clear reminder that, in an era of geopolitical instability, Australia needs energy sovereignty more than ever. Clean energy storage, efficiency and electrification are not just climate solutions; they are economic resilience and national security solutions. Recent global shocks show that Australia's dependence on oil and gas leaves us exposed to crises beyond our control, but renewable energy, generated locally and supported by storage, gives us more control over our energy costs and reliability. Increasingly, defence and security leaders are also recognising and calling for climate change, as a national security issue, to be elevated in how we address it. This week it emerged that some of the loudest voices against climate action and a transition to renewable energy—Pauline Hanson, Matt Canavan and Kevin Hogan in this place—access subsidised solar support for their own homes. It shows that, no matter your politics and what you say in this place, the benefits of renewable energy are abundantly clear in reducing cost-of-living issues. Australia must accelerate the rollout of clean energy across the economy. We must electrify homes, apartments, transport and small businesses so Australians are less exposed to oil and gas price shocks. We need to ensure apartment residents are not left behind in the clean energy transition. Shared solar, battery storage and strata-friendly programs are essentially but sadly missing, as are government incentives for household energy efficiencies and rolling them out to stratas. In Warringah we're already seeing what home electrification can achieve. For example, Rob McKay, a Cremorne resident, helped lead his nine-apartment strata block through the installation of a rooftop solar and battery system. He told us that this was a real feel-good story for him and his neighbours, saying: It reduces your power bill significantly. It reduces demand on the grid, and we are lowering greenhouse gases. It's also been good for community building in our block. This is exactly why I launched the new Warringah Sustainability Guide. It helps households and businesses to plan upgrades, to cut energy bills, access government rebates and incentives, and understand the interaction between local government, state and federal supports. It strengthens resilience to extreme weather and international energy price shocks. This week, my amazing team of volunteers—I have to do the shout-out and thank you—will also be hosting free electrification events across our community and at the Neutral Bay Community Centre. In Warringah, we're committed to helping lead that transition to a more sustainable and resilient economy. Lyons Electorate: Australia Day 104 09:38 Ms WHITE 224102 Lyons I rise today to acknowledge the outstanding service of several remarkable constituents from my electorate of Lyons, who've been recognised in the Australia Day 2026 honours. Mr Geoffrey Ashton-Jones AM has been honoured for his significant contribution to the environment, primary industry and the broader community. Through his leadership as chair of the Tasmanian Rivers and Water Supply Commission, Geoffrey has left a profound and lasting impact on local communities and on the stewardship of our natural resources. Mr Athol Bennett OAM has been recognised for his dedication and service to the Southern Midlands community, his leadership as chair of the Community Advisory Committee for the Midlands Multi-Purpose Health Centre, and his past role as president of the Oatlands District Homes Association. Mr Will Smith OAM has been acknowledged for his service to the youth of Tasmania. As CEO of JCP Youth and the program director for BEAST, Will has shown exceptional dedication to empowering young people and fostering positive life outcomes. Mrs Kim Brundle-Lawrence AFSM OAM has been honoured for her exceptional service to the Carrick Fire Brigade. With more than 35 years of dedication to the Tasmania Fire Service, Kim has contributed enormously to community safety, resilience and emergency response in Northern Tassie. I'm lucky to see firsthand the incredible contributions made by people from all walks of life, people who help build— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 09:40 to 09:58 Ms WHITE 224102 I'm lucky to see firsthand the incredible contributions made by people from all walks of life, people who help build up our communities and our country. There are so many others who do incredible things but go without recognition, especially women. In the Australia Day 2026 Honours List, women represented just one in four of all appointments and awards. There is no good reason for this. Afterall, we all agree that men and women should be treated equally, and we recognise that they contribute in an equally impressive way to building the strength of our community. The challenge for all of us is to nominate a woman who we see doing great things in our community so they get the recognition they deserve, whether they are volunteering every season in the footy club canteen, running a small business, working to breakdown stereotypes in male dominated industries, educating the next generation in our classrooms or serving our community at the local health clinic. You don't need to be an astronaut, as impressive as that is, in order to receive a nomination for an award. These honours exist to acknowledge Australians who make meaningful and lasting contributions anywhere in our community. Each of these recipients awarded in 2026 exemplifies the very best community-minded service. On behalf of my community, I express our deep gratitude for their tireless efforts, and proudly recognise the significant contributions they have made. National Disability Insurance Scheme 105 10:00 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo On Sunday afternoon, every MP was emailed a video by investigative journalists Pete Z and Drew Pavlou on NDIS fraud. They investigated suburbs with high numbers of NDIS providers. In some buildings, there were multiple shopfronts with padlocked doors and no operational phone numbers or websites. A whistleblower cleaner stated that many providers charge participants for a minimum of two hours for just 30 minutes of cleaning or less, and that providers double the charge when two participants in the one property are both receiving NDIS funding. This is a rort. The NDIS states that a provider cannot charge a participant for more time than is actually booked for support delivered. The journalists booked an Airbnb unit, a little studio, for an NDIS clean. Help in Support cleaners stayed for just 25 minutes. They brought no equipment, they used the unit's tissues and they gave a very poor clean. They invoiced for two hours—$236 for that 25 minutes, where $116.60 was for cleaning and $120 was for labour costs. The provider stated that auditors advised them to charge a minimum of two hours, as required under NDIS rules. That is not correct. Upon being confronted, the provider changed the invoice from $236 down to $24. Further investigations showed a banned provider allegedly reappearing in the same location with the same phone number and same accountant. M&F Disability Services was closed due to fraud. Their registration was revoked and they were served a lifetime ban from providing NDIS services. Now operating in the same location with the same phone number and using the same accountant is Sunny Days Care. When Drew and Pete asked staff if the business was in any way connected to or using the same accountant as M&F Disability Services, they were threatened. They were assaulted and called retarded. It's on the film. This was sent to all of us. We should all be watching this. The NDIS is supposed to be an important social service that provides reform and a change of life for people living with disability. It's not supposed to be a bottomless pit of funding to be exploited by some providers. We're going to see, in the 2028-29 year, $63 billion in funding. There is so much to say about this. I would just like to say that Pete and Drew have done an exceptional job in exposing this one element of potential fraud in the NDIS. The NDIS fraud chief, in recent Senate estimates, said 10 per cent of NDIS claims are potentially fraudulent. This is $5 billion a year. The government must investigate this now. Lalor Electorate: Community Events 105 10:03 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Well, it's been a vibrant couple of weekends at home in the electorate of Lalor. I'm pleased to speak about those weekends here today. On 28 February, I was very pleased to attend the Wyndham Holi. This is the 12th year the Wyndham Holi have run this wonderful event. I want to thank Neha Kolape and the Wyndham Holi team for what was a terrific event, and, of course, the sponsors and all of those from the community who attended. It was a fabulous event, as Holi events across the outer west of Melbourne—the member for Gellibrand will attest—have been across the last few weeks. On 7 March, this Saturday, I attended the Melbourne Telangana Forum International Women's Day celebration, which is in its second year. I was joined there by Sarah Connolly, the member for Laverton. I want to thank Lakshmi and the volunteers who work tirelessly to support community members across the western suburbs. I followed that by attending the Aussie Bangla Sisterhood's Ramadan Eid exhibition at Eagle Stadium. This was a first for the outer west of Melbourne. There were 36 stalls, mostly small businesses run by local women, selling goods in preparation for Eid. I spent some time with Janatul Ferdous, meeting some of the stallholders and hearing the stories of families buying clothes for Eid celebrations in a few weeks. That was followed by an iftar dinner that evening with the Victorian Bangladeshi Community Foundation. I want to thank President Morshed Kamal for the invitation. I was joined there by John Lister, the state member for Werribee. It was a beautiful evening, and I thanked them for the invitation and the opportunity to wish everyone a blessed Ramadan. On Tuesday I look forward to my own International Women's Day event, where I'll be joined by about 160 women from around our community from various groups, not-for-profit organisations and even some of our school principals bringing along a few students. It's always a terrific event. I also want to spend a moment more. I got to meet Dr Cynthia Maung, who founded the Mae Tao Clinic on the Thai-Myanmar border decades ago. She came to Werribee quite recently and was in Canberra last week. I met her here in Canberra with Ko Saulsman from the Myanmar Campaign Network and Saw Lwin Oo from the Australian Karen Organisation. I want to pay tribute to this wonderful physician and the work that she has done for decades supporting the Burmese community on that Thai border, who've been in those camps for such a long time. Her care for their health and her work with the Thai government and with our refugee community here is extraordinary. Cole, Ms Ellie 106 10:06 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra As Australians tune into the Paralympics this year, many will recognise one of the voices guiding them through the action, Ellie Cole. Ellie is far more than just a competitor; she's one of Australia's greats of sport. Across an extraordinary career spanning four Paralympics, Ellie amassed an incredible 17 medals in the pool. She is the most decorated Australian female Paralympian of all time and one of Australia's greatest competitors. Today, Ellie Cole is not just a celebrated athlete but a valued member of our community. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:06 to 10:18 Mr LEESER 109556 Today Ellie Cole is not just a celebrated athlete. She is a valued member of our community, choosing the Berowra electorate to live in towards the end of her Paralympic career and to now raise her family in. She's a vital part of our community. Ellie's story is well known and deeply inspiring. As a young child she faced a life-changing experience, losing her legs to cancer, and part of her rehabilitation she took up swimming which soon became not just therapy but a passion. What followed were years of discipline, sacrifice and determination culminating in 17 Paralympic medals and the honour of carrying the Australian flag at the Tokyo 2020 closing ceremony. Ellie's talents and leadership extend far beyond the pool. She's also played wheelchair basketball at the national level, and is now a prominent disability advocate and television commentator with roles including television host and commentator for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games and now the Winter Olympics. Ellie's many accomplishments include authoring a children's book, Felix and His Fantastic Friends, which encourages young readers to embrace inclusion and celebrate diverse abilities. Ellie was also recognised with an AM in 2024 for her service to sport and her advocacy for inclusion. In the Berowra community we honour our heroes so that they might inspire the next generation. That's why I recently launched a petition to rename the Hornsby Aquatic and Leisure Centre in honour of Ellie Cole. The proposal is more than simply naming a building; it's about acknowledging excellence, character and contribution. It's an opportunity to pay tribute to one of Australia's most decorated athletes and one of its most influential Paralympians. The Hornsby Aquatic and Leisure Centre is used every week by young, aspiring swimmers. It's a place where swimmers dream. It's where they build lifelong skills. It's home to both the Berowra and the Hornsby swim clubs, where the next generation of swimmers are learning their craft. When I speak with the coaches, with the parents and with the young athletes, they tell me the same thing: Ellie Cole inspires them. She shows what's possible with hard work, discipline and resilience. Renaming the facility would not only celebrate her extraordinary achievements but embed her example into the everyday life of our community. Her story would inspire the next generation of young swimmers walking through those doors, who, for many years, would be reminded that greatness can begin right here in the Berowra electorate. So today I encourage everyone across the electorate to sign my petition, to get involved in the campaign, to honour not only a remarkable Paralympian but a remarkable Australian and an inspiration to people not just in the Berowra community but throughout the whole country—Ellie Cole. Islamophobia, Middle East 106 10:20 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand Ramadan is a time for reflection and for connection in our community, and there's no better place for this connection than at a local iftar in your community with friends and family. Attending iftars in recent weeks, many members of parliament in this place would have heard about the trauma of the conflict in the Middle East and how that is causing anxiety across Australia. They will also have heard about the effects of the rising anti-Muslim rhetoric from some in this place and the way that is compounding this anxiety. The reality is that the Australian Muslim community has been experiencing increased levels of Islamophobia in Australia in recent times, and the rhetoric in this place inevitably filters down into the community and into our schoolyards. There have been some appalling incidents targeting mosques and even iftars this year driven by Islamophobia. It's un-Australian and it needs to be called out. Every Australian Muslim, just like every other Australian, has a right to feel safe and to be safe. Every Australian politician has an obligation to ensure that their words do not incite hateful actions. In the Middle East conflict, our first priority is the safety and security of Australians in the region. Although not all want to leave, we are aware that there are still over 100,000 Australians in the Middle East. Unfortunately, the conflict in the Middle East remains volatile and dangerous. For decades, the Iranian regime has posed a threat to its own people, the region and international peace and security. Iran's retaliatory strikes have targeted energy infrastructure and civilian areas across 12 countries in the region. We are gravely concerned at the expansion of the conflict into Lebanon. It's been heartbreaking to see the loss of life there and across the region, especially the number of children killed. I know how painful this has been to watch for so many members of the Australian community. If the conflict escalates further, it will have devastating consequences for civilians across the region. The Australian government has raised with Israel our concern about potential Israeli military action in the suburbs of southern Beirut. Our concerns include the impacts of Israeli military action on civilians in Lebanon, especially given the large numbers of Australians in the country and the potential for further displacement of the Lebanese population. For Australians in the region, commercial flights are still the best way to leave. The Australian government is working closely with airlines across the region on commercial flight options, and since 4 March approximately 3,000 Australians have returned to Australia on 21 flights. The Australian government will continue to look at all options available, engaging partners and taking action to help Australians who want to leave the Middle East. We encourage all Australians in the region to monitor and subscribe to Smartraveller for advice on how to stay safe and to return home, and we'll continue to support Australians to navigate the disruption and provide consular assistance where we can. Grey Electorate: Community Events 107 10:23 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey Seventeen years ago Sunny Singh arrived in regional South Australia with little money and few connections. Today he's a justice of the peace, an elected member and a community leader, and for years he has been quietly raising the issues that matter most to the people of Giles. The Liberal Party chose him for a reason. Giles deserves a representative with proven dedication and real roots in the community. That person is Sunny Singh, and he has my full support. On Monday, 16 February, I had the privilege of attending the annual Bushfire Resilience Day at the Wasleys Bowling Club. I was joined by my friend and colleague the member for Frome and candidate for Ngadjuri Penny Pratt. Together we spent the morning listening to the lived experience of those who survived the Pinery bushfire, and the choice of the venue was no coincidence. Ten years ago, the Pinery fire tore through our region with a ferocity that changed lives forever. I'd like to acknowledge the deaths of Allan Tiller and Janet Hughes. The Wasleys Bowling Club was destroyed—reduced to nothing but charred remains. However, the story did not end in the ash. Penny and I stood in a facility that not only has been rebuilt but is currently thriving. At Wasleys, resilience is not a buzzword. It is the lived reality. It is the grit of the volunteers and the determination of a community which refuses to be defined by disaster. I want to extend my gratitude to the CFS for organising this commemoration. We honour the memory of what was lost, and we celebrate the strength found in the aftermath. The west coast is the best coast. I had the privilege of spending a lot of time out there in the last few weeks, travelling from Port Lincoln to Ceduna, Penong and Port Augusta, meeting with councillors, small-business owners, farmers, miners and community leaders. These people are the people who run this nation, often without the recognition or adequate support. I visited the South Middleback mine, the future of Whyalla, a place that is thriving and is full of possibility but also a business that is struggling under power prices plus green and red tape. I met with small-business owners in Port Augusta, who are working incredibly hard for their slice of the Australian dream but feel crushed under power prices, rising crime and a police presence that is simply not good enough. Sunny and I met with Ben at SportsPower and Anne from Harvey Norman and with many other businesses in that community. I heard from remote and regional councils starved for funding by a city-centric Labor government, which is passing the burden onto regional ratepayers, but I also witnessed something extraordinary—a space launch facility at Koonibba partnering with companies across three continents and Penong footy club, a team undefeated for three years. Virgen, Mr Ronald Charles, OAM, Lilley Electorate: Community Events 108 10:27 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley Northside has lost a valued community champion with the passing of Banyo resident Ron Virgen OAM on 30 December 2025. Ron's life was dedicated to service. A 20-year Army veteran, he saw active duty in Borneo with the 4RAR during the Indonesian confrontation. His service did not stop there. When Ron finished his military career, he channelled his passion into helping war widows and veterans through the Banyo RSL subbranch in my electorate of Lilley. Ron was instrumental in establishing Australia's first RSL citizens auxiliary, supporting non-veterans and allowing them to give back as well. This model has now been adopted nationally by the RSL. Ron deservedly received his Order of Australia medal in 2010 for service to the welfare of veterans and their families through the Banyo RSL subbranch and to youth. A proud member of the Australian Labor Party, Ron was farewelled by his wife of 62 years, Annette; his children, Karen, Chris, Paula and Warren; and their families and friends on 14 January. Vale, Ron Virgen; our community will be poorer without you, Last month, it was my great honour to officially open a new state-of-the-art netball clubhouse in my electorate of Lilley thanks to a $3 million investment from the Albanese government. The new Brisbane Netball Association clubhouse at Bradbury Park, Chermside, delivers better accessible facilities, changerooms, new administration spaces, function rooms, canteen and registration areas, storage amenities and spectator areas along with carpark upgrades. The BNA has been around for more than 50 years, and this $3 million investment helps set them up for the next 50. More than 1,300 netballers play at Bradbury Park each week, and this new clubhouse provides a modern facility to support the growth of netball across the northside. This is yet another demonstration of us delivering not only on our election commitments but on our broader commitment to develop Australia by funding projects that build opportunity and improve liveability. Two organisations in my electorate of Lilley are receiving grants under the Albanese government's Saluting Their Service program. Everton Park State School P&C will receive $10,000 to construct a memorial garden, install a flagpole and relocate a memorial rock and plaque on the school grounds. There are many Defence Force families at the school, and I know this project will be welcomed. Separately, the Friends of Nundah Historic Cemetery group received $6,500 to develop a website, which will include an interactive map of Queensland's oldest cemetery. This will allow visitors to locate the graves of service personnel and view detailed biographical information of the area's first settlers. These are important local projects for my community, and I look forward to each progressing in my patch on the north side. With my remaining time, I wish the Brighton Roosters all the very best against the Logan Pride this Saturday in the first round back. Also, in the Hostplus Cup, very best of luck to the Norths Devils, who will be off to Toowoomba for round 2 on Sunday. Good luck, everyone. Fuel 108 10:30 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay How much more can Australian families and small businesses take? Across my electorate of Lindsay and throughout Western Sydney, the message I hear every single day is that people are at breaking point. Families who work hard, pay their taxes and play by the rules are watching the cost of living spiral further out of reach under this Albanese Labor government. Western Sydney is the engine room of our economy. It is home to millions of Australians, hundreds of thousands of families and nearly a third of businesses in New South Wales. Yet, it is also where the cost-of-living crisis is hitting hardest. Unlike in the inner city, people in Western Sydney rely on their cars. Parents drive to work, to school drop-offs, to sport on the weekend and to multiple jobs just to make ends meet. When petrol prices surge, it hits household budgets immediately. But the impact of rising costs does not stop at the petrol pump. It flows through every part of the local economy, pushing up prices for everyday Australians. Local business NRS Security has told me that with fuel prices skyrocketing, the cost of running patrol vehicles is becoming unsustainable. If fuel prices keep rising, they'll be forced to scale back vehicle patrols simply to survive. That means increased risk for local businesses already doing it tough. It is another example of how rising costs ripple out and affect entire communities. Small trade businesses are feeling the same pressure. Local plumber Aaron has three service trucks on the road. Because of rising fuel prices and fuel shortages, he's already taken one off. For years, Aaron offered free call-outs and investigations to help customers understand their plumbing issues before committing to a job, but he told me he can no longer afford to do that. The cost of simply getting a truck to a home has become too high. One of his suppliers has doubled their delivery fee overnight, from $15 to $30. Aaron now has no choice but to pass some of those costs on. And who ultimately pays the price? Hardworking mums and dads who are already struggling with their own rising household bills. A Western Sydney transport company has advised their fuel supplier has begun rationing fuel. If they need 10,000 litres they may only receive 2,000. Since last Sunday the cost of fuel has risen by 70c a litre, with another 16c added just yesterday. We will also start to see another worrying consequence of soaring fuel prices: the rise of fuel theft. We will see this not just at petrol stations, where drivers fail to pay, but also from trucks and equipment at construction sites. For businesses already struggling with rising costs, this is yet another hit they simply can't afford. Right now, families are hurting. Small businesses are under pressure. Under this Albanese Labor government, the pain at the petrol pump and across the country is very real. Discrimination 109 10:33 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga All of us in this place have a responsibility to use our words wisely—not for clickbait, not to generate outrage through algorithms and especially not to leave members of our communities feeling vulnerable and open to attack. It is in this light that I highlight the concern within my community around Senator Hanson's recent comments suggesting there are no good Muslims. The Senate has, rightly, censured her for this, because language like this does real damage to people in our communities, to our very sense of these communities and, in fact, to our country. In my electorate in Melbourne's north-east, people from different backgrounds live side by side. First Nations families live alongside families who have been in Australia for generations, who live alongside families who have come here more recently to build a life, to raise their children and to contribute to our country. There are many Muslims in my electorate, including a strong Somali Australian community who I'm so proud to represent here in this place. When I drop my kids off at school in the morning, I join with Somali parents, with Indian parents, with Iranian parents and others. Our kids are learning together. They are playing together at school all day. Across our community, people from different backgrounds are volunteering at our sporting clubs and our local organisations. They are working. They are building small businesses. They are our nurses, our students and our neighbours. This is a great strength of our country. When Senator Hanson suggests there are no good Muslims, people in my community hear that and know it is an insult against Australians they know and the Australia they know. It is why, on behalf of my community, I am calling it out. Our country works because we've built a society based on fairness, respect and inclusion. It will be to the detriment of us all if we give that up, if we decide that those places where we can come together—our sporting clubs, our schools, our local organisations—don't count as much as the places that the algorithms send us to and if we are not willing to champion these values of fairness, respect and inclusion. That is why today I am saying, on behalf of my community, that we value the places we have built where people from different cultures and faiths have come together to build communities where everyone can belong. When Senator Hanson singles out Muslims, when she singles out Australians based on their faith or background, it chips away at this sense of belonging that holds our communities together. That should concern all of us in this place. We do live in difficult times. There is so much happening in our world that is terrible, and that is affecting many people in our communities at this time. It is on all of us to show the leadership and the responsibility that holds our communities together and that brings together those values of respect so that we can move forward together. Mornington Peninsula 109 10:36 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders On the Mornington Peninsula, we live with an administrative identity crisis. The state Labor government's official tourism site lists it as one of Victoria's beautiful 'regions' to visit. But then, when it comes to tax time, we are on par with St Kilda Road. The Allan Labor government treats the peninsula as metro for revenue and as regional for responsibility. We've got regional buses running every half hour and a diesel powered, single-track train that runs every hour or two, but we get metro-style taxes that arrive with terrifying punctuality. Our businesses pay the metropolitan rate of payroll tax of 4.85 per cent, nearly four times the 1.21 per cent rate that applies to eligible businesses in Geelong. That single difference accounts for an estimated $225 million more in payroll tax paid by the peninsula every year. We also cop the cladding rectification levy and the metropolitan planning levy, neither of which apply to Geelong, due to our metro classification. We have nearly 3,200 short-stay listings on the Mornington Peninsula, compared to roughly 1,500 across Greater Geelong. And, despite shouldering a much larger proportion of Victoria's influxes of tourists, we get taxed more as a result of the government's short-stay levy. We are taxed like a city but funded like an afterthought by the state Labor government, which takes us for granted. Last week, the Committee for Frankston & Mornington Peninsula released its 2026 benchmarking report comparing our region of the peninsula and Frankston to the comparable region of Geelong and Queenscliffe on the other side of the bay. It showed the scale of imbalance in state government investment. Across the last three state budgets, Geelong received about $4.2 billion in capital investment, compared with just $1.8 billion for the region of Frankston and the Mornington Peninsula. That works out to be $14,400 per person in Geelong, compared with just $5,600 per person on the peninsula. When you look at where that money goes, the contrast is even starker. Geelong receive funding for tourism, regional development, justice and city-shaping infrastructure. The current by-election in the state seat of Nepean, which falls within my electorate, is a chance to give the Allan government a healthy and loud reminder that they need to pay attention to our region. Every day that I'm not here, I'm out on the streets with our Liberal candidate for Nepean, Anthony Marsh—our mayor, with whom I've worked for years. He will be a passionate and persistent advocate for our area in the state parliament within a future Wilson coalition government. It's not enough that we pay higher payroll tax and Airbnb tax and contribute billions in tourism, agriculture and hospitality. In the eyes of Jacinta Allan's Labor government, we are an easy target for tax grabs. Now that Labor has run out of money, it's coming after yours. It's time for a fairer classification, a fairer land tax and a government that remembers that the peninsula is part of Victoria—not its ATM. Middle East 110 10:39 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle The Fremantle community 'contains multitudes', to use the Walt Whitman phrase. Our social heritage includes crucial Defence estate sites, vital veterans organisations and precious memorials to those who died and suffered in war. But Fremantle is also a place with a sustained commitment to peace. It has a strong Quaker community. I've been fortunate to know, and be influenced by, people across the peace movement who embody a devotion to conflict resolution through nonviolence and to nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament. While I am an optimistic and hopeful person, partly by nature and partly by resolution to work towards the possibility of better days, I accept that there will never be a time where humans overcome the tendency to believe there is something to be gained in violent conflict. That is why every effort and every emphasis on peace is so crucial. That's why every ounce of scepticism and every grain of peaceful resistance that can be brought to bear against the use of unjustified military force against unchecked state violence, against the idea that some problems can only be solved by war, is absolutely vital. The long, imperfect and inconsistently applied post World War II compact that nevertheless provided the basis for avoiding global scale conflict has frayed and is fraying still. Right now, we have a fresh conflict in the Middle East, and we say clearly that the principles of the Geneva Conventions and the requirements of international humanitarian law must continue to apply— A division having been called in the House of Representatives — Sitting suspended from 10:40 to 10:54 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 As the Foreign minister has said, our posture in relation to this conflict is defensive. We want to protect Australians, and we want to protect our friends in the region. Last week, Prime Minister Albanese and Prime Minister Carney separately made a compelling argument for middle powers to rally around and seek the reform of multilateral institutions while building new collaborative bulwarks against the destabilising and dangerous application of hegemonic power for its own sake. It is neither naive nor unrealistic to seek to be the friends and allies that great powers need, rather than the friends they might prefer. This government has walked that path. We've sought and achieved an end to the serious encumbrances on trade with China and a resumption of respectful engagement that does not shy away from disagreement. Across two presidential administrations, we have forged new economic and strategic ties with the US while of course being prepared to use our own national interest positions to good effect. We've had differences of approach with the US, including on tariffs, the imposition of which we regard as not being the act of a friend, and, working with the US, we achieved a just outcome in seeing Julian Assange come home. Australia has recognised Palestine alongside our partners the United Kingdom and Canada and also sanctioned Israeli government ministers for human rights abuses against Palestinians. That is how Australia should conduct itself in accordance with our national interest and our national character—understanding the world as it is but always seeking to influence the world in the direction of justice, equality and sustainable shared wellbeing, all of which can only exist on the bedrock of peace. Alexandra Headland Surf Life Saving Club, Fuel 110 10:56 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Only a few weeks ago, another tragic incident occurred on the Sunshine Coast that highlighted both the power of the ocean and the extraordinary courage of our surf lifesaving volunteers. In the early hours of Saturday 31 January, in Alexandra Headland, members of the Alex Surf Club were arriving to set up for a carnival. At around 5 am, members of the public alerted them to a person in distress in the water north of the clubhouse. Although there was no patrol underway, club members immediately sprang into action. Nino Dukic and Justin Cash launched the IRB into challenging surf conditions and headed more than 150 metres offshore to reach the patient. Once the patient was aboard, CPR began immediately, as they navigated back through the break to the beach. Onshore, a coordinated response unfolded. Members including Sue Gregory, Andy Ovenden, Ellen Whinnett, Dave Richardson, Tim Bowles, Dave Cockroft, Matthew Cleverly and Stu Voigt rotated through CPR, administered oxygen and delivered defibrillation while managing crowd control. Other members included Jett Kenny, Trent Winstanley, Shane Peterson and Ross Hutton from the Dicky Beach Surf Club, who assisted with operations and beach management. Unfortunately, despite sustained and coordinated resuscitation efforts by these volunteers and by paramedics, the patient, sadly, could not be revived. Our ambulance and police services both praised the professionalism and teamwork shown by the surf lifesavers involved. These men and women are volunteers. They run and swim towards danger when others run away. On behalf of the Sunshine Coast community, I want to thank them for their courage and their service. Yesterday, in the House, I raised serious concerns about fuel availability on the Sunshine Coast. Since then, the messages have not stopped coming. Last night, I received a message from a regional family quarry and trucking business in Kingaroy. They've now run out of diesel completely. Their trucks have stopped, their quarry has stopped and they have no idea when fuel will arrive. Farmers, truckies, professional fishermen and miners all rely on diesel. If the trucks stop moving, the economy stops moving. Further, when fuel prices jump and supply becomes uncertain, inflation surges. Higher transport costs mean higher food prices—higher prices for families already struggling with Labor's cost-of-living crisis. Australians are told by the energy minister that we have 34 days of fuel supply, yet businesses across regional Queensland, including in my electorate of Fisher, are already running dry. This government needs to stop the spin and start taking fuel security seriously because when diesel stops flowing, Australia stops moving. Melbourne Electorate: Schools 111 10:59 Ms WITTY 316660 Melbourne Strong schools build strong communities, and strong communities create better futures for everyone. That is why I am proud to highlight two schools in my electorate that are receiving support through the Commonwealth's Capital Grants Program. At St Joseph's School in Collingwood, a $1.5 million grant will refurbish classrooms and buildings and improve learning spaces for children. At Saints College in North Melbourne, a $3 million grant will upgrade key buildings on campus, improving safety and access for students and staff. For the students who learn there everyday, that will make a real difference to their school lives. Since being elected as the member for Melbourne, one of the most rewarding parts of this job has been getting out and visiting schools across our community. While walking through schools like Fitzroy Primary School you see what education means at its most local level. Children arriving each morning ready to learn, supported by teachers who care deeply about their future. That is why the Albanese Labor government is working with states and territories, through the Better and Fairer Schools Agreement and under the Schooling Resource Standard, to lift the federal government's share of school funding. The Commonwealth contribution will rise from 20 per cent to 25 per cent by 2034, bringing billions of dollars in extra funding into schools across the country and across Melbourne. Recently, I had the pleasure of visiting University High School in Parkville, where I spoke with students. And although it is still early in the school year, they are already thinking about what is next. For those who go on to further study, our government has also changed the HECS-HELP repayment system, so graduates can keep more of what they earn. For someone earning around $70,000 a year that means about $1,300 more in their pocket each year. That means more young people can study, train and build their future without carrying such a heavy burden of debt. The honourable Minister for Education summed up why this matters. He said, 'Education opens the doors to opportunity.' This highlights how access to learning can transform individual lives and expand their future possibilities, and I see that clearly when spending time visiting schools across Melbourne. Whether it's a classroom in Collingwood, a primary school in Fitzroy or a high school in Parkville, the goal is the same: to give every child the chance to learn, grow and succeed to be the best they can be. For me, that is at the heart of why I am in politics. Every child deserves the best chance in life to reach their full potential. Wannon Electorate: Community Events 111 11:02 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Across the south-west of Victoria on the long weekend we saw the very best of what our volunteers do by putting on the wonderful community events which thousands upon thousands of people attend. We had the Port Fairy Folk Festival, and once again people turned up in their thousands to watch a great display of folk music. And to all the wonderful volunteers who put that on, a huge congratulations and thank you. In particular, thank you for what you then put back into the community, back into the clubs and the schools that service the community so wonderfully well. There was also the nippers carnival on at the Warrnambool Surf Lifesaving Club. What a venue to host the nippers from right across Victoria, and once again the Warrnambool Surf Lifesaving Club do such a fantastic job putting that event on. And I say this to the Victorian state government: this club deserves your support, including you helping them fund a new club facility. The hours that those volunteers put in and what they contribute to not only keeping people safe along the beach but also running carnivals that people from across Victoria come to is second to none. They deserve your support. And a big shout-out to John McNeil. I was able to go over, have a chat with John and find out all the latest that was occurring with the nippers carnival. We also had the lawn tennis championships on at the Warrnambool Lawn Tennis Club, and what an event! I had the great honour of being able to enter in both the doubles and the singles—admittedly not at the highest grade. On the Friday afternoon, I had a very good social game of doubles, which was a lot of fun, and then we were able to have a sausage and a cold beer afterwards, which was great. Unfortunately we went down, but I was able to redeem myself in the singles the next morning, which was fantastic. I've got to say there were some muscles that I hadn't used before, because I hadn't played tennis for a while, which then meant I was a little bit sore to continue on for the rest of the tournament. To Lew Officer, Kim Tobin and all the volunteers at the Warrnambool Lawn Tennis Club, thank you for putting on such a great event. Once again, people travel from right across Victoria to come play and contribute. They spend dollars in the local community. They have great social fun. There are young kids, there are people playing in the veterans—it's just absolutely fantastic. So well done to everyone across the long weekend. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 11 : 05 to 11 : 18 South Australia: Roads 112 11:19 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin As I understand it, due to a historical trade-off that occurred years ago, South Australia has been receiving a lower annual share of federal-local government road funding than other states, both in terms of dollars per person and dollars per kilometre of roads. South Australia has nearly seven per cent of the national population and over 11 per cent of the national road network, yet it receives only 5.4 per cent of local government road funding, if you look at a per-person allocation, or 7.3 per cent, if you look at a per-kilometre allocation. To address the inequity, since 2004-05 South Australia has been receiving an annual supplementary local road funding allocation of $20 million. Whilst the supplementary top up is very welcome, the current arrangement is far from satisfactory. Firstly, the funding is allocated on a year-by-year basis with no annual or long-term security. To highlight this point, under the last coalition government no payment was made for two years between 2015 and 2017. Secondly, the payment is not indexed for inflation. If it was, according to the Local Government Association of South Australia, the annual allocation would now be $31.8 million instead of $20 million. Because the allocation is not indexed, the Local Government Association of South Australia claims that $56 million has been lost over the past nine years, which is the period since the supplementary funding was reinstated after the coalition government pause of 2015-2017. As we heard from the House Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport's inquiry into local government sustainability, additional road funding is a priority for local governments throughout Australia. For the Local Government Association of South Australia, the road funding inequity has been a cause of grievance for now nearly three decades. It's not in the interest of the federal government or the Local Government Association of South Australia to have the uncertainty, the annual lobbying and the negotiations to continue. They are time-wasting and costly. Furthermore, local governments need to be able to plan with certainty. It is time to permanently resolve this issue in a satisfactory way to all parties and to end the charade that we go through every year in which local government representatives come to this place to lobby ahead of the May budget in order to secure another $20 million for the coming year. Casey Electorate: Community Events 112 11:21 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey We have so many amazing community events that play an important part in making our region even stronger. They are run by volunteers and community groups who give their time to allow locals to come together with family, friends and neighbours. This weekend, we have two of those fantastic local events. Celebrate Mooroolbark is exactly what the name suggests—a celebration of everything that makes Mooroolbark so special. I'm looking forward to being out with my community this Sunday 15 March to celebrate with Mooroolbark locals and celebrate this amazing community. There will be fun for the whole family with free activities, market stalls by local businesses, local arts and crafts, delicious food, live entertainment and so much more. Thank you to the entire committee and volunteers who have planned this weekend's festival. I look forward to Celebrate Mooroolbark this weekend. The Wandin North Harvest Market at Wandin North Primary School is a staple in the Yarra Valley. It's wonderful to be there every year with my team and see local kids having fun with their friends, families and teachers. The Harvest Market at Wandin North Primary School is their main fundraiser, and it's a fantastic day for the whole family. It's got entertainment, crafts, market stalls, delicious food, activities for the kids, fresh local produce and so much more. The fundraiser for the school is so important to make sure they can get the support that they need. Thank you to Megan who is the key Harvest Market organiser along with the many parents and volunteers and to school principal Paul Bailey and all the teachers for all the work they put into this great local event. I'm looking forward to speaking with so many locals at the Wandin North Harvest Market this Sunday. Last weekend it was great to attend the Connecting Community Festival in Healesville. It was wonderful to see local stallholders, including the Healesville Lions Club on the barbeque, as well as street parades, community crafts, concerts and dances throughout the day. Some of the old legends from the Healesville Football Club also shared some stories. I've heard them before, but they were a lot cleaner than how they were normally told at the terminus back in the day. I had the privilege of presenting an award to the founder of the Good Life Farm, Lesley Porter, on behalf of the board of directors. Lesley started the Good Life Farm in Chum Creek in 2005 to support vulnerable young people in our community. Her farm is the only farm in Australia to deliver animal based therapy and education on a mixed farm. She has helped countless young people find purpose in their lives and integrate into their communities, equipping them with resilience to overcome challenges. Congratulations, Lesley, on this well-deserved recognition, and thank you for your ongoing commitment to young Australians and to our community. Calwell Electorate: Community Events 113 11:24 Mr ABDO 316915 Calwell I rise to recognise the important work of ICMG Women's Meadow Heights community and acknowledge their incredible efforts in raising $12,000 in support of Northern Health, contributing to vital health services for families across our region. Their efforts extend far beyond fundraising. For years, these remarkable women have been supporting Northern Health with hand-knitted clothing and accessories for patients and newborn babies. This work matters, and I have a particular appreciation of its impact. I was heartened to see their work, where I was reminded of the maternity and women's health ward, of the NICU ward where my son spent weeks, of the wonderful nurses, doctors and staff. That work at the Northern Hospital saves lives and holds families together in their most vulnerable moments. In those moments, community can also be there in ways that matter as well. Their work continues to grow. I am pleased to see them now partnering with the hospital on new initiatives that will bring comfort and support to cancer patients throughout our community. It is why I'm incredibly proud of the team and volunteers at ICMG Women's, who are doing everything they can to support Northern Health. As we marked International Women's Day just a few days ago, they remind us of the incredible women in my community delivering acts of service, care, dignity and hope. There are many organisations in my community doing important work that are delivering outcomes for our area. Eritrean Families in Hume and the North is a vibrant organisation working across my electorate and Melbourne's north. What stands out about EFHN is the energy and leadership it brings in building engagement and opportunity for many people in our community. Importantly, as I've seen, it is across all ages. I've had the opportunity to attend activities and programs hosted by Eritrean Families in Hume and the North and have seen the impact of their work in promoting participation, wellbeing and positive connections through sport. Importantly, I have seen how everyone plays a part in this grassroots organisation and how leadership is spread amongst all ages. EFHN's active role within the Eritrean community in my electorate has helped to create meaningful opportunities for people to engage, build skills, leadership capability and a strong sense of community connection. Like many of the diverse communities contributing to our local area, I'm grateful for the positive impact EFHN continues to have in the lives of people, particularly young people, across our area. I congratulate the new committee, the members who support the delivery of programs, their ADAL initiative and wish them every success as they continue with their important work. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265980 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 114 BILLS Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 114

Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026

Second Reading 114 11:28 Ms CAMPBELL 312823 Moreton Phrases such as 'critical minerals', 'rare earths', 'net zero economy' and 'a future made in Australia' are not just passing buzzwords, and they're not just convenient political catchphrases. These words represent the strategic foundations of Australia's economic resilience and growth, our national security and our long-term competitiveness. Those words mean something. They mean something to a lot of people. I cut my teeth representing workers in the manufacturing industry, representing boilermakers, fitters and turners and sheet metal workers. Can I tell you that, whether those working Australians are working to build trains, working in medical manufacturing or making components, what is clear is that manufacturing is important because it creates jobs. It creates good jobs, ones that offer secure pathways and a job with dignity. It affects livelihoods; it affects families. Making sure that those families have a strong foundation—at the same time as building economic resilience for our nation, at the same time as value adding to core and critical supply chains in our globe—is something that we can never forget. Once those skills are lost, once those industries are lost, they are very hard to get back. These factors are all part of Australia's strategy in what is very much a changing landscape—how nations secure supply chains, how they develop advanced manufacturing and how they prepare their workforces for a low-emissions global economy. Because that's what the future is, that's what the future holds. We as a country, as a nation and as a people want to be at the forefront of that future if we are to secure both our communities and our economy going forward. Australia is extremely well positioned to capitalise on our strengths in this evolving landscape. We have abundant natural resources, a skilled workforce, R&D excellence and a geographic location in the Indo-Pacific. We need to invest in that. We need to make sure that those things continue and we need to make sure, if we're going to drive our economy, that it involves this mix. Our nation's future prosperity, and indeed our security, will be reliant on our ability to capitalise on these strengths and harness and support the emerging industries focused on critical minerals, rare earths and the net zero economy. At the core of this drive is the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the NAIF, which is the foundation of northern Australia's economic development agenda. The NAIF is a $7 billion Commonwealth government financier providing concessional loans for the development of infrastructure projects in northern Australia and the Australian Indian Ocean Territories. Its primary aim is to accelerate infrastructure development across northern Australia. Its core purpose is to stimulate economic growth, attract private sector investment and deliver broad public benefit, including sustainable Indigenous participation and employment outcomes. The NAIF supports a wide range of sectors that are critical to northern Australia's economic and social development. It provides financial assistance, primarily in the form of concessional loans, to projects that deliver new or materially enhanced infrastructure, boosting the economies of the Northern Territory, of my home state of Queensland and, Deputy Speaker Mascarenhas, of your home state of Western Australia. In the energy sector the NAIF contributes to projects involving the generation, transmission and storage of renewable energy, supporting the growth of a sustainable energy future and national net zero objectives. The NAIF also plays a significant role in the resources sector by funding developments across critical minerals, rare earths, fertilisers, gold and copper. These minerals are so critical to our modern way of life. They're so critical to the way that the world works now and the way that our country works now. They're critical to connectivity. They're critical to health. They're critical to education. They're critical to our economy. In transport and logistics the NAIF finances infrastructure like ports, airports, rail and freight networks, which connect communities and unlock supply chains. Beyond these core sectors the NAIF supports additional industries where investments leads to substantial new or improved infrastructure. This is about building our nation, it's about driving our economy and it's about making sure that we've got the skills to continue do so. This includes areas such as manufacturing, telecommunications, tourism related developments and aquaculture. Crucially, the facility also invests in social infrastructure, enhancing essential services such as education, health care, housing and community facilities to improve liveability and support thriving local communities. Perhaps the best summary is this: the NAIF's investments are forecast to generate around $33 billion in direct economic benefit from the 32 funded projects across northern Australia. They are also supporting thousands and thousands of jobs—good jobs, jobs that create pathways and futures not just for the individual but for the family and the community as well. Many of these jobs—over 1,385 of them as of 31 December 2025—have gone to First Nations people. These positive outcomes for First Nations peoples reflect the requirement of NAIF financed projects to support local businesses and local communities—the ones that need that investment, those skills, those secure jobs the most—and project plans that specify First Nations involvement from procurement all the way to employment. This bill amends the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Act 2016 to extend its operations until 30 June 2036. This comes after a recent review, which involved significant consultation across northern Australia, concluded the facility is fit for purpose. The bill implements five-year reviews to ensure it remains that way. There are two other key amendments to this bill. The first concerns strengthening accountability for compliance with the investment mandate, and the second establishes joint responsibilities for the two ministers responsible, the Minister for Resources and Minister for Northern Australia, and the Minister for Finance. This brings the facility in line with standard practice for Commonwealth specialist investment vehicles. It's worth looking more closely at some specific projects that were made possible by NAIF—projects that came to life only because the Albanese Labor government has made an investment in this space, projects only made possible because NAIF exists and because we've worked to make sure that we continue to invest in it. The Critical Minerals Strategy 2023 to 2030 outlines the government's plan to strengthen and indeed expand Australia's critical minerals industry. The NAIF was accordingly directed to set aside $500 million of its appropriation to support projects aligned with this strategy. It's a big investment, and it's a big investment because we know that these are the projects that drive our economy and that also drive and lift up those local communities in and across northern Australia. An example of this is the Arafura Nolans Bore Rare Earths Project. This Northern Territory based project received up to $200 million in financing in January 2024. It's expected to deliver around $1.4 billion in economic benefit and generate approximately 334 jobs, supporting long-term growth in the region. Behind each and every one of those 334 jobs is a story, a family, skills and a pathway for their future. What is the project? It's the mining and processing of two rare-earth elements which are critical for producing high-performance permanent magnets for electric vehicle motors, wind turbines, smartphones and a range of robotic technologies. What the NAIF does is bring together so many things that are important to this Labor government. It brings together secure jobs. It brings together investment in regions. It brings together the technologies that we know are economy driving, and it packages them up to make sure that we get a boost for our nation. The Alpha HPA project in Queensland is also accessing $200 million through NAIF to support the production of over 10,000 tonnes of high-purity alumina. This will be used in manufacturing for products such as LED lights, lithium-ion batteries and semiconductors. Aligned with A Future Made in Australia, this investment is enabling industry diversification in the Gladstone area, creating hundreds and hundreds of jobs and injecting hundreds of millions of dollars into the regional economy in Queensland. Over in WA—this might be an interesting one for you, Deputy Speaker—the Chichester Solar Gas Hybrid Project is part of the drive to a net zero economy. The $90 million loan from the NAIF enabled the development of a new solar generation facility. The facility is expected to displace 100 million litres of diesel generation annually from the Pilbara, and the result is a cleaner and more affordable supply of energy. It's not only the economic impact, though; it's also the social impact that NAIF brings. The NAIF complements its economic development mandate with finance for vital social infrastructure projects—I say 'vital', because northern Australia spans vast distances, with small, widely dispersed populations, making it difficult for many communities to access essential services. The region's remoteness, climate and limited infrastructure create unique challenges for delivering education, health care, housing and other everyday needs. A large share of the population is made up of First Nations communities, each with specific cultural and social priorities. Purpose built social infrastructure is vital to support these communities, to preserve cultural identity and to improve access to key services. I know that this is also something particularly important to the member for Leichhardt, who's sitting there as a great representative of those Queensland regional communities every day. When you think about regional and remote communities and what they need to stay strong, it's facilities such as schools, medical clinics, housing, community hubs and cultural spaces which are critical. When these services are strong, they help attract and retain residents, support the local economy and workers and boost overall liveability. They're important. The NAIF helps address these challenges by providing long-term, flexible finance for social infrastructure projects, with a focus on developing infrastructure that provides clear and lasting public value. This includes investment in facilities for education and skills development, enabling people to train, skill up, learn and build long-term career pathways. One example is the Cairns Seniors Community Housing Project, which has benefited from a loan of up to $140 million from the NAIF. Construction on this project is due to be completed by December this year, with 490 dwellings being available to house around 690 people. Another North Queensland example is the NAIF's loan to James Cook University to construct new student accommodation. It's a seven-storey facility that houses over 400 students, and it's right next door to James Cook University's Engineering and Innovation Place. NAIF funding of $96 million enabled the development of a dedicated space where engineering and IT students, researchers and industry partners can collaborate on innovation and technology development. As part of the social infrastructure mandate, there is also investment available for health and aged-care infrastructure to improve wellbeing and support quality care across those regions. The NAIF has already delivered more than $4 billion worth of investments across northern Queensland, the NT and northern Western Australia. The few I've mentioned here today illustrate how the NAIF has the capacity to affect positive and lasting change across many sectors, in many communities and in many families. The Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 means that the NAIF will remain a secure, consistent and transparent source of funding to bolster economic development, jobs and infrastructure for our whole nation. 11:43 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise today to speak on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026. As the member for Durack, I consider this bill to be very close to my electorate and to me. Nearly half of my electorate is part of northern Australia and has benefited from the NAIF. This bill directly affects me in my role to support those living in the north of Western Australia. The coalition has long supported and advocated for the development of northern Australia. We've always recognised the importance of a strong northern Australia and the prosperity this provides to our economy. It was, of course, a coalition Turnbull government that established the NAIF back in 2016, and I was very proud to support the new funding model at the time. The $7 billion fund has underpinned around 20,000 jobs across Australia. As at October 2025, NAIF was supporting 32 projects. The Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility has helped improve essential services, strengthened global supply chains, created jobs and training opportunities, supported Indigenous engagement, increased resilience of infrastructure and encouraged private investment. It has been a central pillar of development across northern Australia since its establishment. The investments provided under the NAIF have backed projects across a variety of industries, from agriculture to transport, mining and energy, housing and telecommunications. It was a coalition government that established, funded and legislated the NAIF, and we will continue to ensure it remains for years to come. At the last election, we took a policy to make the fund permanent because we acknowledge the need to cement the north's economic footprint. It is a real shame that the Albanese government is not legislating to make the NAIF permanent. Instead, we are left with uncertainty over the program. I can attest that the support provided through the NAIF has allowed growth and development in resource-rich regions of Durack, particularly the Kimberley and the Pilbara. Under the Turnbull and Morrison governments, thousands of new jobs were created in Durack from those investments, which have provided arguably billions of dollars in public benefit, with the value growing as these projects evolve. The NAIF plays a vital role in enabling projects that might otherwise never be built. By partnering with private industry to support large-scale infrastructure, the NAIF creates jobs during construction, sustains long-term employment once operational and delivers lasting benefits to those regional communities. For communities across the Kimberley, the Pilbara and beyond, this investment means new opportunities, stronger local economies and greater long-term certainty. I want to take a moment to note the Minister for Climate Change and Energy's recent comments regarding the Albanese government's NAIF investment in the Perdaman urea project in Karratha. I'd like to take this opportunity to put on record that this investment was created and announced under the Morrison government, to make this important urea project a reality. This was a significant investment in what will be Australia's largest urea plant, kickstarting a new multibillion-dollar fertilising industry, creating 2½ thousand jobs and around $8½ billion in public benefits. This project is significant. In 2021, in support of the Perdaman project, the coalition announced a NAIF commitment of $160 million to the Pilbara Ports authority. These funds were for a multi-user wharf and facilities at the Port of Dampier. At the same time, there was also a funding commitment of $95 million to the Water Corporation for the expansion of the Burrup seawater supply and brine disposal scheme. It is worth highlighting that both of these entities are owned by the state government of Western Australia. Without the investment by the coalition in the key infrastructure for the Perdaman project, this project would not have got to the starting line. In addition to investing in state government entities—important infrastructure—the coalition announced a further funding commitment of $220 million to the actual Perdaman urea project in August 2022. I was in Karratha only the other week, and it is so pleasing to see this project coming out of the ground. It is really, really exciting. The coalition supports the extension of the NAIF's investment period for another 10 years, through to 2036. This extension is critical, but, as I said, it would have been preferred if we were today talking about it becoming a permanent body. Major infrastructure projects do not operate on short timelines. Ports, rail networks, energy infrastructure and water projects require long-term planning, financing and construction. Extending the NAIF provides certainty to investors, businesses and communities that the Commonwealth remains committed to the development of northern Australia. As the member for Durack, of course I would like to see more projects funded by the NAIF in north-west Australia. So, although supporting this extension, the coalition will be focused on ensuring that projects deliver genuine public benefit and that regional communities see real outcomes, not just announcements. Investments must prioritise projects that strengthen local economies, create sustainable employment and deliver lasting benefits to regional communities right across the north. Northern Australia holds enormous potential for our nation's future. From critical minerals and energy to agriculture and international trade, the north will play a vital role in our economic prosperity in the decades ahead. I reflect on travelling around in 2012 and 2013, when Andrew Robb was the relevant shadow minister, and talking about the development of the north and what we could do there. I think it's fair to say that we still haven't done enough. We still haven't unlocked the economic potential. NAIF is a part of that. If I can give a message to the people in NAIF it would be that if we can make decisions quicker—say no quicker and say yes quicker—I think that would be of enormous potential and an enormous help to those projects, because people are left hanging for far too long. It's a little bit of encouragement. If we're going to say no, we should say no quickly or say yes quickly, so we can actually get these projects out of the ground. We are supporting this bill. Of course, we support the NAIF. The coalition created the NAIF, and we recognise the importance of continuing this investment. For the communities across Durack and the north, NAIF represents an ongoing commitment to the infrastructure that supports jobs, drives investment and strengthens regional Australia. A thriving north equals a prosperous Australia. It always has; it always will. For that, we need the Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund, which is why the coalition created the fund and why we support this bill today. 11:51 Mr MATT SMITH 312393 Leichhardt I rise today to speak on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 and the important investment it will unlock in northern Australia, and I do mean unlock. There are a lot of technical parts to this. The member for Moreton went over them in great detail. I'm not going to bother. The fact is that if you look at Australia from my perspective, it's upside down. All of the population is in the south, but all the best stuff—everything that we need—is in the north. Throughout history, the way colonisation occurred was that the population was in the south; in the north, there was not quite as much. The NAIF exists to rectify this—to give the north the opportunity to really, really shine. We shine pretty brightly anyway. Our mining sector punches above its weight. The critical minerals, which will be so important for the rest of this century and into the future, are all in the north. Our tourism is the best in the world. We have world-class attractions. We have places you can go and see that are represented only in Australia and only in the north of Australia. It is beautiful. Our people are tough and resilient. We handle natural disasters in our stride. We deal with the humidity and the heat. We are a tough group of people. Our farmers reflect that. They are strong. They bring us the best produce in the country and some of the best beef in the world. American McDonald's uses Australian beef, and they use a lot of it too. There are bananas, exotic fruits and avocados. Your hamburgers are better because of what happens in the Far North. At Christmas when you're getting those gulf prawns, the big tigers—they're from the north as well. Our cultural history goes back for 60,000 unbroken years. When you go to some of the communities that I get to represent, English is the third or fourth language. Children will speak to you first in Wik, and it is beautiful. We are in a position, though, where we can take all of this, add to it and make the north even stronger and, as a consequence, make Australia stronger. We have the potential for renewable energy, massive tidal zones, huge amounts of space, plenty of wind, plenty of water, plenty of sunshine and biofuels. There's so much work being done with sugar—turning sugar into ethanol and turning sugar into jet fuel. Guess what there's a lot of in Leichhardt? There's sugarcane everywhere as far as the eye can see. It's a part of our identity. When I drive home over the Barron River and look over the cane and the vistas going back up to the range, it's beautiful. It screams Far North Queensland and it screams prosperity. It screams opportunity. All these opportunities in our regions are going to help the country grow. But, to make the most of any opportunity, to make the most of any potential, we have to invest in it. If you don't invest in potential, that potential is wasted. That's precisely why the NAIF is so important, precisely why it exists and precisely why it needs to be extended. The Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility fund is worth $7 billion and is a government development financier providing concessional loans for the development of infrastructure projects right across the north and the Indian Ocean Territories. There is an impressive portfolio of investments in my own seat, including social and affordable housing. There are 490 places. That's 490 homes. It's not just about the jobs. It's not just about addressing the housing situation. It's a place where families are going to grow. It's a place where grandparents will meet their grandchildren for the first time. It is a place where Christmas presents will be opened. It is a place where birthdays will be celebrated and where loved ones will be welcomed. That's what these investments are. They're not just economic; they're also social. If we are going to build the economic future of Australia in the north, we're going to need people and we're going to need places for these people to live. I've inspected that place many times. I'm very excited about what that means for my community. The NAIF will stick around until at least 2036, safeguarded by five-yearly reviews. The world is changing. The way that we interact with technology is changing. So it is appropriate that this legislation is built to change with it. That flexibility is going to enable us to deliver the right projects in the right areas. The increase from $2 billion to $7 billion is massive. It shows confidence in what the Far North can deliver. It shows confidence in our regions. It shows that this Anthony Albanese Labor government acknowledges that the world is pivoting to the north and is going to pivot with it. I'm so very proud to be part of a Labor government that now has so many regional MPs and so much representation across the north of Australia and that our voices are being heard. The potential, the opportunity and who we are are being recognised. It's about what that means not just for me but for the future of my children, my children's friends and the communities that have sometimes been left behind in economic development. Every community that I go to across Leichhardt has a plan. They know where they want to go. They know what they want to do. The NAIF is going to help them unlock the finance that they need to get that going. I hear about abattoirs and produce markets and ways to feed the mining camps at Rio Tinto and Cape Flattery. I hear about cultural tourism and what that could mean to these local communities. People are talking to us about geothermal electricity. There's all this potential. It all needs investment, and sometimes government needs to step in to be that investor—to invest in our people and invest in our ideas. That is what the NAIF is for. A part of that, of course, will be the rest of the infrastructure that we're investing in. That includes better roads. You need that connectivity, which is why the investment in the Bruce Highway, the Kennedy Development Road, the Cairns Western Arterial Road, the Kuranda Range Road and the bridges is so important. These are just some of the roads in my electorate that are going to benefit from that. We're also investing in universities. This holistic approach means that the Far North is positioned uniquely to move forwards, and it is all driven by the NAIF. I hope through my speech I have shown just how important both the NAIF and government investment are to northern Australia and what northern Australia means to the rest of the country. We are not the final frontier. We are the future. The NAIF allows us to be the best version of ourselves and will help bring Australia along with us. I commend this bill to the House and all urge all members to back in northern Australia. 11:59 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I rise to speak on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026, and I have to admit I'm getting a bit of deja vu. I've had this bill in this House previously, and I still have the same issues with it. It is an incredibly important fund and aspect, for Northern Australia needs that investment. Earlier last year I had the opportunity to travel around the Torres Strait Islands, and it's incredibly clear how much investment is needed in the northern and more remote areas of Australia. This NAIF facility is incredibly important. I absolutely support that northern Australia needs investment. It needs roads, ports, transmission, storage, water, housing, community infrastructure and clean industry. But let's be really clear: what it does not need is a publicly backed slush fund for fossil fuel expansion. This bill extends the NAIF's life to 30 June 2036. That is considerable. That is a further 10 years. It strengthens its governance settings, including joint ministerial responsibility and future review. But the central flaw of this bill is what it does not do. It does not rule out public money being used for fossil fuel infrastructure, and it does not require NAIF decisions to align with Australia's legislated climate goals. It does not make clear the consultation with First Nations Australians. If government and parliament are going to extend this facility—extend a $7 billion financing vehicle—for another decade, then parliament must also set clear public-interest guardrails. The NAIF says that it now has 32 projects and more than $4 billion in commitments. That scale makes the absence of climate guardrails and consistency even more serious and concerning. Under the Morrison government the NAIF was expanded, and critics warned it could be used to support coal and gas. In January 2022, when the coalition announced an extra $2 billion of funding through the NAIF, it would not rule out the facility being used for projects such as the Beetaloo Basin—absolute carbon bombs in the making—with devastating consequences for climate change. In 2021, when the Morrison government changed the NAIF framework, I moved amendments to prohibit NAIF assistance for fossil fuel based infrastructure, expressly including not funding natural gas projects or pipelines. Let's be clear. Gas companies are making super profits. They do not need public funding to facilitate them making money off the backs of Australians. Those amendments said that financial assistance must not be provided for fossil fuel based infrastructure. They have already benefited from generations of generous public subsidies. We cannot continue to do that and sensibly balance the budget. Gas was included in that definition, of course, as part of fossil fuels. Taxpayers should not be footing the bill for bad fossil fuel investments, so I will be moving amendments to prohibit fossil fuel funding through the NAIF. Of course, it was not accepted under the Morrison government, but it's disappointing to see that these same loopholes exist under the Albanese government. In 2023, when the NAIF was expanded from $5 billion to $7 billion, I again warned this parliament that government investment in resource extraction, particularly fossil fuels, remained a major concern, and I again proposed amendments to stop public money being used to prop up further fossil fuel infrastructure. The contrast is stark. History seems to be repeating itself. On one side, we extend the NAIF and commit significant amounts of public funds, and we leave the door open for fossil fuel funding. On the other, we have an opportunity to extend the NAIF—only modernised for the decade that we're actually in. Expand it so you're generally helping the northern communities with infrastructure they need, which will help them be resilient, productive and healthy into the future. In a decade of climate risk, the net-zero transition and the need for genuine partnership with First Nations communities, it is so important that a fund of this scale has the appropriate guardrails. The facts and statistics that put the challenges and opportunities into perspective are stark. The wider issues this bill is trying to address are real. Northern Australia does face chronic infrastructure gaps. Capital is harder to secure. Distance and remoteness increase costs. Communities need long-term funding certainty. There is a real role for public finance to crowd in private investment where markets fail. I absolutely agree, and I support this, loudly, but an effective game plan for northern Australia's development in 2026 cannot look like a replay of 2021, or even previous years. First, back the infrastructure that actually prepares the north of Australia for the future it is facing. This includes transmission, storage, road, port resilience, community infrastructure and clean energy. Second, stop treating gas expansion as if it were nation building. It is not. It is just writing a blank cheque for gas companies to make superprofits. Third, require public financing to be consistent with Australia's climate law. This is not antidevelopment; this is smart and responsible investment into our future. Even the NAIF's own public messaging now talks about helping northern Australia transition to a renewable energy superpower, yet the legislation still lacks a clear prohibition on fossil fuel funding. That contradiction should be resolved in law, not in marketing copy. Fossil fuel related projects continue to be funded under the NAIF from decisions made by the Morrison government, and the Albanese government has done nothing to stop that. The Olive Downs Steelmaking Coal Project, approved in 2021, produces 4.5 million tonnes of steelmaking coal per annum. Funding for the Onslow Marine Support Base expansion project, approved in 2017 and funded by a 10-year loan, supports vessels operating in the offshore oil and gas industry in Western Australia. A loan to the Chichester Solar and Gas Hybrid Project in Western Australia, approved by the NAIF in 2019 at a total cost of $90 million, is to be repaid over 22 years. It is clear there are still a number of projects, including fossil fuels and gas in particular, that are getting access to public funding through the NAIF. That is precisely why we need to do something about this. The funding pipeline remains heavily weighted towards resource extraction and associated industrial development. We need legislative guardrails. A facility can avoid direct fossil fuel approvals in recent periods and still remain structurally open to fossil fuel funding. The issue is both what the NAIF has funded recently, and what this bill still allows the NAIF to fund in the future. On gas company profits, I've sought from the Parliamentary Library an analysis of just how much profit there is from the ATO office. The statistics show that the oil and gas extraction sector report incredibly large profits in the most recent available year. In accordance with that analysis, the sector's total profits or losses are just staggering, and yet somehow public funding should be available to help fund infrastructure. It simply is obscene. When we think about what's sensible economic management, the pressures on the budget and every other aspect of the economy, we should be asking, as a basic public policy question, why should public concession finance be available to support an industry generating superprofits on a scale that is just breathtaking? If gas proponents say their projects are commercially attractive then they should be able to finance them on that basis. They should not be requiring concessional finance through government funding. If they need taxpayer backed support to proceed, then parliament is entitled to ask whether the public is carrying a risk for those projects whose private returns are already substantial. Are we asking the NAIF then to fund projects that will ultimately be stranded assets? It reinforces the case that scarce public capital should be directed to public interest infrastructure, not used to the risk fossil fuel expansion. I totally support that the bill has a legitimate purpose in extending the NAIF's decision-making window and maintaining an investment vehicle for northern Australia. There is a case for continuity, and I know the need is dire across so many areas. But there is definitely clear need for guardrails to ensure public funds are not used to further fund fossil fuel expansions. The amendment deals with funding decisions; making this legislation consistent with current law around the Climate Change Act and the net zero by 2050 obligation; prohibiting finance under the NAIF for gas facilities, including pipelines; and mandating consultation with First Nations for funding decisions under the NAIF. Too often we hear of First Nations communities who are being sidelined from public consultation in northern Australia but who are going to be impacted by projects, and that is just wrong. I don't understand how the Albanese government can continue with a process that does not embed proper consultation. Left unamended, this bill extends the NAIF without clearly defining the public interest boundaries of that extension. A modern public finance institution should not be technology blind where the technologies in question carry radically different long-term risks for the communities that they are intending to help. Let's be very clear—we are on track to at least 2.5 to 2.6 degrees of warming. The consequences for northern Australia are dire. Those areas will have severe impacts. We are talking about heatwaves, a number of days per year that will be incredibly difficult, we are talking about their vulnerable communities becoming more vulnerable and we are talking about a much higher risk of floods and disasters. So let's be really clear—is this concessional funding supposed to make this problem worse or better? If the NAIF were focused on actually building adaptation and resilience for northern Australia, I would be applauding, because that would actually make sense. But, if we don't have guardrails to ensure that the NAIF is not used to make the very problem those communities are going to face worse, then this is just bad spending. 12:10 Mr HOLZBERGER 88411 Forde I rise to support this bill, the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026. I'd like to respond to a couple of things the member for Warringah brought up. We understand what you're saying and what the community is asking. But the first thing is that, on First Nations participation, I think the point should be made that financing is conditional upon First Nations communities being incorporated into procurement and employment opportunities. As of last year, NAIF financing had supported over 1,385 jobs for Indigenous people in northern Australia and at least $240 million in Indigenous procurement. The government is very focused on getting a just and equitable outcome for First Nations people through this legislation. The second thing I'd say is that, while this piece of legislation may not deal entirely with the net zero objectives of the government, it forms a part of that. You've got other measures, such as the Net Zero Fund, which recognise that. As a government we understand, and as an individual I understand, the wrench that the decarbonisation of the world economy has put in the Australian economy, particularly the Queensland economy. But I think the point should be made that, ultimately, this is not about funding oil and gas projects. This is about funding infrastructure, a lot of which will serve dual purposes. This is about unlocking roads and rail lines. I think the point needs to be made not only that there is a broader approach to net zero, which this government is very focused on, but also that we have to maintain a balance and that energy security is just as important. Ultimately, it is the people in the community that I represent and the communities that we represent who would be impacted the hardest if we completely shut down those industries. I think the government's approach is the most sensible approach available to us. It is an approach of renewable energy, firmed by gas and batteries. I'm not exactly sure what an alternative approach that takes out gas would look like. I know what the opposition's approach is, though. It's the most expensive approach of coal and nuclear. I don't quite know why they're pursuing that policy, but I think it's because they've got an ideological obsession to prove their credentials in fighting the science of climate change. That's why they're going with coal and gas. They think that, if they can credibly pursue an argument that coal and gas is the answer, then they don't need to address climate change. I think that's why they're stuck on that loop. The government's approach is a whole approach to reduce net zero. That's why this bill is important to me both on a personal level and on a political level. Personally, some members will know, I come from the bush—not northern Australia; I'm not privileged enough to come from above that line just below Rockhampton. I come from outback Australia, and I appreciate the economic potential that exists not just below the ground and walking around in paddocks but of the people of outback Australia and northern Australia. There is a spirit of resilience, a spirit of entrepreneurialism and a commitment to have a go. If we can help people in that area, if we can help the economy of that area, it is going to have an enormous benefit for people in the rest of Australia. That's the second reason that I'd like to support this bill. I know, being privileged to represent and live in an outer metropolitan seat covering Logan and the Gold Coast, how important those northern Australian industries are to our local economy. The importance of that is hidden. In fact, I was looking at some of the statistics the other day. There's a suburb in Forde called Wolffdene, where five per cent of the whole workforce works directly in mining as FIFO workers. I think that Logan and the northern Gold Coast communities would have to be the biggest mining commuting communities in South-East Queensland. They're the direct jobs arising out of that development in the north of Australia. Then there are the indirect jobs. Think of Hastings Deering, which is set up next to the light plane airfield out at Archerfield in Brisbane. It employs thousands of people in South-East Queensland who service the dump trucks and the loaders and that enormous mining material that then goes up to northern Queensland to work on those mines. So you've got people that work directly in the mining industry and people that work in the service and maintenance industry. It just shows that, from an employment point of view, supercharging development in the North has an enormous benefit for people in the community that that I represent. Of course, it is not just employment. This gets back to something I'm saying earlier. We as a government recognise what a wrench it is for the Australian economy to now be in a decarbonising world economy. Coal is still Queensland's single biggest export. It provides an enormous amount of money to the government directly through coal royalties. These are the sorts of services that people in our community rely on, provided by government and effectively paid for by coal royalties. So it is important that something like the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility not only has an eye to developing for the North but has an eye to developing and replacing the industries which will be affected by a decarbonising world. I won't be too unkind to the opposition, seeing as they were the ones that set it up, but there was a bit of a joke at the time that 'NAIF' actually stood for the 'No Actual Infrastructure Fund'. It did take some time to get going, but it's got going now, and I understand the opposition is supportive of it continuing, which is exactly what this legislation does—it sees it continuing until 2036. I think this approach is a fantastic way for government to get in behind industry and to give it that push for a loan that may not get through the bean counters at the Commonwealth Bank or at Macquarie. This is really government stepping in and providing that essential service of finance. Philosophically, I love that saying that you run a country like you run a company. That, I think, sometimes that gets thrown by the Libs as if to say we can't run the country. There are two ways to run a company. I've run a company; I know it. One is that you can invest in your plant and your people. The other is that you can delay the maintenance, you can strip out the profits, and you can run it into the ground. That is exactly what the NAIF does. That is exactly the Labor government's approach to running the country—investing in our plant and in our people. Even better, this is an investment that actually has a measurable return on its investment. This is money that will keep coming back in, so that the money can then be used again and again to grow the economy even further. This is an investment in the classic sense of the word. This will actually return dollars back into the government. So, as I say, this NAIF fund sits within a broader strategy not only of achieving net zero but of housing. For example, the government has worked with the Queensland government to invest in the Cairns Seniors Community Housing Project, providing a loan of $140 million to the Cairns Seniors Community Housing Project—working with the Queensland government and working with Housing Australia to deliver 490 dwellings, comprising 245 social dwellings, 223 affordable and 22 SDA, specialist disability accommodation, apartments, providing housing to around 690 people. That's because there's a recognition here that housing is—in my view, which is a view that I've long held—the No. 1 thing that a government can do to improve economic capacity and productivity in the community. In postwar Australia, there was a philosophy that, if we build public housing not just for the people who desperately needed it but for car workers, railway workers, teachers, police officers, aged-care workers, then we keep the cost of living down. That means that we keep rents down, which actually takes pressure off wages because they don't need to be so high. So you can maintain a high standard of living with a low cost of living. That helps business. Projects like this are providing that economic infrastructure. I guess the hint is in the name: the North Australian Infrastructure Facility. Projects like the housing project here are a material example of how the NAIF fits into the government's broader economic strategy. But of course it is not just that. There's also net zero. I have never seen net zero as an economic problem. Net zero is a massive economic opportunity. If anything at the moment we have seen what it means when you are reliant on international energy supplies. I don't understand why the opposition are so wedded to coal and nuclear. Well, perhaps I do. Perhaps it is because they think that they need to satisfy Sky News—I mean their base—by saying that coal and nuclear are still the way. That way, they can avoid all the arguments about climate change science. But I just don't get why you would want to be walking away from what is the cheapest form of energy, which is renewable, which has the power to lift economic living standards. As I said, in postwar Australia, housing was one strategy which governments followed to supercharge the Australian economy. But there was another strategy as well, which was cheap public energy—wonderful government owned public assets providing cheap energy to again keep the cost of living down, to keep that pressure off wages. That then helped business. Of course, in manufacturing, the cost of energy is such a vital part of that manufacturing cost that it helped keep that cost down for business as well. In Western Australia, it is the Chichester Solar Gas Hybrid Project—a loan of up to $90 million to displace 100 million litres of diesel generation annually from the Pilbara. This is a way of not only getting more energy into our system but providing it in a cleaner way. Finally, I'd just say that there are many examples here, whether it's critical minerals, whether it's the future made in Australia, whether it's agriculture—this NAIF forms an essential part of the government's broader economic strategy and meets those broader economic goals. The idea that it continues to 2036 and the idea that its accountability measures are strengthened—I think it's going to give it the longevity that it so desperately needs and create the opportunities which are so abundantly clear. I commend the bill to the House. 12:25 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan The Greens will be opposing the unamended Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 in the House and reserving our position in the Senate. The reality is that there's nothing stopping the NAIF from being a fund to keep coal and gas on life support, and that is why we're opposing it. I have an amendment, which has been circulated, to stop the NAIF funding dirty coal and gas projects and related infrastructure, and also native logging projects. Ending the public financing of coal and gas projects and infrastructure is an area where we were able to work with the government to make advances in the last parliament, and my amendment should be supported by the government to build upon that good work. In the last parliament, we closed off the National Reconstruction Fund from funding coal, gas and native forest destruction. In the Future Made in Australia package, we ended the ability of Export Finance Australia to finance coal, oil and gas projects both in Australia and overseas. And we amended the broad grant power in the Industry Research and Development Act to turn off the massive pipeline of fossil fuel subsidies that the coalition was using to fund fracking in the Beetaloo and new coal plants in Queensland and support the gas fired recovery. The same treatment now needs to extend to the Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund. It was used by the coalition, who wanted to fund Adani's coalmine with $1 billion of public money—but the deal fell over. Queensland Labor vetoed it because they were worried about losing seats to the Greens. But the risk of financing fossil fuel projects with public money is not over. Right now, there is a gas project, the Comet Ridge project, that has issued a statement to the ASX that they are in discussions with the NAIF for a $110 million loan. Australians do not want their money propping up new coal and gas projects. The NAIF is one of the last remaining specialist investment vehicles able to finance fossil fuel expansion with public money. My amendment gives effect to what informally appears to be Labor government policy—to not use public funding to fund coal and gas projects. The government should make its policy position clear by supporting this amendment. Comet Ridge have applied for that funding because they couldn't or wouldn't obtain it through private lenders. Let me spell out what that means. That is the government, and therefore Australian taxpayers, taking on the risk of this gas project. Privatise the profits and socialise the losses of a project that'll make climate change worse and damage our future—it makes absolutely no sense, and the government must rule out funding it by supporting this amendment. To summarise, public money should not be used to keep coal and gas projects on life support. It's simple. The Australian people don't want it, so why is the government entertaining the idea? Comet Ridge, that new gas project in Queensland, have bragged that they're in discussion with the NAIF, a government funding body, for a loan of $110 million. Let's be clear about what that means: Comet Ridge should and could be seeking private funding, but they're applying for this government backed loan because it gives them a better deal. It's the government, it's taxpayers, that are taking on the risk of that loan. Instead of derisking our future and our climate by ending new coal and gas projects, we are derisking this gas project, operated by a for-profit corporation, that'll make climate change worse. We saw a decade of subsidies for fossil fuels under the Liberals, and now we're seeing Labor doing exactly the same. There's the fuel tax credits scheme, which cost the budget $10.2 billion in the 2024-25 financial year. Labor also put aside a tidy $1.9 billion in their first budget for the Middle Arm hub in Darwin, which will enable even more gas exports out of the Northern Territory. The Greens want no new coal and gas, because it's clear that new coal and gas is not compatible with a safe climate. But the least we can ask for is committing to an end to public money—to taxpayer money—going to make climate change worse. 12:30 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Northern Australia is half of our continent by landmass and home to some of our most dynamic industries, our fastest growing communities and the First Nations peoples whose stewardship of country spans millennia. Of course, a strong north means a strong Australia, and today I'm proud to speak in support of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026, which will extend the NAIF, the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, for a further 10 years. This is a practical, nation-building step that will unlock investment, create jobs, deepen First Nations participation and help secure critical supply chains as we transition to net zero, all while returning significant public benefit well beyond the Commonwealth's outlay—as significant as the Commonwealth's outlay is. The Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility is a $7 billion Commonwealth financier that provides concessional finance to infrastructure projects in the NT—and I'm proud to represent Territorians—in northern Queensland and in north-west WA, as well as in the Indian Ocean territories, finely represented by my mate and colleague the member for Lingiari in this place. These are projects that may often struggle to attract commercial finance because of their remoteness, their high level of risk—at times—the smaller populations and the long project timeframes. Over its life, the NAIF has already committed more than $4 billion—as has been said, it had a slow start—hitting the ground in 32 project investments. The forecast public benefits now exceed $33 billion, so it's been a great return on investment from the NAIF so far. Importantly, tens of thousands of jobs have also been supported in the north. The core rationale for the NAIF and for economic and social development in the north remains unchanged: there is a genuine financing gap in our north, and the NAIF fills that gap. Distance, cyclones, flooding—like what we've got in the Territory at the moment—sparse populations and high logistics costs mean that commercially bankable projects often stall without catalytic public financing. The NAIF was designed to fill that gap. Reforms since 2021 have equipped it with more flexible tools to do that job even more effectively. A new investment mandate strengthened the facility's ability to support high-impact projects, expanding eligibility and clarifying how to assess public benefit. It has also enabled on-lending arrangements to help regional and community-scale projects and removed earlier restrictions that limited the NAIF's ability to carry appropriate risk when it was necessary to unlock projects of national significance. With this flexibility, the NAIF has accelerated its commitments and broadened its portfolio across critical minerals, renewable energy, transport, logistics, water infrastructure, education and social infrastructure. Recent annual reports and quarterly updates show a clear trajectory of delivery: over $4.3 billion committed across 32 projects, as I mentioned; forecast public benefit between $33 billion and $38 billion; over 18,000 jobs supported across the north; multiple loans already fully repaid, proving the recyclability of the NAIF model; and hundreds of millions deployed each financial year as projects reach major milestones. The 2023-24 annual report of the NAIF highlighted more than half a billion dollars in approved loans in that year alone, generating billions in projected public benefit. The project pipeline remains strong and includes major critical minerals developments, renewable energy hubs and key logistics corridors. This is direct, measurable, place based progress. One of the NAIF's most important contributions is its integration of First Nations participation into every project. Every proponent must develop an Indigenous engagement strategy outlining commitments for employment, procurement, training and community benefit. This has delivered real outcomes across the north—more than 1,000 First Nations jobs supported; more than 190 Indigenous businesses engaged; and tens of millions spent on Indigenous procurement, scholarships, training pathways and mentoring programs linked to NAIF-supported project activity. Case studies demonstrate this impact vividly, from scholarship programs in Townsville to pathways in Western Australia's Mid West region. These are significant long-term workforce and capability investments that strengthen communities and deliver economic inclusion. The renewed 10-year mandate in this bill will allow NAIF to deepen this focus, including expanded pathways for traditional owner organisations to be project proponents or co-investors where this is appropriate. I want to go next to securing our economic transition and supply chains. Northern Australia is central to our future, and it is the nation's engine room for critical minerals, agriculture, resources and renewable energy opportunities. Extending NAIF ensures that patient capital is available to projects that derisk private investment in these areas of critical minerals processing and clean energy generation but also important transmission infrastructure, export capacity expansion and enabling infrastructure for new industries. This support is essential for Australia's industrial transformation and our ability to strengthen sovereign capability. We're building resilient communities where people want to live. The north's economic future depends on its liveability, and this means investing in airports, in education precincts, in health facilities, in digital infrastructure and in community services. NAIF's track record supporting universities, like Charles Darwin University in my electorate, airport expansions, community facilities and regional services highlights the importance of social infrastructure to population growth, to workforce retention and to long-term regional sustainability. This 10-year extension will provide the certainty required for councils, universities and local developers to plan multi-year precincts and community anchoring projects. We're partnering with First Nations to co-design prosperity. A longer horizon creates the space for deeper First Nations participation and long-term planning. This includes pathways for equity participation by traditional owner entities; stronger procurement and employment commitments; sustainable capability building, and capacity building for that matter; alignment between NAIF investments and local community priorities. The 10-year extension allows for long-term partnerships rather than short-term transactions. The government has introduced legislation to extend NAIF's investment period by 10 years, supported by modernised governance arrangements, including, but not limited to, joint ministerial responsibility, regular statutory reviews in 2029, then 2034 and beyond, strengthened alignment with national strategic policies. Earlier independent reviews found there was strong support from government, industry and regional communities for NAIF's continuation. The five-year review cycle will ensure that NAIF remains contemporary, accountable and fit for purpose. Combined with a refreshed investment mandate, these arrangements maintain the right balance between independence, oversight and strategic direction. What another decade enables is a practical agenda, providing certainty for long-term projects and ensuring strong accountability. I want to focus on five things it will enable. The first is critical minerals and clean energy precincts, with the enabling infrastructure—power, water, transport and common-user facilities—needed to support processing and value-adding in Australia. The second is transport and logistics corridors, which means ports, intermodals, airports and roads that reduce freight costs and strengthen Australia's competitiveness. Way back when NAIF started there was an opportunity to do that with the Darwin port, using NAIF to help an Australian proponent. But I won't digress. The third is water security and climate resilience, which requires resilient infrastructure capable of withstanding cyclones, flooding and climate pressures, including modern water systems and nature-positive remediation projects. That's something very close to my heart. The fourth is social infrastructure that anchors population. That is health, education, community housing and digital backbone investments that attract people and talent to the north, not only through jobs but through helping to anchor that workforce in the north. The fifth is greater First Nations enterprise participation, involving the expansion of Indigenous engagement requirements into long-term capability and ownership opportunities. Extending the NAIF is also about national resilience. Northern Australia is a strategic region for our country, central to our relationships in the Indo-Pacific—South-East Asia, the Indian Ocean and the Pacific countries themselves. But we are uniquely exposed to climate impacts, as are being experienced across the north right now. Strong infrastructure—ports, roads, grids and water systems—strengthens national security, humanitarian response capability and economic sovereignty. NAIF is a vehicle that helps to deliver that infrastructure responsibly, patiently and in line with our national priorities. NAIF was established with bipartisan support and has been extended and strengthened under successive governments of both sides of the chamber. That continuity has enabled projects across Queensland, Western Australia, the Northern Territory and the Indian Ocean Territories to grow with confidence. The proposed 10-year extension continues this tradition of national interest above politics. The rehabilitation of the Mount Morgan site illustrates NAIF's value—a complex legacy project now supporting hundreds of jobs, delivering environmental benefits and producing critical minerals essential for a clean energy future. University expansions, airport upgrades that are desperately needed across the north and Indigenous procurement successes further reinforce how NAIF's investments shape vibrant communities, not just balance sheets. These are the human stories behind the spreadsheets—stories of regions revived, opportunities created and communities strengthened. Extending NAIF's mandate for another decade, as well as the additional $2 billion that have been put into it in recent times, is a clear-eyed investment in Australia's future. It supports vital economic infrastructure in the north, it strengthens regional communities in the north, it advances First Nations participation in the north, it catalyses private investment and it enhances national resilience for our whole country. A stronger north means a stronger nation. Let's extend the NAIF for another 10 years, put billions more into it and continue building the infrastructure of a secure, prosperous, strengthened and inclusive Australia. 12:44 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I'd like to start by thanking members for their contribution to this debate on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026, particularly the Special Envoy for Defence, Veterans' Affairs and Northern Australia and the member for Solomon, my good friend Mr Gosling. We were elected in 2016. He has been a strong fighter for the north, and I thank him for his support. I thank all members for their contributions. I note with sadness that of the 14 members of the Nationals in the chamber of the House of Representatives, only one was able to speak on the NAIF, and that was the former leader. I thank the former leader of the Nationals, the member for Maranoa, for his support of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility and also, of course, northern Australia. I was also elected at the same time as the member for Maranoa, and he's always been very productive in our discussions across a range of issues. I note only one member of the Liberal Party, the member for Durack, managed to speak on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility bill before the parliament. I note that a number of projects are in her electorate, and she is a regular at the opening of these projects that are very important to her community and indeed to the whole of Western Australia. Before I continue with my speech, I welcome the coalition's support for the bill before the parliament that was confirmed by the former leader of the National Party in the main chamber earlier this week, and I trust that nothing has changed with the new leadership in the coalition partner. No doubt I'll hear about that if it has. The Australian government is committed to driving economic development in northern Australia in a stable, reliable and accountable way. The Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment Bill 2026 delivers practical and targeted updates to the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Act 2016. It ensures the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility remains fit for purpose and capable of supporting transformational projects across the north well into the next decade. The amendments to the NAIF Act will extend NAIF's investment decision-making period for another decade, strengthen accountability for compliance with the investment mandate, establish joint responsibilities for the responsible ministers—myself and the Minister for Finance—in accordance with standard practice for the Commonwealth's specialist investment vehicles and it will refresh statutory review requirements to allow for two future reviews of the operation of the NAIF Act. The continuation of NAIF's investment period through to 2036 responds directly to the findings of the statutory review of 2024. This will preserve NAIF's capacity to continue promoting transformational projects across northern Australia and provide long-term certainty to investors and communities. These projects create jobs and new economic opportunities for communities across the north. The amendments introduce new mechanisms requiring the NAIF board to notify the responsible ministers when NAIF or a subsidiary fails to comply with the investment mandate. These mechanisms empower the responsible ministers to direct corrective action where necessary while confirming their inadvertent noncompliance does not invalidate transactions. These measures align NAIF with other Commonwealth specialist investment vehicles and bolster its governance framework. The bill updates several provisions to reflect contemporary governance arrangements by adding the Minister for Finance as a responsible minister. The addition of the finance minister to the ministerial responsibilities outlined in several places throughout the act will ensure an appropriate level of oversight and accountability and is consistent with arrangements for all of the Commonwealth's specialist investment vehicles. The bill also provides for two future reviews of the NAIF Act, after 30 June 2029 and 30 June 2034, ensuring structured and timely evaluation throughout the extended investment horizon of the NAIF. The second of these reviews will include consideration of whether the investment timeframe of the NAIF should again be extended. This government is committed to transitioning Australia's energy sector to net zero by 2050 and the reduction of Australia's emissions by 43 per cent by 2030. NAIF has a key role in contributing to this objective. In 2023 I issued NAIF with a new investment mandate which includes a list of government policy priorities to which NAIF is expected to contribute through its investments. Among these is a priority to support sustainability, climate change and circular economy principles and solutions in northern Australia. In relation to the bill, I want to draw one particular project to the attention of the House, and that is in relation to the Perdaman urea project under construction at the moment in Karratha in Western Australia. This is a really important project and a matter of important and critical national resilience in a time of conflict in the Middle East. It will provide important and stable supply chains for farmers into the future for all the agricultural industries and the work they do which is required to feed Australia and our regional neighbours. Importantly, the Perdaman urea project will decrease our dependency on the importation of urea for fertiliser. Urea is the nitrogen in NPK, and many of those in rural communities will understand what NPK fertiliser is—in fact, many gardeners would as well. It is really very important to the food and fibre that this nation creates. It will be Australia's largest urea plant. It will produce 2.3 million tonnes per annum. About half of that will be kept in Australia to ensure that we have that secure supply chain and that farmers have the fertiliser they need that will strengthen national food security and reduce reliance on imported fertilisers. The Perdaman urea project is one of the largest downstream processing and manufacturing investments in Australian history, and it will solidify our supply chains. NAIF has supported a number of projects contributing to this: a $220 million loan to Perdaman to build this plant and kickstart the new multibillion-dollar fertiliser industry, a $160 million loan to the Pilbara Ports Authority for a new multi-user wharf and facilities at the Port of Dampier, and a $95 million loan to the Water Corporation of Western Australia for the expansion of the Burrup seawater supply and brine disposal scheme. This total $475 million federal commitment to the project and supporting infrastructure will see an estimated $8.5 billion in public benefit. It is a remarkable project. At a time where we are seeing constraints on the export of urea through the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, knowing that this project will start production in March of next year will be very reassuring for Australian farmers into the future. This bill strengthens the legislative foundation of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility. It enhances accountability and provides certainty to investors and project proponents. It ensures NAIF remains a reliable partner in delivering the long-term infrastructure necessary to grow northern Australia. It is a practical, measured and future focused package of reforms. It makes sure that a strong north will contribute to a very strong Australia. I thank all members once again for their contributions, and I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Consideration in Detail 126 12:54 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan I move: (1) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 5), after item 1, insert: 1A At the end of Part 2 Add: 8A Prohibited financial assistance (1) Financial assistance must not be provided under this Act if it would: (a) directly finance the extraction of coal or natural gas; or (b) directly finance the construction of pipeline infrastructure primarily for the extraction of natural gas; or (c) directly finance the logging of native forests. (2) In this section: native forest does not include a plantation. plantation means an intensively managed stand of trees that is created by the regular placement of seedlings or seed. Question unresolved. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299498 As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195, the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration. STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS 126 STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS International Women's Day 126 12:55 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm Many years ago, before I was even a candidate in my electorate of Chisholm, one of my local neighbourhood houses was selling second-hand books in Mount Waverley. A memoir caught my eye. Zelda, it was called—written by the incomparable, uncompromising Zelda D'Aprano. Zelda D'Aprano was a passionate warrior for equal pay, chaining herself in protest to government buildings and pursuing the cause her whole life. Zelda D'Aprano passed away in 2018, and in 2024 a beautiful bronze statue of her was erected in Melbourne outside the Victorian Trades Hall Council building, which I spent a few years at working as an assistant secretary. Her statue is one of too few statues of women in my hometown in Melbourne. Emblazoned on the base of her statue is a quote, which was a response. She made the statement in response to an incredulous question she was asked about her activism and whether she could achieve anything. This is what she said: Today it was me, tomorrow there will be two of us, the next day there will be three and it will go on and on and there won't be any stopping it. As we mark International Women's Day this year, with its theme of 'balance the scales', let's think about the scales of justice and ensuring that all women and girls can access fairness and equality. Just as Zelda D'Aprano sought justice for herself and others, we must continue to make sure we never take a backward step and we move forward together to achieve meaningful and sustainable equality. It is worth remembering that, when the first iteration of International Women's Day was held in 1909 in New York, it was led by garment workers who were trying to secure better wages and hours and the right to bargain with their employers. The conditions that garment workers toiled in were unsafe. It was only two years later, in 1911, that one of the greatest industrial disasters in United States history occurred—the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, a brutal event which killed 123 women and 23 men. In Australia, our first International Women's Day was held in 1928, soon after parliament first sat here in Canberra. Its focus was again on women's rights at work. Equal pay for equal work, eight-hour workdays and better conditions were central themes. Fast forward almost 100 years, and there have been considerable achievements made. In 1973, the Whitlam government appointed the first women's adviser to a prime minister in the world, and the Sex Discrimination Act passed by the Hawke government in 1984 was a landmark moment for our nation and women's rights more broadly across the world. The gender pay gap right now is at a low of 11.5 per cent. It's still too high, but this is good progress when considering that a decade ago it was over 18 per cent. There is clearly still more work to do though to ensure real economic equality. Since the Fair Work Act came into effect in 2009, introduced by the Rudd government, certain rights have been guaranteed to all workers under the National Employment Standards. These were expanded to include paid parental leave provisions and paid family and domestic violence leave. These are entitlements we know do disproportionately impact women, as they are vastly more likely to be primary caregivers and assault survivors. These additional entitlements were all introduced under Labor governments. In addition to more choice in taking paid parent leave for both parents regardless of gender and implementing paid family and domestic violence leave, the Albanese Labor government has critically made gender equality an object of the Fair Work Act. The Albanese government's industrial relations reforms have reflected both the changing nature of work and families and the idea that the gendering of work—women's work and men's work—has been harmful to both the wages taken home by Australians and also the aspirations and opportunities for every person in our country. We should have boys and girls wanting to take on all sorts of occupations and opportunities, having all kinds of dreams about their future, not just those that have been preordained for cohorts based on gender alone. I am proud to be part of a government that is making important progress, with over 50 per cent of our caucus made up of women. Positive change is what happens when there are different voices and including women's voices in rooms where decisions are made. Our women's health package, which provides for new medications and takes seriously the experience of girls and women in the medical system, is another big part of the way we are listening to and acting for and with women. There is still so much more to do, despite all the positive advances. We must all act to eliminate the absolutely appalling rates of violence against women we see in this country, the misogyny we see online and the real and potential gendered harm we witness due to the growth of artificial intelligence and the way it may develop in the future. There has, unfortunately, been a global contraction of global aid to support girls and women, and rights have been going backwards for girls and women in parts of the world, which is something that should terrify us all and mobilise us all to take action. There is so much more work to be done, and this year I once again commit myself to doing all I can, inspired by the efforts made by those who came before me. Change is possible when we work together. I want to pay tribute to all those who came before me, from the first Labor woman elected to the House of Representatives, Joan Child, who represented an area that overlaps my current electorate—her electorate of Henty has unfortunately been abolished—to the suffragists in my own family who went out and knocked on doors to get people to sign the monster petition in Victoria for women to have the right to vote and who, of course, put their name to that petition themselves. On International Women's Day and in responding to the statement made by the Assistant Minister in the house, I think it is really important this week to mention and acknowledge the brave Iranian soccer players who will now call Australia home. They will now be able to be athletes in a democratic society that values their contributions, where they can make choices and be heard. When we look at the world, we see that democracy is something that has become very fragile in recent times. I want to thank the Iranian Australian community, who I have worked with for many years, for their work and their advocacy. I particularly want to acknowledge the Iranian Women's Association and other groups that I've worked with in my own community of Chisholm in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne for their voice in conversations about women's rights and about girls and women being able to make all the choices that should be able to make as free agents of their own destiny. On International Women's Day, let's look back at what's been achieved, but let's also acknowledge the challenges that lay before us and commit ourselves to working together to make sure that we have a more equal and better society for all. 13:04 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne I'll take this opportunity. It wasn't planned, clearly. I'm not standing in the right position, but here we go anyway. I very proudly stand here as the first woman elected to the seat of Lyne on the mid-north coast of New South Wales and as only the second woman from the New South Wales Nationals Party elected to the House of Representatives in over a 100-odd years. It's quite an achievement. In my first speech, I paid tribute to the very first woman elected from New South Wales, Kay Hull, an absolute dynamo. I had the privilege, as a staffer, to see Kay in action here in the parliament. She was somebody who, frankly, ministers found it very difficult to say no to. Perhaps, she didn't nag about urgent care clinics like I have been doing since I entered the parliament, but she certainly found a way to get her case across. She has served until recently as our federal president of the National Party and has done an outstanding job. I'm incredibly privileged to have seen Kay and many other very strong women enter the parliament from the Nationals in my own area. Wendy Machin, former member for Port Macquarie, was one of the first female ministers for a coalition government in New South Wales. Wendy really was a trailblazer and continues to contribute as the chair of the local primary health network. She certainly continues to show a great deal of passion for the area that she represented. On the weekend, on Saturday, I had the great privilege of attending the Rotary Club of Taree for Manning's International Women's Day event to raise funds for Dolly Parton's Imagination Library, which is quite an incredible charity that's doing amazing work to support our children to thrive. It was an honour and a privilege to be there as one of the panel speakers with May Ambour and Meg Nicholson, the other two women on the panel. We were joined by a gentleman as well who runs a very large business from Taree. My state colleague Tanya Thompson, the member for Myall Lakes, also joined us, as well as women from across the Manning, including a number of women who were affected by the floods of last year. I have to say, it was an incredibly emotional luncheon event in celebration of International Women's Day. A lot of tears were shed because, for a lot of us, the trauma of that flood event lives large in our lives. There are many people, many women, who remain out of their homes. For some people it's very hard to imagine that 10 months after an event of that significance—you don't see the rubbish on the side of the road anymore. You can look out across paddocks that were once covered and completely underwater that are green, appear lush and have cattle grazing on them. But the fact of the matter is that the trauma of that May event lives large, and it certainly lived large on Saturday. There are the stories of the women, including Rhonda Futterleib—I didn't mention her by name, but I spoke of her in my first speech—whose business was affected. But, like so many women across the Lyne electorate, they mucked in. Again, I think I said in my first speech that strangers went to best friends in a moment by simply saying, 'Mate, how can I help?' So many women showed that mateship to their neighbours, their family, their friends and complete strangers during that event in May last year. The trauma that we're experiencing—the fact that so many people are not yet back in their houses and that businesses are suffering—is the very reason why the member for Myall Lakes and I continue to fight for justice for Taree, Wingham and the Manning Valley. We are still fighting for additional support for our communities. We still have not yet seen it, despite call after call for additional funding for small businesses across the region. The Deputy Speaker would appreciate this: Queensland does do disaster recovery funding quite well compared to New South Wales. I've seen quite generous support to flood affected communities in Queensland, and rightly so. Our community is looking for similar levels of support, given this was a once-in-500-years flood. We're still calling for that additional funding for small business. We still need an equivalent program to the one offered in Lismore for house raisings. We still need more support for farmers and oyster growers in the region. These are the issues that women in Lyne support and continue to call for. They themselves are small-business owners. It's wonderful. I know this parliament celebrates women who are entrepreneurs and innovators wherever they are in this country. I'm very privileged, like all members, to be able to get up here and represent these incredible women. But many of these women remain devastated by this flood event and, equally, need this additional support to get back on their feet, as do a number of people that are still not back in their homes. Some continue to struggle to find a residence to call home. I was myself lucky during the flood event that I had my own bed to go back to. So many didn't. It's still a very painful and traumatic experience. I want, in this short period of time—unplanned as it is—to simply say that it was an incredible honour and privilege to participate in this event on Saturday and to share with so many incredible women the stories of survival, courage and tenacity that women showed during that flood event and continue to show today. I congratulate Rhonda and I congratulate the Rotary Club of Taree on Manning. As a Rotarian myself, I'm very proud to always participate in Rotary events. Rotary, too, has a big focus on domestic violence. I've participated in a number of rallies through my own Rotary Club, focusing on domestic violence and how we can better support women and men in our communities through very difficult and traumatic experiences. I want to send a shout-out to all of the women in the Lyne electorate. I'm so incredibly proud of all of you, of what you get up and do every day. I hope that I can continue to do my very best, as the first female member for Lyne, to represent you with all my heart and all my passion. 13:12 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle It's with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to mark International Women's Day 2026 and to celebrate the women of Newcastle, in particular, but also of the Hunter and of our nation who continue to organise, lead, care, create, advocate and fight for an equal Australia. International Women's Day is always a moment to reflect on how far women have come but also, to be honest, on how far we still have to go. Progress does not happen by accident. There's a lot of careful design in making incremental change towards equality in Australia. Progress happens because women organise for it, it happens because unions fight for it, it happens because communities demand it, and it happens because governments might choose to act. That's why I am so proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government that has made gender equality a central feature of all our thinking. It's not just a matter of policy, as important as that is; it's a priority and a fundamental principle for every one of us in the Australian Labor Party. I need only point to the very long journey that was establishing affirmative action within the Australian Labor Party, a journey that I've been part of for more than 30 years. Now I get to stand off the back of all that hard work we did for three decades, where women stood up in our party rooms and demanded equality and an equal seat at the table. I sit with my sisters, my Labor sisters here—the member for Melbourne and the member for Cunningham—and, indeed, a sister from the National Party, the member for Lyne, and we're all beneficiaries of the hard work that was done in the Australian Labor Party and the wider Labor movement. Today, we sit in Australia's first ever majority female government and Australia's first ever majority female cabinet. I do want to stress that. I have a lot of young women that come and talk to me about entering politics, and I actively encourage them to do so. But I really emphasise the point that, with some things, you've got to be in it for the long haul. There are no quick fixes for a lot of the structural inequalities that continue to exist in Australia. I think, if anything is to be learnt from the 30-year journey of the Australian Labor Party—I say this with kindness and sincerity to the Nationals member sitting opposite me—there are really important lessons about how you generate an environment within your party rooms and party structures to ensure that women are equal partners. It's a hard road. I don't underestimate it. I know that it's something that occupies the minds of all women in parliament. Wherever we can lend support to ensure that more women are getting a seat at the table, in whatever party room they stand in, that's a good thing. Over the last term, Labor delivered on a lot of reforms that are making a huge difference now to women's lives. That's the hard policy work we did to come to government: talking with Australian women in the regions across Australia and making sure we were crafting policy that spoke to the lives of Australian women. We've strengthened workplace rights. We've delivered on the 10 days paid family and domestic violence leave. It's a matter that is a huge issue in all of our electorates. This is not something that is peculiar to Labor women's interests; we know that family and domestic violence is a scourge and it occurs throughout our communities, in every economic band within our communities and in all geographical locations. That's been the focus of our term of government: having a policy focus that strengthens workplace rights, delivers on the 10 day paid family and domestic violence leave, expands paid parental leave, improves job security and wages, increases transparency around the gender pay gap and puts women's economic equality back where it belongs, at the centre of national policy. Making sure that women have economic security, that there's an equitable arrangement in terms of workplace rights, parental leave rights and the gender pay gap, ensures that our national policy reflects the reality, which is that we want to see women being able to participate fully as productive members of our economy and our society. In this term, that work will continue. We're building on those strong foundations from the last term with further expansion of paid parental leave, including paying superannuation for the first time ever on government paid parental leave. When I tell young women that they don't get paid superannuation—well, they didn't get superannuation on their paid parental leave until now, thanks to the Labor government—they are horrified. They had no idea of this inequity that exists, but it is a critical part of why there is profound inequality in the retirement incomes of Australian men and women. Every time women took a break from the workforce, they were being penalised not just by the lack of employer contributions but by no super being paid on their parental leave, even if it was paid by the government or their employer at the time. We're demanding greater transparency and accountability on gender pay equity. We're reducing that really stubborn gender pay gap in Australia. It's down to 11.5 per cent now, but that is still too much. That's still too big a gap. It's the lowest it's ever been in Australia, which is shocking. There is a lot of hard work still to be done on that front. We've made some major new investments into women's health. I'm so proud of the work that's been done there, from better access to contraception and menopause care to more support for women dealing with endometriosis and pelvic pain. For too long, women were just told that it's a woman's lot, and we've seen the sometimes catastrophic results of that really poor understanding of endometriosis and pelvic pain. Finally we've got dedicated clinics where women can walk in with confidence and know they'll be heard, listened to and taken seriously—and that pain is not something they have to live with for the rest of their lives. These reforms matter. They matter because equality is not abstract. It's about whether a woman can afford to leave a violent relationship, whether she can return to work after having a child without being penalised for it, whether her work is properly valued, whether she can access the health care she needs, whether she can participate fully and safely in public life and whether the next generation of girls grows up with more freedom, more safety and more opportunity than the generation before. That's what real progress looks like—not just words but structural change. Of course, the story of International Women's Day has always belonged not just to the parliaments but to the movements. Over the weekend I was so proud to see that spirit alive and well in Newcastle. On Friday evening I joined the Hunter Workers Women's Committee's International Women's Day Dinner that they held at Club Charlestown. It was a wonderful night of solidarity, community and celebration. On Sunday morning I was proud to stand with our community again as many marched in the International Women's Day rally and march at Gregson Park in Hamilton. I want to put on record my sincere thanks for the Hunter Workers Women's Committee for the extraordinary amount of work that went into this entire weekend. On the Saturday they ran a whole festival of events for women, and these events don't happen without a lot of volunteering and collective effort. Year after year, the committee helps create space for women to come together in solidarity, to celebrate achievements and to reflect on the struggles that remain. I want to also give a shout-out to the remarkable Timeless Textiles and the Wednesday Makers Group. I was so honoured to launch the Inspiring Women in Stitch exhibition. Thank you for your creativity, skills and ongoing connection and work in our community. Happy International Women's Day. 13:23 Ms WITTY 316660 Melbourne On Friday morning I walked down Lygon Street in Carlton towards Trades Hall for the annual International Working Women's Day Rally. You could hear the crowd before you saw it. Women were calling to the gathering crowd through megaphones, and the steps of Trades Hall were already filled with union banners and handmade signs. There were students standing beside nurses, teachers beside hospitality workers and parents beside young people who were attending their first rally. It was a powerful reminder that in Melbourne the fight for equality has always been at the heart of who we are. The Victorian Trades Hall carries a rich history. For more than a century, women have gathered there to organise for fair pay, safer workplaces and the right to participate fully in our economy and our democracy. Standing there on Friday morning, you could feel the long stretch of history surrounding you as the next generation of women take up the fight. International Women's Day always invites us to reflect on how far we have come. This year the Status of Women Report Card gives us some real reasons to feel encouraged. Australia is now ranked 13th in the world for gender equality. Just four years ago, we were ranked 43rd. Our national gender pay gap has fallen to 11.5 per cent, the lowest ever on record. Those improvements didn't happen by accident. They reflect decades of work by women in unions, community organisations and parliamentarians who pushed for change. But the report card also reminds us that progress doesn't mean the work is finished. Across my electorate of Melbourne, our communities run on the work of women, but too often the systems around them struggle to reflect the realities of their lives. That was reinforced to me when I met with Carolyn and Wil from the Victorian Trades Hall Council. They came to my office to talk about the union movement called It's for Every Body. We spoke for a long time about the stories they were hearing from workers across Victoria, about how women undergoing IVF had quietly used up their annual leave because they had no other options, about workers returning to their jobs just days after miscarriage because they felt they had no choice. They also described people who had hidden medical appointments from their employers because they were worried it might affect their job security or career progression. Listening to those stories made something very clear. Our workplaces have changed in many ways, but many of our leave systems were designed for a different time. They assume a worker who never needs reproductive health care, never needs flexibility and never experiences the interruptions that real life can bring. That's why the 'It's for Every Body' campaign is calling for 10 days of paid reproductive health leave. The idea behind it is simple: when someone needs treatment for endometriosis, fertility care or pregnancy loss, that is health care, and health care should never cost someone their job. This is the same principle guiding the actions of this Labor government. We believe that women shouldn't face barriers to getting the care they need. That is why we are expanding access to cheaper medicines through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, helping to reduce the treatments that many women rely on. Across the country, we are establishing endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics so women can receive earlier diagnosis and proper treatment. For decades many women living with chronic pain were told their symptoms were normal, exaggerated or simply something they had to live with. Too many were dismissed or left waiting years for answers. That culture is changing because women spoke up, shared their experiences and demanded that the system listen. This government has also acted to protect dignity for families at some of the most difficult moments in life. Last year I spoke in support of Baby Priya's bill. Before that change, some parents who experienced the heartbreak of a stillbirth or the loss of a new child could also lose their employer funded paid parental leave. That meant families facing unimaginable grief could also lose the support they had been promised. The federal Labor government changed that, because equality is not only about opportunity when things are going well; it's also about dignity, compassion and fairness when life becomes incredibly hard. Of course, health and economic security are only part of the story; safety must always come first. Across Australia, a woman is killed by a current or former partner, on average, every eight days. That number can sound like a statistic, but every one of those eight days is a life—a daughter, a friend, a mother who should still be here. That reality is why the Albanese government has committed more than $4 billion nationally to end gender based violence in one generation. That funding is strengthening frontline services, expanding crisis accommodation and supporting prevention programs that work with communities before violence occurs, in recognition that leaving violence is rarely a single moment—it requires housing, financial security and a support system that walks besides the woman every step of the way. At the same time, the report warns us about new challenges. Abuse through the use of technology is becoming more common, with tracking apps and digital monitoring tools used by predators to control partners. It is a reminder that the fight for equality evolves with the world around us. Before becoming a parliamentarian, I spent many years working across businesses and community organisations in Melbourne. During that time I was often one of the only women in leadership positions. Around International Women's Day each year, I would often receive the same request: could you come and speak at our International Women's Day event and talk about being a woman in leadership? I would often talk about the first time I heard about subconscious bias. It was like a light-bulb moment. It wasn't something that I could really put my finger on, but once I heard that, I knew what was happening to me. Those conversations stayed with me because the same questions kept coming up: How do we make workplaces fairer? How do we support more women to move into leadership? For me, those questions led me to join EMILY's List. Through that network, I found a community of women who believe something powerful—if we want to see more women in leadership, we have to support each other to get there. Equality does not grow out of patience. It grows when women back each other, when communities organise and when systems are built to give everyone a fair chance. International Women's Day reminds us that the progress we see today was built by generations before us, from the suffragette movement led by Vida Goldstein here in Melbourne to the union women who organised through Trades Hall and the hundreds of people who rallied at the same great building on Friday. Each generation builds on the work of the last. Today, Australia is making real progress. Our global ranking on gender equality is rising. The gender pay gap is at its lowest level ever recorded, and we are investing in policies that strengthen women's health, safety and economic security. But equality is not a destination we arrive at. It is a commitment we renew again and again, because the measure of a society is not simply how it distributes power; it is how it protects dignity, supports families and ensures that every woman and girl can live safely, work fairly and build the life she chooses. That is the work ahead of us, and it is the work this government will continue to do. Sitting suspended from 13:31 to 15:59 15:59 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong International Women's Day was last Sunday, 8 March. It's a wonderful celebration of the contributions of women across Australia and the world. As much as it is a celebration, though, International Women's Day is also a reminder that equality is something we need to defend, protect and advance every day of the year. That means confronting the inequalities that still exist within our own laws. In 2026, our nation still lacks equality in our discrimination protections. A notable example of this is section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, which provides carve-outs that allow religious education institutions to discriminate against staff and students on the basis of certain characteristics. These include somebody's sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital or relationship status or pregnancy. In effect, this provision enables faith based and religious education institutions to fire or refuse to hire staff, as well as to suspend, expel, refuse to enrol, or disadvantage students simply because they are gay, trans, pregnant, divorced or unmarried. Section 38 enables them to discriminate with impunity. In Australia's recent history, there are documented cases of teachers who've been dismissed, refused employment or pressured to resign for being gay, for marrying a divorcee, for becoming pregnant out of wedlock or even for becoming pregnant with the assistance of IVF. There are cases where students have been forced out of schools or denied leadership positions based on their sexuality. There are cases of children who have been denied enrolment because a parent is trans or because their parents are in a same-sex relationship. All of these instances are and remain lawful under section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act. A version of these exemptions dates back to 1984, when Australia's Sex Discrimination Act was first introduced. It's been said that the exemptions which emerged at that time were in response to strong representations from private schools seeking the right to refuse to employ teachers in de facto relationships or women who became unmarried mothers. At the time, Labor stalwart Senator the Hon. Susan Ryan—no relation—was Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on the Status of Women. At that time, in 1984, she considered that the proposed exemption was not consistent with the objectives of the Sex Discrimination Act. She proposed that the exemption be subjected to a two-year sunsetting provision, and that, in the meantime, an inquiry into the provision be conducted by the commission. Ultimately, however, that exemption was passed without any time limit being attached. Subsequent inquiries by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner in 1992 and the Australian Law Reform Commission in 1994 both recommended repeal of section 38. It's hard to comprehend that we recognised back then what we seem unable to recognise now. The Australia that passed those carve-outs, that allowed that discrimination in 1984, is not the Australia that we live in today. In the more than 50 years since, Australia has elected an unmarried female prime minister, it has legislated to legalise same-sex marriage and has become more open and more inclusive of the many diverse groups within our community, including the LGBTQIA+ community. Plainly, section 38 of the Sex Discrimination Act no longer represents Australian values and beliefs about equality. It is an anachronism. Today, religious schools, colleges and universities hold a really significant place in Australian public life. In 2022, about 1.4 million primary and secondary students attended faith based schools in Australia. Approximately 30 per cent of Australia's schools are faith based, and I'm proud to say that I attended one and my children have attended one. In some remote areas, faith based schools are the only educational institutions available to parents. Those institutions employ large numbers of people. In 2022, it was reported that non-government schools employed approximately 173,000 full-time equivalent teaching and non-teaching staff. Those numbers reflect the fact that faith based schools are a substantial part of our education system. They affect millions of Australians—students, staff, parents—every day. It's for those reasons that the Labor government and the Prime Minister himself have been on record for years recommending their support for the removal of section 38. In 2022, Labor moved an amendment to that end. As opposition leader, the now prime minister took this policy to the 2022 election. He pledged then a commitment to reform antidiscrimination laws so that religious schools could no longer discriminate against their students and their staff. Once the Prime Minister was elected, his government commissioned the Australian Law Reform Commission to conduct an inquiry into Australia's antidiscrimination protections for LGBTQIA+ students and staff in faith based schools. In 2024, the Australian Law Reform Commission released its final report into religious education institutions and antidiscrimination laws. That report, again, recommended that section 38 be repealed and that, instead, institutions should only be allowed to preference staff in line with their beliefs, so long as it was proportionate and reasonably necessary to maintaining a community of faith and so long as the expression of those preferences did not breach existing discrimination laws. Despite reportedly having a draft bill on hand to enact those changes, the Prime Minister has declined to make these simple changes unless there is bipartisan support—a situation which appears vanishingly unlikely. I hope that with International Women's Day—a day to be celebrated—passing us for yet another year, we are reminded that equality and the progress of women and of other vulnerable groups in our community can never be guaranteed or taken for granted. There is no clearer example of this than the current federal legislation, which still permits active discrimination against women and against LGBTQIA+ people. That's federal legislation that was recommended for reform back in the 1990s. It is long past time that section 38 be repealed. I call on this government, with its supermajority, its dominance in the House and its stated commitment to this policy to action this repeal in this term of parliament. 16:07 Ms KARA COOK 316537 Bonner What a pleasure it is to speak today on this significant matter. It's also Queensland Women's Week this week. I am delighted to talk about International Women's Day, where we recognise the strength, resilience and achievements of women right across our country and the world. It is also an important moment to reflect on the barriers that women continue to face and the work that still lies ahead if we want to genuinely achieve equality. This year's theme is 'Balance the Scales', and it reminds us that progress towards equality requires collective effort. When governments, communities and individuals invest in women and girls, the benefits are felt right across families, workplaces and, indeed, the broader community. International Women's Day is not just about celebration. It's also about honesty and acknowledging that, despite the progress we have made, women in Australia continue to experience inequality, discrimination and violence simply because of their gender. Addressing these issues requires sustained commitment, thoughtful policy and leadership at every level. As a former domestic violence lawyer and CEO of Basic Rights Queensland, I have seen firsthand the impact that gender inequality and violence can have on women and their families. I've worked alongside women who have experienced profound hardship but who have also found incredible courage. I've also had the privilege of working with advocates, community organisations and frontline workers who dedicate their lives to ensuring that women are safe, respected and supported. As the member for Bonner, I am proud of the Albanese Labor government, a government that has placed gender equality and women's safety at the centre of its agenda. Last week, the Status of Women Report Card was released. This report provides an important annual assessment of the wellbeing of women in Australia. It examines the social, economic and safety outcomes experienced by women and evaluates how government policies and social attitudes are shaping progress towards equality. Importantly, the report provides insight into not only the progress that has been made but also the areas where challenges still remain. There are some encouraging signs of progress. The report shows that the national gender pay gap continues to narrow and now sits at 11.5 per cent. While there is still work to be done, this represents a meaningful step forward and reflects the impact of policies designed to improve women's economic security. We are also seeing positive changes in caring roles within families. The report card highlights that more fathers are taking on primary caring responsibilities. In medium and large private-sector employers, men now account for 20 per cent of primary carer parental leave recipients, while 33 per cent of recipients of government funded paid parental leave are fathers or partners. That shift matters. Greater participation by men in caring roles supports gender equality at home and helps ensure women can pursue opportunities in education and, of course, the workforce. The report also highlights progress in representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in highly skilled professional roles. More First Nations women are entering careers in fields such as health, education, environmental science and policy. This achievement reflects the strength and leadership of First Nations women and the importance of ensuring opportunities are accessible across all sectors. It also reflects that they have a genuine seat at the tables where decisions are being made. Violence against women remains one of the most pressing issues facing our nation. We know that more than one woman a week was murdered last year in our country. Those murders have continued this year. The report also highlighted that nearly one in four women in Australia have experienced intimate partner violence since the age of 15. These figures remind us that gender based violence remains a national emergency. The report card also reveals the disproportionate impact of violence on First Nations women. First Nations women are 32 times more likely to be hospitalised and 11 times more likely to be murdered than non-Indigenous women. Women with a disability are also significantly more likely to experience violence from a current or former partner. Nearly two in three women with a disability will experience violence in their lifetime. These findings reinforce an important truth: gender inequality intersects with other forms of inequality, and addressing violence requires targeted and sustained action. That is why the Albanese Labor government is delivering the $4 billion National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. This plan represents the most comprehensive national strategy ever undertaken to address gender based violence. It includes significant investment in prevention, early intervention, crisis response and long-term recovery. It includes our commitment to 10 days of paid domestic and family violence leave, ensuring that victim-survivors can take time away from work to seek safety and support. We've invested $1 billion in funding for crisis and transitional housing, recognising that safe and accessible accommodation is critical for those leaving violent relationships. We need to stop asking the question, 'Why doesn't she leave?' and start asking, 'Where would she go?' That is also why the Leaving Violence Program has been made permanent, with $5,000 in financial support available for women escaping violence. The government has also taken action to ensure that government debts cannot be used as a further tool of financial abuse, recognising the complex way in which perpetrators exert control. Importantly, the Status of Women Report Card highlights that violence is evolving. Technology is increasingly being used to monitor, harass and control women. Our government has taken steps to criminalise deepfake pornography and image based abuse, with penalties of up to six years in prison, and to regulate online platforms through the eSafety Commissioner. Women's health is another area where targeted action is critical. For too long, women's health had been under-researched, underfunded and under-recognised. The Albanese Labor government's women's health package is seeking to remedy that—an almost $800 million investment designed to address these gaps. This investment will help ensure that women and girls can access the health care they need throughout their lives. This includes improving access to contraception, reproductive health care, menopause support and specialist services. The Status of women report card highlights the importance of ensuring women can access health care that reflects their specific needs. Access to appropriate health care is not simply a medical issue; it is a matter of equity, dignity and also economic participation. Gender equality cannot be achieved without economic equality. The Status of women report card also highlights that workforce segregation remains a persistent challenge, with four in five Australians working in occupations dominated by either men or women. This segregation contributes directly to the gender pay gap and limits opportunities for women across many industries. That is why the Albanese Labor government is taking practical steps to support women's economic security. That includes pay increases for workers in feminised industries such as aged care, early childhood, education and health care. These are essential professions that have historically been undervalued despite the critical role they play in our society. Through free TAFE, more women are also entering industries traditionally dominated by men. Women commencing trade apprenticeships have increased by more than 30 per cent, and almost 60 per cent of free TAFE students are women. These programs are helping to expand career pathways and break down barriers. In my electorate of Bonner, I've met many women who are forging new paths in emerging industries. One example is Zaahra, an apprentice at the Tesla workshop in Mount Gravatt who is supported through the government's new energy apprenticeship scheme. As one of only a small number of female apprentices nationally within the organisation, she is helping demonstrate that careers in advanced manufacturing and clean energy are open to women. Her story reflects the broader change that is occurring across the country. Our government has also expanded and extended paid parental leave to 26 weeks and ensured that superannuation is paid on that leave, recognising that caring responsibility should not come at the expense of women's long-term financial security. The Status of women report card shows that meaningful change is possible when governments, communities and individuals work together, but it reminds us that equality is not inevitable. The persistence of gender based violence, the ongoing gender pay gap and the barriers women face in workplaces and communities show there is still much work to be done. International Women's Day reminds us that the pursuit of equality is not only about improving outcomes for women and girls; it's about building a fairer, stronger and more inclusive Australia for everyone. As the member for Bonner, I am committed to continuing this fight. 16:17 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence International Women's Day gives us an important opportunity each year to pause and recognise the women who shape our communities in quiet, determined and often extraordinary ways. It is a moment to celebrate achievement, to acknowledge leadership and to recognise the countless contributions women make every day to families, workplaces and community life across Australia. Over the past week, I had the privilege of attending the Burundian community of South Australia's International Women's Day celebration with the Minister for Multicultural Affairs in South Australia, Zoe Bettison, and the Mayor of Playford, Glenn Docherty—a warm and welcoming gathering that brought together families, community leaders and women from across the Burundian community. It was a wonderful opportunity to celebrate women's achievements, to share stories and to reflect on the role women play in strengthening multicultural communities here in Australia. Events like this are incredibly important. They create space for connection, for reflection and for recognising the many women who contribute to building vibrant, resilient communities far from the countries where many first begin their journeys. Australia's story has always been shaped by migration, and communities like the Burundian community here in South Australia are a powerful reminder of that strength that cultural diversity brings to our nation. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 16:19 to 16:32 Mr BURNELL 300129 The women in that community are leaders, mentors, mothers, business owners and community organisers. They help preserve culture and tradition while also building opportunities for the next generation of young Australians. I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank Emmanuel Bizimana, President of the Burundian Community of South Australia. Emmanuel's dedication to his community is evident in everything he does. Through leadership, organisation and an unwavering commitment to bringing people together he continues to create opportunities for the Burundian community to connect, celebrate and support one another. Leadership like that strengthens not just one community but the broader community we all share. It was a privilege to attend this event and celebrate the achievements of Burundian women who are making a positive difference here in South Australia. These gatherings highlight something very important. When women from multicultural backgrounds are supported and empowered, the entire community benefits. Their voices, experiences and perspectives strengthen our national story. They help shape a society that is inclusive, compassionate and forward-looking. As the federal member for Spence I often reflect on the remarkable woman our electorate is named after, Catherine Helen Spence. Catherine Spence was one of the most influential reformers in South Australian history. She was a writer, a social advocate and a passionate champion for fairness and democratic reform. At a time where women were largely excluded from public life, Catherine Spence stepped forward and made her voice heard. She advocated for electoral reform, for education and for a more just and representative society. Most famously, she became Australia's first female political candidate, running for election at a time when women were still fighting for the right to vote. That courage, that determination to speak up and advocate for change, helped shaped the democratic institutions we know today. Her life reminds us that progress often begins with individuals who refuse to accept the limits placed upon them. Representing an electorate named after Catherine Spence is a great honour. It is a constant reminder that leadership means lifting others up, expanding opportunity and ensuring that every person, regardless of background, has a chance to contribute. The women we celebrate on International Women's Day carry fourth that same spirit. They lead in business, in sporting clubs, in volunteer organisations and in communities across the north. Another event I had the pleasure of attending recently was the Gawler International Women's Day Breakfast, with James Agness, a candidate for Light, me, Nathan Shanks and councillors from Town of Gawler Council. This event has become a cherished tradition in the local community, bringing together women from across Gawler and the surrounding districts to celebrate leadership and community service. This year's breakfast was held at Nixon Function Centre, and it was completely sold out. The strong turnout says a lot about the value the Gawler community places on recognising women's achievements and sharing stories of leadership. Guests gathered early in the morning to listen to a powerful and deeply personal address from Nicole Dempster, coordinator of The Haven in Gawler. Nicole spoke candidly about her remarkable 40-year career with South Australia Police. It was a career defined by dedication, professionalism and service to the people of South Australia. But Nicole's story did not end with her time in uniform. She also shared her journey of confronting and recovering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Her willingness to speak openly about that experience was both courageous and inspiring. It reminded everyone in the room that strength is not just about perseverance through difficult moments; it's also about having the courage to seek help, to heal and to support others facing similar challenges. Her story resonated deeply with many in attendance, and reinforced the importance of supporting mental health and wellbeing in our communities. The breakfast also recognised a number of extraordinary women whose dedication to community life in Gawler continue to make a lasting difference. These women represent the very best of local leadership, service and volunteerism. Shirley Banson was recognised for her services to the Gawler Bowling Club. Ann-Marie Bookman was honoured for her longstanding work supporting Gawler's environment and ecology. Melissa Hardy was acknowledged for her contributions to the Gawler town band, helping sustain an important cultural institution in the community. Councillor Helen Hennessey was recognised for her dedication to promoting and preserving the history of the town of Gawler. Sarah Henson received recognition for her work in business and for her charitable initiatives, including her involvement with Love for Lobes. Erica Kokoschke was celebrated for her service to the Gawler VIEW Club. Marie-Louise Lees was acknowledged for her work with the Rotary Club of Gawler, contributing to projects that support the community locally and internationally. Katrina May was recognised for her service to the Gawler business community and her ongoing support for local enterprise. Karen McColl was honoured for her enduring commitment to the Willaston Football Club, supporting generations of local players and families. Jayne Polito was recognised for her service to the Gawler and District Tennis Association, helping to grow participation in sport across the region. Sondra Taylor received recognition for her contribution to the Gawler Show, an event that has long been a highlight of community life. Tanya Veldkamp was acknowledged for her service to the Gawler Agricultural, Horticultural and Floricultural Society. Belinda Wellington was recognised for her advocacy on women's health issues, an area of work that has helped raise awareness and provide support for many in community. Bianca Williams was honoured for her contributions to Co-op BLGW, strengthening local cooperation and community initiatives. And Kim Wright was recognised for her enduring commitment to the Gawler community through years of dedicated service. Each of these women has made a lasting contribution to our community, often through volunteer work, through leadership and through countless hours spent supporting others. Their efforts remind us that community strength is built not just through large national decisions but through local action, through people who step forward to help organise events, run clubs, mentor young people, advocate for causes and create opportunities for others. That spirit of service is something we see across the north every single day. From multicultural community organisations and sporting clubs to volunteer groups and charities, women are often at the centre of these efforts. They organise, they lead, they support and they inspire. International Women's Day is an opportunity to celebrate those contributions, but it is also a reminder that the work of advancing equality and opportunity continues. Ensuring women have equal access to education, employment, leadership and community participation remains a priority, because when women succeed, communities grow stronger, families prosper, and societies become more inclusive and resilient. These events I attended across the north this International Women's Day, from the Burundian community celebration to the Gawler breakfast, demonstrate the incredible contributions women make every day. They also remind us of something Catherine Spence understood more than a century ago: progress happens when people step forward to lift others up, it happens when communities support one another and it happens when we recognise the value of every voice. To the women we have celebrated today, thank you for everything you do. Thank you for your leadership, your service and your commitment to strengthening our communities. To all women across Australia and Adelaide's northern suburbs, happy International Women's Day. 16:40 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane This Sunday just gone, as we just heard, was International Women's Day, and the theme for that day was 'Balance the Scales'. It's a day when we reflect and honour the women and girls from all walks of life: young women, courageous women, inspiring women, pioneering women, girls growing up to be women, brave women, women who take on other people's burdens, radiant women, tenacious women and all the women in between. Women matter, and their voices matter. For this International Women's Day, I joined the member for Griffith and the member for Moreton in the sea of pink at the Mater fun run in Brisbane. Mater Chicks in Pink exists so no woman has to face breast cancer alone. This year they raised more than $2 million in donations and had over 25,000 participants. The streets were alive with bright pink shirts, and it was truly a remarkable sight. In the afternoon I returned to my high school, Mt St Michael's College, to deliver a keynote speech to the mothers and daughters at their high tea. At the event, I spoke about the importance of backing yourself and leaning into your values. I shared my story that speaks to how young girls and women have a place in our world, how they can lead and they can make a difference, and how, as others before us have done, we can use our experiences, our courage and resilience to better balance the scales. While I believe each of us can make a difference on our own, I do believe we need women in decision-making roles to make those scales tip more quickly. I'm not talking about pushing men down. I'm talking about making sure we all rise. It's not a zero-sum game. There's not one winner nor one loser. Balancing the scales is not about asking for special treatment; it's about ensuring that when decisions are made—whether it be in this House, in business, in schoolrooms, in churches, in homes—women are present. Here in Australia, we are beginning to see some real change take form. Throughout history, I think it's fair to say, Labor has been a progressive force for women, establishing many of the reforms and initiatives that continue to drive gender equality to this day. But having women in key government decision-making roles had been slow. When I think about the first federal Labor woman in cabinet, it was Senator Susan Ryan, and that started back in 1983. What a trailblazer she was, the architect of the Sex Discrimination Act. Slowly, over time, more and more women were elected to parliament and have taken on significant roles. In our party, how can we forget Julia Gillard, who became our first female prime minister in 2010? Jump forward 16 years and what do we see? This Labor government is the first majority woman federal government, with women making up 52 per cent of the Labor caucus. The Albanese Labor government's cabinet is now the first ever federal cabinet to be gender equal, with women comprising 11 of the 22 positions. The representation of women in Labor is not by accident, and I talked a lot about this on Sunday. On 26 September 1994, the ALP made a historic decision to introduce quotas for women. It was highly controversial. I remember it at the time. There were arguments on merit versus tokenism, but over time the party found accomplished women to run for seats, and that rule changed the culture and a process. The facts speak to its success. The parliamentary Labor team has swelled from under 10 per cent women in 1989 to over 50 per cent now. Further, in May last year, seven of the nine representatives who won in Queensland were women. Their CVs are impressive and they're doing a great job. The tokenism argument is gone. We know that getting women elected matters because it means we can drive the change that women need. We make up half the population, and yet our issues are often misunderstood, dismissed or ignored. I want to say to women all across the country and in my seat of Brisbane: you matter, and this Labor government is listening and delivering. Let's start with health. For far too long, women's health has been overlooked, underfunded and misunderstood, even though it's central to women's equality. Last year, our government announced a landmark women's health package, investing almost $800 million in women's health. The investment improves access to long-term contraceptives, provides better support to women experiencing chronic pelvic pain and supports those with menopause conditions. This includes funding 11 additional endometriosis clinics and expanding all 33 clinics to provide specialised menopause care. Since this historic health package was announced, more than 660,000 women have accessed more than two million cheaper scripts. Before Yaz, Yasmin and Slinda were listed, women were paying around $380 a year for their contraception, and now they're paying only $25 a script. Before EstroGel was listed, women could have paid up to $670 a year, and now they're only paying $25 a script, or $7.70 if they're on concession. Since this package was announced, more than 71,000 women have received Medicare funded menopause health assessments. Since 1 November last year, women in Brisbane have also had access to affordable IUDs and birth control implants, as have women around the country. Women asked the government to take their health seriously, and this Labor government is delivering. Let's look at the workplace. The Albanese government centred gender equality as a key economic issue at the Jobs and Skills Summit. They expanded paid parental leave. They increased funding for child care. They made gender equality an object of the Fair Work Act. They introduced paid family and domestic violence leave. They funded and legislated the implementation of all 55 recommendations of the Respect@Work report. They finalised the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children They finalised Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices, the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan to End Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence. The government also established the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce and began work on a national strategy to achieve gender equality. In 2022, Labor introduced legislation forcing companies, especially those with over 100 employees, to publish their gender pay gaps. There's a lot going on. On 7 March 2024, the Australian government's Working for Women: A Strategy for Gender Equality was launched by the Minister for Women, the Hon. Katy Gallagher, outlining the government's vision for gender equality. Alongside that announcement, the Albanese Labor government announced that superannuation will now be paid on parental leave. The government has also taken very strong steps to support working women with the three-day childcare guarantee. Let's briefly talk about housing. It was this government that passed the legislation to establish the Housing Australia Future Fund. More women are buying their homes with five per cent deposits. We're investing in crisis accommodation. In response to the unacceptable rates of violence against women that continue across Australia, the Albanese government has taken a national leadership role and convened National Cabinet meetings on gender based violence. The Commonwealth, states and territories have agreed to increased action to address this violence, and the Commonwealth has made a range of investments. A couple that I'll mention are the $1 billion in the new Leaving Violence Program and the $4.4 billion that followed in September, which includes funding to support legal assistance. The majority-women Albanese government continues to invest in women, putting women and gender equality at the centre of Australia's economic plan and making women's lives safer, fairer and more equal. When women and girls stand equal, families are stronger, workplaces are fairer, communities thrive and society becomes safer and better for everyone. Government plays an important role in driving change for women and girls across the country. This government, as you've heard, has done a lot, but we do have more to do. I'm really proud to be a member of this Labor government that backs women and delivers for them. I also say to the women across the country and in Brisbane that, if you're questioning yourself—and we had some of these discussions at the event at Mt St Michael's—just think a little bit. Maybe channel a bit of Michelle Obama: 'Am I good enough? Yes, I am.' Or maybe hear the words of our first Australian astronaut: Every day you need to believe it's going to happen. Happy International Women's Day. Federation Chamber adjourned at 16:50