﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2026-03-23</date>
    <parliament.no>3</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Monday, 23 March 2026</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Milton Dick</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 10:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petitions Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the eighth report of the Petitions Committee for the 48th Parliament.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PETITIONS COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">REPORT No. 08</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Petitions and Ministerial Responses</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">23 March 2026</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair Ms Jodie Belyea MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Deputy Chair Mr Leon Rebello MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Cameron Caldwell</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MP Ms Emma Comer MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Trish Cook MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Rowan Holzberger MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Llew O'Brien MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Tracey Roberts MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This committee is supported by staff of the Department of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Report summarising the petitions and ministerial responses being presented.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The committee met in private session in the 48th Parliament on 3 February, 10 February and 3 March 2026.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee resolved to present the following 196 petitions in accordance with standing order 207:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 3 February 2026</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—regarding fission and fusion nuclear energy research priorities (EN7582)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a national fusion energy development program (EN7583)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a national fusion energy development program (EN7584)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a national fusion energy development program (EN7585)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a national fusion energy development program for defence applications (EN7586)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting free cardiopulmonary resuscitation education for expecting parents (EN8892)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting amendments to online safety legislation affecting minors (EN8893)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting discussion of national technological and digital independence (EN8895)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting changes to social media age limit restrictions (EN8896)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting reconsideration of defence exports to Israel (EN8897)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting establishment of a national health awareness day (EN8899)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting constitutional protection for freedom of speech (EN8900)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 84 petitioners—requesting improvements to internet and mobile connectivity across the Bellarine Peninsula (EN8902)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting reconsideration of recent online safety measures (EN8904)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—regarding online safety legislation (EN8905)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8912)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting recognition of twins as a multiple birth (EN8913)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting adoption of an official Parliament House pet (EN8916)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8917)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting reductions to immigration levels (EN8918)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting public affirmation against religious and racial hatred (EN8921)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—regarding guidelines relating to family cooperation after serious crime (EN8922)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting review of visa security screening processes (EN8924)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 69 petitioners—requesting inclusion of Australian sign language in school curriculums (EN8925)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 22 petitioners—requesting strengthened border screening (EN8927)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting strengthened national firearms regulations (EN8928)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a pause to immigration (EN8931)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting formal recognition of individual bravery (EN8933)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8936)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting consideration of the interests of licensed firearms owners (EN8937)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting prohibition of public desecration of the Australian National Flag (EN8938)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8939)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8940) From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8944)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting investigation of immigration and firearms policy (EN8945)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—regarding the Prime Minister (EN8946)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8948)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8949)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8951)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting an investigation into intelligence and law enforcement processes (EN8952)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—regarding the Prime Minister (EN8954)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8955)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8958)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 30 petitioners—requesting reforms to immigration screening and counter-extremism measures (EN8959)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting an early federal election (EN8964)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8966)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a referendum on federal governance arrangements (EN8967)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into extremist violence and national security risks (EN8968)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting strengthened visa cancellation and removal powers (EN8971)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting reconsideration of additional firearms restrictions (EN8972)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a pause to new firearms legislation pending review (EN8973)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into antisemitism (EN8974)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8975)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8976)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a halt to new firearms legislation (EN8978)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting reductions to immigration levels (EN8980)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8984)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2,839 petitioners—requesting extension of research protections to all non-human primates (EN8985)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting suspension of proposed firearms law reforms (EN8990)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 906 petitioners—requesting strengthened transparency requirements for foreign lobbying (EN8991)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting consideration of leadership and governance arrangements (EN8993)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN8994)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting an independent inquiry into ministerial accountability (EN8995)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8997)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8998)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a pause to firearms legislation pending consultation (EN9003)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting improvements to online age verification systems (EN9006)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into public safety (EN9008)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9012)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9013)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting an increase to income support payments (EN9017)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting parliamentary action to support social cohesion (EN9027)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a referendum on citizen legislative veto mechanisms (EN9030)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9032)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting changes to immigration policy to prioritise housing capacity (EN9033)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 34 petitioners—requesting designation of an overseas organisation as a terrorist organisation (EN9034)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 70 petitioners—requesting rejection of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism EN9035)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9038)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 78 petitioners—requesting criminalisation of promotion of violent extremist ideology (EN9039)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a plebiscite on multicultural policy (EN9043)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9044)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9046)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a change to the national anthem (EN9049)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a halt to firearms policy changes (EN9053)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9054)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting strengthened visa screening measures (EN9056)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 461 petitioners—requesting rejection of the Brisbane Airport master plan (EN9057)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting support for victims of the Bondi Beach attack (EN9060)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting review of regional permanent visa eligibility requirements (EN9062)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting prohibition of extremist preaching and activities (EN9065)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting strengthened laws against intimidation and extremist conduct (EN9066)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN9070)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting an end to decommissioning of non-National Broadband Network infrastructure (EN9074)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting review of public funding guidelines for media outlets (EN9075)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting counselling services for descendants of veterans (EN9079)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting changes to social media age limit restrictions (EN9080)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into violent extremism (EN9081)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9082)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into national security and social cohesion (EN9085)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5,417 petitioners—requesting revocation of a diplomatic invitation (EN9092)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into counter-terrorism arrangements (EN9095)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9104)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN9120)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting access to vaping products for adults (EN9126)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 148 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence in a minister (EN9128)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting public health campaigns addressing domestic violence (EN9129)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting adoption of national security measures (EN9130)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9133)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting reforms to improve tax fairness (EN9135)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18 petitioners—requesting strengthened federal resource taxation (EN9136)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting re-establishment of a federal rail authority (EN9137)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism and the Bondi Beach attack (EN9142)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN9153)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting removal of tax deductibility for advertising expenses (EN9154)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9156)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9157)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9164)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting a change to the national anthem (EN9166)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN9174)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting changes to welfare income thresholds (EN9181)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9182)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting research into fly population control (EN9184)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into antisemitism (EN9185)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 29 petitioners—requesting severance of diplomatic relations with Iran (EN9188)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting electorate-level transparency for electronic petitions (EN9191)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting condemnation of human rights violations in Iran (EN9192)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 26 petitioners—requesting review of Australian passport fees (EN9194)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting streamlined importation of small vehicles (EN9196)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting information relating to the proposed national firearm buyback scheme (EN9197)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting a royal commission into the Bondi Beach attack (EN9198)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting repeal of compulsory voting requirements (EN9199)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting guaranteed access to income support payments (EN9206)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting reform of parliamentary expense entitlements (EN9211)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting legislative protection of Australia Day (EN9229)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting consideration of a national gendarmerie (EN9235)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting expanded subsidised access to semaglutide (EN9245)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting a referendum on becoming a republic (EN9250)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting amendments to anti-vilification laws (EN9251)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting changes to standing orders relating to petitions (EN9252)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting retrospective student loan debt relief (EN9267)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 180 petitioners—requesting international action on human rights violations in Iran (EN9270)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting review of child support legislation (EN9271)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting a pause to hate speech legislation pending inquiry (EN9273)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting legislation for a child-specific digital network (EN9275)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting prevention of new hate speech laws (EN9281)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 18502 petitioners—requesting revocation of diplomatic recognition of the Islamic Republic of Iran (EN9283)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting transparency and oversight of critical mineral resources (EN9284)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting subsidies for continuous glucose monitoring devices (EN9285)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 10 February 2026</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting consideration of fusion energy for submarine propulsion (EN7587)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting consideration of fusion energy development in relation to regional infrastructure (EN7588)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting consideration of fusion energy in relation to regional transport (EN7589)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting consideration of fusion energy for water infrastructure (EN7590)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting consideration of fusion energy development in relation to housing (EN7591)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting a motion of no confidence (EN9287)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting an audit of legislative factors relating to industry subsidies (EN9291)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 447 petitioners—requesting restrictions on entry of individuals who have served in a foreign military (EN9292)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting changes to parental access arrangements for children's health records (EN9293)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting targeted sanctions and export controls in relation to Iran (EN9295)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting non-participation in a proposed international body (EN9297)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2,345 petitioners—requesting restrictions on entry and residency of officials linked to a foreign government (EN9299)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting extension of paid placement support to allied health students (EN9300)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting a public statement supporting Greenland's sovereignty (EN9301)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting changes to minimum annual leave entitlements (EN9303)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting a referendum on constitutional protection of freedom of expression (EN9304)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting prohibition on intentional damage to the Australian National Flag (EN9305)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1,835 petitioners—requesting engagement with an Iranian opposition figure (EN9306)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 139 petitioners—requesting constitutional protection of freedom of expression and freedom of the press (EN9309)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4,508 petitioners—requesting removal of age-based eligibility limits for disability support (EN9311)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting inclusion of an online gaming platform within social media age limit restrictions (EN9312)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting phase-out of lead wheel weights (EN9313)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—regarding regional skilled migration visa application processing times (EN9314)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting review of employment standards relating to amblyopia (EN9316)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting implementation of recommendations from the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (EN9319)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 34 petitioners—requesting non-participation in an international sporting event (EN9320)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting sanctions in relation to human rights violations in Iran (EN9323)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting measures to prevent entry of individuals linked to human rights abuses in Iran (EN9326)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 54 petitioners—requesting financial assistance for veterans during legislative transition (EN9327)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting legal protection for the Australian National Flag (EN9329)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—regarding regulation of circumcision practices as a health matter (EN9332)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 199 petitioners—requesting criminalisation of damage to national and state flags (EN9333)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 15 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into a budget revision (EN9335)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting consideration of transitional housing policy measures (EN9336)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 264 petitioners—requesting review of migration compliance in relation to an individual (EN9337)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 279 petitioners—requesting action in relation to Israel (EN9339)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting investigation of rental market valuation practices (EN9342)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 231 petitioners—requesting review of access to subsidised breast reduction surgery (EN9344)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 21 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into meat labelling and composition standards (EN9345)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting engagement relating to education and the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan (EN9347)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting support for human rights in Afghanistan (EN9348)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 312 petitioners—regarding entry into Australia for individuals linked to human rights abuses (EN9351)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 594 petitioners—requesting national implementation of sepsis prevention and care measures (EN9354)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—requesting changes to taxation of digital assets (EN9355)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 41 petitioners—requesting reduction of capital gains tax concessions (EN9356)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2,741 petitioners—regarding skilled regional permanent residence visa application processing times (EN9363)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 81 petitioners—requesting examination of an invitation to a foreign head of state (EN9366)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 107 petitioners—requesting changes to veterans' compensation assessments (EN9367)</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>5</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 196 petitions:</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Safety</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersecurity</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>7</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits: Twin Births</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliament House</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Cohesion</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Crime</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Auslan</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ahmed, Mr Al Ahmed</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>15</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>16</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>17</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>18</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Animal Welfare: Primates</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>20</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ministerial Standards</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Newstart Allowance</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Cohesion</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Muslim Brotherhood</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>24</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Multiculturalism</title>
          <page.no>25</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Anthem</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>26</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aviation Industry: Brisbane Airport</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>27</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech: Public Safety</title>
          <page.no>28</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Broadband</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Media</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Vietnam War: Intergenerational Impact</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>29</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>30</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>President of Israel</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>E-Cigarettes and Vaping Products</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Veterans' Affairs</title>
          <page.no>31</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>32</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Railways</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>33</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Deductible Expenses</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>34</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Anthem</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>35</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fly Control</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Antisemitism</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>36</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Petitions</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Passports</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Vehicle Standards</title>
          <page.no>37</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bondi Beach: Attack</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral System</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>38</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentarians' Entitlements</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia Day</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Obesity</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>40</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tertiary Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law: Child Support</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>41</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Critical and Strategic Minerals Industry</title>
          <page.no>42</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Diabetes</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Procurement: Submarines</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nuclear Energy</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Business</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel Defense Forces</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Relations: Australia and the United States of America</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tertiary Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Greenland</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution: Freedom of Speech</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Constitution</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment: Lead Pollution</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Discrimination: Vision Impairment</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indigenous Australians: Justice System</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>FIFA World Cup</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans: Compensation</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Safety: Male Circumcision</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Migration: Integrity and Standards</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care: Breast Reduction Surgery</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Food Labelling</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Afghanistan: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Afghanistan: Human Rights</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Visa Refusal or Cancellation</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sepsis</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation: Digital Currency Transactions</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Capital Gains Tax</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skilled Migration</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>President of Israel</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Repatriation Medical Authority</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>57</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Responses</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 28 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented:</para>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 3 March 2026</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Treasurer to a petition requesting amendments to the</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 </inline> (EN6601)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Financial Services to a petition requesting increased protections for self-managed superannuation fund and retail investors (EN7384)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Social Services to a petition regarding the Newly Arrived Resident's Waiting Period for the Paid Parental Leave scheme (EN7561)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury to a petition regarding Gondwana Rainforest Trust Limited (EN7781)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury to a petition requesting investigation of advocacy organisations for alleged coercive conduct (EN7802)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a motion of no confidence (EN7892)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting that burning of the Australian National Flag be made a criminal offence (EN7906)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8050)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition regarding the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (EN8101)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting that burning of the Australian National Flag be made a criminal offence (EN8107)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8108)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting amendments related to the National Firearms Agreement (EN8114)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8137)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting a motion of no confidence (EN8151)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition regarding Iran's detention of Dr Ahmad Reza Djalali (EN8174)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding impacts of social media age limit restrictions (EN8189)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting national minimum standards for self-defence rights (EN8191)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting a ban on Sharia Law (EN8197)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting review and reform of the family law system (EN8427)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme to a petition regarding recording of National Disability Insurance Agency participant communications (EN8429)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding the role of the eSafety Commissioner and the development of industry codes (EN8431)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting recognition for emergency personnel who assisted in the aftermath of Cyclone Tracy through the National Emergency Medal (EN8433)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding social media age limit restrictions (EN8434)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding industry codes registered by the eSafety Commissioner (EN8457)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Industry and Innovation to a petition requesting the introduction of mandatory country of origin labelling for cut flowers (EN8477)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Finance to a petition regarding the <inline font-style="italic">Digital ID Act 2024</inline>(EN8492)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Finance to a petition regarding the <inline font-style="italic">Digital ID Act 2024</inline>(EN8511)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Aged Care and Seniors to a petition requesting implementation of security cameras in common areas of aged care homes (PN0641)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Jodie Belyea MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair—Petitions Committee</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corporate Governance</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gondwana Rainforest Trust</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Consumer Protection</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian National Flag</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gun Control</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prime Minister</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Djalali, Dr Ahmadreza</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Crime</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Society</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>66</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Awards and Honours</title>
          <page.no>67</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>68</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Flower Imports</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>69</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Information and Privacy</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>70</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>71</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Statements</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are currently 71 petitions open for signatures on the House e-petitions website. The petitions cover a diverse range of topics including arts and education, national security, visa processing, protests in Iran and the sale of military assets. More certifications will follow at the committee's next meeting.</para>
<para>The committee's inquiry into the standing orders relating to petitions continues to progress, with 16 submissions received and available on the committee's website. The committee is continuing to gather evidence and looks forward to continuing to engage with stakeholders throughout the process. I look forward to updating the House further on the work of the Petitions Committee.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>71</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7450" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>71</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>71</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>Today is a historic day for Australia, as I again present to the parliament our country's very first bill to protect Australia's prime agricultural land: the Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill 2026.</para>
<para>It's legislation that is crucial to the future of our country. This bill secures and safeguards not only Australia's prime agricultural land but also our nation's food security.</para>
<para>It's hard to believe that a country which relies so much on agriculture to sustain it has never before passed legislation to protect the land that is the source of such bounty and prosperity.</para>
<para>Our prime agricultural land is at serious risk.</para>
<para>The gross value of agricultural production has increased by 34 per cent in the past 20 years to $82.4 billion in 2023-24. It's forecast to hit $95 billion in 2025-26.</para>
<para>In 2024-25 the value of Australian agricultural exports surged to $77.2 billion or 15.1 per cent of Australia's total exported goods. These statistics demonstrate how important agriculture is to our country and also to the future of regional Australia.</para>
<para>As the population of the world continues to increase, so too does the importance of food and water resources. Their social, economic and strategic importance can't be underestimated. This being the case, why hasn't anyone made any effort to safeguard our prime agricultural land?</para>
<para>Other countries, like Canada, are way ahead of us in protecting their best agricultural land. And, as the Australian population grows, the footprints of our cities, towns and villages continue to grow as well.</para>
<para>Around our country residential developments and urban sprawl are encroaching on some of our finest agricultural land. This is the land that feeds and nourishes us, yet we're building houses and parking lots on top of it. It's wrong, and it must stop.</para>
<para>It's not just residential developments that pose a threat to prime agricultural land. Across Australia, foreign corporations are rolling out renewables projects, some of which are on prime agricultural land. I'm not against renewable energy, but at some point our national interest has to be the paramount consideration.</para>
<para>To be clear, we should not have foreign corporations or anyone else effectively deciding how our prime agricultural land is used. Our prime agricultural land should be off limits. Residential, mining and industrial developments need to go elsewhere. Our prime agricultural land should be preserved for agriculture.</para>
<para>I shouldn't have to spell it out, but food security is a key part of national security. A nation which can't feed itself is a very vulnerable one.</para>
<para>The Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill provides that, if a person, which includes a corporation, is in possession of prime agricultural land, the person must not use the land for a purpose other than agriculture or permit another person to use the land for a purpose other than agriculture.</para>
<para>It also provides that, if a person purchases prime agricultural land, the person must ensure that the land is not used for a purpose other than agriculture.</para>
<para>The bill also makes it a requirement that a person in possession of prime agricultural land that is being used in part for a purpose other than agriculture at the date of commencement of this act must not expand or extend that usage. The bill further requires that, if prime agricultural land is being used for a purpose other than agriculture as at the date of the commencement and such non-agricultural land use ceases, the prime agricultural land must once again be used for agriculture.</para>
<para>Our prime agricultural land is under threat and it can't be taken for granted. The general public listening to this debate may well be asking: 'How has this been allowed to happen? How come nobody has ever stood up to protect our prime agricultural land?'</para>
<para>The truth is that there has been a shocking failure of politicians at all levels of government to do their jobs—lazy local councils prepared to rubberstamp developments regardless of their impact on agriculture, lazy and derelict town and city planning and lazy state governments failing to pass planning laws to properly protect our prime agricultural land. At a federal level, the major parties have also been asleep at the wheel on this issue since the time of Federation.</para>
<para>Where have the so-called guardians of the bush, the National Party, been on this?</para>
<para>On 24 March 2025 I tabled this game-changing Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill in parliament. But once again the original thinkers, the plagiarists in the National Party were at work.</para>
<para>Fresh from copying my bill and policy to ban the foreign buying of residential property for two years in the lead-up to the last election, and also plagiarising my gas reservation policy at the same time, the National Party are now trying to copy this bill as well, coming up with their own cheap imitation and knock-off.</para>
<para>They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but you cannot make this up.</para>
<para>No original thinking—is it any wonder that people in the bush have lost faith in them? And the Farrer by-election awaits.</para>
<para>They claim to be the protectors of agriculture, but in 12 years in New South Wales government and nine years in federal government they utterly failed to live up to one of their founding tenets and very reason for existence—not one piece of legislation.</para>
<para>They have completely and abjectly failed to protect our vital and irreplaceable prime agricultural land. And let's not forget that it was the National Party which created renewable energy zones in New South Wales and which also passed laws to put wind farms into state forests and then abrogated its responsibility to properly regulate them.</para>
<para>They've created chaos, pitting neighbour against neighbour, failing to ensure that there is genuine consultation between developers and communities and failing to properly protect the rights of neighbouring landholders. The failure has been epic. It's been of epic proportions.</para>
<para>And there looks set to be a high political price to pay.</para>
<para>Because of the opposition inaction and chaos, it falls to the crossbench to do the heavy lifting for Australia, and that is what this bill is all about. Australia's farmers are the best in the world.</para>
<para>Our prime agricultural land is a precious gift that must be protected. It defies belief that we continue to build houses, parking lots and industrial developments on it. If we don't act now, it will continue to disappear before our eyes.</para>
<para>We as a country need to remember where our food comes from. It just doesn't automatically appear on supermarket shelves.</para>
<para>Our nation's ability to feed itself comes from the great food baskets of country Australia and its prime agricultural land. It's also where the fibre comes from that makes the clothes we wear. I urge all members of this House to stand up for agriculture, to stand up for our nation's food security. We cannot squander this precious resource.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House and cede the rest of my time to the member for Kennedy.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Speaking on the Protecting Australia's Prime Agricultural Land Bill 2026—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you second the bill?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the bill. I point out to my fellow Australians that if you move 100km west of Sydney, Newcastle or Brisbane and the Gold Coast, you could drop a series of atomic bombs right across Australia and you would kill nobody. There's nobody living there. In fact, if you take a narrow 120-kilometre-wide belt out of the east coast of Australia and a little dot from around Perth, there would be less than a million people collectively living on a continent the size of the United States or China or Europe. There is no-one living there, so why do you have to take up prime agricultural land when, if there is one thing that Australia has, it's empty land?</para>
<para>The demography of Australia is heartbreaking. People are living on a tiny, narrow coastline paying $270,000 for a piece of land in an empty land, and who's responsible? The people in this place are responsible. The people in the state parliaments are responsible. They have created this situation, and they must be held responsible.</para>
<para>No-one in this place would deny that the average Australian can't afford to buy a house now, and that is mostly a product of land prices. There are real estate sharks all over Australia, and they have a great vested interest in keeping land prices up high. But if Australia is a food producing country, and it can't feed itself now—I'll quote the figures to you. According to the figures of the federal government, 40 per cent of our fruit and vegetables are coming in from overseas and almost all of our seafood.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order. The member's time—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Ask yourself how much fruit, vegetables and seafood you eat in a week.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>has concluded. The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>73</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Pursuant to standing order 113, at the request of the member for Indi, I fix Monday 25 May 2026 as the day for presenting the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Strengthening Communications in Natural Disasters) Bill 2026.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>73</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>73</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that the Government has made Australia's housing crisis worse than ever by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) expanding the 5 per cent deposit scheme from a sensible and targeted approach, to an uncapped and non-means-tested free for all which has supercharged house prices by 3.6 per cent in just one quarter, and exposed first home buyers including young Australians to larger mortgages;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) creating the failing Housing Australia Future Fund which has $11.4 billion within it but has built only 895 houses in 2.5 years of operation; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) proposing to fiddle with the capital gains tax and negative gearing, which is dressed up as an equity measure but will not actually result in the construction of new dwellings;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the Government is overseeing a historic collapse of housing construction, with dwelling completions are now running at around 170,000 each year, whereas 200,000 dwellings were completed annually under the previous Government, while the population has grown by more than 1.6 million since the Government came to power; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes that the Government is already running more than 80,000 dwellings short of the National Housing Accord target of 1.2 million homes by mid-2029, and modelling by the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council says the Government will not reach its own target, falling more than 60,000 dwellings short.</para></quote>
<para>As we start this sitting week, Australians are suffering a fuel crisis, a cost-of-living crisis and a housing crisis. The economy is weak, fuel supplies aren't guaranteed and Australians are hurting. The great Australian dream is becoming a nightmare under this Labor government. It's a nightmare for young Australians, it's a nightmare for renters, it's a nightmare for homeowners and it's a nightmare for seniors. If you've got a home, you're worried about whether you'll be able to keep it, and, if you haven't, you worry that you never will.</para>
<para>Last week, the RBA lifted the official cash rate to 4.1 per cent, on the back of raging inflation, meaning that mortgage holders have been dealt yet another blow. The average mortgage holder is paying $27,000 a year in interest more than what it was under the coalition government. Renters are not escaping either, with rents up 22 per cent in the same time. These numbers underpin the reason why standards have fallen and Australians are going backwards.</para>
<para>There are two major factors in determining whether housing in this country is successful and achievable, and that is the balance of supply and demand. At the Joint Standing Committee on Migration hearing on Friday 13 March, the Department of Home Affairs admitted it has never modelled the impact of the Albanese government's migration numbers on housing and infrastructure. Infrastructure Australia, during the same hearing, in their evidence described the recent surge as 'mega-population-growth'.</para>
<para>Treasury has said that net overseas migration is expected to moderate to, say, 260,000 in 2025-26. But, in recent years, the forecasts have not been close to reality. In the year 2022-23, they forecast 235,000, and what did we get? We got 538,000. In 2023-24, 235,000 was the forecast, while the actual was 429,000. What's interesting about these numbers is that the current minister for housing was the Minister for Home Affairs at the time. The irony that she is now the minister whose job it is to fix the housing crisis is not lost on anyone. We remember that she was hopeless in Home Affairs, and now we've seen she's hopeless with homes.</para>
<para>The minister talks about there being a crisis that's been building for 40 years, but the reality is that it's only been the last four under this Labor government. In short, immigration has been way too high, and it's been putting unsustainable pressure on the housing sector. There must be an alignment of immigration and housing, or this crisis will only deepen.</para>
<para>It doesn't matter what the question is, but the answer is never higher taxes. But, of course, in true Labor fashion, when they run out of actual ideas, they reach for the taxation drawer. Labor now wants to fiddle with capital gains tax and negative gearing, changes that are dressed up as fairness, but they won't lead to more homes being built. The Property Council said last month that there is a long-held misunderstanding that changing the capital gains tax discount would help housing affordability, 'even though it will not boost supply'. The Property Council are not new to analysing this issue, and in September 2017, when Labor was in opposition, they said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We have also consistently put the view that the Opposition's plan to cut the discount from 50 per cent to 25 per cent would damage the industry, the economy and the security of the livelihoods of many in the industry who rely on construction.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">There is a big difference between a tap the brakes approach to CGT and slamming on the handbrake.</para></quote>
<para>That is the key point: if you tax housing and investment more, you won't get more housing. Higher taxes will lead to fewer houses. The government's dream of 1.2 million homes is so far from reality. It is absolutely unachievable; they are not getting there. We must restore homeownership as the centrepiece of the Australian dream, and it's only the coalition who will protect Australians' way of life and restore their standard of living.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Rebello</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's pretty extraordinary that the member for Fadden has come here today to talk about irony. It's pretty extraordinary because he is part of a coalition that didn't have a housing minister for most of the time that they were in government. It's pretty extraordinary because he is part of a coalition that teamed up with the Greens to vote down, to block and to delay critical housing policy. It's pretty extraordinary because he's part of a coalition that voted against Help to Buy. He's part of a coalition that voted against build to rent. He's part of a coalition that voted against the HAFF. It's pretty extraordinary and it's pretty ironic, because, when those sitting on that side of the chamber were in government, they built a measly 373 homes in nine long years.</para>
<para>What Australia needs and what Australians need isn't talk. It isn't business being brought to this place to have a chat about. What Australians need is a plan, and what they need is consistent delivery of that plan. In this country we have a supply problem when it comes to housing. We have a supply problem that has been building for the last 40 years. For Australians, this has real impacts. This has impacts because, everywhere I go—whether it's at the local fete, whether it's across the back fence, whether it's while you're out doorknocking and talking to people—families want the key to their first front door, parents want their children to have the same opportunities when it comes to housing that they did, and young people are contemplating whether housing will ever be a reality for them and their future.</para>
<para>We have a long way to go. People are doing it tough, but there are green shoots coming through. I've seen the faces of those people who are getting into their first homes because of the work that Labor is doing with our local communities to make housing more accessible and more affordable. The other day I met with Mitchell. Mitchell is a young person in my electorate on Brisbane's south side. He just bought his first home, a townhouse in Moorooka not too far away from the city. It's pretty close to the train station. Mitchell said that he wouldn't have had a hope to get into that first home without the Help to Buy scheme. In my own team, Kane and his partner, Jaxen, have just moved into their first home. They did it because they were able to save the five per cent deposit, something introduced by Labor.</para>
<para>Housing is more than bricks and mortar. It's about having a home. It's about having security. It's about setting down roots and being able to have a place where you can watch your kids grow up and you can build a life. Our government has been working to do practical things to throw the kitchen sink at what is an incredibly challenging problem for our nation. It's why we're building more homes and we have an ambitious target for 1.2 million new homes—570,000 built since we came to government and new home starts up by 11.6 per cent. It's why we're delivering 55,000 new social and affordable homes through the HAFF, with 6,000 complete and 24,000 in planning and construction. It's why we've introduced five per cent deposits. There are 230,000 Australians who have bought their first homes with it. The shadow minister called five per cent deposits a gimmick. It's not a gimmick for those young people who are buying their first home. It's not a gimmick for those people who, for the first time, have the ability to plan for their future.</para>
<para>The member for Fadden says it's only been the last four years. That shows the profound misunderstanding of this challenge from the coalition.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure to speak to this motion moved by my dear friend the member for Fadden. I acknowledge also the member for Moncrieff, who is also in the chamber. The three of us represent constituencies of the Gold Coast, and we are no stranger to the issue of housing because we're seeing it right in our backyards. I'm pleased that the member for Moreton recognised the importance of housing. It's just really unfortunate that those opposite and the policies that they reflect do not reflect that fact.</para>
<para>The motion today before the House of Representatives touches on a number of different important things and, in particular, something that's become even more relevant over the last two weeks. That is the fact that the government has made Australia's housing crisis even worse. And they've done this by expanding the five per cent deposit scheme from what was a sensible and targeted approach to something that is uncapped and not means tested. So it's a free-for-all approach which has supercharged house prices by 3.6 per cent just in one quarter. Why is that amplified by everything else that this government is overseeing?</para>
<para>In the last week and a bit, we've seen an increase—yet another increase—to our interest rates in this country. That takes us to 14 rate rises under this Albanese Labor government. So all of those people who may have gotten into the housing market for the first time under this government's five per cent deposit scheme are now hit. They are absolutely hit with having to pay higher interest rates on those houses. We've also seen a government—and this motion goes to the fact—that has created the failing Housing Australia Future Fund. That has $11.4 billion in it, but—get this—it has only built 895 houses in 2½ years of operation.</para>
<para>Now, when I speak to people in my constituency on the southern Gold Coast—in fact, I was at the Burleigh Heads markets for about five to six hours on Saturday morning. We had a number of, especially, young people who are struggling with rentals because we've got a situation on the Gold Coast where the rental market is severely constricted. Then there are others who are young families who have just gotten into their first home. They're dealing with not only the cost of housing and not only these interest rate rises but the cost of housing and these interest rate rises on top of every single other increase in cost that we're facing under this government. And it all goes back to two main points: (1) a lack of ambition in relation to housing by this government and (2) that this is in relation to the fact that we've got a government that is addicted to spending. It's a combination of those two factors that have resulted in where we're at as a country right now.</para>
<para>I have recently been appointed, or elected, to the deputy chair role of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration. As the member for Fadden touched on, we had our first public hearing last Friday or the Friday before, and something came about which I think this House really needs to know.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Caldwell</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was extraordinary, actually.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was absolutely extraordinary, Member for Fadden. What we saw was—we had the Department of Home Affairs, which is the department that is responsible for administering Australia's migration policy. They came before the committee, and we asked them what I thought was a quite simple and straightforward question. The question was: does the department rely on any modelling in relation to infrastructure and in relation to housing when it devises, along with the government, its migration intake and our numbers for migration into Australia? I was expecting a list of the modelling, and I was expecting a detailed and comprehensive answer, because this is something that I think most reasonable Australians would turn around and say: 'Well, yes, surely our migration figures are based on based on what our country can take, what our infrastructure can take, what our housing can take.' But what was the answer? There was nothing. There was no modelling that was actually the basis of our immigration policy. I think that just goes to the lack of concentration by this government on something that, to be quite honest, Australians deserve better on. It's something that the young people of Australia, the older people of Australia, the working class and the families are all struggling with, whether it's rentals or whether it's homeownership. It's something that, when I hear the members of parliament on the other side of the chamber come in here and talk about the value of housing, I really hope they finally learn a lesson from the opposition on and start to act appropriately.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I agree with the opposition: we are in a housing crisis. That is a fact. But for the opposition to think that this started in 2022 is simply delusional. This has been bubbling along for decades. There's no doubt that we're in a critical time in our nation's history, where we need all levels of government working together to build the homes we need for this generation and the next.</para>
<para>Housing is a human right. It is something I have said in this chamber many, many times. People are working hard. They're doing everything right, yet they still can't afford a place to call home. Young people are outbidding each other for rental properties. Families with kids who would absolutely have owned their own home a generation ago cannot get a foothold in the market. We hear it from parents who cannot give their kids the stability that they had as kids, and we hear it from renters that prices are going up. We see women in my electorate in Brisbane who are fleeing domestic violence or unworkable domestic situations, left stranded, couch surfing and car sleeping. And, of course, we see a rise in homelessness.</para>
<para>No matter what your situation is, having a roof over your head fundamentally changes your life's trajectory. For a long time, the Commonwealth government had tapped out on our national housing challenge, leaving most of the hard work up to the states. I'll say it again, as the member for Moreton said: for the nine years the coalition was last in power they didn't even have a housing minister, and they built just 373 social and affordable homes over that entire nine year period.</para>
<para>Now, this crisis wasn't created overnight, and it won't be fixed overnight. Our government understands this, and that's why we are throwing everything at it. We are acting, contrary to what the member for McPherson said. We're not sitting on the sidelines. What we're doing is implementing the single biggest housing build since the Second World War. That's full of ambition; it's not a lack of ambition, as said by the member for McPherson. Our $43 billion agenda is focused on three things: backing first home buyers, building more homes and making it better and easier to rent. We've completed over 5,000 social and affordable homes and have 25,000 more in construction and planning. This includes 80 social and affordable homes in Lutwyche and Windsor alone.</para>
<para>These programs are helping people right across the country like Karen, who lives in my electorate. Karen is in her 60s. She fled domestic violence seven or so years ago. She lived in shared accommodation, and she now has a home that she can call her own. She can decorate it the way she wants, she can leave the dishes till tomorrow and she can sit on her balcony and listen to music whenever she wants. She finally gets to live her life, her way.</para>
<para>Since Labor was elected over 180,000 Australians have bought their first home with the five per cent deposit including almost 2,100 in Brisbane. I ask the member for McPherson, again, to ask them if they think this is a bad policy. More than one million households have been supported, with our 50 per cent increase in rent assistance, and this has helped almost 9,200 recipients in Brisbane alone. We're seeing a real turnaround in home building, with almost half a million homes being built since we came to office and new housing commencements up 17 per cent. But we know the job's not done, and in this term we will continue to do more. We will continue to build more homes, continuing on the path of building 55,000 social and affordable homes as well as building 100,000 homes for first home buyers, excluding investors. And we're working towards a bold aspiration for Australia to build 1.2 million homes in five years.</para>
<para>We're about making it better to rent, helping thousands more rental homes get built and continuing to lift rental standards through our work with the states, implementing Help to Buy, our first national shared equity scheme, and delivering our five per cent deposit guarantee to every first home buyer. We need to keep building, we need to make it easier to build and we need to make it quicker to build. I want to say to the people of Brisbane: this Labor government has your back. We will do everything we can to tackle the housing challenges you are facing, but to make a difference we all have to work together. It's going to take all levels of government—state, federal and local—to sort through getting houses built more quickly. We need to think innovatively about how we build more homes. We owe it to the next generation to continue to do what we can to make homes available for people.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PENFOLD</name>
    <name.id>248895</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For generations, Australians understood a simple truth: if you worked hard, saved diligently and made responsible choices, you could own a home. That promise—the great Australian dream—is now slipping out of reach, and what attempts do we get from the Albanese government to fix the issue? We get more intervention, more distortion and more pressure on interest rates, making the problem worse, not better.</para>
<para>Take the government's expanded five per cent deposit scheme, for example. On the surface, it might sound compassionate. It might sound like it's helping young Australians into the market, but in reality it does something far more dangerous. It pushes up demand without fixing supply. And when you artificially inflate demand in a constrained market, what happens? Prices go up. That's not theory; that's basic economics. Instead of helping first home buyers, this scheme risks locking them in to higher levels of debt at higher prices, with thinner equity buffers. This government is effectively encouraging people to stretch themselves to the limit, to take on bigger mortgages with less margin for error. That is not responsible policy. While the government is busy pumping demand, where is the serious plan to boost supply? Where is the investment in regional infrastructure to unlock new land? Where is the reform to planning systems that choke development? Where is the support for local builders dealing with rising costs and workforce shortages?</para>
<para>Australia doesn't need more Canberra designed demand schemes; it needs practical policies that increase supply, reduce costs and support local economies. The coalition took such a policy to the last election—a $5 billion housing infrastructure program to fund shovel-ready enabling infrastructure, such as water, sewerage, power and telecommunications headworks, to unlock 500,000 houses that had stalled on greenfield sites. This is the type of investment that the housing industry and my electorate are calling for.</para>
<para>They're also calling for relief from the high-taxing regime on housing. The taxes, fees and regulatory charges new homebuyers must pay, which constitute up to 50 per cent of the total price of a new house and land package, effectively mean that they are spending 15 years of their 30-year mortgage solely paying off government taxes. As the Housing Industry Association said last year:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is incongruous that governments set home building targets, while at the same time tax new home building even more. The more government tax new homes, the fewer homes will be built.</para></quote>
<para>Despite this, the government is flirting dangerously with changes to the capital gains tax discount. Weakening the CGT discount is not some harmless tweak; it is a direct attack on private investors, who play a critical role in providing rental homes, especially in regional towns, where government housing simply cannot meet demand. With rents already up 22 per cent under Labor, this risks making a bad situation even worse. If you reduce the incentive to invest, you will reduce supply, and when rental supply falls rents rise. Again, this is not complicated.</para>
<para>We're already seeing rental shortages across regional Australia. Families are struggling to find a place to live. Employers cannot attract workers, because there's nowhere for them to stay. And yet, at precisely the wrong time, the government is considering policies that will push investors out of the market. This shows the government's fundamental misunderstanding of how housing markets actually work. You cannot tax your way to more homes, you cannot regulate your way to lower prices, and you certainly cannot solve a supply crisis by discouraging the very people who build and provide housing.</para>
<para>What Australia needs is a government that backs aspiration and the private sector, not one that punishes those things. We need policies that reward saving, encourage investment and unlock supply. That means investing in regional infrastructure, with investment in headworks, to open up new housing developments, streamlining planning and approvals, supporting the construction workforce and restoring confidence for investors, because, when investors have confidence, homes get built. When homes get built, supply increases. And, when supply increases, affordability improves. It's that simple.</para>
<para>Homeownership isn't just an economic goal. It's about a promise that, if you have a go, you can get ahead. That is the promise this government is putting at risk. That is the promise we must restore.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Since being elected in 2022, Labor has made one thing absolutely clear. We are determined to help more Australians into a home of their own. I have to say, it's quite remarkable to hear those opposite criticise the Housing Australia Future Fund. The member for Fadden points to 895 homes delivered so far, as if that proves failure. Let's be honest: even that cherrypicked number is more than double the 373 social and affordable homes delivered over an entire decade by the former Liberal-National government. That is the record they're bringing into this chamber, and their criticism ignores a simple reality: housing construction takes time. It takes time to secure land, complete design, obtain approvals and build. Two years in the construction sector is the very beginning, not the end, of delivery.</para>
<para>But what makes their argument truly cynical is this: while they complain about delivery, they actively worked to stop it. They blocked, delayed and voted against the Housing Australia Future Fund, voting against 40,000 social and affordable homes for Australians who desperately need them. And this is not a one-off. The Liberal-National coalition has consistently voted against every serious measure to improve housing affordability in this country. They voted against Labor's five per cent home deposit scheme, which has already helped 230,000 Australians get into their first home; they voted against the Help to Buy shared equity scheme, a model proven across the world; they voted against increasing Commonwealth rent assistance for the most vulnerable renters in my electorate; and they voted against our build-to-rent scheme, designed to deliver more than 80,000 long-term rental homes. Every step of the way, when given the choice, they have chosen to stand in the way of housing affordability. I will not be lectured by a party that, when in government, couldn't even be bothered to appoint a housing minister for six out of their nine years in office. That is not leadership; that is neglect.</para>
<para>The housing crisis we face today is serious. It cannot be solved overnight, and no-one pretends otherwise. It demands commitment, consistency and real policy. That is exactly what Labor is delivering. We are working with states and territories to build 1.2 million new, well-located homes by July 2029, and we are investing more than $43 billion to make that happen. We went to the election promising $10 billion to build 100,000 homes reserved for first home buyers, we have expanded access to the five per cent home deposit scheme so more Australians can enter the market sooner, and we are doing the hard work with states and territories to reform planning systems, making it easier to build the medium-density housing Australians need—closer to jobs, transport and opportunities. In my home state of Victoria, we are already seeing that ambition, with an even bolder target to increase housing supply and unlock more homes for future generations. Labor has a plan, Labor is delivering on that plan, and Labor is focused on outcomes: more homes, more affordability and more Australians with a place to call their own.</para>
<para>Australians should not be fooled by the Liberal-National coalition. The Liberal and National parties have opposed measure after measure designed to improve housing affordability. At the last election they promised to scrap existing programs, with no credible replacement, and even today Australians are still waiting to hear what their plan actually is. So I say this clearly: Australians cannot afford more delay, more obstruction, more empty promises. They need homes, and only Labor is getting on with the job of delivering them.</para>
<para>I want to commend the Minister for Housing, Clare O'Neil, for her work over the last two years. In the face of obstruction she has shown determination and a genuine commitment to tackling the housing crisis.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():  There is a false promise being peddled to the young people of this country—a cruel illusion that says a five per cent deposit is a doorway to a more secure future, whereas it's actually a trapdoor. This Labor government doesn't just miss the mark on housing; they've engineered a mirage and then have had the audacity to call it a blueprint. A blueprint is supposed to be a promise for what can be built, but under this Labor government the only thing being constructed is a catastrophe by design. The great Australian dream hasn't just been priced out; it has been evicted and replaced by a great Labor nightmare.</para>
<para>This Albanese Labor government has made the housing crisis in this country worse. They've taken the First Home Guarantee and turned it into a reckless non-means-tested free-for-all. By removing sensible income caps and targeted place limits they have supercharged house prices by 3.6 per cent in just one quarter. This five per cent deposit lure is being used to tempt young Australians into a market that is already boiling over. We've seen this movie before, and it ended in a global disaster. In 2008, housing collapse in America was an architecture of catastrophe built on the shaky ground of subprime lending and an erosion of deposit standards. By encouraging young families into a volatile market with minimal equity—and they have been geared to the absolute hilt—these young borrowers face extreme risks and are being forced into bloated mortgages for inflated homes. If this continues, this government will have paved the way for a generation of first home bankrupts.</para>
<para>Last week's interest rate rise—the second hike this year—has sent a shockwave through every family home. At Senate estimates, the Reserve Bank governor was clear, stating that these highly leveraged borrowers face higher risk and higher repayment costs. These families are at risk because they are geared more highly on overpriced homes, starting their journey on a financial razor's edge. Every rate rise cuts deeper into the family budget, and there is nothing left to give until the only choice remaining is to give the house back to the bank.</para>
<para>By replacing private insurance with a government guarantee, Labor is using tax dollars to fuel the very price hikes that make houses unaffordable. It is a circular firing squad of economic policy. Then we have the crowning jewel of failure: the Housing Australia Future Fund. The Albanese Labor government has locked away $11.4 billion in a bureaucratic nightmare. After 2½ years, how many houses has the Labor government built? A grand total of 895. At this rate, children in primary school today will be retirees before Labor finishes their first suburb. They are labouring under the delusion that a spreadsheet can provide shelter. The maths is as hollow as their promises. Labor is overseeing a historic collapse of construction. Under the previous coalition government, we completed 200,000 dwellings a year. Under Labor that has slumped to 170,000. All the while, the population has surged by more than 1.6 million people. How do you think those numbers can work?</para>
<para>This government is already running more than 80,000 dwellings short of its National Housing Accord target. The problem is that, instead of building, the government is busy fiddling with the capital gains tax and negative gearing. Labor dresses it up as an equity measure, but let's call it for what it is: it's a tax grab. It is a cynical distraction from the fact that Labor is failing on supply, failing on construction and failing on common sense. We see the human cost in Dawson every day. We see young people outbidding each other for rentals because they have no other choice. We see families who do everything right yet cannot get a foothold. Most heartbreakingly, we see women who have fled domestic violence left stranded, couch-surfing or car-sleeping because there's nowhere to go. Housing is a life-defining challenge. This government puts the ideological before people, and the result is higher taxes.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In 2000, the average age of a first home buyer was around 30. Today, the average age of a first home buyer is around 37. This is a symptom of the housing affordability crisis that has taken grip in this country for decades, ever since the Howard government's policies destroyed the housing market for future generations. They were warned. They chose to go ahead.</para>
<para>Younger Australians are no longer able to afford their own home. They're not even able to get their foot in the door for a rental property. Families who might have been able to afford their own home decades ago are now priced out of the market. The coalition, who claim to have the miracle cure for all our housing woes, did nothing during their decade of government. We on this side of the House recognise the enormity of the situation and that an ambitious plan is required to address many of the underlying issues. That is why the Albanese Labor government has committed an unprecedented $45 billion to build more homes, to make homeownership more affordable and to ensure that renting is accessible, secure and fair.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government's plan sets an ambitious national target of 1.2 million new homes. As Minister O'Neill says, yes, it is ambitious because it needs to be. This will involve lessening the burden of bureaucracy and red tape, ensuring there is infrastructure to service those new homes and to train more tradies who are at the heart of the process of the build. The coalition, on the other hand, did not set a single housing target during their 10 long years in government—not even a whisper of a target. They didn't even have a housing minister for six of those years. They cared so little. And now they try to tell Australians that this has only been an issue for four years. Talk about being out of touch!</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government, not yet five years in, has already seen more than 570,000 new homes built nationwide. We're working with states and territories to ensure that planning reforms will have tangible benefits for communities. We're modernising methods of construction to ensure efficiency and reliability. We've seen the number of new home sales increase by 11.6 per cent in the last year alone. We've seen construction costs, which under the coalition had reached a 50-year high of 17 per cent, brought down by 1.8 per cent. It is an ambitious plan that's delivering ambitious results because these are big and complex issues that will require long-term commitment.</para>
<para>That is why the Albanese Labor government has also committed to, and is on track to, delivering 55,000 new social and affordable homes. If ever proof was needed that the coalition dawdled away a decade in government, they delivered just 373 social and affordable homes nationwide. With the Housing Australia Future Fund's first round of funding announced in September 2024, the government has already completed 6,000 new homes under that scheme, with 24,000 in planning and under construction—again, no surprises in terms of the coalition's determination to do all they can to do nothing. That's 6,000 new social and affordable homes built despite the coalition's dogged attempts to delay the housing fund. In fact, the coalition made it a centrepiece of their election commitments last year to cut the Housing Australia Future Fund—a trend they continue to this day, with their attempts to get rid of build-to-rent laws, Help to Buy and five per cent deposits, with no viable option to address the issue. All of these have been crucial in helping Australians to get into their own home; indeed, 230,000 Australians have already taken up the five per cent deposit. The shadow minister for housing—they now have one—has dismissed this scheme as a 'gimmick', which tells you all you need to know about attitude of those opposite towards broader homeownership. But by shaving years off the time you would normally take to save for a deposit, the Albanese Labor government is giving every first homebuyer the opportunity to buy a house now, with a small deposit and a smaller mortgage.</para>
<para>The concept of homeownership has often been described as a dream and it is the Australian dream. But we need to be using more concrete terms than 'dream'. Homeownership should be available to all Australians. Renting should be accessible, secure and fair because every Australian deserves a place where they can build their life, a place to raise a family and watch them grow, a place that provides warmth and security where memories can be made and celebrated—a place to call home.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I share the member for Fadden's concern that expanding the five per cent deposit scheme has added pressure to an already overheated market, increasing competition and exposing first homebuyers, particularly young Australians, to larger mortgages. While the Housing Australia Future Fund is well intentioned, it's moving too slowly to deliver the social and affordable rental homes Australians urgently need. Two years in, the $10 billion fund has delivered fewer than 900 completed homes, roughly two per cent of its 40,000 home goal; although there is much activity still in the pipeline.</para>
<para>On tax settings, I agree changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing won't on their own build extra dwellings, but they can help level the playing field so first homebuyers are not consistently outbid by tax-advantaged investors, and I continue to urge the government to reform these property taxes for the benefit of younger Australians. We should be honest that Australia's housing crisis was allowed to develop across successive governments, as both sides of politics realised that they were popular when house prices went up, at least with the two-thirds of households that were owned. For the other third, owning a house became increasingly out of reach. Houses have increasingly become vehicles to passively store and grow wealth rather than places to live. If we're serious about fixing this, we need clarity about what each lever can and cannot do and, importantly, what else can be done.</para>
<para>In this House a fortnight ago, I set out four practical ideas from my community to help ease the housing crunch, and today I'm adding another four drawn from the Curtin housing policy I developed with residents and housing experts. None is a single fix, but together they are achievable, fair and evidence based. They require governments to work together rather than passing the buck. As context, in Curtin we have about 7,000 vacant homes and about 29,000 homes with two or more spare bedrooms, while essential workers and young families are priced out of the communities they serve. People want practical actions that activate the homes we already have while unlocking capacity to build more. With that in mind, here are four more steps the government should take now.</para>
<para>First, labour shortages are the handbrake on housing delivery. You can rezone and approve forever, but, without more workers, completions won't rise. We should prioritise construction trades in migration, fast track skills recognition and align training places with real project pipelines through a time-limited construction workforce compact tied to housing output. This is targeted capacity building, not open-ended migration, and should wind up as supply catches up.</para>
<para>Second, in tight labour markets, government infrastructure projects can unintentionally outbid housing projects for the same carpenters and sparkies and concreters. For the next 18 to 24 months, residential construction should take priority over lower value infrastructure projects. Resequencing marginal infrastructure is basic capacity management. It reduces cost pressures, frees up workers for housing and gets more homes finished sooner.</para>
<para>Third, stamp duty locks people into homes that no longer suit them. It penalises downsizers, discourages mobility and strands spare bedrooms. The Curtin housing policy supports a gradual transition to a broad based land tax, with federal support to help states manage that shift.</para>
<para>Do it slowly and transparently, but start it now. Every year we delay, more households remain mismatched to their homes while affordability worsens.</para>
<para>Finally, the fastest, lowest-carbon housing supply is the supply we already have. A modest vacant-home levy or higher rates for long-term vacancies could encourage more homes back into use. We should also make it easier and safer to rent out spare bedrooms by simplifying tax settings and providing a standard, fair agreement. Even modest uptake in Curtin could add capacity quickly for a student, a midwife on night shift or an apprentice needing somewhere close to work.</para>
<para>These four measures share three things in common. They use existing levers, they respect local communities and they sequence changes sensibly. These build on the measures I've already discussed in the House, reforming property taxes, building more social and affordable housing, allowing more medium-density supply and strengthening renter protections. The point is that we need to pull all these levers at once. These are practical steps that can help the nurse at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, the apprentice in Innaloo, the downsizer in Subiaco and the young family in Doubleview stay connected to the communities that they love. I urge the government to meet this moment with courage so more Australians can get into housing they can afford.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>80</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Free TAFE Program</title>
          <page.no>80</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELYEA</name>
    <name.id>309484</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the Government's Free TAFE program has, for three years, expanded opportunity and opened new pathways for Australians to gain the skills they want for the jobs we need;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that, despite opposition from the Opposition, the Government has successfully legislated to make the Free TAFE program permanent, securing its future and ensuring this pathway is not taken away from the next generation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) observes that, through the Fee-Free TAFE Skills Agreement, the Government has partnered with state and territory governments to invest over $1.5 billion in Free TAFE program places across the country; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) reflects that, unlike their federal colleagues, the Victorian State Opposition will not oppose a bill to guarantee Free TAFE.</para></quote>
<para>I rise today to speak not only about policy but about opportunity, because TAFE and all it offers is not an abstract idea to me and the many students of Dunkley. It is an important pathway to one of many careers. It provides so many opportunities.</para>
<para>I entered TAFE in my mid 20s. Like many Australians, I was searching for something more meaningful, more fulfilling and more impactful. At the time, I had been working as a secretary, volunteering in the community, working closely with young adults with disabilities. That experience opened my eyes to the difference that dedicated, skilled support workers can make in people's lives. It also inspired me to pursue a career in youth work and community development. TAFE provided that pathway. It gave me the chance to study, to build knowledge and to develop the skills I needed to turn passion into a profession. At TAFE, I studied youth work and community development, and I am proud to say that at one stage I even taught at Chisholm TAFE. That journey gave me confidence, capability and a sense of purpose as a young woman to pursue a career and then go on to study a master's in business leadership. And I remind the House this was before TAFE was even free.</para>
<para>We cannot talk about TAFE without acknowledging what happened in the past. In the 1990s, TAFE in Victoria was gutted. Those opposite, when they were in government, cut $3 billion from the VET system and TAFE. The consequences of those decisions are still being felt today. We see it in our skills shortages. We see it in our housing crisis and we see it in the lack of trained workers in critical sectors like child care and aged care. That is why the work of the Albanese Labor government is so important. We are rebuilding TAFE. We are backing apprentices. We are investing in the future workforce of this country. Through direct support of up to $10,000, we are helping train the carpenters, plumbers and electricians. In Dunkley alone, there are 1,800 apprentices currently in training.</para>
<para>Since 1 July 2025, more than 11,000 apprentices have commenced housing construction trades. These are real people gaining real skills for real jobs.</para>
<para>This government is not just investing to fill our current skills shortfall; it is also developing the skills for future-ready jobs. Just a few weeks ago, I was pleased to announce with the Minister for Skills and Training a $30 million investment in the Digital, AI and Technology Centre of Excellence, a national first at Chisholm TAFE in Frankston. In addition to this, Labor has delivered 740,000 free TAFE places, opening doors for Australians who may never have had the chance otherwise. In Victoria alone, there have been over 149,000 enrolments and more than 59,000 course completions. These numbers continue to grow as students balance study with work and family commitments. Free TAFE is also delivering real cost-of-living relief. A student studying a Diploma of Nursing can save up to $17,000, while a student studying a Diploma of Building and Construction can save up to $15,000. These are real-life savings.</para>
<para>Despite this success, those opposite continue to oppose free TAFE. They have called it wasteful spending and previously voted against making it permanent. This is despite a track record of cuts, including the loss of nearly 10,000 full-time TAFE teaching positions nationally between 2012 and 2019. The contrast could not be clearer. Free TAFE is working, it is popular and it is transforming lives and careers. Free TAFE is now so popular in Victoria that the Victorian Liberals did not oppose a bill to guarantee free TAFE. So I say to my colleagues across the aisle: look at the numbers, look at the outcomes and look at the opportunities being created. We need more skills in this country, and our initiatives are delivering them and supporting productivity. Together, let us continue upskilling our workforce and building the future of Australians and Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Fernando</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Dunkley for the opportunity to speak to this very important issue. Fee-free TAFE is one of the most significant investments that this government has made in working Australians. Enrolments in priority courses like construction, early childhood education, nursing and clean energy have surged. Free TAFE is telling students that our country is willing to invest in their future. The case for fee-free TAFE is also economic. Every qualified worker that we train here is a worker that we don't have to import. Every young Australian who enters the workforce will contribute to their community, to our tax base and to Australia's productive capacity.</para>
<para>But, despite this investment, Australia still faces critical workforce shortages in a number of key sectors. According to Jobs and Skills Australia, roughly half of all occupations in the category of technicians and trades are currently in short supply. That's the consequence of decades of underinvestment in vocational training. Free TAFE aims to address this, although I am hearing from constituents like Ian Baker, who I met with in Kooyong last week, that, despite free TAFE, first-year apprenticeship opportunities remain very difficult to secure. Free enrolment is only valuable if it leads to completion and to a good job.</para>
<para>According to the National Centre for Vocational Education Research, around half of all apprentices who commence their training fail to complete it. For those who started in 2020, the four-year completion rate is only 47.9 per cent. Between June 2024 and June 2025, trade apprenticeship numbers fell by more than seven per cent, and non-trade apprenticeship numbers fell by more than 20 per cent. Young people in Kooyong are telling me that the most common reason for their walking away is that employers are unwilling to hire first-year apprentices. But they're also really dissatisfied with pay and conditions, and national figures back that up. A first-year boilermaker apprentice who finished year 12 earns about $587 a week before tax—perhaps $500 in the hand. One who didn't finish school could earn less than $500 a week. The median rent in metropolitan Melbourne is now $580 a week, and a room in a share house is often over $300 a week. The arithmetic is brutal. A young person committed to their trade can't fund themselves with $200 a week left for transport to the job site, for the tools, for their food and for a phone. It just does not add up.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, we know that 83 per cent of those who abandon apprenticeships are in employment shortly afterwards. Most end up in cash-in-hand labouring work in the very same industries, doing similar work but without the qualifications, without the protection and without the same future. We are losing their skills to the cash economy at exactly the time that our economy needs them the most. The apprenticeship system is under strain. Host employer networks are fragmented. Group-training organisations are overstretched. The paperwork burden on small operators is unreasonable. We should be making it easier for younger people to get a first break, not harder. We also have to be honest about who is bearing the brunt of these barriers the most. Young women entering male dominated trades are still facing structural and cultural obstacles, and First Nations young people face enduring geographic and system disadvantages.</para>
<para>I do support the member for Dunkley's motion, and I welcome the government's investment in fee-free vocational education to support the next generation of workers. I recognise that some in this place, like Pauline Hanson, have consistently voted against this measure, against free TAFE for young people. But the government's responsibility for apprentices doesn't end at enrolment. It extends to ensuring that the full pipeline works, from the classroom to the workforce, from the qualification to the career. That means genuine incentives for employers to take on first year or mature aged apprentices. It means reducing the administrative burden of apprenticeships, and it means seriously addressing apprentices' wages. The young Australians who are trying to build a future in this country deserve more than a good start. They deserve to finish, and they deserve a good job.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is a simple question at the heart of this debate: who gets opportunity in Australia, and who gets left behind? The Albanese government believes free TAFE is all about opportunity—opportunity for people to get ahead and lead fulfilling lives. That is why I rise to support this motion, because this is about more than policy. It's about what kind of future we choose to build.</para>
<para>Last week the Minister for Skills and Training set out a clear idea in a speech at the McKell Institute that skills policy is about the future, equipping Australians with the skills to navigate change—embrace opportunity or be left behind. That is the choice before this House. On this side, we believe in building that future. We believe in expanding opportunity. We know that talent is everywhere in Australia, from our cities to regions like mine across the Bellarine, Surf Coast and Geelong. Those opposite take a different view. They oppose free TAFE, they vote against making it permanent, and they continue to undermine a policy that is changing lives for the better. As their former leader said, 'If you do not pay for something, you do not value it.' That statement reveals everything. It says that opportunity should depend on your capacity to pay.</para>
<para>The Albanese government rejects that, and so too do Australians. We believe that skills and training is a public good. We believe they connect aspiration to opportunity and success, and that is exactly what free TAFE is doing. More than 740,000 Australians have now enrolled—hundreds of thousands of people gaining skills in areas our country needs in construction, aged care, early childhood education, technology. In my home state of Victoria, we've seen nearly 150,000 enrolments. These are not just about numbers; they are about real people who will gain qualifications to set them up for rewarding work. They're people like Jack, an apprentice plumber from my region who is now working on some of the most transformative government projects that we've seen.</para>
<para>That is what free TAFE does. It opens doors, it creates pathways to meaningful work, it builds confidence and it strengthens our country. If we are serious about building more homes, we need tradies. If we're serious about delivering care, we need qualified workers. And if we're serious about a future made in Australia, we need skills, and skills require investment, and that is why the Albanese government has made free TAFE permanent. That is why we're investing over $1.6 billion into the future of the program, supporting at least 100,000 places every year. And it is why we are targeting those who need it most—young people, job seekers, women, First Nations Australians, people with disability.</para>
<para>This is about fairness. It is also about delivering economic prosperity. We know that VET graduates are more likely to find employment and will earn more after completing their qualifications. This is cost-of-living relief and this is real workforce policy. It stands in clear contrast to the approach taken by those opposite—a decade of cuts, a weakened TAFE system, fewer teachers and fewer opportunities. And now they call our investment in free TAFE wasteful. Tell that to Jack, whose life was forever changed for the better because of free TAFE, or to the parent retraining for a secure job.</para>
<para>This motion recognises something important. It is that free TAFE reflects a belief in the future, in fairness and in Australians. The real choice Australians have is simple: do we go backwards or do we build what comes next? Or, in the words of our skills minister, do we get drawn in by nostalgia or push forward to the future, writing our own story? The Albanese government and Australians choose to push forward, to invest in people, to expand opportunity, to build our prosperity.</para>
<para>I'd like to thank the member for Dunkley for bringing this motion forward and for her advocacy, supporting free TAFE and helping Victorians and all Australians to get ahead. I commend the motion to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's great to be able to contribute to this motion moved on free TAFE, and I'd just like to go through the points in the motion itself. In the first point, the government asks us to celebrate three years of expanded opportunity, but let's look at what the three years of data actually shows. What it shows is that, out of roughly 650,000 fee-free enrolments since January 2023, fewer than one in four has resulted in a completed qualification. Now, a completion rate below 26 per cent isn't expanding opportunity; it's expanding enrolment numbers for a press release. Opportunity means someone finishes their course and walks into a job, and by this measure this program is failing the very people it claims to help.</para>
<para>The second point says 'despite opposition from the opposition'. This motion frames scrutiny as obstruction, and that's not what it is. This side of the House has asked three very reasonable questions about this policy: what are the completion rates, why is there no means testing, and where is the evaluation? These are very reasonable things to ask of any policy, and the government's response was to legislate the program as permanent before answering any of those. Making a program permanent doesn't make it effective; it just makes it harder to fix. The Business Council of Australia, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and major employer groups have all opposed this legislation, not because they're against skills and training—none of us are against skills and training—but because they recognise that you don't lock in a program with a sub-26 per cent completion rate and no published evaluation.</para>
<para>The third point talks about the $1.5 billion investment. The motion celebrates $1.5 billion in spending as though spending itself was the achievement. But we've got to ask: what has that $1.5 billion delivered? For every dollar spent, roughly three-quarters has gone to enrolments that have not yet produced—and may never produce—a qualified worker. Meanwhile, apprentice and trainee numbers have fallen, with commencements dropping 36 per cent since the government took office. The question was never whether we should invest in skills; the question is whether this particular investment is working, and the government can still not demonstrate that it is.</para>
<para>The fourth point is the comparison with Victoria—and this is a distraction. What happens in Victoria is for the Victorian parliament. But in this chamber we are accountable for how Commonwealth taxpayers' money is spent. On that question, the facts are clear: a cleaner earning $60,000 a year is subsidising fee-free training for plumbers and electricians, who will go on to earn sometimes $100,000 a year. I challenge the word 'free' because everyone always pays for something. That's not to say that taxpayer money should not be invested in skills training for people who most need it, but this act contains no capacity to pay-test, no targeting of the most disadvantaged and no mechanism to ensure completions. Pointing across the aisle or pointing to the Victorian parliament doesn't change any of that.</para>
<para>I think everyone in this chamber supports skills, supports TAFE and supports giving every Australian the chance to build a better career. But what we don't support is spending $1.5 billion of taxpayers' money and getting a completion rate that wouldn't be tolerated in any other area of government. We wouldn't tolerate refusing to publish a proper evaluation of a program that spends that amount of money and then coming in here and wanting the chamber to somehow congratulate the government for it. I say to the government: show us the completions, show us the employment outcomes and show us it's working, and then we can talk about celebration.</para>
<para>My experience with TAFE and of having witnessed vocational educational training overseas, particularly in Germany, Sweden and Finland, is that their vocational education training schools, facilities and teaching are far better than what we have in Australia—and that has led to highly qualified people going into the workforce in those countries, and they're much more linked with industry than people here in Australia. I say to those opposite: we want people to access TAFE, but we also want a much better TAFE system than we have at the moment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I love TAFE. My mum was a TAFE teacher for decades in Central Queensland, and I saw every single day the difference she made to those students in training the early childhood education teachers of the future. When I think about being here in this place and the importance of being in this place, there is nothing more important than fee-free TAFE. That is why I'm so proud of the Albanese Labor government's commitment to making fee-free TAFE permanent.</para>
<para>From next year we are going to deliver 100,000 free TAFE places every single year, and the impact is already being felt right across the country. We've got more than 740,000 people enrolled in fee-free TAFE, and in Queensland alone there have been over 134,000 enrolments and more than 45,000 course completions. These are not just numbers; they are lives being changed.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Bonner, I see that impact each and every day. From Wynnum to Wakerley, from Ransome to Rochedale, locals are gaining skills, changing careers and building better futures. They are studying everything from nursing to construction, from accounting to cybersecurity. Importantly, they are saving thousands of dollars while they are doing it. A student studying accounting at the Mount Gravatt campus can save up to $4,800, and a nursing student can save more than $16,000. That is real cost-of-living relief and that is also real opportunity.</para>
<para>Behind these numbers, there are powerful stories—people like Stacey, a Diploma of Nursing student in Queensland. She was inspired to become a nurse by battling stage 3 ovarian cancer and being cared for by nurses she describes as 'the best people I've ever met in my life'. Now, because of fee-free TAFE, she is on her way to becoming one of those nurses herself. Rhys, a Brisbane student studying cybersecurity, said free TAFE had changed the trajectory of his life and set him up for a future in an industry where his skills will always be needed. That is what this policy is about—not just qualifications but transformation.</para>
<para>Free TAFE is also helping us build the workforce Australia needs. Today there are 50,000 more apprentices in training than before the pandemic, and we've seen a 28 per cent increase in construction apprentices, which are critical to building the homes Australians need. Through the Key Apprenticeship Program, we are supporting apprentices with up to $10,000 to help cover the costs of tools, fuel and living expenses. Already, more than 11,000 apprentices have started in housing construction and over 12,000 are training for clean energy jobs. If we are serious about building homes, we must also build the workforce to deliver them.</para>
<para>We are also seeing something else shift, and it matters—more women are entering traditionally male dominated trades. The number of women starting apprenticeships is up 32 per cent, and women now make up 62 per cent of free-TAFE enrolments. That is not just progress; that is also transformation. We are also making it easier for Australians to keep learning. There is a new national credit recognition framework, and we are reducing the barriers between TAFE and university. This means that students can receive credit for their existing qualifications, cutting the time and cost of a degree. Learning should not be limited by cost or by rigid systems, and the results speak for themselves. Research shows that VET graduates are now more likely to be employed and to earn more. On average, graduates see income increases of over $14,000 after completing their qualification, and 84 per cent are employed after finishing their course. That is the value of skills and that is the value of TAFE.</para>
<para>Labor understands that education does not stop at 18 or 21. Nine out of 10 jobs in the next decade will require post-secondary education, and that is why supporting TAFE is not optional; it's essential. Free TAFE is delivering for young people, for jobseekers, for women, for First Nations Australians and for people with a disability. It's removing barriers, lowering costs and opening doors. Only Labor backs free TAFE, only Labor backs skills and only Labor backs the future of this country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a great privilege to be able to make a contribution to this, because I have a number of children and I am a supporter of TAFE. Yes, you heard it. I'm a supporter of TAFE, but the system is broken. I do agree that, as a nation, we need to be training the tradespeople, the apprentices and the trainees to build the infrastructure that our country needs, and, at the moment, this government is failing.</para>
<para>When we left office, four years ago, there were 412,000 apprenticeship trainees in the system. Today, under this government's management, do you think the numbers have gone up with fee-free TAFE, or have they dropped? I can report to the House they are down by 100,000—that's over 100,000 fewer. It's great to bring motions into the House and espouse fee-free TAFE, but you need to be able to back it up with outcomes. We are not in dispute. There are fewer apprenticeships and trainees today. My family attended TAFE. I was fortunate enough to have a tertiary education, but, for the boilermaker and tradie relatives of mine that went to TAFE, I remember it being an institution that was held in high regard.</para>
<para>I'm going to ask the people in the gallery a question about the completion rates for the trades that we need to build this country—the electricians, the carpenters, the boilermakers or any trade that you can think of in the TAFE system as it stands today. What do you think are the completion rates for construction sector apprenticeships in Australia at the moment? What's the percentage? Is it 80 per cent? Is it 50 per cent? Would you be surprised to hear—it beggars belief that they would bring this motion into the House when they were armed with this data—that the completion rate in the construction sector at TAFE colleges right across the country is 8.37 per cent? That is shameful.</para>
<para>We want to fix this. We need to fix this. Our country needs both sides of this House to work together to fix it, and fee-free TAFE is something that, when in office, we will need to adjust because these figures are not sustainable. Where they are, where the TAFE system is excelling—and I want to throw a bouquet to them—is in the care sector. Just under 30 per cent of people in the system studying care have completed their courses. Bravo, we need those people. With an ageing population, we need to be making sure that we've got the training skills to be able to look after the requirements we have into the future.</para>
<para>But it's not just about focusing on fee-free TAFE. When you have a look at why we've got less than 10 per cent completions in the construction sector, you only have to look at the construction sector's record insolvencies under this government's regulation and red tape on business. The cost is spiralling out. We have amazing inflation data which puts upward pressure on interest rates, and they, rather than addressing all the other underlying core problems and why we've got record insolvency problems in the construction sector, come into the House and say: 'Oh, we've got the answer. We don't have to look at all the other underlying problems that the government has created.'</para>
<para>The Reserve Bank governor clearly said that the inflation issues in this country are homegrown. That means they can be fixed. TAFE is an institution that needs our support. TAFE is an institution that I want to see returned to an institution held in high regard, but we need to change the completion rates. Having a cert II in bushwalking skills or a certificate in guiding is not going to help build the infrastructure that our country requires. It's only this side of the House that will put a broom through the TAFE system and make it great again.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I understand the member for Pearce would like to present a copy of her speech for incorporation into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>, in accordance with the resolution agreed to on 6 November 2025.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para><inline font-style="italic">The incorporated speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<para>Thank you for this motion, and I speak in support of a program that is changing lives in Pearce and right across our country.</para>
<para>For three years now, free TAFE has expanded opportunity and opened up new pathways for Australians to gain the skills they want for the jobs we desperately need. It began in January 2023 and has already seen more than 500,000 enrolments in priority areas such as digital and technology, construction, and early childhood education and care. These are not abstract numbers, they are real people: mums returning to the workforce, young people finding their first career and workers retraining as our economy changes.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has now legislated to make free TAFE a permanent feature of our national training system, securing its future so it cannot be taken away on a whim. From 2027, Commonwealth funding will support at least 100,000 fee-free TAFE places every year, embedding free TAFE at the heart of vocational education and training.</para>
<para>We should be very clear that this has happened despite opposition from those opposite. At every step, they have dragged their feet, refused to back in extra free TAFE places for construction and new energy and voted against the very bill that locks in free TAFE for the long term.</para>
<para>Through the Fee-Free TAFE Skills Agreement, the Albanese Labor government has partnered with state and territory governments to invest over $1.5 billion in free TAFE places across the country. In 2023 alone, 180,000 free TAFE places were delivered nationwide, and a further 300,000 places are being rolled out over the three years from 2024, with an additional 20,000 places targeted to construction and housing.</para>
<para>In my own electorate of Pearce, we see the benefits of this investment every day. Local TAFE campuses and training providers have welcomed hundreds of new students into fee-free courses in aged care, disability support, early childhood education and construction trades, helping to meet Western Australia's skill shortages in health, housing and critical community services. Young people from suburbs and regional communities across Pearce are gaining their first qualifications without being deterred by upfront fees, and mature-age workers are retraining into in-demand roles instead of leaving the workforce altogether. Importantly, free TAFE is reaching groups who too often miss out: women now make up nearly 62 per cent of enrolments, First Nations Australians around 6 per cent and people with disability about 8.5 per cent, with strong participation from regional and remote areas.</para>
<para>It gives local businesses access to trained workers in the sectors where they are crying out for staff. It supports our hospitals, our childcare centres, our aged-care providers and our construction sites with a steady pipeline of skilled people who live in the community they serve.</para>
<para>For each student, it turns aspiration into a practical pathway from the classroom to a good, secure job.</para>
<para>That is why legislating free TAFE matters so much. With the passage of the free TAFE legislation at the Commonwealth level, free TAFE is now an enduring part of our national system, guaranteeing at least 100,000 places a year from 2027 and locking in long-term support to the states and territories. This safeguard means that future governments will not be able to quietly walk away from their responsibility to train the workforce Australia needs.</para>
<para>The contrast with those opposite is stark. Federally, the opposition opposed the fee-free TAFE bill and refused to support key measures to grow TAFE and apprenticeships. However, in Victoria, their state colleagues have understood what their federal counterparts will not: that Free TAFE removes the single biggest barrier to vocational training and that guaranteeing its future is both economically responsible and socially just. The Victorian parliament has legislated a free TAFE guarantee, recognising free TAFE as a pillar of their education and training system, and the Victorian opposition has not opposed that bill. If the Victorian Liberals can accept that free TAFE works, then there is no excuse for the federal Liberals to stand in the way.</para>
<para>I commend this motion to the House and reaffirm our commitment that no-one will be held back and no-one left behind when it comes to skills and training in Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion because free TAFE is fundamentally about fairness, opportunity and the future prosperity of this country. At its core, this policy represents a powerful idea. No Australian should be locked out of education and skills training simply because they cannot afford the upfront cost. No-one should be forced to put their ambitions on hold because the qualification they need is out of reach. Let us be clear: no government serious about boosting productivity, economic growth and social mobility can ignore the paramount importance of skills and training. This is exactly why the Albanese Labor government proudly backs free TAFE. We know that investing in public education means investing in our people. It's an investment in the essential workers our communities need, laying the foundation for the stronger economy our country depends on.</para>
<para>Right now, free TAFE is delivering for our national priorities. It is training the tradies who will build the homes we need urgently. It is training the dedicated care workers who will support our older Australians and people with disability. It is opening doors for early childhood educators, hospitality professionals and the highly skilled workforce essential to building a future made in Australia. The Australian people have enthusiastically embraced this initiative. Free TAFE has now supported more than 740,000 enrolments nationally. This staggering number is not just demand; it is a testament to what happens when a government removes financial barriers and backs its citizens.</para>
<para>Driven by this success, Labor has made free TAFE permanent. We are investing over $1.6 billion, through to 2034-35, to support at least 100,000 free TAFE and VET places every year from 2027. This matters because it gives certainty to students, certainty to training providers and certainty to industries in need of skilled workers. This is what good Labor policy looks like—practical, targeted and focused on opening doors.</para>
<para>At the end of January I joined the Minister for Skills and Training, Andrew Giles; Victoria's minister for skills and TAFE, Gayle Tierney; and the member for Melbourne, Sarah Witty; at Box Hill Institute. We were there to celebrate three years of the federal free-TAFE program, and it was deeply inspiring to hear directly from students about how free TAFE is helping them gain the skills and confidence to build a better future. I hear the same stories in my electorate of Holt every single week. Constituents tell me how free TAFE has transformed their lives. For some, it's a chance to retrain for a career in nursing. For others, it's an opportunity to finally start in construction or community services, without carrying the unmanageable financial burden. As a proud TAFE graduate myself, I know firsthand that TAFE changes lives. I know the value of that educational path and the profound confidence it gives. To so many Australians, TAFE is not just a qualification; it is a second chance, a fresh start and a reliable pathway to economic security, which is why this reform matters so profoundly. When we invest in skills, we are not just helping people into jobs; we are building the workforce this country needs.</para>
<para>Despite all of these undeniable economic and social benefits, the Liberals and Nationals still voted against making free TAFE permanent. They recklessly dismissed it as wasteful spending. After years of the coalition neglecting the sector, Labor is reversing the damage. We are rebuilding TAFE, backing public education and ensuring that opportunity is not reserved for those who can afford it but is available to anyone willing to work for it. This government believes in the power of education to uplift communities and drive progress. By supporting our students, we empower our entire nation. Labor will always back TAFE, back workers and back Australians. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GREGG</name>
    <name.id>315154</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to proudly support the motion brought by the member for Dunkley. Free TAFE has been an incredibly important program in the state of Victoria, helping to train the next generation of enrolled nurses, people assisting with literacy and numeracy in the classroom and, of course, tradies. Students at Swinburne TAFE in Croydon, where I visited as recently as last week, are learning those essential skills. We're seeing free TAFE make an enormous difference to individuals' lives, enabling people to gain initial skills after leaving school or to reskill midlife.</para>
<para>In an economy where there is so much transition going on at the moment, the ability for all of us to equip ourselves with new skills, mid-career, mid-working-life, has become more important than ever. With artificial intelligence changing the world of work, many of us will have to adjust to a new career. Often, when it's time to make a career transition, we're not carrying a wallet brimming with cash. Sometimes it happens suddenly and unexpectedly. To now have the option of being able to reskill and enter a new career, a new workforce, is now more important than ever before.</para>
<para>We're seeing the rewards of this across different sectors desperate for skills. When I talk to employers, they often say they're struggling to find skilled workers to fill their vacancies. We have a low unemployment rate, but we need to make sure that our workforce has the skills industry needs in order to provide the essential services we all rely upon, and free TAFE is an enabler of that.</para>
<para>The criticisms of free TAFE I've heard from the other side of the House seem to be based, frankly, on a contempt for the TAFE sector as it now sits. That's despite the fact that we inherited a system which was dominated by private providers whose reputations were various—we had some very good providers, but plenty were providing subpar education, and many have been deregistered in recent years due to the low quality of training and support they were providing. TAFE, on the other hand, has the trust and confidence of industry and of students to make sure that they are receiving the quality education they need and to bring the skills that are essential for their success in their next careers.</para>
<para>Victorians understand this so much so that even the state Liberal Party in Victoria recognise the need for free TAFE and, unlike the Liberals in this House, are actually not opposing the free TAFE program. They support it, as they should, because Victorians recognise the importance of free TAFE. In Victoria we've seen about 150,000 enrolments. Nearly 60,000 of those have already completed their courses, and many more will be completing them as they complete their training part time—a very significant completion rate. I know, from the experiences of my own family and of course many in my community that those who have transitioned into careers in nursing and in personal care as well, that this has made an enormous contribution not only to the lives of the students themselves but also to the community more widely—having access to those skilled professionals who can contribute to the provision of those essential services across the board.</para>
<para>In Victoria, the top three courses are literacy and numeracy support—something we desperately need, with both young people and older people needing support in literacy and numeracy at rates that are really higher than we've seen for a very long time; a diploma of nursing—we're talking about qualified enrolled nurses as well, able to administer medications and provide essential support to people in hospitals, aged care and other settings as well; and the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment, which enables people to contribute their industrial know-how and their formal skills and qualifications to train the next generation of skilled workers. These are really important courses, and this is the kind of work that has been made possible through free TAFE. We have seen a large increase in the number of enrolments.</para>
<para>Now, the opposition have said this is a bad idea because it doesn't solve all problems at once. Completions and other aspects of the training system of course work together. This is a multifaceted challenge to ensure that we have the workers that we need, that completions occur and that employers have the incentives and supports they require. It's a multifaceted system. Free TAFE is an essential part of that. It enables people to enrol in the courses to build the skills we need without having a massive financial burden at the start of their careers, often when they least need it. It means young people don't enter the workforce already with a debt, unable to enter the housing market and limited in what they can do. This is a weight off their shoulder, as well as enabling industry to access the skilled individuals they need.</para>
<para>It has been an enormously successful program. It's a great pity that the coalition do not recognise the important contribution made by TAFE in our community. I can only hope that, with time, they will learn to see the value of it as we continue to build the skilled workforce. I know that, in the construction industry, which was raised before, as part of the Key Apprenticeship Program, we're already seeing about 11½ thousand people signing up for those key apprenticeships in housing construction. So we're very much focused on the job, and I commend the motion to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Fee-free TAFE is transforming the lives of Western Australians, and it is changing the nation and the state of WA. We are building skills not just for today but for tomorrow as well. And do you know what? We are seeing employers needing more skilled workers and we are helping solve that problem. We are also doing this in the areas that matter: nursing, construction, aged care and disability care, early childhood education and of course the tech sectors. Fee-free TAFE is smart design. We are opening affordable targeted training in spaces in fields that are state and national priorities.</para>
<para>Since the program began, over 100,000 Western Australians have enrolled in fee-free TAFE. Fee-free TAFE has delivered more than 34,000 course completions in WA, with additional completions to come as many students choose to study part time while balancing work and family responsibilities. Behind these numbers are regular Western Australians taking these real opportunities—people like Natalie, who used fee-free TAFE to complete a Certificate III in Individual Support and moved straight into disability support work in the same year. She explained:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Getting my qualifications at South Metro TAFE has helped build my self-worth and I now have a job in disability support that I love. The guidance you get from lecturers is amazing; they are so encouraging, and no question is a silly question.</para></quote>
<para>This is an Albanese government policy helping people with the next chapter of their lives.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Swan, we are proud to have South Metro TAFE's Bentley campus. This is home to the Bentley Pines Training Restaurant. It's a live-training venue where hospitality and cookery students train in the professional kitchen and dining room. This particular restaurant is booked out for months. The Albanese government invested $2 million to upgrade the commercial kitchen at Bentley Pines and the WA government's contribution to further support to these facilities was completed last year. This is a game changer for students. The upgraded facilities deliver modern equipment, a clear line of sight between the kitchen and the dining area, and a facility that mirrors contemporary industry standards.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister has twice visited this campus, and this reflects the government's commitment to Swan and to building a skilled workforce for our venues for tourism businesses and hospitality, because we want to keep the doors open and lift the service quality and showcase what Western Australia has to offer. For a school leaver taking their first step, a parent retraining or a mature-age workout that is changing careers, the Bentley Pines restaurant upgrades turn ambition into practical skills that translates to more shifts, more jobs and more income for West Australians.</para>
<para>In a previous visit to this campus, I met Kayla, a single mum and one of the thousands of Australians benefiting from fee-free TAFE. For Kayla, not having to find money to cover course fees meant that she finally had the opportunity to improve her skills. She had been working in kitchens most of her life, but now, with her kids in school, she wanted to get qualifications towards a career that she can do for the next 20 years. This is a really big deal. As Kayla told her kids, 'I'm going to school to get a better job so we can have a better life.'</para>
<para>Fee-free TAFE is a reform that only a Labor government is willing to provide to Australians, and it is targeted towards building skills for students and aligned for the WA workforce priorities. The difference between having fee-free TAFE versus a paid TAFE course is the difference between someone deciding they want to study this course or not.</para>
<para>We are trying to do two things. One is lower the barriers for students because we want them to have access to education—something that the Albanese Labor government will always invest in. But we're also ensuring that our businesses have the workers that they need. If people want to study these areas, we want to make sure that we send that signal. These are the ways that the Albanese government is making sure that we not only transform the lives of Australians but our workforce as well.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When it comes to free TAFE, I have some real-life experience from just last week, because on Monday just last week I had the great pleasure of visiting not just a TAFE but the largest trade training centre in the entirety of the Southern Hemisphere—the Acacia Ridge TAFE. I'm lucky enough that it is housed on Brisbane's southside in the electorate of Moreton. When Minister Giles and I went to that TAFE, we experienced what apprentices and others uplifting their skills were doing. We visited mechanics who were upskilling on EVs so that, when EVs enter the market, they would know how to deal with them safely.</para>
<para>As future technology expands, those working people will have the skills that they need, and they get them at TAFE. We saw plumbers just a few months shy of taking their final exams to go out into the workforce and to get their plumbing apprenticeship stamped from that TAFE, giving them the skills to drive not only household plumbing but also work in construction. We need to build homes, and the skills to do so come from TAFE. We saw future chippies—people learning how to build a home, a home our country needs so that we can address the critical supply issues that this Labor government is working to solve every single day. I did have a go at the nail gun, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker Georganas, and I assure you that we need people at TAFE who can build houses.</para>
<para>TAFE means something. It's not just about going back to school. It's not just about what they do. TAFE is about building pathways to secure work. It's about making sure that people can map out a future for themselves, supported by a quality education system. TAFE builds the skills that the Australian economy needs. It builds the skills that we know we need to drive the economy and to drive what our country needs, whether they're in housing, whether they're in construction, whether they're in health care or whether they're in education. TAFE—free TAFE, in particular—removes barriers, as the member for Swan said, and creates a country where we value those skills and make sure that people can have them. It is not just about providing cost-of-living relief to young people and people training to get jobs; it's also about making sure that we are building our nation to be something bigger and stronger with skills that people get at TAFE.</para>
<para>What a stark contrast there is between those of us on this side of the chamber and those on that side of the chamber when it comes to free TAFE. Those opposite don't back in TAFE. They don't back it in, because they voted against free TAFE. They told those students that Minister Giles and I visited at the Acacia Ridge TAFE that they shouldn't have free TAFE and that they shouldn't have the opportunity to go to TAFE to get skilled and to make sure that they have a pathway to a good, skilled country.</para>
<para>It's not just that we've been investing in free TAFE; this Labor government is focused on education and creating the skills that we need more broadly as well. It's why we've invested in free TAFE, but it's also why we've invested in 20 per cent off of student debt and why we have invested in $10,000 for apprentices to make sure that we have the people that we need to build homes of the future. And it's working. Free TAFE has supported over 740,000 enrolments nationally. In the first year of free TAFE, in 2023, there were over 355,000 enrolments against a target of 180,000 places. What that means is not only that free TAFE is something that is important for building our skills, our future and our economy but also that Australians want it—they need it. And the only way we're going to build those skills is with a Labor government in power.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I remember standing in this place in 2023 and speaking about what fee-free TAFE could mean—the doors that it might open and the lives it very well might change. I have to say it is an absolute pleasure to stand here now not to talk about potential but to talk about what has already been delivered for Australia and for communities like mine across the northern suburbs of Adelaide. This reform has moved quickly, and it has landed powerfully.</para>
<para>Across the country, more than 742,000 Australians have enrolled in free TAFE, and over 245,000 have already completed their courses. In South Australia, there have been 26,725 enrolments and more than 6,100 completions. Free TAFE is about removing that upfront hurdle and replacing it with opportunity. In Adelaide's north, that opportunity has been seized. Free courses are offered in areas that lead directly into jobs in our economy—aged-care and disability services, community and family services and women's education. These are sectors built on care, compassion and connection, and they are crying out for skilled workers. At the same time, we are seeing strong uptake in industries shaping our economic future—workplace training, hospitality and cookery, cybersecurity, IT support, networking, programming, website development and automotive servicing. These are modern skills and practical skills, and they are opening pathways to secure, well-paid employment. Free TAFE is about building the workforce we need to construct homes, to care for our ageing population, to drive clean energy and to strengthen our digital capability. That is why only Labor is backing free TAFE, because only Labor is making the choice to invest in people—to train the tradies, the carers and the technicians our country needs.</para>
<para>This is practical support, not theory, not slogans and not ideas but real investment in real Australians. Importantly, this is not temporary. Free TAFE has been made permanent, giving certainty to students, to providers and to industries that rely on skilled workforces, because, if we are serious about building Australia's future, we have to be serious about skills. We have to recognise that talent exists everywhere but that opportunity does not always follow. That is why free TAFE is targeted, supporting young people, job seekers, women, First Nations Australians and those facing barriers to education. It's about making sure no-one is left behind, and, when people are given that chance, they take it.</para>
<para>The results speak for themselves. VET graduates are more likely to be employed and earning more within a year of completing their qualifications, on average earning around $11,800 more. That is meaningful change, not just in wages but in confidence, in stability and in future planning, because when someone gains a qualification, it does not just change their job prospects; it changes the way they see themselves and what they believe to be possible. In the north, I see that first hand. TAFE Elizabeth and TAFE Salisbury allow apprentices to start in trades, parents to return to study after years out of the workforce and young people to choose a pathway that leads somewhere tangible. That is what good policy should do. It should not just sit on paper. It should move through communities, lifting people up as it goes. That is exactly what free TAFE is doing.</para>
<para>This government understands that education is not just an individual benefit; it's a national asset. We have the responsibility to help people now and a duty to the next generation to build an economy that rewards effort and unlocks potential. That is why investing in skills is not optional. It is essential, and it is why supporting TAFE is in Labor's DNA. We are rebuilding a system that was neglected, restoring confidence and ensuring public training institutions are strong and accessible. Through the National Skills Agreement, through long-term investment and through making free TAFE permanent, we are laying the foundations for sustained growth, because this is about the kind of country we want to be, only where opportunity is real, where skills are valued and where your future is not limited by your circumstances. In communities like mine across the north, that matters deeply because, when opportunity reaches places that have been overlooked, it does not change individuals; it transforms communities. That is what free TAFE is delivering. That is why it is worth backing now and into the future.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>90</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Bill 2026, Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>90</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7443" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7447" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7442" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>90</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2025, Corporations (Review Fees) Amendment (Technical Amendments) Bill 2025, Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Bill 2026, Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026, Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026, Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026</title>
          <page.no>90</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r7378" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2025</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7383" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Corporations (Review Fees) Amendment (Technical Amendments) Bill 2025</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7443" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7437" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7435" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r7447" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r7442" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Parliamentary Frameworks Legislation Amendment (Reviews) Bill 2026</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Assent</title>
            <page.no>90</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>90</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral Matters Joint Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Joint Committee, National Capital and External Territories Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>90</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Membership</title>
            <page.no>90</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Mr Burnell be discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and that, in his place, Ms Payne be appointed a member of the committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Ms Payne be appointed a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Ms Scrymgour be discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories and that, in her place, Ms Payne be appointed a member of the committee.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>90</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>90</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) the House invite Her Excellency Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, to attend and address the House on Tuesday, 24 March 2026;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) unless otherwise ordered, at the sitting on 24 March:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the House shall meet, at the ringing of the bells, at no earlier than 11.55 am and the proceedings shall be welcoming remarks by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and an address by the President of the European Commission;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) at the conclusion of the address by the President of the European Commission the House shall suspend until the ringing of the bells, at no earlier than 2.55 pm when business shall be Questions without notice;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) immediately after Question Time the House shall resume business in accordance with standing order 34;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the provisions of standing order 257(c) relating to good order shall apply to the areas of Members' seats as well as the galleries for the period set out at (3); and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) that so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Federation Chamber from meeting at approximately 5 pm and the order of business being as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) one hour of Members' constituency statements; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) one hour of grievance debate; and the Federation Chamber then adjourning immediately without debate;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) a message be sent to the Senate inviting Senators to attend the House as guests for the welcoming remarks by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and address by the President of the European Commission; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) any variation to the arrangement be made only by an action by the Speaker or by a motion moved by a Minister.</para></quote>
<para>For the information of members, tomorrow, should this resolution be carried, the following will happen. The bells will ring at 11.55 as usual, but we will gather in the House for the address of the President of the European Commission. Following the address, the House will suspend. Members are aware that there is a physical alteration that happens to the chamber when we have a guest speak here. So we will suspend after the address, and the bells will ring again at 2.55 pm for question time to occur at three o'clock. After question time, we'll have the normal order of business. The Federation Chamber will not meet until 5 pm, and the only business in the Federation Chamber will be constituency statements and the grievance debate.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>91</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>91</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7409" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>91</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The coalition is going to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill because it contains important reforms that Australians have been waiting for, including sensible protections around the use of genetic information in life insurance and improvements across our financial system. This bill also highlights a consistent problem with this government: reforms are delivered too slowly, even where there is broad agreement.</para>
<para>Genetic protections are being delayed despite years of consensus. Schedule 1 prevents life insurers from using genetic test results to deny or limit cover, ensuring Australians can access medical testing without fear of discrimination. Genetic testing can be life saving. It supports clinicians to prevent, diagnose and treat serious conditions, including hereditary diseases and cancer. No Australian should be discouraged from undertaking genetic testing because they fear it could affect their ability to obtain life insurance. These reforms have had broad bipartisan support and strong backing from clinicians, researchers and patient advocates for years, so we encourage Labor to deliver these much more quickly.</para>
<para>The coalition has had to drag Labor kicking and screaming to this. In 2019, while in government, the coalition supported the introduction of an industry moratorium as an interim safeguard, with the clear expectation that legislation would follow. This meant that by the time of the 2022 election a broad consensus was already built. In September 2024, to much fanfare, Labor announced that they would be introducing legislation to ban genetic discrimination in life insurance. This announcement raised real expectations among Australians, but by the 2025 election no legislation had been introduced. That just shows that this has not been a priority.</para>
<para>With strong bipartisan support and no opposition, there is no reason why this legislation shouldn't have been introduced in the previous parliament, and there are consequences for this. People who could have benefit from this testing may have been discouraged from doing so because of concerns about insurance discrimination. Participation in medical research could have been affected. The problem is being fixed now, and we support these reforms. They provide certainty. They prevent discrimination. They support better health outcomes. As I said, the reality is that this has been agreed to for a long time.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 has relief for foreign financial service providers. This schedule provides long-overdue clarity for financial service providers operating in Australia. It will help ensure our markets remain open, competitive and connected to global financial expertise. Again, this is another bipartisan reform that has broad stakeholder support. We introduced legislation in 2022 and since then have been waiting for Labor to deliver this. These four years of delay—again, while there's been broad support—is not acceptable. They have real consequences as well: ongoing regulatory uncertainty, reduced confidence for international firms and risk to Australia's competitiveness as a financial services destination. Again, we support these changes and encourage the government to do them very quickly.</para>
<para>Schedule 3, on the multilateral development banks, changes how Australia funds its commitments to international financial institutions such as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund. As a member of these banks, Australia contributes capital. There's a concerning shift towards open-ended financial commitments here. The bill introduces standing appropriations without a clear upper limit. This is concerning, and parliament should not be asked to sign blank cheques. While disallowance mechanisms exist, they are not a substitute for full parliamentary scrutiny. We understand there are some genuine administrative challenges with the current system, but we think these changes reflect a broader trend to reduce parliamentary scrutiny. While the coalition supports this schedule—as Australia must meet its international obligations—we encourage the government to resist additional pressure from new levies, including the Compensation Scheme of Last Resort, which would further increase the cost of staying in the profession. While there are some bad eggs, like in any profession, too often, government has painted all advisers with the same brush, but good financial advisers are the best tool at any Australian's disposal to protect themselves from bad advice.</para>
<para>The conclusion is that, ultimately, it's Australians that are paying the price of fewer advisers, higher fees and reduced access to affordable financial advice. When financial advice becomes too expensive to access, people don't stop seeking advice; they just look elsewhere, and they may get it from people who are not properly qualified. That's why the coalition commissioned the Michelle Levy Quality of Advice Review, and that review set out a clear pathway to simplify regulation, reduce costs and improve access to advice. Again, the government have stalled their response. So, again, the coalition supports this bill, but we're calling on the government to deliver the reforms outlined by Ms Michelle Levy to rebuild the adviser workforce, reduce the cost of advice and ensure every Australian can access affordable, high-quality financial advice.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Genetic testing saves lives. It supports medical practitioners to prevent, to diagnose, to treat and to monitor a range of cancers, cancer predisposition syndromes and other heritable conditions. Medical practice is moving forward in leaps and bounds. We know a lot more than we did a hundred years ago, we know a lot more than we did 10 years ago, and we know a lot more than we did one year ago. Genetic testing is one of the areas where this is the most prominent and, indeed, the most impactful. But, right now, too many Australians are delaying or avoiding genetic testing that could save their lives, not because their doctor hasn't recommended it but because they're afraid their life insurer could use the results against them. And that's what's core to this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This bill is about health. This bill is about making sure that Australians can be diagnosed as early as possible and that we remove every barrier we can to allow that to be a reality. Australians should never have to choose between their health and their ability to access affordable life insurance, and, with this bill, they won't have to.</para>
<para>This bill delivers four core outcomes. Firstly, it bans life insurers from using adverse genetic test results in their underwriting decisions. Next, it reduces licensing exemptions for certain foreign financial services providers. Thirdly, it modernises Australia's legislative framework for multilateral development banks. And, finally, it repeals the stage 2 financial adviser registration requirement.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of this bill bans life insurers from using those adverse genetic test results in those underwriting decisions. From the date of commencement, an insurer will not be able to use your genetic test results to decide whether to offer you cover or to set the terms of that cover. This has a big impact.</para>
<para>This is a measure that is carefully designed. Individuals can still choose to volunteer their test results, with written consent, where it benefits them, and insurers can still use information about clinical diagnoses, symptoms and family medical history. That distinction matters because life insurance needs to be properly risk rated. This bill removes the chilling effect that genetic testing results have had on people's willingness to seek potentially life-saving information. The objective is straightforward: to provide certainty to individuals that undertaking genetic testing will not impact their ability to obtain life insurance cover or the terms and conditions of that cover.</para>
<para>For too long, the industry relied on a voluntary moratorium. In June 2023, Monash University published the final report from the A-GLIMMER study—the <inline font-style="italic">Australian </inline><inline font-style="italic">genetics and life insurance moratorium: monitoring the effectiveness and response</inline>. The report was unequivocal: the moratorium was inadequate to address and prevent genetic discrimination in life insurance. It recommended a legislative model of prohibition, and that is exactly what this bill does and delivers. The ban makes amendments to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and related amendments to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, aligning our antidiscrimination laws with the ban. It also creates civil penalties of up to $1.65 million and criminal offences for non-compliance enforced by ASIC. These are not token penalties; they are a clear signal that the government is serious about this change. If someone seeks to circumvent them, they will feel the full force of penalties and the law. To make sure these protections keep pace with advances in medical science, the bill requires five-yearly reviews of the operation of the provisions to be tabled in parliament.</para>
<para>This ban is underpinned by extensive stakeholder engagement and consultation. The government consulted closely with genetics research organisations, patient advocates, the life insurance industry and the medical community throughout the design of the measure and draft legislation. This is a reform that the community has asked for, that the evidence has supported and that the industry has accepted.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 of the bill introduces licensing exemptions for certain foreign financial service providers who operate in Australia's wholesale and professional investor markets. Currently, foreign financial services providers must hold an Australian financial services licence or rely on temporary relief instruments issued by ASIC. This bill elevates those arrangements to primary law, giving industry certainty and improving regulatory oversight—oversight that we know is needed in this space. There are three carefully targeted exemptions: the comparable regulator exemption, the professional investor exemption and the market maker exemption. They benefit Australian superannuation funds, institutional investors and businesses by giving them access to a greater range of international investments, specialised global financial advice and new sources of financing.</para>
<para>The bill also introduces a fast-track licensing pathway for foreign financial services providers already regulated by comparable overseas regimes. This removes the need to go through the full fit-and-proper person assessment when applying for an Australian licence to service wholesale clients, and it reduces duplication without compromising market integrity. As the minister has stated, this improves outcomes for millions of Australians, as these services are commonly used by superannuation funds and institutional investors, among other financial firms.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 modernises Australia's legislative framework for our participation in multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. These amendments provide a more flexible and efficient appropriations framework, including provisions to support the government's commitments announced in the 2024-25 MYEFO process, and this covers the purchase of US$150 million in hybrid capital from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. It also enables the purchase of US$200 million in guarantees through the Asian Development Bank's Innovative Finance Facility for Climate in Asia and the Pacific. Multilateral development banks are rapidly evolving in their financing models in response to the G20's calls for more innovative instruments to address global development financing gaps, and, without a flexible legislative framework, Australia risks falling behind in its ability to participate in these arrangements.</para>
<para>Crucially, new financial obligations under this framework will remain subject to parliamentary scrutiny through disallowable legislative instruments. Transparency and oversight are maintained. What changes is that the legislative burden of routine, non-controversial transactions is reduced, freeing up Treasury officials to focus on substantive decisions, not administrative process.</para>
<para>Finally, schedule 4 repeals the stage 2 financial adviser registration requirement, which would have required individual advisers to register themselves annually with ASIC from 1 July 2026. Stage 1 registration, which already requires Australian financial services licensees to register their authorised advisers with ASIC, achieves the objective of a functioning and effective disciplinary system. The Financial Services and Credit Panel already has the authority to take necessary action against financial advisers where required, including suspending or cancelling registration. Stage 2 would result in added cost and administrative burden, including bespoke IT infrastructure, without meaningfully enhancing consumer protection. Not proceeding with it is the right call, and it's consistent with the government's broader commitment to reducing regulatory burden on advisers where that regulation does not enhance consumer protection. Deputy Speaker, you would have seen in this place and in the other place work being done to ensure that consumers are protected around a range of policy initiatives. This does not impact on that.</para>
<para>This bill brings together four very practical, well-considered reforms, but the one that will be felt most in communities like Moreton on Brisbane's south side is the ban on the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance. As I said at the front of this speech, this part of the bill is fundamentally about health. It's about making sure that people understand and have no barriers to accessing testing that may help save their lives, and it's part of the commitment that this Labor government has made to health in so many different ways. Ordinarily, we talk about the commitment to affordable and accessible health care, whether that be through $25 caps on PBS medicines, through the creation of urgent care clinics or through making more bulk-billing in our local communities. But this is important too, because it means that people can have the confidence to go and get those tests. It means that their families know that their loved ones can go and get those tests and that it will not be a burden in terms of their life insurance.</para>
<para>For years, advocates have campaigned for this change. Researchers have documented the harm of the status quo. That's why the status quo is changing today. Families have had to make difficult decisions about their health because of the fear of financial penalties, and this government is delivering the protections people were promised and fixing a problem that those opposite ignored for a decade. Medical practice is moving forward in leaps and in bounds. The law must keep pace, and, with this bill, it will. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025 is incredibly important legislation. It is a baseline test for whether or not we want an Australia that is free from discrimination based on people's life circumstances and, because we have life insurance policies, whether they make judgement calls about people based on their genetic make-up.</para>
<para>It's actually quite a straightforward bill in one sense. The oddity is: why did it take this long? This is not a new issue. It is not one that has not been raised in parliament before. It is not one that has not been raised as a consequence of the design of financial products. We have known for a long time that there has been a question about genetic testing and the impact it has on people's capacity to access life insurance policies. In fact, the industry has moved forward on this issue. The parliament has regularly discussed this issue. There has only been one group who have been neanderthalic in their response, and it has, of course, been the current Labor government. So we support this legislation, because, finally, they are doing something. Finally, we are actually getting action, after four years, to stop medical testing being a pathway to deny access to life insurance.</para>
<para>When you think about it, so many Australians, not knowing what the future holds—and none of us know what tomorrow holds, let alone today—take out life insurance policies because they simply want to be in a position to be able to support their families, beyond their current life, if, unfortunately, the worst happens, particularly with themselves and their families. Of course, while every family is different and every family has a different economic make-up, life insurance policies heavily go towards those who are principal financial contributors to the household to make sure that people have confidence in the future. But, by providing a pathway for genetic testing for life insurance, what you can end up with is people being excluded from being able to access a pool of insurance to give them protection—and that is the whole point of insurance. Insurance is a pool to mitigate risk. Risk can range from people's genetic make-up to the circumstances they face, the workplaces they work in and, of course, other factors that put or pose risks to their overall wellbeing. So it is a simple expectation that life insurance operates in a non-discriminatory way, when we know full well that people face different circumstances within their lives—and they're specifically seeking insurance to protect things like their livelihood, their income and their capacity to support their family in light of that.</para>
<para>So why did it take this government so long to be able to progress it? In 2019, when we were in government, we started the whole process to have this conversation. What it meant was that, by the time we got to the 2022 election, there was broad agreement across the sector, from the life insurance industry themselves. And, in September 2024, the old—remember him, the Assistant Treasurer, Stephen Jones? I'm not sure I'm going to say that I'm going to miss him, but let's put that to one side. I think he's off at the OECD these days. I don't know what he's doing there; you can't run interference for industry super funds there. The then assistant treasurer, Stephen Jones, announced, to much fanfare—you know when they do that, when Labor get up and they announce with trumpets and songs and their own people what a wonderful job they're going to do?—that they were going to, finally, ban genetic testing.</para>
<para>Well, September 2024 is a fair way from where we are now, presently. But they did nothing, as a consequence. That announcement was widely welcomed and raised real expectations among Australians and the medical community—but never let the opportunity to stall, to do nothing, pass this government, which marks its success not on what it achieves for the Australian people. This government marks its success by the number of days bums sit on those seats over there, the number of days that the Prime Minister can do things like humiliate the Treasurer of the country, the extent to which the Prime Minister can occupy C1 but not actually deliver for the Australian people. That is not a good pathway for governing this country. But we are all left waiting while the Minister for Energy and Climate Change lets the country run out of oil, the Treasurer pours debt-petrol on the inflation fire, and as for the Prime Minister—well, when somebody can tell me what he's doing, I'd love to hear it.</para>
<para>Australians have been left waiting with the consequences of this bill while we have sat here patiently waiting for change. Now we have legislation delivered from on high, and now we have a pathway to vote for it. And what happened? It was a shock. The coalition said: 'Yes, actually we believe in this. What's taken you so long?' The cute observations of the assistant minister on the other side of the chamber are particularly entertaining.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm sorry, are you a minister? I don't know. You never quite know where everybody is these days. The minister on the other side of the table has been interjecting, 'What took you so long?' I'm not sure if you noticed, Minister, but you're sitting on that side of the table. You're in government. I'm quite happy if you want to forgo that. But the reality is you did not—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You are in government. You have a responsibility to deliver. I am quite happy to pick up the legislative agenda on your behalf and run it, if the minister or the assistant minister doesn't want to. You'll be happy to as well, won't you?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Caldwell</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Absolutely, let's jump over there.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We'd all be quite happy to jump over and define the future of this nation, rather than just wait patiently for the Prime Minister to—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Exactly, it's not clear.</para>
<para>But here we are. Labor's delays have had consequences. There haven't been changes to the legislation. We are now changing that legislation. We support these reforms for simple reasons: they provide certainty, they prevent discrimination and they support better health outcomes for Australians. It's really important because, under this government, there has been so much confusion around financial services. I know this isn't necessarily a topic that keeps everybody awake at night, but financial services are so important for the strength, endurance and capacity of Australians to be empowered to live out their best lives. And what we've consistently seen under the government is they have completely mishandled financial services. This includes the problems of financial advice, which is also a subject of this bill, all the way through to, of course, doing anything they can to fatten the pig of industry super along the way.</para>
<para>You've got to hand it to the Labor Party. The Labor Party do understand who it is they're elected to serve; it's just not the Australian people. Once upon a time, the Labor Party were elected to serve blue-collar workers, but they don't really seem to care about them anymore. They were then elected to serve public servants, but, even when public servants wages started to outstrip private sector wages, they're weren't actually that interested in serving public servants anymore. These days, the primary purpose of the Labor Party is to serve organised capital. It's not organised workers; it's organised capital and particularly industry super funds. As we mentioned before, the former assistant treasurer has gone off to the OECD—he was probably paid off to go there so that the Labor Party could avoid having to continue dealing with him—but I imagine industry super is not that happy about it because they've lost one of their biggest advocates in this parliament.</para>
<para>Labor exists now to advocate for the case of organised capital to create slush funds that ultimately they influence and control. If you look at financial advice, their approach is: 'Well, how do we give all this power to industry super funds? We don't really care what the impact is on workers—people who've saved or sacrificed. It just means that we can suffocate everybody else and stop them from doing anything else to be financially independent.'</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I absolutely believe in making sure that we have Australians who are financially independent, and you do that by making sure Australians have choice, agency and ownership over their future—they're not merely beaten into submission by the Labor Party to go into a select number of funds. The Labor Party pool capital, they get marketing expenses and they shower it upon themselves for their campaigning activities so that they can send members to this parliament. They can then garnish the wages of more Australians—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>which they can then pull into those funds and undermine the very foundations of Australians. Financial advice—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Keogh</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Keogh</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Might you draw the speaker's attention back to the topic of the bill?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, I've been listening intently over your interjections, and I think that he's staying pretty relevant to the topic, so he can continue on.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Deputy Speaker! This is clearly an opportunity to point out to the minister that schedule 4 of this bill is about financial adviser registration. Clearly, the government not only is delayed; they don't even understand the bill they're trying to pass through parliament. I'll give the minister the benefit of the doubt. We do on the opposition side. We understand what the point of this bill is. I can tell you that the one thing that is the point of this bill is not to shovel more money into the hands of capital pools and organised capital simply so it can be showered on marketing expenses for the Labor Party and then go on to their campaign coffers, amongst other things, so they can then be in a position to give money to organised crime through the CFMEU-Labor cartel. I know Labor members, every time I raise this, are appalled at raising—I can tell you not a single financial adviser in this nation is going to say, 'The best pathway forward for Australians to get ahead is to give your money to organisations that then empower a government to hand money to organised crime through the CFMEU-Labor cartel.' That would be anathema to financial advice, but that is the law in Victoria and that is the law in this country right now. And that is the law that the members of the government want to make the case for.</para>
<para>We're supporting this bill because it doesn't actually entrench that power. We're supporting this bill because we actually believe that Australians should be empowered to live out their best lives. We're supporting this bill because we believe that life insurance should be there to pool capital and to mitigate risk and that people shouldn't be discriminated against based on their pre-existing or genetic conditions that are factors beyond themselves. But, more importantly, we're supporting this bill because we desperately want to give a reprieve to those financial advisers out there that Labor would actually really deep down like to outlaw and just throw into industry super funds. We're supporting them to be able to give financial advice to Australians. So, whether you're wealthy or you're just starting out on the ladder of opportunity, you can afford financial advice. So you can be in a position to make strategic decisions for your long-term future. And, most importantly, so that Australians can get ahead, so they don't go on then and just get financial advice from those whose recommendation is, 'Throw your money into funds the Labor Party owns so they can use it for marketing expenses and so they can campaign to sit in this chamber so they can then pass laws and appropriation bills to hand money to organised crime through the CFMEU-Labor cartel.'</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>That was quite an extraordinary performance. I'm not sure who it was for. There were a few moments there, I must admit, when I thought that I'd entered the chamber with the wrong piece of legislation before me because the tirade that we just heard really bears no resemblance to what we are being asked to consider today. I do think it's a real shame that that was the case. It is a shame that the speaker just before me is incapable of acting in good faith where there is broad agreement in the chamber here today and incapable of cooperating in the best interests of Australians. But, as they say, when people show you who they are, believe them. And I think we've seen that today from the shadow Treasurer.</para>
<para>I'm a bit gobsmacked too that, on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, where we're talking about something like access to care in the health system, there was very little respect and consideration paid to those people who have been advocates for these changes in life insurance. I think it was very disrespectful, frankly, the carry on we saw from the previous speaker. And I want to apologise on behalf of the parliament to those advocates who've worked in this area for so long that their voices were seen as secondary in this conversation. I've got some stories I'd like to share of some people who've participated in studies and who've advocated very strongly for the bill before us today, and I want to make sure that their voices are heard and that they're treated with the respect that frankly everyone in this parliament owes those Australians.</para>
<para>Our party, the Labor Party, is, of course, the party of universal health care, where Australians can access the care they need without having to worry about the cost. That principle has guided every major health reform we've pursued as the Albanese Labor government, reflecting a simple belief that health care is not a privilege but a right. It reflects our commitment to equity, to fairness and to ensuring no Australian is held back and no-one is left behind. It reflects our understanding that a strong health system is the foundation of a strong, thriving society. It's not just about money; it's about the consequences and costs that arise when Australians delay seeking early diagnosis and treatment, which is why access is so important. When care is delayed, conditions worsen. When diagnosis is postponed, outcomes, unfortunately, deteriorate. When treatment comes too late, the consequences can be irreversible. This is something that affects not just individuals but families, communities and generations.</para>
<para>Genetic research is critical to improving the screening, early diagnosis and treatment of Australian patients. We are living in an age of extraordinary medical advancement, with many advancements being made right here in Australia and, I know, in my own electorate of Chisholm. At the centre of that transformation is genetics. Genetics and genomics are reshaping clinical practice and changing the way we prevent, diagnose, treat and monitor a range of heritable conditions, cancer predisposition syndromes and rare cancers. This means we're enabling earlier detection and more targeted treatment, giving Australians the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about their health. With innovation, though, must come protection. With progress must come safeguards. With new knowledge must come confidence.</para>
<para>We know that some people, unfortunately, have been wary of undergoing genetic testing. They're postponing it or avoiding it altogether because of the perceived risks to their privacy and, significantly, to their ability to access financial products such as life insurance. This is deeply concerning because when Australians avoid testing they're not just avoiding information; they're missing opportunities for early intervention, missing opportunities to protect their health and, sadly, in some cases, missing opportunities that could save their lives. No-one should be dissuaded from potentially life-saving testing out of fear of discrimination in life insurance.</para>
<para>This bill before us today is about fairness, and it's long overdue. No Australian should ever be punished for seeking to understand their own health. They should never face a penalty for taking proactive steps to protect themselves and their families. Australia lags other countries on this issue, with prohibitions or bans already in place in the United Kingdom, Canada, parts of Europe, the United States and New Zealand. But this bill changes that. This bill brings Australia into line with global best practice. It provides certainty, clarity and protection.</para>
<para>This bill amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to ban life insurers from taking into account information about an individual's genetic testing to inform the offer of life insurance cover or the terms and conditions of the cover that is offered. It bans the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance underwriting and applies to life insurance contract decisions made on or after the date of commencement. This ensures that the protection is forward-looking. It ensures that Australians can engage with genetic testing with confidence, and it ensures that the system is fair.</para>
<para>This legislation has broad support across the parliament—or I thought it did, before we heard the previous speaker—and has been a long time coming, spanning multiple parliaments. This should not be a partisan issue. This should not be an opportunity for cheap performances and political points. This is a national issue about making sure all Australians can get the health care they need when they need it. This reflects years of work, consultation and advocacy, and it demonstrates what can be achieved if we decide to work together as representatives and legislators.</para>
<para>In response to a 2018 parliamentary committee report, the Financial Services Council introduced a genetics moratorium to address disincentives to undertaking genetic testing. In 2023, following years of research advocacy, Monash University—which happens to be my former university, in our local area—played a leading role in this space with the A-GLIMMER report, published in June 2023 by Jane Tiller, measuring the impact of the moratorium. I want at this point to thank Dr Tiller for her extraordinary work in this space. She has done so much. I've met with her a couple of times to talk about this, and I'm really pleased that we're able to see this bill before the House today.</para>
<para>Her research provided critical evidence, insight into behaviour and highlighted the real-world consequences of policy gaps. Dr Tiller's report and subsequent genetic testing studies show that more than half of the participants who stopped their involvement in testing did so because of concerns about accessing affordable insurance. That's an incredible number. This is not a marginal issue. This is a systemic problem and one that absolutely demands the action we're taking today. Every Australian should have every opportunity to receive the care that they need. We cannot accept a system where fear overrides health or where financial concerns override medical advice, and we cannot accept a system that discourages prevention.</para>
<para>One participant in the research was Ben. Ben didn't have any significant family history of cancer, but he took part in a genetic testing study. The results showed he carries a PALB2 variant, which raises the risk of prostate and breast cancer in men. This information was important not only for him but also for his female relatives, who now know that they face high risks of breast and ovarian cancer and have begun the process of getting tested. Learning about these elevated risks has motivated Ben to adopt risk-reducing strategies, and I thank Ben for his advocacy and participation in this work. Ben's story is powerful. It shows the value of knowledge. It shows the ripple effects of testing, and it shows how one decision can benefit not just an individual but an entire family.</para>
<para>Dr Tiller called for an amendment to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to prohibit the use of genetic or genomic testing results to discriminate between applicants for risk rated insurance. This bill responds to that call. We want people to get tested and to use this knowledge to improve their health and better manage any underlying conditions they may have. We want Australians to feel empowered in every regard. We want them to be informed and to be supported.</para>
<para>In 2024-25, the government subsidised more than 600,000 genetic and genomic tests under Medicare, totalling over $160 million in benefits. This reflects growing demand. It reflects growing awareness, and it reflects a central role that genetics now play in modern medicine. This represents a growth of approximately 85 per cent in the annual number of Medicare funded genetic and genomic tests between the years of 2019-20 and 2024-25. This growth will continue, and, as it does, our policy framework must keep pace.</para>
<para>If a person wishes to voluntarily provide their test results to an insurer, they may do so. However, there are strong consumer protections to ensure that any disclosure is deliberate and properly authorised. An insurer cannot use volunteered test results to produce a less favourable insurance outcome than would have applied had the results not been disclosed. This is a critical safeguard. It ensures that disclosure cannot be used against individuals, and it reinforces fairness in the system. The intention of this bill is to reduce the number of Australians delaying or forgoing genetic testing due to concerns about the possible impact on their life insurance, because when we remove fear, participation increases. When participation increases, outcomes improve, and when outcomes improve, lives are saved. The ban is not intended to remove a life insurer's ability to obtain and use other information necessary to effectively risk assess and underwrite insurance policies. However, insurers must continue to comply with the reasonableness requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.</para>
<para>This reform will not increase the cost of life or other insurance products. As life insurers remain able to effectively risk rate policies, there is no threat of the industry taking on unacceptable risks that would increase pay-outs and drive up premiums. What this bill does is create a new strict liability offence and a civil penalty provision for breaches of the ban, with ASIC assigned regulatory responsibility for monitoring and enforcement, because enforcement matters, accountability matters and strong oversight ensures confidence in the system. Whether ASIC chooses to pursue criminal sanctions or a civil penalty will depend on the facts of each case. The ban covers life cover, total and permanent disability insurance, trauma insurance and income protection insurance and will come into effect six months after receiving royal assent.</para>
<para>No-one should be dissuaded from potentially life-saving testing out of fear of discrimination in life insurance. That's the core message of this bill. It's a message that deserves to be repeated. Australians should never have to choose between protecting their health and protecting their family's financial future. That's the choice that this bill removes, and this reform really does matter.</para>
<para>I once again thank Dr Jane Tiller, author of the Monash report, for her ongoing advocacy in this area as well as Minister Mulino, former minister Stephen Jones and colleagues across this parliament and previous parliaments who have contributed to this important reform. This is a testament to what can be achieved through persistence and collaboration and in doing what is right. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak to schedule 1 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. I want to begin by acknowledging the work that's gone into bringing this bill before the parliament. This is an area that has been discussed, consulted on and called for over many years, and I welcome the fact that we're now delivering clear, legislated protections for Australians.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 bans life insurers from requesting or using a person's genetic test results when making decisions about life insurance. It replaces a voluntary industry moratorium with a clear legal rule, backed by enforcement and review. It allows insurers to continue to rely on clinically diagnosed conditions and family medical history, but draws a firm line around predictive genetic information which reflects risk rather than illness. Just as importantly, it gives people certainty that choosing to undertake genetic testing will not jeopardise their access to financial security.</para>
<para>This reform matters, because fear of insurance discrimination has been preventing people from accessing potentially life-saving genetic testing and participating in medical research. No-one should have to choose between protecting their health and protecting their financial future. Many of us on the crossbench have been raising this issue for some time through letters to government, questions in parliament and collaboration with health experts, researchers and consumer advocates. We've pushed for legislation because the evidence was clear a voluntary framework is not enough. This bill reflects that evidence, and it reflects the overwhelming consensus from the medical community, consumer groups and, importantly, the insurance industry itself. This is what good evidence based policymaking looks like.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 is a sensible, proportionate reform that strengthens privacy, supports public health and removes the barrier to early diagnosis and prevention. It shows that when parliament listens carefully, works collaboratively and follows the evidence, we can deliver reforms that make a real difference to people's lives. I commend the government for bringing this forward, and I commend schedule 1 of the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025 is an important piece of legislation. It truly is. What I do question is why it has taken this long to be brought before the House. The coalition, as is often the case, had to drag Labor kicking and screaming to this point.</para>
<para>The government does need criticism for delaying implementation of this vital bill, which contains long overdue protections around the use of genetic information in life insurance, which is in schedule 1; relief for foreign financial services providers, which is in schedule 2; and financial adviser registration requirements, which is in schedule 4. But there's also the point about weakening scrutiny by introducing new funding arrangements for multilateral development banks, which is part of schedule 3.</para>
<para>I appreciate that there has been stakeholder negotiation. All too often we find with any bill Labor introduces that, first of all, it's too little, too late. There's procrastination. But so often we hear from stakeholder groups that they have not been able to put their case to the government and that there has been little or no consultation. At least these organisations are supportive of the bill: the Financial Services Council, the Council of Australian Life Insurers, the Australian Financial Markets Association, the Financial Advice Association Australia and Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand. That support is to be encouraged because a bill which contains these sorts of measures needs proper input.</para>
<para>In 2019, whilst in government, the Liberals and Nationals coalition supported the introduction of an industry moratorium as a temporary or interim safeguard with the expectation that legislation would follow. By the time the May 2022 election came around, there was broad agreement across industry, clinician stakeholders and the parliament that legislated protections were needed. Of course, a number of things happened after 2019, not least of which was COVID-19, that put great difficulties on a number of things. Move on to September 2024, when the coalition was no longer in government—more's the pity—the then assistant treasurer, the former member for Whitlam, the immediate past member for that electorate, announced to great fanfare that Labor would be introducing legislation to ban—forbid—genetic discrimination in life insurance. That announcement was widely welcomed, and it raised genuine and real expectations amongst Australians and the medical community, as previous speakers have noted, that people should not be discriminated against because they go and get medical checks for hereditary illnesses or diseases or the like. But by the 2025 election, no legislation had been introduced, none. These reforms, it seems, were simply not a priority for Labor. Labor came to office in May 2022 promising to be more transparent, promising that it would get on with the job that it said it would do. But we know, in so many areas of endeavour that are so important to Australians, that Labor has failed, and this is another of them.</para>
<para>Australians were left waiting and wondering and the delay has had genuine consequences. Delaying a bill such as this does have an impact in the community, in all of our communities. The people we represent, ordinary everyday Australians, expect better and expect this place to just get on with the job. I know the wheels of parliamentary process, just like the wheels of law and legalese and justice, turn very slowly at times but they don't have to turn this slowly. We just heard from the Teal member for Curtin. With strong bipartisan support—refer back to what I said when we were in government in 2019—and with no opposition, there is no reason why this legislation could not have been introduced in the previous term—no reason, none whatsoever.</para>
<para>Labor's delay was not without effects, not without consequences and, as I said, they are real consequences. People who could have benefited from genetic testing may have been discouraged because of concerns about insurance discrimination. That is not being melodramatic; it is not too far fetched. That is a genuine concern. It was a real fear amongst people who could have, would have or possibly did delay the genetic testing that would have gotten the important medical results they needed for their own peace of mind and for the sake of their own health. Labor kicked this into the long grass.</para>
<para>As I said, when there is procrastination and the government delays, as it so often does, there are genuine impacts in our communities across Australia. We have to be better than this—we do—particularly when there is bipartisan support, and when it seems you're not going to get pushback from the crossbench, and when it's just perfunctory legislation, or it seems that way. When the Senate will agree, the parliament will concur and royal assent will be given, I ask: Why the hold-up? Why the delay? What we're talking about is people's lives. What we're dealing with here is people's health. It's not good enough. We've got to be better. The government has to pull its socks up; it really does.</para>
<para>The coalition supports these reforms, as we always did. We back them because they provide that certainty that is needed. They do prevent discrimination. I genuinely, in my heart of hearts, would've thought that avoiding discrimination would've been one of the hallmarks of a Labor government. It seems that, whilst it might be, the delays are questionable. The coalition backs these reforms because they support better health outcomes.</para>
<para>When I came into parliament in 2010, I was told that, if you had a healthy community, you had a happy community and things would go along pretty well. We've got a cost-of-living crisis at the moment, but health is everything. Yes, people are finding it difficult to pay their bills and, yes, every time they open their energy bill, every time they go to the supermarket and, goodness gracious, every time they go to the petrol station now they almost need to extend their mortgage, but if they're healthy, at least they're going to be happy. This bill supports better health outcomes, and that's why the coalition backs it. It's why Labor should've introduced it much, much earlier than right now. The reality is that this was a reform everyone agreed on, yet Australians were left waiting due to Labor's delays, and we don't know why.</para>
<para>In schedule 2, where there's relief for foreign financial service providers, the coalition acted and Labor delayed; that's a simple fact. This schedule provides long-overdue clarity for foreign financial service providers operating here in this country. It will assist in ensuring our market remains open, competitive and connected to global financial expertise, and let's face it—there are some xenophobic people in this place; we all know who they are and what they're about—we do live in a situation where we are very much part and parcel of international global financial markets.</para>
<para>In this particular schedule, schedule 2, we see more evidence of how slow this government has been on this particular bill. This legislation is another bipartisan reform that has broad stakeholder support. The coalition introduced this legislation in 2022, and since then industry has been waiting for Labor to deliver. It's been four years—four long years—of delay from this government for reforms that have across-the-board support. At the same time, Labor will look to rush through controversial new taxes, as they did with the super tax. These delays have led to ongoing regulatory uncertainty, reduced confidence for international firms, which is a shame, and risks to Australia's competitiveness as a financial services destination. We don't want that, and we can't afford that; we simply can't.</para>
<para>The third schedule deals with multilateral development banks. As I said, we are at times very much at the whim of international global uncertainty and the financial markets and how they're shaped by other bigger players in this area. We are a competitive force, and we need to ensure that anything to do with this and other bills has that taken into accord and account.</para>
<para>The bill introduces standing appropriations without a clear upper limit, meaning funding can be committed by the government without the same level of parliamentary approval each time. You can look at that a couple of ways. One of the situations that we've got at the moment is uncapped limits, it seems, on the National Disability Insurance Scheme. That is having all sorts of consequences for employment, because a lot of people are acting as carers when they would otherwise be engaging in other services in our community, services that are now being left way behind—I refer to child care and aged care—under the guise of the NDIS, which is this all-encompassing monster. I'm sure that every single one of our electorate offices is being bombarded with complaints about NDIS issues at the moment. And this, in this particular bill, is concerning.</para>
<para>The parliament should not be asked to sign blank cheques. All too often, particularly under this government, we have seen this parliament just push through legislation, and it seems as though the debt situation is just getting out of control. Nobody is caring, nobody is monitoring, and we do not want a situation with the NDIS similar to that where it just gets out of control.</para>
<para>I can remember Morris Iemma, who was a Labor state premier, was concerned about the health aspects of the New South Wales budget getting out of control. He said so, bravely. It was necessary to rein it in not to cut costs at the expense of people's health but to put a diligent ruler over what was necessary. We have to. We must, as an absolute priority, do it with the NDIS at the moment, lest it get out of control, if it isn't already. When it comes to this particular bill, this legislation before the House, we ought to do the same.</para>
<para>The coalition ultimately supports these provisions because we must meet our international obligations. Our credibility in global economic institutions actually does matter. We cannot afford to be seen as a slow or unreliable partner, and we never are. We said—and we said it under the previous leader of the opposition, the member for Farrer, and I know the member for Hume feels the same way—that when there's good legislation, the shadow cabinet will consider it, we'll take it through the normal processes, and, if it's good legislation and it's good for Australia, then it will be good for the coalition. We'll certainly support it because that's the way the coalition operates. We do it in the best interest, the national interest. We're always operating in the national interest. When Australia makes commitments, they will be honoured, and that's important, too. You must keep your word. Keeping your word is something that is important not just in politics but in life. It's important that you stay the course, keep the faith and keep your word.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I still remember walking through the city on my lunch break in Brisbane many years ago, when my phone rang and my dermatologist's number came up. I had had regular skin checks since I was 16. I grew up in central Queensland, in a small town called Yeppoon. I spent long days at the beach and did competitive sailing with not a lot of protection, and it had its consequences. Over the years, I had many biopsies. My last routine check before that phone call, a suspicious mole was removed, and, this time, it came back. That phone call was life-changing for me. It was a melanoma, and I was 27 years old. In the years that followed, I was diagnosed with two more melanomas in different locations. In total, I had three melanomas diagnosed before I turned 30. After that, I sought support from the Cancer Council Queensland, I joined fundraising efforts like the Melanoma March, and I enrolled in clinical trials, hoping that my experience might help others.</para>
<para>It was during those trials that I first encountered the challenges around genetic testing. I remember being told that participating and providing DNA samples could affect my ability to get life insurance. I was asked whether I wanted to know if there were any indicators of future illness and warned about the consequences of receiving those results.</para>
<para>At that time, as someone who was under 30, it was a pretty confronting conversation to have. When faced with your own mortality and with choices about whether to proceed with receiving those results, I do remember wondering how many people would opt out, how many people would choose not to know because of the complications for them with their life insurance? How many would potentially walk away from life-saving treatment and testing not because of the fear of the illness but because of the fear of the financial consequences that might follow for them and, most importantly, for their family. That is why I rise today to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025.</para>
<para>This legislation is about giving Australians certainty—certainty that they can take steps to protect their health without being penalised for it. For too long, Australians have faced discrimination based on their genetics when seeking life insurance. Insurers have been able to refuse cover, increase premiums or impose conditions on genetic test results. That's exactly what happened to me with an exemption around skin cancer. The result of that is clear; people do delay or avoid testing altogether, even when it could save their lives. This bill changes that. It ensures that life insurers cannot use protected genetic information to refuse cover, raise premiums or impose conditions. It means Australians will no longer have to disclose genetic test results when applying for life insurance, and it gives Australians the confidence to participate in medical research and take control of their health without fear.</para>
<para>This is not just a policy issue; it is a human issue and it is an issue of fairness. We have seen what happens when protections are not strong enough. The industry's self-regulated moratorium was a step forward, but it has not provided the certainty Australians need. Confusion still remains, trust is low and too many people still avoid testing. This is not a system that protects people; it is a system that holds them back, and this bill fixes that.</para>
<para>The need for reform is not abstract; it has very real consequences. Some people may have heard of the story of a Bundaberg mother, Judy Honor, who lives with Lynch Syndrome, a genetic condition that increases cancer risk. Her son Dwayne avoided genetic testing not because he didn't want to know about his health but because he feared the impact on his life insurance. Because of that decision, he also stepped back from participating in research. That is the consequence of the current system, and it's not an isolated case. When I spoke to researchers at the PA hospital where I did a number of clinical trials, they told me that they were struggling to get participants because of the genetic-testing consequences for people. Surveys and research have shown that many Australians delay or avoid testing for the same reason. Researchers have often reported difficulties in recruitment. Health professionals have overwhelmingly agreed that change is needed. When people are too afraid to learn about their health, something is fundamentally wrong in the system and does need to change.</para>
<para>We know that genetic testing saves lives. It enables early intervention, it guides treatment, it allows families to make informed decisions. We are entering an era where genomics is transforming health care from cancer detection to rare-disease diagnosis to targeted therapies, but that progress means very little if Australians are afraid to access it. This bill will ensure that those healthcare advances translate into real benefits for Australians, not more barriers.</para>
<para>Ten years on from that first diagnosis, I happily remain cancer free. I still have regular skin checks every six months and I continue to support clinical trials. I know how important it is for Australians to feel confident to do the same, because when people avoid testing, we will all lose—we will lose opportunities for early diagnosis, we will lose opportunities for prevention and we will lose progress in medical research. This bill will ensure that we do not suffer any of those losses and also that Australia keeps pace with the rest of the world. Countries like the United Kingdom and Canada have already acted to protect citizens from genetic discrimination.</para>
<para>Without reform, we risk falling behind not just in fairness but in science, so the choice before us is clear. I'm pleased to hear the support from all sides of the chamber on this bill. We know that we cannot allow fear and uncertainty to continue to hold Australians back. We can create a system that supports people to take control of their health, and this bill does exactly that. It will remove a major barrier to testing, it will support research participation, and it will restore trust in the life insurance system.</para>
<para>This type of research and testing also has the potential to reduce out-of-pocket costs. By detecting diseases early on, Australians will save extensive treatment and out-of-pocket costs down the track. That certainly was the case for me. Supporting Australians' health and being proactive in getting the health care they need is a priority for the Albanese Labor government. That is why we have implemented things like tripling the bulk-billing incentive. This will see over 4,800 more clinics convert to fully bulk-billed over the next four years, including 13 in my electorate of Bonner. This will mean that local families can continue to see a doctor for free. With cheaper medicines, Australians can get the health care they need when they need it. They won't put off looking after their health. It also eases the financial pressure that many families experience when faced with incredibly hard decisions between things like groceries and medication due to cost-of-living pressures.</para>
<para>The Albanese government has made medicines cheaper. Residents in my electorate have saved more than $12.8 million across two million scripts. From 1 January, we have seen the cost of PBS medications drop to just $25 per script. Since being elected, Labor has added over 300 new and amended listings to the PBS. Those listings have saved families hundreds of thousands of dollars, and, through the $800 million women's healthcare package, we are seeing much needed treatment for women and girls being made cheaper and more accessible. With more medicines listed on the PBS, it's also enabled more than 365,000 women to access more than 715,000 cheaper scripts for oral contraceptives and menopausal hormone therapies.</para>
<para>Labor has also invested more than $49 million to provide around 430,000 more services to help women across the country with complex gynaecological conditions, including endometriosis, polycystic ovarian syndrome and chronic pelvic pain. The women's healthcare package includes the first new listing of oral contraceptive pills in more than 30 years, saving 150,000 women hundreds of dollars every year. By making health care more affordable, more Australians will put their health first. This bill is one more piece of that work.</para>
<para>What this bill really says is simple—no Australian should be judged by the genes they are born with. No Australian should be denied life insurance because of a condition they may never develop. Genetic information is not destiny. It is not a guarantee of illness. It does not predict when a condition might appear, how severe it might be or whether it will happen at all. This bill restores fairness, it restores dignity and it restores trust in the life insurance system. No Australian should have to choose between knowing their health risks and securing life insurance to provide financial security to protect their family. This is practical and compassionate reform. It strengthens our health system. It supports our research sector, and it reflects modern science. It will also protect our families, and it will ensure that Australians can take control of their health without fear. I am proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government that is ending this form of discrimination. The message is very clear with this bill: your genes are not your fault, your health decisions should not determine your insurability, and your future should be shaped by your choices, not your DNA. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise this afternoon to speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. I will come to the bill in a moment; I want to first, as the shadow minister for regional health, talk about the importance of primary and preventive care.</para>
<para>Halting genetic discrimination in the life insurance industry is a good start on better health care. It's just the beginning. We are at a fork in the road when it comes to health care in this country, particularly in regional Australia, with an ageing population and burgeoning rates of chronic disease. Our health services are struggling to keep up in the cities, let alone in the regions. We cannot afford to continue investing in acute hospital based care if we are not adequately investing in preventive health care and primary health care.</para>
<para>The Australian health system does not prioritise prevention as it should, or in the way other countries do, with only two per cent of the Australian health budget targeted at prevention or public health. Other nations with similar health systems spent in excess of five per cent of their budget on prevention. We know in regional Australia how important primary and preventive health care is. As in many rural towns and localities, it is the only health care close to where you live. We don't have the urgent care clinics that Labor like to get up and thump their chests about. We don't even have the doctors; they vanished into metropolitan areas under rule changes Labor made as soon as they came to office in 2022.</para>
<para>Increasing funding for prevention via genetic testing is an important step. DNA screening found hundreds of people at high risk of cancer and heart disease who can now take action to prevent disease. They published health economic modelling that indicated it would be cost-effective to offer high-risk DNA screening to the whole Australian adult population. This sort of evidence for policy decision-making should not be ignored.</para>
<para>I am speaking today amid a fuel crisis in regional Australia, and I'm very concerned that regional Australians will postpone or cancel a visit to their doctor if they can't afford or even source the fuel to get to the doctor. It is high time the Albanese Labor government thought about policy for regional Australians, not just for metropolitan Australians, that considers their poorer health status. One of my constituents, from Kaniva, told me recently she had to cancel a health appointment in Horsham because her local service station was out of fuel. Labor has let that woman down. She couldn't access health care—so spare me the posturing about women's health. Labor is not doing enough to help regional women access the health care they need.</para>
<para>I note this is an omnibus bill with amendments across several unrelated areas of law—what a shock! I intend to speak today to schedule 1 of the bill, on genetic protections in life insurance. This is an issue close to my heart, and I have advocated in this space over a period of time, working with Dr Jane Tiller of Monash University, particularly in my past role in the shadow ministry in regional health—a role that I'm honoured to hold again as the shadow minister for regional health and regional communications. I've long been interested in the benefits of predictive genetic testing for prevention and removal of discriminatory use of this health information. I've spoken on this issue in parliament previously. I am regularly contacted by constituents from my electorate of Mallee who are concerned about discrimination in the life insurance industry based on genetic information and who laud the benefits of genetic testing for preventive health interventions. I acknowledge the tireless work of Dr Jane Tiller and her team at DNA Screen, Monash University, Melbourne, in this area. Dr Tiller is project co-lead at DNA Screen, a lawyer and genetic counsellor with a keen interest in the regulatory and ethical aspects of genomics and public health.</para>
<para>What does this bill do? The 'genetic testing protections in life insurance' schedule of this bill amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to insert a new division banning life insurers from using or requiring protected genetic information when deciding whether to offer life insurance cover. This includes trauma, total and permanent disability or income protection policies often bundled with life cover. 'Protected genetic information' generally refers to results from predictive genetic tests—for example, for hereditary disease risks like BRCA mutations—but family history or already diagnosed conditions may still be usable. A related amendment to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 aligns antidiscrimination protections with this ban to ensure consistency. The change aims to encourage Australians to undergo genetic testing for health or medical reasons without fear of being denied insurance or copping a loading on their insurance, which addresses a longstanding discrimination concern.</para>
<para>It is essential to see the provisions of schedule 1 of this bill pass both houses of parliament to remove disincentives that discourage Australians seeking preventative genetic testing, and that is because genetic testing saves lives. Genetic testing can enable prevention of disease in very high risk people, and there are more of them than most people realise. The DNA Screen study at Monash University tested 10,000 people aged 18 to 40 years for high genetic risk of preventable cancer and heart disease, finding one in 50—two per cent—cent at high risk. That is a lot of Australians. Monash's DNA Screen study found that those people were able to access preventative measures such as surgery, surveillance and medication.</para>
<para>Regional people are especially burdened by the types of disease that genetic testing can help prevent. The Wesfarmers health index 2025, based on 3.6 million real time SiSU Health Station checks from July 2024 to June 2025, ranks my electorate of Mallee as the most at-risk federal electorate in Victoria for cardiometabolic conditions, including obesity, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risks like heart attack and stroke. Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of death in regional Australia. This is not the case in major cities, where dementia is the leading cause.</para>
<para>The holistic burden of disease due to coronary heart disease—this means not just the impact of people dying, but of years spent living with illness—increases with geographic remoteness from 9.5 disability adjusted life years in major cities per thousand people to 21.3 in remote and very remote areas. The rate of cancer is highest in inner and outer regional parts of the country, at 512 cases per 100,000 people, which is higher than in major cities. Shockingly, the rate of survival with a cancer diagnosis reduces with geographic remoteness. Given the impact of cancer and heart disease in regional Australia is far greater than in our cities, it is essential we progress measures to reduce that risk by preventing disease where possible. Prevention and delay of chronic conditions increases quality years of life and decreases costs to the healthcare system.</para>
<para>Most notably, prevention saves the precious lives of dads, mums, sons and daughters—children. The loss of life is always tragic, but preventable loss is even more so. In regional Australia, access to healthcare services is a challenge. Vast distances, higher costs, challenges in recruiting and keeping the required workforce, and inadequate government investment—these factors all contribute. Regional people are well known to present to hospital with later stage illnesses, sicker than their city counterparts, often being hospitalised for conditions that were in fact preventable or could have been managed in primary care by a GP or nurse practitioner. With this in mind, it's not hard to see why I'm a strong advocate for interventions like preventive genetic testing, with the potential to identify risk factors for disease before they become life threatening, and encourage people to seek the care they need before it's too late.</para>
<para>Interestingly, it's not just older people who are interested in accessing genetic screening. Young Australians want preventive genetic information, too. The DNA Screen study was extremely popular, with tens of thousands of young people registering their interest in participating in the study. In my electorate of Mallee, at least 36 young people participated in the study. One young person was found to be at high genetic risk of bowel cancer and has now been able to access preventive health care.</para>
<para>The main reason that people who signed up for DNA Screen decided not to participate was genetic discrimination in life insurance. For decades this has been a significant ethical concern for Australians who have had to choose between genetic testing that could save their life and potential financial implications for their life insurance. This bill will end that discrimination and that fear and enable Australians to make decisions about genetic testing and genetic research without worrying about life insurance. This legislation will address the most significant barrier to testing for Australians and will pave the way for greater investment into preventive genomic screening.</para>
<para>The DNA Screen study hopes to expand its testing to 100,000 people. This would identify thousands more at-risk people, who will not have to worry about life insurance discrimination, and move towards a screening program to use genomics to prevent disease. We must move into an era of using genomics to prevent and get ahead of disease. Published modelling indicates that this screening is cost effective, with associated productivity gains in the billions of dollars. This makes very good economic sense.</para>
<para>It has taken too long for the Albanese Labor government to bring this legislation to the parliament. They shamefully abandoned their promise to protect Australians from genetic discrimination in life insurance in the previous term of their government, breaking a historic commitment made in September 2024. The pledge, publicly announced by the Assistant Treasurer, was a sign of hope for any Australian with a hereditary disease and was widely celebrated by clinicians, advocates, researchers and organisations across the country. Genetic life insurance discrimination discourages individuals from seeking vital genetic testing, denying them access to potentially life-saving information and treatment. The government's commitment was a landmark step towards ensuring equitable access to genomic health care for all Australians, offering security to individuals and families undergoing genetic testing.</para>
<para>There has long been broad agreement and support for this ban on life insurers using genetic testing to refuse cover, and it is disappointing that Australians have faced delays due to the incompetence of this government. This is an egregious example of the Albanese government's focus on announcements and grandstanding rather than the follow-through. Dr Jane Tiller from Monash University has been campaigning for a ban for almost a decade. With strong bipartisan support and no opposition, there is no reason why this legislation should not have been introduced to parliament sooner, as promised by the government. I am grateful—on behalf of all Australians, but especially regional Australians—that this bill is now before us, and I look forward to seeing the passage and implementation of this legislation in practice.</para>
<para>In closing, schedule 1 of this bill represents a long-awaited and profoundly important step towards safeguarding Australians from genetic discrimination, ensuring that individuals can seek life-saving genetic information without fear or penalty. For too long, the threat of insurance consequences has acted as a barrier to preventive health care, limiting the potential of modern genomics to reduce illness, improve wellbeing and save lives.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate will be resumed at a later hour, and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>104</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>One Nation, Fuel</title>
          <page.no>104</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>First of all, I'd like to say thank you to the people of South Australia for what is a remarkable turn in the politics of this nation. I hope that, with the great honour you've entrusted in One Nation, that One Nation does its absolute, diligent best to look after the people of South Australia. I'd like to say to Cory Bernardi and Carlos Quaremba: congratulations on a brilliant election, and you've done a great job.</para>
<para>Now, unfortunately, it's back to the fuel crisis. When this started, Minister Plibersek said: 'Don't worry, we've got electric trucks to cart things around.' Well, no, we don't. And then Minister Bowen said there was no shortage. Next thing we know, there's a shortage. Then, Minister Bowen told us there was no crisis, and, next thing we know, he's telling us about a crisis. Then, he said there was no rationing.</para>
<para>These things were brought up first by One Nation—no rationing, now they're talking about working from home. So I'm trying to work out how this works. Abattoir workers—how exactly does that work? Do they take the bodies back and break them down in the lounge room? How do you work from home as a coffee shop owner? Do the semitrailers never leave the garage? What about supermarket workers? We've had an electricity crisis brought on by this government's climate policy and a fuel crisis brought about by climate policy. What we actually have is a government in crisis.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cockman, Ms Margaret, OAM</title>
          <page.no>104</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge the Member for Pearce. I understand that the Member for Pearce would like to present a copy of their speech for incorporation into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard </inline>in accordance with the resolution agreed to on 6 November 2025.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I agree, it'll bore them all to death.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I ask the member for Kennedy to withdraw that comment immediately.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I withdraw.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para><inline font-style="italic">The incorporated speech read as follows—</inline></para>
<para>I would like to acknowledge someone truly extraordinary, Margaret Cockman, who was honoured posthumously on the Western Australian Women's Hall of Fame Roll of Honour.</para>
<para>Margaret wasn't just a leader—she was the heart and soul of Wanneroo. Her quiet strength, compassion, and unwavering belief in service shaped the community we are so proud to call home. She dedicated her life to bringing people together, and she did it with humility, warmth, and a genuine love for others.</para>
<para>Margaret's lifelong commitment to community service was recognised in so many ways. She was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia, received the Centenary Medal, and was named a freeman of both the City of Wanneroo and the City of Joondalup in Western Australia. Each of these honours reflects the deep respect and gratitude felt by all who had the privilege of knowing her and witnessing her remarkable contribution.</para>
<para>I was fortunate to know and work alongside Margaret. She was a dear friend who led with wisdom, grace, and a smile that could light up any room. To her family: thank you for sharing her with all of us. Her legacy will continue to inspire us to lead with kindness, strength, and community spirit, just as she always did.</para>
<para>Congratulations, Margaret. We miss you dearly, and today I honour you with love, respect, and heartfelt gratitude for a lifetime of selfless service.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Fuel prices, fuel distribution and now fuel shortages are front of mind for families, farmers and small businesses right across the electorate of Flynn. This is no longer just a cost-of-living issue; it is becoming a supply crisis. Right now, fuel excise must be cut to provide immediate relief while prices remain volatile and unpredictable. Beyond price, we are facing a deeper problem. Large fuel suppliers are failing to provide adequate quotas to independent distributors and the very businesses that keep our agricultural sector moving, our transport industry running and our regional communities connected. Farmers are being left without diesel to operate machinery during critical periods. Transport operators are struggling to keep goods moving, and, in some communities across the Flynn electorate, families are arriving at the bowser only to find there is simply no fuel available. Minister Chris Bowen must step in and ensure that fair fuel allocations are mandated so that independent distributors can continue to supply regional and rural Australia.</para>
<para>At the same time, we must address this long-term challenge. Australia needs to prioritise increasing domestic fuel production, strengthen our fuel supply chains and invest in refining capability to ensure we are never left in this vulnerable position again. Fuel security is national security, and regional Australia is being left behind.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Greenlink Box Hill</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NG</name>
    <name.id>316052</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Greenlink nursery in Box Hill in my electorate is a wonderful example of the way in which our community benefits from the dedication, hard work and generosity of volunteers. This indigenous plant nursery is 100 per cent volunteer run, and it was clear how much passion they have for the flora that is native to the City of Whitehorse and restoring the environment of the area to how it once was. It was a pleasure to visit the nursery recently and learn firsthand from the expertise of volunteers about the unique seeds, saplings, shrubs and trees. I saw firsthand how organised and efficient the Greenlink team are at producing thousands of plants that are available at affordable prices to the local community every year. Volunteers put in over 5,000 hours and plant close to 50,000 plants annually, helping create greener indigenous spaces across residential, public and community areas in Menzies. Greenlink have created an environment where every volunteer is valued for their expertise and interests. There is no doubt that this is the secret of the longevity and success of their organisation, which has spanned several decades. Thank you to Robert, Emi, Trevor, Gabrielle and everyone else at Greenlink for the tour and for the delicious morning tea. I look forward to returning soon to help fill out my own garden with beautiful Indigenous plants.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():  We export our oil production for $8,000 million a year and we import our petrol and diesel for $62,000 million a year. Someone could infer from this that we are run by morons, but, then again, I don't hear any answers coming from the opposition. Well, in our little bailiwick, we'll give you the answers—we'll talk about ethanol. There's a country called Brazil. It makes jetliners. I flew with Qantas the other day, and the plane was an Embraer jet made in Brazil, one of the most advanced industrial countries on earth—60 per cent of its fuel needs are met from ethanol.</para>
<para>When Iemma introduced ethanol in New South Wales, he said, 'I can't go another day with people dying that don't have to die,' and there is no doubt that, every year in Sydney, somewhere between 1,000 and 2,000 people die that don't have to die. If you put aromatics in your petrol, as we are doing, it's carcinogenic—the small particles are carcinogenic. If you put ethanol in, instead of the aromatics, you get rid of the small particles and you get rid of the carcinogens. Has this country done it? No.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lavarch, Ms Colleen</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FRANCE</name>
    <name.id>270198</name.id>
    <electorate>Dickson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to honour the exceptional life of Colleen Lavarch, who left us in February, aged 94. She devoted her life to her two great loves: her family and the Australian Labor Party. She grew up inCamooweal, the daughter of the local publican, and was a single mum when she was motivated to join the ALP, after Gough Whitlam was dismissed in 1975. Like my own grandmother, she was aghast that the founder of Medibank and free university had been removed.</para>
<para>More than 50 years of campaigning for Labor in the Moreton Bay region followed, and her little love, Michael, followed her every step—letterboxing, street stalls and many election days together. They had a special bond. Michael recounted on the weekend that his mum, unmarried, had been put under pressure to give him up for adoption in 1961—she refused. Colleen raised Michael, instilling in him an unwavering commitment to social justice, and that little boy went on to study law at QUT and then, of course, to become the first Labor member for Fisher, the very first member for Dickson and the Attorney-General of Australia in the Keating government.</para>
<para>Colleen was the backbone of her local branch, a tireless election campaigner and a life member of the Queensland branch. Vale, Colleen Lavarch.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge one of my state members, Jimmy McDonald, who reached out to me on the weekend. We have a number of fuel suppliers and distributors in our region, and he received a text from one of them—I have also had conversations with many other suppliers. To put it in terms as simple as possible, the text outlined the fact that this supplier would normally receive between eight and nine B-doubles a week from the Brisbane terminal. They service 450 farmers across the region. They supply six independent service stations. They provide the fuel for the bus companies that get the kids to and from school, and they supply to councils. So that's all the vehicles and the machinery that go with making sure that our community is functional. In the last two weeks they've gone from eight or nine B-double loads, out of the Brisbane terminal, to two B-double loads. The text that Jimmy McDonald received said that, as of this week, there is nothing scheduled.</para>
<para>I want to share with the parliament my concerns: if my growers—the 450 farmers—can't start their tractors up to plant the food, the crisis we have today is going to look like child's play.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Soldier On</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Territory, as a lot of Australians know, has been hit by floods and cyclones. I want to give a shout-out to all those that are responding and assisting Territorians in their time of need. It was particularly impressive, on Friday just gone, that more than 350 people walked 14 kilometres in torrential rain from RAAF Base Darwin to Robertson Barracks, the home of the First Brigade, for a very important reason—that is, assisting Soldier On with the work they do to support our veterans.</para>
<para>RAAF to Robbo is organised by Soldier On and supported by our local radio station, Mix FM 104.9—tune in online! Soldier On delivers support services for current and former ADF personnel and their families. Soldier On's March On Challenge challenges people to walk or run 96 kilometres, symbolising the length of the Kokoda Track, to honour the courage and sacrifice of our veterans and their families. Here in Canberra tomorrow morning I'll be joining the March On walk around Lake Burley Griffin. A big shout-out to Soldier On NT's Rob Johnston and Mix 104.9's Daniel Hilliard and 'Lukey' Preece—good on you, mate— for making this important event happen.</para>
<para>Thank you to everyone who walked and who volunteered and backed the walk. The event keeps growing from year to year, and so does the support behind our veterans from the Albanese Labor government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The legacy that's being left by this Labor government is that the economy is weak, fuel supplies aren't guaranteed and Australians out there are hurting. The cost of living at the moment is getting hard to ignore. Day-to-day life just feels more expensive across the board. Groceries, fuel, insurance, housing—everything keeps creeping up, and it's not occasional any more; it's constant. It feels like you're always adjusting to just stay in the same place.</para>
<para>Those are not my words; they're the words of Madeleine, from Oxenford in my electorate. She's feeling the pain every single day, and the reason she's feeling the pain is, right now, if you go to the fuel pumps you'll pay nearly $3 a litre for diesel. There are local businesses that I know are contemplating putting a levy on their transport. Prices will continue to rise, inflation is already raging out of control and the Reserve Bank has just had to act by putting interest rates up to 4.1 per cent.</para>
<para>Australians out there are hurting. Everything is getting more expensive under the Albanese Labor government, and they don't seem to have a plan or a willingness to fix it. So what's left for the Australian people to do? The only thing they can do—that is, bring back a coalition government on that side of this House who will restore Australian standards of living.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Juvenile Arthritis</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Juvenile Arthritis Awareness Week was 16 to 23 March. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is one of the most common chronic childhood diseases, yet one of the least recognised. An estimated 6,000 to 10,000 Australian children under 16 and up to 30,000 young people under 24 live with this condition. Many are diagnosed only after permanent joint damage or even loss of vision has already occurred, and 80 per cent of children experience daily pain. This disease places a heavy burden on schooling, social participation, mental health and long-term wellbeing.</para>
<para>The Juvenile Arthritis Foundation Australia is working to change this. Through national awareness campaigns, community events, family hangouts and the Step Together with JAFA virtual fundraiser, they are bringing attention to the early signs of juvenile arthritis and encouraging families, educators and health professionals to recognise symptoms sooner.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government has also expanded access to humira, under the PBS, to treat juvenile idiopathic arthritis, taking the price from $650 per script to just $25—a significant saving and just one way we support impacted families. By raising awareness, we can help shorten the path to diagnosis and ensure that children receive specialist care as early as possible. I acknowledge all the families in my electorate— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Weekly Times Coles Farmer of the Year Award</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week I visited the Eather family farms near Narrabri. The Eathers were awarded the 2025 Weekly Times Coles Farmer of the Year award. I have met many pioneering families throughout the electorate of Parkes, where families have a reputation for being not only resourceful and resilient but innovative in their actions. This generational farming family are a great example. Since 1936, when Sydney and Isabelle Eather bought this land on the banks of the Namoi River and named it Bellevue, the family have weathered storms and droughts and evolved with the changing times. Bellevue began, as many farming operations did in those days, as a sheep grazing property. In the 1960s, the family began irrigation and diversified into fodder crops.</para>
<para>Fast-forward another 30 years and the Bellevue Pastoral Company portfolio has expanded and expanded, with a focus on broad-scale irrigation, particularly cotton and durum wheat. But, in response to the many challenges farming brings with it, the Eathers also use dryland farming practices to grow wheat, canola, sorghum and other cereals and pulses. The third and fourth generations of Eathers are now at the helm, with Darren and Leanne Eather and their son, Tom, leading a dedicated and hardworking team. It is an honour to be the farmer of the year in this great country of farmers, but one the Eathers richly deserve. The awards recognise excellence, innovation and resilience—qualities that have grown alongside these generations of the Bellevue Pastoral Company. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>AUKUS</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Following the recently announced $3.9 billion Albanese Labor government investment at the Osborne Naval Shipyard in Adelaide's north, they are building, preparing and planning for the greatest security partnership in this country's history—AUKUS. By the end of this decade, Australia will begin building its first SSN-AUKUS class boats in Osborne, the beating heart of this national endeavour.</para>
<para>To support the planned construction and operation of the submarine construction yard, enabling works have commenced to optimise access routes and traffic flows around the site, because thousands of additional highly skilled workers will need to access the site to build the boats. Of those thousands of additional workers, some of them will be trained at the Skills and Training Academy being built at Osborne, following a $480 million investment into Australia's naval shipbuilding and submarine construction workforce by the Albanese Labor government. The STAC will be supported by Australia's sovereign build partners, BAE systems and ASC, and is critical to growing our skilled workforce so that we can build our defence future.</para>
<para>The re-election of the Malinauskas Labor government last weekend means both state and federal Labor will continue to work together to encourage effort, collaboration and investment across our country as we upgrade and expand our defence capability in the interests of our national and regional security.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Regional Australia has grown accustomed to copping the brunt of this government's mismanagement, but nowhere is it more dire than the current fuel crisis. Last week I received an urgent plea from Carlie Comer, CEO of trusted community transport provider Linked Community Services in Port Macquarie. Linked transports well over 6,000 clients in my electorate to critical services like GPs and health specialists, as well as providing much needed relief from isolation for those in need, and, in many cases, grateful clients rely on this transport link just to make life worth living. But, right now, up to 70 per cent of those clients are at risk of losing access entirely without immediate intervention in fuel pricing and supply. That's 4½ thousand vulnerable older Australians left isolated and without options in Cowper alone.</para>
<para>With a minister for climate change and energy more concerned with crafting headlines than providing help, it's no wonder that the inboxes of every regional MP are filling up with similar pleas from farmers, freight operators and small businesses legitimately concerned they may be forced out of business as input costs surge and supply guarantees disappear. No farmers means no food. No freight operators means no supplies to the nation. While this government continues to serve up denial, diversion and deflection, regional Australia needs honesty, action and delivery, and they needed it—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Bendigo has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Government</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm really proud to stand here today as part of the Albanese Labor government to talk about our record on delivering, particularly for regional Australia, real cost-of-living measures.</para>
<para>We are expanding bulk-billing. Every Australian is now able to be bulk-billed if their doctor chooses to bulk-bill. We've made medicines cheaper. The maximum price that you'll pay for a medicine on the PBS is now $25—$7.70 for concession card holders.</para>
<para>We're delivering tax cuts for every worker, scrapping the unfair stage 3 by those opposite, and introducing more tax cuts—the next coming on 1 July 2026. We've lifted the super guarantee to 12 per cent. Social security payments have increased under us, including an almost 50 per cent increase in rent assistance. We've made child care cheaper, guaranteeing every child three days of subsidised child care early learning. There are more free TAFE courses. There's 30 per cent off home batteries. The 20 per cent instant asset write-off has been extended for another year, and the list continues.</para>
<para>In these uncertain, chaotic global times, what we need in this country is stable, experienced, mature government, and that's what we get from the Albanese Labor government. That's what we're delivering each and every day, not just for the people in my electorate of Bendigo but for all Australians everywhere.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's an absolute delight to get out of the Canberra bubble and go home to my wonderful electorate, but the stories I bring back are not great. I spoke to a farmer who had to stop mid-harvest because the price of petrol meant that he was no longer going to receive a profit from continuing on with his work. I spoke to a family in Toowoomba who could not afford to make the hour-long drive back and forth to Millmerran to see their elderly grandparents because the price of petrol made it unaffordable. I spoke to a truck driver who was having fuel stolen from his truck while he slept.</para>
<para>The clash of two worlds—what's happening out there and what's happening in the bubble—could not be more stark. We had a minister here, telling us there was no fuel supply issue in Australia. He blamed those farmers, those families, those truck drivers for causing the issue. He said it was panic buying. Minister, you cannot panic-buy from an empty servo. That's what we're experiencing. This minister needs to get out and see this.</para>
<para>How could he have handled this differently? Do you know what he could've done? He could've followed our blueprint from the AdBlue crisis of 2021. He could've followed what we did. Instead, he's been distracted. He's more concerned about being president of COP31. He's more concerned about his international commitments and looking good on the grand stage. He is not on the ground, experiencing what Australians are experiencing. It's an absolutely disgraceful performance from this minister, and I will call him out.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Medicare</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Bulk-billing rates are going up across the Hunter, and this did not happen by chance. It came from the biggest investment in Medicare in Australia's history. We chose to support our local GPs, strengthen primary care and make it easier for people to see a doctor without worrying about the cost. In the Hunter, we're already seeing the results of this. There are now 27 GP clinics that are fully bulk-billing. This means families can get care when they need it, where they need it. Pensioners do not have to delay treatment either. Young people can look after their health without financial stress. This is about getting Medicare back to what it should be. It should be for everybody, it should be easy to access and it should be fair.</para>
<para>But there is still more to do. In the Lake Macquarie area, access is not what it should be. That is why I'm working closely with the minister to make sure these improvements reach all parts of our community. We are not saying the job is done, but we are getting on with it. We are strengthening Medicare, we are supporting doctors and we are helping with the cost of living by improving everybody's health care, because in the Hunter and across Australia health care should be based on what you need, not on what you can afford. That is what people expect and that is what we are delivering.</para>
<para>Only an Albanese Labor government really cares about Medicare. That's why we will continue to invest in it, and we'll continue to invest in areas like the Hunter.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia is facing a massive fuel crisis, and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy acknowledged that two weeks ago in this House. Families, businesses and industry are feeling the pressure around the country as fuel prices spike and fuel shortages emerge. People want to know what the Albanese government's plan is.</para>
<para>You don't have to be an expert to see how dependent Australia is on global events. Most people know that we are trade exposed and vulnerable to supply chain disruption. That's why people are shocked to know that the Albanese government had no plan to deal with an oil supply shock in the Middle East. The Prime Minister should have known better. He, after all, gets briefed by his defence chiefs and his intelligence chiefs. He's even got President Trump's mobile phone number. He knew there was a military build-up in the Middle East. He knew there were rumblings of war. And now, after three weeks, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed and 20 per cent of the world's oil and gas is no longer on the global market.</para>
<para>When we asked the Minister for Defence Industry two weeks ago about military operations in the Strait of Hormuz, he couldn't give an answer. But, more importantly, he revealed he hadn't even thought about the question. The truth is that there was no plan for an extended closure of the Strait of Hormuz from the Albanese government, and Australians are now suffering as a result. Fuel prices are up, farmers are panicked about their crops and we are going to be waiting a very long time at the end of a very long global supply chain. It's not good enough, Prime Minister. Do better for the Australian people.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macquarie Electorate: Great Western Highway</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to set the record straight: Mount Victoria, Blackheath and Megalong Valley, west of Katoomba, are all open for business. Media reports of the closure of Victoria Pass—the steep hill you drive down at the end of the mountains to get to Little Hartley—have given people the wrong idea that somehow the mountains are closed. Yes, when you're heading west beyond Mount Victoria, the Great Western Highway is closed and a detour is in place to get people to the Central West. While traffic would that would normally stay on the Great Western Highway moseys on through the village of Mount Victoria, the cafes, hotels and retail shops are open as usual and keen for people to stop. The same is true for Blackheath and the Megalong Valley. The delis, the cafes, the butcher and the accommodation are all open and noticing that fewer people are stopping. So my message is: 'Go visit them, and Easter is the perfect time.'</para>
<para>I commend the state member for Blue Mountains, Trish Doyle, on the work she's doing to make sure all suggestions to help traffic move through the detour smoothly are considered and to ensure that the investigations into the Victoria Pass happen as fast as possible. Some vehicles are opting for the Bells Line of Road to and from Lithgow. Don't forget to stop at Berambing, Mount Tomah, Bilpin or Kurrajong, if you come that way, and support those local businesses. We are open for business.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians are hurting. After nearly four years of the Albanese government, Australians are worse off, and they believe the country is heading in the wrong direction. People are frustrated and angry because the price of everything is skyrocketing and they've been left behind by a prime minister who promised to govern for all Australians.</para>
<para>Australians are working this mob out. They see the arrogance. They see the hubris. They see the refusal to answer any questions at the dispatch box. Australians know they were lied to by the Labor Party. They were promised a $275 reduction in the cost of their energy bills by 2025, and it simply hasn't happened. It was a big fat Labor lie to get elected. Life keeps getting harder under the Labor Party, and last week mortgage holders copped another interest rate rise. The average mortgage holder in Australia today is more than $25,000 per year worse off, with extra interest payments, since the Labor Party came to power in 2022.</para>
<para>After nearly four years of the Albanese government, we are paying more for everything: insurance is up 39 per cent, energy is up 38 per cent, health is up 18 per cent and food is up 16 per cent, and now we have the fuel crisis. Australians are hurting. After four years of the Albanese government, Australians are worse off and the country is heading in the wrong direction. Only the coalition will restore Australia's standard of living.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>One Nation</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to speak directly to anyone who's considering supporting One Nation: don't do it. I know you're feeling frustrated or anxious, with cost-of-living challenges and concerns about the global fuel supply, but One Nation isn't the answer.</para>
<para>One Nation is like a bad Tinder date: they've got a photoshopped profile pic and they promise you the world, but the reality is very different. Just look at their voting record. They voted against strengthening workers' rights. They voted against making homes more affordable. They voted against funding more public schools, early childhood education and health care. And, just like any bad Tinder date, they'll stiff you with the bill at the end of the night. One Nation will leave us all paying a heavy price, and the coalition are no better. They are commitment phobes. They can't commit to each other, can't commit to their leaders and can't commit to their own policies.</para>
<para>The only party you should have a long-term relationship with is the Labor Party. We're there in the good times, with an increase in funding for public schools and TAFE, and we're there during the challenging times, with tax cuts. We're there in sickness and in health, delivering cheaper medicines, Medicare urgent care clinics and more bulk-billing. The Labor government is committed to its relationship with all Australians.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>SHADOW MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>110</page.no>
        <type>SHADOW MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the information of honourable members, I present a revised shadow ministry list reflecting changes made and announced on 16 March.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The document read as follows—</inline></para>
<para>SHADOW MINISTRY</para>
<quote><para class="block">Each box represents a portfolio. Shadow cabinet ministers are shown in bold type.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>111</page.no>
        <type>MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Temporary Arrangements</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House that the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories and Emergency Management will be absent from question time today. The Minister for Home Affairs will answer questions on her behalf in relation to emergency management, and the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government will answer questions on her behalf in relation to regional development, local government and territories.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>112</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. When was the government advised that six shipments of vital fuel supply bound for Australia were cancelled, and as of today how many ships have been cancelled?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are in constant engagement with all of the importers and all of the receivers of these supplies. It is on a daily basis. The minister notified publicly, said publicly yesterday on the <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> program, exactly what the circumstances were. When it comes to fuel security, obviously there are global challenges. We are visited today by the head of the International Energy Agency—I look forward to meeting with him after question time today—and we're having a series of meetings as well with our international partners, making sure that we can secure supply. I can inform the House that at one o'clock I had a very good discussion with Prime Minister Lawrence Wong of Singapore, and we are issuing now a joint statement on energy security.</para>
<para>People would be conscious, after the closure of four of Australia's six—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The manager on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It goes to direct relevance. You can't get a more specific question. When were you advised that the six shipments were cancelled, and have anymore been cancelled since then? You cannot get more direct.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister did answer that part of the question when he indicated the timeline when he referred to the minister's statements yesterday. I'm listening carefully regarding that part of the question, but the Prime Minister is now giving information to the House on fuel security and fuel arrangements. I assume that will also deal with the second part of the question that was about fuel supply and any cancellations. So the Prime Minister is being directly relevant. He did address the first part of the question that the manager raised in maybe the first 20 seconds of his answer.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I find it extraordinary that they would interrupt an answer talking directly about what has happened in the last hour to secure Australia's energy security. The statement that we have said is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We are committed to working together to strengthen energy supply chain resilience, including by deepening regional cooperation, accelerating renewable energy transition, addressing unjustified import and export restrictions, and maintaining open trade flows.</para></quote>
<para>We are talking with our partners in Korea, in Japan, in China, in Singapore. We are engaged. We are reliable partners when it comes to energy security, and we expect that to be a two-way flow.</para>
<para>I table the joint statement on energy security by me and Minister Wong.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Middle East</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BERRY</name>
    <name.id>23497</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister update the house on the impact of the war in the Middle East and outline the action being taken to boost Australia's fuel security and supply?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Whitlam for her question. We know that the war in the Middle East is impacting Australia like it's impacting the entire world. Big spikes in demand for fuel have pushed prices up, and there are shortages in some areas as supply chains work to keep up. We know that that is causing frustration. That's why our government is taking action with the plan for Australia's fuel security by securing fuel supply for Australian industry and households; cracking down on price gouging, through the actions of the ACCC; shielding Australians from global energy price spikes; focusing on stability and affordability for gas users, in particular—of course, that's critical for the manufacturing sector; and we're strengthening our resilience to future shocks. We've released 20 per cent of the national fuel reserve so more fuel gets to where it's needed, we've made sure that all the fuel made here in Australia is used here in Australia. And we've given Australian oil refineries the certainty that they need to make more fuel here.</para>
<para>When we left office, there were six of those refineries. When we returned to office, there were two. But we've made sure that we'll still have two, with the announcements that we have made. And last week, National Cabinet established the Fuel Supply Taskforce. Earlier on today I spoke with Singaporean Prime Minister, Lawrence Wong, and we're continuing to engage.</para>
<para>All of this action builds on our agenda of the past four years to strengthen our national resilience and our economic security, investing in a future made in Australia, making more things here as a critical part of our agenda for government: keeping industry onshore, building our sovereign capability and our resilience. Now, we'll work calmly and methodically, always in the national interest, building on what we've achieved, working together, shielding our nation from the worst of global uncertainty.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. When was the minister advised that six shipments of vital fuel supply bound for Australia were cancelled? How many ships have been cancelled to date?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question. As the government has made crystal clear in recent days and weeks, every expected delivery of fuel has arrived on schedule to this point. We have also made crystal clear at every opportunity that there has been uncertainty from mid to late April onwards. That's been consistent. That has been consistent in every single statement we've made.</para>
<para>As the Prime Minister has indicated, we're in constant contact: I have spoken to the chief executives of Ampol and Viva every day, in effect, and sometimes several times a day—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The chief executives of the two refineries in Australia have been advising me of the uncertainty from mid-April onwards. They have also advised me more recently of the six cancellations—which is still the current number—and several of those have been replaced with new sources, as I said very transparently on <inline font-style="italic">Insiders</inline> yesterday and hid away in an interview on the ABC. Six out of the 81 expected deliveries over that time have been cancelled or deferred and have now, at least to some degree, been replaced with new supply.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SOON</name>
    <name.id>298618</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How is the Middle East conflict impacting global energy and fuel supply chains? What actions has the government taken to ensure Australia is prepared?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank my honourable friend for the question. Whether it is liquid fuels in petrol or diesel, or in electricity, we enter this international crisis, which the visiting chief executive of the International Energy Agency has said is the worst we have ever faced today, better prepared than ever before. We certainly have that as the case when it comes to liquid fuels. On Saturday, we updated our supply figures to show that there are 38 days worth of petrol and 30 days worth of diesel and jet fuel in Australia, as we speak—held in Australia, where the Australian strategic reserve should be.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>So we were able to release some of that in relation to diesel and petrol on the condition that it flows to regional Australia. And more than 500 million litres is flowing to regional Australia as we speak—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause. The member for Lyne has injected 14 times in 10 minutes. That is completely unacceptable. We had a lot of interjections during the last fortnight. I'm giving everyone fair warning right now: it is not going to be the same as happened last fortnight, so the member for Lyne will remove herself from the chamber for continual interjecting. It's just not the way this House will be conducted with me as Speaker.</para>
<para> <inline font-style="italic">The member for </inline> <inline font-style="italic">Lyne</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When the House comes to order, when the Leader of the Opposition ceases interjecting or responding, when everyone ceases interjecting—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! When the House comes to order and only when the House comes to order, the minister is going to be heard. The minister will continue.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. We've been able to release 20 per cent of that, as I said, and we could release it because it's in Australia. Until 2023, that was not the case. If we'd had to release it from Texas on 28 February, it still wouldn't be here today, because it takes about 30 days to get from Texas to Australia. Under previous administrations, the only release we could have had was the then energy minister saying, 'Houston, we have a problem.' That was the only energy security plan we had, not just when it just came to liquid fuel but also electricity. The honourable member for Banks would be pleased with the release of the draft default market offer, which shows his constituents get a 4.6 per cent reduction in energy prices and small businesses 10.1 per cent under the draft default market offer, which has been released publicly—not hidden from the Australian people but released for all to see.</para>
<para>Also, I am pleased that we are better prepared for this crisis because we are saving more renewable energy for the night through the day and that reduces our reliance on gas. In the last summer of the previous government, we used 2.7 terawatt hours worth of gas. In this summer just gone, we used 1.5 terawatt hours, a very big reduction in gas use, which means we are less exposed to gas prices and that is in no small part due to home batteries. I am pleased to tell the House that since 1 July we have installed 286,831 home batteries and 1,987 of those have been in the electorate of Banks. Also, for those Australians who have not been able to access those, the member for Banks and I the other week launched the Padstow community battery, which will enable access to renewable energy to 10,000 houses in his electorate—10,000 houses for the Padstow community battery. Now, all this not only leads to reduced energy prices and lower emissions but also increased sovereign capability when it comes to energy. Because the sun does not need to go through the Straits of Hormuz and Vladimir Putin cannot interrupt the wind in Australia, it makes our energy system more resilient, more reliable, more sovereign. We on this side of the House think that's a good thing.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>114</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Acknowledgement</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is Joe Kelly, the member for Greenslopes in the Queensland state parliament, accompanied by David McDermott, the chair of Parkinson's Queensland, as guests.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>114</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Corporate profiteering by big gas corporations skyrocketed after the invasion of Ukraine, causing rising power bills. It's happening again thanks to Trump and Netanyahu's war on Iran, which you support. These corporations literally take Australian gas for free and make obscene profits from it. Will you put a 25 per cent tax on gas exports?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. Just to clarify, the budget will be delivered in May, and I'm not going to comment on any processes in the meantime. I would just clarify that the oil and gas industry contributed almost $12 billion in taxes in 2023-24. We reformed the petroleum resources rent tax to deliver a fairer return to the Australian community from their natural resources. These changes to the PRRT ensure that offshore gas companies pay more tax sooner and, as I said, deliver a greater return to the Australian people. These changes provide industry and investors policy certainty to allow sufficient supply of domestic gas and to ensure Australia remains a reliable international energy supplier and investment partner. As everyone would imagine—everyone knows here—that's very important and important now more than ever.</para>
<para>We are working to ensure multinationals, including gas companies, pay their fair share of tax in Australia. Obviously, the PRRT only applies to offshore tax exporters, as opposed to those that onshore in Queensland, which is a different matter. Nonetheless, all of the gas companies do pay a significant amount of tax in this country. They also employ over 80,000 Australians and contribute quite heartily to the regions right around the country. I thank the member for her question.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>South Australian Government</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government working with the Malinauskas government to deliver for South Australians? How will this also benefit all Australians?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the fantastic member for Sturt for the question. It was a pleasure to be with the member for Sturt on Saturday with Jenn Roberts, our candidate for Hartley and the newly elected member for Hartley, along with Premier Peter Malinauskas. I do want to take the opportunity to congratulate the Premier of South Australia on his outstanding election victory. The result reflects the focus, energy and determination of the South Australian government, working closely with the national government as well, on matters that make a real difference to the lives of South Australians.</para>
<para>On Friday I was in Whyalla, at the steel facility there, and talking with workers who would have now been unemployed were it not for the joint intervention by the federal and the South Australian governments to make sure that we continued to make steel here and that we continue to create those jobs which are good jobs. When I went with Premier Malinauskas a year ago, there were seven apprentices at that site. Today there are 76. It is employing more, training more and contributing more to prosperity. The other group that we met there was, of course, many of the contractors—the suppliers who make a difference. If you took away that facility from Whyalla, it would indeed really suffer. But, because of that work, it has made an enormous difference for our sovereign capability going forward.</para>
<para>In addition to that, we have very important agreements that we've signed with the South Australian government—the hospitals agreement that's making an enormous difference, the opening of urgent care clinics making a difference there as well as, of course, properly funding every single school in South Australia. South Australia is leading the country when it comes to building more new homes, including at just one of the sites I went to in the northern suburbs there, along with our member—17,000 additional homes, 7,000 of those reserved for first home buyers, making an enormous difference going forward.</para>
<para>And, of course, South Australia is front and centre of our AUKUS arrangements. On the nuclear powered submarines, we're training people. The connections that are there with the trade schools that have been established under the Malinauskas government are providing those career opportunities and secure work for South Australians as we go forward. More homes, more jobs, more Australian manufacturing—I look forward to working with the Malinauskas government over the years to come and continuing the success that our partnership is bringing the people of South Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Manager of Opposition business, resume your seat. When someone is on their feet, do not approach them while they're concluding their answer. It's a habit that's been starting to come in, and we're going to cease that. Now the manager has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. When were you advised that six shipments of vital fuel supply bound for Australia were cancelled?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I refer the honourable member to my previous answer, which was that we have been in constant contact every day, usually more than once a day, with the chief executives of energy companies. They have been telling me that there was uncertainty from mid-April onwards, which is what I've said publicly. And yesterday we went out and confirmed six cancellations or delays—which are not happening now but are scheduled for April—and they largely have been replaced. That is what updating the Australian people factually is about. The alternative is to mislead the Australian people.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It goes to relevance. You can't ask a simpler question, and we just want a simple answer.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. The manager is seeking a date, time and place for when and where something occurred.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Barker and the Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting while I deal with this point of order. The manager is seeking a date, place or time—an exact figure or time. I understand where you're coming from. Where I'm coming from is that I can't compel the minister to answer the question as you would like. I'll do my best. He needs to be directly relevant to the question he was asked. Unfortunately, I can't deliver at the moment what you would like, but I'll listen carefully.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Perhaps I'll have another go at explaining it to the opposition. These orders were not all cancelled on the same day at the same time. It was an iterative process where some were cancelled. They weren't all cancelled at the same time. It's not like the chief executive rings up and says, 'Hey, we just had six cancelled.' Yesterday I provided a factual summary to the Australian people on the total number that had been cancelled over the recent period. That is what transparency looks like. The alternative is the approach of the Leader of the Opposition, who went to social media on Saturday and said that Australian refineries are exporting diesel and petrol, which is simply untrue. A former energy minister should know better than that.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister has concluded his answer. Order! The House will come to order and the Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>If I give an instruction to cease interjecting, it's not the time to keep interjecting, Leader of the Opposition. We'll wait till the House resets, and we'll hear from the honourable member for Forde.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. What is the impact of the conflict in the Middle East on Australia's economy? How is the Albanese Labor government approaching this challenge?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Forde is already an outstanding local member in our part of South-East Queensland—and, while I'm talking about outstanding local members, I also acknowledge Joe Kelly up there in the gallery with Dave McDermott. It's nice to see you too, mate. The conflict in the Middle East is weighing heavily on global markets today and on the global economy more broadly as well. Our own Australian economy is very well placed, but we're not immune to these pressures. We've got faster economic growth than any major advanced economy. We've got low unemployment and lower public debt than the major advanced economies as well. But we do know and we do understand that Australians are feeling the pressure around the kitchen table and especially at the petrol bowser. The two key considerations here are how long the war drags on for and how long it takes for supply chains to normalise afterwards.</para>
<para>I asked Treasury to model a number of scenarios. I released them publicly last week. They are conservative, but they still show a hit on growth and substantial pressure on prices. These pressures don't replace the challenges that we had before the war, but they do exacerbate them, and that's why we are taking a number of steps, as the energy minister and the Prime Minister have already mentioned in today's question time. We are releasing hundreds of millions of litres of fuel, temporarily amending the fuel standards, working with international partners and also empowering the ACCC to go after any suppliers or retailers who are doing the wrong thing, with the tougher penalties that I'll introduce to this parliament later this week. We're also working with the industry to get supply where it is most needed.</para>
<para>I also want to alert the House to a meeting I convened on Friday of the Council of Financial Regulators, which was to ensure that our markets are operating properly and that they are working through and thinking through all of the risks. We do have a strong, well-regulated and resilient market, but we are not complacent about that, and nor are the financial regulators.</para>
<para>This conflict that we're seeing in the Middle East is the major influence on our economy, and it will be a major influence on the budget as well. We will continue to work through these issues in a considered and methodical way but also in an urgent and decisive way. We know that Australians are feeling the pressure at the petrol pump and around the kitchen table. That's the government's focus as we work through the decisions and deliberations that lead up to the budget in May.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McKENZIE</name>
    <name.id>124514</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and I refer to the national fuel crisis. How many service stations in Australia have run out of fuel?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for the question. I have these figures, state by state. In New South Wales at the moment, there are 37, out of a total of 2,444 service stations. In Queensland, there are 47 outlets with no diesel and 32 with no regular unleaded, out of just over 1,800 service stations. In Victoria at the end of last week, we saw 109 outlets with one or more grades unavailable—that is how the Victorian government collects that information—and today's update is that around 50 stations are out of diesel. I have further updates for Western Australia, more by supplier than by service station, and I am pleased to say—and I've been speaking to some Western Australian members opposite about this—that we are seeing more fuel flow in Western Australia and those numbers come down.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Assistant Treasurer and the Minister for Financial Services. How is the Albanese Labor government protecting consumers and maintaining economic stability in the face of heightened global volatility?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for McEwen for his question, and I acknowledge his long history in the transport sector and his advocacy for that sector and the workers in it. The Albanese government is firmly focused on protecting Australian consumers and maintaining economic stability at a time of heightened global volatility. Australia enters this period from a position of strength. Our economy is resilient, our banking system is well capitalised and we are well placed to withstand the impacts of volatile global markets.</para>
<para>We know that many Australians are under pressure, in particular given recent shocks to energy prices, which is why our government continues to roll out responsible, targeted cost-of-living relief. This includes two further tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer, cutting student debt, cheaper medicines, cheaper child care and making it easier and more affordable to see a doctor. We're also backing increases to minimum and award wages, delivering cheaper energy and free TAFE and boosting government funded paid parental leave. Our plan is about easing the cost-of-living pressures now while also building stronger, fairer and more competitive markets for the future.</para>
<para>On 11 March, the Treasurer, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury announced a major consumer protection package, doubling penalties for false or misleading conduct and cartel behaviour to $100 million per offence. This is a tenfold increase since we came to government. The government is also directing the ACCC to step up weekly fuel-price monitoring and working with industry to boost fuel supply, including supporting ACCC authorisation to coordinate supply where needed.</para>
<para>The ACCC have held an emergency meeting with fuel companies, pressing them to explain recent rapid price increases and provide detailed supply-chain information that the ACCC will now scrutinise. The regulator again warned the sector against any collusive, anti-competitive or misleading conduct. On 19 March, the ACCC launched an enforcement investigation into alleged anti-competitive conduct by Ampol, BP, Mobil and Viva Energy following reports about diesel availability for independent wholesalers in regional and rural areas. The ACCC has also urgently authorised fuel suppliers to coordinate supply with conditions that prioritise independent distributors and protect fuel access for regional communities.</para>
<para>We are strengthening competition across the economy, from cracking down on unfair trading practices in the supermarket sector and strengthening unit-pricing laws to investing in food security in remote communities. We know many people are doing it tough. That's why we're working to ensure Australian consumers, no matter where they live, benefit from fairer prices, more transparent markets and stronger competition across the entire economy.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to your previous answer with respect to supply of diesel at service stations in the east coast states. Could the minister supply us with information on the lack of diesel and fuel at service stations in the Northern Territory, South Australia and Tasmania?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We'll continue to work with the states cooperatively through the National Cabinet and through the energy ministers council, which convened on Friday. National Cabinet convened earlier in the week, and both will convene again soon and will continue to share information. I am participating in a Tasmanian roundtable at the request of the acting—</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">An opposition member interjecting</inline>—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am participating this afternoon in a Tasmanian government organised roundtable at the request of the Liberal minister for energy in Tasmania, which I'm very happy to participate in. I can report to the House in terms of flow of fuel to regional Australia. The release of the minimum stock obligation, which I approved a little over a week ago, was conditional on fuel flowing to regional Australia.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, the minister was asked a question about—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm done.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat! The manager is now warned. Do not approach the dispatch box.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>AUKUS</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering AUKUS across the country, including in my home state of South Australia? How does this compare to other approaches?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the member and her work in contributing to South Australia being at the heart of Australia's defence industry. AUKUS represents the biggest leap in Australia's military capability in more than a century, but it is also the largest industrial project in our country's history—20,000 jobs. Engaging the industrial base of the eastern seaboard, it already represents the biggest diversification in the Western Australian economy in decades, and it will see our future submarines built in South Australia at the Osborne Naval Shipyard.</para>
<para>In coming decades, $30 billion will be invested here. Just over a month ago, the Prime Minister and Premier Malinauskas announced a $3.9 billion downpayment on this. At its peak, the shipyard will be home to those sustaining the Collins class submarines, building our Hunter class frigates and building our future submarines, which in total represents more than 7,000 workers—the biggest industrial site in our country. We will see steel being cut on our future submarines by the end of the decade and, already, work is underway in constructing the submarine yard. This is a project which is being delivered, and we are really fortunate to have the Malinauskas state Labor government as our partner. They see that Osborne is central to the South Australian economy. Indeed, South Australia rightly and proudly declares itself the defence state.</para>
<para>So it's no surprise to me that, on Saturday, the South Australian people roundly endorsed the economic agenda of the Malinauskas government with its thumping re-election. I really want to congratulate the Premier and his entire team on their remarkable win. This stands in contrast to One Nation, who have really only ever been about stunts and the vibe; they have never been about the actual delivery of jobs and defence capability. It also stands in contrast to the coalition because, when they were last in government, they—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister was asked about how this compares to other approaches, and he is dealing with that, so it's going to be very difficult to take a point of order.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Don't worry. I'm keeping an eye on these questions, trust me. The minister is being directly relevant because he was asked about comparing directly to other approaches. So of course he's going to talk about other parties and other approaches. He has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The coalition declared that South Australians could not even build a canoe. Indeed, they tried to take the build of our future submarine offshore, and then they literally failed to deliver in the attack class program. That is very different to Labor because the Albanese and Malinauskas Labor governments, in partnership, are delivering the Osborne Naval Shipyard, which will be a cornerstone of the South Australian economy for decades to come. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gas Industry: Taxation</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This question is for the Treasurer. The war in the Middle East is driving gas price spikes, which is great for resource company revenue, but Australians are hurting. This boosted revenue is not a reward for wise investment decisions. It is a by-product of an unexpected war. Will you impose a windfall tax, as other nations did in 2022, to ensure Australians get a fair share of this wartime windfall from their natural resources?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Wentworth for her question. I want to acknowledge the substantial amount of work that the member for Wentworth does when it comes to thinking through options for tax reform. I also wanted to acknowledge that, on the specific question that the member for Wentworth has asked, there are a range of views about the best way forward. From the government's point of view, we haven't changed our policy on that. Our big focus, as you can tell from answers from the PM, the energy minister and others, is fuel security. That's our big focus and our big priority—releasing more fuel, securing more fuel in international markets, working with the ACCC and the like.</para>
<para>Now, of course, I more than believe that it's necessary that Australians receive a fair return from the natural resources that they own. We have taken some steps in the course of the life of this government to make sure that offshore gas companies, for example, pay more tax sooner. That was the motivation behind the changes to the PRRT that we landed in the course of the last parliament. What that meant was that the number of entities paying that PRRT went from 11 to 16 in the most recent data, and you can see that the combination of company tax and PRRT paid by the oil and gas sector has gone up compared to the pre-COVID average.</para>
<para>Once again, though, I acknowledge that there are a range of views about it. For our part, when it comes to tax, the big focus is on those tax cuts that we're rolling out in July and in July next year as well, opposed by those opposite but voted for by the member for Wentworth. Any further steps on tax reform would be a matter for cabinet in the usual way.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How is the Albanese Labor government making medicines cheaper for all Australians? How do cheaper medicines help strengthen Medicare after a decade of cuts and neglect?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUTLER</name>
    <name.id>HWK</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Melbourne, who is such an amazing advocate for a stronger Medicare. I particularly want to thank her and the member for Maribyrnong for their tireless work in securing a long-term future for that inner Melbourne icon, cohealth, which we're working on very hard together.</para>
<para>The member also knows how important a strong PBS and cheaper medicines are for her community. The PBS is one of the world's best medicine systems. For eight decades it has been delivering Australians access to the world's best medicines at affordable PBS prices. Today that is more important than ever, in a time of turbocharged discovery, where new medicines are coming onto the market at a huge, unprecedented pace every single month. These new treatments, using revolutionary technology, are highly effective, but they're also incredibly expensive.</para>
<para>Since we've been elected, we've listed more than 400 new medicines onto the PBS. And this month, just as an example, I'm delighted to say that we listed a new treatment called Ultomiris for a relatively rare condition, myasthenia gravis. This relatively rare condition impacts only about 3,000 Australians, but it can impact their ability to manage everyday tasks very severely, like walking or even chewing or breathing. This is the first new treatment for those patients on the PBS for 30 years. It's going to make a huge difference to their lives. But, without this listing today, those patients would have to pay $25,000 for every single script. From this month, instead of $25,000, they'll pay just $25. That is the beauty of the PBS—the world's best treatments here in Australia at affordable PBS prices.</para>
<para>As the member for Melbourne knows, we've been busy over the last three or four years making those prices even more affordable. Since we were elected in 2022, Australia's pensioners and concession card holders have received about 90 million scripts completely free of charge as a direct result of the changes we made to the safety net. Australian pensioners' maximum script price will be locked in at $7.70 and frozen for the rest of the decade.</para>
<para>For those many Australians who don't have the benefit of a concession card, general patients' PBS script prices are now no more than $25—the same price they were way back in 2004. These changes already have saved Australians more than $2.3 billion at the pharmacy counter, with more being saved every single day. It's good for their hip pocket but also incredibly good for their health.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sovereign Capability</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Agriculture. I refer to the national fuel crisis. Fertilizer Australia has written to the government, warning that further shipment disruptions will 'have catastrophic impacts on domestic agricultural output in the 2026 season'. Given that the price of fertiliser has doubled, what is the government's plan to secure fertiliser for Australian farmers?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
    <electorate>Franklin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member opposite for that question. As I said last week, fertiliser is a significant input into our agriculture sector, and it is very important. I've certainly been working with the Minister for Industry and Innovation to see what we can do in relation to fertiliser in Australia. As I said last week, we have enough fertiliser either in Australia or on ships in terms of the initial cropping season. We're certainly getting a lot of input from farmers about fertiliser prices, and we have been working with the ACCC on how we can work with them, as we have in relation to fuel for fertiliser and what needs to be done there so that we can ensure fertiliser is getting to the people that need it most.</para>
<para>As a government, we are aware that some cargoes booked for Australia are delayed in the Persian Gulf, and we continue to monitor it. We do source urea fertiliser from other regions, and we're working with industry to seek alternative supplies. In the same way, as I said, that we are working with the ACCC and industry for fuel, we are also working with them in relation to fertiliser. We do continue to monitor this situation, and I'm having weekly meetings with the agriculture sector in relation to fertiliser, and we're in regular contact with Fertilizer Australia on how we might source more fertiliser as Australian farmers need it. We have been doing the work to make sure that Australian farmers can have certainty when it comes to future crops.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering for workers, including in South Australia? How does this compare to other approaches?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the member for Adelaide for his question. Of course, he is a proud South Australian, always standing up for the city of Adelaide and, of course, the whole of South Australia in this place.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government's No. 1 focus is delivering cost-of-living relief while building Australia's future. Our Labor government has delivered significant workplace changes and investment in critical industries to deliver better outcomes for working Australians, including, of course, for South Australians. I'm very pleased to inform the House that, in good news in my home state of South Australia, more people are in work and, of course, they are earning more. In the last four years, South Australia's unemployment rate has dropped from five per cent in March 2022 to four per cent in February 2026. That is an extra 90,000 people in work, and that is good news. Compared to four years ago, the average South Australian full-time worker is now earning an additional 19 per cent extra in wages.</para>
<para>Again, good news for South Australians—200,000 workers in South Australia are benefiting from our government's advocacy to the Fair Work Commission for a real wage increase to the minimum wage, and these workers are also benefiting from the action our government took to protect penalty and overtime rates. We are creating well-paid jobs in South Australia and it hasn't happened by accident; it's because of state and federal governments working together to deliver.</para>
<para>The state and federal Labor governments have worked in close partnership and have jointly invested to back over a thousand workers at the Whyalla steelworks. Action was critical not only to save jobs in South Australia but also because it is in our national interest that we have structural steel-making capacity in this country. Together with the Malinauskas government, we've made significant investments in the AUKUS program to secure Australia's defence future capability and the lasting prosperity for jobs in the state of South Australia. This investment will directly create close to 10,000 highly skilled, well-paid jobs in South Australia alone and this will provide enormous economic opportunity to lift skills, wages and living standards for generations to come. Not only is this a good thing for South Australia; it is a good thing for the country.</para>
<para>With the re-election of the Malinauskas Labor government, our two governments will continue to work to deliver for South Australians. This is in sharp contrast to the coalition, who dared Holden to leave South Australia when they were last in government. They destroyed local car manufacturing. It's only this government that will deliver for— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to your previous answer. Treasury has downgraded predicted revenue from the PRRT at successive budgets. Will you admit that the government got it wrong and properly secure revenue for Australians from its gas at a time when Australians, primary producers and small businesses need targeted support to meet rapidly increasing costs?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As the honourable member says, I answered part of this question a moment ago. In regard to the additional part of it, what we've been able to ensure is that there is more tax paid sooner than would otherwise have been the case. And obviously when you're dealing with a volatile commodity that we're talking about now, then sometimes the numbers come in lower and sometimes they come in higher than is forecast.</para>
<para>Now, on the broader point that the honourable member is making, a bit like the point that her colleague near her was making a moment ago, I understand that there are a range of views about this. We believe that Australians deserve a fair return on the resources they own, and that's what motivated our efforts with our PRRT reforms to get more tax paid sooner than would otherwise have been the case.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Manufacturing Industry</title>
          <page.no>120</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Innovation. How is the Albanese Labor government working with the South Australian government to back steelworkers in Whyalla? Why is this important for our sovereign manufacturing capability?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member, a proud South Australian, for his question. The Albanese Labor government's No. 1 focus is delivering cost-of-living relief while building a future made in Australia. This will increase our independence and sovereignty and create Aussie jobs. It was at the heart of the progressive patriotism agenda the Prime Minister took to the people in 2022 and 2025.</para>
<para>Making steel in this country is central to that. It's been just over a year since we joined the Malinauskas government to intervene and save the Whyalla steelworks—a year since we made that critical decision to protect Aussie jobs and strengthen our sovereign manufacturing capability. Our intervention has ensured that the steelworks is not only continuing to operate but has a bright future. Jobs have been protected and created, with performance restored. The steelworks has been having a record-breaking performance across steel, rail and finished goods. Output is at multiyear highs, and while those opposite wrote off Whyalla time and time again we joined with the community to fight for its future, saving thousands of jobs.</para>
<para>Building sovereign manufacturing capability builds resilience throughout the economy. For example, 52 tonnes of steel used in the construction of the Port Wakefield missile factory came from the Whyalla Steelworks—Aussie-made steel leading to Aussie-made missiles. And Phosphate Hill, Australia's only producer of ammonium phosphate fertilisers, announced earlier this month that it had found a buyer. This was only possible because of the government's intervention to save the Mount Isa copper smelter. Let's be clear: without critical inputs from the copper smelter, we would not have the fertiliser factory. Steelmaking, copper smelting and fertiliser production are all critical manufacturing capabilities essential to our sovereignty and were all opposed by the Liberals.</para>
<para>The current Middle East conflict reminds us that we need to have an economy that is resilient and sovereign. We need an economy that makes more things here. So, when those opposite attack a future made in Australia, they weaken our sovereignty and our resilience. We also need an economy where we train and skill up Australians for jobs that will build our sovereign capability. A year ago, there were seven apprentices at the Whyalla Steelworks. Today, there are more than 70. Now we're in a position where we've got five serious bidders looking at purchasing the steelworks. That's great news for workers, great news for Whyalla and great news for Australia.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to your previous answer where you said that shipments carrying vital fuel were cancelled over a period of time. When were you notified that the first shipment was cancelled?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I refer the honourable member to my previous answers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Housing, Homelessness and Cities. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its commitments to ensure that Australians have a safe and secure place to call home?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Makin for his question and for his fantastic advocacy for more housing in his community. Our country is confronting a housing challenge that's been building for 40 years, and this is placing a hugely unfair burden on Australians, on young families, on women and children who are fleeing family violence and particularly on that younger generation who are struggling to find a foothold in the housing market. That is why our government has built the boldest and most ambitious housing agenda that a Commonwealth government has had in this country since the postwar period—$45 billion. We are building more homes, we're getting renters a better deal and we're getting more Australians into homeownership.</para>
<para>My job is about delivery, delivery, delivery. I want to share with the chamber some of the work of our government over the past week. On Monday last week, the member for Fenner and I turned the sod on 315 new homes we are building in Belconnen. The member for Swan turned the sod on 58 Housing Australia Future Fund homes in Riverdale. On Tuesday, the member for Blair announced 24 new social homes in North Ipswich in his electorate. On Wednesday, the member for Gilmore opened 15 new crisis homes in her community. On Thursday, the member for Barton joined the New South Wales Premier to announce 600 new social and affordable homes that are being funded through the Housing Australia Future Fund. On Friday, the member for Cunningham opened six new crisis homes in her electorate, and the member for Bendigo opened 73 new Housing Australia Future Fund homes in her electorate.</para>
<para>If I go back to Monday last week alone, our government turned the sod on 373 homes. That may sound to the parliament like a familiar number—373. That is because that is the total number of homes that those opposite built in nine years governing our country. I'm not making this up. Last Monday, we turned the sod on the same number of homes that they built in almost a decade in what was a national disgrace. These homes join the 570,000 homes that have been built since we came to office, the 6,000 social and affordable homes we've already completed and the 24,000 homes we've got in planning or construction right now.</para>
<para>I've shared a lot of numbers here, but let me bring it right back to the heart of the matter. Our government understands that housing is not just about bricks and mortar. We are helping Australians build the foundation on which they and their families will grow and build a great life in this beautiful country of ours—55,000 social and affordable homes that will change the lives of 55,000 Australians and their families.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget: Medical Research</title>
          <page.no>121</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Treasurer. Treasurer, your government has a productivity problem and a worsening cost-of-living crisis. Every dollar invested in Australian health and medical research yields close to $4 for the Australian economy. Without giving this place a shopping list of other economic data, does the government, in their forthcoming budget, plan to invest more in medical and scientific research, recognising both the productivity dividend and the positive effect it would have on the nation's health?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the honourable member for Kooyong for her question. This government are very enthusiastic, very substantial investors in research, including medical research. I pay tribute to my colleague here and thank him for a number of conversations we've had in the lead-up to the budget in May about this really important question, because we do understand, we do appreciate, the link between good research and better outcomes when it comes to productivity and a stronger economy more broadly. And our colleague in the other place, Minister Ayres, has received and now released some good work that we had done when it comes to the future of research and development, and obviously the Medical Research Fund is part of our thinking in that regard. We're going to work through the recommendations of that report and make our views known in due course. But I assure the member, as I have on other occasions as well, that we're enthusiastic supporters of and investors in medical research.</para>
<para>When it comes to productivity—the beginning of her question—it's important to remember that we've had a productivity challenge in our economy for the last couple of decades now, not just the last couple of years. In fact, over the last year productivity was one per cent through the year, annual. That's above the 20-year average, but it's still not good enough. Market sector productivity was 1½ in the most recent data. That means it's grown for five quarters in a row. But, again, we need to do much better to deliver the higher living standards that our people need and deserve. So I assure the honourable member that, as we work through these issues with productivity, as we work through the report on research and development, that will continue to play an important role in the ambitious productivity agenda we already have rolling out and also in the additional steps we're considering between now and the May budget.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Skills and Training</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Skills and Training. How is the Albanese Labor government helping more Australians get the skills they want for the jobs we need with fee-free TAFE and apprenticeships? Are there any risks to this program?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GILES</name>
    <name.id>243609</name.id>
    <electorate>Scullin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to my friend the member for Swan for her question. She's an incredible advocate for learners and apprentices in her community, and I saw that when I went with her to see students at Bentley TAFE to celebrate a $2 million commitment that we made to deliver a state-of-the-art commercial training kitchen through the TAFE Technology Fund. TAFE is breaking down barriers and setting up Australians for the future, and free TAFE is of course at the very core of this. This is a policy that this prime minister took to the 2022 election. Australians voted for it, and we have delivered it.</para>
<para>Just last week I announced that we've reached nearly three quarters of a million free TAFE enrolments, at 742,000 so far, and almost a quarter of a million course completions, at 245,000, with plenty more on the way. This means more opportunities for young Australians like Blake, who I met while he was completing his cert II in carpentry. For someone like Blake it means more opportunities after free TAFE, too, as he moves into his career, because the Key Apprenticeship Program is offering $10,000 in incentives to new housing apprentices, people like Blake, to help with the cost of tools and transport so they can play their part in meeting our national priorities, like building more homes for Australians—the more than the 373 social homes that the Minister for Housing was just talking about. In just the first six months of this program, more than 11,000 apprentices have commenced in housing through the Key Apprenticeship Program—a program that, importantly, is helping not just apprentices but also their employers, the vast majority of which are small businesses.</para>
<para>You'd think the coalition would support programs that are making a real difference, helping Australians get a good start in great careers and making a contribution, but the former leader of the opposition infamously said of free TAFE that Australians don't value what they don't pay for. What about her replacement? Well, we don't know, because it would mean actually saying the word 'TAFE' in parliament, something he hasn't done in more than a decade, since his idol Tony Abbott was Prime Minister. He should also clarify for the thousands of apprentices and the thousands of people who employ them his position on the Key Apprenticeship Program, given his shadow minister calls it 'wrong' and talks about throwing good money after bad money.</para>
<para>Free TAFE is getting thousands of Australians new qualifications in areas of need. We think that's a good thing. The Key Apprenticeship Program is backing in thousands of housing apprentices. We think that is a good thing too. Labor—and only Labor—is backing Australians like Blake to get skills they need for the jobs we need doing.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>122</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Has the minister sought or received advice from his department on the implementation of fuel rationing?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for her question. Of course I have engaged with my department in prudent contingency planning. As I indicated again on the weekend, the establishment of a national fuel emergency would be a very significant step—it's never been done, and that's what would be required. However, states have considerable powers, and that's why that's outlined in the National Liquid Fuel Emergency Response Plan, which was agreed by COAG in 2006. That indicates that voluntary restraint—i.e. public information campaigns requesting people to save fuel—would be the first step, and that only after that would any further actions be considered. I made clear yesterday that I think we're a long way from that, but of course the Commonwealth and the states will work together for prudent contingency planning in a very challenged international environment.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the minister for Aged Care and Seniors. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering meaningful aged-care reforms for older Australians after a decade of neglect?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bean for his question. He does a fantastic job representing the people of Bean, including my old stomping ground of the Tuggeranong Valley. There's a critical feature of this Albanese Labor government: we listen and then we deliver. We listened to the royal commission, we listened to older Australians and their families, we listened to the workers and the providers who know this system inside and out, and then we got on with fixing it. The sector told us that older people needed rights, not just rules, and we delivered Australia's first ever statement of rights enshrined in the new Aged Care Act that came into effect on 1 November last year—the first wholly rebuilt act since 1997.</para>
<para>Older Australians told us they want to stay home for longer, with support that enables them to maintain independence and dignity, so we delivered Support at Home along with 83,000 additional home-care places. Advocates told us that aged-care places should be allocated to people, not providers, so we changed that too. Aged-care places are now allocated directly to the individual—more choice, more control, more dignity. Providers told us we need more beds and we need them in the places where demand is greatest, so this month we announced a further $115 million through the Aged Care Capital Assistance Program, targeted at hotspots in Adelaide, Illawarra, Perth and the Hunter, with an expression-of-interest process designed to get beds open within two years.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Lindsay will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That takes our total ACCAP investment to over a billion dollars since 2022, more than that of any other government in Australian history. These aren't promises.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals in the House of Representatives!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They're real beds. They're older Australians getting care closer to home sooner.</para>
<para>Aged-care workers told us that they were undervalued, underpaid and stretched to breaking point, so we delivered the biggest pay rises in the history of aged care. There were four rounds of fully funded increases. Thanks to these pay rises, the average registered nurse in aged care is now earning $28,000 more a year. That's 550 bucks more every single week. Those opposite spent nine years in government. They had the same royal commission, the same reports, the same workers—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Grey! The Leader for the Nationals is now warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>the same families, the same older Australians telling them what needed to change. They didn't listen and they didn't deliver.</para>
<para>Aged care is a fundamental promise this country makes to older Australians that, when the time comes, they will be safe, they will be seen and they will be cared for with dignity. This government listens. This government delivers, and we are keeping that promise.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I refer to a report in the <inline font-style="italic">Daily Telegraph</inline> titled 'NSW fuel crisis sparks Minns Government to wargame emergency powers to ration and divert petrol and diesel'. Has the minister been briefed by the New South Wales government or any other state governments or territory governments on fuel rationing?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question. As I indicated in previous answers, there was a meeting of state and territory ministers with me on Friday, literally. And as I indicated on Friday, we compared notes on contingency planning and our respective powers. There is no Watergate here. That is what I announced on Friday. As I indicated to the member for Monash before, there is the National Liquid Fuel Emergency Response Plan, which was agreed by all governments in 2006 and has been endorsed by all governments since then as a gradation of changes.</para>
<para>In this environment, I would also remind all honourable members of the need for factual information when communicating with the public. I would remind the member for Cook, of the need for factual information when communicating with members of the public. I remind the member for Cook that, when he went on social media yesterday and said the Australian government is forcing diesel and petrol to be exported, that is a lie.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Kennedy</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You lied last week.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Cook will withdraw that.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Kennedy</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I withdraw.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks, Member for Cook.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>President of the European Commission</title>
          <page.no>124</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister update the House on the visit to Australia by the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen? How does this visit further Australia's national interests?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bendigo for her question. Earlier today, a senior delegation from the EU, led by President Ursula von der Leyen, arrived in Sydney, and tomorrow she will address our parliament. She is the first woman to address our parliament as the leader of a country—or a group of countries, when it comes to Europe—and the 20th world leader to address our parliament.</para>
<para>This is a milestone moment for the relationship between Australia and the European Union. It is such an important relationship. The European Union represents the world's second-biggest economy, and it's already Australia's second-biggest trading partner. Our two-way trade is worth some $109 billion. That represents jobs and economic prosperity, and our government has been working patiently and constructively to take that to the next level to give Australian farmers, growers and exporters better access to a market of 450 million consumers and to give our friends in Europe the chance to enjoy Australian food, fibre and wine—the best products in the world, which we are so proud of.</para>
<para>Closer engagement matters for our prosperity. One in three Australian jobs is trade dependent. This follows the work that we've done repairing the relationship with China, establishing the free trade agreement with the UAE to open up those markets, engaging as well with ASEAN and through APEC with our traditional partners and our partners in this region. The upgrade in the relationships with Indonesia and with India all make a difference for us. A free trade agreement with Europe would, of course, strengthen that even further.</para>
<para>But we also need to engage with Europe on matters of security. Australia has, on a bipartisan basis, been unequivocal in our support for the struggle of the Ukrainian people against Russia's illegal invasion. That will remain the case, and we will continue to participate in the coalition of the willing. A security and defence partnership with Europe will deepen that relationship.</para>
<para>In a more volatile world, closer partnerships with trusted friends are more important than they've ever been, not just as a safeguard against uncertainty but as the foundation for greater prosperity and greater security. We look forward to welcoming President von der Leyen tomorrow. I'm sure it will be a great success. And on that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</title>
        <page.no>124</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Roberts, Ms Rhoda Ann AO</title>
          <page.no>124</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On the weekend, Australia lost one of the brightest stars from the Australian constellation. Rhoda Roberts AO found a way to pack multiple lifetimes into just one. A proud daughter of Bundjalung country in the Northern Rivers of New South Wales, she was a towering presence in the cultural and journalistic life of our country. Crucially, she never stopped working to put Indigenous culture centre stage. Just one peak in her long and varied career was her use of the opening ceremony of the Sydney Olympics. She showcased First Nations culture as part of our great welcome to the world.</para>
<para>Rhoda captivated and entertained. She informed and inspired. She shaped and advised, never losing sight of an Australia that was even truer to its heart. And she was a mentor to so many, including the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Senator Malarndirri McCarthy. She was often the first—including the first Indigenous host on mainstream Australian TV—but she made sure that she wouldn't be the last. Rhoda Roberts now walks in another place, but she left the clearest possible footprints here for others to follow. May she rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to join the Prime Minister in honouring the life of Rhoda Roberts. The coalition acknowledges the passing of Rhoda Roberts, who died peacefully on Saturday at the age of 66. Raised in Lismore in a big family, she started out as a nurse. She once described her entry into nursing, saying she always wanted to be a writer and a journalist but said that when she grew up, 'The attitude was: why would we put you through to year 12? So I went to Sydney to do nursing, and, once I had that under my belt, I started to explore options in the arts.'</para>
<para>Her exploration led to groundbreaking achievements, an indelible impact on the prominence of Indigenous Australians in art and culture in this country. A proud Bundjalung woman, she achieved many firsts, as we heard: the first of a mainstream TV show, the first head of First Nations programming at the Sydney Opera House and the inaugural elder in residence at the SBS. She was the director of the Festival of Dreaming in the lead-up to the fantastic 2000 Olympic Games and the creative director at the visual awakening component of the opening ceremony, a showcase of our history to the world.</para>
<para>On behalf of the coalition, we send our deepest condolences to Ms Roberts' family, friends and especially to the arts communities where her legacy will live on. May she rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Parliament</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Speaker, it's a question to you. It concerns the administration of the House with respect to <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>. During the course of question time, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy responded to a direct question from you on a point of order. In responding to that question, he said, 'I'm done.' That remark was not captured on the live caption service. <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>should capture a question that you ask—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Bowen</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>What a joke!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>So you don't now want your answers recorded in <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>? You said—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. Before I respond on the question to me, I call the Leader of the House.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Just on the issue—because there's always a risk that we end up with questions to the Speaker being abused, as I'd suggest is happening right now—for the benefit of the House, traditionally, administration effectively goes to the financial decisions that the Speaker and the presiding officers make in terms of the decisions for, in fact, the administration of the building and those sorts of matters. I just raise it as a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Further to the point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I refer you to pages 621 and 622 of the <inline font-style="italic">P</inline><inline font-style="italic">ractice</inline>? It's quite clear there that, when you ask a minister a question and he responds with, 'I'm done,' then that would be captured.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para><inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> is only a proof today. That's the first point. So there is time for a correction. Order! We're just dealing with the question from the manager in an orderly way. He's got every—</para>
<para>An honourable member interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Could people cease interjecting, otherwise I won't respond. I don't want to detain the House. Questions to me have to be about operations, not what happens during question time. That's the first point, as the Leader of the House has indicated. When I ask a minister whether they have concluded, not all responses are always recorded. Sometimes people nod. I understand the point you're trying to make, but just for clarity for the House, this is not a normal question to the Speaker. You've made your point now, but I'll just say that I don't want this to become a continuation. We've had a couple of these since the change of manager, and I don't want a recurrence of using questions to the Speaker to somehow make a secondary point that could be made during question time.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Report Nos 17 and 25 of 2025-26</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the Auditor-General's performance audit report No. 25 of 2025-26 entitled <inline font-style="italic">Procurement and contract management by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for its Security Enhancement Program: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade</inline>. I also present a corrigendum to the Auditor-General's financial statements audit report No. 17 of 2025-26 entitled <inline font-style="italic">Audits of the financial statements of Australian </inline><inline font-style="italic">g</inline><inline font-style="italic">overnment entities for the period ended 30 June 2025</inline>.</para>
<para>Documents made parliamentary papers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>125</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Choice in Superannuation and Other Measures) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>125</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7412" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Choice in Superannuation and Other Measures) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>125</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025</title>
          <page.no>126</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r7409" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>126</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In Griffith we are fortunate to have a community that believes deeply in good health care, in medical research and in looking after one another. We are also home to some of our country's most valued hospitals, medical research facilities and other treatment facilities. We are a community that knows illness is never abstract. It is the specialist appointment in the middle of a workday. It's the test result you wait on. It's the quiet and difficult conversation at the kitchen table about what happens next. It is the hope that early action, good advice and modern medicine can all make a difference.</para>
<para>Australians deserve protection from discrimination of all forms when it comes to accessing the health care and health information that they need. That is why I support this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, which delivers on this Albanese Labor government's commitment to ban the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance and to do exactly what we said we would do to protect Australians from discrimination when engaging with their own health care.</para>
<para>At its heart, this bill is about making sure our laws keep up with modern science and keep faith with people who these laws are supposed to serve. Most importantly, it's about ensuring Australians are not punished for seeking information that could protect their health or even save their lives. This bill establishes a ban on life insurers using certain information about an individual's genetic testing when deciding whether to offer life insurance or on what terms, and it aligns with the Disability Discrimination Act with that reform.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of this bill deals with a problem that has sat in front of governments for too long. Genetic testing has become an increasingly important part of modern medicine. It can help doctors prevent, monitor and treat a range of cancers, cancer predisposition syndromes and other heritable conditions. It can guide earlier intervention. It can help families understand risk. It can also support clinical research that improves care for everyone. But, for too many Australians, the promise of that science has been overshadowed by a very practical fear. 'If I take this test, will I be penalised by an insurer?' Treasury's analysis shows that concerns about life insurance have caused some people to delay or avoid genetic testing, including participation in research. That is not an acceptable choice for any Australian to face. No-one should have to choose between protecting their health and protecting their family's financial future. No-one should sit in a doctor's office and hesitate about a medically recommended test because they are worried that an insurer may later use that information against them. No-one should hold back from joining medical research because a commercial consequence hangs over them. Health care should be guided by clinical need and informed consent, not distorted by fear or financial disadvantage.</para>
<para>This issue is also a personal one to me. As someone living with MS, multiple sclerosis, I know what it's like to live with health uncertainty. At present, we've identified over 200 genes which have been linked to the risk of developing MS. I know what it's like to think seriously about the future, to navigate medical systems and to understand that a diagnosis or a test result can shape not only how you feel physically but how secure you feel in every other aspect of your life. I understand in a very real way why health decisions must be driven by care, by knowledge and by what gives people the best chance to live well, not by the fear that doing the right thing medically will somehow leave them worse off financially. That is why this reform matters so much. It gives people certainty. It tells Australians that, if they undertake genetic testing, whether for their own health care or through health and medical research, that decision will not be used to block them from life insurance or saddle them with worse terms. This government announced these reforms because the existing arrangements were not delivering that certainty, and this legislation gives effect to that decision.</para>
<para>The bill will apply the ban to life insurance contract decisions. It amends the Insurance Contract Act 1984 to stop insurers from using protected genetic information in life insurance underwriting and contract decisions. It also amends the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 so that our antidiscrimination law is aligned with that new protection. This matters because people deserve a framework that is coherent. They deserve laws that speak clearly to one another. They deserve to know that the advance of genomic medicine is being matched by the advance of legal protection.</para>
<para>It is also important to be clear about what this reform does not do. It does not prevent life insurance from continuing to be properly risk rated. Insurers will still be able to use information they can already access and use, including signs, symptoms, diagnosed disease and family medical history. The bill is directly targeted at genetic test information and has been drafted and consulted on to remove a specific barrier to care while preserving the broader capacity of insurers to underwrite policies in a way that reflects actual clinical presentation and existing risk factors. Nor does this bill prevent people from choosing to disclose test results where that benefits them. The framework allows an individual with written consent to volunteer genetic test results in circumstances where doing so would not adversely affect the insurance offer or policy terms. It is a proportionate and sensible response, and it protects people from harm while allowing room for choice where disclosure is genuinely in their interests.</para>
<para>These protections have teeth. The bill establishes both civil penalties and strict liability offence for non-compliance, with regulatory responsibility assigned to the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, ASIC. That matters because rights without enforcement are often not rights at all. If this parliament is going to say to Australians that they can proceed with genetic testing without fear of misuse by insurers, then we must back that promise with a regulator that can monitor, enforce and act.</para>
<para>The bill also provides for regular review of the operation of new provisions, including whether they are effective in giving individuals reasonable certainty and whether there are any unintended consequences. That is good lawmaking—firm where it needs to be and accountable over time.</para>
<para>For me, one of the most compelling arguments for this reform is what it says about the kind of country we want to be. We should be a country that backs prevention. We should be a country that wants people to seek information early, not late. We should be a country that supports research participation, because the discoveries of today become the treatments of tomorrow, and I would like to acknowledge all of the wonderful medical research facilities that exist in my community of Griffith and the remarkable work that they are doing in this space. And we should be a country where the benefits of scientific progress are not reserved for those wealthy enough to absorb financial risk but shared fairly across the community.</para>
<para>Consultation on this very issue followed years of concern from advocates, clinicians and researchers, and the evidence put before government showed that the status quo was suppressing the full benefits of genetic testing. We know that, in health, delay can come at a real cost. Delay can mean a missed opportunity for surveillance. Delay can mean treatment starting later than it should. Delay can mean a family member not understanding their risk in time. Delay can also mean fewer people participating in research, slowing progress for the whole community. When the law creates hesitation around testing that may be medically indicated or socially valuable, the law is failing to serve the public interest. I hope this is unacceptable to all members.</para>
<para>It is worth saying plainly that voluntary arrangements were evidently not enough. The Australian Genetics and Life Insurance Moratorium: Monitoring the Effectiveness and Response report from Monash University found that the existing moratorium was 'inadequate to address and prevent genetic discrimination in life insurance', and they recommended a legislative prohibition instead. That is why government action matters here. A patchwork approach could not deliver the certainty that Australians needed. Only a clear, statutory rule could do that.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Griffith, this matters because our community values research, innovation and access to good care. We are home to families who participate in screening, who support medical research and who understand that early intervention often changes outcomes. We are also home to people who carry enough already—a health concern, a family history, caring responsibilities, the cost of living. They should not carry an extra burden created by outdated insurance settings. This reform says to them, 'Your health comes first.' It says to clinicians and researchers, 'We will not leave unnecessary barriers in the way of good care and scientific progress.'</para>
<para>Schedules 2 through 4 of the bill deal with practical questions on how our economy is regulated and how public administration should work. They are different in subject matter, but they share an underlying principle that good law should be clear, modern and proportionate.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 deals with foreign financial services providers. It establishes licensing exemptions for certain providers, including a comparable regulator exemption, a professional investor exemption and a market maker exemption. It also creates a faster path through aspects of the licensing process for some foreign providers who have already been authorised in comparable regulatory regimes by exempting them from the fit-and-proper-person assessment when applying for a standard Australian financial services licence for wholesale services. The aim is to facilitate access to a wider range of global investment opportunities, specialised advice and new financing sources for Australian businesses and investors while retaining conditions, notification requirements and ASIC oversight.</para>
<para>That matters in practical terms because Australian wholesale and professional investors, including superannuation funds, operate in global financial environments. Access to international markets can help diversify holdings and increase competition. At the same time, we should never lose sight of the need for regulatory safeguards and domestic market integrity. What this schedule attempts to do is strike that balance: reduce duplication where there is comparable overseas regulation but preserve conditions, court submission requirements in some cases, and ASIC's ability to supervise, vary conditions or cancel exemptions. Schedule 3 modernises the legislative architecture that supports Australia's participation in multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. These institutions matter because they help finance development, economic stability and, increasingly, climate resilience across our region.</para>
<para>The amendments standardise appropriation provisions, allow Australia to participate more effectively in evolving financial arrangements and reduce the need for repeated legislative amendment every time routine or non-controversial administrative steps are required. At the same time, they retain parliamentary transparency by requiring notice of new financial obligations through disallowable legislative instruments. That is important for a country like Australia. Our prosperity is tied to the stability and the resilience of our region. In an era of climate disruption, economic uncertainty and growing development finance needs, multilateral development banks are changing how they work.</para>
<para>The 2024-25 MYEFO included support through a US$150 million purchase of World Bank hybrid capital and US$200 million guarantees for the Asian Development Bank's Innovative Finance Facility for Climate in Asia and the Pacific. This schedule helps ensure our legislative settings are flexible enough to support commitments of that kind and future commitments without sacrificing parliamentary oversight.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 repeals stage 2 of the financial adviser registration process that was due to commence on 1 July 2026. Under the current stage 1 system, Australian financial services licensees already have to register authorised financial advisers with ASIC before those advisers can lawfully provide personal advice to retail clients. The Financial Services and Credit Panel also already has the authority to take disciplinary action where needed. This schedule removes the requirement for individual advisers to separately register themselves annually, a process that otherwise would add red tape without improving consumer protection.</para>
<para>These are sensible changes. Consumer protection must always be real and robust but regulation should also be effective and proportionate. Our laws must evolve alongside science; when medicine advances, policy must keep pace. When we know that an outdated rule is discouraging life-saving or life-improving action, it is our responsibility to change that rule. When people have raised this issue for years, we owe them far more than just warm words; we owe them guarantees.</para>
<para>That's what this bill is here to do. It gives Australians reassurance against genetic discrimination in life insurance. It offers hope to people considering genetic testing or participation in research. It aligns our insurance law with our anti-discrimination framework. It establishes enforcement provisions that give reform real force. It modernises financial service regulation, supports Australia's international economic engagement and removes unnecessary red tape. Most of all, it says to Australians living with uncertainty about their health, quite simply: get the test, join the research, have the conversation with your doctor, seek the information that could help you or help your family. This government will not leave you exposed for doing so. That is fair, that is humane and that is exactly why this House should support this bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a great privilege to rise to speak on this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, because it's an important piece of legislation. It's legislation that has been a long time in the making—too long—and it enjoys broad bipartisan support. In making my remarks, I'm going to acknowledge the work and great efforts of people like Dr Jane Tiller who have invested significant amounts of time, passion and expertise and a profound sense of equity and fairness in making sure that, this week, this bill gets to the start line and, I hope, through the Senate, the finish line as well.</para>
<para>The coalition is pleased to support this bill because it contains important reforms that Australians have been waiting for. They're sensible reforms. They're practical protections, they make sense and they make fairness around the use of genetic information in life insurance and improvements across our financial system. It's also a bill that highlights two consistent problems that have arisen at different times during the tenure of this government: reforms are delivered too slowly, and, even when there is broad agreement or bipartisan support, which the community hope for and expect from us as legislators on important issues like this, they take too long. The other point I wish to raise is about the scrutiny of public spending and where that is weakened and undermined.</para>
<para>I will deal with schedule 1 in my remarks, particularly around genetic protections, as they've been delayed despite years of bipartisan consensus and significant work by legal experts, ethicists, medical researchers and the broader community. This schedule prevents life insurers from using genetic-test results to deny or limit cover, ensuring Australians can access medical testing without fear or discrimination. Genetic testing can be life saving. It supports clinicians to prevent, diagnose and treat serious conditions, including hereditary diseases and cancer. No Australian should be discouraged from undertaking genetic testing because they fear it could affect their ability to obtain life insurance.</para>
<para>These reforms have strong bipartisan support and clear backing from clinicians, researchers and patient advocates. Indeed, they have enjoyed that support for years now, so the simple question is: why has it taken Labor so long to deliver this? In fact, the coalition had to drag Labor kicking and screaming to the start line for this legislation. In 2019, while in government, the coalition supported the introduction of an industry moratorium as an interim safeguard, with the clear expectation that legislation would follow. That meant, by the time of the 2022 election, there was broad agreement across industry, among clinicians and in the parliament that this legislation was needed, that its time had come and that the protections put forward were necessary and critical.</para>
<para>There's a broken promise by Labor, then, because we saw in September 2024 the then assistant treasurer Stephen Jones announce to much fanfare and lots of bells and whistles that Labor would be introducing legislation to ban genetic discrimination in life insurance. Great stuff—terrific and broadly supported! If only they had got on with the job and finished it! The announcement was widely welcomed, and it raised real expectations among ordinary Australians and the medical community. But, by the 2025 election, no legislation had even been introduced—no bill, no forward steps and no progress since that announcement, which had been made with bells and whistles, great fanfare, great media attention and with great acclaim and accolade for the government. Nothing was followed up.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, that is an analogy for a lot of serious stuff that we deal with in this parliament where there is a lot of fanfare and a lot of fuss but not a lot of follow-through. Australians were left waiting—and with real consequences. There was strong bipartisan support. There was no opposition. There was no reason why this legislation could not be introduced to the parliament in the previous term. We think about the consequences of that. We often talk in this place about unintended consequences, and we should have regard to that. I acknowledge that there are school students sitting above us, watching the proceedings in this chamber. We must give them hope and go about our work in this place with a real sense of purpose but also with a sense of priority. There could be no better example for wanting to expedite the process of this legislation in what we are discussing today.</para>
<para>The consequences of delay will now have, I think, an impact on generations of Australians yet to come, who really needed this legislation to come in earlier. People could have benefited from genetic testing, but they may have been discouraged from doing so because of the concerns about insurance discrimination, and there were very real concerns to be had about insurance discrimination, which is why we are debating and supporting the legislation before us today. Participation in medical research could well have been affected. We don't know, but we're fixing the problem now because the coalition supports these reforms, particularly around a sense of certainty and the need to prevent discrimination and to better support health outcomes overall.</para>
<para>There are many families in my electorate of Monash that have hereditary diseases, from cancer to heart disease, in their family. They want to make sure that they can get on top of these things early through the great benefits that genetic testing provides. But they should not have to expect—they should not fear—the discriminatory consequences of doing so. So this is very important legislation. The reality is this is a reform everybody agreed on from the start; except Australians were left waiting due to Labor's delays.</para>
<para>It's estimated that around 1½ million Australians undergo genetic testing every year. It's really important because the science around that helps promote and develop and implement preventive medicine and the developments that that is able to progress. However, some Australians have decided to refuse this testing that could potentially save their life because of financial concerns. I mentioned Dr Jane Tiller, who's a lawyer, genetic counsellor, public health researcher at Monash University—named after, of course, the great Sir John Monash, although it's not in my electorate! Dr Tiller has done some incredible work on this issue. I know she's in Canberra; I think she's in Parliament House today. I do want to acknowledge the very long time that she's spent on this issue and her helping as a really key person in getting it to this point of the legislative lens. I'd like to acknowledge Dr Tiller today.</para>
<para>Genomic research holds enormous promise for identifying genetic causes of disease and enabling earlier prevention and treatment. However, Dr Tiller recognises the fears around genetic discrimination in life insurance. Indeed, she's dedicated huge amounts of time and expertise to this very topic, and she notes that people's financial fears for themselves and their families are very valid. They do not want to disadvantage, particularly as we discuss so regularly right now, the cost-of-living crisis and the very real financial insecurity that people and families across Australia live with every day. These fears are entirely valid. In Australia, life insurers have historically been allowed to use genetic test results to deny coverage or to increase premiums. This has created a significant barrier to genomic research and clinical care. We don't know what we don't know. That is why research, clinical trials and clinical care are so very important.</para>
<para>I'm going to use a brave example: Meg Herrmann, a fit 25-year-old woman, who told the ABC that she underwent a preventative double mastectomy after genetic testing found she carried the BRCA2 mutation. Meg carried a 70 per cent lifetime risk of developing breast cancer—as well as making her more likely to develop ovarian, pancreatic and skin cancer. I really want to commend Meg for very bravely sharing her story so publicly. Meg underwent genetic testing after her mum was diagnosed with breast cancer. After undertaking the procedure, Meg's risk of contracting breast cancer reduced by 95 per cent, but her decision came at a cost to her financial future. As a person who was a BRCA2 gene carrier, Meg said she would never be able to 'take out more than $500,000 in life insurance cover'. As a reference point, this is about $240,000 lower than the median house price where she lives. Meg says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… yet, a smoker can go on and ask for a higher level of cover—</para></quote>
<para>in the example that she has given to the ABC. This is not fair and this is not right. She says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">They might pay a higher premium, but they can.</para></quote>
<para>This is where the discrepancy in fairness, in justice, in an equity of outcome has been experienced by many Australians right across Australia.</para>
<para>I commend brave people like Meg for sharing their stories so vulnerably and so charitably. I commend researchers and advocates like Dr Jane Tiller. I think it is a great moment for this parliament at a time where we quite rightly have a very robust contest of ideas on a number of contentious issues—and this place should be a place of strong debate. But I think there are some topics where the community and the broader public want to see us come together as a parliament to champion an issue and to progress a cause that is worthy of support, and this bill does just that. I'm very pleased to be part of a coalition who has had a strong track record of supporting this issue, and I'm very pleased to commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DOYLE</name>
    <name.id>299962</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. At its heart, this legislation is about removing barriers to better health, to smarter investment, to global engagement and to sensible regulation. For Australians, it is about confidence—confidence in our health system, confidence in our financial system and confidence that government is working in their interests.</para>
<para>One of the greatest barriers to broader participation in genetic screening has been the fear of discrimination by life insurers. No-one should ever be deterred from taking a potentially life-saving test because they are worried it could later be used against them. That is why I am proud to be part of a federal Labor government introducing legislation to ban the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting. Schedule 1 amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and aligns the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to make it crystal clear that life insurers will not be able to use a person's genetic test results to determine whether they are offered cover or on what terms.</para>
<para>Genetic testing can extend and indeed save lives. It allows doctors to prevent, treat and monitor cancers and other genetic conditions. It enables research that identifies new risk factors and develops new therapies. Yet Treasury analysis shows the current framework has led some Australians to delay or avoid testing, even avoiding participation in clinical trials because of fear it could affect their access to affordable life insurance. That means the full benefits of genetic science are not being realised, and that is exactly what this bill addresses.</para>
<para>I understand on a deeply personal level the importance of undergoing genetic testing. Just over 30 years ago, in February 1996, I underwent genetic testing for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations after being diagnosed with breast cancer in early December 1995, aged just 25. At that time, genetic testing was in its early stages. I had blood drawn—it wasn't a cheek swab back then—and it took another 18 months to receive my results. During that long wait, anxious about what lay ahead, I received the added benefit of genetic counselling. At first I was very confused by this, not quite understanding why I needed to have genetic counselling. I just wanted to know, with these gene mutations, which meant a higher chance of breast cancer recurrence, what medical options were going to be available to me so I could live my life to its fullest. Of course I would need genetic counselling along that road—even more so if my results turned out to be positive.</para>
<para>I was very young and very naive. I'd only just gotten engaged a month or so before my cancer diagnosis, so there was a lot going on in my mind. I was yet to even think about my wedding venue, wedding date and wedding dress, and all that guff, let alone think about having children one day with my husband-to-be. The thought of passing on a gene mutation to our future children was quite alarming, to say the least. All of these thoughts were popping into my head, so of course it never occurred to me what genetic testing might mean if I was ever to apply for life insurance one day. Long-term financial matters such as that are rarely on the radar of a young person in their mid-20s. Yes, there are many things to consider.</para>
<para>Ultimately, I was very glad I underwent genetic testing. In August 1997, 18 months later, I received a letter in the mail informing me that I had tested negative for both the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene. The relief that swept over me was incredible. It was as if decades of my life ahead had been handed back to me, and they were. I'm so thankful for genetic testing and I highly recommend it for anyone who may require it. For those like myself, a negative result gives some peace of mind that there isn't a genetic link at least for the cancer or other ailment with which they may have been diagnosed.</para>
<para>For those who do receive positive results, however, it gives them the ability to look at options that suit them and to take swift action. From the stories I've heard over the years from people who do have positive genetic test results for cancer or other ailments, it is an empowering step for them to take, as they are now able to take control of their medical and health decisions. They are forewarned and forearmed. They say knowledge is power. It can be life saving or life extending for them, and that means the world to people who have tested positive and for their loved ones. That kind of empowering knowledge should not have to be forsaken out of fear of being unable to obtain life insurance or an affordable life insurance option.</para>
<para>I'd like to now acknowledge the outstanding work of Dr Jane Tiller, senior research fellow, genetic counsellor and public health researcher at Monash University, for her dedication and advocacy in regard to this important issue. Dr Tiller has advocated tirelessly to raise awareness regarding genetic discrimination in life insurance for around a decade, and without her and her team's efforts, this bill may not have been introduced into this House today. I thank her.</para>
<para>For many families and households juggling mortgages, raising children and planning for retirement, life insurance is not a luxury. It means a sense of security, and that should never come at the cost of affording lifesaving medical information. The ban on the use of genetic test results in life insurance will provide a level of certainty. It will reassure people that participating in genetic testing, whether through their doctor or through medical research, will not jeopardise their financial security.</para>
<para>Importantly, the reform strikes the right balance. It does not prevent individuals from voluntarily providing genetic test results where it would not adversely affect their policy. It does not prevent insurers from using information about diagnosed conditions, symptoms or family medical history. Risk ratings remain intact. What is removed is discrimination based on predictive genetic information. There will be strong enforcement, including civil penalties and criminal offences, of non-compliance, regulated by ASIC. This reform removes a real barrier to preventive health and medical research, it encourages early detection, it encourages participation and, ultimately, it saves lives.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 will ensure that Australia remains competitive and globally connected. It introduces three targeted exemptions from the requirement to hold an Australian financial services licence for certain foreign financial services providers—the comparable regulator exemption, the professional investor exemption and the market maker exemption. It also streamlines the licensing process where firms are already regulated by comparable overseas authorities. Why does this matter? It matters because our local economy is deeply connected to global markets. Australians work in many fields: banking and financial services, retail, health care, education, advanced manufacturing, small businesses and professional services amongst others. Our superannuation funds, which represent the retirement savings of hardworking Australians, rely on access to international markets to diversify investments and to secure returns. These reforms will help ensure Australian businesses and investors can access specialised global expertise and new sources of capital, while maintaining regulatory oversight and market integrity. It is about getting the balance right—maintaining strong safeguards whilst reducing unnecessary red tape.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 futureproofs Australia's legislative framework for multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. These institutions are evolving rapidly, developing innovative financial instruments to meet development and climate financing gaps. The amendments ensure that Australia can continue to participate effectively, including in hybrid capital and guarantee arrangements without requiring repeated legislative change for routine transactions that parliament has already endorsed. In regard to global stability, climate resilience and responsive international engagement, this ensures Australia remains a constructive and influential global partner. At the same time, transparency is strengthened through requirements to notify parliament of new financial obligations via disallowable legislative instruments. This is modernisation without diminishing oversight.</para>
<para>Finally, schedule 4 delivers on the government's commitment not to proceed with stage 2 of the financial adviser registration process. The existing stage 1 system already requires AFS licensees to register advisers with ASIC. The Financial Services and Credit Panel has strong disciplinary powers, including suspension or cancellation. Proceeding with stage 2 would have required new IT infrastructure and imposed annual registration requirements from 1 July 2026, adding cost and regulatory burden without enhancing consumer protection. For many small financial advice practices which serve families and retirees, unnecessary red tape ultimately increases costs for clients. This amendment removes duplication while preserving accountability.</para>
<para>This bill is about fairness in health, confidence in financial markets, modernisation of international engagement and sensible regulatory reform. This bill means greater confidence for people to pursue genetic testing without fear, stronger access to global investment opportunities, responsible participation in international financial institutions and reduced regulatory burden where it does not serve consumers. Our government is getting on with the job—removing barriers, modernising systems and putting Australians first. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Genetic testing and genomic research are essential to improving prevention, care and treatment for individuals and their families and for reducing Australia's burden of chronic disease. The legislation before the House, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, prohibits life insurers from using genetic test results to discriminate against applicants when offering life insurance cover. It's a long-overdue reform which represents a significant shift in how genetic information can be used and misused outside clinical care. The legislation will help decouple decision-making in health from financial penalties and disincentives for individuals and their relatives.</para>
<para>For decades, concerns about insurance implications have contributed to hesitancy around genetic testing. Individuals at risk of hereditary conditions, like inherited cancer syndromes and neurodegenerative disorders, have often delayed or declined testing due to their fears that the results could affect future life insurance access or premiums. That issue was highlighted by the Australian Law Reform Commission back in 2003, when it recommended that improved safeguards should be applied to the insurance industry's use of genetic information for underwriting processes.</para>
<para>Removing insurance related barriers increases the likelihood that individuals will engage with genetic testing earlier, that they can act on those results sooner and that they can participate more fully in risk management, early treatment and clinical trials. Early identification of genetic risk also reduces the need for late stage interventions, and it will decrease hospital admissions. Genetic testing can also inform treatment of those people who've already been diagnosed with health conditions by predicting their response to medications, immunotherapies and other forms of treatment. Pharmacogenomics is increasingly improving targeting and the cost-effectiveness of prescribing.</para>
<para>It's important to note that de-identified, de-aggregated genetic data is valuable input for scientific and medical research. It can be used to identify vulnerable populations, to contribute to workforce planning and to guide cost allocation in health. But, for decades, many Australians have deferred or declined genetic testing because of their very reasonable fears that discrimination will be applied when they attempt to obtain life insurance.</para>
<para>In a 2019 study of nearly 1,500 Australians, more than 80 per cent expressed significant concern about potential insurance discrimination based on their genetic data. Another Australian study found that the proportion of participants who declined genetic testing more than doubled when they were informed of its potential impact upon their insurance eligibility. Those fears were reasonable. Sector research released in 2021 indicated that about 10 per cent of individuals who had disclosed genetic test results had their insurance cover offered on less favourable terms or declined, despite the life insurance industry introducing a mandatory standard in 2019 which theoretically restricted the use of predictive genetic test results in their underwriting.</para>
<para>Individuals should be able to receive optimal health care without the fear that it could compromise their ability to obtain life insurance cover on reasonable terms. That's why I support these reforms, which will remove that powerful disincentive and which will encourage more Australians to benefit from potentially life-changing genetic testing. For many Australians, that legislation will be transformative. The bill will operate by regulation, ensuring that the legislation can remain effective, even in the face of very rapidly evolving genetic testing technologies, and individuals can consent to use of their genetic information in underwriting so long as it does not disadvantage them.</para>
<para>I'm also pleased that the bill protects the rights of genetic relatives. A person doesn't require the consent of their relatives to undertake genetic testing, but, in the absence of adequate legal protections, a young person's ability to obtain life insurance could well be compromised by decisions made by relatives that they've never actually met. It's absolutely vital that, as legislators, we protect all individuals from the possible downstream economic and personal effects of the testing of a relative as best we can.</para>
<para>Sadly, we can't protect all Australians from the health impacts of such scenarios. I well remember diagnosing a child with juvenile Huntington's disease, a heartbreakingly sad condition, which led to the inevitable cascade diagnosis of numerous other family members. That was a horribly difficult experience for that family to have to go through.</para>
<para>It is disappointing, though, that this legislation does not apply retrospectively. The bill will apply only to existing life insurance contracts when those contracts are varied, reinstated or extended, but not to automatic contract extensions. While it may have very significant benefits for those people who are yet to obtain life insurance coverage, those who've already had penalties or other discriminatory terms imposed by life insurers will still be discriminated against. They've possibly already been paying higher premiums for years, and they'll now be faced with the choice of either extending an unfavourable deal or negotiating new coverage on possibly poorer terms because they're older. It's also worth noting that those people who have applications in progress now are not protected from adverse decisions until the bill commences six months after it receives royal assent.</para>
<para>It's my belief that the government should not abandon those who have already been subjected to the discriminatory practices that this legislation should prevent in the future. The government also has to be mindful that life insurance is a pooled arrangement. While risk is shared across millions of people, an increase in claims because of this legislation could well have pricing impacts. We need to ensure that life insurance remains affordable for all Australians.</para>
<para>The government must ensure that the impacts of this legislation on the cost of life insurance are closely considered in its statutory review of this legislation. It's particularly important that life insurance companies do not infer genetic test results based on other data points, for example, information about other aspects of an individual's medical care, such as risk surveillance activities, the medications that they're prescribed, their participation in preventative healthcare measures, their involvement in clinical trials and other direct methods. These protections have to be enshrined in the regulations that accompany this bill. I call on the Treasurer to ensure that that happens, and I foreshadow here careful examination of those regulations as they're developed to ensure that this occurs. I ask the government to review these regulations and the impact of this legislation in this very rapidly moving field after three years, not five as is currently foreshadowed in this bill.</para>
<para>Despite these concerns, there is broad consensus about the bill from advocacy, research and peak bodies, as well as across the superannuation and insurance industry. The bill has been a very long time coming, and I acknowledge the tireless work of the advocates who have pushed for it, particularly Dr Jane Tiller from the Public Health Genomics Program at Monash University, who has advocated for this legislation for years and whose work on a sentinel study of the life insurance moratorium found it inadequate to address and prevent genetic discrimination in life insurance.</para>
<para>As a doctor and a medical researcher—and possibly the only person ever lucky enough to hold a seat in this House, who has actually identified new genes and who has actually described new genetic diseases—I'm uniquely placed to attest to the importance of genetic testing as an invaluable tool in the prevention, early detection and treatment of serious diseases. I bring to the House's attention the remarkable recent progress on carrier and newborn genetic testing in Australia. Research studies like Mackenzie's Mission, which investigated ways to deliver a large-scale, more-than-1000-gene national reproductive genetic carrier screening program, found that such testing is generally well-received, it is widely adopted and it is cost effective. Mackenzie's Mission should be the basis for the design and the delivery of a national reproductive genetic carrier screening program, which should be available to all Australians who are considering having children.</para>
<para>I also bring to the House's attention the DNA Screen program, which represented a world-first initiative to increase the prevention and early detection of cancer and heart disease in adults through population DNA screening. That study targeted high-risk, medically actionable conditions in which effective interventions could manage risk and prevent disease. Those conditions in that study were hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome and familial hypercholesterolemia.</para>
<para>A landmark study recently published in the <inline font-style="italic">Lancet</inline> identified significant productivity gains from the implementation of targeted, population based genomic screening. There have been recent extraordinary advances in genomic-sequencing technology, which means that other conditions could easily be added to screening panels without a significant increase in test cost. But, for the moment, in this country, larger gene panels remain user pays, and that creates inequitable access to them. In 2023, carrier screening for cystic fibrosis, spinal muscular atrophy and fragile X syndrome was finally included under the MBS after decades of work by tired researchers like me.</para>
<para>Since that time, there has been huge uptake of this three-disease screen. In 2025, the screen was accessed by more than 123,000 of the 300,000 couples who are having babies in Australia. We should be developing, supporting and funding additional population programs for carrier testing and genetic screening, we should expand support under the MBS, and we should fund the genetic counselling and education required to support those programs so that Australians can make informed decisions about screening and so that they can be supported to navigate unexpected results. World-leading Australian medical research and clinical programs have demonstrated that these sorts of programs have real-world flexibility, and they are demonstrably cost effective.</para>
<para>I'd like to mention a former patient of mine who is now a constituent. Tom Strahan has Batten disease. It's a rare disorder which manifests with balance problems and seizures in early childhood. It used to be invariably fatal in childhood. After Tom was diagnosed at age 2, his parents found an enzyme replacement therapy trial in Italy and, with great effort and great resourcefulness, managed to get Tom onto that experimental treatment. That medication, Brineura, proved able to slow cognitive and motor decline in Batten disease, unexpectedly, by 80 per cent.</para>
<para>When the treatment was no longer available in Italy, Tom's parents, Kate and Antony, secured access for the medication in Melbourne. They had to fight for it. It wasn't, at the time, funded or approved here, but they prevailed. I can attest to the force of their natures in fighting for the wellbeing of their son at that time. It's now the case that all children with Batten disease in Victoria can access that treatment. It has radically changed their outcome and it has extended their life expectancy.</para>
<para>Newborn screening for Batten disease wasn't feasible when Tom was born, but it is now, and it would transform the lives of babies born with this and similar neurological and other conditions. Within a few years, babies found to have Batten disease on newborn screening could well be effectively cured within a few weeks with a single dose of gene therapy. All such treatments work best when they're given early. With proactive genetic diagnostics, we could be providing the very earliest possible access to such life-saving interventions for all Australian children.</para>
<para>As genetics increases its influence upon modern health care, policy changes like this one play a critical role in ensuring that scientific progress, particularly that made by world-leading Australian medical researchers, translates immediately and effectively into meaningful clinical benefit. Genetic testing is increasingly incorporated into everyday health care in Australia. By removing a key structural barrier to its implementation, this legislation reinforces the role of genetic information as a tool for empowerment to support earlier action, better planning and improved health outcomes across the lifespan. Given its importance, we should, as a nation with world-leading medical care and an outstanding research sector, be looking to more actively embrace new technologies in genetic diagnosis, and we should be providing their benefit to all Australians.</para>
<para>In closing, I move amendments (1) to (3) circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) genetic testing and genomic research are essential to improving prevention, care and treatment and reducing Australia's chronic disease burden;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Australia has made remarkable progress on carrier and newborn reproductive genetic testing;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) genomic sequencing technology means that conditions can be easily added to a screening panel without significant increases in test costs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) world-leading Australian medical research has demonstrated that such programs have real-world feasibility and demonstrable cost-effectiveness; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) pathology items 73451 and 73452, covering genetic carrier testing for spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis and fragile X syndrome, were welcome inclusions to the Medicare Benefits Schedule in November 2023;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls upon the Government to heed expert calls to expand the Medical Benefits Schedule to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) develop, support, and fund population programs for carrier testing and genomic screening; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) identify couples and individuals at high risk of medically actionable conditions before conception or disease onset; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes that the above measures, along with restrictions on the use of genetic testing by the insurance industry contained in this bill, will encourage a greater uptake of genetic testing.</para></quote>
<para>I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Scamps</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question now is that the amendment be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Our modern health system is amazing. Our health system here in Australia, despite its challenges, is the best in the world. If you're sick or you're injured, you wouldn't want to be anywhere else. But no-one wants to be sick, and as in all things, prevention is better than cure. It's cheaper and more effective. So a lot of focus in the health system goes to health prevention, and if you can't prevent disease, then early intervention is next best.</para>
<para>One of the amazing areas of health that has advanced so much in recent years is genetic testing. We know that a number of conditions have a genetic link, either directly causal or in terms of susceptibility. So genetic testing, identifying an individual or a family's genetic susceptibility to conditions, enables them to make informed decisions about screening, preventive actions and treatments. We want people, particularly those who know they have a family history of a particular disease state, to get tested and be able to make those informed decisions so they can stay healthy or seek early treatment.</para>
<para>One of the barriers to this has been where life insurance companies have required individuals to disclose the results of genetic testing and have used this either to deny life insurance or to increase premiums, which is completely counterintuitive. Those people who know they have a susceptibility and are actively managing the risks to prevent the disease state from developing are, in fact, at lower risk of death or disability from that disease than those who have the genetic predisposition but don't know it and therefore aren't able to seek screening or early intervention. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025 will ensure that any adverse findings as a result of a genetic test will not impinge on the determination of an individual's cover for life insurance. No-one should be dissuaded from potentially life-saving testing out of a fear of discrimination in life insurance products.</para>
<para>Australia lags globally on this issue. The UK, Canada, Europe, the US and New Zealand have all implemented some form of prohibition or ban. This bill seeks to rectify this blind spot in our current framework. Specifically, it bans life insurers from assessing eligibility for cover or the terms and conditions of the cover on the basis of the results of a genetic test, thereby ending the discriminatory practices of insurers who would, as is their job, prioritise their financial bottom line over people's health.</para>
<para>I'd like to pause here and thank Dr Jane Tiller from the public health and genomics unit at Monash University, who's been a consistent campaigner on this issue. Dr Tiller is very familiar to many of us here in the halls of parliament, as she's made her way around, making the case on a bipartisan basis, for a number of years—backed by data, backed by science and backed by compassion and a commitment to improving the health of Australians by encouraging them to get informed about their risks and to manage those risks.</para>
<para>A 2018 parliamentary inquiry into the life insurance industry recommended a ban on the use of genetic results in life insurance underwriting. In 2019, the life insurance industry introduced a partial, self-regulated moratorium, which prohibited the use of genomic testing results for underwriting policies above certain financial limits. But the moratorium did not provide confidence to Australians that the results would not be used against them, and we know that many people chose, and still choose, not to proceed with genetic testing as a result. The self-regulated moratorium had no government oversight and therefore failed to meet the expectations of the parliamentary inquiry. This legislation provides that confidence to Australians—that they can proceed with genetic and genomic testing without it impacting their ability to get life insurance and without it affecting their premiums.</para>
<para>This legislative amendment brings into alignment the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, ensuring that our antidiscrimination laws do not lag behind the medical science and ensuring that Australians with adverse genetic test results are protected in their dealings with life insurers, because this is as much a human rights issue as it is a medical one. No-one with a disability should be discriminated against, including those with genetic variations, and we want to encourage people to look after their health, including through preventive and early intervention measures, such as genomic screening.</para>
<para>The industry led moratorium in place since 2019 prescribes that companies will allow individuals to take out life insurance up to certain limits without having to disclose a genetic test. However, the report of Monash University's Australian Genetics and Life Insurance Moratorium: Monitoring the Effectiveness and Response, A-GLIMMER, finds that many individuals are still dissuaded from getting a genetic test for fear of discrimination in their life insurance policy and that, because the moratorium is industry self-regulated, there is little certainty for consumers. Currently, there is no government oversight of the industry led moratorium, and there's no review process for individuals to challenge insurers' decisions in the event that they may be influenced by genetic testing results. Ultimately, people are postponing or avoiding undergoing genetic testing in case it should negatively impact on their life insurance cover. Parents are reluctant to tell their children of any genetic condition and recommend testing in case it should impact their policy.</para>
<para>Genetic testing is crucial for determining whether an individual has a genetic disease or condition. Many common life-threatening illnesses are influenced by genetic factors: cancer, autoimmune diseases, degenerative diseases and many other conditions. Genetic testing allows individuals and their medical practitioners to plan for every contingency. Genetic and genomic health technology can be used to determine whether an individual is likely to develop genetic conditions later in life. The early identification of an increased risk of developing a condition empowers the individual and their treating team to make rational decisions to limit the risk. As in the well-known public health metaphor of the fence at the top of the cliff versus the ambulance at the bottom—where the relatively cheap preventive force of the fence at the top stops someone falling off the cliff and needing an expensive and potentially less effective ambulance service—genetic testing is that fence at the top of the cliff.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government is committed to the future of genetic testing and research for Australians, a health system and scientific frontier focusing on prevention and early intervention that is crucial for the health outcomes of all Australians. The government, through its Medical Research Future Fund Genomics Health Futures Mission, is investing $500.1 million in genomic medical research over 10 years from 2018-19. The Minister for Health and Ageing previously announced new listings on the MBS for a range of genetic tests valued at $148.5 million over the next four years. Additionally, the government is consulting with states and territories on the development of a nationally cohesive approach to medical genomics, including the establishment of a national genomics body. That life insurers should potentially hold genetic testing against individuals, and therefore put their health at risk, is indefensible. Australians should not have to be forced to choose between life and death when there are alternatives that can identify risks and enable treatments to be implemented.</para>
<para>Treasury analysis indicates that people are likely to avoid or delay genetic testing or to refuse to participate in medical research for fear they will be penalised by their insurer. Remarkably, life insurers do not need to provide reasons for their decision to charge higher premiums or to decline insurance. They do not need to advise if a genetic test may have been a factor. A life insurer's assessment of their financial risk may be at odds with the medical assessment of risk. Ironically, by discouraging consumers from accessing genetic testing and early intervention, they may in fact end up paying more as their consumers get sicker and die from conditions that may have been preventable if they'd been empowered to get that prevention.</para>
<para>This amendment puts an end to the exploitative and illogical practice. It protects individuals who have a high risk of a heritable condition from life insurers raising the premiums on their cover or even denying it. As a result, more Australians will be encouraged to undergo genetic testing without the looming anxiety of their life insurer potentially altering their cover, because of which Australians will be able to obtain preventive and earlier treatment, potentially saving thousands of lives and thousands of years of disability.</para>
<para>Australians will also be encouraged to participate in clinical research, which will help to advance new scientific medical developments and, ultimately, greater health outcomes. Genetic research is critical in improving the screening, early diagnosis and treatment of patients. Genetics and genomics are reshaping clinical practice and changing the way that we manage a range of heritable conditions, cancer predisposition syndromes and rare cancers. The ban will mean that individuals can give written consent to volunteer their genetic testing information to life insurers if they determine it is to their benefit, and life insurers are still able to use symptoms, diagnosis and family history to ensure that their policies are properly risk rated and underwritten.</para>
<para>In addition, these changes create both civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance and attribute the powers of enforcement and oversight to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC, as per the government's commitment. These reforms are intended to bolster individuals rights and afford them protection when it comes to their healthcare decisions, recalibrating a health system that should be working for them, not against them.</para>
<para>It's an amendment that has been a decade in the making. I again pay particular tribute to Dr Jane Tiller, whose tireless campaigning over the last few years has now seen deserved success. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. The bill amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to prohibit life insurers from requesting, using or relying on the results of an individual's genetic tests when deciding whether to offer life insurance cover or the terms and conditions of that cover, including pricing and exclusions. This applies to genetic tests undertaken for clinical care, for research participation or for personal or preventive reasons. Genetic discrimination in life insurance will also be unlawful under the Disability Discrimination Act.</para>
<para>Life insurance in Australia encompasses insurance policies covering death, total and permanent disability, trauma and critical illness, and income protection, salary continuation or business expenses. The bill allows consumers to voluntarily disclose favourable genetic test results if they choose; for example, where the results indicate reduced genetic risk. Insurers may consider such disclosures but cannot require them.</para>
<para>The field of genetics has great potential to improve medicine and public health through enabling diagnosis, prevention and early treatment of disease. However, to date in Australia, the life insurance industry has been legally allowed to use genetic test results in underwriting, leading to what has rightly been described as genetic discrimination. In 2018, a joint parliamentary committee inquiry into the life insurance industry recommended that Australia urgently implement a ban on the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting, similar to the moratorium that was operating in the United Kingdom since 2001. In 2019, the life insurance industry peak body, the Financial Services Council, or FSC, introduced a partial moratorium requiring applicants to disclose genetic test results only for policies above certain financial limits. The FSC moratorium has been industry self-regulated, with no government oversight.</para>
<para>To investigate the effectiveness of the FSC moratorium as a regulatory solution to genetic discrimination in Australian life insurance, the Commonwealth government funded the Australian Genetics and Life Insurance moratorium, monitoring the Effectiveness and Response Project, otherwise known as the A-GLIMMER project. This was funded from 2020 to 2023 through the genomics mission of the Medical Research Future Fund. The A-GLIMMER project reported that health professionals, consumers and researchers are all concerned about the life insurance industry's self-regulation of the FSC moratorium and its effectiveness. The majority of stakeholders expressed concern about the absence of any Australian government oversight, demonstrating that the FSC moratorium is inadequate to address and prevent genetic discrimination in life assurance insurance. The results are clear: 93 per cent of health professionals, 88 per cent of patients with experience of genetic testing, 78 per cent of the general public and 86 per cent of researchers agreed that legislation is required to regulate the use of genetic test results in life insurance underwriting. That is why we're here today.</para>
<para>Patient testimonies from the A-GLIMMER project present a stark illustration of how a fear of discrimination has deterred people from undertaking genetic testing. A 34-year-old female interviewee who has a high risk result for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, stated, 'Even in my extended family, there's quite a few people who haven't done genetic testing because they don't want to be denied insurance cover. They're not getting regular scans. They're putting their health on the back foot because of all of this.' Another study participant, Frank, whose father had Huntington's disease, was penalised by his insurance company prior to undertaking genetic testing. He was penalised with a 200 per cent premium loading due to his family history of the disease. Despite Frank subsequently receiving genetic test results that showed he did not inherit the Huntington's disease variant and was not at risk of the disease, the insurer refused to remove the loading unless Frank made a new application. Frank took the insurer to the complaints tribunal and a settlement was reached. The insurer refunded Frank's loading from the date he informed them of his genetic result on the condition he withdrew the complaint. It is scenarios like Frank's that this bill will ensure no longer occur.</para>
<para>This bill has been shaped by an extraordinary coalition of more than 60 stakeholders across the medical, research, legal and consumer sectors, who came together to produce a unified voice to government. It includes the Australian Medical Association, the National Heart Foundation of Australia, Cancer Council Australia, the Human Genetics Society of Australasia, Breast Cancer Network Australia, Rare Voices Australia, Genetic Alliance Australia, the Lung Foundation Australia and the Australian Alliance for Indigenous Genomics, alongside leading research institutions like the Murdoch Children's Research Institute and the Centre for Population Genomics. Together, these stakeholders came to a powerful consensus that, without legislative intervention, genetic discrimination will continue to undermine both individual wellbeing and the future of health care in Australia. At the heart of their concern is the reality that Australians have been penalised simply for accessing information about their own health. Individuals who have undertaken genetic testing, often on the advice of their doctor and often to prevent or better manage serious disease, have faced higher premiums, exclusions or outright denial of life insurance. In many cases, these are people who are not unwell but who carry a genetic predisposition. This is discrimination not on the basis of current health but on the basis of potential future risk.</para>
<para>The stakeholders also highlight that discrimination is not always direct and can occur in more subtle but equally harmful ways. For example, insurers may infer genetic information from a person's medical care, surveillance programs or family history, effectively using proxies for genetic test results. Furthermore, stakeholders warn of emerging risks as genomic testing becomes more widespread. One such risk is the potential for insurers to offer so-called discounts to individuals who disclose low-risk genetic results. While framed as a benefit, this would in practice create a two-tiered system where those without favourable results are effectively penalised. This is precisely the kind of indirect discrimination this legislation must guard against.</para>
<para>A key concern raised by stakeholders deals with the imposition of penalties, loadings, exclusions and other adverse action in existing contracts. Many Australians have done the right thing—disclosing their genetic test results in good faith—and have paid the price through higher premiums or restricted cover over many years. At present, the ban only applies to decisions about entering into new life insurance contracts. It does not apply to the enforcement of unfair terms on people who already have contracts of insurance in place with discriminatory terms applied.</para>
<para>The Council of Australian Life Insurers 2024 submission to Treasury reported that a small number of applications have received adverse underwriting outcomes on the basis of genetic results—only 90 out of 1,674. On this basis, the impact of removing loadings or exclusions prospectively for those already insured who have been discriminated against should be negligible in the context of the entire insurance market. Given the additional premiums collected from many of these individuals by insurers in the past, it's not unreasonable to ask insurers to proactively rectify the discrimination applied and cease to discriminate prospectively against current clients in a way that is unlawful for new life insurance applications. This is not a suggestion that insurers should retrospectively refund premiums but only that penalties should be removed prospectively. Insurers should identify which individuals have received adverse underwriting outcomes on the basis of genetic test results and remove these loadings and exclusions from each of them from the date of the ban's commencement. This does not require completely new underwriting to be done but merely for adverse terms applied on the basis of genetic results to be removed.</para>
<para>It's clear this legislation is urgently needed. Without it, the system would continue to discourage preventative health care, penalise individuals for seeking medical advice and undermine public confidence in both the health system and the insurance sector. Implementing this legislation will remove one of the most significant barriers to genetic testing in Australia. It will give Australians the confidence to access potentially lifesaving information about their health without fear of financial penalty, and it will ensure that advances in genetic and genomic medicine—advances that have the potential to transform health care through earlier diagnosis, more precise treatment and better prevention—can be fully realised for the benefit of all Australians.</para>
<para>To ensure the law keeps pace with developments in genomics and insurance markets, the bill currently requires mandatory reviews every five years of the genetic testing ban. I support the independent member for Kooyong's proposed amendment to change this mandatory review period to every three years—this is a rapidly changing field of medicine.</para>
<para>In closing, this bill is about restoring fairness and trust. It ensures that Australians are not penalised for seeking to understand their own health, and that medical advice, not financial fear, guides decisions about genetic testing. It reflects years of advocacy and a clear consensus that the status quo is no longer acceptable. This legislation represents a critical step towards ending genetic discrimination in life insurance and unlocking the full potential of the genomic medicine in Australia. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GREGG</name>
    <name.id>315154</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Genetic testing saves lives. More participation in genetic testing means better prevention, earlier treatment, stronger health outcomes and advances in scientific knowledge that benefit all Australians. But, for too long, many Australians have been discouraged from seeking genetic testing due to a fear of being penalised by insurers, and that is what we're fixing with the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. We are changing the law to put the health of Australians first, banning life insurers from using someone's adverse genetic test results—or information in their DNA highlighting a potential risk—to determine whether or not they get cover or to set the terms of that insurance cover. This ban has been carefully designed, ensuring that individuals can still volunteer their test results, with written consent if it's of benefit to them, and insurers can still use symptoms, diagnoses and family history to ensure policies remain properly risk rated—an essential feature of insurance.</para>
<para>Genetic testing saves lives through the prevention of disease in very high risk people, and there are more of them than most people realise. The DNA screen study at Monash University tested 10,000 Australians from ages 18 to 40 for high genetic risk of preventable cancer and heart disease, finding that one in 50, two per cent, at high risk. Those people were able to access preventive measures, such as surgery, surveillance and medication. Young Australians want preventive genetic information. The DNA screen study was extremely popular, with tens of thousands of young people registering their interest in participating in the study. In my electorate of Deakin, at least 66 young people participated in DNA Screen. One of those people was found to be at a high genetic risk and has now been able to access preventive health care.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, there were many people who signed up for the DNA screen who decided not to participate because of genetic discrimination in life insurance. For decades, this has been an impossible decision for many Australians, who have had to choose between genetic testing that could save their lives and the potential financial implications for life insurance. I think of that one person in Deakin, who now has access to preventive health care, and how many more people would be accessing potentially life-saving health care if they didn't have to worry about the impacts to the cost of their life insurance. This bill will end that fear and enable Australians to make decisions about genetic testing and genetic research without worrying about their life insurance. This legislation will address the most significant barrier to testing for Australians and pave the way for greater investment into preventive genomic screening.</para>
<para>It's pretty common for politicians and policy wonks to talk about how much more effective we are when we invest to prevent a problem from occurring in the first place than when we try to patch things up afterwards. Often this is because, dollar for dollar, we get much more value from early intervention. With the bill before us today, we're not just saving money by reducing the need for complex and expensive treatments; we're saving lives. With the bill before us today, our government is implementing a clear policy. Life insurers will no longer be able to use an individual's adverse genetic testing results to determine whether they can get cover or to set the terms of that cover.</para>
<para>I want to recognise the efforts of my friend the Assistant Treasurer in this space. Getting to this point, where we have a bill with broad support, took a lot of effort, conversations and consultation. Those efforts have led us to this point and I believe they will lead to longer, happier, more fulfilling lives for many Australians. This bill ensures our anti-discrimination laws keep pace with modern science. We are aligning the Insurance Contracts Act and the Disability Discrimination Act so that Australians have certainty and protection, not fear and confusion, when making decisions about their health.</para>
<para>Australians should not have to choose between their health and their ability to access affordable life insurance. Under the current legal framework, vulnerable Australians have been delaying or avoiding genetic testing because they're worried about being penalised by insurers. We're fixing that. Treasury's analysis is clear. People are holding back from essential testing, or even from participating in medical research, because of the actions of life insurance companies. That means that not only are the current laws discouraging vulnerable people from seeking information about their own health; they're holding back advances in medical knowledge and technology that could help thousands, or even millions, of people. That is not good enough and that is why the government is stepping in to make sure the system works for people, not against them.</para>
<para>Banning life insurers using someone's adverse genetic test results to determine whether they can get coverage restores certainty. It tells Australians, especially those at higher risk of heritable conditions, that their decision to undertake genetic testing will not jeopardise their access to life insurance or force them into more expensive or restrictive policies. These reforms will support greater uptake of genetic testing and participation in medical research. That means better prevention, earlier treatment, stronger public health outcomes and advances in scientific knowledge that benefit all Australians.</para>
<para>Importantly, this ban has teeth. This reform establishes civil and criminal penalties and places enforcement authority with ASIC, which ensures these new protections are backed by strong oversight. Vulnerable Australians deserve a system that supports their health decisions, not one that punishes them. I'm proud that we are moving our system in that direction with this bill.</para>
<para>I'll go through the details of schedule 1 of the bill, which implements the government's decision to ban life insurers from using information about an individual's genetic testing results to inform the offer of life insurance cover or the terms and conditions of the cover that is offered. The ban makes amendments to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to implement the ban and related amendments to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to align Australia's antidiscrimination laws with the ban, just ensuring all the different bits of legislation work together.</para>
<para>Genetic testing can help save lives, supporting medical practitioners to prevent, treat and monitor a range of cancers, cancer predisposition syndromes and other heritable conditions. Medical research that involves genetic testing contributes to scientific advancement, which can lead to significant individual and public health benefits, such as identifying new risk factors for future illness and testing new therapies for diseases.</para>
<para>Treasury analysis shows the current life insurance framework has caused individuals to not undergo or to delay genetic testing, including participating in clinical research­, due to concerns that this may impact the ability to afford life insurance. That means the full benefits of genetic testing—saving lives and improving the quality of life for individuals and advancing medical knowledge and technology—are not being realised. This ban will lead to an increase in genetic testing and therefore extensive individual, public health and scientific benefits.</para>
<para>As I flagged earlier, the ban will not prevent individuals from volunteering genetic testing results with written consent and the use of these volunteered results in underwriting where this would not adversely impact the insurance offer or policy terms. The ban will not limit the existing ability of life insurers to access and use certain information for underwriting life insurance, including existing symptoms, diagnoses of diseases and obviously the individual's family history—again, very standard in insurance. This is necessary to ensure that life insurance can continue to be properly risk rated and underwritten, whilst still achieving the aim of providing protection over genetic testing results.</para>
<para>While I wanted to focus my remarks today on the banning of genetic testing and life insurance, as other speakers have done, I think it would be remiss of me not to speak briefly about the other components of this important bill. Schedule 2 of this bill removes unnecessary barriers for well regulated overseas financial firms operating here in Australia. It recognises that, if a company is already bound by laws overseas that are equivalent to ours in Australia, there really is no need to duplicate processes unnecessarily when we know those outcomes can already be achieved. It's focused on maintaining protections around overseas financial products where they're needed most—everyday consumers—while providing more flexibility where those using the services are sophisticated institutions like superannuation funds, banks and large corporations and at the same time making sure that our system continues to provide robust protection for individual consumers. It's there to facilitate more competition. It's there to ensure that the financial regulation is more efficient, more competitive and better connected globally to enable Australians to have a diverse array of investments and to attract investment here in Australia—so, many benefits economically.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 of the bill modernises the legislative framework around multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund, reducing the administrative and legislative burden of Australia's commitments. It effectively standardises and streamlines these arrangements—clearer rules for funding, contributions and future commitments—providing one clean modern framework instead of a messy patchwork like what we're seeing right now. The law around the funding of these institutions is incredibly complex, fragmented and really outdated, so these are very important reforms in schedule 3 as well. They're consistent with our support for international institutions and the G20's call for multilateral development banks to develop and support innovative financial instruments. It also includes provisions standardising appropriations, effectively meaning the way they are spent. It means that if money is required, it can be spent as long as it meets certain criteria, and those are then published in an instrument which comes to the parliament providing oversight. Effectively, it is a disallowable instrument to spend money, which the parliament can come in and debate, block or whatever it wants to do. But it does mean that the regular functioning of government can continue in a clear, simple and streamlined way consistent with the obligations we as a country have already entered.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 of the bill implements the government's commitment to no longer proceed with stage 2 of the registration process for financial advisers established by the Better Advice Act. That might sound very bland and very unexciting, which is understandable. Effectively, a few years ago, following the royal commission into banks, there was legislation brought in by the Morrison government which created a two-step registration process for financial advisers: stage 1, which already requires financial advisers to be registered with ASIC via their Australian Financial Services licensee—in other words, their employer registers them together; and stage 2, which was in the bill to be implemented later, also required individual advisers to register themselves individually. The reason given for that at the time was so that they could be reminded of the importance of their legal obligations, but it's now essentially a political consensus that that just adds another layer of regulation without achieving any public policy goal. This bill doesn't abolish adviser registration in any way. What it does is keep stage 1 while abolishing stage 2. All advisers are still registered officially. It just means there isn't now two registrations that individual advisers have to go through. So that is another efficiency and really just cutting red tape.</para>
<para>In conclusion, all parts of this bill are important, but, most importantly, we're removing the barrier for vulnerable Australians seeking more information about their own health. This is good for those individuals, good for our healthcare system and good for our society. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. I support stronger legal protections against genetic discrimination in life insurance, and I support a legislative ban, not continued reliance on industry self-regulation. At the heart of this debate is a very simple principle: Australians should not be punished for seeking information about their own health and genetic predisposition. If a person undertakes genetic testing to better understand their risk of disease, that should be recognised as responsible, forward-looking health care but not be used as a basis for making insurance harder to access or to afford, because that then disincentivises. It means that Australians will not go and get the testing they should because of the fear of not being able to then have life insurance. It's why the issue goes not only to insurance settings but also to fairness, access to preventative care and public trust.</para>
<para>For too long, the existing framework has created the wrong incentive. People have been left worrying that following medical advice, undertaking testing or participating in research could jeopardise their financial security. That's a profound policy failure. Genetic testing can help people act early, manage risk, make informed decisions, access preventative care and, in some cases, save lives. I have previously supported serious consideration of a legislative ban in this area, and I continue to take the view that legislation, not industry self-regulation, is the appropriate response when we are talking about life-and-death situations for so many Australians. The government's decision to legislate is therefore an important step, and it reflects years of advocacy, consultation and multipartisan work.</para>
<para>Ultimately, the reform is about giving Australians confidence that seeking potentially lifesaving information for themselves and sometimes their families because it will impact their kids and other aspects will not later be used against them in preventing them from accessing insurance. In Warringah, I have had a huge amount of correspondence on this issue from residents in the community urging me to support an expansion of genetic screening for disease prevention in adults—in particular, for those with predispositions to cancer and heart disease—and to understand that genetic aspect and how it can then impact children or prospective children. We have amazing organisations like the Fragile X Association, which is founded and based in Warringah. All of these areas rely on continued support for genetic testing. It is so important. Warringah residents want more funding and enacted protections for this critical issue to ensure that genetic testing does occur and has support.</para>
<para>Concerns about genetic discrimination in insurance are not new. For some time, patients, clinicians, researchers and advocates have warned that the use of predictive genetic test results in life insurance can deter people from getting tested and undermine confidence in both the health system and the insurance system. That concern was formally recognised in 2018 when the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services examined the life insurance industry and raised concerns that the use of genetic tests results was adversely affecting participation in health research involving genetic testing. In response, the Financial Services Council introduced an industry moratorium in 2019. That moratorium was presented as an answer, but, in practice, it was only a partial and temporary fix. It fell short in several important aspects.</para>
<para>First, it relied on industry self-regulation, rather than protections enacted in law. That matters because public confidence is weaker when the industry is, effectively, left to supervise itself. And, in practical experience, that was found to be wanting. Second, it only protected people from having their genetic test results used against them up to certain insurance limits. For many families seeking a realistic level of cover to protect dependents, service a mortgage or maintain financial stability, those limits were too narrow. And, third, it did not resolve the broader problem of uncertainty. In the absence of legislated safeguards, people were still left unsure about their rights, the durability of the protections and what remedy they had if something went wrong. In other words, the industry led moratorium was better than nothing, but it's not the same as an evidence-based preventative public health policy.</para>
<para>Crucially, research and consultation since then have shown that the self-regulatory model did not solve the core problem. Evidence showed that people continued to delay or avoid clinical genetic testing because of their concerns about life insurance, and that goes to the heart of the policy failure. Predictive genetic testing is becoming increasingly useful in modern medicine, but too many people have feared that obtaining that information could later be used against them when applying for life insurance, trauma cover, total and permanent disability cover or income protection, and that's the wrong incentive structure. We should be encouraging Australians to access early testing where appropriate. We should be encouraging Australians to participate in research that advances knowledge and improves care. The existing framework applies quite a chilling effect on both.</para>
<para>By late 2023, Treasury had released a consultation paper on the use of genetic testing results in life insurance underwriting. By that point, there was already a significant body of evidence showing that the existing arrangements were not delivering confidence, clarity or fairness. The question was no longer whether there was a problem; the question was whether parliament and the government were prepared to address it properly. In 2024-25, the government moved towards legislation to prohibit the use of adverse, predictive genetic test results in life insurance underwriting. That was the right step, and it marked an important shift from temporary self-regulation to a clearer statutory framework.</para>
<para>I do welcome the government's move to legislate in this area. Moving from consultation and self-regulation to legislation is a meaningful and necessary step. Legislation provides greater certainty, strengthens public confidence and makes clear that it is parliament, not the industry alone, that sets the boundaries of what is fair. That shift matters because it's not a marginal issue. It sits at the intersection of health, financial security, consumer confidence and scientific progress. If we get this right, we remove a barrier to testing, early intervention and research participation. The stakes of the debate are high not just for insurance law but for the broader direction of preventative health policy in Australia. We want to make sure Australians are participating in research and are going to access testing early.</para>
<para>The bill addresses a central and pressing issue, but broader questions remain about fairness, antidiscrimination protections and how other forms of health or family information are treated in underwriting. In that sense, the bill is important but targeted. It addresses one specific problem—the use of protected genetic information in life insurance underwriting, including predictive genetic information—but it does not on its own address the problem of discrimination in insurance law. That means broader discrimination issues can remain. Even with this reform, insurers can still rely on other kinds of information in underwriting, such as diagnosis, symptoms and family medical history.</para>
<para>It's important to recognise that life insurance sits within a special exception under antidiscrimination law. So banning genetic test results does not automatically eliminate every unfair or differential outcome in underwriting, and that's why this bill should be seen as a major and welcome reform but not the final chapter. Parliament should support it while remaining alert to the broader question of fairness, loopholes, enforcement and consumer redress in life insurance. Legislation is important, but consumers too must understand their rights and have confidence that those rights can be meaningfully protected.</para>
<para>This bill is an overdue and necessary step that should be understood as part of a broader task: building a life insurance framework that is fairer, more transparent and better aligned with modern medicine. Ultimately, it's about whether Australians can seek potentially life-saving information about their health and the possible health implications of their children, without fearing that the consequences will follow them into the insurance market. And that's why I support this legislative ban on genetic discrimination in life insurance. This is about fairness, public trust and access to preventive care. It's about making sure that Australians are not deterred from testing, early intervention or research participation because they fear financial disadvantage. It's very important that we understand that but that more can still be done.</para>
<para>I welcome this bill and I urge the government to continue ensuring that discrimination when it comes to life insurance is addressed in all its forms.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is an important day and this is an important piece of legislation. And, as with most bits of legislation like this, there's been a lot of work behind the scenes by a lot of people. There are plenty who need to be acknowledged for this moment, and I'll just name a few here as we debate this bill.</para>
<para>Krystal Barter, who's a fierce advocate for genetic testing protections—she's a friend and someone I know who does not quit until she's achieved her goal. Eve Olsson was a Lynch syndrome advocate who shared her story and her experience publicly to help achieve this reform that the government is proposing today. Kara Ryan, one of the DNA Screen participants who work so closely with Monash University, used her experience as reason for this reform to progress. Then, of course, there's Dr Jane Tiller. There wouldn't be too many members of parliament that haven't met or sat with Dr Jane Tiller over the years, talking about not only her role in the Monash testing but also her role in advocating for this bill. I've met her at least 10 times in my time in this place and I'm sure she's been meeting many other members to get to today. Of course, we have our former assistant treasurer Stephen Jones, who started this process and importantly committed a re-elected Labor government to this reform, and the current assistant treasurer, the member for Fraser, who finished the job and introduced this really important piece of legislation here today—because genetic testing saves lives.</para>
<para>We're at a point in medicine, and with technological advancement, where we can identify risks before disease develops. But, like most things, our laws haven't kept up to date with the fast-moving pace of technology. The scientific and medical breakthroughs that will allow Australians to act early to avoid disease and to live longer, healthier lives are available to us right now. Yet, for too long, public policy has lagged behind scientific capability. This bill seeks to address that. For decades, Australians have had the worry of a terrible choice—the choice between genetic testing that could save their lives and prevent illness and the potential financial implications for their life insurance.</para>
<para>This was the key reason why the people who did initially sign up to a really important study, the DNA Screen led by Dr Jane Tiller at Monash University, didn't participate when they realised this choice that they had to make because of the genetic discrimination in life insurance. In the cost-of-living pressures we all seem to face, every financial decisions that Australians make matters, particularly when it comes to their health and their wellbeing. I'm supporting this bill because no Australian should be forced to choose between knowledge that could save their lives and the financial security of their family.</para>
<para>As I said, people were holding back from getting DNA screening, either through this big trial that Monash University conducted or just getting it done privately themselves because of the impact it may have on their life insurance. Life insurers, operating for profit, have had free rein over how they screen and how they can accept, deny or increase the costs of people's life insurance—insurance that people deserve. Treasury analysis has shown that the current life insurance framework has caused individuals to delay or, in some cases, not even undergo genetic testing because of the potential impact on their insurance affordability. It also put pressure on the research, and that's particularly concerning because we're not going to get improvements to health, or improvements to science or technology without research.</para>
<para>Monash University's DNA Screen struggled to get people to participate due to the impact of the current system. We need Australians to participate in medical research where it benefits our country and our economy. This bill seeks to address that anomaly and that unfairness. It ensures that Australians can get fair access to life insurance cover and that they are not discouraged from undertaking genetic testing. It's about a fair go, it's about better medical research, and, ultimately, it's about better health care, which is, to be honest, what all Labor governments are about.</para>
<para>In short, we're banning life insurers from factoring in the results of anyone's genetic testing when deciding whether or not to offer that life insurance and how to price that life insurance. Schedule 1 of this bill implements the government's decision to ban life insurers from using information about an individual's genetic testing to inform the offer of life insurance cover or the terms and conditions of the cover that is offered. The ban makes amendments to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to implement the ban and related amendments to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to align Australia's antidiscrimination laws with the ban. The objective of the amendments to these acts is to provide certainty to individuals that undertaking genetic testing—including through participation in health and medical research—will not impact their ability to obtain life insurance cover or the terms of that cover. It's intended that the ban will lead to increased uptake of genetic testing and provide extensive individual, public health, scientific and research benefits. The ban will not prevent individuals from volunteering genetic testing results with written consent and the use of these volunteered results in underwriting where this would not adversely impact the insurance offer or policy terms. The ban will not limit the existing ability of life insurers to access and use certain information for underwriting life insurance, including the existence of signs, symptoms or diagnoses of diseases, or individuals' family medical history.</para>
<para>This legislation and the clarifications within it are necessary to ensure that life insurance can continue to be properly risk rated and underwritten while still achieving the aim that we seek to address—and that's to provide protection over genetic test results—because genetic testing is only going to become more cost effective and more prevalent in our health system, and we need to make sure that these protections exist. It will create civil penalties and criminal offences for noncompliance and will be regulated by ASIC because we're changing the law to put people's health above insurer profit margins, and that's the right thing to do.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Bennelong, we've already seen firsthand the impact that genetic testing can have. Through the well-documented and spoken-about Monash DNA screen study, at least 80 young people from Bennelong participated in this kind of testing, and it's young people, in particular, that I think will benefit the most from broadly available genetic testing. Nearly 40 per cent of people in Bennelong are aged between 18 and 40. The sooner that they can get results from genetic testing, the sooner they can address anything that's identified. One participant in the Monash DNA screen study was identified as being at high risk of heart attack due to genetically high cholesterol, something they would not have known had they not got a genetic test. Because of that early detection, they are now accessing preventive health care that will literally save their life.</para>
<para>This legislation is about enabling people to get access to genetic testing without the issue of it affecting their life insurance premium. Just like that participant from Bennelong, all Australians deserve fair access to life insurance without being penalised for the preventive steps they take in getting genetic testing. Without these reforms, that same individual could have faced higher premiums or been denied cover altogether, simply for taking responsible action. If they hadn't, they would have been at risk.</para>
<para>These amendments ensure that our antidiscrimination laws and modern science work hand in hand with each other. Australians deserve certainty and protection, not fear and confusion, when making decisions about their health. We are here to tell all Australians that, following the passage of this bill, their decision to undertake genetic testing will not risk their access to life insurance. The bill addresses the most significant testing barrier for Australians and will pave the way for greater investment into preventive genome screening.</para>
<para>This fits in with our government's healthcare agenda. It's another way that we're strengthening Medicare and ensuring better health outcomes for all Australians. Across the spectrum, we're reducing costs for Australians because we believe that everybody deserves quality access to affordable health care. This is just one part of our health reform agenda, building on cheaper medicines, which have already saved Australians over $35 million. We've got bulk-billing GPs increasing in numbers across the country. In Bennelong, you'll be very pleased to know that we've gone from nine fully bulk-billed clinics up to 18, doubling the bulk-billing GP clinics in Bennelong, because of this Labor government. We've invested heavily in urgent care clinics across the country, with two servicing Bennelong—one in Top Ryde and a very recently opened new urgent care clinic in Chatswood that I had the pleasure of visiting only last week.</para>
<para>This is a health system that is complex but that needs to be agile. It needs multiple avenues to fix it and bring it up to standard after nine years of deliberate neglect by the former government. That's exactly what this government is doing, having been re-elected in 2025.</para>
<para>For too long, Australians have been holding themselves back from life-saving genetic testing because of fear created by the way that the system was set up. It wasn't a system that worked for people. I believe no-one should be discouraged from seeking life-saving information because of how it might be used against them. These amendments remove that fear and replace it with certainty. They remove a real barrier to preventive health care and will ensure that Australians can make decisions about their health without worrying about the financial consequences.</para>
<para>These reforms will have great impacts across Australia, particularly for younger Australians—those who have a history of illness within their family. The bill will support greater participation in genetic testing, which will, hopefully, also bring the cost of genetic testing down. It will strengthen public health outcomes as we learn more from increased participation in scientific research, and it will drive continued progress in health care in this country.</para>
<para>Amendments like these are what good governments do. It has been a long journey to get here but one that this government—starting under former assistant treasurer Jones and now introduced into the House by the Assistant Treasurer—is doing in consultation with advocates, insurers and the health community. This legislation will fix problems, remove barriers, back Australians to look after their own health and encourage them to do so. Australians should never have to choose between their health and their financial security, and with this legislation—when it passes through this parliament—they'll no longer have to. I commend it to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JORDAN-BAIRD</name>
    <name.id>316021</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, which was introduced by the Assistant Treasurer, and I commend him for doing so. This amendment to the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 is a significant one because genetic testing can save lives. Genetic testing supports medical practitioners to prevent illnesses, diagnose conditions earlier, and treat and monitor a range of cancers, cancer predisposition syndromes and other heritable conditions sooner. It plays a critical role in monitoring all of this. For many Australians, one major thing has stood in the way of getting tested for and treating conditions early, and that's the concern that life insurers will use that information against them. That's not right—and, what's more, it takes one easy fix, and that fix is this bill in front of us.</para>
<para>This bill bans life insurers from taking information from an individual's genetic testing into account when deciding whether to offer life insurance cover or when making decisions about the terms and conditions of that cover. It's about protecting Australians, making things fairer for Australians and giving Australians confidence—confidence to get tested, confidence to look after their health and confidence that doing the right thing won't come back to bite them.</para>
<para>Medical science is moving forward quickly, and genetic testing is one of the most important and impactful advances we've seen. But our laws have simply not kept pace. Under previous arrangements, people could be penalised for genetic information that is completely outside of their control, something they were born with and did not choose. Some Australians delayed testing or avoided it altogether out of fear it would affect their access to life insurance. That fear has real consequences for people's health. This legislation is addressing this problem. In practical terms, it bans life insurers from using adverse genetic test results when making decisions about life insurance contracts entered into after the commencement of this bill. Put simply, if someone chooses to undergo genetic testing to protect their health, that information cannot be used against them when they apply for life insurance. That is a significant reform, and it will make a real difference. It allows people to focus on their health without worrying that they will be financially punished for doing so. It removes a barrier that never should have existed in the first place.</para>
<para>I want to take a moment to pay tribute to my colleague the wonderful member for Macnamara, Josh Burns, who has led the charge for these reforms within government along with his constituent and close friend Dr Jane Tiller. Josh represents the largest Jewish community in Victoria, which is highly predisposed to genetic disorders. One in 40 Ashkenazi Jews carry the BRCA gene mutation, which can lead to higher risk of breast, ovarian, prostate, pancreatic and skin cancers—that's 10 times higher than for the general population. Back in 2023, Josh hosted a roundtable with Dr Jane Miller; the Assistant Treasurer at the time, Stephen Jones; and a group of advocates and women directly impacted by these reforms. These were women who had done everything right. They had taken the responsible step of getting tested, discovered they carried the BRCA gene and, in many cases, undergone preventive surgery to reduce their risk, only to find themselves penalised by life insurers. Many other Jewish Australians have avoided genetic testing altogether to avoid paying higher premiums, leaving genetic disorders which could have cost them their lives undetected. Thanks to this bill and to Josh's advocacy, that would no longer be the case. It is also thanks in no small way to the research of Dr Jane Tiller and her team at Monash University. She is someone who has dedicated her career to public health research and to increasing equitable access to genomic medicine for public health outcomes. She's passionate about this because she knows that genetic testing saves lives through the prevention of disease in very high risk people. She knows that there are more high-risk Australians than most people realise.</para>
<para>Recently, Monash University, led by Dr Tiller, conducted a DNA screen study which tested 10,000 18- to 40-year-old Australians for high genetic risk of preventable cancer and heart disease. They found that one in 50 Australians—two per cent—were at high risk of preventable cancer and heart diseases. Now, don't be misled; one in 50 Australians is still a lot of Australians. In my friend the member for Macnamara's electorate, at least 67 young people participated in the DNA screen. Four young people were found to be at high genetic risk—two of breast, ovarian and prostate cancer, one of bowel cancer and one of a heart attack due to genetic high cholesterol. In my electorate of Gorton, 39 young people participated and three were found to be at high genetic risk—two of breast, ovarian and prostate cancer and one of heart attack due to genetic high cholesterol.</para>
<para>I want to be clear: we're talking about preventable diseases—diseases which have life-altering consequences if detected early. So, when those participants in the electorate of Macnamara and in my electorate of Gorton, alongside other participants in the study, found they were at high risk of these preventable genetic diseases, they were able to access preventive measures such as surgery, surveillance and medication. For them, this study was very possibly life changing. Now, that is incredible.</para>
<para>While this study was life altering for these individuals, it also highlighted a severe fault in our healthcare system—the thing that is the most significant barrier to testing for Australians. The main reason people who signed up for the DNA screening ultimately decided not to participate was genetic discrimination in life insurance. This isn't new. For decades, this has been a significant ethical concern for Australians, who have had to choose between genetic testing that could save their lives and potential financial implications for their life insurance.</para>
<para>This is not how the system should work. Life insurers should not be able to discriminate like this. Life insurers should not be able to act as a barrier to Australians accessing preventable health care. This bill will end that discrimination. It will end that fear and it will enable Australians to make decisions about genetic testing and genetic research without worrying about life insurance. Here, we are addressing the most significant barrier to testing for Australians, and we are paving the way for greater investment in preventive genomic screening, because preventive healthcare matters. Investing in preventive health is a proven way of increasing national productivity, reducing health system spending and keeping Australians out of hospital. Preventive health takes the burden off our hospital systems and off our public spending. While there's plenty of research that tells us of the benefits of investing more broadly in the prevention of diseases in adults through DNA screening, until we pass this bill, Australians cannot have confidence that they can get tested without consequences. This bill is an opportunity to invest more broadly in prevention of disease in adults through DNA screening without people having to worry about insurance concerns. It sends a clear message that you should not have to choose between your health and your financial security.</para>
<para>This legislation restores balance between individuals and large insurance corporations, and it puts people back at the centre of the system. For communities like Gorton, this matters. We are a young and diverse community in Melbourne's western suburbs, with many families already facing financial and cost-of-living pressures. The median age of people in Gorton is 35 years old, and young Australians want preventive genetic information. The DNA Screen study was extremely popular amongst young people, with tens of thousands of young people registering their interest in participating for the study, and young people found that genetic testing has significant benefits for their futures. Around 22 per cent of people in my electorate of Gorton are living with at least one long-term health condition. That means reforms like this are not abstract or theoretical; they affect real people in our communities. This legislation helps reduce one of those barriers by giving people confidence that getting genetic testing will not come at a personal cost.</para>
<para>This reform follows extensive consultation with community members, medical practitioners, genetic researchers and the insurance industry. The DNA Screen study hopes to expand its testing to 100,000 people, which would identify thousands more at-risk people who would not have to worry about life insurance discrimination. It's a step towards a screening program to use genomics to prevent disease. We must move into an era of using genomics to prevent and get ahead of disease. Published modelling indicates that this screening is cost-effective, with associated productivity gains in the billions of dollars.</para>
<para>This bill has broad support across parliament, and it fits squarely within Labor's broader agenda. We have invested more than ever before in the health of Australians. With record investments in Medicare, we are bringing bulk-billing back and strengthening as we do so. In my electorate of Gorton, 72 per cent of clinics are now fully bulk-billed. We've brought cost-of-living relief to Australians by lowering the cost of PBS listed medicines to just $25, and we've increased access to health care by expanding those lists of medicines on the PBS. We've opened new urgent care clinics across the country, including in Melton and Sunshine near my electorate. We're rolling out 1800MEDICARE, a new 24/7 service families can access from home whenever they need it. This is a state-of-the-art expansion of telehealth.</para>
<para>We're growing Australia's health workforce with the largest GP training program in Australian history, and we're investing landmark commitments in women's health. For too long, women's health issues have not been adequately addressed. We're working to reverse decades of neglect to women's health, with $573.3 million to deliver more choice, lower costs and better health care for women. We're introducing the first new contraceptive pills added to the PBS in 30 years—Yaz, Yasmin and Slinda. We're introducing the first new menopause treatments on the PBS in 20 years—Estrogel, Estrogel Pro and Prometrium. We're ensuring there's better access to IUDs and birth control implants as well. This comes alongside the opening of 22 endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics, with another 11 to be opening soon.</para>
<para>Thanks to these initiatives, Australian women and their families will save thousands of dollars on health related costs across their lifetimes. This is what happens when we elect women: women's issues become at the forefront of the government's agenda. On this side of the House, we're committed to tangible cost-of-living relief and health outcomes for Australians. Labor built Medicare, and we will always protect it. This is all because the Albanese Labor government is ensuring that accessible health care for all Australians remains a priority. No-one should be discouraged from looking after their health—and, with this legislation, they won't be. Life insurers will not have the power to stop Australians from getting tested early and treated early for their genetic conditions. On that note, I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of the biggest issues in genetic testing is that, under an insurance process, it allows the insurer to remove any sense of risk. You don't have the risk if you remove all the high-risk components. The whole purpose of insurance is to have a pool of people in which you include low risk and high risk for the general betterment that those of a higher risk have a form of cover. If we allow genetic testing in and to go unchecked, then any person who has latency towards cancer, latency towards respiratory disease or heart attacks will of course be treated just like a person who is a smoker. They'll say, 'I don't really have an interest in insuring you, because I make more money out of this group.'</para>
<para>I want to bring attention to something else that's in regard to genetic testing and the protections in life insurance. I'll talk about genetic testing and protection in life. What we have—and we've seen more of, as I refer to a study by Edith Cowan University—is people, especially with non-invasive prenatal testing, who are testing for the sex of a child below 10 weeks. We've had an unreasonable increase—the general ratio is about 105 boys to 100 girls. That's generally where it is. But what we're seeing in some sections is 134 boys to 100 girls, as people have a preference to move towards the abortion of girls so that—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I call the minister.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Leigh</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member is straying well beyond the bill. I would ask you to ask him to return his comments to the legislation before the House, not opining on every matter under the sun.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have been listening closely to the member. I'm going to see where this leads. He is specifically talking about medical issues, and we are talking about health insurance here. I'm happy to let the member proceed, but I'll watch him, and, if he gets off course, I'll redirect him.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I always understand the sensitivities that I raise. It's actually a United Nations issue. They're trying to deal with this. Even at the United Nations level, they see this as a serious problem. The last report from the United Nations said that we're down 200 million girls. I thought that might have rung a bell somewhere. I can understand if that's not a concern for the honourable member opposite, but it is to the United Nations. The reason is the capacity for people to actually utilise this and for insurance to cover this, even in regards to how it works vis-a-vis Medicare.</para>
<para>It is incredibly pertinent as to what is happening in regards to genetic testing and testing for issues that sway away from the natural predisposition of the balance of traits. If you test and find that someone has a prevalence to cancer and therefore remove them as somebody you wish to cover, then you are not doing the appropriate thing in covering risk. If you find people who have a heart disease and remove them from the people you ensure, then the predisposition sways what the purpose of insurance is. Likewise, if you use genetic testing—and it is genetic testing—to determine the sex, especially in non-invasive prenatal testing, you're changing the natural dynamic which is completely at odds with what people are trying to do with the equality of the sexes. You're changing it in the most profound way.</para>
<para>This is something that should be part of the scope. If we want to comply with where the United Nations is heading with this, then we have to be brave enough to acknowledge this. We are seeing now, even in Australia that what they call the sex ratio for births, in some demographics in Australia, has gone to 1.39 when it should be around 1.05. If we concur with this, then we concur with the belief that girls are not as important as boys, and I hope that that wouldn't be the case. I put it to the honourable member opposite—if he disagrees with that, he's welcome to stand and say so.</para>
<para>This study by Edith Cowan University has brought once more to light the whole gamut of this new world we're in with genetic testing. Genetic testing has to have some ring-roads put around it. If it doesn't, it will become incredibly Orwellian in terms of the type of world that we want to create. Of course, the attributes being tested for don't stop with people's predisposition for wanting male children, because that's where it generally moves towards—male. It also comes to other attributes that people wish to select for, and they can do it by genetic testing. They can do it for eye colour. They can do it for height. They can do it for whether a person has the propensity to become obese. All these things become part of this rather dark and perverse new form of eugenics in trying to create a new form of humankind—one that fits our ideal model for what we believe to be the perfect human being. It's completely wrong. It's a very bad thing.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for New England will resume his seat. A point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Leigh</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's on relevance. We are in the realm of Dennis Denuto's 'vibe of the thing'. The member for New England is not addressing the question of genetic testing, discrimination and life insurance. He's seen the words 'genetic testing'—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am listening carefully. I ask the member to resume his seat. The member for New England has the call, and I ask him to stay relevant.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you very much. On relevance, he seemed very upset about genetic testing. This is genetic testing. He then said the word 'discrimination'. I couldn't be more profoundly relevant to the issue of discrimination, in its most exact form, than with precisely what I'm talking about. I don't know whether the member finds it offensive or what the issue is, but you can't stand up and say it's got nothing to do with genetic testing, when it absolutely has, and it's got nothing to do with discrimination, when it is most profoundly attached to discrimination. And to belittle it by making a reference to Dennis Denuto—that is profoundly insulting and, I thought, quite below you, but anyway.</para>
<para>In closing, it is incredibly important, when we see this, that we bring it before the chamber and before the Australian people. The Australian people understand that, as we've seen here in a classic example, they will immediately try to shut you down. They will immediately try to put a shackle on this discussion because it doesn't suit their views of what they want. On this, I will side with the United Nations. He thinks it's some right-wing conspiracy. I've been reading this report, and it's hardly a right-wing conspiracy; it's a complete expression of a concern that the world has, which we are now also seeing in Australia. If the member believes that it's not an issue that 200 million girls are just not there because of people's preference for boys over girls, then I don't know when he became so lost in his own compass.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. I just can't let pass that the member for New England mentioned 105 males born, but, he said, 'Sometimes'—in a good season—'you have more, sometimes less.' Anyway, he's left the chamber, so I don't feel the need to continue that.</para>
<para>When I was elected, I made a commitment in Forde to listen to the community, to fight for what I hear and to deliver on what the community wants. To that end, I came across a woman called Jess Short, who lives in Waterford West. Jess has a rare condition called osteopathia striata with cranial sclerosis. It is a rare disease. Jess is somebody who is a fierce advocate for people with that condition, but she is also a fierce advocate for people with rare diseases. As part of working with Jess, we held a community forum on rare diseases in Forde last week. From that, it has emerged how significant rare diseases are in our community. Even though each has a propensity in the community of about five in 10,000, collectively there's something like 7.8 per cent of the Australian population living with a rare disease, which means around 13½ thousand people in Forde.</para>
<para>I'd like to read out a bit about Jess. Jess was unofficially diagnosed when she was around 12 years old. When she later sought a formal diagnosis, she says that she was told she couldn't have children and that that advice was delivered without much empathy. Six weeks later, it was confirmed that she did in fact have the condition. Much of Jess's childhood was spent in and out of hospital, and, by the age of 18, she'd undergone more than 30 surgeries, including hernia surgery, jaw surgery, cleft palate repair and the removal of tonsils that had grown so large they affected her breathing. As Jess put it to me, with a bit of humour, 'Let's just say I've had a lot of anaesthetic.' Thirty surgeries before the age of 18! But what really struck me about Jess when we spoke wasn't just the number of surgeries; it was how hard it can be for people with rare diseases to navigate the health system. Jess says there is often no clear place to go. Because the condition is rare, patients can struggle to access a multidisciplinary team. She told me that there's very little transition care between childhood and adult services, meaning people can suddenly find themselves trying to navigate a system on their own.</para>
<para>Jess isn't interested in blaming anyone. What she wants is something better for the future. She wants to advocate for people with rare diseases. She knows children with the same condition who are not getting the help they need, and she wants to help connect families and push for a system that works. And that's exactly why we held a forum last week. It was very well attended by the community, and there was a lot of participation and discussion online and in emails I received. I very much want to take the opportunity during this debate to shout out to Jess Short, who is a remarkable individual and a fierce advocate for people with these conditions.</para>
<para>Arising out of the forum was an email I got last Friday, a couple of days after the forum, from another legend in our community, Kerri Meulman of Ormeau Hills. She is also a fierce advocate. I spoke to her today, and she's very happy for me to read out what she wrote to me. In this email, she advocates for the treatment she receives to be included on the PBS. There a couple of things I'll say on that at the end, but I think this really gives us an insight into what it means to have genetic testing to determine your condition. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Thank you for the opportunity for the session! Unfortunately after treatment and dealing with the M1 carpark for 2hours trying to get to treatment this morning, I was unable to attend in person.</para></quote>
<para>She said she started listening to it, though, and wanted to put what she thought in writing:</para>
<quote><para class="block">So thank you for the opportunity to have a voice!!</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A little about my rare disease—I was diagnosed in 2023 with a rare cancer—gallbladder cancer, luckily found after going to make my regular blood donation and for them to tell me my iron levels were too low, go see my GP. Long story short, I have been through a couple of surgeries, oral chemotherapy, then more intensive chemotherapy and immunotherapy when the cancer spread in 2024 all through the public system. I do have private health but the call was taken that under the public system I would be in more of an umbrella situation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Last year, my cancer metastasised again—and thanks to genomic sequencing, targeted treatment Enhertu was recommended as my best hope to beat this once and for all. Two pathways only were available—a clinical trial or private treatment. I tested for the clinical trial based out of Blacktown Hospital in Sydney, however my tumors were considered too small to qualify. Really I was a number to the trials people.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">By the time my tumors had progressed further, there was no spot available on the trial.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">So private was only available to me. Luckily for me, at a very young age, my financial advisor had set me up with a raft of insurances one of which I am now using to pay for the $10,000 it costs me for every second treatment, which I will have every three weeks for the next 2 years of my life. The treatment is working—I am 6 cycles in and there are no signs of tumors now. I literally had this news today, which is amazing and very exciting for someone told they had 12months to live.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But do you know, the same protein that Enhertu is targeting in breast cancer patients, if I had breast cancer, I would have access to this drug at $31.30 each cycle. The national breast cancer foundation advocated for this drug for the 1,700 patients each year who have this same sequencing and need of targeted treatment through Enhertu, for this drug to be on the PBS. The power of a powerful advocate for a recognised disease. But I am left out of this as a rare cancer battler.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Now Rare Cancers does what it can—rare cancers themselves as a combined cancer are the 3rd largest cancer group in Australia. But there are multitude of needs not one high profile group.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And nor do I have access to a cancer care nurse. I did under the public system at Gold Coast University Hospital—that cancer care nurse was there to answer questions but was a reactive support service, not an advocate or a support person for myself and my family. I have had to seek out, resource and upskill myself in medical terms and knowledge bases, as I am sure you are hearing, because there is really no one out there who can do it for me.</para></quote>
<para>What stands out from Kerri Meulman's email is that, first, my contribution to this debate would be insignificantly small in comparison to the contribution that she is able to make to this debate, and so it is in her words that I think we sum up exactly what is going on here. The second is that, quite potentially, the private insurance which she has relied on to save her life would have been denied her—her condition would have been excluded—had insurance companies been able to use earlier test results to make that exclusion. The third thing that I'd say is that she's right to be advocating for the PBS. I feel amazingly privileged that I can be a voice for people in my community in this place. The Minister for Health and Ageing made the point today that, since we were elected, we've listed more than 400 new medicines on the PBS. Just as an example, he said that we listed a medication called Ultomiris this month, which treats a relatively rare condition called myasthenia gravis, which impacts only about 3,000 Australians but impacts those 3,000 Australians profoundly.</para>
<para>We as a society are living in a time where treatments are coming onto the market at an unprecedented pace, every single month, and these treatments are often specifically targeted to the genetic testing, which is identified through that test result. By the way, Kerri climbed Mount Kosciuszko last year to raise $2,600 for Cancer Australia. It is people like Kerri and Jess Short that inspire me to get up here and talk about what it means to protect their right to health insurance through the law.</para>
<para>The difference between going through genetic testing and going through a normal route of diagnosis—and there was a study done there—is, potentially, that going through the normal route is extremely frustrating. It can take up to five to seven years, and it can cost anywhere from $10,000 to $40,000. The alternative, through genetic testing, is that it can take weeks or, at most, months, and can cost anywhere from $1,000 to $7,000. Apart from the impact this has on the individual, the impact this has on the economy as a whole and on the productivity of the economy as well as the cost of the health system has got to be profound.</para>
<para>In the last three minutes of my contribution, I will come specifically to why this legislation is so important. In some ways, you'd think that it goes without saying that it should be illegal and unlawful for insurance companies to use genetic testing against somebody to deny cover. But the fact is, in the community, there is a perception that the insurance companies will do just that; I don't know where people get the idea that insurance companies are untrustworthy! It is essential that people have confidence that they can undertake getting that diagnosis without fear of being excluded from insurance cover. In the most severe way possible, criminalising it as an offence, not just making it a civil penalty, truly sends a message to insurance companies to do the right thing and, with that, to give people in the community confidence that they can get the cover they need.</para>
<para>It is through that process and philosophy that I have in Forde to listen to our community, to fight for our community and to deliver for our community—this is a great example of being able to identify an issue which is much bigger than I would have ever thought before. As Kerri said, cumulatively, rare cancers put together are the third-most common type of cancer. That rare diseases are not rare, even though it may affect five in 10,000 Australians—when you put it all together, there are probably 13,500 people in Forde alone who are suffering from a rare disease. It is by listening to the community and fighting for the community—and, I should say, doing what little I can to help people like Jess and Kerri fight—that we as a parliament can deliver. That's what this legislation does. It delivers certainty to people to go and get the diagnosis and undertake the testing that will potentially not just save their life but give them a quality of life they wouldn't have had otherwise. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025 and express my support for this bill. I commend the Assistant Treasurer for bringing forward this bill. It legislates important changes, two of which I've been advocating for some time.</para>
<para>This bill includes four key provisions. Firstly, schedule 1 limits the use of genetic testing by life insurers. Schedule 2 creates licensing exemptions for foreign financial institutions, including international market makers. Schedule 3 standardises the legislative framework for Australia's involvement with multilateral development banks and schedule 4 removes the requirement for stage 2 registration of the better advice act.</para>
<para>To start on life insurance, schedule 1 of this bill is a long overdue outcome of Australians seeking preventive health care. Preventive health care is the future of health in Australia, and we need to be encouraging more, not fewer, people seeking potentially life-saving genetic testing. They should not have to avoid this sort of testing based on the concern that the information they obtain could potentially be used against them by insurers who would seek to exclude people from insurance products. This bill would introduce formal protection against life insurers accessing and using genetic information for determining life insurance product eligibility and premiums. This is very welcome and this is so important.</para>
<para>But to be honest, we have been slow to act on this. In 2003, the Australian Law Reform Commission first recommended that the life insurance industry needed safeguards around the use of genetic testing—that is, 23 years ago. In 2018, a joint parliamentary inquiry into the life insurance industry recommended a moratorium on the use of genetic testing results in life insurance. In 2019, the life insurance industry introduced a partial industry-led moratorium to set policy limits. While I commend the industry for taking the first step, it's overdue that Australia committed to the change. I wrote to the Assistant Treasurer about this issue back in 2023 and again in 2025, when I was contacted by members of my community and also by others, particularly Dr Jane Tiller from Monash University, who has been a leading light in this area. I think the point is that we have come to the right conclusion. I welcome this bill. I support this bill, and I would also say that parliament needs to work at a greater speed than we currently do when issues are raised with us over a long period of time. I also recognise the Council of Australian Life Insurance, CALI, for getting behind some of these changes. It is really important that the life insurance industry is working with these changes as opposed to trying to fight them.</para>
<para>The additional component of the bill that I'd like to talk to in particular is the market makers bill. Some sensible changes, particularly the foreign financial services provider legislation in schedule 2, will provide certain exemptions to foreign financial service providers from licensing requirements under the Corporations Act, including for market makers and providers under comparable regimes. This is a commonsense change. This issue was actually raised with me at a pop-up office in Kings Cross by a constituent who was concerned last year with the uncertainty around this legislation and the need for action to be taken here, so I welcome the government's action on this. I'm really proud to have been advocating really loudly and proudly on this issue, and I think that this is an appropriate resolution.</para>
<para>Finally, schedule 4 of the bill follows through on the government's commitment to scrap the proposed phase 2 of the better advice reforms from 2021, which would make advisers undertake duplicated licensing arrangements every year, set to commence in July 2026. The financial advice profession is in such a decline that it is becoming prohibitively expensive to obtain financial advice, and those who need it are least able to afford it. We need to be doing all that we can to bring more financial advisers into the system, having lost thousands of them in the last few years. So I welcome any legislation that provides appropriate safeguards but that makes it easier and reduces some of the duplicate red tape for financial advisers. So thank you to the government and the ministers for action on these bills, and I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Ian has familial hypercholesterolaemia, a condition which leads to high cholesterol levels and the risk of heart attack at an early age. He's on cholesterol-lowering medication which controls his cholesterol levels, and when he applied for life insurance, those levels were similar to or lower than the general population. But because he had a genetic result, he had a loading placed on his premium. 'Ian' is a pseudonym, but the story is very real and it's a story that's being repeated across a host of different contexts.</para>
<para>A 2021 survey by the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia found that around 10 per cent of individuals who disclosed a genetic test result had insurance cover offered on less favourable terms or had cover declined. Other countries have long banned insurers from discriminating based on genetic information. The UK has had a ban in place since 2001, but in Australia many people are deterred from getting genetic testing because of the fear that it might drive up the cost of getting life insurance. They're having to choose between looking after their health and looking after their financial security.</para>
<para>This is a particular problem given how great the improvements have been in genetic testing over recent decades. The cost of sequencing a full genome has gone from millions of dollars and many years down to hundreds of dollars and minutes. The ability of those genetic screens to detect conditions has significantly improved. The Royal College of Pathologists has found that 95 per cent of people carry at least one genetic variant that affects their response to commonly prescribed drugs, and the Australian Medical Association says that genetic testing has 'the capacity to rapidly transform health care in Australia'.</para>
<para>The ability of life insurers to distinguish between applicants based on genetic history can have implications for particular ethnic groups. For example, Jewish people are 10 times more likely than the general population to have a high-risk variant of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which significantly increase risk of breast, ovarian and prostate cancers. The ability of life insurers to discriminate based on genetic tests effectively places a larger burden on Jewish Australians. I commend the work that has been done by Jane Tiller and fellow researchers, and indeed some of the examples that I've quoted have been drawn from the A-GLIMMER final stakeholder report, of 2023. As others in the debate have noted, this has been an issue of long standing. I commend the former assistant treasurer Stephen Jones and the current assistant treasurer, Daniel Mulino, for their work in bringing these reforms to the parliament.</para>
<para>This bill aligns the Insurance Contracts Act and the Disability Discrimination Act so Australians have certainty and protection, not fear and confusion, when they're making decisions about their health. Genetic testing saves lives, and we have more and more examples of tests which are revealing genetic variants. I mentioned before the BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants. There is also the PALB2 variant, which raises the risk of prostate and breast cancer in men. The presence of large datasets linked to genetic information is improving the quality of the information that can be gleaned from genetic testing every day. In coming years, we can expect the cost of genetic testing to fall and the information provided by genetic testing to improve. We can expect that getting a genetic test will be more valuable in determining your risks of cancer, your risks of having an adverse reaction to particular drugs and your risk of passing on a disease to your children.</para>
<para>It is important that Australians are able to take advantage of these advances in science and not be held back for fear that getting a genetic test will drive up the cost of life insurance. This ban will restore certainty. It tells Australians, especially those at higher risk of heritable conditions, that their decision to undertake genetic testing won't jeopardise their access to life insurance or force them into more expensive or restricting policies. Better uptake of genetic testing also improves medical research, and that means better prevention, earlier treatment, stronger public health outcomes and advances in scientific knowledge. Right now, people are being deterred from taking part in genetic tests as part of scientific research for fear that, if those results are revealed to them, they will then be obligated to reveal them to potential life insurers and therefore pay more.</para>
<para>Under this bill, individuals will still be able to volunteer their test results with written consent where it benefits them, and insurers can still use symptoms, diagnoses and family history to ensure policies remain properly risk rated. The value of being able to volunteer test results was highlighted, in Dr Tiller's A-GLIMMER <inline font-style="italic">Final </inline><inline font-style="italic">stakeholder report</inline>, by the case of Frank, whose father had Huntington's disease and who had a 200 per cent premium loading applied to his policy due to his family history. But he had a genetic test result showing that he did not inherit the Huntington's disease variant and so was not at risk of Huntington's disease. He had to take the insurance company to the complaints tribunal in order to finally reach a settlement. Under the bill that is before the House, it will be possible for people like Frank—a pseudonym, of course—to take forward the sorts of genetic tests that benefit them.</para>
<para>We are acting on behalf of vulnerable Australians. The most affluent can get away without buying life insurance, but vulnerable Australians often feel a need to purchase life insurance in order to forestall the risk that their family are left adversely affected by the economic consequences of their death. This bill will ensure a greater sense of equity and protect some of the most vulnerable in our community. It will be good for medical research, and that is why it enjoys the backing of so many medical research companies. It will be good for health, which is why it enjoys the backing of so many medical advocacy bodies, such as the Australian Medical Association and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. It will bring peace of mind to Australians who want to go and find out more about their genetic history, either through curious inquiry or because they are keen to see what genetic testing reveals about them and how they can help their own health and that of their families. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This bill is a significant piece of legislation. It's about fairness, modernisation and the fundamental health of every Australian. At its core, this bill delivers on a clear commitment to ban the use of adverse genetic testing results in life insurance. We are protecting Australians from being discriminated against simply because they took a proactive step to understand their own health.</para>
<para>I approach this bill not just as a member of parliament but through the lens of my career as a registered nurse and midwife. Throughout my years in clinical practice, I've stood at the bedside of patients facing the most daunting diagnoses imaginable, and I recently submitted my doctoral research focusing on the experiences of patients receiving medical treatments, specifically the impact of chemotherapy and immunotherapy infusions delivered in the home. I have seen firsthand the physical, emotional and financial toll that cancer treatment can take on an individual and their family. When we talk about preventive health, we aren't just using a policy buzzword. We're talking about the difference between a patient undergoing a pre-emptive life-saving procedure and, alternatively, enduring the gruelling, exhausting cycles of chemotherapy and immunotherapy because a condition may have been caught late. I know the cost of the latter, and not just the cost to the Medicare system and the health system but the human cost. Genetic testing is at the frontier of preventive health. It allows us to move from the reactive healthcare model to a proactive one. But, for that to work, patients must feel secure and feel safe to access the technology.</para>
<para>This is why the story of Zoe, a young woman from my home state of Western Australia, is so vital. Zoe's mother was diagnosed with stage 3 breast cancer at only 39 years of age and passed away only 18 months thereafter. Zoe, knowing her family history, did the responsible thing. She sought a DNA test through the public system, but, unfortunately, did not qualify under the rigid criteria. However, she was selected for a DNA screen trial, a groundbreaking initiative led by Monash University. That trial confirmed that she did, indeed, carry the high-risk breast cancer gene. Armed with that knowledge, Zoe underwent a double mastectomy. She took control. She prevented the experience that her mother suffered, and she probably saved her own life.</para>
<para>But here is the tragedy: many Australians in Zoe's position choose not to take that test. It's not because they're afraid of the needle. They're afraid of the insurance company. Their fear is that a positive result will mean that they can never get a mortgage, they'll never be able to protect their children's future or they will be priced out of the peace of mind that life insurance provides. As a nurse, it breaks my heart to think that a patient would decline a life-saving map of their own DNA because of a corporate profit margin.</para>
<para>This bill ends that fear. Schedule 1 ends genetic discrimination. For too long, a shadow has hung over the consultation rooms of genetic counsellors and over the laboratories of our great medical research institutions. That shadow is the fear of not being eligible for life insurance. Under the current framework, vulnerable Australians have been faced with a difficult choice: do I take a genetic test that may save my life by identifying a predisposition to cancer or heart disease or do I protect my family's financial future by ensuring that I can still access affordable life insurance? In a First World nation like Australia, no-one should ever have to make that choice.</para>
<para>Here is the evidence for change. Treasury's analysis on this matter is clinical and it's clear. The status quo is failing. People are holding back from essential testing. They are delaying life-saving screenings, and they are even withdrawing from groundbreaking medical research because they're terrified of being penalised by the insurer for a bad result. When people avoid testing, we lose the chance for early intervention. We lose the chance for prevention. When people avoid research, our scientific progress stalls. This government is stepping in to ensure that the system works for people, not against them.</para>
<para>How does the ban work? Schedule 1 implements the government's decision to ban life insurers from using genetic-testing results to inform the offer or terms of their cover. We are amending the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 to ensure that our laws keep pace with modern science. This ban is robust and fair. Integrity of underwriting means that insurers can still use signs, symptoms or family medical history to conduct risk-rate policies which are appropriate, but the hidden code of our DNA is protected. Patients can still volunteer results if it helps them—for example, if they do not carry the family mutation. There is also strict enforcement. The bill creates civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance that are regulated by ASIC. We're not just asking the industry to do better; we're requiring it to.</para>
<para>In schedule 2, supporting global investment, we are streamlining our financial markets by introducing licensing exemptions for foreign financial service providers. By reducing red tape for comparable regulators and professional investors, we're encouraging global capital to flow to Australia. For our superannuation and retirement industry, this means better access to international markets and lower costs through increased competition. It's about making Australia a more sophisticated, competitive financial hub.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 is about modernising international finance. It modernises our engagement with the multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. In our region, these institutions are at the forefront of climate resilience and infrastructure. By providing a more flexible legislative framework for transactions, like our support for the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, we will ensure Australia remains a leader in regional development. We've ensured transparency remains paramount and any new financial obligations must be notified to government.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 reduces the burden for financial advisers. It removes the redundant stage 2 registration of financial advisers. As a researcher, I'm a firm believer in efficient systems. We already have a functioning disciplinary system forcing individual advisers to register annually with ASIC, and this would add another unnecessary administrative burden and cost. We want advisers focused on helping Australians plan for their future, not navigating bureaucratic hurdles that offer no additional consumer protection.</para>
<para>In conclusion, it's people over products. As a nurse, I've always believed that prevention is better than cure. As a PhD candidate, I understand that the data tells us the same thing. And, as the member for Bullwinkel, I know my community expects us to put health ahead of insurance industry loopholes. For 10 years, those opposite ignored the genetic underclass. They allowed this system to persist, where Australians were punished for being proactive about their health. The Labor Albanese government is fixing that. We're telling every Australian: your DNA belongs to you, not your insurer. We are choosing science, we are choosing prevention and we are choosing people. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Officially, they are called 'in-valids'. They are the healthy ill. They don't actually have anything yet—they may never have. But, since few of the preconditions can be cured or reversed, it is easier to treat them as if they were already sick. This is a quote from the film <inline font-style="italic">Gattaca</inline>, nearly a quarter of a century ago, that might describe an imaginary future world, but discrimination on the grounds of genetic status, very sadly, is not science fiction.</para>
<para>In my first parliamentary term, I was part of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, and one of our inquiries was into the life insurance industry. The terms of reference for this inquiry went to the need for further reform and improved oversight of the life insurance industry; the benefits and risks to consumers of the different elements of the life insurance market; whether entities were engaging in unethical practices to avoid meeting claims; and possible reform and oversight of the industry. Throughout the inquiry, concerns were raised about privacy and genetic discrimination relating to genetic testing in health care, and to this end I want to pay particular tribute to Jane Tiller and the great advocacy work that she has been doing, prior to that inquiry and ever since, to ensure that legislation like this can come to fruition today.</para>
<para>At the completion of the inquiry, there were a number of recommendations—9.1 to 9.4—that went to this issue, recommending that the Financial Services Council, in consultation with the Australian Genetic Non-Discrimination Working Group, assess the consumer impact of imposing a moratorium on life insurers using predictive genetic information unless the consumer provides genetic information to a life insurer to demonstrate that they are not at risk of developing a disease. Despite this work on a moratorium—and, in some ways, because of it and the self-regulatory approach—a legislative approach is needed. Some of us are not surprised.</para>
<para>Fast-forward eight or so years and we now have this legislation before the parliament—legislation that our government committed to in its first term. During the course of this debate, those opposite have tried to take issue with the fact that we announced this legislation a year or so ago and we're bringing it forward now, but they had five years, after the committee that I was a member of provided its report to the then government, in which they did nothing. So I find it a bit rich that they now complain about us having taken action to progress this legislation during our first term in government.</para>
<para>Genetic testing saves lives through getting in early and preventing disease. This bill delivers on the Albanese government's commitment to ban the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance. We're protecting Australians from being discriminated against for playing an active role in their own health care. Life insurers will no longer be able to use an individual's adverse genetic test results to determine whether they can get cover or to set terms for that cover. We are changing the law to put people's health needs ahead of insurers' profit margins. Genetic testing does save lives, and Australians should not have to choose between their health and their ability to access life insurance. This bill will make sure that we're keeping people well for longer.</para>
<para>Under the current law, Australians have been delaying or avoiding genetic testing because they are worried about being penalised by insurers or being refused insurance, including through superannuation, or facing exorbitant premiums. We are fixing that. The passage of this legislation ensures Australians', especially those at high risk of inherited conditions, decision to undertake genetic testing that may enable them to undergo treatment that could save their life, or indeed demonstrate that they will not have that condition, will not jeopardise access to life insurance or force them into more expensive or restrictive policies. This includes conditions like breast cancer.</para>
<para>Genetic testing can be used to identify a fault or a mutation in the BRCA genes, which increase the risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer within a family. This testing can help individuals make decisions about how to reduce their risk of breast cancer and what sort of surgery you might want if you have been diagnosed. Unfortunately, the statistics bear out what my oncologist friends tell me. They have to warn patients that results may have to be disclosed to life insurers, and it may negatively affect their ability to be insured. This results in many, despite family history, not getting tested when they should so that they can make their own properly informed life decisions.</para>
<para>Our intention is that these reforms will support greater uptake of genetic testing and thereby save lives. It will also mean more Australians will be willing to participate in much-needed genetic research to save many more lives in the future, without the risk of becoming uninsurable. That means better prevention, earlier treatment, stronger public health outcomes and advances in scientific knowledge that benefit every Australian.</para>
<para>Although genetic testing is on the rise, a recent study from Monash University saw more than half of people who signed up to participate then subsequently discontinued their involvement in the study because of concerns around accessing affordable insurance. In this DNA screening study, some 10,000 Australians between the ages of 18 and 40 were assessed for their risks of preventable cancer and heart disease. Seventy-three of those were from my community of Burt in Perth's south-east. They found that one in 50, or two per cent, of those tested are at high risk. This information armed these individuals with the knowledge to be able to then do something about it. They were able to access preventive treatments and early interventions, and make lifestyle changes that would benefit them in the long run. But more than half of potential participants who had the opportunity to be armed with this information lost out, unable to prioritise their own health due to a fear of hip-pocket pain or risk to their family's long-term financial security.</para>
<para>Australians have had to choose between genetic testing that could save their life and potential financial implications for their life insurance. This bill will end that discrimination and that fear, and enable Australians to make decisions about genetic testing and genetic research without worrying about life insurance. These amendments ensure our antidiscrimination laws keep pace with modern science. We are aligning the Insurance Contracts Act and the Disability Discrimination Act so Australians have certainty and protection rather than fear and confusion when making decisions about their health. We shouldn't have to be relying on oncologists and medical professionals to advise of the need to seek further financial advice at a time of dealing critically with one's health.</para>
<para>This reform has real consequences for non-compliance as well. It establishes civil and criminal penalties and places enforcement authority with ASIC, which ensures these protections are backed by strong oversight. We are acting because vulnerable Australians deserve a system that supports their health decisions, not one that punishes them. This will have positive outcomes in the long run for our economy too.</para>
<para>We're getting ahead of disease. By treating people early and enhancing prevention, people are well for longer. This enhances productivity in the billions. People will be able to work and contribute to our economy for longer because they will be well. It will also mean we are able to continue to undertake great advances in medical science by having people able to participate in research.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is delivering these protections so that people can take charge of their own health, fixing a problem those opposite ignored despite the pleas from the committee of which I was a member. This bill does many other things in other schedules. I support all of them, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Sometimes the law has to play catch-up with developments in science. Way back in the 1950s, science fiction writers like Alfred Bester in his novel <inline font-style="italic">The Demolished Man</inline> grappled with the idea that human potential might one day be biologically measured and then used to restrict people's lives. Science fiction is full of warnings about how knowledge and power can be misused.</para>
<para>Genetic testing, once the stuff of science fiction, is no longer theoretical. It is a part of modern healthcare, helping Australians understand their risks, take preventive action and, in many cases, save their lives or the lives of their children. But the rules governing how that information can be used have to keep up, and, because of that, Australians have been forced into an unacceptable position, weighing their health against their financial security. I'm glad to say that this is what this bill, Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, fixes.</para>
<para>In this place in 2024, I reflected on how genetic screening being so new can feel confronting, even unsettling, but also how it represents a profound opportunity for prevention and care when handled responsibly. This legislation supports people in their use of this technology because the evidence is clear. Treasury analysis shows Australians are delaying or avoiding genetic testing due to concerns about life insurance. Participation in research has also been affected. The departmental advice is backed by public reporting and independent research. For example, coverage of Monash University's DNA screening program highlighted that a significant proportion of participants withdrew or hesitated because of fears about insurance consequences. As reported by ABC News, concerns about life insurance were a key reason some Australians chose not to proceed with potentially life-saving testing.</para>
<para>That is squarely our business because, when people avoid testing, they miss the chance for early intervention, scientific progress is slowed, and health outcomes are worse. I have met with Dr Jane Tiller a number of times over the past three years to discuss the real-world impact of genetic discrimination and the urgent need for reform. Those meetings are the sort of meetings I like to have—ones that are grounded in evidence and experience. Doctor Tiller's work, particularly through the Australian Genetics and Life Insurance Moratorium: Monitoring the Effectiveness and Response, A-GLIMMER, report has shown that genetic discrimination is not hypothetical. It is occurring, and it is influencing behaviour.</para>
<para>Dr Tiller found that Australians were very variously declining or delaying clinical genetic testing due to fears about potential insurance discrimination. She also found that there was a general lack of knowledge in the community around whether life insurance companies were legally allowed to use genetic test results in underwriting, and that there was strong support for the proposal that government should introduce legislation to protect genetic test results and almost no opposition to that proposal. Some of the comments recorded in the studies are revealing. One respondent said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… at the moment it is better to be in the dark …</para></quote>
<para>Another admitted:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It has caused family members to hold off on very important gene testing …</para></quote>
<para>A third stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… if I'm aware of my genetic condition and keep up with my screening, I don't think I should be discriminated against. I should be rewarded for being proactive …</para></quote>
<para>This really is the nub. We all know that, in relation to any disease, early diagnosis is crucial. Dr Tiller and her group underline their work by reference to 'Shona', whose screening betrays a predisposition to breast cancer. With screening and treatment, her prospects are good. Without it, they are much worse and, at the same time, much more likely to occasion high costs to an insurer. It is simply the case that, when people choose not to know out of fear, we have a failure of the system to support healthy decisions.</para>
<para>The Australian Medical Association has publicly supported reform, stating that no-one should avoid a potentially life-saving test because they fear it could be used against them. That position has been widely reported, including in coverage by the <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline>, which highlighted the medical community's concern that insurance settings were undermining preventive health care. Similarly, reporting in the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline> drew attention to the experiences of Australians who declined or delayed testing because of uncertainty about how results might be used by insurers.</para>
<para>Back in August 2023, Duchenne Australia held an event here in the parliament. Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD, is the biggest genetic killer of boys. Early diagnosis and treatment can make a world of difference to a child's life, as treatment can slow down deterioration. We need to have a legislative framework that supports those families. I acknowledge my colleague the member for Macnamara, who brought a motion to the parliament then to help raise this awareness.</para>
<para>The current legal framework has been holding Australia back. This bill responds directly to that reality. It introduces a clear and enforceable ban on the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance underwriting. It amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 and aligns with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 so that our legal protections reflect modern science and community expectations. It provides certainty that Australians can engage with their health care without fear of financial penalty.</para>
<para>It is also important to be clear about what this reform does not do. It does not prevent insurers from assessing risk altogether. They will continue to rely on clinical diagnosis, symptoms and family history. The fundamentals of underwriting remain intact. This bill removes a specific and harmful practice: the use of predictive genetic information in a way that discourages people from protecting their health—not overreach, just targeted and proportionate reform.</para>
<para>In my earlier contribution in this place, I spoke about families who have benefited from genetic screening and were able to take preventive action because they had access to critical information. This is what this technology enables. But, under the previous framework, the same information could affect access to life insurance, so people hesitated. They questioned whether it was safe or not to know. As Dr Tiller's research has demonstrated, even the perception of disadvantage can be enough to deter people from acting. By removing this barrier, we will enable Australians to make decisions based solely on their health, not fear of material disadvantage. It will be good for individuals but will also support greater participation in research and strengthen the foundations of a more preventive healthcare system. When more Australians engage with genetic testing, we improve our understanding of disease, we enhance our ability to develop targeted treatments and we build a stronger and more resilient health system.</para>
<para>The legislation has civil and criminal penalties for breaches, with oversight by ASIC. Laws must evolve alongside our knowledge. Genetic science has advanced rapidly. Our understanding of prevention and personalised medicine has grown. It is our responsibility to ensure Australians can benefit from those advances without unintended harm.</para>
<para>I spoke about the changes being based squarely on the evidence of harm created by the current laws. This legislation also reflects something fundamental about fairness. Fairness is at the heart of Labor policy. Australians believe in a fair go. They believe that people should not be penalised for taking responsible steps to protect their health. I agree, and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRENCH</name>
    <name.id>316550</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This is a bill about fairness, about modern medicine and about ensuring that Australians are not punished for taking responsibility for their own health.</para>
<para>Before I turn to the detail of this legislation, I just want to begin with something personal. When I was 25, I went for what I thought was a routine pre-employment medical. I was about to start my electrical apprenticeship, and I felt fine. I was working hard in building a career, and, like most young people, I was not thinking much about my health beyond getting through the week. That medical changed my life. A urine test picked up something that did not look right. That led to further investigations, and ultimately I was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease. I did not feel sick. I did not have symptoms that had prompted me to go see a doctor, and, without that test, I would not have known. If I had not known, I would not have been able to manage it, I would not have been able to slow its progression and I would not have been able to make decisions that have allowed me to live a full life, build a career, start a family and stand here today. That is the power of early detection. That is the power of information, and that is exactly what this bill is about—ensuring Australians are not discouraged from accessing that information.</para>
<para>The issue this bill addresses is straightforward. For too long, Australians have faced a quiet but very real disincentive to engage in genetic testing, not because they don't want to know, not because they don't value their own health, but because they fear what that knowledge might mean for their ability to obtain life insurance. The evidence before this parliament is clear. Australians have delayed or declined potential life-saving genetic tests because of concerns that adverse results could be used against them in insurance underwriting. That is not a hypothetical concern. It is a documented behavioural response. It is, in effect, a system that penalises prevention, and that is a system that cannot stand in a modern healthcare environment.</para>
<para>This bill responds to that problem in a targeted and proportionate way. Schedule 1 amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to prohibit life insurers from using what is defined as 'protected genetic information' in underwriting decisions. That includes whether a person has undergone genetic testing, whether they have been advised to do so and the results of any such testing. The effect is clear: an insurer cannot refuse cover, vary terms or increase premiums based on predictive genetic information.</para>
<para>The bill also introduces enforcement mechanisms. It creates both a strict liability offence and a significant civil penalty for breaches, with regulatory oversight vested in ASIC. This is not guidance. This is not a voluntary code. It is enforceable law. And that shift from industry led restraint to legislative certainty is critical. It means that individuals no longer need to rely on policy settings that can be altered, withdrawn or interpreted inconsistently. It means that rights are clearly defined, enforceable and capable of being relied on in practice, not merely in theory.</para>
<para>It is important to be precise about what this bill does and what it does not do. It does not dismantle risk based insurance. Insurers will still be able to assess risk based on clinically diagnosed conditions, medical history and other relevant factors. What this bill does is draw a clear boundary. It says that predictive genetic information—information about what might happen in the future—cannot be used to deny Australians access to life insurance. That is a rational distinction. It recognises that genetic predisposition is not the same as a diagnosed condition, and it ensures that individuals are not treated as if they are already unwell simply because of what their genes might suggest. In legal terms, this reflects a careful balancing of competing interests. It preserves the principle of risk assessment while removing the category of information that is inherently uncertain, highly sensitive and not determinative of actual health outcomes.</para>
<para>It is also necessary to acknowledge why legislative intervention is required. The current system relies heavily on an industry moratorium. That moratorium was a step forward, but it has not resolved the underlying problem. It applies only within certain policy limits. It relies on industry compliance rather than statutory obligation, and it has been the subject of confusion among consumers and health professionals alike. For many Australians, the question has remained unclear: if I get tested, will this affect my ability to obtain life insurance? Where that question cannot be answered with certainty, the rational response is caution, and in this context, caution means delay or avoidance of testing. That is precisely the outcome this bill seeks to correct.</para>
<para>This reform is not occurring in isolation. It reflects a broader shift in how we think about data, privacy and fairness in the 21st century. Genetic information is deeply personal. It is not just about an individual; it can have implications for families, future generations and communities. Unlike many forms of information, it is not something a person chooses; it is something they are born with. That is why it demands a higher level of protection. This bill recognises that. It acknowledges that, while insurers have legitimate interests in assessing risk, there must be limits on how that risk is assessed. There are certain types of information, particularly genetic information, that should not be used to determine access to essential financial products, and that balance is carefully struck.</para>
<para>The public health implications of this reform are significant. Genetic testing is an increasingly important part of preventive health care. It allows individuals to identify risks early. It enables clinicians to tailor interventions. It supports participation in research that benefits the broader community. There is also a broader public health dimension to this reform. Genetic testing is not just about individual outcomes; it is about collective benefit. When more Australians undertake genetic testing, we improve early detection, enable more targeted treatment, strengthen our understanding of disease and accelerate medical research. But that only happens if people feel safe to participate. If people are opting out, if they are declining tests or if they are withdrawing from studies because of insurance concerns, then we are all worse off. This bill removes that disincentive. It supports greater participation in genetic testing and research. It aligns our regulatory settings with our healthcare ambitions.</para>
<para>I want to return briefly to my own circumstances. When I was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease, it did not just affect me; it affected my family. It raised questions about genetic predisposition. It raised questions about what it might mean for my boys. That is where this bill becomes even more important, because the question is not just whether we should be protected; it's whether our kids should be protected—it's whether, in the future, they should be penalised if, out of an abundance of caution, on medical advice or to participate in research, they choose to undergo genetic testing. The answer, in my view, is unequivocally no. They should not face higher premiums. They should not be denied cover. They should not be put in a position where understanding their own health becomes a financial liability. This bill ensures that they will not be.</para>
<para>We're also at the point in medical history where genetic knowledge is increasingly actionable. In the case of kidney disease, there are now emerging treatments and new medications that can significantly slow disease progression and, in some cases, prevent kidney failure. That changes the equation entirely. A genetic predisposition is no longer a fixed destiny. It is information that can guide intervention. It is information that can improve outcomes. It allows clinicians to act earlier and with greater precision. But, again, that only matters if people are willing to access that information. This bill supports that shift from reactive health care to preventive health care.</para>
<para>I want to acknowledge the work of Kidney Health Australia and its ambition to end dialysis by 2050. That is an ambitious goal, but it is not unrealistic. It is grounded in early detection, better management and advances in treatment. It reflects a broader shift in health care from managing failure to preventing it. Genetic testing has a role to play in that future. It allows for earlier identification risk, it enables earlier intervention and ultimately it can reduce the number of Australians who progress to end-stage kidney disease. This bill supports that objective. It aligns financial settings with health outcomes. I also want to acknowledge the outstanding advocacy of Dr Jane Tiller, from Monash University, who has helped bring this issue out of the margins and into the national spotlight.</para>
<para>There is also an economic dimension to this reform. A system that discourages detection is, in the long run, more costly. It increases pressure on the healthcare system. It reduces workforce participation. It shifts costs from prevention into crisis management. By contrast, a system that supports early detection is more efficient. It keeps people healthier for longer, it reduces long-term costs and it supports productivity. This bill is consistent with that approach.</para>
<para>One of the most important features of this bill is the certainty that it provides. The existing industry moratorium has not delivered that certainty. It has been limited in scope. It has been poorly understood and has left too much discretion in the hands of insurers. This bill replaces that with a clear legislated framework. It gives Australians confidence that the rules are fixed, enforceable and fair.</para>
<para>In closing, this bill is about trust—trust that Australians can engage with modern medicine without fear of financial penalty, trust that their most personal information will be treated with care and respect, and trust that our systems, both health and financial, are working in their best interests. By passing this bill, we reinforce that trust. We send a clear signal that fairness matters, that privacy matters and that the wellbeing of Australians, both physical and financial, matters. This bill is, at its core, about removing a false choice. Australians should not have to choose between their health and their financial security. They should not have to choose between knowledge and protection. They should not have to choose between participating in modern medicine and participating in the financial system. This bill ensures they do not have to make that choice. It is a measured reform, it is a necessary reform and it is a reform that reflects both the realities of modern medicine and the expectations of a fair society. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. This is an important bill. It's a bill about fairness, it's a bill about trust and, above all, it's a bill about making sure Australians can make decisions about their health without fear. At its heart, this legislation delivers on a clear commitment. We said we would stop life insurers from using genetic testing results against Australians. This bill does exactly that. Genetic testing saves lives. It allows doctors to identify serious risks early. It allows people to take preventive action. It allows families to understand their health and plan for the future as well. But, for too long, Australians have faced an unacceptable choice: do they take a genetic test that could protect their health, or do they avoid testing because they're worried it will affect their ability to get life insurance? That's not a choice anyone should have to make.</para>
<para>This bill removes that fear. Schedule 1 of the bill amends the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 to ban life insurers from using genetic test results when deciding whether to offer cover or what terms to offer. It's clear and it's a simple rule: your genetic test results cannot be used against you. This reform ensures Australians are not punished for taking proactive steps to manage their health.</para>
<para>Treasury analysis has shown that people are delaying or avoiding genetic testing because of concerns about life insurance. Some are even avoiding participation in medical research. That's a loss for individuals. it's a loss for families and it's a loss for our entire health system. We cannot allow fear to stand in the way of life-saving care, and this bill fixes that. It ensures that, when somebody is considering a genetic test, their focus can be on their health, not on how their insurer might respond. It aligns our laws with modern science. It brings the Insurance Contracts Act into step with the Disability Discrimination Act. It provides clarity, certainty and protection.</para>
<para>This reform has been carefully designed. It does not prevent insurers from using clinical information. They can still consider diagnosed conditions. They can still consider symptoms. They can still consider family medical history. This is important because it ensures that life insurance remains properly risk rated. What we're doing is drawing a fair line. We're saying that predictive genetic information should not be used to disadvantage people. We're protecting Australians from discrimination while maintaining a functional insurance system. There are also strong enforcement mechanisms. Breaches of this ban will attract civil penalties and criminal offences. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission will oversee the enforcement of these rules. These protections are real, they are backed by law, and they will be upheld.</para>
<para>There is broad support for this reform. Genetics researchers support it. Patient advocacy groups support it. Even the life insurance industry supports it. That tells us something important. It tells us that this is the right reform at the right time. And it's not just about removing harm; it's about unlocking opportunity. We should see this reform as part of a broader shift towards prevention in health care. We're entering a new era—an era where we can prevent disease instead of simply treating it. This bill helps Australia move into that era.</para>
<para>Prevention is not only better for individuals; it's much better for the entire system. When diseases are identified early or avoided altogether, we reduce pressures on hospitals, reduce long-term treatment costs and improve quality of life. Families avoid the trauma of late diagnosis. Communities remain stronger because people stay healthier and active for longer. This is the kind of reform that delivers benefits well beyond the individual.</para>
<para>I want to highlight the real-world impact of genetic testing. The DNA screen study at Monash University tested 10,000 Australians aged between 18 and 40 for genetic risks of preventable cancers and heart disease. The results were striking. One in 50 participants were found to be at high genetic risk. That's two per cent of those tested. That's a significant number of Australians. These individuals were then able to take preventive action: they accessed surgery; they undertook regular surveillance; they began medication. These are the life-saving interventions.</para>
<para>Young Australians want this information. The DNA screen study was oversubscribed. Tens of thousands of people expressed interest in it. But there was a problem. The main reason many people chose not to participate was fear of genetic discrimination in life insurance. That's deeply concerning. It means people were walking away from potentially life-saving knowledge because of financial fear. This bill removes that fear and that barrier. It also sends a powerful signal to researchers and clinicians. It tells them that Australia supports innovation in medical science and that we're willing to remove outdated barriers that hold this progress back. When participation in research increases, discoveries accelerate, new treatments are developed, and lives are improved.</para>
<para>We can also think about the families who carry inherited conditions that are not yet visible. A patient who knows there's a history of heart disease may hesitate to test their children. A young adult may delay testing for a cancer predisposition. Under the old system, that hesitation was understandable. Under this new framework, that hesitation should no longer exist. People can act early, seek advice and take control of their future without second-guessing the financial consequences.</para>
<para>Consider also regional and rural Australians, who often face higher barriers to accessing specialist care. For them, early knowledge can be even more critical. Genetic testing can guide limited healthcare resources more effectively and help avoid late-stage illnesses that require complex treatment far from home. Removing insurance fears makes these benefits more accessible across the country.</para>
<para>Let me offer another example. A young couple planning to start a family may choose to undertake genetic carrier screening. This test can identify whether they're at risk of passing on a serious inherited condition to one of their children. Under the previous setting, some couples hesitated, worried that even the act of testing could affect their financial security. That hesitation could delay important decisions about family planning and early medical care. Under this bill, that couple can proceed with confidence. They can seek the advice, understand their risks and make a more informed decision about the future of their family without fear of insurance consequences.</para>
<para>In my electorate in the Hunter, we have already seen the impact of genetic testing. At least 30 young people participated in a DNA Screen study. Three were identified as being a high genetic risk. A young woman was found to be at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Two young men were found to be at high risk of bowel cancer. Because of testing, they were able to take action early. That is what prevention looks like, and that is what this bill supports.</para>
<para>This reform will pave the way for expansion in genetic screening. The DNA Screen study aims to expand to 100,000 participants. That would identify thousands more Australians at risk and, importantly, those Australians would no longer have to worry about insurance discrimination. This is how we build a healthier nation. Modelling shows that population-level genomic screening could deliver productivity gains in the order of billions of dollars. This is not just good health policy; this is good economic policy. Prevention reduces long-term healthcare costs. It keeps people in the workforce. It strengthens families and communities. This bill is an important step toward that future.</para>
<para>I now turn to schedule 2 of the bill. This schedule deals with licensing exemptions for foreign financial services providers. It introduces three exemptions from the requirement to hold an Australian financial services licence. The first is the comparable regulator exemption. This applies to providers that already regulate in jurisdictions with comparable standards. The second is the professional investor exemption. This allows providers to offer services to Australian professional investors without a licence. The third is the market maker exemption. This applies to providers making markets in certain derivatives.</para>
<para>These reforms are about balance. They maintain the integrity of our financial system while reducing unnecessary regulatory burden. They ensure Australian businesses and investors can access a broader range of financial products and services. They support competition, they support investment, and they support economic growth. Importantly, these measures elevate existing relief, which has been provided through ASIC instruments, into primary legislation. This provides greater certainty and stronger oversight. There has been strong support for these measures from industry stakeholders. There is no expected opposition. This is sensible and practical reform.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 of this bill deals with multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund. It modernises and streamlines the legislative framework governing Australia's participation in these institutions. These institutions are evolving. They are developing new financial models. They are responding to global challenges. Australia must be able to respond as well. This schedule provides a valid appropriation to meet commitments made in the 2024-25 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. It supports investment and institutions like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. It also reduces administrative burden by allowing routine decisions to be delegated where appropriate. These changes will make Australia a more agile and effective participant in the global financial system. They will allow us to meet our obligations effectively. They will support international efforts to address development challenges. There is no expected stakeholder opposition to these measures.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 repeals stage 2 financial adviser registration. Under existing arrangements, financial advisers are already registered through their licence. There is already a functioning disciplinary system in place, and the proposed stage 2 would have required individual advisers to register annually with ASIC. This would have created additional red tape without improving consumer protection. This bill removes an unnecessary burden. It ensures regulation remains effective but not excessive. It supports financial advisers while maintaining strong standards. Again, there is broad stakeholder support for this measure. Taken together, this bill delivers practical reforms across several areas, but, at its core, it's about people. It's about ensuring Australians are not penalised for taking care of their health, ensuring our laws keep pace with science and building a system that works for the community.</para>
<para>For decades, genetic discrimination in life insurance has been a concern. Australians have worried about that information and about how their DNA could be used against them. The fear has real consequences. It has discouraged testing, and that really matters—just the same as trust matters in this as well. When people trust the system, they engage with the system. They get tested, they participate in research and they seek early treatment. That leads to better outcomes for everyone. This bill is also forward looking. It recognises that genomics will play an increasing role in healthcare into the future. I'm looking forward to seeing what Australians can do with this and what we can do with this as a government to make sure that no Australian has to choose between their health or their financial security.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025. At its heart, this bill asks a simple question: in a country as wealthy and as clever as ours, should anyone have to choose between knowledge that could save their life and the security of protecting their family? Our government is saying no. This bill delivers on the Albanese government's commitment to ban the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance underwriting, changing the law so that Australians can engage with their own health care without fear of discrimination. This government is aligning the Insurance Contracts Act and the Disability Discrimination Act so our antidiscrimination framework keeps pace with modern science, because genetic testing saves lives.</para>
<para>Australians should never have to choose between their health and their financial security. People have been delaying or avoiding genetic testing and even avoiding participating in medical research because they are worried about how insurers might respond. This hesitation can mean a missed opportunity to prevent illness. It is a barrier to prevention, a barrier to early treatment and a barrier to scientific progress. The Albanese Labor government is removing that barrier. Schedule 1 implements a clear, scientifically led decision: life insurers will no longer be able to use an individual's adverse genetic test results to determine whether they can access cover or to set the terms of that cover. It is important to note that this bill does not interfere with insurance companies designing their policies. They will still be able to consider diagnosed conditions, symptoms and family medical history. It does not prevent individuals from volunteering genetic test results with written consent where doing so benefits them.</para>
<para>What it does do is end the practice of penalising someone for proactively seeking information about their own health. It ends a regime that has forced Australians into cruel calculations—'Should I stay in the dark and protect my insurance or seek knowledge and risk financial consequences?' This is not a fair choice; this is not a humane choice. This is not consistent with a country that believes in preventive health care. Genetic testing can identify risks for cancers, heart diseases and other inherited conditions long before symptoms appear. It allows doctors to monitor more closely, to intervene early, to prevent disease altogether. This is the frontier of modern medicine.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Melbourne, more than a hundred young people participated in a DNA screening study. Backed by Monash University, the study looks into preventive genetic testing. While attending an event with DNA Screen, I met Kara, a young woman from my community who did not want to wait for a health scare to take control of her future. She was told she was too young to worry. She chose to act anyway.</para>
<para>Through DNA screening, Kara discovered she carries the BRCA2 gene variant, putting her at higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer. That kind of news could stop you in your tracks. For Kara, it did the opposite. With the right support, she was connected to medical specialists. She now has a care plan, and she is being regularly monitored. She has options, she has time, she has control, and what could have been overwhelming became empowering.</para>
<para>However, the reality is that too many people are still held back from taking that step. The main reason people who signed up for DNA Screen ultimately decided not to participate was fear of genetic discrimination. It was fear, not science, not medicine, not cost. It was just fear. For decades, Australians have raised ethical concerns about genetic discrimination. They have asked why a test taken to prevent illness could be used to price them out of insurance protection. This bill answers that question. It tells Australians, especially those at high risk of inherited conditions, that their decision to undertake genetic testing will not jeopardise their ability to protect their families.</para>
<para>It does something else. It supports medical research. Treasury's analysis makes clear that concerns about life insurance have discouraged participation in clinical research. When people hold back from research, the full benefits of genetic science are not realised. That slows discovery, it stifles innovation, and it dims hope. By removing this barrier, we pave the way for greater participation in preventive genomic screening and stronger public health outcomes. This is what proactive governments look like. It looks ahead. It recognises that prevention is not just kinder; it is smarter. Investment in disease prevention reduces pressure on our healthcare system. It keeps people in work longer. It strengthens productivity. It lowers long-term costs. It is not just a health reform, it is an economic reform, and it is a structural reform. It will be backed with real action. The ban creates civil penalties and criminal offences for noncompliance and places enforcement authority with ASIC. Vulnerable Australians deserve more than good intentions. They deserve enforceable protections.</para>
<para>For Melbourne, this reform matters deeply. We are a city of students, researchers, health professionals and young families. We are home to world-class institutions like the Florey institute in Parkville, where this government announced over $40 million for the fight against motor neurone disease. In my electorate, we want to be at the forefront of genomic medicine. We want our young people to participate in research that advances global understanding. We want families to make health decisions based on evidence and trust. This bill will ensure they can.</para>
<para>This bill also speaks to something bigger. It speaks to what kind of government we choose to be. The Albanese government has been clear that health should never depend on wealth. We have reduced the cost of medicines. We have strengthened Medicare. We have invested in urgent care clinics. We have acted on women's health. And now we are ensuring that preventive genetic medicine is not undermined by financial fear. That is the story of our government—a government that backs prevention, a government that removes barriers, a government that puts people before profit.</para>
<para>It is also important to reflect more fully on the broader architecture of this bill. Schedule 2 provides targeted licensing exemptions for foreign financial service providers where they are already subject to comparable regulation in trusted jurisdictions. This is not deregulation for its own sake; it recognises that Australian businesses operate in a global marketplace and that access to international capital strengthens our economy. Australians' retirement savings system is one of the largest pools of capital in the world. Access to global markets helps deliver stronger returns, builds competition and opens up new sources of investment for Australian businesses. In my electorate of Melbourne, home of some of the country's largest super funds and asset management firms, this creates stronger connections to global markets and more opportunities to grow Australian savings. At the same time, the reform maintains appropriate oversight, balancing openness with integrity.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 speaks to Australia's role beyond our shores. It modernises and futureproofs the legislative framework that governs our participation in mutual development banks. These institutions are evolving rapidly, particularly in response to climate change and shifting global economic pressures. Australia is not a superpower; we are something else. We are a middle power with influence. We are a trusted partner in the Australian Pacific. We are a country that builds bridges and brings nations together. Through our work with these department banks and funds, Australia supports infrastructure, climate resilience and economic stability across our region. Australia has agreed to participate in hybrid capital and guarantee arrangements that expand the lending capacity of these institutions. These amendments ensure our domestic legislation can accommodate such innovative financial tools without repeated technical, legislative change. They reduce administrative burden while preserving transparency, including parliamentary notifications of new financial obligations.</para>
<para>This is responsible internationalism in practice—Australia showing up, Australia investing in regional stability, Australia using its place as a middle power to shape solutions that no country can deliver alone. When our region is stronger, more resilient and more prosperous, Australia benefits too. Together, schedules 2 and 3 show that government understands both the domestic and international dimensions of economic policy. This is a government that strengthens our financial system at home while reinforcing Australia's leadership role abroad.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 reflects something equally important: this government knows when to step in and when to step back. The previous framework proposed a second layer of financial adviser registration that would have required individual advisers to undertake additional annual processes supported by new and costly IT systems. The current system already provides strong oversight. Advisers are registered, misconduct can be investigated, and registrations can be suspended or cancelled. Accountability is there, which means what was proposed was extra process, not extra protection. Many financial advisers are small business operators. They employ staff. They serve families. They guide Australians through some of the most important financial decisions of their lives. They should spend their time supporting clients, not navigating unnecessary bureaucracy. This government is serious about reducing regulatory burden where it does not serve a clear public purpose. We will strengthen rules where consumers need protection. Schedule 4 delivers practical reform and reflects the government's focus on substance over symbolism.</para>
<para>These are sensible, measured reforms, but the moral centre of this bill sits with schedule 1. Australians deserve certainty when they seek knowledge about their bodies. We are living through a revolution in medicine. Genomic sequencing is faster, cheaper and more precise. It is changing what is possible. We can find risk before disease takes hold. We can step in earlier. We can guide treatment. We can give people time—time to act, time to plan, time to protect the people they love. This changes lives. It takes someone out of the dark and puts them back in control. But policy must keep up. Antidiscrimination law must keep up. Insurance law must keep up. Regulation must keep up. This bill ensures they do.</para>
<para>There will be some who argue that this interferes with market practice. I say this: markets exist to serve people, not the other way round. Penalising someone for taking a test that could prevent disease crosses a line. We are drawing that line today.</para>
<para>When I think about this reform, I think about Kara, about a young woman who chose not to wait. She now has a plan. She has the support. She has time. This reform is also about the thousands of Australians who will now step forward to participate in research without fear, about families who will make decisions in consultation with doctors, not insurers. And I think of what this reform says about us. It says we trust people with the truth and place control of their health in their hands. It says that we act early, giving people a real chance to change their future. It says we stand beside Australians when it matters most with care, strength and certainty.</para>
<para>We promised to ban the use of adverse genetic test results in life insurance. We are delivering on that promise. This parliament has a choice. We can cling to outdated frameworks that force people into silence or hesitation, or we can embrace a future where science advances, prevention expands and fairness underpins our laws. For the people of Melbourne, for families across this country, for every young person considering a test that could change their future, I know whose side I am on. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Melbourne. The question is that the amendment be agreed to, and I call the Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs and Assistant Minister for International Education. I'm pleased to see you're so eager to speak on this bill.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I am very eager to speak on this bill. I strongly support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, which will ban the use of genetic test results in life insurance.</para>
<para>It's been a long time coming, and I give an enormous and very warm shout-out to Dr Jane Tiller. She is irrepressible, with her intellect and her charm and her steadfast advocacy; no-one can avoid Jane. She first graced my office, I think, in late 2023 or early 2024, and her work has led to this. I have no hesitation in saying this.</para>
<para>I've campaigned for this bill also—with Jane and more broadly for a long time—and I want to acknowledge my daughter. As part of the campaign, a couple of years ago, she spoke up in an ABC article. I was actually overseas at the time. She rang me and said, 'Dad, they've asked me to do TV.' I thought, 'Oh my God, TV.' But the interview was amazing. I was incredibly proud of her. She told her story with grace—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>She did.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and determination. She batted away the tricky questions. She was exemplary.</para>
<para>It's because of her personal experience. My daughter almost died in 2017, when we were in Sri Lanka. Eventually, we figured out she had a 64-centimetre blood clot in her leg. She was in the ICU, and they saved her. We worked out, through tests and interrogation, that it was a combination of an off-label contraceptive pill and an undetected minor genetic mutation—a Factor V Leiden, which is very common—and, unfortunately, the same GP who put her on the pill also, at the same consultation, knew she was going on long-haul flights the next week to Europe, so it was a triple whammy. She's okay now, but there's lifelong damage. She's on blood thinners—a pretty heavy dose—for the rest of her life, high-risk pregnancy and all that stuff, and she pays through the nose for travel insurance, health insurance and all the rest of it.</para>
<para>I went to get tested, which was part of the advice after this happened, and I was absolutely floored. I went to the GP, who referred me to the haematologist, I think it was, and he said: 'Well, don't get tested. It'll stuff up all your insurance.' I was stunned by that, which first got me to understand this issue. The risk, he said, was for my life insurance, my income protection insurance and potentially even travel insurance. When my dad died when I was four, it was only because he had life insurance that the family survived. Mum could pay off the house. We didn't have much but we had the house.</para>
<para>Successive governments have been promoting genetic testing and educating people on genetic health, and the advances in modern medicine are incredible. It is the way of the future. Part of investing in medical research is empowering individuals and encouraging them to get genetically tested where they can, where they have the opportunity, where they can afford it and so on. Deputy Speaker Freelander, as a senior medical professional, will know this far better than the rest of us. Increasingly, personalised medicine targeting interventions for disease or prevention based on your genetic heritage, your genetic lottery in life, is the way of the future. But we had this peculiar situation where on one hand we encouraged that yet, on the other hand, the insurance systems settings actively discriminated against some people who discovered through no fault of their own, not through a lifestyle decision, not through a personal choice that they'd made—just the lottery of life; that's just genetics; you can't change it—that they were then discriminated against.</para>
<para>It was through a Commonwealth funded research project that Dr Tiller found empirically that consumers were putting off genetic testing because they were worried they would be denied insurance. I understand that; it was my experience. Jane said in an article a long time ago, 'Every time someone considers whether they want to have a genetic test or wants to be part of genetic research, we have to tell them the life insurance implications if they're signing up to that.' We found that the majority of people across all of those stakeholder groups believed that legislation was required. And she was right. This full legislative ban, which we've been arguing for, will bring Australia into line with, say, Canada, which made the switch in 2017, and the world didn't end there.</para>
<para>The government wants all Australians to take control of their health. I say to people: if you have the opportunity to get to do the testing, people should feel free to do that and feel safe to do that or to participate in medical research, as the previous speaker said, without them thinking, 'It's going to deny me life insurance cover or cost me forever.' I don't want any Australian to have to regret understanding their own heritage and health and trying to do things that enable them to live a longer, happier, healthier life. My daughter in that article said she argued very strongly for this change, and I know she's very pleased about it. She still struggles to get travel insurance when she goes overseas and so on, but knows from our family story the importance of it.</para>
<para>On a related matter, I also just want to remark on the other part of her story, which does have implications potentially for insurance if things go wrong, which is around the contraceptive pill prescribing. There's been a series of recent moves by state governments across the country to allow pharmacists to prescribe contraceptive pills. It's risky, but it also may raise insurance concerns, as I said, when things go wrong—and they will. I just want to state my view clearly. As contraceptive pills pose extra risks for people with genetic conditions like my daughter's, state governments can decide, are deciding, to ignore medical advice and ignore the advice of the TGA if they wish and allow pharmacists to prescribe contraceptive pills. They can do that. The pharmacy lobby has long advocated this, and I've got a lot of time for our community pharmacy model. I have an enormous amount of time for the skill and professionalism and education of our community pharmacists and for the Pharmacy Guild for the work that they do. But I do disagree on this aspect firmly.</para>
<para>My home state of Victoria is the latest state to announce that they will allow this. I fear that the rest, the last holdouts, will fall like dominoes soon. Since Victoria announced it, because people do the Google search and realise I've spoken on these issues for a long time, I've been contacted by many GPs, advocates and others who are concerned. There's been some media reporting, but I just want to record very clearly so there's no misunderstanding. I've made no public comments on this but, given this bill and the interest, I just want to read into <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> my response, which I sent to GP Dr Stephanie Hammond, which succinctly explains my view—don't be scared; it's one page. It said: 'Thank you for your letter and for taking the time to raise this. I was also surprised, to say the least, to see this announcement by a state government against the advice of relevant medical colleges. I spent a lot of time some years ago after my daughter almost died of a DVT connected to an off-label prescription of Diane-35 researching these issues. While I'm not a medical professional, I did read a lot of journal articles and engaged widely to advocate for various policy and system improvements, some of which we got. There is a good case for repeat prescriptions to be issued by pharmacists for appropriate on-label contraceptive medications once a patient is stable on a drug, possibly with periodic clinical oversight. But having asked some basic questions, I share your concern about aspects of the model as announced. One broad issue is that there are many other options for contraception aside from the pill, both for women and men. Many of these are less risky than women's contraceptive pills, and it's not clear whether pharmacists will or could be trained to provide a full consultation on contraceptive options in an appropriate private room setting. I understand there are some overseas models whereby pharmacists can prescribe, but in a multidisciplinary setting and where a script that is issued, then it is filled elsewhere to avoid any commercial benefit or conflict of interest through profiting from dispensing a medication. Complications are more likely on most medications—not all, of course, but most—to arise in the first few weeks or months of taking a pill, a new medication, and screening for risk factors other than blood pressure, such as genetic and family history and weight and so on would seem sensible. Going to a pharmacy for a first prescription for a contraceptive pill seems a terribly risky thing to do and I'd strongly suggest to anyone in my life who asked, woman or man, to go and see a doctor for contraceptive advice and an initial prescription of the pill, if that is the preferred option. Thank you again for raising this.'</para>
<para>I do make that distinction: for appropriate pills once there has been some clinical consultation, I think there's an enormously strong case for repeat prescriptions to be available through pharmacists. It's convenient; it can save pressure on the medical system and so on. But my concern is deeply held and genuine, and I know it's held by other colleagues, including Dr Michelle Ananda-Rajah, who is a member of this House and who is now a senator for the state of Victoria, has made public comments as well.</para>
<para>I note the Victorian government has doubled down on its decision to allow first-time prescriptions. I just want to keep emphasising that distinction. I think some of their plan has a lot of merit, but this first-time prescription thing is risky and it's dangerous. My old, dear friend—actually, I shouldn't call her old, because it means I'm old, and we've just been around a long time—of 30 years, Premier Jacinta Allan, in response to media criticism in which my letter to Dr Stefanie Hammond had appeared in the media—it's not a comment that I gave—stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I'm not going to let vested interests and old-fashioned ways of thinking—and middle-aged white men—decide when and where women should get the healthcare they need.</para></quote>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>At least she said 'middle-aged'.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Indeed, yes, that's right. You could argue it leaves you out, but I'm not going there, Deputy Speaker.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Littleproud</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Whoa, reflection on the chair.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, friendly reflection. While I don't think we need to reach for gender based insults, stereotypes or pejoratives, I've certainly never argued middle-aged white men ought to determine such policy. But the experience of my daughter, someone who would be directly impacted by this policy, is more relevant than any older politician, regardless of their gender.</para>
<para>I'd also note Senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah's comments where she raised very strong and sensible concerns that there are more effective forms of contraception these days. The pill, I think, is about 92 per cent effective—so, eight in 100 cases, there's the baby. I won't tell the story of how my daughter was conceived in the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>, but it had something to do with the pill. If you take one every second day, it's not very effective. That's a tip for young players. But we were on holiday. There you go. I told the story. The world needed to know that. Ninety-nine per cent of IUDs are effective. So there are other safer mechanisms out there. It's not for me or any politician to say to young women or, indeed, young couples and young men, if they want to pursue male contraceptives, what the right option is, but I passionately believe it is the safest thing to do for Australians to ensure that there's a proper medical consultation where people consider all the options and we don't have the commercial conflict of interest of a pharmacist writing a script and then profiting from dispensing the script. I say that very genuinely.</para>
<para>The Commonwealth has announced, as the dominos have fallen, that the government will ensure concessions are available to support pharmacy prescribing of contraceptive pills, and that is a logical position. There is little else you can do once the states have decided to do this but extend the concessions for concession patients. I mean, it's just a ridiculous situation that you'd be paying full price for people who should be getting a concession with a valid prescription.</para>
<para>I'll just conclude on this. I know it was done in good faith; I really do, but I do encourage all of the states and territories that are looking at this or intending first-time prescriptions to restrict it to repeat prescriptions only. This is an area to make haste slowly, if I can say that myself. I'll give the member for Calwell the choice of whether he wants me to add further contributions to the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> or give him the five minutes now.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABDO</name>
    <name.id>316915</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was really enjoying the assistant minister's contribution, so apologies for taking up some of his time. I rise to speak in support of this bill and particularly the reforms contained in schedule 1, which will prohibit life insurers from using genetic test results to discriminate against Australians seeking life insurance. At its heart, this reform is about something very simple. It's about fairness. Australians believe deeply in the idea of a fair go. We believe people should not be penalised for things beyond their control. We believe that the benefits of modern science should improve lives, not create new barriers or new forms of discrimination.</para>
<para>Until now, the rapid advance of genetic science has outpaced our laws. Genetic testing is transforming modern medicine. It enables earlier detection of risk, identification of inherited conditions and more personalised treatments, often helping prevent illness or managing it far more effectively. As the Assistant Treasurer said when introducing this bill to the House:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Genetic testing can help save lives, supporting medical practitioners to prevent, treat and monitor a range of cancers, cancer predisposition syndromes and other heritable conditions.</para></quote>
<para>These are not abstract benefits. They are real improvements in people's health and wellbeing.</para>
<para>Genetic testing can identify the inherited risks of cancers, heart disease and other serious conditions long before symptoms appear. With that knowledge, people can undertake monitoring, preventive treatment, lifestyle changes and medical interventions that significantly reduce their risk. In other words, genetic testing gives people the power to act early to protect their health and the wellbeing of their families.</para>
<para>The uncomfortable truth is that many Australians have been hesitant to take advantage of these life-saving technologies. The question is: why? It's because they fear that what they learn about their genetic risks might be used against them when applying for life insurance. For years, researchers, doctors and patient advocates have warned about this problem, and the evidence backs this up.</para>
<para>A recent genetic testing study conducted by Monash University found that more than half of the participants who withdrew from the study did so because they were concerned about the impact genetic testing might have on their ability to access affordable insurance. Think about that for a moment. People were participating in medical research—research that could improve their own health outcomes and potentially save the lives of others—and yet many felt compelled to walk away because they were worried that knowledge about their own DNA might come with financial risk. That is not how a modern health system should work.</para>
<para>One of the participants in that study was Ben. Ben did not have a significant family history of cancer, but he chose to take part in a genetic testing study. The results revealed that he carries a genetic variant, which increases the risk of prostate and breast cancer found amongst men. That information proved to be critically important not only for Ben but for his family. His female relatives were able to undergo testing, understand their own risks and take preventive action. Ben himself has begun adopting strategies to reduce his risk and monitor his health. In other words, genetic testing did exactly what modern medicine intended it to do. It gave a person and their family the information they needed to take control of their own health. The fact that Ben's story comes from a research study where many participants withdrew because of insurance concerns tells us something deeply troubling. Too many Australians are still being forced to make a choice between protecting their health and protecting their financial security. That is a choice nobody should have to make. That is the problem this legislation seeks to address.</para>
<para>This reform has also been the subject of extensive consultation, research and evidence. The government did not arrive at this legislation lightly. For years, there has been growing concern from researchers, clinicians, patient groups and the broader community about the impact of insurance practices on genetic testing. A parliamentary inquiry into the life insurance industry raised the issue as far back as 2018, warning that the use of genetic test results in insurance underwriting was discouraging Australians from participating in research and even in undertaking clinically recommended testing. In response, the industry introduced a voluntary moratorium in 2019, but it was always understood that this arrangement would need to be monitored carefully. Treasury subsequently released a national consultation paper to examine the issue in detail and seek views from stakeholders across medicine, research, the insurance sector and the community.</para>
<para>The evidence that emerged from that consultation was clear. Australians continue to report difficulties accessing insurance after genetic testing, and some avoided testing altogether for fear of financial consequences. Stakeholders also raised concerns about the moratorium and had a lack of confidence in its consistent application. In other words, the voluntary system and the effectiveness of industry—</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>164</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence</title>
          <page.no>164</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week, Australians learnt sobering news that an Iranian projectile struck near the Al Minhad Air Base in the UAE, where Australian Defence Force personnel were stationed. An accommodation block was damaged. A medical facility was damaged, and while, thankfully, no Australian personnel were injured, the message to this parliament could not be clearer. The world is becoming more dangerous and faster than this government is acting.</para>
<para>This is not theoretical. This is not strategic abstraction. This is not a line in a white paper. This is an Australian linked base under attack. And yet, at precisely the moment our servicemen and women face rising risk, Labor continues to tell the Australian people that what they are doing is enough. It is not enough. While Labor boasts about headline announcements, the reality is this: defence spending remains stuck at around two per cent of GDP. It is at 2.05 per cent in the 2025-26 budget. Even in the government's own long-term trajectory, it only reaches over 2.3 per cent by 2034. In a far more dangerous world, this is not urgency; this is drift, and Australians know it.</para>
<para>The Port Macquarie RSL subbranch recently wrote to its local federal member, warning of deep concern about defence spending and recruitment. They said that members fear we will not have the resources to procure the armament required for modern warfare, and they are calling for a much stronger national commitment. They also raised concern about the ongoing fallout from the Brereton report and the way that it's been handled. They warned that public demonisation of serving personnel has harmed morale, damaged esprit de corps and undermined recruitment. Those concerns are real. Those concerns are justified, and they are not isolated.</para>
<para>RSL Australia has publicly called for the government to immediately lift defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP, and then to three per cent within 12 months, warning that Australia needs a balanced force, stronger recruitment and retention and more investment in defence equipment. In its pre-budget submission, the RSL also warned the government must properly resource both ADF capability and the implementation of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide because a hollowed out Australian Defence Force and a broken veteran system is a betrayal of those who serve.</para>
<para>RSL national leadership has warned that the government risks hollowing out the ADF and pouring money into select high-end platforms, while neglecting manpower, retention and readiness, and they are calling the outsourced recruitment model an abject failure. Let's get real. You can't deter aggression with slogans. You can't recruit with spin. You can't ask Australians to wear the uniform while refusing to give them the tools, the numbers, the support and the certainty that they deserve.</para>
<para>The strike near Al Minhad should be a wake-up call. If our people can be placed in harm's way overseas, then this parliament has a solemn duty to ensure they are properly protected, properly equipped and properly backed. That means real investment. That means urgency. That means rebuilding capability, strengthening recruitment and retention, restoring morale and funding defence for the strategic reality we face, not the political comfort zone of the Albanese Labor government. Peace is preserved through strength, and right now Labor is asking Australia to accept weakness.</para>
<para>We must do everything to ensure that the Australian Defence Force has the equipment, the ability to fight and to win and is supported, because right now we have a recruitment, a retention and a readiness issue, and it has not been addressed by this Labor government. It has been glossed over and pushed to the side. Members of the Australian Defence Force are worried. They know that they need the equipment now. You need to train like you fight. And they can't, because of poor investment and poor leadership. The Australian Defence Force is made up of professional men and women, and they need to be supported by this weak Labor government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>165</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FRANCE</name>
    <name.id>270198</name.id>
    <electorate>Dickson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is a difficult speech for me because it's personal, but it is not unique. I am telling it in the hope that the Queensland government reverses its decision to delay—effectively cancel—the construction of the Queensland Cancer Centre, which was to be a state-of-the-art hospital and centre for research and treatment excellence. The hospital was due to start construction last year, in 2025, and begin treating cancer patients from 2028. It was shovel-ready, with funding allocated by the former Queensland Labor government and the Albanese Labor government. It was a lifeline for cancer patients across Queensland—in particular, leukaemia and blood cancer patients. Years of planning, of staff and patients making do until construction, are all now in the bin.</para>
<para>My boy, Henry, lost his battle with leukaemia at the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital on 20 February 2024. We were told on a Sunday afternoon that he would not make it, and by Tuesday he was gone, taking his last breath in the cancer ward—the general cancer ward at the RBWH. He spent 12 months almost constantly in hospital after a bone marrow transplant. While the dedicated nurses, doctors and healthcare professionals did absolutely everything they could for him, for us, his experience at the RBWH was fraught and distressing, not just because he was fighting cancer but because the hospital did not have enough space or enough isolation beds, and it had no beds specifically for 18-year-olds in an adult system.</para>
<para>His health and his mental health were constantly at risk because the RBWH, as a specialist centre for bone marrow transplants and blood cancers, is not fit for purpose in 2026. He regularly shared cramped four-bed, single-bathroom rooms with much older patients when severely immune compromised after his transplant. Many of those older patients were dying, extremely ill and incontinent and had Alzheimer's and dementia, and the impact on his mental health was devastating. One day he tried to run away. I found him in the hospital car park crying, begging to never have to go back.</para>
<para>No teenager should have to endure an overcrowded hospital, sharing rooms with much older patients in wards that compromise their health and increase their risk of an early death. I spoke to staff about the risk to Henry at the time, and their response was always the same: 'Sorry, there's no other option right now, but there's a new Queensland cancer hospital on the way. That will change things.' Now there is no light on the hill.</para>
<para>The Queensland Cancer Centre was due to start construction last year. Funding had been allocated, and the preferred contractor had been engaged to progress the design. It was shovel-ready. It was to be built within the Herston Health Precinct on the RBWH site. Plans called for 150 dedicated beds, four operating theatres, outpatient consultant rooms, pathology, pharmacy and chemotherapy services, but the Queensland Crisafulli government has put those plans on ice. They have pushed back construction of the Queensland Cancer Centre until 2031 at the earliest. There is no line item in last year's budget or the forward estimates. It feels to me like it's been erased.</para>
<para>It is quite difficult to comprehend the thinking behind this decision. It is cruel. It is a decision made on a spreadsheet, far removed from the reality of a parent watching their child get sicker. Now we're left with no centre and no construction date. The Queensland Cancer Strategy 2024 set out a plan to expand cancer services across regional areas and hospitals, as well as the construction of the Queensland Cancer Centre for more complex cancer services—all costed and budgeted for.</para>
<para>While the Crisafulli government seems to be talking about more cancer services in the regions, which I am all for, there is radio silence on the Queensland Cancer Centre. The urgent need for more dedicated beds at the RBWH impacts people right across Queensland who must come to Brisbane for a transplant. It is unacceptable that the lives of young people are being compromised due to a lack of beds. I urge the Queensland government to reconsider and to start construction of the Queensland Cancer Centre.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>South Australia: Feral Animal Management</title>
          <page.no>165</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, I stand here to speak for the hardworking people of regional and remote SA. We are facing a huge crisis. Feral animals are tearing apart our beautiful land. From the APY Lands to our far north-east borders, pests are destroying our farms, our native bush and our transport roads. Kangaroos, pigs, dogs, brumbies, camels, cats, rabbits, wombats, deer and goats are all causing significant damage. The people in Canberra do not want to admit how bad this problem is, but the families of the farmers living out there see the awful truth every single day. We must act to fix this crisis now before it is too late for everyone.</para>
<para>Right now, there are more than 300,000 feral camels wandering all across Australia. In the APY Lands, they smash fences and drain our precious water. The Labor government and the greenies have completely dropped the ball. Numbers are out of control. With some of these species, we have a value chain. We can't just rely on helicopters shooting at them. That's a terrible waste. Instead, we must fund the mustering of these camels to export them. We have a fantastic but empty abattoir in Peterborough. We could use it to turn a massive pest into a good trade. I acknowledge the current trade they have with the Turkiye Defence Force at the abattoir in Peterborough.</para>
<para>It's not just camels that are causing trouble. Out at Quondong Station, the owners are fighting a hard war against tens of thousands of feral goats. The farm property covers 147,000 hectares. Already this year they have had to cull 5,000 goats. Goats strip the ground bare. They even reach up to eat the leaves on trees. But it costs too much money to round them up. A whole truckload of goats might only sell for $1,500. That does not even begin to pay for the diesel, the motorbikes or the workers needed to catch them.</para>
<para>Then we have feral pigs. They are spreading fast, even moving into the northern Flinders Ranges. These pigs cost our farming sector $160,000 every single year. They are tough animals. A single pig can have litters of 13 piglets multiple times a year. They take over water troughs. They even eat newborn lambs. People are now seeing them wandering into our towns like Hawker, Quorn and Coober Pedy.</para>
<para>Feral deer are just as bad. A few years ago we had 40,000 deer across South Australia. Hard work has removed 28,000 of them, but the rest are breeding fast. Down in the south-east and the Adelaide Hills, they break fences, eat crops and cause crashes on our roads.</para>
<para>I want to take a moment to thank the great work of the Foundation for Rabbit Free Australia. Rabbits remain our worst pest. They threaten 300 species and cost our farmers over $200 million every single year. Groups like Rabbit Free Australia do vital work to protect our native bilby and fight back against the rabbit plague.</para>
<para>I also want to praise our local graziers, our wildlife experts and our traditional owners. They fight this tough battle every single day. To do this, they rely on firearms. We must have a commonsense approach to guns for licensed farmers and locals. Their daily pest control is the only thing stopping these animal numbers from exploding between big government culls. We must not create silly rules that stop them from doing this important work.</para>
<para>Our farmers are tired. Our land is hurting. These feral pests threaten our roads, our towns and our whole way of life. It is time for Canberra to wake up and listen to the locals to fund real culling solutions—solutions like the Peterborough abattoir. We cannot afford to wait another single minute. Action is required right now from our leaders. Let us protect our great state.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Magdalene Catholic College</title>
          <page.no>166</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Every day I'm left astounded by the tremendous accomplishments of our younger generation in my electorate of Macarthur. Recently, 10 students from Magdalene Catholic College, a school within my electorate, travelled to the United States to represent Australia in the prestigious International Space Settlement Design Competition, held at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This opportunity came after this team of students were successful at the Australian Space Design Competition national final held in Brisbane early last year, where Magdalene was named national champion.</para>
<para>Magdalene Catholic College was one of only two Australian schools invited to compete in this international competition. These 10 students—Isibeal Abbey, Isla Attard, Angelina Bampton, Zachariah Belanszky, Sienna Beller, Christine Brazier, Lachlan Campbell, Lachlan Chadwick, Charlotte Hawkins and Luca Saprun—were accompanied by their teachers Mr Chris Ferry, Mrs Jodie Hort and Mr Danny Avalos on this thrilling journey.</para>
<para>The students competed over three days alongside 250 students from over a dozen countries to simulate the work of aerospace engineers, challenging students to collaboratively design a large-scale space settlement. For this competition the students had to create a professional engineering tender to design, plan and build a floating or propelling settlement within the atmosphere of Venus in 2075. This was an invaluable learning experience as they had to respond to a formal brief, present their proposal to industry judges and work under pressure in a three-day design sprint. I was impressed to hear of how hard the students worked, the energy and dedication which they put into their proposal and how well they delivered themselves professionally. These students benefited from the international connections they made and from being active in the competitive STEM community.</para>
<para>This isn't the first time I've been impressed by students of the college and their work in STEM. The school and its students have excelled over the years, both in national and international competitions—from F1 to robotics and coding. To these students at Magdalene Catholic College: thank you for your hard work and dedication to your fields of interest. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed. To the teachers, parents and school community, who supported and assisted these students along the journey: you've done wonders to support such an incredible group of students, and I congratulate you. The young minds engaging in STEM across our nation are the minds of tomorrow and the work, thought and dedication that these students put into their studies will pay dividends for both themselves and all of us in the wider community.</para>
<para>High-quality STEM education is critical for Australia's current and future productivity. Young Australians engaging in STEM learning and studying STEM subjects in schools across the region will support a pipeline of individuals in STEM skills and careers in the future. I'm proud to see our government invest in STEM education to bolster the STEM teaching workforce; to support STEM educators; to improve participation and achievements in STEM in schools; and to build STEM pathways to encourage more diverse cohorts to take part.</para>
<para>I was also pleased to hear the Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science announce that applications for sponsorship grants for STEM science engagement and international competitions 2026 are now open. The Albanese government is providing $1.6 million in sponsorship grants to schools and eligible organisations to support students participating in science, technology, engineering and mathematics activities, events and competitions. It's initiatives like these which allow our students to flourish, and I hope to see many of the students in my electorate benefit from these grants.</para>
<para>I want to congratulate the teachers in STEM education in the over 80 public, Catholic and independent schools in my electorate. They do wonderful work. I'm incredibly proud of the students and the work that they do. We're now seeing them in the universities including Western Sydney University—particularly in the medical faculty, where I still do some student teaching. It's great to see many of our local students coming there, showing us their skills and excelling across the medical faculty and further into the future. Now many of our students are advanced specialists doing incredible 21st century work in health care. They're now working in science. They're working in research and making me very proud of them. My electorate and young people across Australia are really showing us the way forward in the 21st century.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>167</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The thing, the issue, the subject that's on everyone's lips at the moment is what is happening with fuel in this nation. People want to know where they can get cheap fuel, when they're going to get cheap fuel and what the government is actually doing to try and help this situation.</para>
<para>To give you a sense of the froth and bubble that we've seen from the Albanese Labor government on this issue, let's look at one announcement that they made recently. They were going to get the ACCC to deal with gouging and they were bringing in wholly new powers to get the ACCC onto it. Guess what? They made that announcement I think—let's be kind to them—about two weeks ago. Have we seen the legislation that's going to give the ACCC these new powers? Was it here at midday or at 10 o'clock, when we got back here to parliament, because, of course, it was very urgent? They were going to come down on people who were driving the prices up. There was nothing—not one bit of legislation—and I'll be very interested to see what's on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline> tomorrow, because I doubt whether the ACCC legislation is going to be on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
<para>This great urgency, this great hurry, has turned into zilch. There is nothing, nothing, nothing on the ACCC, these new powers and this new legislation. You could think to yourself: 'Okay. Well, for this government, there might have been issues with the drafting or whatever.' But it's true to form, because Chris Bowen also announced that he was going to put measures in place to stop fuel being exported out of Australia because of its sulphur content during this national fuel crisis. He made that announcement, and the member for Maranoa will remember when he made that announcement. Well, guess what? It required paperwork to make those changes. Guess how long it took the minister to do the paperwork? One day? Two days? Three days? Four days? It took five days to tick off on something which would've meant that we would've had fuel staying here in Australia instead of being exported overseas. It took five days to do the paperwork.</para>
<para>What utter arrogance! How out of touch is this minister? Let's be maybe a little unkind: what incompetence! It beggars belief. Now we get here to today, and where is the minister? We ask, because we wrote to him on 10 March, asking him to detail where the fuel shortages are and where his plan is to make sure that he could get fuel to where those fuel shortages are, and he should be able to do that location by location. We haven't heard boo, yet today he turned up in question time and was able to give partial answers for Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. But guess what he had to say about Tasmania? Nothing. Guess what he had to say about South Australia? Nothing. Guess what he had to say about the Northern Territory? Nothing. And my good friend from Western Australia is here. Guess what it was with Western Australia? No idea!</para>
<para>I don't think the minister's got any idea. That's the problem, and the Australian people are rightly concerned, because guess what this minister promised them in the lead-up to the 2022 election on over 97 occasions? The minister promised $275 off your power bill. This is the minister who's now in charge of this national fuel crisis. Not only that; guess what he did last week when the national fuel crisis was getting worse and worse and supplies were getting worse and worse? He went to Brisbane for a climate change meeting, because guess what else he's doing at the moment? He's the chief negotiator for COP. What a cop-out! Seriously, do your job, Minister.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Littleproud</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Reshuffle.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Forget about COP.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Littleproud</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Get ready, Julian. Promotion, brother.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As people are now rightly interjecting, when is the reshuffle going to come? The minister said in question time today, 'I'm done.' Chris Bowen, in question time today, said, 'I'm done.' Surely he's done, Prime Minister; do the job for him.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Holt Electorate: Community Events, Energy</title>
          <page.no>168</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I begin with a remarkable local milestone—the 25th anniversary of Moonlit Sanctuary in Pearcedale. I was pleased to join the community in marking this special occasion and to recognise the extraordinary work of Michael Johnson and the entire team behind Moonlit Sanctuary. Over the past 25 years, their dedication has helped build the sanctuary into one of Victoria's leading wildlife conservation and education centres, playing an important role in protecting native wildlife, supporting breeding programs for threatened species and inspiring visitors of all ages to develop a deeper appreciation for our natural environment. What began as a childhood dream has become a source of pride for Pearcedale and the wider Holt community, attracting visitors from across Victoria and contributing to local jobs and tourism. I congratulate Michael and everyone at Moonlit Sanctuary on this important milestone, and I thank them for everything they have done over the past 25 years.</para>
<para>This strong community spirit brings me to another fantastic local event: the fourth annual Holt Harmony Gala, which I hosted in my electorate last weekend during Harmony Week. It was a wonderful evening and a very strong reflection of the community I represent in this place. Holt is one of the most multicultural electorates in Australia. In our community, people from many cultures, faiths and backgrounds live side-by-side and raise their families, run businesses, volunteer, worship, celebrate and contribute immensely to our nation. The gala was an opportunity to proudly celebrate that diversity. It was a night that brought together culture, connection and community spirit.</para>
<para>I am proud to be a part of a Labor government that sees multiculturalism as one of Australia's greatest strengths, not something to be exploited for political gain. I thank my parliamentary colleagues who made the trip down to join us—Minister Tony Burke, who attended as our special guest, and the member for Deakin, Matt Gregg, who did a fantastic job as emcee for the evening. I also thank Yvette and the entire venue team for their tremendous work behind the scenes, which helped make the evening such a great success.</para>
<para>I want to turn to a policy that is delivering real cost-of-living relief for households in Holt—Labor's Cheaper Home Batteries Program. Home batteries let you store cheap solar energy generated during the day to use at night, when families are home and need it most. At a time when households are doing everything they can to manage rising costs, many families want to bring down their power bills, improve the efficiency of their homes and take part in energy transition. But too often the upfront cost of a battery has been a major barrier.</para>
<para>That is exactly why Labor's 30 per cent discount matters. It is bringing that upfront cost down and making home batteries much more affordable for households. The result is lowering power bills, greater control over household energy use and less pressure on the grid. This policy is already making a real difference across the country, with more than 250,000 households, small businesses and community organisations having installed a battery under Labor's Cheaper Home Batteries Program.</para>
<para>In Holt, I'm incredibly proud of the local uptake. Before this program began, there were just 721 home batteries across our community. By early March, that number had risen to 1,741. That is an increase of more than a thousand installations, and it means Holt now ranks fifth in Victoria for the battery uptake. That is not just a statistic; it means more local families keeping more money in their pockets. This is what Labor governments do. We back Australians with practical policies that ease the pressure on household budgets now while preparing our country for the future.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>168</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>168</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo></subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Monday, 23 March 2026</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY SPEAKER </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">(</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Ms </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Mascarenhas</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 10:30. </span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>170</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: Environment</title>
          <page.no>170</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Right across the country, communities are being forced to come to terms with the rapidly escalating frequency, intensity and the cost of climate disasters. Indeed, bushfires, floods, storms, droughts and marine heatwaves are inflicting growing damage on fisheries, farms, homes, critical infrastructure and local economies. We're seeing it almost constantly, even right now in northern Australia, and the financial toll is staggering. In fact, climate related disasters are already estimated to cost around $38 billion a year in Australia, or about two per cent of GDP, and that figure is only expected to grow. Moreover, insurance claims from extreme weather in the 2020s have averaged $4.5 billion annually—that's about triple the levels of the 1990s.</para>
<para>Bushfire in particular is an increasing risk in my home state of Tasmania, with the fire service estimating that 98 per cent of the state is now bushfire prone, with projections suggesting a 40 per cent increase in extreme fire danger days in Tassie by 2050. This risk, of course, comes as no surprise to Tasmanians, with one in six people living within 50 metres of the bush and with greater Hobart widely regarded as one of the most bushfire prone cities in the world, with more than 4,000 buildings facing at least moderate bushfire exposure. No wonder insurers are sounding the alarm. No wonder taxpayers and ratepayers are increasingly lumbered with the cost of mitigation measures and cleaning up. And no wonder households, more and more, simply can't afford cover.</para>
<para>At the same time, the fossil fuel companies, whose products are driving the climate crisis, pay a pittance in tax. We've seen just in recent weeks, amid global energy shock and geopolitical instability, how many fossil fuel producers are recording record windfall profits. These companies contribute significantly to climate change and profit from global instability, but they don't contribute in any meaningful way to the costs of the damage they cause. In fact, they continue to enjoy generous tax rates and concessions, which are granted to few others, let alone ordinary taxpayers. That's why I bring to the chamber today a petition signed by 35,171 Australians calling on the government to introduce a climate disaster levy. This levy, proposed by the Australia Institute, would be placed on fossil fuel exports so that the companies whose products are driving climate change actually contribute to the cost of the disasters they help to cause. This could raise up to $100 billion each year—money that could be invested in preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery. It's money Australians won't be forced to fork out to cover the damage caused by these multinational companies.</para>
<para>I seek leave to table a copy of the petition.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I table the petition.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Alves, Mr Joe, Murray, Mr Phil</title>
          <page.no>170</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to recognise two extraordinary heroes from my electorate of Cunningham who have proven the difference the power of one can make in the world. For 28 years, Joe Alves has been shaving his head all in the name of a good cause, raising funds for life-changing blood cancer support and research.</para>
<para>On Sunday 1 March, Joe held his 28th fundraising lunch for the Leukaemia Foundation's World's Greatest Shave. Once again the room was filled with local families, small businesses and long-time supporters, all coming together for a cause that Joe has championed for nearly three decades. Year after year, Joe has shaved his head in solidarity with Australians facing blood cancer problems. It is a simple but powerful act—one that sparks conversations, builds awareness and, more importantly, raises vital funds. Over that time, Joe has raised more than $350,000. This is an extraordinary contribution from one individual driven by compassion and an unwavering commitment to helping others. This year alone, he raised an incredible $16,357.40, a testament not only to Joe's dedication but also to our vibrant and generous Portuguese community, who continue to stand beside him. Joe's leadership and humility is truly inspiring, reminding us that community spirit is alive and well in the Illawarra. I thank him and everyone who supports him each year for the meaningful difference they are making in the lives of Australian families.</para>
<para>Another incredible individual who has dedicated decades of his life to others is Phil Murray. For 21 years, Phil has run the Great Ocean Pool Crawl. Each year, the party bus leaves from Towradgi Beach Hotel. They swim through magnificent ocean pools at Coalcliff, Wombarra, Austinmer, Bulli and Towradgi—ending, of course, with a beer and a raffle back at the pub. The event raises much needed funds for the Cancer Council. Since its first year, Phil and the ocean pool crawlers have raised more than $508,000, which has supported the vital work the Cancer Council does across the Illawarra. Sadly, this was the last year for Phil. He is hanging up his cossies after more than two decades. He leaves an incredible legacy of generosity and community spirit that will not be easily forgotten.</para>
<para>It takes a lot of work to pull together a community event like this, and I'd also like to acknowledge the Cancer Council's Robyn Dawson and her team for their efforts rallying community support for this fun event. We are so very grateful to Phil and everyone who has participated in the crawl for the last 21 years. Our community is stronger because of you, a local hero. Thank you again to Joe, Phil and all of the incredible local Cunningham heroes working to make a better world. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>The Neighbourhood Hub, Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>171</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If you want to understand the human cost of Labor's policy failure, stand on the steps of the Neighbourhood Hub. This isn't just a community centre; it's a triage unit for a society in crisis. This amazing service provides emergency relief when the cupboard is bare, financial coaching when the debt becomes too much and a food program that puts good-quality, nutritious food into a hungry child's hand. Sadly, the harsh reality confronting the staff at the hub is that the number of people in need has doubled, and there is no end in sight. In 2022, total enquiries at the hub sat at 8,000. Last year, this surged to over 16,000. Already, in the opening weeks of 2026, more than 3,000 families have come through the door seeking help. The emergency relief statistics are equally confronting. In 2022, the hub averaged 21 requests a week. Today, that has escalated to 44—all happening on this government's watch. Shame, Labor. Shame.</para>
<para>The most haunting proof that we are in a national catastrophe is that the human face of the disaster has shifted. It is no longer just those in chronic hardship seeking help. The general manager reports that they are now seeing nurses, tradies and working parents standing in the charity line for the first time in their lives. For the average working family, the savings are exhausted because the cost of everything is going up. The conversation at the hub is singular and brutal: do I fill the tank, or do I feed my kids? When fuel prices climb, grocery prices follow, and our families are caught in the deadly crossfire. Then there is energy, and we know that energy is the economy. The Albanese government and Minister Bowen boast about cheaper renewables, but these hollow slogans are making electricity prices even more expensive. Every single person knows that electricity prices have gone through the roof. While this government protects its image, the Neighbourhood Hub protects lives.</para>
<para>When the average Aussie is forced into a charity queue, the promise of a great life in this lucky country is evaporating due to this inept government. Those struggling to make ends meet aren't asking for a miracle; they are asking for the basic dignity of a roof, a meal and a future they can afford. We need to push this Labor government to protect Australia's way of life and to restore the standard of living that Australians deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>171</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think what's going on in the world at the moment—in the Australian economy in particular—is an experience that we've all felt on a personal level. There's nothing like when you think you're starting to get ahead and then the car breaks down or the fridge breaks down and you get a bill that you didn't expect. That's how I feel it is in the Australian economy at the moment. After four years of Australians working so hard to tighten their belts and to bring inflation down, I feel that the world's circumstances have really set us back. That is so incredibly frustrating, because when you look at where this government is going, when you look at the record of this government so far on things that I campaigned on and was elected on in 2022, and was elected in 2025 to pursue—things like cost-of-living relief, housing, health care, energy, skills and mental health. When you look at our record in each of those areas, we are making progress.</para>
<para>The previous speaker, the member for Dawson, spoke about so-called hollow promises, such as in energy, but there is nothing hollow about the default market offer coming down by 10 per cent, more than 10 per cent in South-East Queensland and even higher for small businesses. There's nothing hollow about building 206 public housing dwellings in Forde, in one electorate, which this government has done in one term, which stands in stark contrast to the previous government, which built 373 dwellings across the entire country in its entire term of 10 years. There's nothing hollow about lifting the number of bulk-billing GP practices in Forde—more than doubling them overnight through that policy, which was introduced in November—from nine to 21 practices. There's nothing hollow about a Medicare urgent care clinic in Oxenford or in Browns Plains. There's nothing hollow about expanding the Medicare mental health clinic in Logan and about setting up a new one on the northern Gold Coast. And there is nothing hollow about the reforms that we've made to superannuation, including payday super, as well as the changes to the LISTO that are going to benefit low-income workers to the tune of 11,353 people in Forde alone, 7,688 of whom are women—68 per cent.</para>
<para>When you look at this government's record, it is a record of achievement. It is a record which stands in stark contrast to 10 years of neglect from the previous government. The Australian people should really be congratulated for making such an enormous effort to fix things up.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersafety</title>
          <page.no>172</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of the advantages of being dumped from the frontbench is that I get to come back to my electorate, spend more time with my community and take up some of the passions that I've been involved with since I've been in this place—10 years now. I want to refer to a report that I authored back in 2020, which was <inline font-style="italic">Protecting </inline><inline font-style="italic">the </inline><inline font-style="italic">age of innocence</inline>. That report, which was on behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, made a number of recommendations. Some of them were in relation to age verification for online pornography and online gambling. Scott Morrison, when he was the Prime Minister of this country, made 'you shouldn't be able to do online what you can't do in the real world' a commonly used phrase. Kids can't walk into a newsagent and access pornography. Kids can't walk into a casino and gamble. Yet for years and years and years, that's what you've been able to do in this country. Kids have been able to access pornography and gamble online.</para>
<para>This report, <inline font-style="italic">Protecting the </inline><inline font-style="italic">age of innocence</inline>, looked into the harms that our society was experiencing as a result of those. Let's face it; they are evil. The porn industry is impacting upon every sector of our society. It's demonstrably involved in the increase in domestic violence in this country—demonstrably—and this report called it for what it is.</para>
<para>It's not very often I'll stand up in this place and give the government a shout-out, but I will on this occasion because the government finally implemented some of these recommendations. I was really pleased to see the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, set guidelines and rules for access to sites like Pornhub that mean that only adults are able to access pornography sites online. Only adults will be able to gamble online. Now, if an adult wants to do that, I don't like it, but that's a matter for them. But what we shouldn't allow is access for our kids as young as seven that were being targeted by these pornography sites. That is damaging for all our kids. It's damaging for us as a society. I'm very pleased to see that Julie Inman Grant, the eSafety Commissioner, who was appointed by the coalition, has finally got on to this and made it clear it's now going to be against the law. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence</title>
          <page.no>172</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GORMAN</name>
    <name.id>74519</name.id>
    <electorate>Perth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week was Harmony Week, a celebration of Australia's cultural diversity and the courage, resilience and determination of those who choose to call this country home. Before that, there was International Women's Day. Modern Australia has been shaped by our migrant story.</para>
<para>I want to share with this chamber the story of Lucy Lee Wood, a story of absolute courage and how far we've come as a country but also how far we have to go. Lucy Lee Wood arrived in Perth 125 years ago, the year Australia federated. She came from Guangzhou. She was a suspected victim of human trafficking. On arrival in Fremantle, her name was Hop Lin Jong. Within days, she was married to James Lee Wood. He was a butcher in Northbridge and a leader in the very small Chinese community in Perth. The discriminatory White Australia policy had just been introduced. Lucy and James were among just 18 Chinese people across all of Western Australia. In the world in which they lived, discrimination was everywhere, but it wasn't forever. Lucy lived to see her son serve Australia in World War II. She saw citizenship open up to her and her family. She saw her granddaughter graduate from the University of Western Australia. She saw so much progress. She saw Australia become the vibrant, multicultural country that we are. She saw doors open up, but she also saw something that endures with us to this day. Lucy's daughter Ruby was killed, not by a stranger and not by accident. Sadly, it's a story far too common. Ruby's husband killed her. It's the worst form of intimate partner violence and something that continues to this day. Some 1.7 million Australian women have experienced physical or sexual violence.</para>
<para>Now, the White Australia policy only exists in the history books. The challenge of this generation is to make violence against women part of history, too. The National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children has been agreed by every state and territory and the Commonwealth. It aims to end gender based violence within a generation, and the change necessary to make that a reality is happening. I'm proud to be part of a government that has invested some $4 billion to address violence against women. We have legislated 10 days of paid family and domestic violence leave. We have more than a billion dollars going into crisis and transitional accommodation, including at the Angela Wright Bennett Centre in my electorate of Perth. We have some $9.3 billion going into our National Agreement on Social Housing and Homelessness. We've got the gender pay gap at a record low. We've got women's workforce participation at a record high. We've got significant investments in gendered parts of our care economy, including aged care and early childhood education. We've also expanded Paid Parental Leave. There's more to do, but I'm really proud of the progress we're making.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel</title>
          <page.no>173</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak about the severe fuel crisis gripping regional Australia. Nowhere is it hitting harder than in my electorate of Mallee. Just a week ago, the town of Robinvale became one of the first in Victoria to run completely dry of fuel over the weekend of 14-15 March. Nathan Falvo, owner of the Happy Valley Store in Robinvale, has been front and centre in the media this week—and well done to him—telling the unvarnished truth about what our people are facing every day. In over 25 years of running his store and servo, he's never seen anything like this: farmers pulling up with empty tanks, workers unable to reach orchards or almond blocks and fruit left unpicked because machinery can't run. Nathan described the whole town, one of Australia's key fruit bowls, as being effectively dry of fuel.</para>
<para>While the Prime Minister and the minister for energy have been at pains to assure us there is as much fuel in Australia as there was before the crisis began, Nathan had no qualms assuring the country there has been no panic buying in Robinvale and this indeed is a supply issue. To the Prime Minister, Nathan said: 'Stop lying to your country. All we're asking for is transparency.' I echo those sentiments.</para>
<para>We have now learnt that some six shipments expected to arrive in Australia in mid-April have been cancelled, contrary to the assurances the Albanese Labor government has been giving us. This government still insists no national shortage exists, yet towns like Robinvale, Wedderburn and Bonnie Doon—all in regional Victoria—are living the reality of empty bowsers and delayed or uncertain deliveries. This government must stop the excuses and act decisively, prioritise allocation to regional independents and farming areas, expedite bulk diesel to high-need electorates like Mallee and build real resilience so we're not this vulnerable again.</para>
<para>It's not just access to fuel that's the problem. People around the country are now starting to feel the impact of surging fuel prices. Shane from Donald said he watched in horror as the price of diesel increased by 10c a day. And it's not only fuel in areas like Mallee but other liquid-fuel-reliant products, like urea. Farmers face crippling costs, and families across Australia will inevitably pay the price at supermarket check-outs.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hunter Electorate: Local Sporting Champions Program</title>
          <page.no>173</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Hunter has always punched above its weight when it comes to sport. We've produced a remarkable number of professional and elite athletes, and it's vital that we continue backing the next generation of local talent so future champions also rise from our region.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Great shooters, too!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Member for Kennedy! Talent and determination alone are not always enough. Competing at a high level comes with real financial pressures, and too often it's families who are left to carry that burden, travelling across the country, paying fees and supporting their young athletes in every way possible. That is where the Local Sporting Champions program makes such a meaningful difference. It provides financial assistance to help young people compete, receive coaching and represent their communities at state, national and international levels. I know firsthand just how expensive that journey can be. These grants may be modest, but their impact is significant for both the athlete and the families behind them.</para>
<para>I would like to acknowledge and congratulate the latest grant recipients. Alexander Campbell from Toronto, a member of the Westlakes Athletics Club, will compete in javelin at the Australian Athletics Junior Championships in Queensland this April. Good luck, Alexander. Alexander Lalewicz from Singleton Heights represented Northern NSW Football at the FA National Futsal Championships in Queensland, helping his under-13 team get to the shield semifinal. Austin Young from North Rothbury also competed at the FA National Futsal Championships, representing the Northern NSW Football under-16 mens team and likewise reaching the shield semifinal. Beau Doyle from Bonnells Bay will compete at the GWM BMX Racing National Championships in Shepparton in April. We wish you the best of luck, Beau. Keira Carlson from Wyee Point competed at the Australian All Schools Athletics Championships in Victoria, placing sixth in the under-17 womens 400 metres—an outstanding achievement. Well done. Liam Gardner from Cameron Park represented the NSW Country under-18 team at the baseball Australian Youth Championships in Victoria, with his team finishing sixth nationally.</para>
<para>These young athletes exemplify the dedication, resilience and community spirit that define the Hunter. Sport has always been at the heart of our region, and it is inspiring to see so many young people striving for excellence on the national stage. These competitions are more than just events. They are stepping stones towards bigger opportunities and lifelong achievements. To all those athletes: stay committed, train hard and keep pushing yourselves. You never know just where your efforts may take you. When you're trying to succeed, as we know you can, remember that the whole Hunter community is behind you, cheering you on every step of the way. I say good luck to all the athletes in the Hunter, and I look forward to seeing what you can all achieve in time.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Youngson, Dr Sarah</title>
          <page.no>174</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RICK WILSON</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
    <electorate>O'Connor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to acknowledge one of O'Connor's most dedicated health professionals, Dr Sarah Youngson, who was recently awarded Community Health Professional of the Year at the WA Rural Health Excellence Awards. For more than a decade, Dr Youngson has served her Warren-Blackwood community not only as a general practitioner but as a tireless advocate for better mental health outcomes for young people. Sarah's work reminds us that, in regional communities, health care is never confined to the walls of a clinic; it is about trust, relationships and a deep understanding of your community.</para>
<para>Dr Youngson's award recognises her community health achievements in improving access to care in local schools, reducing wait times for families and her commitment to suicide prevention. She exemplifies that progress comes through collaboration between health professionals, schools, community organisations and families. That collaborative spirit is embodied in services like Blackwood Youth Action, which Dr Youngson helped establish and chairs. BYA has been a cornerstone of youth wellbeing in the Warren-Blackwood, providing counselling, outreach and practical support for young people aged 12 to 25.</para>
<para>I first met Dr Youngson in 2021 when BYA secured a Commonwealth volunteers grant for their op shop, which was their main income stream at that time. She advised me that BYA had recently failed in their bid for funding through the WA Mental Health Commission, but she had a vision for something like a headspace in the Warren-Blackwood. Sarah presented compelling evidence of the need for local youth mental health support and the latent mental health workforce in the region that could service a headspace. This resonated with me both as a parent and as a local federal MP, having witnessed the impact headspace has had in the Goldfields-Esperance and Great Southern regions of O'Connor.</para>
<para>I also knew of the socioeconomic reality of the southern forests, with many communities experiencing unemployment and uncertainty due to the transition away from the native forest and timber milling industry that had sustained them for many generations. On her behalf, I made representation to the federal health minister, Mark Butler, and the WA Primary Health Alliance, outlining the demonstrable need and local capacity to deliver these services.</para>
<para>Fast forward to last week when I visited Manjimup and met Emily and Mark of Youth Focus for a briefing on the new headspace set to open mid-year. Dr Youngson sits on the board and will practice there, delivering free youth-friendly mental health care in the region. headspace management will work hand in glove with other local GPs and existing community volunteer organisations like Blackwood Youth Action.</para>
<para>I close by thanking Dr Sarah Youngson for her drive in creating Blackwood Youth Action and for her vision for a local headspace and congratulate her on her well-deserved accolade of Community Health Professional of the Year.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>174</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Labor's three-day childcare guarantee is making a real, tangible difference for families right across the north—not in theory, not in headlines, but in the day-to-day lives of parents trying to make it all work. This guarantee is about certainty, about fairness and about making sure families across this country and particularly in communities like mine can plan their lives without the constant pressure of rising childcare costs and unpredictable access. Because, for too long, too many families have been left wondering whether they could afford to work, whether they could take on extra hours or whether child care would simply cost too much to make it worthwhile.</para>
<para>Recently, I had the opportunity to visit a Goodstart Early Learning centre in the heart of the north. Walking through those doors, speaking with educators who show up every day with passion, meeting the mums and dads who are doing their best for their families and seeing their children engaged, learning and thriving reinforced exactly why this reform matters. These centres are not just places of care; they're places of early learning, of development, of confidence building and of opportunity.</para>
<para>The three-day childcare guarantee ensures that families can access at least three days of subsidised early education and care regardless of their working arrangements, removing one of the biggest barriers families have faced. In Adelaide's north, where many parents are balancing shift work, casual hours, study and caring responsibilities, that certainly is not a luxury; it's essential. It means that parents can say yes to work, say yes to training and say yes to building a better future without the constant trade-off between earning an income and caring for their children.</para>
<para>At the centre I met a mother named Michelle, and her story is one that speaks volumes. Michelle shared that the three-day guarantee has helped her immensely, easing the financial burden, but, just as importantly, giving her the confidence to continue working a full-time job and supporting her family. She didn't overcomplicate it. She summed it up in one word: life changing. And that word carries weight because it reflects what this policy is doing in real homes for real people. It's about backing working families in the north, strengthening workforce participation and ensuring every child, no matter their postcode, has access to quality early education. It's about giving parents breathing room, giving children the best possible start, building stronger communities into the future—because when families are supported, when children are given opportunity, the entire North benefits.</para>
<para>In closing, I also want to send out a huge shout-out to our premier, Peter Malinauskas, on a historic win in South Australia, with a record number of seats. Well done on a fantastic campaign, and hopefully we'll get our candidate for Light over the line in the coming days as the vote continues.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>175</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women's Health</title>
          <page.no>175</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the government's Women's Health Package. I acknowledge that, 12 months into this package, it is a positive step that more than 660,000 women have accessed more than two million scripts for contraceptives, hormone therapies and endometriosis treatments on the PBS. But, while those numbers look good on paper here in Canberra, they mask a glaring divide. When it comes to comprehensive care, regional Australia has been entirely left off the map.</para>
<para>Nowhere is this more evident than in the treatment of endometriosis. Last year the government announced 11 new endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics. Do you know how many of these clinics were in South Australia? Zero. There are currently only two clinics in South Australia, one in all of regional South Australia, which is in Kadina. I've stated previously that the Primary Health Network allocation for country SA has a population of about 497,000 people. That's 259,000 women. Yet the single clinic in Kadina is expected to service them all, from Ceduna to Port Lincoln and all the way to Roxby Downs and Coober Pedy. Are people going to drive for seven hours for an appointment? No, I don't think they are, especially when diesel costs $3.20 a litre in Coober Pedy right now. That's more than $350 for a tank of fuel.</para>
<para>To exclude South Australia from these new clinics is yet another example of how regional South Australia has been forgotten. Driving for hours to access essential services is unacceptable for an electorate that covers 92.3 per cent of our state. The sheer logistics are punishing. There is no longer a ferry service in Wallaroo, and there are no regional airports in Kadina. When regional women face severe abdominal pain and struggle with infertility and chronic nausea, we are essentially telling them to endure a road trip to get help, to rely on the Patient Assisted Transport Scheme to send them to Adelaide instead of treating them locally. Monica Forlano, the chair of Endometriosis Australia, rightfully points out:</para>
<quote><para class="block">With endometriosis affecting at least one in seven Australian women and an average diagnosis delay of seven years, expanding access to specialist clinics in regions and outer suburbs is absolutely vital.</para></quote>
<para>Local medical professionals are feeling the strain. Dr Anna Kearney from Kadina Medical Associates notes:</para>
<quote><para class="block">No new clinics being announced in South Australia was a disappointing, but not unexpected result.</para></quote>
<para>Anna highlights:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Our clinic prides itself on multidisciplinary care, however, workforce issues are still often unavoidable with rural retention a national issue.</para></quote>
<para>Our GPs are perfectly capable of dealing with the holistic management of period pain, yet the government provides them with little to no support to do so. We must listen to patients who have endometriosis, like Endometriosis Australia SA ambassador Deanna Flynn Wallis. She shared her reality, stating:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The symptoms, journey, medical gaslighting, and life implications are beyond exhausting for so many.</para></quote>
<para>And:</para>
<quote><para class="block">South Australia truly needs more clinics, and it is my sincere hope that we get them, especially for our regional warriors.</para></quote>
<para>We in the regions just put up with being second-class citizens, but enough is enough.</para>
<para>South Australians were excited to have a health minister from their home state, yet South Australia continues to be at the bottom of Mark Butler's list, with regional South Australia even lower. The system of allocating our clinic-per-primary-health-network is fundamentally flawed when our network covers a vast portion of the continent. This lack of foresight extends across regional women's health care, including maternal support. Again, I'm calling on the government to commit to the Australian Breastfeeding Association's four-year $14.8 million funding proposal. The ABA has six local groups right here in Grey, and in the last financial year alone, that 24/7 helpline fielded more than 55,000 calls. Since 2008 they have supported 1.2 million families, yet their funding cycle has been slashed to just 12 months, making long-term planning impossible. This $14.8 million investment is vital to upgrade their system and maintain their 24/7 services. Regional women deserve certainty. They deserve care where they live. It is time the government stop abandoning regional South Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JARRETT</name>
    <name.id>298574</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We know that women are held back from fully participating in work, family and community because of health issues. I met a lady in Lutwyche while I was doorknocking not that long ago who rarely went out and socialised because of the issues she was facing associated with menopause. She missed work, her illness was debilitating and her treatment too costly. And she's not the only one I've met along the way.</para>
<para>This Labor government is helping to fix this, and with more than 50 per cent of the government caucus being women, we are driving the change that's needed for women. We believe that women's health is central to women's equity and our community wellbeing, which is why it's at the heart of our government's agenda. Us women make up half the population, yet our issues were often misunderstood and dismissed and we've heard many stories of them being ignored. To all the women in Brisbane and across the country, I want to say that you matter and this Labor government is listening and delivering.</para>
<para>Last year our government announced the landmark Women's Health Package—$790 million in women's health. This didn't happen under the Liberals and Nationals, it didn't happen in the nine years that they were leading this government, this country. This is the single biggest investment in women's health in our history, and it has been life-changing for so many women across the country. This investment improves access to long-term contraceptives and provides better support to women experiencing chronic pelvic pain and menopause. That funding includes 11 additional endometriosis clinics, and expanding all 33 clinics to provide specialist menopause care. Since this historic health package was announced, more than 660,000 women have accessed more than two million cheaper scripts.</para>
<para>Before the listing of Yaz, Yasmin and Slinda, women were paying around $380 a year for contraception; now they're paying $25 a script. I mentioned this to a number of young women I saw at the university O-week: (a) they didn't know about it, and (b) when we told them, most of them being on Youth Allowance, that they'd have to pay only $7.70, they were absolutely thrilled. Before the listing of Oestrogel, women would have to pay up to $670 a year; now they're paying only $25 a script, or $7.70 if they're on concession. Since this package was announced more than 71,000 women have now received Medicare funded menopause health assessments, and 363,000 have saved more than $45 million on menopausal hormonal therapies. In times when the cost of living is tough, that's a lot of money.</para>
<para>Since 1 November last year, women in Brisbane have also had access to affordable IUDs and birth-control implants. Brisbane's first GP endometriosis and pelvic pain clinic is open in Toowong. It provides care for women with endometriosis or persistent pelvic pain, and it will expand to cover menopausal care. The centre has strong connections with local allied health, specialist gynaecology and other services, and that's needed to provide that multidisciplinary health support that women in these situations really do need. It's the first of its kind in Brisbane, and it's life-changing. It's changing the lives of women every single day. Gone are the days when women were told by their doctor to just take a panadol and see if the pain goes away. These changes are helping women not only in Brisbane but also across the country by providing more choice, lower costs and better health care.</para>
<para>Those opposite don't have a strong record when it comes to women's health. That's just the facts. A woman's right to choose has always been at risk under the LNP government. In my home state of Queensland, most LNP members sitting in parliament believe that abortion should be a crime. Even the Queensland Premier has gagged parliament from debating this important topic. These decisions are never easy for women, and this choice really should only be between a woman and her doctor. It is 2026, and I can't believe we're still talking about this issue—but here we are. Make no mistake: the LNP will always try to take away a woman's right to choose.</para>
<para>The former deputy prime minister of this country, former leader of the Nationals and now member of One Nation said in 2006 about the HPV vaccine:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Don't you dare put something out there that gives my 12-year-old daughter a licence to be promiscuous.</para></quote>
<para>Come on! I don't even know how you could say that. But, anyway, it was said. Australia's HPV vaccination program is a global success story due largely to former prime minister Mr Rudd. We have more work to do. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak on this motion, and I'd like to deal with it in a couple of parts—firstly, by addressing where the women's health package is up to and where we as a nation need to be and, secondly, by reflecting on a number of conversations that I've had with very important local groups in my electorate of Monash.</para>
<para>It's been 12 months since the bipartisan women's health package commenced, and that's a good thing. This package received support from both major parties of government and builds on the significant work undertaken by the former coalition government to improve health outcomes for Australian women. The coalition supported this package as an expansion of the historical commitment made in government to advance women's health outcomes. Women's health has long been a priority for the coalition, and this has been demonstrated in a number of ways, particularly through the launch of the National Women's Health Strategy 2020-2030, which sought to improve long-term outcomes for women and girls. We welcomed the government's decision to build on this work with an additional 11 endometriosis clinics. Prior to the last election, the coalition committed to matching this important women's health package, including measures which would improve menopause care through the new Medicare rebate, expand health professional training and develop national clinical guidelines, as well as increase funding for endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics.</para>
<para>I also want to draw attention to perinatal depression and anxiety, which affects around one in five mothers, impacting nearly 100,000 parents in Australia each year. With early, evidence-informed support, outcomes can improve significantly. Yet access to care is often prohibitive for new parents, particularly around cost. In regional areas like mine, access is inhibited by barriers.</para>
<para>Last year, I met with Arabella Gibson from Gidget House. Gidget House plays a vital role by providing free counselling and support for parental mental health. The Monash electorate will soon be home to the second Gidget House in Victoria. This is very important because parents will be able to access up to 10 free psychological sessions each year. This service is named after Gidget, a vibrant young mother who tragically took her own life while experiencing postnatal depression which she kept to herself. One in seven women live with endometriosis, and every experience is different. Symptoms can vary widely and are often invisible, making diagnosis difficult without advanced imaging or surgery. Research from Federation University, a great regional university, shows that one in five girls aged between 10 and 16 have considered leaving sport due to period related challenges, highlighting the broader impact on participation.</para>
<para>I recently met with QENDO, a not-for-profit supporting those affected across Australia, and I commend the work that they've done in this area. I also want to acknowledge a number of local organisations in my electorate of Monash, particularly Gippsland Women's Health and their CEO, Kate Graham, who has done some outstanding work supporting women and young girls across these areas.</para>
<para>I also would like to take the opportunity to raise an issue I care deeply about, and that is coercive control and the further work that we need to do as a parliament and a nation to effect change. I am particularly inspired by Change for Sam, which has been established in honour of Sam, a Phillip Island local in my electorate of Monash. Sam was a psychologist, mother and deeply valued member of our community, who had her life taken. She was murdered by her former partner, and this organisation has been set up in her legacy. I want to acknowledge her friend Lija Matthews, who founded Change for Sam and is doing incredible work. They are pushing for practical safety through 24/7 monitored duress alarms. I would love to see this funded through a national pilot project. I want to commend Lija and all of the people involved in Change for Sam, because I know there is a family, a friendship circle and a community that is still deeply bereaved by Sam's loss. We need to do far more around coercive control in this country and the impact that it has.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Women's health is about the big things. It's about philosophy and how this government views the importance of women's health. I'm very proud to be a member of the Labor Party and in particular very proud, after working for half a century in health care, to be a member of a government that understands the importance of women's health across the whole spectrum of health care in Australia.</para>
<para>Our $800 million Women's Health Package, announced in the last budget, is driving more choice, lower costs and better care for women and girls across the country. We're already seeing better outcomes. We're already seeing an understanding that women's health is very important in family health. I myself have been an advocate for many years of first-thousand-days policy that looks at children's health from preconception through their first two years of life, and Labor's changes to women's health care will make a huge difference in the first thousand days for children in Australia.</para>
<para>Since introducing the Women's Health Package, more than 700,000 women have accessed over 2.3 million cheaper PBS prescriptions for contraceptives, menopausal hormone therapies and endometriosis treatments. This is really important when you couple this with our 60-day prescribing policies, which were opposed tooth and nail by the coalition. This is a dramatic difference to women's health care in Australia. I'm very proud of it and very proud that we have a health minister who has pushed this policy for the last almost 10 years. It is fantastic news.</para>
<para>We have new contraceptive pills listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme—the first in almost 30 years. These are two better contraceptive options, helping over 300,000 women save more than $26 million on 660,000 scripts. We have new menopausal hormone therapies listed where we've had none for 20 years. This supports hundreds of thousands of women and saves them over $50 million across almost two million scripts. Seven-thousand women with endometriosis are accessing over 30,000 cheaper scripts, saving almost $6 million on treatment that previously put major financial pressure on women with endometriosis.</para>
<para>We're getting earlier, more affordable IVF treatments for women, with almost 50,000 people getting lower-cost IVF fertility treatment. Since January 2026, PBS scripts are now just $25 and $7.70 for concession cardholders. These are the lowest medicine prices in over 20 years, giving Australian women more cost-of-living relief and better access to health care that they may not have had otherwise.</para>
<para>We also have made major advances in access to genomics and genetics treatments and tests for women who may have had health problems, particularly some of the inherited cancers. This is a dramatic improvement for women with major illness. We're delivering new pelvic pain clinics again. That makes a huge difference to women and their families. We're having over 30 endometriosis clinics open up, providing better, more timely and cheaper treatment for people who have endometriosis, like my daughter Amelia. We're providing additional funding to expand services to provide perimenopause and menopause care, something that was needed here for many, many years but didn't happen under the coalition government. This year, the government will launch Australia's first national awareness campaign for menopause and perimenopause, finally giving women the information and recognition they have deserved for decades and decades. This is historic. This is historic women's health care delivered for people in ways that they can access both geographically and financially.</para>
<para>We have now also provided treatment for uncomplicated UTIs directly from pharmacies, repeat prescriptions for the contraceptive pill from pharmacies and more affordable access to fertility treatments, as I've mentioned. We are delivering reform for women's health care that had been denied for far too long. We have the women's expert panel for cardiovascular health now being set up by Rebecca White, the Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care and Assistant Minister for Women. These are dramatic changes done on a philosophical basis that proves that women's health is very important to this government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For far too long, Women's health has been treated as an afterthought. It was treated as something optional, something secondary. Australian women have been asked to pay more, to wait longer, to justify their pain and, worse still, to simply put up with it or go without care altogether. And we know this because women in our communities have told us. They are women who have sat in doctor's offices, explaining deliberating pain, only to be told it's just a bad period; women who have waited years—sometimes a decade—for a diagnosis of endometriosis; women who have questioned their own physical experiences because the system dismissed them.</para>
<para>Access to affordable health care is a cornerstone of our nation's identity and it is an absolute essential to women's health; to their independence; and to their ability to live full, equal and active lives in their families, in their workplaces and in their local communities. That is exactly why, a little over 12 months ago, the Albanese Labor government announced our historic women's health package, making health care more affordable, more accessible and far more responsive to the actual realities of women's lives.</para>
<para>And let's be clear why this change is finally happening. It's because this Labor government actually reflects the communities we serve. For the first time in our nation's history, we have a majority-female government and a majority-female cabinet. Women are not just present in this parliament; we are shaping it, we are leading it and we are helping drive the agenda. When women are at the table, women's health care is no longer sidelined; it's front and centre. That is why, in just 12 months, more than 700,000 women have accessed 2.3 million cheaper prescriptions through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the PBS. That is 2.3 million moments of genuine relief at the local pharmacy counter. It's 2.3 million moments where a woman didn't have to choose between her health and paying a grocery bill.</para>
<para>Let's look at what that means in real, everyday terms. More than 328,000 women have saved on contraception. This is giving women greater control over their own reproductive health and their futures. Three hundred and eighty-three thousand women have saved on menopausal hormone therapies. This provides crucial support at a time in life that too often has been ignored, brushed under the rug or trivialised. Forty-six thousand women have saved on IVF and fertility treatments, bringing them the dream of starting or growing a family within closer reach for so many. And 7,000 women have saved on endometriosis treatments. These are women who have who were told that their pain was normal or exaggerated or who were simply not taken seriously.</para>
<para>While costs are down, access and quality are going up. Through our investments in Medicare, we are making health care not just cheaper but better and closer to home. New Medicare items mean that essential gynaecological care is more affordable. Procedures like IUD insertions and contraceptive implants are now up to $400 cheaper each year, removing cost as a major barrier to effective long-term care.</para>
<para>We are also tackling the areas that have often been completely overlooked. Since July last year, more than 71,000 women have accessed Medicare funded menopause health assessments. We are finally bringing support, clarity and dignity to a stage of life that has too often been surrounded by silence.</para>
<para>We are investing $49 million to deliver an additional 430,000 services for women living with endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome, chronic pelvic pain and other complex conditions because women living with pain deserve answers. They deserve to be believed and they deserve the care that meets their needs. We are also expanding our national network of endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics, adding 11 new clinics to bring it to a total of 33 across Australia, including in regional and rural communities. These clinics aren't just medical facilities; they are places built on a deep understanding of our community's needs. This means more women, no matter their postcode, can access specialised, respectful and comprehensive care.</para>
<para>This is what it looks like when a government takes women seriously. This isn't just about health care; it's about equality. This is our government's record and this is our promise to keep delivering for women not just in words but in real, tangible change that you can see, feel and access every single day in our clinics, in our pharmacies and in our communities.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Artificial Intelligence</title>
          <page.no>179</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the rapid changes artificial intelligence (AI) is driving across Australian workplaces, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) automation of routine tasks;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) augmenting jobs and increasing productivity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) creating new jobs and skill sets; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) workplace restructuring and business changes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the Government has not developed an AI transition plan for Australian workers adversely affected by workplace restructuring and business changes, meaning the Government is silent on how Australians who lose their job because of AI will be supported or transitioned to another industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises that conflict and tension between Government ministers and members is causing:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) AI policy inertia and delays;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) uncertainty for business to invest in AI technology; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) serious unknowns for Australian workers impacted by potential workplace changes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) further notes that after the Government won the 2025 election, it suddenly scrapped an expert AI advisory body after spending 15 months and $188,000 finding experts to join it; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) calls upon the Government to resolve its internal conflicts and act now so Australian businesses, workers, and investors have certainty and clarity over Australia's AI policy direction.</para></quote>
<para>There's a great saying: if you don't have a destination, any path will get you there. Unfortunately, that saying sums up the Albanese Labor government when it comes to artificial intelligence—no destination, no plan. Even worse, they had a destination that wasn't a destination that Minister Husic was taking them under, and then when Minister Husic got rolled the destination changed again. So now industry is left with a world with no certainty, no destination and changing priorities depending on the minister's whim. They rightly wonder what happens. To use the words of then minister Husic and still the member for Chifley, if the factional assassins come for Minister Ayres, does Assistant Minister Charlton get promoted? Does he take it in a different direction? Industry has no certainty. They've seen this play out over four years under this government.</para>
<para>Let's understand, when it comes to artificial intelligence, how important this transformation is for our society. While the technology is new, the transformation is not unprecedented. Society has gone through big technological changes before—the printing press, electricity, the internet, smartphones and social media just to name a few. So it's a question for government of how they capture the upside but make sure that they mitigate the downside, and providing that certainty not just for businesses to invest but also for workers is so crucial.</para>
<para>We have seen silence from this government when it comes to workers and how they will support them. Undoubtedly, they are waiting to get their marching orders from the unions on how they will look after communities when it comes to AI. We saw this play out in the last term of parliament when it came to industrial relations. We saw outsourcing to the unions resulting in productivity—less than a five per cent—decline under this government, productivity going backwards significantly. But they needed an action plan through microcredentials, through training people today. In these ways they can protect people, because we are seeing jobs being lost today.</para>
<para>Those opposite will look to spin and look to talk about how they actually have a plan and they are doing things when it comes to AI. I have no doubt they're going to reference the plan that they announced in December, and I look forward to hearing the references. They won't talk about how, within that plan, there was no framework. There were no real actions. There was talk about more conversations. Even worse than that, those opposite will potentially talk about the AI accelerator fund. They will talk about the money they're spending in the AI accelerator fund and how that is going to help businesses invest in artificial intelligence and our community take advantage of it. But that is a false claim by this government, because that fund does not provide money to industry until 2028. The one plan, the one idea, this government has to support artificial intelligence is to provide industry with funding in 2028—two years away. That is a lifetime when it comes to investment decisions and to artificial intelligence. We are seeing the changes move so quickly.</para>
<para>We know that this government has no plan and that all its ideas are talk. We know how bad it is because the member for Chifley—a member of this government and the former minister in this area—has consistently and publicly criticised this government when it comes to failures in artificial intelligence. The Prime Minister talks about how unified they are, how supportive they are, but what does it say that a member of his own government is prepared to take the risk to publicly come out and criticise this government? We all know what happens to those on the ALP side when they criticise the government. Senator Payman is a living example of that.</para>
<para>This government's own members admit it has failed when it comes to AI, and this is a technological revolution that will impact every Australian. It is one that we need to get right. There are so many opportunities to drive productivity, to drive economic growth and to improve our communities, but there is downside risk. We cannot afford to have a government that is asleep at the wheel, sending us in two different directions, then flipping those directions and flipping them again—providing no certainty for businesses, no certainty for the community and no certainty for the workers of Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Kennedy</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the shadow minister's motion and I reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Artificial intelligence is bringing a massive shift to our workplaces, and this Labor government is working to ensure everyday Australians aren't left behind. Looking at the motion put forward today, you'd be forgiven for thinking that those opposite have suddenly become the great defenders of the Australian worker. Frankly, it's a bit rich coming from a party with a long and miserable track record of attacking workers' conditions. They want us to forget that they spent the last decade fighting against better pay, trying to strip away essential protections and literally cheering when our local auto manufacturing industry closed its doors. Now they want to be seen as the saviours of workers facing technological change. Give me a break!</para>
<para>We all know what their real approach to technology and industry looks like. Just a few weeks ago, Senator Bragg let the cat out of the bag when he was asked for his views on AI. His answer was simply that the government just needs to get out of the way. That is completely at odds with what our government believes. We back working people. We know that by getting everyone around the table—unions, employers and the training sector—we can make sure workers actually get ahead.</para>
<para>Despite those opposite having no road map on AI, they are making an absurd claim that we have no plan for workers whose jobs are changing, and that is simply not true. Helping people navigate these shifts doesn't mean leaving them to fend for themselves, as Senator Bragg suggested we do. It requires genuine investment in lifelong training—something those opposite have historically undermined through repeated cuts to skills and training. It requires making workplace laws stronger, which, again, historically, those opposite have banded against. It means ensuring the enormous economic gains from this technology flow to working people and not be concentrated with the few, as those opposite have consistently preferred.</para>
<para>In other words, the work needed to protect workers goes right to the heart of Labor's bread-and-butter priorities. It's exactly why we've invested heavily in education and why we are rolling out fee-free TAFE. Through our massive $12.6 billion National Skills Agreement, we are supercharging the VET sector and making sure Australians have the hands-on digital skills that they need for tomorrow. This is what real support looks like—not the empty rhetoric of an opposition that will cut funding to skills and training the second that they get the opportunity.</para>
<para>The coalition also tries to claim that there is policy inertia and confusion on this side of the House. Again, I think they're living in their own fantasy land, not in reality. Our National AI Plan is a crystal-clear road map to make sure these new tools build a fairer country. The economic upside is huge, and we're looking to inject up to $200 billion into our economy every year, generating 150,000 brand-new jobs by the end of the decade. We are focused on grabbing on to those economic opportunities, making sure that the benefits reach every postcode and putting the right guidelines in place to keep people safe. Instead of the opposition's bizarre claim that we've scrapped the expertise—we're actually putting $29.9 million on the table to build a permanent, dedicated AI safety institute. Getting up and running early next year, this institute will give our regulators the teeth and the expert advice that they need to stay ahead of the curve.</para>
<para>Just today, we announced a new, strict five-step framework for tech giants wanting to build data centres and use artificial intelligence in Australia. Under this framework, these companies must help pay for the renewable energy infrastructure and grid upgrades, with the aim of ensuring costs aren't passed on to households and businesses. These tech companies will also need to use water responsibly and make their computing power available to local businesses. Across our government, ministers are moving in the exact same direction. From workplace relations to education, we are heavily coordinating the rollout.</para>
<para>We're doing all of this because we know that AI, when implemented with a real understanding of our community's needs, can be genuinely life changing. Earlier this month, I visited Dementia Australia's pop-up here at parliament, where they showed how they train healthcare workers in AI through immersive simulations to better support people living with dementia. It's a practical example of this technology at its best. Artificial intelligence is reshaping the world, but our government's approach is grounded in our Labor values of fairness, inclusion and opportunity. While those opposite often lose sight of these principles, Labor is committed to ensuring AI enhances workers' skills and never simply replaces them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KENNEDY</name>
    <name.id>267506</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The AI Safety Institute is a good idea. Do you know how we know it's a good idea? It was first announced on 18 June in 2021. The member of the government said that the coalition did not have an AI plan. That's actually incorrect. On 18 June 2021, the Australian government, then led by Prime Minister Morrison, published <inline font-style="italic">Australia's </inline><inline font-style="italic">AI</inline><inline font-style="italic">a</inline><inline font-style="italic">ction plan</inline>. That was one of the first action plans anywhere in the world. We had to wait years for the Albanese government to come out with something, and, when it came out with its plan, it was pretty much a carbon copy of what we had published only three years earlier. Yes, we suggested establishing a national AI institute. Yes, we looked at strategies for digital skills. Yes, we looked at AI ethics.</para>
<para>Australia has three massive problems. We have chronically low productivity, high inflation and low economic growth. Yet we have a solution staring us straight in the face: artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is perhaps the biggest lever in the world right now for productivity, yet Australia is not doing enough. Artificial intelligence is a race, and, sadly, it's a race Australia is losing. Right now, the US, China and many other middle powers are powering ahead. They're actually securing chips, securing energy and securing data supplies for their countries while Australia idly does next to nothing. We've empowered unions to promote AI. If you look around the world at any of these leading countries—be it Korea, the US or China—they do not have industrial unions driving their AI policy. That's what we have here at home. What could the government be better focused on? Reliable, cheap energy that will power this nation and power an AI world.</para>
<para>The truth is, Minister Bowen drew up our energy grid plan before the AI world and before blockchain was using an enormous amount of power. How do we know this? The energy market simply does not function any more. Energy prices are up 40 per cent in a retail sense. Many commercial areas in my area—manufacturers in Cook, Caringbah and Taren Point—have energy prices that are up almost 100 per cent. And what are they having to do to accommodate these energy prices? They're firing workers. FJP Manufacturing in Caringbah used to have seven apprentices. It's down to one. Energy costs are spiking, revenues are declining and there is no way to claw back these increased costs.</para>
<para>In AI, data centres and big tech, we are facing the same energy crunch. We have global companies looking for where they are going to invest tens of billions of dollars. What do they want to see? They want to see the Australian government help secure chips, provide security of energy supply, provide low-cost energy and fast-track permitting for data centres and the infrastructure that will build the knowledge revolution of this country. But instead we have crickets.</para>
<para>Yes, we have an AI institute, and I commend the government on that. That is smart and clever policy. But this isn't just about putting up an AI safety institute; this is about winning the race. This is akin to COVID. We are competing against the US, China and the whole developed world for hundreds of billions of dollars of capital and for jobs, and they won't naturally choose Australia. We are a smaller middle power. If we do nothing, this investment will go to the US, to China and to Russia—to these large superpowers.</para>
<para>This government needs to lead. They need to lead with energy policy. They need to lead with securing chips. They need to lead with fast-tracking permitting for data centres. They need to lead with catalysing private capital to invest in Australia. They need to work out copyright solutions so we can not just rely on inference modelling but build frontier modelling right here in Australia, right now.</para>
<para>The coalition is willing to partner with the government on this. If they come to the table and show how we will catalyse lower-cost energy, cheaper chips, secure energy supply and fast-tracked permitting, we are willing to work with them. But right now we are not seeing that commitment from the Labor government, and, sadly, Australia's economic growth, Australia's next generation and the wealth of the Australian households will all be poorer for this.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRENCH</name>
    <name.id>316550</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to respond to the motion moved by the member for Casey. At the outset, it is necessary to address the premise of the motion. It presents itself as a defence of Australian workers in the face of technological change. That is a curious position from those who have consistently opposed stronger workplace laws, argued against lifting wages and previously supported the exit of industries from this country. The House has been asked to accept that those who say the government should get out of the way are now the principal advocates for workers affected by artificial intelligence. That is not a serious policy position. It is a contradiction.</para>
<para>Artificial intelligence is shaping the global economy. It is changing how Australians work, learn and connect. The issue before the House is how that change is managed and in whose interests. The government's position is clear: we do not accept that the answer is to step aside and hope the market resolves these issues. Technological change must be shaped so that its benefits are broadly shared and its risks are properly managed.</para>
<para>That is why the government has developed the National AI Plan. It is a coordinated framework to ensure AI contributes to a stronger and fairer economy. It is anchored in three objectives: capturing the opportunity, spreading the benefits and keeping Australians safe. Estimates indicate that AI could contribute up to $200 billion annually to Australia's economy and support around 150,000 jobs by the end of the decade. The task is not to resist AI but to ensure Australians benefit from it.</para>
<para>That begins with skills. Supporting workers through technological change requires sustained investment in training and education. Through the National Skills Agreement, expanded vocational education and fee-free TAFE, we are increasing access to the skills Australians need to adapt and succeed. We're also investing in advanced capability in artificial intelligence and emerging technology.</para>
<para>The motion suggests that workers will be left behind. That ignores both the current policy settings and the role of our industrial relations system. Workers and their representatives must have a voice in how AI is introduced into workplaces. That is why the government is engaging with unions, industry and stakeholders to ensure deployment is transparent, safe and fair. Artificial intelligence can increase productivity and improve safety, but it also raises legitimate concerns around surveillance, bias and the nature of work. These issues are being addressed through consultation, regulation and the existing workplace protections.</para>
<para>Productivity gains should be shared, not concentrated. On regulation, the motion proceeds on an incomplete understanding. Australia already has robust, technology-neutral laws covering workplace safety, consumer protection and privacy. These frameworks continue to apply. At the same time, new risks emerge. That is why the government is establishing an AI safety institute to support regulators and ensure our legal settings remain fit for purpose. This is a measured and evidence based approach.</para>
<para>The government is also putting in place the conditions for investment and growth. Australia has a skilled workforce, a strong research base and access to clean energy. These are significant advantages in attracting investment in AI and digital infrastructure. The National AI Plan provides the policy certainty needed to support that investment and build domestic capability. The motion speaks of uncertainty, but, in reality, uncertainty arises when there is no plan. There is a plan. It is coordinated and practical and is being implemented in consultation with industry, unions and the community.</para>
<para>Ultimately, this debate is not about whether artificial intelligence will change our economy; it will. The question is whether the change will be managed in a way that reflects Australian values: fairness, inclusion and opportunity. This government's approach is grounded in those values. We support innovation, but we do not abandon workers. We invest in skills, not slogans, and we ensure the benefits of technological progress are realised here and shared by Australians. For those reasons, the assertions advanced in this motion cannot be supported.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When I started as the federal member for McPherson, in my first speech I made reference to the fact that government needs to have a vision that looks to the year 2100. We need to have a vision that looks beyond each electoral cycle, considers what Australia will look like in the future and, in doing so, considers the needs of Australians in the future and how we're evolving as a society. I think about my electorate when I look at this motion because I have Burleigh Heads in my electorate, which I'm very, very proud of, and—</para>
<para>An opposition member: A lovely place!</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Burleigh Heads, in addition to being a lovely place, is an absolutely booming area for tech and for the tech startup industry in particular.</para>
<para>I recently had the opportunity to host Senator Andrew Bragg in my electorate, and we had a roundtable with a lot of the leaders of tech groups and new startup companies in my electorate. One of the things that came out of that really good discussion was that people felt government was behind the ball when it came to emerging technologies, including things such as AI.</para>
<para>AI is becoming a lot more familiar to Australians, and we're seeing it in our daily lives. But there is a part of it that also raises certain concerns. I hear from people, especially across small businesses, who are starting to see the implications of AI. Sometimes they're good and they enable us to be more efficient and more productive, but sometimes AI can also provide a level of concern in terms of job security. That's why one of the things that this motion touches on is the fact that the government has not developed an AI transition plan for Australian workers. I would have thought that, for a government that typically talks itself up about what it does for the Australian worker, it would have had some experience in putting something like that together—partly because we want to make sure that the government's got a strategy but also partly to provide a level of assurance to small-business owners in my electorate and across the country as well.</para>
<para>The scale of AI change is quite rapid, and we are starting to see routine tasks being automated. I think that as a parliament we should welcome that. We want to make sure that we're upskilling a new generation. I go into a lot of schools and universities in McPherson and see firsthand that the next generation is being upskilled in emerging technologies such as AI. We can use it productively, but we just need to get that balance right, and that's ultimately where I think this conversation needs to go. It's all about balance and about getting the balance right between embracing new technologies as a country, which we haven't always been very good at, and making sure that we are taking the Australian community and the business community with us on the journey.</para>
<para>The only way that Australians will benefit from AI is if this transition is managed effectively. The fact that there is no current plan for workers that would be displaced by AI is problematic, and I think it's incumbent on the government and the relevant minister to come into this place and tell us what their plans are, what their strategies are, for those individuals. We need to have a complex approach to that because we need to be targeting education. We need to make sure that those people are educated in alternative streams of employment. We need to make sure that they're able to use AI.</para>
<para>But we also need to make sure that new industries have the support they require, and we all know, especially those of us on this side of the chamber, that, when it comes to making sure that those industries are set up and act effectively, it's not typically government that has the best track record of doing so. It is the private sector that does that. So government should, in coming up with these strategies, work with the private sector. They should take lessons from, for example, the people that Senator Bragg and I met with—people who are at the forefront of this technology revolution. They're the ones government needs to be listening to.</para>
<para>Instead we've got a government that doesn't really know what it's doing when it comes to AI. They've had different messages coming from different ministers. We've had one saying we need to have a light-touch approach. Another one said, 'There are no plans to change it.' Then there's another one who has publicly called for a dedicated AI act. I think the people of my electorate and the people in the tech space across this country deserve better. They deserve a government that is prepared to lead so that we as a country can make the most of this transition for the benefit of Australians.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>To put the concerns of the member for McPherson at rest, the government does have a national AI plan. There are three pillars. The second is to spread the benefits, and that has a dedicated goal of ensuring that Australian workers are not left behind in the AI transition. It also has a secondary goal of ensuring that Australian workers are appropriately upskilled and trained so they can meaningfully participate in the AI transition and share in the benefits. So the suggestion that the government doesn't have a plan for workers during the AI transition is incorrect. In December 2025, the National AI Plan was launched, and, as I said, it includes a direct goal of ensuring that Australian workers are upskilled and can share in the benefits that we will all enjoy through the AI transition.</para>
<para>AI is here to stay, and it has boomed in recent years. It has become commonplace in both business and everyday life. People use AI every day to make their lives easier, interacting with AI-powered virtual assistants or programs. Companies use AI to streamline their production processes, make unbiased projections of gains and losses and predict when maintenance will have to occur. AI can also help the Australian worker by reducing the risk of human error, and it can complete particularly difficult or dangerous tasks, meaning humans can mitigate or avoid the risk of injury or harm. So there are many benefits.</para>
<para>But, like anything, of course there are negative aspects. Although AI can create original and unexpected ideas, it just can't overtake humans in the ability to be creative, which means that it may be prohibited in its decision-making. If companies or governments or individuals are looking for a new or creative solution to a problem, humans are better at providing that solution, and humans, being human, will always inherently consider the emotional ramifications of decision-making. So there will always be that gap with AI, and there will always be a role for the Australian worker.</para>
<para>There is also a role for government and regulation in AI. It's the role of government to regulate without paralysing innovation and technological development. The role of government is to avoid overregulation because, as well as paralysing development, overregulation can create unnecessary fear and uncertainty. Governments have a difficult job of regulating to ensure that AI, which is not going anywhere, improves the lives of Australians in a way that is safe, sustainable and cost effective.</para>
<para>There is no greater need for balanced regulation than in the industrial and workplace space. This government will always protect jobs and working families—always. Our track record speaks for itself, with a consistent policy platform of protecting conditions for working Australians, growing wages sustainably, budgeting for continued rounds of tax cuts for every taxpayer and deliberately creating a pathway for collaboration and partnership between industry, unions and workers. The Labor Party will always stand with workers, and we believe that, by working together with unions, businesses and skills organisations, the interests of workers can be advanced.</para>
<para>Our consistent approach to conditions and support for working Australians will not change in the face of the disruption that AI poses in the workplace. We will support working Australians across a range of industries through all facets of AI—the growth, the disruption, the challenges. And we will do this by ensuring that worker protections remain a core policy driver, meaning that we'll consistently review and measure them to make sure AI is working for businesses and workers. We will also ensure that productivity gains from AI are shared fairly and not just concentrated. But, in doing that sharing, we will insist that the gains are real and measurable. We'll also invest in lifelong skills and training programs.</para>
<para>As well as being the party of working Australians, Labor is the party of education. We firmly believe that every Australian should have the opportunity to develop the skills and receive the training that they want and that we need in order to prosecute our policy of a Future Made in Australia and so that working Australians can meaningfully participate in a changing workforce in order to earn a fair wage, contribute to the economy and provide for their families. This is why we have a National AI Plan, which has a deliberate AI vision for Australia, where AI is used to build a fairer, stronger Australia and where every person, especially working Australians, benefits from this technological progress.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a very important topic that we're speaking on—artificial intelligence—and I'd take a moment to acknowledge the member for Chifley, sitting opposite, and the contributions he's made to this and to my local manufacturing industry, which relies heavily upon AI and will continue to do so. So when I speak to this topic I'm speaking about local jobs. I think there are many people across the chamber who still focus on good jobs and good pay, and that's what should be driving this current debate.</para>
<para>We have seen the largest drop ever in productivity in Australia since Labor came to government—over a five per cent drop. We could have an argument as to the causes of that. The Labor government will point to events that have happened outside this nation, we will speak to policy decisions that the government has made, and we can have that debate about the causes of that. The important point, though, is: what are we going to do about it? What is the government of the day going to do to address that incredible drop in productivity—over five per cent?</para>
<para>We're blessed, in some ways, that at this time in Australia's history the opportunity AI presents has made itself available. We have to acknowledge that this is a race across the world. The people who want to build data centres that would support localised AI within each nation have constraints on their capital and are having to make decisions based upon where they can invest and who's going to support that the most. The countries that are able to best support the investment in data centres are going to have the most benefit. It's a very simple equation. And, given that drop in productivity, it's absolutely vital that Australia jumps into that race and leads it.</para>
<para>I was recently speaking to the headmaster of Toowoomba Grammar School about the role AI plays in the education system there. They've gone from a time when they would actively ban the use of AI in any assessments to considering how to include the use of AI in the assessment of kids—knowing full well that the jobs of the future will be for people who can use AI, who can use it well and who can understand it in the same way those of my generation learnt how to use the internet and those of previous generations learnt how to use AutoCAD or whatever was the driving technological advantage of the day. AI is going to be a tool that we have to use, and we have to get into that race. It's as simple as that.</para>
<para>I want to talk to what I think is the most important part of that conversation, which is cheap energy. Regardless of the moral views that come out in the energy conversation, if we want AI data centres to be built in Australia then we're going to need to provide them with cheap energy, or they're going to have to provide it for themselves. That's the reality that is faced all over the world, and everyone we speak to who is interested in investing in data centres has a No. 1 concern: what is the cost of energy? This is not a technology that can rely on intermittent power. This is not a technology that can just run when the sun is shining or when the wind is blowing; this is technology that needs to run 24/7. If we don't do that, we will not have the advantage of it. Of course, there is the question that's obviously put forward: what about batteries? To which I would answer: South Australia's battery is charged by coal and gas from New South Wales and Victoria. We see those numbers from AEMO every single day.</para>
<para>The cheap energy that Australia needs now and will need to get in front of the race for the development of AI data centres will come from things like coal and gas—and, goodness me, who knows, if we can get over ourselves and look around the rest of the world, maybe even nuclear. This is how the race is being won by other countries right now. We have a very short window to decide whether we actually want to be in that race or if we want to sit back and be bystanders and watch others take advantage. The only thing that we can offer at the moment is the stability of government. That's a good thing; of course, it's Australia's great advantage.</para>
<para>We are not building the structural advantages into our system of government as to why we would build an AI data centre in Australia. We do not provide cheap energy. The number one thing that will be needed, we don't provide. Until we do and until we make the firm decision that that's important to us and that we don't want to miss out on the next great leap forward that is happening around the world, we will fall behind; we will not win this race.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In the last few months, we've seen thousands upon thousands of tech workers retrenched due to AI—workers who were right to believe and who had been made to believe that they'd have a job for life. AI has busted open the sanctuary gates. If those jobs are no longer sacred in an AI future, then what about the rest of our workforce? Because, while a serious danger before us is that a lot of jobs will profoundly change or disappear due to AI, the greatest danger is that, as Professor Toby Walsh has put it, we will sleepwalk into an AI future not shaped by us at all. It's a question of power, of control, of sovereignty.</para>
<para>Governments have a responsibility to think ahead, step up and act in the national and local interest, looking out for communities that might be impacted. Governments can't just be cheerleaders for novel uses of AI; they must prepare and dilute the associated risks. We can't be scared to act because we're worried about the reaction of the Trump administration. We can't have a hands-off, laissez-faire approach to AI or respond in a knee-jerk, spasmodic way to the AI risks that only threaten the loudest or most powerful voices in society. Saying we want overseas generated AI models to bake in Australian values is a terrific rhetorical sweetener, but, without any legal or enforcement power, it simply melts in the heat of big tech obstinacy. We need a comprehensive, national, economy-wide AI act that identifies risks and sets out our expectations on how to manage them and build sorely needed confidence in AI.</para>
<para>Sixty-five per cent of Australians believe that, overall, AI creates more problems than it solves. That's up eight percentage points since 2023, according to Roy Morgan Research. Linked to this mad rush around AI is a frenzy to build data centres. There are now more than 250 data centres operating in Australia. We attracted $10 billion in data centre investment in a single year. But this expansion is not without consequence. Data centres are extraordinarily energy intensive. Their impact on carbon emissions doubled over five years. They could represent 11 per cent of Australia's electricity consumption by 2035, up from one per cent today.</para>
<para>The demand on our labour force to build this new wave of data centres is also significant at a time we're 90,000 workers short in construction and trying to build 1.2 million homes by 2030 and roll out more renewables and deliver a major infrastructure pipeline. Many of these overseas tech firms want governments to move faster, water down regulations, speed up access to land energy infrastructure, while, in some cases, even threatening not to build data centres if they're forced to pay tax. Those points bring into scope fundamental questions about the social licence of many of these tech firms.</para>
<para>I want to be clear: I am not anti data centre, but I am anti hype, and I'm very pro getting our act together to devise a structured approach to infrastructure, energy, workforce, taxation and sovereign capability. If overseas tech firms want to build data centres here, then spell out the benefit for the country. Will their computing power be set aside for Australian industry and researchers to help Australia tackle our challenges? That should be a condition of the Foreign Investment Review Board when they attach approvals on data centres that overseas firms want to build here. Overseas tech should be required to show that, when they build data centres, they're not going to negatively impact on the power and water supplies of our communities. They should demonstrate they won't compete for labour, especially in regional Australia, which is helping build more homes or infrastructure work that's vital to the nation.</para>
<para>There's something else that needs to be taken up. Many data-centre builders say they'll build new renewable supply to meet their needs. They can't always do that onsite. They have to draw supply from elsewhere. That means energy needs to be moved around. Data-centre builders should be required to pay the cost of that, specifically via transmission levies, contributing to the cost of building transmission lines. That's not radical. Canadian provinces have introduced a data-centre levy applied to data centres connected to the grid with electricity capacity of 75 megawatts or more. This means power-hungry facilities pick up a slab of the cost associated with the energy demand that they created, shielding residential and business customers from paying for this through their energy bills.</para>
<para>We need to debate AI openly and have a wider public discussion about artificial intelligence and the infrastructure needed to support it. Yes, we have to act fast. Yes, AI has benefits, but we can't allow AI to reshape our economy or sovereignty on terms the Australian public does not choose or support.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At its heart, this motion speaks to the government's current hands-off approach to artificial intelligence. AI is already reshaping economies, labour markets and the information environment, and, while its ultimate trajectory remains uncertain, the scale of potential change is enormous. Yet, despite this, Australia has done remarkably little strategic thinking about what this transformation means for our economy, our institutions and our society. That gap was apparent in the government's long-awaited national AI plan. It set out three worthy objectives: capturing the opportunities, spreading the benefits and keeping Australians safe. But, beyond that, its 37 pages largely collated existing announcements. Somehow both the techno-optimists and the techno-pessimists walked away dissatisfied. There was little ambition in relation to capturing AI's upside and limited reassurance on safety.</para>
<para>While I commend the establishment of the AI Safety Institute, the plan did not offer much of a sense of preparedness for the future. The underlying message felt like, 'Let's sit back and see how this develops.' That approach is also reflected in investment. Australia is not investing much in AI compared to other countries. Over the last five years, Canada has invested six times more than us in AI. Singapore has invested 15 times more than us. The UK and Germany have both invested three times more than us per capita. To be fair, part of this tentative approach reflects genuine uncertainty. No-one knows exactly how powerful AI will become or how quickly. Perhaps today's excitement will amount to little more than a generation of very effective chatbots. But, globally, there's an incredible amount of capital riding on the bet that the impact of AI will be much greater than that.</para>
<para>We should be shaping our own future. At present, many of the most consequential decisions are being made by the tech oligarchs on the other side of the world. We must seize the reins. So how do we do this? First, we must deal with the risks and opportunities that already exist. We're already seeing real harms from AI: psychological distress from chatbot interactions, sophisticated AI-enabled scams and fraud at scale. A sensible starting point is a digital duty of care, requiring platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm. This must extend to include AI chatbots. We should ensure our regulators have the technical expertise to identify and disrupt AI powered scams. We must also start to develop policy to manage AI enabled disinformation campaigns, particularly during elections.</para>
<para>On the opportunity side, AI's potential in science and research is already clear. Australia should be investing heavily here. The government has already committed more than $360 million through existing programs. That's a strong foundation, but it must be clearly directed towards AI powered research, and it must be scaled up.</para>
<para>Second, we should pursue no-regrets policies, policies about our future that make sense regardless of how AI ultimately develops. Strengthening the AI Safety Institute is an obvious one. The institute has a significant responsibility in monitoring risks from AI and working with policymakers and regulators to manage them. Yet funding for our AI Safety Institute is about one-sixteenth of comparable efforts in the UK. It needs more funding. It also needs to be protected from the bureaucracy of the standard Public Service so it can move nimbly and independently. The government should also consider giving the institute more powers to gather information so it can effectively monitor the AI risk landscape.</para>
<para>Another no-regrets policy is investing in an AI-ready workforce, from university training to mid-career transition pathways and deepening international collaboration with trusted partners on standard safety and governance. These investments will never be wasted.</para>
<para>Finally, we must start planning for the most significant future risks. There are some very dramatic predictions about how AI could change our workforce, society and economy. These may or may not come to pass but, with the speed of AI, we can't afford to wait for them to happen before thinking about how we might respond. Even if the likelihood of some of these scenarios is low, the consequences are so significant that we need to be prepared. A large chunk of the workforce could become unemployable. Economic value could be concentrated in a small number of companies across a wide range of industries, and our tax bases could be undermined. All of these shocks would require a government intervention, and it would take time to build the social licence needed. What is clear is that this hands-off approach is not good enough. The government must take an active approach, because we must ensure that Australian voices are determining our future, not big tech.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices</title>
          <page.no>186</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KARA COOK</name>
    <name.id>316537</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—On behalf of the member for Lingiari, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) commends the Government for launching <inline font-style="italic">Our Ways</inline><inline font-style="italic">—</inline><inline font-style="italic">Strong Ways</inline><inline font-style="italic">—</inline><inline font-style="italic">Our Voices: National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan to End Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence 2026-2036</inline>, a plan which is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's first standalone plan that strives for a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children can live free from violence;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) developed in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and state and territory governments; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) backed by $218.3 million in new funding, that as an immediate step will invest in a national network of up to 40 Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations to deliver community-led specialist support services;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have been:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) steadfast in their advocacy to be safe and to be heard; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) calling for strong action;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further recognises that the Government is doing just that by funding support programs like:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) mobile teams in remote areas to work with families after a violent incident, or offer safe transport and emergency accommodation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) plans to help victims leave violence safely and continued support once they have;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) community playgroups where mums and bubs can connect with elders, receive parenting support, and be linked to early help and healing; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) behavioural change and education, like outreach programs for men and boys;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women face unique and significant barriers to getting help, and are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) seven times more likely to be victims of intimate partner homicide; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) 27 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family violence, which increases to 41 times more likely in regional and very remote communities;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) further notes that this plan:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) will make real progress in addressing Target 13 (family violence) of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap and contribute to Target 12 (out-of-home care);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) responds to eight recommendations in the <inline font-style="italic">Missing and Murdered First Nations women and children</inline> inquiry report of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Reference Committee; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) responds to 12 recommendations in the report of the Rapid Review of Prevention Approaches, <inline font-style="italic">Unlocking the Prevention Potential: Accelerating action to end domestic, family and sexual violence</inline>; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Parliament to support this vital plan to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children can live free from violence.</para></quote>
<para>I want to start by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we gather, the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people, and pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. My husband, Josh, is a proud Waanyi and Kalkadoon man, and I stand here today as the proud mum of three First Nations children. It is an absolute honour to speak on this motion moved by me but brought to this place by the member for Lingiari, and I thank her for bringing this motion to the chamber and for her advocacy over decades in advancing the interests of First Nations Australians.</para>
<para>In February I had the profound honour of standing alongside my mother-in-law, Sandra Creamer, as the Albanese Labor government launched Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices, the national plan to end family, domestic and sexual violence against First Nations women and children, right here in Parliament House. I want to acknowledge Sandra and the many, many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women who have been steadfast in their advocacy to be safe, to be heard and to drive change to ensure that this plan became a reality. This plan stands on the shoulders of that advocacy over not years but decades. It is Australia's first standalone plan dedicated to ending domestic and sexual violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children. It is a genuine partnership between governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and it is backed by a $218.3 million investment in new funding to deliver real change on the ground.</para>
<para>The reality we are confronting is devastating in our country. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are seven times more likely to be murdered by their partners than non-Indigenous women and 27 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family violence, rising to 41 times more likely in remote and regional communities. This is not just a policy challenge. It is a national crisis, and it demands action. Every woman and child deserves to live free from violence. That is not negotiable.</para>
<para>This plan is not just about responding to violence. It is about listening and acting. For decades, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have told us what is needed—community led solutions, culturally safe services and systems that respect their voices through extensive consultation, including direct engagement with women, communities and even children and young people. This plan reflects those voices. It reflects a simple truth—that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children are not just victims or survivors of this crisis; they are central to the solutions. As has been said for generations, they are the nurturers, the teachers, the protectors and the carriers of culture and identity, even in the face of profound adversity.</para>
<para>This plan turns those voices into action. It invests in a national network of up to 40 Aboriginal community controlled organisations, delivering specialist, culturally safe, community led services because we know that real change happens when communities lead that change. It funds practical immediate supports, mobile outreach teams in remote areas, safe transport and emergency accommodation so that, when violence occurs, women and children can access help quickly and safely. It supports women to leave violent situations and, importantly, to stay safe after they leave. It invests in early intervention through initiatives like community playgroups, where mothers and young children can connect with elders, accessing parenting support, and link to early help and healing. It backs prevention through programs that work with men and boys to challenge harmful behaviours and build respectful relationships.</para>
<para>This plan also recognises the importance of healing the impacts of intergenerational trauma. Dispossession and discrimination are real, and they continue to shape the experiences of many communities, but so too does the strength of culture, connection and country. That is why healing programs grounded in culture and led by community are central to this plan.</para>
<para>Importantly, this plan is not operating in isolation. It does contribute to Closing the Gap, particularly target 13, to reduce family violence, and target 12, to reduce the overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care. Labor promised to deliver this plan and we have delivered it. The work is not over. It is just beginning.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Zappia</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Family and domestic violence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities is a grave and an urgent issue. But acknowledging the problem is not the same as solving it. The motion in front of me today asks the House to commend a government that has consistently failed to deliver the real outcomes. The motion commends announcements, plans and funding, but it actually ignores the real-world outcomes.</para>
<para>The government is very good at launching plans but far less effective at delivering results, because, as we all know, more Labor announcements and more spending don't automatically mean better outcomes. We continue to see national plans, action frameworks, advisory groups and consultation processes, but, despite all of this, many of the key Closing the Gap targets are not actually going the right direction. They're going backwards. Community safety outcomes are not improving at the pace that our communities expect. Announcing the program is not the same as delivering a result.</para>
<para>The motion asks the House to commend new funding and new programs, but what we've seen is that the government's developed a pattern of avoiding scrutiny when it comes to existing Indigenous programs. For the first time in 17 years, there were no standalone Senate estimates hearings for cross-portfolio Indigenous matters. We've seen the deliberate removal of a key mechanism here, one that's designed to test spending, to examine outcomes and to hold ministers and their departments accountable. We all know that we need to make sure that the taxpayer money that is being invested in these programs is actually getting the result not only for taxpayers but for the communities and the individuals to whom the programs are targeted. This isn't administrative oversight. It's a conscious decision which avoids scrutiny. The government has shut down dedicated scrutiny in one of the most critical policy areas. They've reduced visibility over how billions in taxpayer funds are being used.</para>
<para>Now, what have we seen in terms of the spending in this space? We've seen a government that's allocated $218.3 million in funding for these services. But, given the track record of the government, it would be remiss of me not to question whether this spending will be effective—because what have we seen in the broader pattern of this government's spending on Indigenous programs? We've seen billions spent across Indigenous programs, and I'm sure that that is out of genuine concern. I don't think those on this side of the House would question that. But we have seen worsening outcomes. We've seen the $300 million A Better, Safer Future for Central Australia Plan, but we don't think that that's actually made Central Australia better or safer. We've seen a $730,000 bill for the First Nations ambassador's travel expenses over just two years, but I'm still waiting to hear the answer to the question about what outcomes that spending delivered on.</para>
<para>Importantly, we get up in this place—and we're very privileged to be here—once every year and we talk about Closing the Gap and Closing the Gap targets, but there's very little effort that goes into assessing how we're going on those targets and calling out the real issues that are preventing us from meeting those targets. We've got four—just four—of the 19 Closing the Gap targets that are on track. If you look at the key indicators that are going backwards, these are serious areas that should be of concern. We're seeing key indicators going backwards in terms of incarceration, suicide, child development, out-of-home care and others.</para>
<para>We as the coalition want to work constructively with the government on this because it's in the interests of all Australians. But we need to make sure that we're putting forward policies that don't just congratulate ourselves like this motion does but that stand in a way that's going to make lives better for Indigenous Australians—not just throw money at problems that are not being solved. I say to the government that standing here commending the government for spending on a new program, a new initiative or a new framework is not necessarily something that we should be proud of. I'd like to see the results first, and then I'd be more than happy to support a motion like this.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I get into the policy and delivery aspects, I begin by acknowledging the traditional owners here in Canberra, the Ngunnawal and Ngambri peoples, but also of the electorate that I'm honoured to represent, greater Darwin, the Larrakia people.</para>
<para>I was privileged in February to attend the launch of 'Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices', the national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander plan to end family, domestic and sexual violence over the next decade. It was a wonderful event where I connected with a lot of old friends—First Nations elders, legends, both from the Territory and from around the country—but I also made some new friends. There was one thing everyone had in common, which is to end the violence. The launch was inspirational. Maybe if the previous speaker, the member for McPherson, had attended that event and talked to and listened to some of the elders there, he might have some ideas.</para>
<para>The vision that was set out in the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children is to end gender based violence in one generation. Under the national plan, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Action Plan was developed, which aimed to address the immediate needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Comprehensive consultation was undertaken—that's the listening part—with community to develop 'Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices'. A driving factor in its development was that the government listened deeply and heard what is needed now: community led solutions that are flexible and grounded in best practice and local decision-making. The old saying that God gave us two ears and one mouth so we could do double the amount of listening as we do speaking is a good one for a very good reason.</para>
<para>Regardless of the politics that some people on the other side still like to play with this issue, the reality is that there are complex issues at play and we need a coordinated and bipartisan focus. So I am pleased that the our ways plan was endorsed by the Commonwealth and all states and territories in late 2025. That even included the Liberal led states and territories. I look forward to working with the Northern Territory CLP government and other stakeholders to implement the plan and to deliver the plan because we all need to be working together. But we also need those jurisdictions to take action, and, whilst we want to work in a bipartisan way, people must be accountable for their lack of action.</para>
<para>One of the main commitments that I took to the 2022 election was funding from the Commonwealth to establish a youth engagement hub in the northern suburbs of my electorate in Darwin. But, with the change of government to the CLP, nothing was done until last week. After almost 18 months, they put out a media release to say that they've chosen a new location for the youth engagement hub—despite the fact that it was shovel ready to build—and they would be doing something at some point in the future. So I think that governments need to be accountable. We're approaching this in a bipartisan way.</para>
<para>I was extremely pleased last week to attend the opening of the Turtle Back program in the other city in my electorate, Palmerston. The Turtle Back program is funded by the Albanese Labor government, with almost $2 million supporting the trial program for adolescent boys. The federal government is funding these community led programs, which will get great results. I want to thank my colleague Minister Tanya Plibersek—the member for Sydney and Minister for Social Services—for her support for that program. I also want to thank Kat Lee and her team at Grassroots Action Palmerston for their fantastic work, which absolutely will get results. Let's see some more action and a collaborative effort to end violence while we can.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion, and I thank the member for Lingiari for the opportunity to do so. 'Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices' is Australia's first standalone national plan for ending family, domestic and sexual violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children, developed in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It provides $218 million in new funding for a national network of up to 40 Aboriginal community controlled organisations to deliver community led specialist support services.</para>
<para>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are seven times more likely to be victims of intimate partner homicide. They're 27 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family violence—41 times in regional and very remote communities. In Victoria, the state that I represent, in the year to March 2025, family incidents involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people increased by almost 15 per cent against an overall Victorian family violence figure that itself hit a record high. In Victoria, family violence is the single biggest driver of First Nations child removal; 88 per cent of First Nations children in home care have experienced family violence. That figure is an indictment on decades of policy failure and its intergenerational cost.</para>
<para>Victoria is one of only two Australian jurisdictions with an Aboriginal-specific strategy on ending family violence. Funding to ACCOs for family violence and sexual assault service delivery has increased tenfold since 2017-18 and Aboriginal access points operated by organisations like VACCA and the Wathaurong Aboriginal Co-operative have opened in multiple sites. But these organisations have consistently raised concerns about the lack of ongoing funding for community prevention projects, the competitive process by which funding is administered and the need to reapply for funding every year—with successful projects often funded only as pilots rather than as ongoing programs. You cannot build a sustained response to intergenerational trauma on annual grant rounds. Victoria's royal commission found that lack of funding and short-term funding cycles was undermining efforts for prevention and early intervention, and that insufficient investment in evaluation meant that it was impossible to evaluate target resources appropriately.</para>
<para>That finding is now a decade old, but the structural problem it identified has not been resolved. The Victorian Aboriginal Child and Community Agency has documented that Aboriginal women and children who are fleeing violence often don't feel culturally safe when they engage with mainstream providers. They're often forced to retell their stories across multiple services, and on occasion they have experienced discrimination when seeking emergency accommodation.</para>
<para>So the gap between policy aspiration and lived reality continues to affect women and children in the community at a state and federal level. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have consistently called for action through the Senate inquiry into missing and murdered First Nations Women and Children and, more recently, through the rapid review of prevention approaches.</para>
<para>This plan is a long-awaited response to eight recommendations from that former inquiry and 12 from the latter, and it provides, for the first time, a genuine framework to address our obligations under the National Agreement on Closing the Gap—specifically, target 13 on family violence and target 12 on out-of-home care. The plan will fund mobile teams in remote areas after violent incidents. It will fund safer transport and emergency accommodation, planning to help victims leave violence and stay safe, and community playgroups where mothers and babies can connect with elders, receive parenting support and be linked into early health and healing. The plan also includes outreach programs for men and boys, because ending violence means changing behaviour, not only managing its consequences.</para>
<para>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have been steadfast for decades in their advocacy for a plan like this. During that time they have buried daughters and sisters while they have worked and called for action. They deserve a parliament that is equally as steadfast in its response. So I commend this motion to the chamber.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm supporting this motion from my good friend the member for Lingiari, and I want to commend her for a long, steadfast advocacy for the safety of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, children and communities. This motion is important because it recognises something that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have been saying for decades. They have been calling to be heard, for safety and for action that is led by the community, grounded in culture and shaped by lived experience.</para>
<para>That is why the launch of Our Way—Strong Ways—Our Voices: National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Plan to End Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence 2026-2036 is such an important step forward. This is the first standalone national plan focused specifically on ending family, domestic and sexual violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children. It has been developed in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and with states and territories, and it's backed up by serious investment. Most importantly, it's built on the principles that lasting change must come from listening to the communities and backing community led solutions.</para>
<para>The statistics before the House are very confronting. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are far more likely to be victims of intimate-partner homicide. They are far more likely to be hospitalised because of family violence, and the risks are even greater in rural and regional remote communities. Behind every statistic is a life, a family, a child, a community carrying trauma that no-one should ever have to bear. As Special Envoy for Men's Health, I want to speak to one part of this motion in particular, which is that it recognises that we must engage men and boys if we are serious about ending violence. We cannot talk honestly about family, domestic and sexual violence without talking about men's behaviour, responsibility and the need to intervene.</para>
<para>Violence is always a choice. Nothing excuses it. If we want prevention, we must understand the pathways that can lead some men and boys towards using violence and must act earlier to change that path. That is where men's health perspective matters. Good men's health is not just about physical health. It's also about social and emotional wellbeing, connection, healing, respectful relationships and teaching boys that strength is shown through self-control, empathy and responsibility.</para>
<para>Too often, poor mental health, unresolved trauma, substance misuse and rigid ideas about masculinity can combine in very destructive ways. None of that removes accountability, but it tells us that, if we want to stop violence before it starts, we need to support men and boys earlier, particularly those dealing with trauma and disconnect. That is why this plan's investment in programs that help men take responsibility for their actions and build respectful relationships is so important. That's why men's wellness centres, community based healing programs and culturally grounded initiatives matter. And that's why Aboriginal community controlled organisations must be at the centre of this work. The plan also recognises that support must be practical, with mobile teams in remote areas, safe transport and emergency accommodation for women and children to leave violence safely, and support for children to heal from this trauma. Community playgroups where mums and bubs can connect with elders and access early support are also vital.</para>
<para>I also want to acknowledge the women whose strength and advocacy have brought us to this point. For generations, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have carried communities through hardship. They have been protectors, they have been teachers and they have been leaders. This plan stands on their shoulders. I thank the many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and organisations who helped shape this work, including the steering committee and the community controlled sector. Their leadership gives this plan its strength. This plan also matters because it aligns with Closing the Gap, contributes to reducing family violence and responds to calls for action from key inquiries and reviews. Parliament should support this plan because it's practical and community led.</para>
<para>For those of us who care about men's health, this is also a reminder that the health of men and boys is so important for the safety of women and children. If we want a safer future, we must back women, protect children and help men change. That is what this plan does and that is why I strongly support this motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR</name>
    <name.id>315618</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion and acknowledge the member for Lingiari for bringing this significant matter before the House. At its heart, this motion speaks to something fundamental: the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and children to live safely, free from violence. The 'Our Ways—Strong Ways—Our Voices' plan represents a significant step forward. It is the first dedicated national framework focused specifically on ending family, domestic and sexual violence against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Importantly, it has been developed in genuine partnership with communities.</para>
<para>That partnership matters. For too long, responses have been shaped without fully listening to those most affected. This plan reflects a different approach—one that places Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices at the centre. We are here because Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women have led the way. They have spoken out, shared their experiences and called for action, and this plan answers that call. The government's investment into Aboriginal community-controlled organisations recognises that communities themselves are best placed to lead. These organisations are trusted, culturally grounded and deeply connected to the people they serve.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Barton, we see this leadership in action. Organisations such as Alawa Aboriginal Corporation, along with other First Nations services across the electorate and neighbouring electorates, play a vital role in supporting women and families. They deliver not just services but culturally safe spaces where people feel understood and supported. Recently I had the opportunity to meet with Shaylee Matthews and Charlene Mckenzie from Alawa Aboriginal Corporation. We spoke at length about the challenges facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women experiencing domestic and family violence. What stood out in that conversation was just how complex these challenges are. It's not just about leaving a violent situation; it is about access to safe housing and about staying connected to culture and community, about trust in the system and about ensuring that support services are culturally appropriate and accessible. They spoke about the barriers women face: fear, isolation and the difficulty of navigating systems that are not always designed with their needs in mind. But they also spoke about strength—the strength of women who are seeking safety for themselves and their children, the strength of the communities coming together to support one another and the strength of Aboriginal led organisations working tirelessly, often with limited resources, to meet these needs.</para>
<para>This plan backs that work, because the statistics we are dealing with are deeply confronting. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women experience significantly higher rates of violence, hospitalisation and, tragically, loss of life due to family violence. These are not just figures; they represent real people, real families and real communities. Addressing this requires more than a one-size-fits-all response. It requires solutions that are designed with community, delivered by community and grounded in cultural understanding. That is what this plan seeks to do—from mobile outreach services and emergency accommodation to programs that support women to leave violence safely and rebuild their lives. These initiatives are practical and necessary. Equally important are the preventive measures—programs that support families early, strengthen connections to culture and engage men and boys in addressing the root causes of violence. Prevention is key to long-term change. This plan also aligns with our commitments under Closing the Gap, particularly in reducing family violence and supporting the wellbeing of children and families.</para>
<para>But, beyond frameworks and targets, this is about people. It is about ensuring that every woman feels safe, that every child grows up free from fear and that communities are empowered to lead their own healing. I also want to acknowledge Aunty Barbara Simms-Keeley, a Bidjigal, Gweagal and Wandi Wandi elder who has generously shared her life story with many people in my electorate of Barton. Aunty Barb spoke of not only the challenges that many Aboriginal women face in dealing with domestic and family violence but also the strength and the resilience from within the community, those in advocacy and community organisations and on the frontlines who have driven this work forward. Their voices are reflected in this plan. Our responsibility is to ensure that this is not just a plan on paper; it must translate into real outcomes, with funding reaching the ground, services being strengthened and communities being supported over the long term.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>192</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Suicide Prevention</title>
          <page.no>192</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the findings of the Australian National Audit Office performance audit <inline font-style="italic">Suicide Prevention Policy Development and Monitoring</inline>, which:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) found that the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing's approach to developing and monitoring suicide prevention policy to be only partly effective;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) raised serious concerns about the accountability and effectiveness of nearly $1 billion in Commonwealth spending on suicide prevention programs; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) found that the grant agreements examined did not include clear performance indicators to measure effectiveness or efficiency;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that around nine Australians die by suicide each day and more than 150 attempt to take their own lives;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) raises serious concerns of the lack of measurable outcomes and clear accountability by the Government in national suicide prevention efforts; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Government to strengthen accountability and transparency in suicide prevention funding by ensuring programs are supported by clear targets, robust evaluation and measurable outcomes.</para></quote>
<para>Today marks 95 years since one of the most esteemed members of this parliament took his own life, 95 years since Major General Harold 'Pompey' Elliott unfortunately tragically committed suicide. This was one of our greatest Australians. This was a man who served at Gallipoli. This was a man who led troops at Lone Pine. This was a man who served on the Western Front. He was the highest-ranking Australian at Fromelles, he was the victor at Villers-Bretonneux and he served in the Senate here for 10 years, representing the state of Victoria as a Nationalist Party senator. And, in 1931, on this day, he took his own life. He is a demonstration that, no matter how strong, no matter how capable and no matter how esteemed an Australian may be, they can be susceptible to the risk of suicide.</para>
<para>In the early 1930s, we saw our highest rate of suicides ever recorded in Australia. I think it was probably due to a mixture of the Great Depression and the aftermath of the Great War. So in 1931, the year before the passing of Elliot, it was our bleakest suicide year on record—29.8 men per 100,000 took their own lives. It remains the bleakest year on record for male suicide.</para>
<para>But, nearly a century later, our rates of suicide across the whole population have reduced by only 25 per cent. I don't think that's good enough, and I don't think anyone in this chamber and in this parliament would agree that that's good enough when you consider all the medical advancements that we've had over the course of that century and all the advances that we've made in technology, in science and in an understanding of mental health. A 25 per cent reduction isn't good enough. That's why it's important that we're debating this today on this anniversary. It's so critical that every dollar that the federal government invests in suicide prevention counts. We need to bring to suicide prevention the same determination and the same commitment that Pompey Elliott and his generation of Australians brought to their public service and the duties that they performed for our nation.</para>
<para>The Australian National Audit Office performance audit into suicide prevention, policy development and monitoring found that the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing's approach to developing and monitoring suicide prevention policy is only partly effective. This report has found that $1 billion in funding is failing to demonstrate accountability or a clear impact. The report also found that, four to five years after the national suicide prevention agreements were signed, the objective of reducing suicide deaths has still not been achieved. I talked about the 25 per cent reduction in nearly 100 years. In this century, we've barely seen any reduction at all. It moves around from year to year, but we're still seeing nine Australians commit suicide every day and 150 Australians attempt to take their own lives.</para>
<para>The grant agreements that the ANAO checked through this performance report found that there were no indicators of effectiveness or efficiency. The findings reflect deep concerns raised by families, clinicians and frontline suicide prevention workers. It simply isn't good enough, and we need to make sure that every dollar is going to count not just because it's the right thing to do by Australia's taxpayers but because 150 Australians are attempting to take their own life every single day and they are relying on us to get this right. When lives are at stake, it simply isn't good enough for the government to write checks and hope that they're going to hit the target and that the money that we are investing in this area is going to achieve the outcomes that we want. We need to make sure that they are hitting the mark.</para>
<para>Suicide prevention must be treated as a national priority, and it must be backed by clear and measurable federal investment. The Auditor-General has clearly found a system drifting without clear direction or proper measurement of results. We need to note the ANAO report with great interest. Taxpayers are funding program after program, yet the government cannot clearly show whether they are working. More needs to be done in this area, and I don't want that to become a partisan thing. It's been a failure of all governments for many decades. It is not good enough, and both sides of the parliament need to be doing better. I commend the motion to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Aldred</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion and thank the member for Bowman for bringing it forward. It's an issue that hits close to home for too many Australian families. Suicide prevention is not just a policy; it's about real people. It's about families losing someone they love, mates losing a mate and communities trying to make sense of something that should never have happened. This House has noted the findings of the Australian National Audit Office, and it's right that we take them seriously.</para>
<para>The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing has agreed to the recommendations. The government has accepted the report. Assistant Minister McBride is working through it very carefully right now. People expect that, when we invest this level of funding into suicide prevention, it's doing what it's meant to do. They are clear about outcomes, proper oversight and a system that is working, and that's fair. At the same time, we need to be honest about what we're dealing with here. Nine Australians die every single day from suicide. More than 150 attempt to take their own lives every day. These aren't just figures on a page. These are sons. These are daughters. These are parents, mates and workmates.</para>
<para>As Special Envoy for Men's Health, I see this through a very clear lens. Too many of those lives are men—men who are struggling, often quietly, telling themselves to toughen up and not reaching out until things have gone too far. We see it every day in workplaces, in sheds and in sporting clubs. Men are less likely to ask for help, more likely to put it off and more likely to wait until they're in real trouble. That's why suicide prevention can't just sit in one part of government. It has to be joined up. It's about mental health services. It's also about housing, the cost of living, family support, education and community connection because the things that push people to the edge are rarely just one thing.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government understands that. Last year, we released the <inline font-style="italic">National </inline><inline font-style="italic">suicide prevention strategy</inline><inline font-style="italic">2025</inline><inline font-style="italic">-</inline><inline font-style="italic">2035</inline>, and we've backed that up with real investment. Since 2022-23, more than $610 million has gone into suicide prevention initiatives, including support for people leaving hospital after a suicide attempt. There has been more than $300 million invested in supports designed to be delivered by First Nations communities. Around $200 million has gone into crisis support lines like Lifeline and 13YARN, making sure someone's there when that call comes in. On top of that, there's a $1.1 billion investment in mental health services to expand access and make it easier for people to get help, which includes more Medicare mental health centres, more headspace services and new youth specialist care centres.</para>
<para>These are practical steps that are helping people on the ground, but the ANAO report makes an important point that it's not enough just to spend money. We need to know that it is actually working. We need clear targets, proper tracking and a better way of measuring outcomes. That's why the work of the National Suicide Prevention Outcomes Framework matters. It'll help us understand what's actually making a difference and where we need to do better.</para>
<para>From a men's health point of view, this is absolutely critical. If we want to bring those numbers down, we have to meet men where they're at, which means making services easier to access, more practical and built around real life. It means reaching blokes in workplaces, in clubs and in community and not just expecting them to walk through the front door of a service. It also means getting in earlier, supporting boys and young men, helping them deal with stress, relationships, pressure and change before it builds up. At the same time, we can't ignore bigger pressures people are under right now. The cost of living, housing stress, family breakdowns and exposure to violence all play a role. If we want to reduce suicide, we have to deal with those pressures as well. So, yes, this motion raises real concerns about accountability, and those concerns should be taken seriously.</para>
<para>The government has accepted the ANAO recommendations and is working to strengthen how programs are measured and delivered, because, at the end of the day, this isn't about ticking boxes. It's about making sure that when someone's doing it tough, they can get the help they need and what actually works for them. Every life matters. We owe it to every mate, every worker out there, every community member, every family, every brother and sister to make sure we get this right.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to commend my colleague the member for Bowman, who cares deeply and passionately about this issue, for moving this motion. I also want to recognise the very good work that my colleague the member for Hunter has done, particularly from a regional area perspective and particularly on behalf of men who are overrepresented in this cohort. So to both of you: I want to praise and commend the efforts that you've invested in this very important issue, because it's something that touches many people.</para>
<para>I want to also acknowledge that there are a number of groups in my electorate of Monash who do outstanding work: Zero Suicide community awareness, the Gippsland chapter and the people involved in that organisation; and Donna, the mother of Daniel, who has an organisation named in his honour—Daniel's Wings of Pride. My own journey through this issue started with Lifeline Gippsland as a board member many years ago in my 20s. I also served on the board of Latrobe Regional Hospital. The Flynn Ward there and the very dedicated mental health staff live with the consequences of this issue.</para>
<para>In my early 20s, as many young people are, I was touched by two people, Bec and John-Michael, who took their lives. Some 22 years later, I still think of Bec's little sister and John-Michael's father at their funerals. I think about how they're getting on today. Men's suicide is overrepresented in this cohort. Some 75 per cent of people who completed suicide are men. That equates to about seven men a day as of 2023. We need to do better by husbands and fathers and sons and uncles and nephews and brothers in our community, particularly in our regional communities, which are again overrepresented.</para>
<para>I know it's a real struggle for a number of organisations who do incredibly good work. Just last week I was in Foster at the South Gippsland Hospital. I want to praise the efforts of community and allied health professionals who do all that they can with scant resources at both state and federal government levels and with a number of obstacles in their way. They care deeply, and they're highly skilled professionals who want to make a change in this area.</para>
<para>The recent Auditor-General's report makes clear that what we're doing, with the best of intentions, is not good enough. We have critical gaps in how policies are designed, funded and measured. Despite close to $1 billion in taxpayer investment, there's no consistent or reliable way to determine whether these programs are actually having an impact on suicide rates. We need to have clear initiatives that don't lack clear baselines, targets and outcome tracking. We need funding agreements to meet meaningful evidence of effectiveness. We need to have a system with results that continue to make sure that there are more significant resources in clear line of sight.</para>
<para>Behind these findings is a stark human reality. Around nine Australians lose their life to suicide every day, with more than 150 daily attempts. That's one in five Australians experiencing mental health challenges every year. This is despite decades of focus and growing expenditure with organisations like Beyondblue, headspace—a proud initiative that I've supported along the way—and Lifeline, who do incredible work as well. National suicide rates have remained largely unchanged. I think this highlights the urgent need for a more effective approach. We cannot continue on as we are. Australians deserve a system that prioritises accountability; strengthens community based support; and measures success by lives saved, not money spent.</para>
<para>I know a lot of these organisations run on the smell of an oily rag. When I was involved with Lifeline Gippsland, the op shops across Gippsland would have e-waste sales and do huge amounts of fundraising to support the incredible volunteer telephone counsellors that save lives and make a huge difference every single day of the week. I pay tribute to their efforts. Headspace is a great organisation. We've got a headspace in Wonthaggi and another one in the Latrobe Valley. I am desperately fighting for a new headspace facility in West Gippsland to meet the needs of the growing population. I commend the member for Bowman and this motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRISKEY</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I came to this parliament, I qualified as a child and youth psychologist. That training set me up for a career working with and fighting for people, for children and for families, and it enabled me to have a deep understanding of the impact of mental ill-health and suicide.</para>
<para>This area of policy is deeply personal and mental ill-health is a lived reality for many, many Australians. Every life lost to suicide is a tragedy that leaves a permanent mark not just on families but on friends, workplaces and entire communities. The numbers are stark, and we've heard every speaker on this motion today talk about the stats, and it's really important that we do. Nine Australians are lost every day to suicide, with more than 150 attempts made. But moving beyond those numbers, these are people we know. These are fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters and friends, whose lives should still be with us and whose absence is felt every single day. That's why this government has put suicide prevention at the heart of its mental health and wellbeing agenda.</para>
<para>We know that suicide is never just about one thing. Behind every statistic are layers of complex experiences: mental ill-health, trauma, loneliness, financial stress, housing insecurity, discrimination and more. No single agency or initiative can tackle this alone. It takes a joined-up, whole-of-government, whole-of-community effort. The recent Australian National Audit Office report made clear the need to do more to ensure suicide prevention policies are effective and accountable. The government recognises the importance of measurable outcomes and clear accountability. We are committed to making sure not just that we work hard but that our work makes a measurable difference. That's why we've already taken decisive action.</para>
<para>Last year we launched the National Suicide Prevention Strategy 2025-2035, a comprehensive, evidence based plan for the next decade. But a strategy alone is not enough. It needs to be backed by real investment and practical action, and that's exactly what we're seeking to do. Since returning to government, we have invested over $610 million in suicide prevention initiatives. This includes universal aftercare so that anyone who has been discharged from hospital after an attempt or is in crisis is supported, not left to recover alone. We have directed over $330 million to culturally relevant, community led supports for First Nations people, including to Culture Care Connect. Around $200 million has gone to crisis support lines such as Lifeline and 13YARN so that help is always there at the most critical moments.</para>
<para>But we also know that the drivers of suicide go well beyond the health system. That is why we're tackling cost-of-living pressures, expanding access to affordable housing and confronting family and domestic violence, all of which are linked to suicide risk. We have made medicines more affordable, restored bulk-billing and cut student debt. Through our $1.5 billion Housing Support Program and more than $4 billion since 2022 in initiatives to address domestic, family and sexual violence, we are working to reduce the pressures that can put people into crisis.</para>
<para>I'm especially proud that this commitment reaches into my electorate of Maribyrnong. Young people in Melbourne's north-west will soon have better access to free wraparound support through a brand new headspace in Moonee Valley. The Albanese Labor government is investing $6.2 million over four years to establish this vital service in my community, which is expected to open in 2027. This is all part of our broader $200 million investment to deliver 58 new, upgraded or expanded headspace services across the country.</para>
<para>Headspace plays a vital role in supporting young people aged 12 to 25 with their mental health, physical and sexual health, substance use, work and study. As a child-and-youth psychologist, I've seen how early intervention can change people's lives. That is why I'm a strong advocate for headspace at Moonee Valley and proud to be working with Minister Butler and Assistant Minister McBride to deliver it. As a qualified psychologist, I know firsthand how important it is to understand what works and why. That's why this government is developing the National Suicide Prevention Outcomes Framework, led by the National Suicide Prevention Office in partnership with the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.</para>
<para>I acknowledge the member for Bowman for recognising the bipartisan approach that's needed on this, and, in my role as co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Suicide Prevention, I have the privilege of meeting with peak bodies right across the sector. There is always more to do. That is why we're working every day to build a country where help is available and affordable and is there when people need it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge the good work of my friend the member for Bowman in bringing this motion to the parliament today, and it's an issue which impacts on all Australians because, whether you have been touched personally by suicide or not, chances are you know someone who has. When I first came to this place, 10 years ago, the suicide figures were five people a day; on average it was three men and two women. It's now nine. Nine Australians a day take their lives. I think it's about six or seven men and the rest are women. Every day, for every one person that takes their life there are 150 that attempt to take their life—not week, not month, but every single day. Think about those 159 families and their friends and their colleagues.</para>
<para>I've been there. I have a personal connection. Suicide destroys families. It is so hard for families to recover once a suicide has taken place or suicide is attempted. There are plenty of good, well-meaning organisations that do their best to try and help families recover and help with bereavement. But we've got to look at why: why is it that it is now the leading cause of death for 15- to 40-year-olds in Australia? What is happening in this country that the leading cause of death—more so than car accidents, more so than cancer—for 15- to 40-year-olds is them taking their own lives, where they have got to a point in life where they have thought that it is not worth continuing on any further and that it is not worth putting their family through things any further? What have we done as a society that has developed this?</para>
<para>There are many reasons—a multitude of reasons. One I spoke about earlier in this place, just an hour or so ago, was the rise of pornography in this country. I led the <inline font-style="italic">P</inline><inline font-style="italic">rotecting the </inline><inline font-style="italic">a</inline><inline font-style="italic">ge of</inline><inline font-style="italic"> i</inline><inline font-style="italic">nnocence</inline> inquiry back in 2020, and that committee received harrowing evidence from young kids who had been preyed upon by the porn industry, some as young as seven. The rise of pornography in this country has demonstrably led to rises in domestic violence levels. That is clear; it is beyond doubt. There are so many reasons: housing stress, job insecurity—so many reasons.</para>
<para>But the particular issue that the member for Bowman brings to this debate is the lack of accountability. We spend north of $1 billion a year on trying to address mental health, particularly around suicide, and yet we don't know what's working. We don't know what is working and we don't know what's not working. If we don't track those measurables and if we don't do that effectively in this place or in this government, how will we know what to spend more money on and how will we know what to spend less money on?</para>
<para>I would plead with this government to look more at its deliverables and look more at the accountability of what's working and what's not, because, if we don't learn those lessons, we're just pouring money down a black hole and more and more Australians will take their lives, and nobody wants that.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are few things more painful than watching someone you love struggle with their mental health and not knowing how to ease their pain. Too many families in our community know the helplessness of knowing that someone they love is not coping. Too many know the heartbreak of watching a friend, a partner, a child or a colleague withdraw, carry too much or lose hope. Too many of us live in fear of that phone call. We know that sometimes suicide comes with no perceivable warning. It leaves families, friends and communities reeling with shock, devastation and confusion, asking how this could have happened and whether anything might have changed the outcome. That is part of what makes suicide so deeply heartbreaking for individuals, for families and for our communities. It is not always visible and its impact reaches far.</para>
<para>This work is deeply personal to me and it's one of the reasons I came to this place. In Australia, we know that men are disproportionately impacted by suicide, accounting for over 75 per cent of all suicide deaths. And I have known far too many good men who are no longer with us due to suicide.</para>
<para>Before entering parliament, I was the CEO of Kookaburra Kids, a national youth mental health charity delivering evidence based prevention and early intervention support through peer based programs and activities. I came to that role because I understood firsthand the impact that family mental illness can have on young lives, and I believe deeply in increasing children's mental health knowledge and encouraging help-seeking behaviour. Over those years, through camps and activity days, I saw firsthand the impact those programs had on young people. I saw friendships form, I saw little eyes light up, and I saw the moment the penny drops when a child realises that their mum or dad's experiences and what they're going through aren't their fault. You could see years, sometimes, of stress, guilt or shame begin to lift, and that experience stays with you. It reminds you that suicide prevention is not only about responding in crisis; it's also about early intervention. It's about connection, mental health literacy, reducing stigma and encouraging help-seeking behaviour before distress deepens into despair. I want to give a shout-out to Kookaburra Kids and the 42 Challenge, which begins on 1 April, with fundraisers completing 42 minutes of movement each day, inspired by the 42 per cent of Australian families impacted by mental ill health.</para>
<para>In that sector, as in so many others, important decisions are made here in this place. They shape everyday lives, and they can save them. One of the reasons I entered politics was because I wanted to help shape those decisions here, where national policy can either strengthen the mental health of our communities or, sadly, leave people to fall through the cracks. That's why I am and remain deeply passionate about suicide prevention and why I believe the mental health of our nation must remain a national priority. I thank the member for Bowman for bringing forward this private member's business, along with colleagues who have spoken before me, including the member for Maribyrnong, who's a qualified psychologist, and the member for Hunter, who has been working so incredibly hard as our Special Envoy for Men's Health. I also acknowledge the contribution from the member for Monash.</para>
<para>Suicide is complex. There is no single cause and no single fix. Suicidal distress can be shaped by mental ill health but also by trauma, family violence, financial pressure, insecure housing, loneliness and isolation. That's why preventing suicide requires all levels of government services and the broader community working together. It requires a joined-up approach across health, housing, education and social services, because people do not experience these pressures in silos, and our response cannot be siloed. That's the thinking behind the National Suicide Prevention Strategy 2025-2035 released last year by our government. It recognises that, if we are serious about prevention, we must not only respond when someone is in crisis but also address the broader conditions that lead to suicide and suicidal distress. We've made a significant $1.1 billion investment to support the mental health of Australians more broadly, including through Medicare mental health centres, an expanded headspace network and a new network of youth specialist care centres, because this is life-changing and life-saving work. It's work absolutely worth doing, and it's work that we must keep doing together.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to acknowledge the member for Bowman, Henry Pike, for bringing this important matter to this chamber. I'd like to acknowledge the immense pain felt by those who have lost loved ones to suicide. I bring this topic to this chamber today with the utmost respect for their grief and their ongoing trauma.</para>
<para>In regional Australia, including communities like Streaky Bay and the neighbouring Elliston district, the heartbreak of severe mental health issues is palpable. Recently, those communities have endured an agonising series of losses. The beautiful community of Streaky Bay on the Far West Coast is incredible. I encourage everyone to go and visit this amazing town. But this community of less than 2½-thousand people has had seven suicides in the last two months alone. For a community of that size, that is absolutely unacceptable. Just down the road in Elliston, a community of less than 1½-thousand, they've had three suicides in recent times, ranging from teenagers to locals in their 70s.</para>
<para>Our farmers, teachers, ag workers and regional families are grappling with immense, compounding pressure, and we all feel it. From soaring fuel prices to the unforgiving reality of drought, the weight on their shoulders is heavy. Too often in the country, a culture of suffering and silence prevails. People shoulder impossible burdens completely alone, and they do not ask for help when they desperately need it. I must acknowledge the tireless work of my predecessor, Rowan Ramsey, whose dedicated advocacy secured headspace centres in Port Lincoln, Whyalla, Port Augusta and Port Pirie. I also acknowledge him for getting a Medicare mental health clinic set up in Port Pirie. These services are essential lifelines. But communities like Streaky Bay are a long way away from Port Lincoln or Whyalla, and these are the sorts of communities that are missing out. I encourage the government to focus on these smaller communities in the more remote and regional parts of Australia and indeed South Australia.</para>
<para>Earlier this year, I had the privilege of speaking with April and Georgia, incredible youth advocates from ReachOut Australia. They reminded me of the vital importance of safe, anonymous online support for our young people navigating complex modern challenges. I too, in another career, helped the Black Dog Institute develop an app for mental health in our young people in this country.</para>
<para>Despite these essential services and fantastic organisations, vast and dangerous gaps remain across the electorate of Grey, and it's because of these remaining gaps and the staggering human reality of nine Australians losing their lives to suicide every single day that we must look critically at how national resources are being deployed. More than 150 Australians attempt to take their lives each day.</para>
<para>When the coalition was in government, we proudly backed a $2 billion mental health and suicide prevention plan. We expanded the headspace network to over 150 centres, many in Grey, and funded 40 adult mental health services to support people closer to home. In stark contrast, recent years have seen a retreat. The current government has reduced Medicare funded mental health sessions from 20 to 10 at a time of growing demand. Key coordinating bodies have been absorbed back into the department, severely reducing oversight. We must shift from a focus of inputs and short-term announcements to relentless focus on results and outcomes.</para>
<para>I call on the government to strengthen transparency in funding. Every dollar spent must be tied to clear, measurable outcomes and evaluation. Community based services must be prioritised as our best place to engage locals practically and accessibly. A consistent national framework for accountability must be reinstated so programs can be properly assessed and improved over time. Australians deserve a system that measures success by lives saved, not just by money spent.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made in order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13:17 to 15:59</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>197</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Iran</title>
          <page.no>197</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BOELE</name>
    <name.id>26417</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like in so many places all around the world, Iranian Australians wake up every morning desperately checking to see what's happened overnight in the war in Iran, desperately hoping for confirmation that their loved ones are safe. My team has been meeting with impacted Bradfield constituents to understand what, if anything, we can do to help them.</para>
<para>One young woman had a clear message for our government which I promised to pass on. She urges the government, the Australian government, to take a clear, principled stand with the people of Iran. As the regime continues to lose legitimacy, she says that it's vital that Australia does not offer even symbolic support. She has three clear asks. Firstly, reject the regime. Ensure Australia does not participate in any mourning of the late supreme leader or allow any platform for his praise. Secondly, end the silence. Pressure the regime to immediately restore full internet access. The current digital darkness is a deliberate tactic to stop the world from hearing the people's cries for help and to hide mass executions. And, thirdly, support a democratic transition. Recognise the need for a stable transition to a secular democracy. I stand with my Iranian Australian constituents at this time of immense upheaval and stress.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Richards, Reverend Adam David</title>
          <page.no>197</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STANLEY</name>
    <name.id>265990</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was recently my honour to attend the induction of Reverend Adam Richards as the rector of the Liverpool South Anglican Church. The occasion of Adam's induction was a joyous and happy occasion for the church and its community, and the church has served in our local community for several decades. Also in attendance was Bishop Lin and the senior minister David Clarke. I'm proud to say I've had a long association with the church. All of my children were baptised there. Reverend Richards is no stranger to the south-west of Sydney and is wonderfully qualified for his new position. He served in ministries at Western Sydney University at Campbelltown, St Barnabas in Ingleburn and the Anglicare facility at Minto. Along with his wife, Trudy, and family, I'm confident that Adam will make a genuine and real difference in the lives of many. My community is one that is defined by faith. Sometimes the faith is expressed in a church, such as the one Reverend Richards is now serving, but it's also expressed in temples, mosques and community halls throughout Werriwa. I wish Reverend Richards every success in his ministry and look forward to working with him to build and strengthen our community. I'd like to also take the opportunity to thank the church wardens and the congregations for welcoming me to the ceremony. It was a wonderful night.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland: Agricultural Shows</title>
          <page.no>198</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOYCE</name>
    <name.id>299498</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Agricultural shows have been part of Queensland's story since 1822. Nearly two centuries on, that tradition is still alive, with around 128 shows held across the state each year. These shows don't just happen by chance. They are powered by dedicated volunteers and supported by proud local communities, ensuring our children and grandchildren can experience these traditions and enjoy some good, old fashioned fun. From livestock competitions to local crafts, sideshow alley and country hospitality, agricultural shows are a celebration of rural and regional life at its very best.</para>
<para>But these traditions are under pressure. This year would have marked the 79th annual Mount Perry Show. However, unfortunately, due to skyrocketing fuel costs, rising insurance premiums and a growing shortage of volunteers, the show society at Mount Perry has made the incredibly difficult decision to cancel the annual local show. Mount Perry is not alone. Across regional Queensland, show societies are struggling to keep their gates open. I'm a proud supporter of local shows right across the region, and often you'll see my team and me set up a mobile office at these shows. From Mount Larcom to Mundubbera, we enjoy engaging with the locals and backing these vital community events. However, if we want to preserve these traditions for the future generations, we must do more to support the volunteers, ease the cost pressures and ensure these iconic events continue to thrive and survive.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tuberculosis</title>
          <page.no>198</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tomorrow is World Tuberculosis Day. For many Australians, TB can feel like a disease from another time. Consumption was in some ways seen as a romantic disease in the 18th and 19th centuries. It claimed the lives of artists such as Keats and Emily Bronte. But the reality is that TB is not just a historical anomaly. Despite being preventable and curable, TB remains the world's deadliest infectious disease, claiming around 1.25 million lives every year. Here at home, rates in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are around four times higher than among non-Indigenous Australians. And in our region the challenge is great, with the Indo-Pacific carrying more than half the global TB burden. The health burden falls on our neighbours in PNG and in communities linked there in the Torres Strait.</para>
<para>That's why Australia's role matters. The Albanese government has continued our strong commitment to the Global Fund, investing $266 million to combat TB as well as HIV and malaria, with a clear focus on our neighbours. I'm proud to once again serve as chair of Parliamentary Friends of Australian TB Caucus in this parliament, and I look forward to working with the members for Mackellar and Monash as we continue raising awareness and pushing for practical solutions to tackle TB. While we may not always see it at the moment, it is very real, and together we can be part of a global movement to end TB.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security, Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>198</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The people of the central west are being treated like second-class citizens, and we've had enough. Our region is in an unprecedented state of economic siege caused by a double failure of infrastructure and essential fuel supply that is threatening the food bowl of our nation and the survival of our businesses. Right now farmers are staring at empty diesel tanks, at the very time that seeds need to hit the soil. If this government cannot even secure the fuel needed to sow a crop, it's failed its most basic duty to the Australian people. Let me be clear: if our farmers cannot plant, this nation does not eat.</para>
<para>But the pain doesn't end at the pump. The catastrophic indefinite closure of the Great Western Highway at Victoria Pass is also an absolute disaster. In the Hartley Valley and around our region, local businesses are being smashed. They're watching their customer traffic vanish, their bookings dry up and diversions destroy their livelihoods. From Lithgow to the Darling Causeway, the diversion roads are not built to carry the extra heavy traffic. It is a recipe for tragedy. The Great Western Highway is not fit for purpose.</para>
<para>We are done with the bandaid solutions in the forever roadworks. We are done with waiting and being told to be resilient. Enough is enough. I call on the government to immediately guarantee country Australia's fuel supply and provide a support package for all the businesses affected by this infuriating and entirely foreseeable failure of a bridge built by a convict chain gang in the 1830s. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moreton Electorate</title>
          <page.no>199</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What is the size of 16 Suncorp stadiums? The answer is the Acacia Ridge TAFE. It's the largest trade training facility in the Southern Hemisphere, both in footprint and in student numbers. It has more than a thousand students a day, six tonnes of potato gems a year and 6,000 iced coffees a year. I visited there with the Minister for Skills and Training on 16 March to talk about the $1.8 million for EV skills training facilities through Labor's TAFE Technology Fund. It means that more than 400 students a year, both in Brisbane and Townsville, will benefit from EV training facilities, enabling new skills, new careers and good jobs in clean energy.</para>
<para>I want to congratulate and acknowledge Souths Rugby Union Club, the Magpies, in my seat in Brisbane. On Saturday 14 March we went to the club to celebrate a big facilities upgrade which has transformed that club. The beating soul of that transformation is Chris Hourigan, the chair of the building, infrastructure and community committee, and the president, Brett Whalley. The club proudly boasts being the most successful rugby club in Australia. It has produced more than 70 Queensland representatives and more than 30 Australian representatives. The federal government contributed funding for a 39.6-kilowatt solar system for the clubhouse roof. These upgrades provide the community with better-quality facilities that can be enjoyed by all. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Maugean Skate</title>
          <page.no>199</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's one year this week since the federal government rushed through changes to the EPBC Act to exempt the salmon industry in Macquarie Harbour from oversight and, in doing so, knowingly hastened the extinction of the Maugean skate. This was an egregious act of environmental vandalism done for the grubby purpose of harvesting votes in the seat of Braddon. And it was done despite the environment department's own expert conservation advice detailing the catastrophic impact of salmon farms on the skate and recommending a significant reduction in stocking.</para>
<para>Moreover, just this month we've also learned from FOI documents that the environment minister ignored the department's recommendation to revoke salmon farming expansion approvals in January last year, months before the government brought those amendments to the EPBC Act to the House.</para>
<para>There are many people in Australia and right around the world who haven't forgotten this and continue to fight for the skate. To that end, I'm pleased to welcome to parliament many who were involved in the documentary <inline font-style="italic">Love Letter to the </inline><inline font-style="italic">Unseen</inline>, which follows youth conservationist Spencer Hitchen on a journey to understand more about the skate. The film will be screened in Canberra this week, and I hope it might provide a fresh perspective from a young Australian which can educate my colleagues and the new environment minister about the need to act now to save the skate for future generations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forgotten Australians</title>
          <page.no>199</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WITTY</name>
    <name.id>316660</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to reflect on a visit I recently made to Open Place in Richmond, where I met with Forgotten Australians and listened to their experiences. Forgotten Australians are people who, as children, were placed in institutions, orphanages and out-of-home care. Many were neglected, mistreated and failed by the very systems meant to protect them.</para>
<para>After that visit, one person reached out to me thanking me for taking the time to listen and hear about their childhood in those institutions. They said something that stayed with me. They said they felt warmth, sincerity and compassion in being listened to and that being heard mattered. They also hoped, from hearing their stories, I now understood the challenges Forgotten Australians have carried throughout their lives.</para>
<para>For too many, that that moment of being heard came far too late. Open Place has created a space where those stories are finally acknowledged, but listening is only the beginning. We must remember. We must carry these stories forward, because we cannot forget what happened, and we cannot let it happen again. The task in front of us is to listen, to remember and to make sure the stories of Forgotten Australians shape what we do next.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>199</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians don't need spin. We need honesty. And right now the reality is the economy is weak. Fuel supplies aren't guaranteed, and Australian families are hurting. Households are being squeezed from every direction. Grocery bills are climbing, energy prices are biting, and now uncertainty around fuel supply is adding yet another layer of pressure. For families already struggling to make ends meet, this isn't abstract economics. It's real. It's daily stress. And where is the government? They're missing in action—MIA. Instead of getting ahead of these challenges, they've been reactive, slow and out of touch. At a time when Australians need confidence and certainty, we're getting confusion and excuses. There's no clear plan to strengthen fuel security, no serious effort to bring down costs and no urgency to address the economic fragility that's becoming impossible to ignore. A strong economy doesn't happen by accident; it requires leadership, discipline and foresight, qualities that are severely lacking under this Albanese Labor government. Australians deserve better than this. They deserve a government that understands the pressure they're under, takes responsibility and acts decisively to secure our energy future, restore economic strength and ease the cost-of-living burden. Right now the message from households across the country is loud and clear: Aussies are hurting, and they're not being heard by this woeful Labor Albanese government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Northern Territory: Construction Industry</title>
          <page.no>200</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to recognise our construction industry in the Northern Territory, particularly those in my electorate of Solomon, in Darwin and Palmerston. I attended the Master Builders NT Members Milestone Dinner earlier this month, where we celebrated Territory businesses with 10 years, 15 years, 30 years and even 40 years of membership with Master Builders NT—'building the Territory'.</para>
<para>I was proud to present certificates for 10 years service building the Territory with Selena Uibo, the leader of the Territory opposition, to Asset Construction and Maintenance, to Fusion NT, to Beare Homes, to McMahon Services, to NC Electrical & Air Conditioning and to Precision Shower Screens & Wardrobes. That was for 10 years. I also want to acknowledge the 15-year milestones to Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education, to Fyfe, to KG7, to Northern Trade Solutions and to Ward Keller. The 30-year milestones were awarded to All Cast NT, DCOH—old mate—and Sunbuild. Finally, the 40-year milestones went to Nowland Builders and Sitzler, that great Territory company.</para>
<para>It was a fantastic atmosphere in the room. I want everyone to know that our construction industry in the Northern Territory is strong and continues to deliver quality jobs and outstanding infrastructure for the Territory. Thank you to all.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fuel Security</title>
          <page.no>200</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THOMPSON</name>
    <name.id>281826</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Fuel security is national security, and this government is gaslighting Australians. Last sitting, it was: 'There is no problem. There is no issue.' This sitting, it's: 'The Australian people are the ones who are taking too much fuel, and we still have lots of fuel to go around.' If that was the truth, then we wouldn't see fuel stations shut up—can't get fuel—people not being able to fill up their cars and businesses going without. It's not just people around the country that are doing it tough because of this failed Labor government's policy on fuel security. Small businesses like Sun City Skips are doing it tough. Meals on Wheels, who provide an essential service to give meals to the most vulnerable, are feeling the pinch.</para>
<para>We heard today from the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. He put his hands up in the air and said, 'I'm done.' He threw the toys out of the cot. He can't blame Australians any more. He can't gaslight you. He has no solutions, and people are going to be paying more at the bowser. This isn't good enough. People are already doing it tough. We need a government that puts Australians first, not one that gaslights them and tells them that they've done the wrong thing. People are filling up now because they won't be able to afford it in a week's time when it's $3.50. People are filling up their cars because Australia is a tough place to do business. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Prostate Cancer</title>
          <page.no>200</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LIM</name>
    <name.id>300130</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently, a Tangney constituent told me about his battle with prostate cancer. He broke down in tears and shared his struggles. His diagnosis has greatly affected his mental health. He is not the only one. Many Tangney constituents have told me about their prostate cancer diagnosis—men who were not aware of or dismissed early symptoms and others who had no idea about the risk associated with family history or generally ignored their health. All of them who spoke to me were shocked that this had happened to them. They speak with deep regrets. Some have long-term physical and mental effects from their treatment. Others are on the other side of treatments and are now strong advocates for more awareness, more conversation and more testing. It is easy to put off difficult conversations with doctors, but we have seen the consequences of not having these important talks. Open conversations like those I had recently in Tangney with community groups like the Melville Men's Shed and the Sikh community leaders need to happen more frequently and more often. We need to be more aware and be more proactive. Our lives depend on it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>200</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Fuel and fertiliser supply disruptions are now being felt across Australia. While national fuel stocks remain stable for the moment, price shocks and supply risks are escalating, particularly in regional areas. Industries are already experiencing sharp increases in fuel costs. Freight and logistics operators have imposed steep fuel surcharges, with air freight seeing sudden increases and shipping lines adding emergency container fees. Many businesses are absorbing these costs in the short term, but they have made it clear that they cannot do this into the future. There is a growing concern about diesel availability, especially in regional and rural communities. Higher fuel costs are also impacting workers who rely on travel.</para>
<para>Beyond fuel, we are seeing industrial supply chain disruptions, particularly in petrochemicals, plastics, construction materials and fertilisers. Nitrogen is fundamental to Australian productivity, and any sustained disruption to supply has serious implications. It has implications for food production, farm input costs and broader food security. Disruption will feed into inflation, which was already a problem because of the Albanese government's record spending and failure to address productivity. Diesel is needed by Matt to harvest his pears, Luke to plant his wheat and Mandy to milk her cows. If they can't get diesel and carry out those operations, Australia is in real trouble.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>De La Hunty, Mr Bob, OAM</title>
          <page.no>201</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BERRY</name>
    <name.id>23497</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to recognise Bob De La Hunty, who is President, Chief Pilot and a Life Member of the Historical Aircraft Restoration Society, which is known as HARS. It's located at Shellharbour Airport in my electorate of Whitlam. HARS is a not-for-profit organisation run by volunteers. It operates an award-winning aviation museum that is admired around the world as well as the Australian Aviation Hall of Fame. Bob is a veteran pilot who was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia in the year 2000 for service to the preservation of Australian aviation history, particularly through HARS. He has been the heart and soul of HARS for decades, leading its mission to recover and, where possible, restore to flying condition aircraft or types of aircraft that have played a significant part in Australian aviation history. There are over 50 aircraft on display at HARS, with about 20 of them still airworthy. Bob is central to the preparations for the arrival, expected in May, of one of the remaining parts of a Boeing 707, donated by John Travolta, who is a renowned aviation enthusiast and a former ambassador for Qantas. Adding one of the last surviving examples of this rare Boeing 707 to HARS will further boost Bob's legacy.</para>
<para>I thank Bob De La Hunty for his huge contribution to the Shellharbour region and, more broadly, to preserving the history of Australian aviation for both current and future generations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme</title>
          <page.no>201</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In 2024, the government passed legislation promising to get the NDIS back on track, but what was sold as a crackdown on fraud has instead clamped down heavily on participants. Clients, advocates and lawyers have reported that new support definitions, funding caps, travel billing restrictions, narrower review pathways and changes to funding periods have reduced participant support. As a result, almost one-third of NDIS participants whose packages have been reassessed since May 2025 have had their support reduced and there is huge anxiety in the disability community about the support needs assessment tool, which is due to be rolled out in mid 2026. I'm hearing from providers like Learning for Life, in Kew, and Abacus, in Hastings, that support for children in the NDIS early childhood pathway is decreasing and that they do not have a clear pathway for transition into the Thriving Kids program.</para>
<para>I believe in the promise of Thriving Kids, but lack of timelines and lack of clarity regarding its rollout are creating anxiety for parents and threatening the financial viability of providers. I'm calling on the responsible ministers to give constituents and their carers greater clarity and confidence in Thriving Kids, in that rollout and in the government's full commitment to the NDIS.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hotel Etico</title>
          <page.no>201</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Saturday, Hotel Etico CEO and co-founder Andrea Comastri finished a 400-kilometre, 13-day run right here at Parliament House. I was among those who waved Andrea off from Mount Victoria on Sunday 8 March as he began the Long Run to Inclusion. The mission was to connect Hotel Etico's original home in Mount Victoria, which I officially opened in 2022, with their two new academies of independence, in Leura and Canberra. Hotel Etico is a multi-award-winning, not-for-profit, social enterprise hotel—the first in Australia—and a trusted industry partner in tourism and hospitality. Their innovative model lets young people with disability work alongside hospitality professionals to build skills, confidence and real-world experience that supports their transition into open employment. Since it began, Hotel Etico has employed and trained 50 young people, with 86 per cent of its graduates gaining secure, ongoing employment in the tourism and hospitality industry.</para>
<para>Their run wasn't all easy, but they arrived in Canberra on World Down Syndrome Day, dancing on the front lawn and finally finishing in the rain at the Mercure Canberra, the site of their new academy of independence. I congratulate them and thank them for their ongoing dedication to inclusion.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Groom Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>202</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's show season on the Darling Downs. Last weekend, I went to the Oakey Show. I want to thank Judy Byers and all her team for the great show they put on. There is nothing bigger at the Oakey Show than the supreme grand champion bull. This year, Mr Jasper took it out. He's taken out titles in Pittsworth, Cooyar and Allora—a massive, massive beast. I haven't seen that much bull since the last election! He is a huge, big thing.</para>
<para>But my favourite event of the show season, of course, is the emerging leaders breakfast at the Toowoomba show. This is a breakfast the subchamber put on with President Lyndall Neal, Secretary Lorraine Crothers and Treasurer Adele Saville. They put it on so that the showgirls and rural ambassadors get some great experience in leadership by standing up and talking to people leading their communities. It's one of the best things on the show circuit because you get to watch the next generation of regional leaders come through. The showgirl circuit's been doing a wonderful thing in my region for a long time. It's an important part of our local communities, and it's a great way for young people to get the opportunity to speak out and to learn.</para>
<para>The Toowoomba heritage show has been going for 165 years. It's the oldest event of its type. This is a great event. I want to thank everyone who's involved in it. I want to thank the community who gets behind it. Every year, we get people from right across the region turning up and supporting this great community event. It's one of the best things in Toowoomba.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>202</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The RSL care home is a war veterans' home located in the quiet, leafy eastern suburb of Myrtle Bank in my electorate of Sturt. It was officially opened on 24 March 1917, following 18 months of community fundraising by the Soldiers Home League. Shortly thereafter, it became known as the War Veterans' Home Myrtle Bank. Now accommodation in the War Veterans' Home at Myrtle Bank is offered as a priority to veterans, war widows and their dependants. It is home to 95 residents.</para>
<para>When I recently visited the RSL care home, I met Jacko. A veteran herself, she was very much running the show, although I'm sure she would deny it. The care, empathy and dedication that Jacko showed not only to the residents but also to her colleagues is something I'll never forget. Whilst the grounds, rooms and facilities at the RSL care home are lovely, what really makes it special is the standard of care that is being provided to residents. Jacko knew the residents by name, including Angas, Wilf, Wes and Nance—all of whom I met and all over 100 years old or getting close. Jacko really is illustrative of the wonderful Australians who not only served our country but who are now working in aged care, supporting our veterans and giving every part of themselves to ensuring that dignity and kindness are afforded to older Australians every single day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>202</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CALDWELL</name>
    <name.id>306489</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to tell this House of the importance of where our economy is at. Our economy is weak, fuel supplies aren't guaranteed, and Australians are hurting. A story that, regrettably, illustrates this is from a friend of ours who is the manager of a local Woolworths. She's told me that in the last two weeks she has had to fire three staff members because of theft from that store—not theft of things that are nice-to-haves in life but toothpaste and food like pasta and pasta sauce. Why? Why are these staff, working in a retail environment, having to steal food and the basics? Because under this Labor government their standard of living has slipped enormously. We must restore Australia to being a country where life is affordable, where our kids can buy a home, where you can raise a family and where there is a fair go once again—a country of strength and unity. Only the coalition will restore Australians' standard of living.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tasmania: Roads</title>
          <page.no>202</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms URQUHART</name>
    <name.id>231199</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Through the Australian government's $150 million Remote Roads Upgrade Pilot Program, the Albanese Labor government is backing projects that strengthen our regional communities. As part of this program, Central Coast Council received $7.5 million for the Ironcliffe Road upgrade, which I officially opened last week. The project has upgraded 8.6 kilometres of Ironcliffe Road with road widening and sealing, safer curves, upgraded intersections and lighting, new line marking, safety barriers and footpaths. These works have delivered safer travel for all road users, improved access for residents and stronger connections for farms, businesses and homes right along this important road.</para>
<para>Importantly, the upgrade increases freight capacity for high-productivity vehicles—a lot of farming and tourism businesses are up this road—supporting the efficiency and growth of our local agricultural sector. I also especially want to acknowledge the contractor on this project, Hardings Group, a Tasmanian owned and operated company and a cornerstone of our state's civil construction industry. This year, Harding celebrates 40 years of operation, growing from a two-person business into a trusted and respected business, employing more than 100 Tasmanians. Their local knowledge, skilled workforce and long-term commitment in Tasmania are critical to delivering high-quality infrastructure that regional communities rely on.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>203</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAFFEY</name>
    <name.id>316312</name.id>
    <electorate>Parkes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is apparent to anyone living and working in the communities across the Parkes electorate that there is a dire lack of access to child care. In fact, the region is often described as a childcare desert. That's why it was so worrying to me to hear that a preschool in Broken Hill had closed suddenly in November last year, leaving many families without the care they needed for their children. No trustworthy, reliable care means a lack of working options for parents and very much limits their ability to earn a wage.</para>
<para>I'm happy to report that another early learning centre, Explorers Early Learning long-day-care centre, has just opened—a great result for families in Broken Hill. Of course, the opening of this centre was not without its hiccups. Explorers wrote to me on 17 February this year in desperation, seeking my help to expedite the assessment of their Child Care Subsidy application. The application had been filed in January. Two weeks later, the centre reached out to the NSW Department of Education to see how it was progressing. The short answer was: it wasn't progressing.</para>
<para>Without approval of the Child Care Subsidy application, the families were facing full-fee costs to put their children through the centre. Explorers sought help through my office. I was able to advocate on their behalf, seeking the urgent assessment of the application and highlighting how important it was to provide child care in Broken Hill as quickly as possible. I applaud the people behind Explorers Early Learning— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>203</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SOON</name>
    <name.id>298618</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>People in my electorate of Banks remain concerned by the cost of living, and understandably so, but, last week, households in my electorate got some very good news. The Australian Energy Regulator published the latest draft Default Market Offer, which shows electricity will be getting cheaper from 1 July this year in my home state of New South Wales. This will be welcome relief for households and businesses in my state, as well as for Victorians, South Australians and the people of South-East Queensland.</para>
<para>This is all down to more renewable energy and batteries powering the grid, like the 10-megawatt Padstow community battery that is powering homes in my electorate of Banks and giving residents access to cheaper electricity plans. The reductions in this DMO will save households in my electorate hundreds of dollars per year, which is why, unlike the Leader of the Opposition when he was energy minister, we are not changing the rules to hide this Default Market Offer from the Australian people. This draft DMO is positive proof that the government's agenda is working, with more renewables, more cheaper home batteries and a more secure energy grid for communities like mine in Banks.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hinkler Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>203</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATT</name>
    <name.id>315478</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On International Women's Day, I had the great pleasure of sponsoring and attending the Zonta Club of Bundaberg's brunch. The Young Women in Leadership Award finalists featured a group of five focused and driven young women, and I had the opportunity to announce the overall winner: Imogen Anderson. The inaugural Robyn Rehbein Yellow Rose Award recipient was Ann Vautin. Congratulations to Imogen, Ann and all the nominees, and to Zonta for supporting, empowering, uplifting and celebrating women and girls.</para>
<para>Customer service is always the number one priority when it comes to doing good business. I learnt that lesson from a young age when I worked in the deli at Woolies on Thursday nights and Saturday mornings. So it felt like being at home when I got to visit Woolworths Kepnock in Bundaberg to celebrate the remarkable achievement of Rebecca Erwin, the national winner of the Woolworths Fresh Leader Award. It recognises someone who brings passion for fresh in stores. Bec's extensive knowledge and passion for developing others, particularly women in leadership, empowers her team to succeed. Congratulations, Bec, on this national award.</para>
<para>In my quest to visit every single school in my electorate and spread the word about civics, I was pleased to present flags to the Pialba State School captains Devon and Avaley last week, along with Principal Matt Winter, who advised that the school is the oldest in Hervey Bay at 142 years old. On Friday, I also attended Childers State School for a flag presentation and Harmony Day celebrations. Our future is in great hands.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bullwinkel Electorate: Community Groups</title>
          <page.no>203</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In a world that often feels fast paced and unpredictable, many in our community in Bullwinkel are feeling the ripple effects of global uncertainty, whether it's the rising cost of fuel or the weight of international unrest. Yet, in times like these, we are reminded that our greatest strength isn't found in global headlines but in the local connections that ground us and keep us moving forward. In my electorate, I see the strength and the incredible power of our local religious and cultural groups, the quiet architects of peace and social cohesion.</para>
<para>Over the past few weeks, I've been privileged to witness firsthand how these communities are actively choosing connection over isolation. Last sitting, it was an honour to host an iftar in parliament, sharing a meal and reflection during the holy month of Ramadan. I also joined Roya and Tracey from Gosnells Safe Communities Now to welcome the Persian new year, the Nowruz, a beautiful celebration of renewal and hope. In Orange Grove. I joined Councillor Tony Thomas from the city of Armadale at the St Joseph Syro-Malabar Parish for the Feast of St Joseph, experiencing the vibrant faith and hospitality that defines their community. In these gatherings we are seeing community groups that choose peace over discord. I thank them for being the steadying ground that they— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>204</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I'm taking the opportunity to celebrate a huge win for the Nambucca Valley. As of last week, the long-awaited CT scanner is finally operational at Macksville District Hospital. This critical piece of machinery will enable early diagnosis, support, emergency and inpatient care and increase overall access and availability in the Nambucca region for imaging, with no more travelling the 120-kilometre round trip to Coffs Harbour. The knock-on positive effects for the Coffs Harbour base hospital's overreached emergency department will be immediate as they'll no longer have to take on all those patients from the Nambucca Valley.</para>
<para>Since 2019, I've been campaigning alongside community health leaders for this life-saving machinery to be delivered and, despite securing funding in 2021, it's been a bumpy ride. But on Thursday I received the fantastic news from the Mid North Coast Local Health District chief executive Jill Wong that the scanner not only is functional but will be operating seven days a week, with additional radiographers now employed and plans in place to accept outpatient referrals in the future, significantly increasing service access to the entire Mid North Coast. I'd like to thank Jill for her collaborative approach in working with me to see this come to a reality at the end of her first year. I look forward to many more years of joint advocacy together.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hoare, Mr Barry, Ireland, Mr Robert</title>
          <page.no>204</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to pay tribute to two steadfast members of our Labor family, Robert 'Bob' Ireland and Barry Hoare, whose lives were defined by service to our movement, to education and to their communities. Bob Ireland was born into a proud Labor family in Sydney in 1943, and his commitment to the Australian Labor Party began early, joining at just 17. In 2009, he was awarded life membership. Across decades of branch service, including many years at the Caringbah and Adamstown branches, where he served as president, Bob fully embodied Labor's values of solidarity, fairness and community.</para>
<para>Bob also made an extraordinary contribution to education as a teacher, head teacher and principal and through his commitment to special education. He devoted his life to creating opportunities for young people. He was also devoted to his beloved wife, Ludi, and their three children, David, Kath and Peter, and six grandchildren. In recent years, Bob cared for Ludi with endless love and compassion.</para>
<para>I also want to honour the remarkable life of Barry Hoare, who recently passed away at the age of 98. Barry was a treasured lifelong member of Newcastle City branch and a true Labor stalwart. He was a staunch advocate for seniors and pensioners throughout his life and remain engaged for as long as his health allowed, always sharing stories from his working life, including his time as a train conductor and his memorable meeting with Gough Whitlam when cabinet travelled by rail to Newcastle. Vale, Bob and Barry. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>2025 Scenic Rim Business Excellence Awards</title>
          <page.no>204</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Scenic Rim Business Excellence Awards were hosted the other night, and it was a great evening. These were some of the category winners. Excellence in Hospitality, Food, Beverage and Dining went to Roast Beef & the Frog, at the Overflow at Wyaralong. The reason they call it the 'frog' is because the chef is a Frenchman. Excellence in Accommodation went to Clandulla Cottages and Farmstay, at Boyland, and Excellence in Tourism went to the Kalbar Sunflower Festival, at which they actually have to cap the numbers at 5,000 because it's so popular. Excellence in Education went to Boonah State High School, who edged out McAuley College, from Beaudesert. Excellence in Health and Wellbeing went to Tamborine Mountain Psychology, and Excellence in Sustainability and Innovation went to Edge Hairdressing at Tamborine Mountain. Excellence in Retail went to My Country Escape, at Canungra—a very popular winner. Excellence in Agriculture, Trade and Construction went to Franklin Plumbing and Gas, also up at Tamborine Mountain. The boys are doing an amazing job. Most Outstanding New Business went to Canungra Beauty.</para>
<para>Of course we have to promote the next wave of businesspeople coming through, and the Trainee/Apprentice of the Year went to Rose Heggie from Boonah State High School; she's doing an apprenticeship with HairShine Hair Fashions. We had over 60 nominees. Please, if you haven't been to the Scenic Rim, do yourself a favour and come and enjoy the beauties that are on offer.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Blair Electorate: Community Events</title>
          <page.no>205</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's been a huge week in my electorate of Blair, with a number of exciting announcements. First up, last Tuesday I announced that a new 24-unit social housing project is under construction in North Ipswich thanks to $14.2 million in funding from the Albanese Labor government. The complex is being delivered by the Queensland government and is due to be finished later this year, delivering much-needed social housing for fast-growing Ipswich. On the same day I was honoured to help open the new Independent Liquor Group Swanbank distribution centre. This $35 million investment will create over 400 new local jobs in Ipswich and support around 500 family owned independent liquor and hospitality businesses across Queensland who are ILG members.</para>
<para>Then on Wednesday I was thrilled to speak at and help with the sod turning and launch of the Future Forgeworks Swanbank Steel Mill, in Ipswich. This will be Queensland's first-ever steel manufacturing facility and the first steel mill in Australia in over 30 years, producing recycled, low-emission green steel reinforced bar, or rebar, for the construction industry and, very likely, for the 2032 Olympic bid. Future Forgeworks are working with the federally funded National Reconstruction Fund for funding. I congratulate them. It's a game changer. It will inject $100 million into the Ipswich and South-East Queensland economies and deliver hundreds of local jobs.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gambling Advertising</title>
          <page.no>205</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHANEY</name>
    <name.id>300006</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Tomorrow marks 1,000 days since Peta Murphy, the former member for Dunkley, introduced the <inline font-style="italic">You win some, you lose </inline><inline font-style="italic">more</inline> report into the parliament and reported that to an empty room. No action on gambling reform has happened from the government in the 1,000 days since then, and I am devastated about it.</para>
<para>During that committee inquiry we heard about 45 hours of evidence from people whose lives were being destroyed by gambling. There is broad public support for gambling reform, yet there has been radio silence from the government. We can only conclude that that is because the government is listening to the money and the power more than to the people of Australia. Sports codes benefit from gambling revenue; TV stations benefit from it as well, with all the ad revenue, and the betting companies themselves make political donations and make millions of dollars from Australians every single day.</para>
<para>On the anniversary tomorrow, I would ask every member of the government to really think about Peta Murphy's legacy and what she did when she was here. I loved being on that committee. It was collaborative. It got agreement from across the political spectrum on 31 recommendations, and the time is overdue for action on gambling reform. This is what the Australian community wants.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further statements by honourable members, the next item of business will be called on.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>205</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Agriculture Industry</title>
          <page.no>205</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes recently released forecasts from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences show that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's farm gate production value is forecast to exceed $100 billion this financial year, four years ahead of the National Farmers Federation's 2030 target; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) agriculture, fisheries and forestry exports will reach a record high of almost $85 billion in 2025-26, with more demand than ever for Australia's world-class food and fibre;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that this significant milestone was achieved with the hard work, resilience and skill of Australia's primary producers; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) acknowledges the significant investments the Government has made in agriculture, fisheries and forestry since coming to Government in support of the industry's target including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) strengthening biosecurity with more than $2 billion in new funding to keep Australia free from the world's most invasive pests and diseases;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) boosting the agricultural workforce bringing employers, unions and government together to tackle the workforce challenges impacting Australia's agriculture and processing industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) making agricultural trade the most diversified it has ever been through 256 market access achievements since July 2022; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) building a climate resilient agriculture sector through the Agriculture and Land Sector Plan backed by more than $2 billion in investment to ensure our farmers and producers can confidently face our climate future.</para></quote>
<para>I rise today to speak about the strength, resilience and future of one of the most important sectors in our nation, Australian agriculture, and what it means for communities like mine in the broader Hunter region. Across our region and right across the country, farmers, fishers and freight operators are navigating a period of real uncertainty. The world is in flux at the moment. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is creating pressure on supply chains and global markets, and people on the ground are feeling it. We see you. In the Hunter—where agriculture, transport, mining and regional industry are deeply connected—we know these global challenges are never far from the farm gate or the supermarket shelf, but what I see every single day in communities like mine is resilience. I see producers who keep showing up, adapting and adopting, getting on with the job of feeding and clothing our nation and our neighbours in the Asian region.</para>
<para>Recently I had the privilege of seeing the future of that resilience firsthand when I attended the graduation at Tocal agricultural college on Friday. There I stood among hundreds of students, young people who've chosen a life on the land or in the agricultural industries. I saw graduates stepping forward with skills, confidence and determination—and some of the best seventies mos and mullets I've seen in a long time, from some of those lads. And the amount of young women was just incredible. These people are embracing agriculture as the future. I also saw tens of scholarships awarded to current students—real, tangible support that is helping them stay in their training and education to build their knowledge and pursue careers in agriculture and the agtech services. It was a powerful reminder that, while we often talk about challenges in the sector, there is enormous optimism and so much youthful energy because the next generation of farmers is already in there making and doing. They're learning how to innovate, how to adapt and how to lead. They understand that agriculture today is not just about tradition; it's about technology, sustainability and global opportunity. And that gives me so much confidence in the future of agriculture in regions like the Hunter and in Australia more broadly.</para>
<para>Despite the challenges—despite the droughts, the floods and the increasingly unpredictable weather—there is a very strong story to tell. The latest forecast from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural Resource Economics and Science—ABARES, as it's affectionately known—shows that the value of Australia's agricultural production is on track to exceed $100 billion—with a B—this financial year alone. That's an extraordinary milestone. It means we are set to meet and exceed the National Farmers' Federation 2030 target four years ahead of schedule. Just a few years ago, it seemed impossible, and we're already beating it. When our government came to office, agricultural production was valued at around $88 billion. Since then, it's grown by 15 per cent. Exports are also reaching record highs with agriculture, fisheries and forestry expected to hit almost $85 billion this financial year. That's more Australian produce meeting and reaching more markets than ever before. And that matters to regions like mine and to our country.</para>
<para>Our farmers don't just produce world-class food and produce; they underpin our regional economies. And that's why the work we're doing to diversify trade opportunities is so important. By removing trade barriers and restoring access to key markets, including securing the return of $20 billion worth of trade with China, we're making sure our producers have more options, more resilience and more certainty.</para>
<para>But I know this government knows that behind these numbers are real people. Behind these numbers are real problems too. People have faced floods. They're dealing with increasing costs, managing the stress of an increasingly unpredictable climate and world. It has been a difficult period for many, and we get that. That's why our focus is not just on growth but on support. We're strengthening biosecurity to protect our industries. We're investing in the agricultural workforce and we're backing innovation and sustainability so that farmers have the tools they need to adapt to the changing challenges and conditions because we know that getting it right is so important for our farming futures.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Neumann</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ALDRED</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a pleasure to follow my colleague the member for Paterson, with whom I'm pleased to be co-hosting a screening of <inline font-style="italic">Just a Farmer</inline>, a really important film, next week in this parliament to promote the importance and understanding of mental health in our farming communities.</para>
<para>In the Monash electorate I'm proud to represent a community that grows, makes and manufactures things the rest of our country relies on. When my region does well, the rest of Victoria and Australia succeed. So this week I'm really looking forward to the annual Farm World event. It's one of our largest field days in Australia. I think it's the best field-day event in Australia, and it's the hottest ticket in West Gippsland this week. Farm World is a celebration of our region, the produce and the people that are behind our agricultural sector, and this year it's going to celebrate 59 years. I think, give or take maybe three or four years, I've attended every Farm World event over the last 20 years.</para>
<para>This year it'll run for three days and draw more than 40,000 visitors to our region. We'll see close to 500 exhibitors showcasing 700 brands across 100 acres. It never fails to draw a big crowd, providing an opportunity for local farmers to browse machinery, share best practice, look at the latest technologies, talk with experts and, most importantly, have that peer-to-peer connection which is so important for our regional and agricultural communities. All visitors can browse an array of stalls, showcasing items from lawn mowers to plants and clothing, and enjoy the equestrian showcase, rodeo action and motocross, and see a number of working animals in action. It educates people from the city on regions like Monash—electorates like Monash—which grow and make things the rest of our country rely on. I will be sad to miss the women in ag lunch this Thursday, due to parliamentary commitments, but I know it will be a great success.</para>
<para>I've been working with local farmers who are waiting on fuel orders to arrive. I'm speaking with dairy farmers who have been forced to make several trips a day into town with jerry cans while they're waiting on those fuel orders, because without fuel they can't operate machinery to feed their herds, harvest or irrigate. I know that is causing a lot of mental and emotional stress for local farming families in my electorate of Monash right now. I want to say to them I stand with you, I'm standing up for you and I'm doing everything I can to back our community through this fuel crisis.</para>
<para>Added to this stress, a number of farmers from my electorate have also reported diesel thefts from their properties. These farmers are already paying through the roof for fuel, and now they're facing thieves on their farms. I know of a number of situations where farmers are sleeping next to machinery or driving all the equipment off farm, as far as 30 minutes away, to guard against thieves drilling into tractor fuel tanks and siphoning diesel. I want to acknowledge Krowera farmer Shane Uren, who had 250 litres stolen from a tractor at 2 am on Friday; Nyora farmer Russell Follett, who last week discovered a drill hole in his tractor's fuel tank; and Krowera farmer Andrew Thomas, who's also had some concerning incidents on his farm.</para>
<para>I want to say also that I am a huge supporter of agricultural field days across Australia, along with Farm World. There are around 35 agricultural field days across our country, and they play an incredibly important role in sharing best practice, availing farmers of the latest technology and providing that really important peer-to-peer support. That's why I'm backing calls from the Association of Agricultural Field Days of Australasia for the federal government to step up and recognise events like Farm World in my electorate as essential regional infrastructure. We know these events are key to Australia remaining a world-class provider and producer of food and fibre, and I want that contribution to be recognised, understood and supported at a federal government level.</para>
<para>Collectively, those 35 national field days represent over a million visitors annually, 20,000-plus participating businesses, $2 billion plus in facilitated trade every year and $120 million in regional economic output, and they have over 50 per cent farmer attendance. Many of these events have operated continuously since the late 1800s and remain a critical economic driver for federal electorates like mine. But since COVID, with flood, drought and bushfire, with operating costs increasing up to 300 per cent and with a reduced capacity for sponsorship, a lot of these field days are under great strain, and that's why I'm standing up on their behalf.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Paterson for the motion. I acknowledge her longstanding commitment to the regions and to our farmers and primary producers in agriculture, fisheries and forestry. The recently released forecast from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural Resources, Economics and Science, or ABARES, was terrific news. It shows that Australian agriculture is due to hit over $100 billion—in fact, $101.4 billion—this financial year. This means, of course, that we have $100 billion for 2030, four years ahead of the National Farmers' Federation target. They anticipated and hoped and aspired to $100 billion of production by 2030. We've got this four years ahead of schedule, up from $88 billion when we came to power in May 2022. We've achieved the target set by industry by working together—industry, our farmers and the Albanese Labor government.</para>
<para>Our government's careful and considered approach to restoring international relations has helped Australian agriculture, and our support for Australian agriculture remains strong during this period. We know, of course, there have been many challenges, and that's why the $100 billion is totally worth supporting and celebrating. The $100 billion target has come at a time when we know some of our farmers have been impacted by drought, floods and rain and by trade displacements across the globe. Conflicts like we're seeing currently have flow-on effects in terms of localised fuel shortages in some areas. I see that in the floods, rains and cyclonic conditions across Ipswich and the Somerset region in my electorate and in the fires which have impacted the farming communities as well. So this is an extraordinary result, and it's a testimony to Australian farmers, industry and government working hard together.</para>
<para>Our trade is more diverse than it's ever been, and we're on target; for agriculture, fisheries and forestry, it is $85 billion in exports during the financial year. That's a very significant figure, and of course it's down to the careful and considered work we've been doing to restore our trade relationships—I pay tribute to Don Farrell, the Minister for Trade and Tourism—and, of course, to work with industry. Over 250 new market achievements have been reached by this government since we came to office. We're working with industry closely and carefully and working with international partners to achieve the record figure that we're talking about in this motion today. This is important for many communities in my electorate, such as in rural parts of Ipswich and the Somerset region, where beef farming in particular and poultry production are major industries. This $100 billion forecast translates to thriving regional communities and thriving rural places, and that's great for a country as big as Australia. This year's outlook is a remarkable achievement and testimony to the immense resilience and skill of our agricultural workforce.</para>
<para>We've worked to ensure Australians can gain the skills they need for good, secure regional jobs that help keep Australian agriculture strong. At the same time, it's worth noting the PALM Scheme is one of the things that has helped achieve this $100 billion figure. We've got over 17,000 people contributing to our agricultural sector through the PALM Scheme, including some in my electorate and surrounding areas like the Lockyer Valley in South-East Queensland. It's been an outstanding success for this country. We're also working with our neighbours at the same time to give people opportunity and financial security both here and in their home countries. There are 10,000 workers working in meat processing as well. That again gives you a sense of the workforce, the work that's going on in this area and the contribution that's needed to achieve the $100 billion figure. We've got a number of big meat processors in my electorate, including the JBS plant at Dinmore in Ipswich and Kilcoy Global Foods in the Somerset region, both in Kilcoy and Coominya. They're some of the biggest employers in the region. They make a huge contribution to local economies and to farmers who produce beef cattle and send their produce to these particular meat processing areas. I'm very proud to be part of a government that supports our meat processors and our farming communities.</para>
<para>I want to congratulate the NFF, for their vision, and the government. Over $100 billion for Australia's agricultural production is significant, and it's worth celebrating. It's a result of the advocacy of the NFF and the cooperation and collaboration we've had with them, and I want to congratulate them in particular. I acknowledge the challenge our farmers are experiencing now and look forward to our recommitting ourselves to their welfare and their families.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>How refreshing it is to hear Labor talking about productivity and agriculture! Farmers know very well about supply and demand, but, unfortunately, Labor doesn't. Energy Minister Chris Bowen claims there's no fuel supply issue, but we now know six supply ships have been cancelled or delayed so far. In Mallee, fuel is running out. Farmers can't sow the seed, spray the weeds, dry out their wet crops after unseasonal rain or harvest without diesel. If farmers don't plant a crop, or lose a crop, or lose yields, or are downgraded on quality because they don't have fuel, guess what? The export returns that the member for Paterson talks about will simply evaporate.</para>
<para>Labor doesn't understand supply or demand and certainly doesn't understand regional Australia. The former coalition government bolstered diesel supplies by increasing our storages by 40 per cent when we were in government. Great farmgate returns are one thing, but huge spikes in input costs are another. One of my Mallee constituents saw fuel prices at his local bowser go up 10c per day.</para>
<para>Fertiliser is another major input cost, and the conflict blocking the Strait of Hormuz is impacting around two-thirds of Australia's annual urea imports. Prices have gone up from around $840 per tonne to about $1,400 per tonne, higher than the spike we experienced when Russia invaded Ukraine. The coalition understand urea supply, which is why we funded the Perdaman urea project—through the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility—which we gave major project status. Perdaman will produce around two million tonnes per year of urea, starting in less than a year's time—2027—and estimated to reach full production in June 2027. You're welcome.</para>
<para>One million tonnes of that output, about half, has been earmarked for the Australian market, which would meet about 96 per cent of our total domestic demand, with Incitec Pivot—through Macquarie Group—to manage all of the offtake from that project. The coalition supported Perdaman through the NAIF and the Export Finance Authority. Some $744 million in support has been provided for the $6 billion Perdaman project, largely through NAIF loans, to support the ports and water supply elements that Perdaman needs to be successful.</para>
<para>Through the NAIF, the former coalition government also funded the Water Corporation's seawater scheme to the tune of $95 million, to underpin the industrial precinct in the area—including Yara Pilbara, which I visited in my former capacity as shadow minister for regional development in October.</para>
<para>One million tonnes per annum of urea, meeting almost all of our demand—that's what the Nationals, as a party of government in coalition, deliver for regional Australia and for our productivity into the future. We have a fuel supply and price emergency in Australia, particularly in regional Australia right now. Without fuel, Australian farmers won't produce the food we need. The last things we need during Labor's homegrown cost-of-living crisis are fuel and food price spikes that further reduce the value of Australian wages. Australians deserve better than this Labor government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank God there is a federal Labor government! People listening may be a bit confused, but, under those opposite, we went from six refineries down to two refineries, and most of the fuel reserves were offshore, somewhere in the United States, whereas we have ramped up fuel reserves so that we can respond in times of crisis like this, having that capacity here onshore or in our EEZ. That is important, and it is helping us manage the situation at the moment.</para>
<para>I want to celebrate our primary producers, but right from the outset I want to acknowledge that we understand that it has been a difficult period for many farmers across the country. Australia's weather extremes—it is a place of drought and flooding plains, such as what we're seeing in the territory at the moment—mean it has often been a hard time to be on the land. That makes it even more impressive that ABARES, the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, forecast that in the current financial year we're on track to reach that $100 billion in agricultural output, which is outstanding—four years earlier than the 2030 target. I want to give a shout-out to the National Farmers' Federation and everyone who has advocated to help our primary producers reach that target. The metres of rain, such as is falling on the Territory, is good for feed, but of course it degrades the roads over which cattle trucks, as an example, travel, necessitating repair and investment.</para>
<para>The conflict in the Middle East is a reality. It's affecting the globe and it's creating renewed uncertainty for our producers and our regional communities. From day one our government, the Albanese federal Labor government, has been working closely with industry, monitoring the impacts of that conflict and helping to keep our food and fibre moving across the country. We've released reserves. We're working with stakeholders to keep Australia and Australia's primary producers moving.</para>
<para>Since coming to government we've backed Australian agriculture in very practical ways, strengthening biosecurity, boosting the ag workforce, opening new trade opportunities and supporting more sustainable and climate-resilient production. That's important, because if we get that balance right we protect the future of the sector while creating the conditions for continued and further growth. Nowhere is that more important than the place that I'm proud to represent, the Northern Territory. The Top End, as all honourable members know, is famous for its cattle. It was great to catch up with the Northern Territory Cattlemen's Association president, Henry Burke, and their CEO, Romy Carey, in the past few days in Darwin at their annual conference. The cattle industry alone is valued at $1.2 billion, and in 2024 those ringers from the Top End exported 274,181 head of cattle from the Northern Territory through Darwin Port, up from 184,597 the year before—a big increase, and well done to all our cattlemen and cattlewomen.</para>
<para>While the NT is known for its vast cattle stations, its agricultural story is bigger than that. In financial year 2024, the agriculture, forestry and fishing industry is contributing around $1.4 billion to the Territory economy, which is up by 10 per cent on the previous year. The Territory is also Australia's largest mango producer, generating $128 million in gross value of production and accounting for more than half of national production—more than four million trays annually. Melons, watermelons, rockmelons, honeydews and even pumpkins are the second largest horticultural activity in the Territory, valued at $70 million, making up around 23 per cent of the national supply. And aquaculture, driven primarily by barramundi and pearling, was valued at $77 million in financial year 2024. That's huge. Ag is so important to the Territory. Last but not least, the Territory is famous for its crocodiles, and not just for tourism; crocodile farming is a serious export industry.</para>
<para>I want to celebrate all the primary producers in the Northern Territory and around Australia. Our federal Labor government has your back. We are working with you as valued and respected stakeholders.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the importance of agriculture to our nation, and not as a man who spent his life in Canberra behind a desk but as someone who's actually got dirt under his fingernails, of a generation experienced in understanding what it takes to work this land. Labor want a pat on the back for a $100 billion production forecast, but that success doesn't belong to the government. It belongs to the hardworking families of our primary producers. It belongs to the men and women who battle the elements, not the bureaucrats who battle these producers—and trust me when I say that; these producers certainly have a battle against the bureaucrats.</para>
<para>I want to bring your attention to the final point of this motion, because I can't believe this government has the gall to brag about climate resilience while they're strangling our farmers with environmental green tape. I have seen correspondence from the department of the environment and water sent to farmers in my electorate, farmers who have used their land for primary production for decades. These people are being penalised. Their businesses are in limbo, and they are being targeted by a government obsessed with locking up productive agricultural land just to bank carbon credits.</para>
<para>One of my constituents received a letter from an environmental investigator from Mr Watt's department—a bureaucratic gag order that has put their livelihood on ice. It tells the farmer that the department has found no breach in practice but that the farmer should cease any land clearing activity. What does that imply for the person on the land? Guilty until proven innocent? It means that even though they have category X listed land, and even though they should have the right to clear the land and develop that land for cane, they can't. Instead, they're being forced into a state of paralysis. They've been told to stop work and, while their equipment sits idle, their legal bills mount up and their income evaporates. The EPBC Act reforms were rushed through in this parliament in a shady deal with the Greens—a deal designed to win inner-city votes at the expense of regional survival. Our farmers are being treated like criminals. For what crime? For wanting to grow the food that keeps this nation fed?</para>
<para>While they're being demonised by this Labor government, they're being squeezed at the other end by the big supermarkets. It's been around a year since the ACCC price inquiry. Where is the action? Forty per cent of vegetable farmers are considering leaving the industry because there are no margins and their lifestyles are crushed. We need big stick legislation. We need divestiture powers. We need to protect our producers from retribution from retail giants. The hypocrisy continues in the international trade. This motion brags about diversification while the beef industry is facing a $1 billion reduction due to China's new 55 per cent tariff. Where is the Prime Minister in this? Where is the trade minister while our premium beef is being priced out of the market?</para>
<para>Finally, let's talk about the fuel crisis. Our farmers can't get supply, and they're paying exorbitant prices for those who can. These pure input costs are exploding. With the Strait of Hormuz effectively blocked, the global supply chain for urea and fertiliser has snapped, leaving our growers vulnerable while the Middle East conflict swells. Every hectare that is now planted is a financial gamble because this government refuses to guarantee the delivery of essential chemicals. This motion is a slap in the face to every person who toils in the sun to feed this country, because this government is failing agriculture at every level. Our farmers don't want belated praise. They want their freedom to farm back. Farmers need to spend their time growing food and fibre, not doing endless compliance, ridiculous paperwork and never-ending bookwork—and dealing with red and green tape. The best thing a government can do is give the freedoms back to the farmers. Let them do what they do best—grow food and fibre for this country—and get out of the road.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, I rise to speak in strong support of the agriculture, fisheries and forestry motion. It's a privilege to stand in this place and acknowledge the sheer scale of the success currently being seen across our agricultural landscape. We're witnessing a historic moment for our Australian primary production, one that underscores the resilience of our farmers and the strategic vision of the Albanese Labor government.</para>
<para>The latest forecasts from ABARES are, quite frankly, staggering. Australia's farm-gate production value is now forecast to exceed $100 billion this financial year. To put that in perspective, we have hit the National Farmers' Federation 2030 target four years ahead of schedule. Furthermore, our exports are set to reach a record high of almost $85 billion for the 2025-26 year. This isn't just a number on a spreadsheet; it represents the premium value that the world places on Australian food and fibre. From our grains to our livestock to our world-class forestry products, the product of Australia brand has never been stronger. However, these milestones didn't just happen by accident and didn't happen in a vacuum; they were achieved through the grit and resilience of our primary producers, who face droughts, floods, and global market shifts with unwavering resolve. They were achieved through the innovation and skill of the industries that are constantly finding ways to do more with less.</para>
<para>On behalf of our Labor government, I say to farmers, fishers and foresters: we see your hard work. We thank you for feeding and clothing not just this nation but across the world. The Albanese Labor government understands that global success requires domestic support. We haven't just cheered from the sidelines; we have made significant structural investments to ensure that this growth is sustainable. I have a few examples.</para>
<para>Biosecurity: we have committed over $2 billion in new biosecurity funding. In an era of global travel and trade, our biosecurity is our strongest shield against invasive pests and diseases that could devastate industries overnight. We are tackling the labour shortages that have long plagued the sectors by bringing employers, unions and government to the table. We're ensuring that the people who harvest our food are treated fairly and that farmers have the workers that they need. Trade diversification: since July 2022, we have achieved 256 market access milestones. We're ensuring that our eggs are not all in one basket, making our trade more diversified and resilient than ever before. Climate resilience: we know the climate is changing. That is why we're backing the agricultural and land sector plan, with over $2 billion to ensure our producers can remain productive and profitable in a changing environment.</para>
<para>The Australian agricultural sector and other primary producers are the powerhouses in the engine of our Australian economy, and they're also at the heart of our regional communities. By supporting this motion, we're not just celebrating past achievements; we're committing to a future where Australian agriculture and primary producers continue to lead the world. I commend this motion to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SMALL</name>
    <name.id>291406</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I woke up almost like I was in an alternate universe reading this motion, because, frankly, the hypocrisy of Labor MPs who crow about agricultural fisheries and forestry exports reaching a high of some $85 billion in this financial year comes as a complete shock to the fishermen in my part of the world, in the south-west of WA, who have had their businesses cut from underneath them by the decisions of the Labor government there. They crow that this is recognising a significant milestone achieved with hard work, resilience and skill of Australia's primary producers—the same primary producers and indeed the same fishermen that have had their businesses lawfully cut from under them by the Labor government.</para>
<para>To listen to a Labor MP just quote 'global success requires domestic support' will come as an absolute slap in the face to the Bunbury fishermen who, like I say, have had their licences cancelled with less than one month's notice, just before Christmas, because we hear in this motion moved by the Labor Party that there is more demand than ever for Aussie produce. So, if that's the case, why are they standing by and allowing their state counterparts to impose this destructive and reckless demersal fishing ban? They talk about exports, but I want to talk about the result, and that's imports.</para>
<para>Australians love to support Australian businesses. Aussies love to eat locally grown or locally caught produce. The reality is that the WA demersal fishery produces some 400 tonnes of fish each year across both the recreational and commercial sectors. But, thanks to Labor, that figure will be less than half this year. Aussies will be eating God knows what caught God knows where, because the reality is that the supply gap will be filled with imported produce, and we can tell you exactly where that's coming from. It's coming from less sustainable and less ethical fisheries across Asia. Last year, Australia imported 211,000 tonnes of seafood from Asia. That accounted for more than 70 per cent of the seafood consumed in this country. It came from elsewhere, and yet Labor have got the gall to come in here crowing about their support for the global success of Australia's primary producers.</para>
<para>It is shameful, and I won't stand for it. If you look at Vietnam as just one example, the degree of fish extraction per square kilometre of fishery controlled waters means that Vietnam fishes at a concentration some 23 times higher than the WA demersal fishery, and yet this government's looking West Australians in the eye and claiming that the fishery is unsustainable. Just 33 days after the Commonwealth signed off on the fishery as being sustainable and in fact meeting global standards for sustainability, the state government knocked these businesses out at the crease. It's another example of a government obsessed with its image rather than the reality experienced by locals.</para>
<para>Last month, hundreds of angry locals rallied together to support our local fishing industry and to cry out for a fair go for our recreational anglers. Where was the state member for Bunbury? He was having dinner in Perth. If you've got a job title like Minister for the South West, it's time you got out from under the doona, Don, and did your job: standing up for the people of the south-west who have been hit with this unfair and unexplained fishing ban. It is frankly disgraceful that he's got plenty of time to turn up for photo opportunities, but, when it comes to listening to locals who have been impacted by a decision of his government—a Labor government—he's nowhere to be seen.</para>
<para>Every day, this ban is having a detrimental impact on my community. Last week, I visited a fish and chip shop owner who's proud to source his produce locally, prepare it locally and sell it to locals. The reality is that prices are going to escalate for him, and the supply will have to come from elsewhere. Local people who enjoy eating local seafood are now, as a result of the Labor government, going to be eating God knows what caught God knows where. To come in here and listen to the hypocrisy of a Labor government that's crowing about its support for Australia's primary industries—it's shameful.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made in order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women in Defence</title>
          <page.no>211</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PENFOLD</name>
    <name.id>248895</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that for over a century, Australian women have played an integral role in Australia's defence forces;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that women have served with exceptional skill, sacrifice, bravery and dedication across all theatres of war; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) thanks all the women who served and continue to serve for their contribution to the safety and security of our nation.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>263427</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Chester</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PENFOLD</name>
    <name.id>248895</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a great honour to present this motion here today, as women have played a role in our Defence Force since 1899. Today, 20 per cent of our service personnel are women. Whilst their sons, husbands, fathers and brothers answered their country's call, so too have successive generations of daughters, wives, mothers and sisters.</para>
<para>When World War I broke out, the role of most women in Australia was that of unpaid homemaker. Whether married or single, women generally stayed home to look after the household and any children or dependants. During the four ensuing years of war, many women took on different paid and unpaid war roles, serving in the Australian Army as nurses, volunteering in the Red Cross, working for soldiers' comfort funds and raising funds for wartime charities that worked overseas.</para>
<para>In World War II, almost a third of working-age women would participate in paid work, many in roles unavailable to them before the war. Valuable duties were also performed by women volunteers, often without any government funds, to address manpower shortages. During this time, the Australian Women's Army Service, Women's Auxiliary Australian Air Force, Women's Royal Australian Naval Service and the Australian Women's Land Army were established to free men from non-combat roles with women who filled crucial positions as cooks, drivers, agricultural labourers, signallers, intelligence and anti-aircraft gun crewing. Many of these women were born and bred in my community or would later settle in the Lyne electorate. They were women like Mary May Hogan, from Cundletown, who joined the Australian Women's Army Service in June 1943 and, as part of the Central Bureau, an Allied intelligence unit, intercepted and deciphered Japanese military and naval radio messages; Uraine Harper, who joined the Women's Royal Australian Air Force during World War II and later settled in Taree; Doreen Rosenbaum, who joined the Australian Women's Army Service in World War II; Dorothy Greening, who served in Tripoli, Crete, Borneo and Singapore as part of the Australian Army Nursing Service in World War II; Dulcie Balderstone, who enlisted in the Women's Auxiliary Australian Air Force in December 1944 and worked as a stores clerk; and Una Keast, a young nurse who keen for adventure, who signed up to serve as soon as war was declared in 1939. During the course of World War II, Una nursed under canvas in the war zones of Greece, narrowly escaping German invasion; in the trenches in Crete; in the dust in the Middle East; and in the jungles of New Guinea.</para>
<para>They included Eunice Hilda Oakeley, who joined the Royal New Zealand Nursing Corps and became an invaluable supporter of the local veteran community; Annie Beatrice May Starling, who was posted to Rocky Creek in the Atherton Tablelands, a 2,000 bed hospital under canvas, and then in Borneo treated POWs before eventually returning home and settling in Tiri in the Upper Manning; Lucy Monk, a Taree local, who was part of the 52nd Search Light Battery; and sister Hannah Pankhurst, who at the age of 22 enlisted with the 3rd Australian General Hospital in July 1915 and commenced duty on Lemnos, where she took care of the Gallipoli wounded. She later was moved to Cairo and then Brighton Hospital in England before eventually returning to the Manning and continuing her lifelong career and devotion to nursing at the Manning River District Hospital. There are many of my constituents today that remember her great work there.</para>
<para>We will be forever proud and grateful for the contributions of all Australian women who served and are serving today. Indeed, I had the great pleasure last year, when I participated in my first Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program, at Williamtown, to be hosted by Wing Commander Vicky Bezuidenhout, who's the senior commanding officer there. It was a great program, and I thank her most sincerely for her support while I was there.</para>
<para>As I come to conclude here, I want to thank the President of the Taree sub-branch of the RSL for his discussion with me at the Taree Hub Market that led to this motion today and for our meeting last week in front of the fantastic display at Club Taree, which recognises local women who've served. We will remember them. Lest we forget.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TRISH COOK</name>
    <name.id>312871</name.id>
    <electorate>Bullwinkel</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This motion acknowledges the profound and enduring contribution of women to the Australian Defence Force for over a century. While women today serve in every capacity across our Navy, Army and Air Force, we must remember that this path was paved by the extraordinary courage of those who came before. In my electorate of Bullwinkel, named in honour of a true Australian heroine, we are reminded daily of the debt we owe to Lieutenant Colonel Sister Vivian Bullwinkel and her colleagues.</para>
<para>To appreciate the security and freedom we enjoy today, we must look back to February 1942. Vivian Bullwinkel was one of 65 Australian nurses who reluctantly evacuated Singapore aboard the SS <inline font-style="italic">Vyner Brooke</inline> due to the Japanese invasion. When the ship was sunk by Japanese aircraft, Vivian and a group of survivors eventually washed ashore on Bangka Island. What followed remains one of the most harrowing chapters in our military history.</para>
<para>On that ratty beach, 22 surviving Australian nurses who, under the Geneva Convention, should have been taken as prisoners of war were instead ordered to march out into the ocean. They knew what was coming. Vivian recalled Matron Irene Drummond saying, 'Chin up, girls; I'm proud of you, and I love you all.' They walked with their heads held high, supporting one another, displaying a calm dignity that defied the horror of the moment, and they were mowed down by machine-gun fire. Vivian was the sole survivor, only a few years older than my own daughter is today. Struck by a bullet that passed through her hip, she feigned death until the captors left. For 12 days she hid in the jungle caring for a wounded British soldier before she was forced to surrender and spend 3½ years as a prisoner of war in trying conditions.</para>
<para>Vivian Bullwinkel did not just survive. She bore witness and later testified at the war crimes tribunal in Tokyo, and she carried the memory of her 21 sisters in arms back to the Australian shores. She ensured that their sacrifice was not lost to the tides of Bangka Island but was instead etched into the soul of our nation. Vivian's story is the pinnacle of a century-long narrative. From the Australian Army Nursing Service in World War II to the intelligence officers, pilots and combat medics serving in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific today, women have been serving our nation with remarkable contributions.</para>
<para>As the member for Bullwinkel, I am humbled to represent the electorate that carries her name. We do not just honour a person; we honour a standard of selfless service. Let us use this motion to recommit ourselves to supporting women currently serving in the ADF, ensuring that they have the resources, the respect and the recognition they deserve. We stand on the shoulders of giants like Vivian Bullwinkel and her 21 fallen colleagues, including Alma Beard from Toodyay, which is in my electorate. We will remember them. Lest we forget.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Member for Bullwinkel, for that fine contribution.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In joining the motion, I want to not only commend the member for Lyne for presenting it to the Federation Chamber today but also congratulate the member for Bullwinkel not only on her election but on her fine tribute to Nurse Vivian Bullwinkel and the extraordinary story of courage and heroism which occurred on Bangka Island.</para>
<para>In that vein, I think it's important that we not only recognise all Australian servicewomen who are serving today and thank them for their service but also thank our veterans for their service to our nation over the past 100 years. It's an incredible contribution to the safety and security of Australia that has been made by women in uniform, and it's something that I think is only appropriate that the House recognises today.</para>
<para>Today women make up about 20 per cent of the Australian Defence Force workforce. In the Navy, it's about 24 per cent; Air Force, 25 per cent; and Army, 15 per cent. I know the service chiefs across all three are working to increase the level of female representation in each of our forces. It's important to note that, since 1899, women have served in the Australian armed forces, but it's only since 2013, when camp combat roles opened up to women—and by 2016 all roles, including special forces entry, were open to women—that they were fully able to participate in any role in the Australian Defence Force. That has been an extraordinary capability boost for our service personnel.</para>
<para>I've been very fortunate in this place to participate in the Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program and also serve as the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel. In that time, I have been exposed to a number of women in leadership roles who have impressed me enormously. I can recall being on a naval patrol boat off the coast of Darwin. The commander of the ship was a female officer, and the way she managed her crew was something quite extraordinary and impressed me enormously.</para>
<para>I remember another occasion where I was on the deck of one of the Australian naval vessels, and there was a young lady there who would have been no more than 25 or 26. It looked like she could have been your typical hairdresser standing beside this burly guy of 120-odd kilos with a big, bushy beard. The reason she looked like she could have been your typical hairdresser was that that's what she was before she joined the Navy. This young lady, at 25 or 26, was actually the officer in charge, teaching the big, burly 120-kilo fellow how to do that job. It just goes to demonstrate that you should never assume anything, when it comes to Australian Defence Force, about who's in charge and who's actually giving the instructions.</para>
<para>I have met women in leadership roles in our military who have been some of the finest Australians that I've ever had the pleasure of spending time with. I think about Lieutenant General Natasha Fox. Natasha is serving today. She is the first female deputy chief of Army and the inaugural chief of personnel. She has been extraordinary in her efforts to improve the transition for our Australian Defence Force personnel.</para>
<para>I think about Air Vice Marshal Tracy Smart, a former surgeon general of the ADF. Tracy has retired, but she continues to work tirelessly to support veterans and the wellbeing of their families. I think about the aide-de-camps I had the great fortune of working with: Fiona, Lisa and Libby. Their organisational skills were extraordinary—even trying to keep a recalcitrant National Party minister on time to get to the right place at the right time!</para>
<para>The one who has stuck in my mind most recently is Major General Liz Cosson. Liz was the first female major general of the Army, and, not satisfied with that extraordinary achievement, when she retired from uniform she went on to become the first secretary of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. During my time as Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Liz was an incredibly important ally in terms of working to improve outcomes for veterans and their families. Her lived experience, I think, made her perhaps more empathetic than other secretaries in the Public Service may have been. Without her support, we would not have been able to bring in the reforms that we were able to bring in, and under her guidance and her leadership I am confident that we set in train some reforms which will continue to deliver long-term benefits for veterans and their families.</para>
<para>I want to finish where I started, in commending the member for Lyne for bringing this motion to the chamber to say, 'Thank you for your service,' to all Australian Defence Force personnel and our veteran community and, finally, to recognise the incredible role that women have played and continue to play in the Australian Defence Force. I wish them safety, security and good fortune as they continue to keep us safe. Thank you for your service. Lest we forget.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion and thank the member for Lyne for bringing it before the House. This motion matters because it recognises two things at once: first, the long service record by women in the Australian Defence Force and, second, the very deliberate reforms that are changing the shape of the force today.</para>
<para>For more than a century, Australian women have served, initially in nursing support roles and often in a volunteer capacity and without recognition or equal opportunity. Australian author Miles Franklin was a volunteer orderly and cook with the Scottish Women's Hospital in Macedonia from 1917 to 1918, supporting the Serbian army during World War I, working at the Ostrovo field hospital under extremely difficult conditions, treating wounded soldiers and fighting the typhus epidemic. In more recent times, Lieutenant Colonel Vivian Bullwinkel's story as the sole survivor of the 1942 Bangka Island massacre has become widely known and celebrated, and I join with the member for Bullwinkel's remarks about that extraordinary story and life of service.</para>
<para>Today, women are engaged across all services and make up more than 25 per cent of new recruits each year. I personally joined the signals corps in the Australian Army Reserve, and back then was a time when women's roles were perhaps more limited. Notwithstanding that we were trained for combat, we invariably didn't have combat-facing roles to serve within. Since then, there's been real progress. All roles in the ADF have been open to women since 2016, serving across the land, the sea, the air, cyber and space. Importantly, we're on track to increase women's participation further over the next decade, driven by our stronger recruitment and better retention strategies.</para>
<para>The outstanding performance of our female officers is being recognised. Three were made members of the Order of Australia this year: Air Commodore Maria Brick, for her service in legal work and staff appointments; Group Captain Aleisha Broadhead, for her contributions to the F-35A Lightning II introduction and to air traffic management; and Wing Commander Nadia Harrison, for developing expeditionary cyberspace capabilities. And there were many more who were recognised for their professionalism and achievements.</para>
<para>Earlier this year, at the last post ceremony marking the commencement of parliament, I had the opportunity to meet a number of women serving at the very centre of defence leadership. These are not symbolic roles; they are operational, high-trust positions supporting the most senior leaders in the ADF. They include Captain Olivia Bowman-Wall, serving as the aide-de-camp to the Chief of the Defence Force, Flight Lieutenant Ayah Khalid, the aide-de-camp to the Vice Chief of the Defence Force, Lieutenant Geraldine Gray of the Royal Australian Navy, aide-de-camp to the Chief of Personnel, Lieutenant Millicent Nye, aide-de-camp to the Chief of Joint Capabilities, and Flight Lieutenant Leah Park, aide-de-camp to the Minister for Defence Industry. These roles require judgement, discretion and a detailed understanding of how Defence operates at the highest level. They are often given to people who are expected to hold significant leadership roles and positions in the future. Alongside them I also met two of the most senior officers in the ADF, Lieutenant General Natasha Fox, AO CSC, Chief of Personnel, who is responsible for the workforce that underpins the entire Defence organisation, and Lieutenant General Susan Coyle, AM CSC DSM, Chief of Joint Capabilities, the first woman to lead a warfighting capability domain in the ADF. These are not modest achievements. They reflect a Defence Force that is beginning to shift at its most senior levels, something that has taken time and care to achieve and something we can all be proud of.</para>
<para>I was very proud to have my picture taken alongside these women. Our modern Defence Force cannot afford to draw from only part of the population; it needs the full range of talent, skills and experience available to it. The pipeline matters. Recruitment is strong. Early retention is improving. But command-track participation and senior representation are where the next gains must be made. So today we recognise more than a century of service. We recognise the women who have served when opportunities were limited and those serving today with far greater scope. To all the women who have served and continue to serve in the Australian Defence Force directly and those who work in support of their partners who are active members: your service is strengthening the Australian Defence Force, and I thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This motion rightly acknowledges, recognises and thanks the women who have served and continue to serve in the Australian Defence Force. Australian women have been a central part of our Defence Force for over a century, in every element of our forces. From the beginning of the Anzac legend in World War I, when women served as nurses on the front lines, to today's personnel operating across land, sea, air and cyber domains, their contribution has been constant, essential and, too often, sadly under-recognised.</para>
<para>Throughout all conflicts involving Australia, our nation's women have been there to protect and care for us, sacrificing their own lives for ours. In World War II, women played a critical role in protecting Australian shores from potential Japanese invasion. With many of our soldiers fighting in Europe and South-East Asia at the time, it was up to the women at home to take up the fight. Thus, the Women's Australian National Service was formed, followed by the Australian Women's Army Service, the Women's Royal Australian Naval Service and the Women's Auxiliary Australian Air Force. In total, over 50,000 women served in these groups.</para>
<para>I recently had the pleasure of experiencing <inline font-style="italic">21 </inline><inline font-style="italic">Hearts</inline>. This is a theatre production by Theatre 180 about the compelling true story of Vivian Bullwinkel and the Nurses of the Vyner Brooke. When leaving Singapore following the Japanese invasion, the group's ship was bombed, forcing the nurses to spend days at sea before finding Radji Beach on Bangka Island, where they surrendered. Despite surrendering to and treating the Japanese soldiers for their injuries, the 22 nurses were forced into the water, where they were shot at. It was one of the most shocking and vile instances of war. With the nurses turning and facing towards the horizon, as they walked into the ocean, they were machine-gunned down. This was on 16 February 1942. It doesn't feel like such a long time ago. Just one nurse survived to tell of the ordeal, and that was Lieutenant Colonel Vivian Bullwinkel. I just want to give a shout-out because that production has now left Western Australia and is travelling around the east coast with the support of the Department of Veterans' Affairs. So I say to anybody out there: please, look out for the wonderful story of <inline font-style="italic">21 </inline><inline font-style="italic">Hearts</inline>. This story symbolises the courage, strength and resilience all women in our Defence Force have shown over many years.</para>
<para>Whether serving in logistics, intelligence, combat support, peacekeeping missions or, now, fully integrated combat roles, women in the Australian Defence Force have demonstrated professionalism of the highest order. They have led troops, piloted many aircraft, commanded many naval vessels and contributed to complex operations both at home and abroad. Servicewomen have broken down barriers not just for themselves but for future generations, who now see defence service as a path open to all Australians, regardless of gender. Today, around 20 per cent of our defence force are women. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this, but, personally, I would like to see that increased to reach the goal of at least 25 per cent by 2030.</para>
<para>Challenges are still being felt by our servicewomen, with underrepresentation in combat and technical roles. While increasing representation is, of course, critical, it is equally important to recognise that the challenges facing servicewomen do not end when their service does. We must all do better to support our women veterans, who are twice as likely to die by suicide compared to civilian women. Eighty per cent of victims of military sexual misconduct are women, with 25 per cent of women experiencing sexual harassment in the last five years in an ADF workplace. That's just shocking. Of course, these numbers are simply too high, and more must be done to better acknowledge and support women in their service of Australia.</para>
<para>I would like to acknowledge the member for Lyons, who has brought this very, very important motion to the House, and I would like to acknowledge the member for Bullwinkel, who spoke previously about Vivian Bullwinkel and her incredible courage. I want to acknowledge that it's just a wonderful thing that we now have a federal seat named after Vivian Bullwinkel.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COMER</name>
    <name.id>316551</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For more than a century, women have been part of Australia's defence story. Their contribution has been central to how our nation has protected itself and supported others in times of conflict and crisis. From the very beginning, women chose to serve their country, often without the recognition, opportunities or pathways afforded to their male counterparts. They stepped forward regardless, motivated by a strong sense of duty and a deep commitment to our nation. For far too many years, women were largely confined to nursing and support roles, but over time that contribution has evolved significantly. Women in uniform now serve in every command of the ADF and across the full spectrum of national service roles and specialties. They operate across land, sea, air, cyber and space, reflecting both the changing nature of warfare and the growing recognition of their capabilities. What has remained constant, however, is the standard of service and the ability to rise to any occasion. Australian women in uniform have consistently demonstrated professionalism, courage and resilience, whether serving in combat zones, contributing to peacekeeping missions or responding to humanitarian disasters here and abroad. Women like Olive King, Vivian Bullwinkel and Florence McKenzie were trailblazers that cleared the way to allow women like myself to enter officer training at Duntroon. I'm proud to be a small part of a large history of women who put themselves forward to serve their nation.</para>
<para>In the modern Australian Defence Force, women are no longer in the margins. They are leaders, specialists and decision-makers. They command units, manage complex operations and contribute to some of the most technically advanced areas of defence. Just last week, I was at the Gallipoli Barracks Open Day, commemorating 125 years of the Australian Army. I got to meet Brigadier Jennifer Harris, a senior Australian Defence Force officer who is a shining example of how women are now serving in critical leadership positions within the ADF.</para>
<para>That said, progress has not come overnight. While women have been serving in uniform for generations, access to combat roles was only opened to women in 2016. That milestone marked a significant shift, but it also highlights how recent some of these changes have been. The growing presence of women has strengthened Defence not only in capability but in culture. The hard work of women throughout the history of the ADF has made it crystal clear that inclusion and diversity is one of our greatest strengths, making the ADF one of the best defence forces in the world.</para>
<para>Today, women serve across every command and every speciality, from flying fighter jets to working in cyber operations, from frontline Army to complex intelligence and logistics functions. They are a vital part in Australia's defence capability. Women now make up more than a quarter of the Defence workforce, and their contribution continues to grow. They bring skill, determination and leadership to their roles, strengthening the ADF in every way.</para>
<para>At the same time, it's important to acknowledge that many women have faced challenges throughout their service. When I was in training, the bridging programs were not appropriately designed to accommodate for the lighter body weight of women. I suffered an injury as a result, and so did many of my female colleagues. Everyone in this parliament would agree that we should not lower the fitness requirements of the military. However, when I was in training, it was clear that we needed to be accommodating of different body types. It was clear that a one-size-fits-all approach risks sidelining capable recruits. I saw too many strong, determined women leave—individuals who had the potential to make significant contributions to our Defence Force.</para>
<para>That's why I have since raised this directly with the former chief of defence force Air Chief Marshal Sir Angus Houston, who is now Chancellor of the University of Sunshine Coast, and I've raised this with the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, advocating for a more considered approach that maintains standards whilst recognising difference. I will continue to advocate for a defence force that upholds readiness and capability, while ensuring that we are getting the best out of every person who has signed on the dotted line.</para>
<para>My electorate of Petrie has over 5,000 veterans. Many of them are women. These women have had to fight to be included in all aspects of the ADF, fight to be equal to their male counterparts and fight for the respect they deserve whilst fighting to defend our nation. If we are serious about building a defence force that is ready for the future, we must continue that work. Supporting women in defence, removing the remaining barriers and fostering an environment where everyone can contribute fully is not just the right thing to do; it is essential to maintaining a capable and ready force. Today we acknowledge and thank the women who have served and who continue to serve in the Australian Defence Force. For their skill and for their courage, I recognise them and respect them.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Petrie, and I thank her for her service too. I call the member for Fisher.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also thank the honourable member for Petrie for her service to the ADF, and all men and women who have served this country in uniform—but, seeing as we're talking about women in uniform, well done. A big shout-out also goes to Linda Reynolds, a former senator who is an Army brigadier, who served this country with distinction and is still doing so, just in a different way.</para>
<para>At a time when we mark 125 years of the Royal Australian Navy, it is fitting that we reflect not just on capability but on the people who have served under our national flag. It's a privilege and an honour to serve under that flag, as it's always been. For far too many Australians, that service has come at the ultimate cost. Some 103,000 Australians have made the ultimate sacrifice in serving this country. Many more have carried the invisible wounds of that service long after they've taken off their uniform, and increasingly that includes women. We know that too many of our veterans, including ex-serving women, are dying by suicide at rates higher than the general population. That is something that should concern every single one of us in this place, because, when Australians are prepared to give everything in service of our nation, we have a duty to stand by them when they come home.</para>
<para>The story of women in our Defence Force is one of evolution, resilience and progress. For much of our history, women's roles were limited. They served with distinction in nursing and support roles, often in some of the most dangerous conditions imaginable but without the same recognition or opportunity afforded to their male counterparts. Over time, that has changed. Barriers have been broken down and continue to be broken down. Opportunities have expanded. Today women serve across more than 200 roles in the Australian Defence Force including in combat roles, in command positions and in some of the most technically complex and strategically important areas of our military. That progress matters because a modern defence force must reflect the nation it serves. Today women make up just over 20 per cent of the Australian Defence Force. That's up from around 14 per cent just over a decade ago. In raw numbers that is more than 17,000 women serving in uniform.</para>
<para>We are seeing strong representation in recruitment, with women making up more than 23 per cent of new enlistments in recent years. We're also seeing progress in leadership, with women now holding senior officer roles and commanding positions across our services. But we also know there's much more to do. Representation remains uneven across the services. The Navy has made strong progress. The Army still has more ground to make up. Retention remains a challenge, and, for younger women, the decision to serve is not always an easy one. If we're serious about building the defence force Australia needs for the future, we must continue to remove barriers, support careers and create an environment where women can not only serve but thrive.</para>
<para>As someone who's worked closely on national security and defence issues in this parliament, I say this clearly: capability is not just about submarines, ships or aircraft. It's about our people. It's about ensuring we attract and retain the very best Australians regardless of their gender because, in an increasingly uncertain strategic environment, we cannot afford to limit ourselves to half the talent pool. It doesn't seem to be a really novel concept. As we invest in projects like AUKUS, as we build the next generation of our defence force, that principle has never been more important.</para>
<para>In the 10 years I've been in this place, I've had the privilege of being on a submarine, of flying in RAAF aircraft and of being out in the field with our Defence personnel. I've seen the way our women have served this country with great distinction, and I tip my hat to them because, whether in the Middle East or here in Australia, they have impressed me greatly with their professionalism and their willingness to serve wearing the Australian uniform. And we owe them a great debt of gratitude. Every single person who has served in this country in uniform deserves our respect, whether they are male or female.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Income Tax</title>
          <page.no>217</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>No wonder the Liberal Party is where it is. That person knows nothing about what he's talking about.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will address his—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, I'll move on. I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an Australian couple both in paid employment without kids can have a combined income of $250,000 and pay approximately $67,634 in combined tax;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an Australian couple with only one person in paid employment while the other is looking after the kids can also have an income of $250,000 yet have to pay $88,167 in tax, over $20,000 more than other couples; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) income splitting:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) would allow the couple in the second scenario to pay the same amount of tax as the couple in the first scenario;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) would also acknowledge and give monetary value to the incredible work done by stay-at-home parents; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) might also allow couples to start and/or grow their families so our nation stops relying on migration for growth; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to take immediate and decisive action to introduce income splitting to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) more fairly share the taxation burden between couples with kids and couples without kids;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) acknowledge and value the contribution made by stay-at-home parents; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) address Australia's declining birth rate.</para></quote>
<para>We have the great honour of belonging to a vanishing race. Dr Bob Birrell said that our population will be seven million towards the end of this century. We will vanish as a race of people. Now, I personally love Australians, and I'd like to see a lot more Australians. I'm not going—and I don't have time—to go into the reasons we are not seeing more Australians. But we believe profoundly that if women are provided with $65,000 at the birth of a baby, then we will have a lot more babies in Australia. The current birthrate is 4.4 million a year, but that should reasonably, I think, be over one million a year. What we are advocating is $65,000 on the birth of a baby. People say, 'What, are we going to buy babies now?' It changes the attitude of people. Young people are desperately trying to buy a house. They can suddenly see, 'Jeez, that would be good.' It will change the attitude, and that really is much more important than the actual $65,000 in itself.</para>
<para>Deputy Speaker Aldred, you may say, 'That's a lot of money.' Look at income splitting at the moment—or DINKS versus SINKS, as they say. Double income, no kids—that's the DINKS—get $110,000 a year. They pay tax. They've got nearly $80,000 in disposable income. If you're a SINK, you're on a single income with a number of kids. Let's say you have three kids and a non-working wife who stays at home to look after the kids. You will be on $15,000 a year. The question is: do you want to be on a $75,000 disposable income or do you want to be on a $15,000 disposable income? Needless to say, Australians are not having a lot of babies. If we've got a value system imposed upon the people of Australia where you are brutally punished if you have children and you're on easy street if you don't have children—well, excuse me if our young people are not having any children.</para>
<para>You ask, 'Where are you going to get that money from?' It behoves me to say: you build the Bradfield Scheme. It's not exactly a fool. We built the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Sydney's water supply, the underground railway system—won the world prize for engineering. It's not exactly a fool. That brings in the Bradfield Scheme. It diverts the water to where it can be used—it rains all the time in the electorate I represent—from where it never stops raining out to the other part of my electorate where it never starts raining. That's the Bradfield Scheme.</para>
<para>We import 62 thousand million dollars worth of petrol every year. What sort of brainless country are we? We send our petrol overseas and we get eight thousand million dollars for it. Then we spend 62 thousand million buying that oil back as petrol. What sort of brainless country are we? We buy all our motor vehicles from overseas—23 per cent of the motor vehicles bought in Australia are bought under a government contract. If you want to get your car free under a government contract, then you will drive a motor vehicle made in Australia—and then we'll have secondary industry back in this country, as well as providing a huge income for Australia. Our gas we gave away for nothing. Qatar exports the same amount of gas—these figures are about 12 years old; it's much worse now. But they get 29 thousand million for their gas. We get 630 million for our gas. They get 29 thousand million for theirs! So, yes, it'd be nice if we got a bit of a return on gas.</para>
<para>For water development programs, we have a proposal called CopperString which'll open up the mineral wealth of North Queensland, and the Bridle Track tunnel, which will open up the mineral wealth of North Queensland. We'll give you back about $30 billion a year if you give us a little bit of wire going out west—and that little tiny tunnel one kilometre long. Brisbane's got 27 kilometres of tunnels, with a million people. We've got a million people in North Queensland and we've got no tunnels—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member's time has expired. Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Sharkie</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The first thing I'd say is that I'm always open to hearing the contribution of the member for Kennedy. Speaking as somebody who's 53 years old, you've been in parliament—state and federal—for two years less than I've been alive. I think that, absolutely, you should be given respect.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I may not have either! The other thing, too, is that you're a former Bjelke minister. You've been around for a long time and you've seen it all.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>11788</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Please address remarks through the chair.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOLZBERGER</name>
    <name.id>88411</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Sorry, Deputy Speaker. The mover of the motion is a former Bjelke-Petersen minister really just shows the length and depth of experience that the member has. So this is an idea which shouldn't just be dismissed out of hand.</para>
<para>But the two things that I'd say to substantially address the motion are that, in terms of acknowledging and giving monetary value to the incredible work done by stay-at-home parents, yes, they absolutely deserve that recognition, and that's what the family tax benefit was about. My understanding is that it was something introduced by the Howard government, particularly family tax benefit B, which really focused on stay-at-home parents. As a second income earner, once your income gets to about $6,000, you start to lose that FTB B, so there is an incentive at the moment.</para>
<para>In terms of allowing couples to start or grow their families so that the nation stops relying on migration for growth, yes, we absolutely do want to lift the national birth rate, but income splitting doesn't do that because it doesn't specifically target people who are staying home to look after kids. Ultimately, yes, in an ideal world, there absolutely is a hunger in the community to be paying less tax. The community knows that the tax burden falls unfairly on pay-as-you-go income earners, but that is something that this government is also addressing through income tax cuts and repurposing the income tax cuts—which the Morrison government left us with—to be more fairly applied across the community. The two income tax cuts that the government took to the last election were about getting to those lower income earners and spreading them evenly. So, yes, the intent of this is 100 per cent obvious. That why there's an acknowledgement from the government that it needs to be fairer and the actions of this government are about making it fairer.</para>
<para>The honourable member would understand through his time here that the importance of the social wage is ultimately not just what's left in take-home pay; Medicare itself is something that is fundamentally part of that social wage that provides benefits to people fairly and equally across the economy and the community. Superannuation is also something which, apart from some of the changes we've made around the LISTO, really targets those lower income earners. In the electorate of Forde alone, there's something like 14½ thousand people that will benefit from those changes to that, by making the tax on their superannuation less—that's 14½ thousand low-income earners, of which 7,600 are women; somewhere around 68 per cent are women. Superannuation is also now being paid on government maternity leave. So, again, there are incentives there that are fairly targeted across the community to encourage people to stay home and raise their kids.</para>
<para>Finally, there are changes to child care to make it cheaper, such as removing the activity test. There's the work we're doing around bulk-billing. There's a lot of work, and while I agree with the intent of the motion, I think this government is doing it in a fair and targeted way as we move to a fairer system.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I commend the member for Kennedy for this motion, because this is about choice and fairness, and it is currently untenable for one parent to care for children at home if they wish to do so. Fewer young people are having children. Our current birth rate is just 1.5 for every couple. Over half of Australians under 35 have delayed parenthood due to cost pressures. We seem to have forgotten that parents are the first and best teachers, and parents should have the choice to raise their children at home if that suits their family best. During the last decade, the proportion of one-year-olds in child care has gone from 25 per cent to over half. We pay for private childcare centres—over $30,000 in many cases—to fund the care of a child, but we place very little value on the parent or, indeed, the grandparent.</para>
<para>Real wages have not kept up with the increased costs of living. Each household now needs two full-time workers to cover a mortgage and just the absolute basics. There were 1.2 million two-parent families who were eligible to receive Family Tax Benefit Part A in 2001. Now that's just over 600,000. That's because we haven't lifted that threshold limit of $120,000 for eligibility for Family Tax Benefit Part B. Going back to when I had young children, when as a family we very much relied on Family Tax Benefit Part B—my husband was a tradie—there were just over 26,000 families, in 2001, who received Family Tax Benefit Part B. Now it's only 7½ thousand, because the thresholds have not kept up.</para>
<para>Going to the motion from the member for Kennedy, when we look at tax distribution, it is fundamentally unfair to families where one parent is at home raising children and one parent is going off to work. Looking at families where two parents are each earning $100,000 each—a total tax income of $200,000—they pay $41,000 in tax. If one parent earns $200,000 and the other does not earn an income outside the home because they're doing the most important job of all, that being raising children in the home, that same family would pay $56,000 in tax. So $41,000 or $56,000, and the same income is coming in under the main roof. That is patently unfair and must be addressed.</para>
<para>Looking at lower-income families, a couple earning $60,000 each would pay $17½ thousand in tax. If there is the same amount of income in a family, $120,000 under that roof, but one is out earning and one is taking care of the children, they pay $26,000 in tax—22 per cent of their income versus just 14 per cent for the previous family's scenario. This is unfair. This is disincentivizing families from caring for children themselves.</para>
<para>Yes, we've got paid parenting leave of 26 weeks a year. But then what happens? What happens when the baby's 26 weeks of age? No family in Australia can afford to stay home with them still. They bundle them off to child care. I see them in the morning, at 6 or 6.30 am, in the dark, having to drop babies off. And I talk to so many families in my community. They say the ultimate dream for their family is to be able to have one parent staying home and raising the children and one going off to work for just those early years. This is about choice. Many women would like to go back to work—absolutely; that is your choice. But at the moment we're taking away that choice from families where one parent doesn't want to go back into the workforce but wants to be able to stay home and see those first steps and hear those first words.</para>
<para>So we must do better. It seems patently obvious to me that we need to do income tax splitting. When you have children who are under school age, it is a fair thing to do. It's something the government must absolutely do. If we want to lift our birth rate, we have no other choice aside from making sure we have incentives there for families. We're then valuing families and valuing the role of the stay-at-home parent. We did that in 2001, but now it's 2026. I feel that that value is not there and not being recognised. We can do better.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to acknowledge and thank the member for Kennedy for bringing forward this motion on income splitting. I would in particular like to acknowledge the intent of the motion, which is very clearly supporting families—something I know the member for Kennedy is passionate about, and it is a passion I share.</para>
<para>In Griffith, families are doing what families right across Australia do every single day. They are working hard, juggling care, managing school drop-offs and shift changes, and stretching every dollar as far as it can possibly go. So when a proposal like income splitting is put forward as support for families, we owe people an honest assessment. Does it make life easier for the families that are under the most pressure? And does it reflect how the majority of Australian families actually organise their work and care today? The answer is no.</para>
<para>When it comes to tax, this government's policy is clear: to deliver a system that is fairer, simpler and more sustainable and that helps Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn. Labor's first round of tax cuts has been flowing since July 2024, benefiting more than 14 million taxpayers, with further tax cuts legislated for this year and next year. Combined, they are expected to deliver an average annual tax cut of more than $2,500 in 2027-28. This is relief for every taxpayer. It does not depend on whether a household has one income or two, and it does not build dependence on the tax system.</para>
<para>Alongside those tax cuts, Labor has increased the Medicare low-income thresholds so more—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Kennedy!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's his passion, Deputy Speaker. I hear your passion, Member for Kennedy. Labor has increased the Medicare levy low-income threshold so that more than one million Australians on lower incomes continue to be exempt from the levy or pay a reduced rate. We have also boosted the low-income superannuation tax offset from 1 July next year, benefiting 1.3 million Australians, around 60 per cent of them women.</para>
<para>Families deserve support, and we already have tools to provide it, like the family tax benefit. Part A helps with everyday costs of raising children while part B supports single parents, grandparent carers and some couple families with one main income. That's targeted support which recognises need directly without distorting the income tax system.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I've got a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>What is the point of order? Under what standing order is your point?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The misrepresentation of what is proposed in this proposal.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Well, no, that's not a point of order. Sorry.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The proposal is to get a fairness between this group of people and that group of people, and the member has not addressed that issue.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, you need to sit down. Please resume your seat. The member for Griffith is completely being relevant, and that's the only point of order that you might have been referring to. I'm going to ask you to resume your speech.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The same is true of paid parental leave. The scheme is already at 24 weeks for children born or adopted after 1 July last year, and that will expand to 26 weeks from 1 July this year. Four weeks can be taken concurrently, giving families more flexibility to share care. Superannuation is now also being paid on government paid parental leave, directly addressing one of the long-term financial penalties that caring has imposed, especially on women. Our cheaper childcare reforms follow the same principle. They are ensuring around one million families receive more help with childcare costs, and the three-day guarantee means 100,000 families will receive more subsidised early education and care.</para>
<para>These policies reflect how families actually live. They support children, parents and workforce participation. Income splitting does the opposite. It rewards stepping back from paid work, particularly for the second earner in a household, who in Australia is very often a woman. Treasury's tax review stated clearly:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Individual assessment supports workforce participation by secondary earners …</para></quote>
<para>and that a progressive individual tax system is far more efficient than family taxation.</para>
<para>Then there's the cost. The Parliamentary Budget Office costed a similar proposal in March last year—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Kennedy! This is your motion. Have a bit of respect, please.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COFFEY</name>
    <name.id>312323</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Parliamentary Budget Office costed a similar proposal in March last year and found it would reduce the fiscal and underlying cash balances by around $12.4 billion over the forward estimates and by $68.9 billion in 2034-35. That's a staggering amount of money for a policy that is poorly targeted and does nothing to address the structural barriers that real families face. Income splitting is not a fair reform. Families in Griffith deserve better than that.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you. Now we're going to continue this debate without interjections. It's a good motion that the member for Kennedy has put forward, and the whole point of that is to enable a debate.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Kennedy, Bob Katter, for raising this motion on income splitting. Let's talk about fairness—not the kind of fairness that gets you political soundbites but the quiet, everyday fairness that happens, or fails to happen, around the kitchen tables of Australian homes.</para>
<para>Let us consider a simple scenario. Imagine two households living side-by-side in any suburb or regional town in my electorate. In house No. 1 we have a couple. Both are in paid employment. They have no children. Together, they bring home a combined income of $250,000. Under our current tax system, they will pay approximately $67,000 in combined tax. Now look at house No. 2. This family also has a household income of $250,000. But, here, only one parent is in the paid workforce. The other parent is at home doing the vital, exhausting work of raising their children. Because our tax system treats them as isolated individuals rather than as a family unit, this household pays $88,000 in tax. That is over $20,000 more.</para>
<para>While we're on the topic of tax, I'd love governments, no matter their colour, to index the tax brackets. Labor's inflation means that more and more tax is raised each year due to our antiquated tax system. The current approach is punitive. It punishes single-earner families. It ignores the reality that, in a household, income is shared, expenses are shared, and sacrifices are also shared. Should the tax burden not be shared as well? The solution is practical and is already staring us in the face. Income splitting would allow a couple to divide their income before tax is calculated, just as they do in other modern economies.</para>
<para>Income splitting is already a reality for the wealthy. Through family trusts, those in certain professions can legally distribute income to spouses and adult children to ease their tax burden. But a standard wage earner is locked out. Income splitting would democratise this system. It would level the playing field. But this is about more than just economics. This is about our national future. We are facing a declining birth rate. We are increasingly reliant on migration to sustain our growth. If we want young couples to start and grow their families, we must stop penalising them for it. In the year 2025, South Australia grew by approximately 19,500 people, with a natural increase of 2,700. That means migration contributed to 88 per cent of the growth in my great state of South Australia. One of the key issues is child care and regional South Australia—or, should I say, the lack thereof. My electorate of Grey faces a severe childcare shortage that forces secondary earners to stay home instead of working. It's deeply unfair that the system punishes families who simply have no childcare options, while favouring those who do.</para>
<para>Income splitting gives tangible monetary value to the incredible work done by these stay-at-home parents. It incentivises those in this position not only to feel financially comfortable enough to have more children but also to stay in the regions that they otherwise might have to leave to find child care. Critics suggest this reinforces an outdated model or that it removes incentives to enter the workforce. But this makes no sense. This is not about forcing anyone into a specific role. This is about choice. It is about removing the financial penalty for a family that chooses or is forced to have a parent at home when their children are young. We must reform this inflexible system. We must recognise that families are the foundational building blocks of our society, not just individuals to be taxed at the highest possible marginal rate by an aggressive Labor Treasury. It is time to share the burden fairly. It is time to value the sacrifices of parents. It is time to bring some common sense to taxation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I support income splitting. I think it's incredibly important. If you want to know where you're going to get savings from, close down the climate change department. All those savings can more than cover the cost of income splitting. It's totally unfair that you have couples discriminated against because one person chooses to stay home. You shouldn't have to stay home, but if you want to stay home, you should be allowed to stay home, and that should be recognised.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Procurement: Submarines</title>
          <page.no>221</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government's initial $3.9 billion investment in the Submarine Construction Yard at Osborne in South Australia, to deliver the infrastructure needed to build at least eight nuclear-powered SSN-AUKUS class submarines, meaning:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) record support for the creation of significant direct employment opportunities, numbering approximately 4,000 for the construction phase and 5,500 for the peak submarine production phase;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) opportunities for small and medium sized businesses to contribute to, and benefit from, this significant investment over a period of decades; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) confidence for industry and workers of significant and durable opportunities for partnership and growth through the construction and build phases; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes the Government's commitment to ensuring Australia has both the capability and the skilled workforce needed as outlined in the 2024 National Defence Strategy, through measures like:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) calling for and supporting partnerships with the private sector;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) investing $480 million in the Skills and Training Academy Campus at Osborne to train the skilled workforce for constructing and maintaining nuclear-powered submarines; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) providing young Australians pathways in the AUKUS submarines industry through skills and training programs.</para></quote>
<para>This motion speaks directly to the huge opportunity before us. It's an opportunity with many parts, but principally it's an opportunity that speaks to the Albanese Labor government's deliberate decision to build a future made in Australia. First and foremost, this motion is about our sovereign capability and defence industrial base, which means a sovereign supply chain and skilled workforce. There has never been a clearer moment to argue in favour of efficiently and effectively entrenching our sovereign defence capability. I want to be clear that, in doing this, it doesn't mean turning our back on our allies or reacting impulsively because of shifting international relationships and the changing approaches of the world's great powers. What it means is acting every time in Australia's national interests by shoring up our own national security and sovereign capability in partnership with our allies when appropriate.</para>
<para>No rational person wants conflict or war—no-one. But we are an island nation and we need a capability that is effective as a deterrent, and we need to continue to prosecute strategies that shore up our seaborne supply now more than ever. Just as no reasonable person wants war, no reasonable person could possibly argue against self-sufficiency, conflict deterrence and protection of our maritime supply chains that are so critical to the security of this country. Secondly, the opportunity before us as we embark upon that sovereign capability journey is also an economic one. Well-paid, meaningful, secure and highly skilled jobs for decades—that is what is on offer for kids who haven't even been born yet.</para>
<para>This national security and economic opportunity is what underpins the Albanese Labor government's initial $3.9 billion down payment investment in the submarine construction yard at Osborne in South Australia to deliver the infrastructure needed to build at least eight nuclear powered SSN-AUKUS class submarines. AUKUS is a national endeavour. It may have its heart in South Australia, but the opportunity is there for all states and territories to contribute to Australia's national security and to embrace that economic opportunity. Small, medium and large businesses are already benefiting. People are moving to South Australia for the work opportunities on offer. Most importantly, we are quite rightly on a pathway with our allies to a greater deterrence capability.</para>
<para>At the submarine construction yard at Osborne, where I proudly used to work, the $3.9 billion investment means support for the creation of thousands of jobs, numbering approximately 4,000 for the construction phase and 5,500 for the peak submarine production phase. Those workers will be highly skilled. We need them to be. This underscores the government's commitment to ensuring Australia has both the capability and the skilled workforce needed, as outlined in the 2024 National Defence Strategy.</para>
<para>Importantly, the government has called for and supports partnerships with the private sector. AUKUS, as I said, is a national endeavour and cannot succeed without the government's support or the support of private industry. New and innovative ways to reward innovation and risks taken by the private sector in supporting this endeavour will be required, with a particular focus on speed to capability.</para>
<para>Again, however, none of this is possible without skilled workers, which is why, in addition to the $3.9 billion investment, the Albanese Labor government invested $480 million in the Skills and Training Academy campus at Osborne to train the skilled workforce for constructing and maintaining nuclear powered submarines, providing young Australians pathways in the AUKUS submarine industry through these skills and training programs.</para>
<para>I recently met two young Australians who were working as apprentices for BAE Systems at the shipyard at the same time as completing their studies at the Regency Park TAFE. We often hear that young people have no hope for the future and they're despondent about work and life. These young Australians were not despondent. They were excited about their career prospects. They are young enough that in their late 20s and early 30s they will literally build the nuclear powered boats when submarine construction begins in the 2030s. The opportunities underscored by this investment are immense—an economic opportunity but, more importantly, a sovereign defence capability imperative. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for this motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burnell</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion relating to AUKUS and the future of Australia's submarine capability. Let me say at the outset that this side of the House will always support investment in Australia's defence capability, because the first duty of any government is to keep Australians safe and protect our way of life. But support for capability must be matched with strategy, leadership and seriousness of purpose.</para>
<para>AUKUS did not begin with this Labor government. It was conceived, negotiated and delivered by the former coalition government as one of the most significant defence partnerships in our history since the ANZUS Treaty in 1951. AUKUS is about deterrence, capability and ensuring Australia can operate with our partners in the UK and US in an increasingly contested Indo-Pacific. As chair and deputy chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and the defence subcommittee, I've seen firsthand the scale of the challenges that we face. The strategic environment that we are in is deteriorating and deteriorating rapidly. It's more uncertain, it's more contested and it's more dangerous than at any time since 1945. This motion speaks at length about infrastructure, jobs and training, and, yes, these things are very important, but defence policy is not an employment program. It's not a regional development strategy dressed up as national security. It is about keeping Australians safe in a dangerous world, and that is where this government continues to fall short.</para>
<para>I ask this question: where is the government's national security strategy? It's all well and good to have a defence strategy, but where is its national security strategy? Where is the framework tying together defence, intelligence, cybersecurity space, critical infrastructure and economic security? We've seen announcements, we've seen press releases and we've seen spin, but we have not seen a coherent plan. Without one, even the biggest investments risk being poorly directed, delayed or diluted.</para>
<para>Labor is very good at spending—we all know that—but spending isn't always delivering. We are seeing delays, uncertainty and serious questions around AUKUS timelines. Capability gaps are emerging. The government talks about submarines in the 2040s while the threat is real today. The government has even ordered the Auditor-General to stop producing its major projects review on Defence's biggest projects, which are collectively over 33 years delayed. That is the reality that Australians are facing today.</para>
<para>The workforce challenge is real. Building and sustaining nuclear-powered submarines will require tens of thousands of skilled Australians engineers, tradies, technicians and Defence personnel. We support investment in skills, but where is the pipeline? Where is the plan to attract, train and retain that workforce? This cannot be switched on overnight, and, while we build this workforce, the government continues to fail to recruit and retain members of the Australian Defence Force. This requires long-term planning and coordination with industry and education providers. AUKUS must be about building sovereign capability. That means backing Australian industry. It means ensuring small and medium businesses are not locked out. It means genuine partnership with the private sector, not just rhetoric, because our national security depends on our own industrial capability. That's sovereign capability.</para>
<para>We are living in a time of growing strategic competition in our region—an increasingly unstable period that demands a clear government led response. We're seeing militarisation, coercion and instability. AUKUS is critical, but it cannot stand alone. It must be part of a broader national security strategy built on stronger sovereign capability. Australians expect strong leadership on national security. They expect clarity and consistency and a government that understands the seriousness of the moment, not one that plays catch up after it's too late.</para>
<para>The coalition will always support measures that strengthen Australia's defence capability. We support AUKUS, we support our submarines and we support our ADF personnel.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNELL</name>
    <name.id>300129</name.id>
    <electorate>Spence</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The delivery of AUKUS is one of the most significant nation-building efforts in our country's history. AUKUS is a central pillar of the Albanese government's national security policy, designed to protect Australia, our interests and our place in the world. It is something I feel passionately about, as one of the co-chairs of the Parliamentary Friends of AUKUS, because the strategic environment we face is becoming more complex, more contested and more uncertain. As the National Defence Strategy makes clear, we are confronting the most challenging circumstances since the Second World War at a time when our economic connections to the world have never been greater. That reality demands a new approach. It demands that we build an Australian Defence Force with greater reach, greater endurance and greater capacity to project greater capability—not for conflict but for deterrence, for stability and for security across our region. That is what AUKUS delivers.</para>
<para>Our investment in conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines represents a step change in Australia's capability. It will allow our defence force to operate over longer distances, remain undetected and respond to challenges with confidence. We recognise the scale of this investment. It is one of the largest industrial undertakings Australia has ever seen, shaping industry, infrastructure and jobs for decades to come. This is about building sovereign capability here at home—a future made in Australia.</para>
<para>We're acting to bridge the capability gap, bringing forward the acquisition of these submarines by a full decade. That acceleration matters because capability delayed leaves Australia exposed. Through AUKUS, Australia will join a small group of nations globally, as one of only seven to operate submarines of this capability. That is a significant shift in our strategic position, and it is one we are delivering with purpose and responsibility.</para>
<para>Nowhere is that transformation clearer than in South Australia. At Osborne we are seeing the foundations of this national effort take shape. In February this year, the Prime Minister announced a $3.9 billion investment as a down payment for the Osborne submarine construction yard. This investment is not just about infrastructure; it is about jobs, skills and opportunities for future generations. The construction of the yard itself will support close to 10,000 jobs, with projections of up to $30 billion in total investment flowing to South Australia over time, driving economic activity, strengthening local industry and delivering benefits across the state.</para>
<para>This is a game-changing project because it is building a workforce and training Australians in highly skilled roles that will last for generations—jobs that are secure, skilled and future-focused. At Osborne, up to 4,000 jobs will be created to design and build the yard and training academy. Once it is operational, a further 4,000 to 5½ thousand direct shipyard jobs will support submarine construction—almost double what had previously been forecast.</para>
<para>Already, Australians are stepping into these roles. Around 180 workers are currently training at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard in the United States, building the expertise we need here at home. The scale of the build is extraordinary—a construction yard 10 times larger than the previous developments, requiring tens of millions of hours of work and vast quantities of material, including steel equivalent to 17 Eiffel Towers.</para>
<para>This is a project of national significance, and, alongside it, the government has committed $310 million to secure long-lead components from the United Kingdom, supporting the delivery of critical systems for our first SSN-AUKUS submarines and ensuring we are building capability in a timely and coordinated way.</para>
<para>But AUKUS is not confined to a single site. Its benefits extend across the entire country through supply chains, small businesses and advanced manufacturing. We are opening doors for Australian companies to participate. Through the Australian Submarine Supplier Qualification Pilot Program, businesses can enter the US submarine supply chain, working alongside global partners to deliver components and expertise. And, through the Defence Industry Vendor Qualification Program, Australian firms are being supported to meet the standards required to supply into both the UK and the US programs. This is about integration: ensuring Australian industry is part of the global effort while strengthening our own sovereign capability.</para>
<para>At every step, the focus is clear: maximising opportunities for Australian workers and businesses, because this is a once-in-a-generation investment—one that will strengthen our economy, secure our future and support thousands of families.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I find myself in furious agreement with the member for Spence, and, when I finish my remarks, the member for Spence—if he's still here—and the member for Adelaide should absolutely applaud. I'll tell you who else should be applauding, and that's Tom Koutsantonis, the Treasurer of South Australia, because, but for the investment, the hope and the opportunity that the Morrison-McCormack and Morrison-Joyce governments put into shipbuilding in Adelaide, his coffers would be nowhere near what they are going to be in the future.</para>
<para>I speak to the Treasurer of South Australia often. He's a good fellow, and he would, I'm sure, in a bipartisan way acknowledge the work the former federal coalition government did in this space. I know the member for Sturt has brought this important—and I will say it's important because AUKUS is important—private member's bill into the parliament. I know that Labor often does this victory lap when it comes to talking about defence spending and investment in the most critical area of government—that is, the protection of our people. But just listen to these couple of statistics. These are from the former coalition government. It's the last three years of delivery, in numbers: 70 defence vessels and 1,700 vehicles built in Australia, 100,000 defence industry jobs and 15,000 small and medium business supported—supported by both the member for New England and me, as former deputy prime ministers, supported by the coalition and supporting Australians. There is no more critical investment for our nation right now than defence because the world is a volatile place. We are facing headwinds, on both economic and certainly defence positions, that we haven't seen since 1945, the end of the Second World War.</para>
<para>They are worrying times. They truly are. You only have to turn on the news of a night or just look at your phones at any minute of the day and you'll see the contest for the Strait of Hormuz and see the price of petrol and diesel at the bowser. This is all because of global worries, global concerns and global interventions.</para>
<para>The AUKUS timeline is an interesting read. You'll see that, in late 2019, then prime minister Morrison tasked defence officials to look into the feasibility of acquiring nuclear powered submarines after doubts over the French contract. I was part of all of those discussions and I know full well why we had those doubts and why we did what we did as far as AUKUS was concerned. There are no greater friends—let's face it—than the United Kingdom and the United States when it comes to defence. The proposal for AUKUS was presented in May 2021 to the full National Security Committee, which gave permission to approach US and UK leaders with an official government policy that had been brought about because of what was going on at the time—which of course has followed on since then.</para>
<para>When AUKUS was announced, on 15 September 2021, it was a red-letter day for Australia and a red-letter day for South Australia, no less, because it did mean that there were going to be ongoing jobs and security. I appreciate that Adelaide suffered greatly when the car manufacturing companies left, and we needed to absolutely make sure that all of those highly skilled jobs were retained in Adelaide, in South Australia. It's an important part of our national fabric and certainly of our manufacturing in this country.</para>
<para>In September 2021, an 18-month consultation period began into how Australia would acquire nuclear-powered subs and which model it would go with. I know that there were important talks going on between Prime Ministers Morrison and Johnson, from the UK, and the then president of the US, Joe Biden, and there was agreement to determine by March 2023 the optimal pathway for an Australian conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarine capability. I spoke to former president Biden on the sidelines—I suppose you could call it that—of the late pontiff's funeral, in Rome, and he was so pleased that they were partnering up with Australia, because if you ask any American Marine, any American serviceman or servicewoman, they will tell you that the best partners in the world are Australians. They know of our defence capability; they know we train them well—of course at Wagga Wagga, through the home of the soldier, Kapooka—and they know that, if Australia gives its word, it means it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of this motion, and I do so because it is one of the most important projects that's been undertaken in South Australia not just for South Australia but for the entire nation, for Australia, for our defence industry, for manufacturing and for the creation of jobs. I heard what the member for Riverina was saying, and I accept that the Morrison government put things into action to ensure that we had the AUKUS partnership and that the nuclear powered submarines, which are so important to our defence strategy, are built in South Australia.</para>
<para>But I also would like to say that, prior to that, there was a lot of campaigning taking place from the previous premier Jay Weatherill right through to the then opposition Malinauskas et cetera to make sure that these projects came to fruition and that work was done to ensure that we got this project up and running. When I think of AUKUS in South Australia, I think of 30,000 to 40,000 jobs being created in our state just to support AUKUS, 5,000 to 10,000 jobs at AUKUS plus another 30,000 to 35,000 in small manufacturing—cutting-edge technology jobs for AUKUS and to support AUKUS. When I think of AUKUS, I think we're on the cusp of the next cutting-edge manufacturing revolution in Australia, and I say so based on the history of South Australia.</para>
<para>Back in the 1940s, there was a factory called Holden's that was producing cars. It got together with General Motors from the US, and they produced manufacturing industries that produced motor vehicles for the next 60 or 70 years. Back then, there were two people that had a vision. They were Premier Playford, a Liberal premier—and I give credit to him—and Ben Chifley. They got together and supported the industry. At the time, there were a lot of sceptics around saying: 'This cannot be done. This won't be done. We can't produce like Ford in the United States.' But these two had a vision, and they created it. That created jobs in South Australia, Victoria and other places for many years to come. My father was one of the beneficiaries of General Motors-Holden's. He worked there for most of his life and supported his family. Thousands of people worked there not only in General Motors-Holden's but also in the manufacturing jobs that supported Holden's.</para>
<para>Today, we have that same opportunity with AUKUS. We have that same opportunity to ensure that it goes smoothly and that people with vision are supporting it. We know that the United States is supporting it. We know that Britain is supporting it. The creation of jobs and the creation of work for future generations of Australians—this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for governments to get this right and to ensure that it takes place. When we look at the types of jobs that are being created—and I've been down there on a number of occasions with ministers and shadow ministers over the years—we are creating cutting-edge jobs of the future with good pay and good conditions. At the same time, we are ensuring that we are looking after our defence needs in a region that we will need to look after for many years to come.</para>
<para>This is, as I said, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. We're on the cusp of this manufacturing revolution that will create jobs for many generations to come. We just have to make sure that we get this right and that we put everything in place. Things are already starting to happen down there. They're starting to build the premises down there that will house AUKUS. There alone, there are about 2,000 to 3,000 jobs. Once AUKUS gets up and running, there'll be thousands and thousands of jobs. The important thing is the industries that will feed into AUKUS. Already, I've seen statistics saying that people who have moved to South Australia have got their front-end offices already set up in the hundreds. This is a magnificent opportunity. We should all be supporting it. We want to see it come to fruition, which will provide jobs for the future for many generations of South Australians and Australians.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to acknowledge, along with the member for Spence, the member for Sturt and member for Adelaide, the great work that this government is doing to support AUKUS, which, of course, started under the coalition. I also acknowledge the initial $3.9 billion investment in the submarine construction yard at Osborne in South Australia, my home state, to deliver the infrastructure needed to build at least eight nuclear powered SSN AUKUS submarines here in Australia, which is a fantastic initiative. The South Australian Osborne Submarine Construction Yard will begin construction in 2030, and this will be the home of Australia's domestic submarine-building capabilities. The funding of $3.9 billion is the first stage towards $30 billion worth of work to get the yard up and running. And this is a good thing, because sovereign capability in Australia is extremely important, whether it's submarines, steelworks or making fertiliser. Right now, in the current fuel and fertiliser crisis, we're seeing what happens when we don't make stuff here. We must support AUKUS for the good of Australia and the safety of Australians and the broader Asia-Pacific region. AUKUS has wide-reaching impacts across Australia, not just in South Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Then the time allocated for this debate has now expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>225</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REBELLO</name>
    <name.id>316547</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that the cash rate has risen to 3.85 per cent, marking the 13th interest rate increase under the Government;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises new data showing a record 760,100 Australians aged 65 and over are now in the workforce, the highest level since records began in 1995;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) expresses concern that nearly 100,000 more older Australians feel it necessary to work or delay retirement or are returning to work due to cost of living pressures;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) condemns the Government's economic mismanagement and unchecked debt fuelled spending, which has contributed to rising inflation and increasing household costs for power, rent, groceries and mortgages; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) calls on the Government to take urgent action to address the cost of living crisis, curb spending pressures driving inflation, and ensure older Australians are not forced to delay retirement due to financial hardship.</para></quote>
<para>When I put this motion forward, it noted that the cash rate had risen to 3.85 per cent, which marked at the time the 13th interest rate rise under this government. Since then, we have had yet another rise, the 14th interest rate rise, under this government, taking the interest rate to 4.10 per cent. The impact of this is significantly affecting not only young people in my electorate but also older Australians, and that's what I'd like to touch on in particular today.</para>
<para>I rise here because too many Australians are being forced to work longer, and this isn't by choice; this is by necessity. We have a situation where people who have worked very hard for the benefit of this country thought they would be retiring comfortably and planned out their life in a certain way. But now, because of the real financial pressure that Australians are under, they're having to work longer.</para>
<para>This motion highlights a deep and concerning trend in Australia. The cash rate now—having had, like I said, 14 increases under this government—has not come out of nowhere. It's a result of a government that is addicted to spending. Because of this economic vandalism, we are seeing inflation hurting Australian households across my electorate of the southern Gold Coast and across the country as well. We're seeing 16 per cent more for food, 18 per cent more for health, 22 per cent more for rents and 39 per cent more for insurance. As we all know, it's almost 40 per cent more when it comes to electricity.</para>
<para>Mortgage holders are paying a lot more now than they had to previously—in the thousands per year. And this isn't abstract economics; it's pressure felt at every kitchen table. It's pressure felt across every bill, payment and mortgage repayment, or even on rent day. Despite the fact that the Treasurer may insist this is attributable to what is happening abroad, we know that this is homegrown inflation, and the 13 interest rate rises prior to the most recent interest rate rise and prior to what's happening in the Middle East are a testament to that. We're seeing a situation where government spending is outpacing economic growth by a measure of four to one. We're seeing $50 billion in new discretionary spending, and savings are simply reallocations of existing expenditure. We all should adhere to one principle here, and that is that you cannot spend your way out of inflation; you'll only make it worse.</para>
<para>While this motion talks to what is happening to older Australians, others are not exempt. Young people are not exempt, and people who have entered into the housing market are not exempt. We're now also seeing the long-term consequences of this government expenditure. We're seeing a situation where Australians are now facing a trillion dollars in debt, right on their doorstep, and $1.2 trillion in debt by the time we get to the next election. That means we're going to see less money for services and more pressure on those who are holding the tax burden. And every dollar that's spent on interest is a dollar that is not spent on Australians.</para>
<para>The largest collapse in living standards across the developed world is something we should not be proud of in this parliament. It's something this government should not be proud of. Australians are working harder and they're falling further behind because of this situation. I represent an electorate that has an average age slightly higher than the national average. I expect that many people in my electorate who thought they would be at the point of their life where they're ready to retire, spend time with their families, and maybe travel and see the world are now facing the tough economic choices where they're having to work longer. It's just not good enough. People who have worked and contributed to this country for so many years deserve better. They deserve access to that retirement, and they deserve a government that is going to stand up for them, get their own expenditure under control—that is, government expenditure—reduce the pressures on inflation and create a situation where people who have worked for this country can retire comfortably and not have to keep working.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is there a seconder for the motion?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Venning</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, and I reserve my right to speak later.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLUTTERHAM</name>
    <name.id>316101</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Inflation is a huge challenge. There is no doubt about it. We have not shied away from this at any stage. We have an inflation challenge in our economy, likely to be exacerbated by the conflict in the Middle East, and that requires action. It has a three in front of it now, but without a dedicated focus on utilising all available mechanisms it is likely to increase. It may increase anyway because of the myriad factors that are beyond the control of the government and beyond the control of business, of the RBA, of industry and of individual Australians.</para>
<para>The volatility in the global economy and the escalation of tensions in the Middle East could add further pressure to inflation in the coming months. We know this. We've been clear with the Australian people about this. We haven't just started the work on meeting the inflation challenge because of the recent conflict. We've been doing the work and implementing policy to support Australians through this inflation challenge since we came to government.</para>
<para>There are a number of parts to the Albanese Labor government's response—firstly, the forthcoming May budget, which will be underpinned by restraint, reform and measures to increase productivity. The Treasurer has been absolutely clear on this. We must take steps to reform in order to put a bomb under productivity growth, to encourage it to further stimulate the private sector, to encourage investment and innovation, and to cement and then further grow our economic prosperity. The budget bottom line has also been improved through the finding of efficiencies. The MYEFO illustrated that we are $233 billion better off than when we came to government, and $144 billion in savings were found in the budget through finding more-efficient ways to provide services and do business.</para>
<para>Budget savings cannot just be implemented by cutting services and cutting support to Australians who need it. Finding more-efficient ways to provide services and support, more-efficient ways to do business, is what our policy agenda is focused on, such as asking APS departments to examine their operational discipline in order to find five per cent of savings. The policy mistake of only cutting services and only cutting support in order to improve the bottom line means that the first objective of structural budget repair and economic reform must be carefully balanced against the second, which is to help working Australians, individuals, families, young people and retirees—a complex web—deal with the cost-of-living challenge that inflation can present. The government acknowledge that people are under pressure, and we're doing something about it, with tax cuts for every taxpayer, more bulk-billing and cheaper medicines, and by backing higher wages and slashing student debt.</para>
<para>The third lever is the labour market. A focus on low unemployment, sustainable wages growth, stimulating private sector growth and investment, and a continued emphasis on a framework where governments, business, unions and workers partner and walk forward together to ensure these goals are not only met but met in a way that benefits all stakeholders as much as possible is the Albanese Labor government way. These goals are complicated and challenging, but it is necessary to strive towards them. The country needs people who are working hard to boost productivity and to contribute to the economy.</para>
<para>We need policies that are designed to increase wages sustainably—not a deliberate policy of low wages, which was the policy agenda of the previous government. In this respect, we are seeing results, with the overwhelming story being one of stronger wage growth and rising living standards. Annual nominal wages have grown above three per cent for 14 quarters in a row, the longest streak in more than a decade and a half. The national accounts for the December quarter showed that real incomes per capita grew two per cent through the year to the December quarter and are growing at more than twice the average of other comparable major advanced economies.</para>
<para>We have also seen more than 1.2 million jobs created under the Albanese Labor government. This is stronger growth than any major advanced economy, with more than four out of five of these jobs having been created in the private sector, which has been and always will be the engine room of our economy.</para>
<para>Our economic policy agenda is underpinned by a focus on good jobs, higher wages and increased productivity. This must always be at the heart of decisions we make in the course of the fight against inflation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VENNING</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australian families are at breaking point. From the kitchen tables of my electorate to the check-out counters across the country, the story is the same. Australians are working harder than ever, yet they are falling further behind. Under this Labor government, we have seen the biggest falls in living standards in the entire developed world. But, instead of taking responsibility, what do we hear from the Prime Minister and the Treasurer? The latest trick is to point fingers overseas. They want you to believe that your mortgage is up and your grocery bill is skyrocketing because of the Middle East crisis. Let's be crystal clear. The inflation we are experiencing right now is not a product of the Middle East—that's coming. The cost-of-living crisis was not imported. It was manufactured right here in Canberra. The government keeps looking for a global excuse, but the data tells a different story.</para>
<para>Inflation in Australia is now higher than in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany and Japan. Are we to believe the Middle East crisis only affects Australia? Of course not. The difference isn't what's happening in the world; it's what's happening in this budget. This inflation right now is homegrown. It is the direct result of a prime minister addicted to spending and a treasurer who continues to put debt petrol on the inflation fire.</para>
<para>Think of the economy like a local market. If the government floods that market with billions of dollars of new money while the amount of goods stays the same, prices go up. It is simple maths. When the government spends recklessly, it competes with every Australian family for every resource, driving prices higher. Government spending is now at a 40-year high outside of a recession. Labor's debt is ticking towards a staggering $1 trillion. To put that into perspective, Australians are now paying more than $50,000 every single minute just to service the interest on Labor's debt. That's $50,000 a minute that isn't going to hospitals, schools or tax relief, and it's not even paying down the principal. The way that I like to relate this to individuals is from a workforce point of view. In South Australia, if you collect the Labor state debt and the Labor federal debt and put it together, the average South Australian worker now owes their governments more than $100,000.</para>
<para>Because this government refuses to stop spending, the Reserve Bank has been forced to do the heavy lifting. We have seen 14 interest rate rises under Labor. These aren't just numbers on a page; they represent an extra $27,000 a year for the average mortgage holder. That is the Labor tax on every Australian family with a home loan. The RBA governor hasn't ruled out a recession because of how this government has mismanaged the economy. While families are cutting back on meat, cancelling holidays and struggling with school costs, this government refuses to live within its means. We are forced to tighten our belts—so should the government. Look at the wreckage of their policies. Insurance is up 39 per cent; energy is up more than 40 per cent, up 32 per cent in this year alone; rent is up 22 per cent; and food is up 16 per cent.</para>
<para>Let's talk about energy. Minister Chris Bowen's wind- and solar- only approach ideology is steamrolling common sense. We see electricity prices up 32 per cent in this year. We see a fuel supply chain in shambles. One day, the government says, 'There is plenty of supply'; the next day, there is a national crisis. They blame Australians for buying too much petrol rather than ensuring the supply chain works. When my colleague Angus Taylor was the energy minister, he didn't make excuses. He got on the phone, worked with suppliers, and ensured fuel reached the families and farmers who needed it. He understood that he needed a backbone to run an economy, not just a printing press. We have offered a bipartisan taskforce to control spending. We have called for a revitalised Charter of Budget Honesty. The response from the Prime Minister: silence, nothing, tumbleweeds. The conflict in the Middle East didn't drive up childcare costs by 11 per cent; the Middle East didn't cause $1 trillion in debt—Labor did.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It takes a bit of chutzpah to come in here. These are the people who wasted $20 billion on JobKeeper—paying money, by the way, to companies that made money and whose profits went up. They wasted $20.9 billion in the last year alone, I might add, on outsourcing up to a third of the Public Service to consultants. That's what was found when independently assessed. Then, of course, who can forget the $21 million spent on the COVID app, where only 17 people were identified as close contacts?</para>
<para>They splurged money left, right and centre and left us with a trillion dollars of debt, and then, by the way, in the last paragraph, call on the government to take urgent action to address the cost-of-living crisis. They opposed student debt reduction. They opposed free TAFE. They opposed energy bill relief. They opposed tax cuts. They opposed cheaper child care. They opposed 60-day scripts. They opposed 25-day scripts for non-concessional income earners. They opposed $7.70 for concessional income earners, with scripts frozen until 2030. They opposed, by the way, the $45 billion Homes for Australia plan to deliver 1.2 million houses. They opposed the Medicare urgent care clinics, and they were going to close them. They opposed the mental health urgent care clinics as well. Again and again and again, they opposed cost-of-living relief. They voted against it in parliament.</para>
<para>They had policies at the last election that were going to increase the debt and deficit. That was their policy. They haven't identified in this debate one example of money that we have spent that they wouldn't have matched as well. In addition to that, the Liberal and National parties are the parties of higher taxation. They were the ones who increased the government expenditure to debt ratio. Since John Howard and Scott Morrison, the Liberal and National parties have told the Australian public to believe what I say, not what I do. When they get into power, they splurge money again and again and again. We were the ones, by the way, that provided two budget surpluses. They promised—Joe Hockey, the shadow Treasurer—promised that they would have a surplus each and every year of their rule. In nine years, they didn't produce one surplus.</para>
<para>It says 'to support people and dignified retirement' in the fifth paragraph here of this motion. The Liberal and National parties have opposed superannuation increases every step of the way and then froze the increases when, of course, Tony Abbott was the Prime Minister. Again and again and again, they opposed relief for working-class people and pensioners. They opposed, for example, the rental assistance that we provided for people who needed it—increasing in the last few budgets. They opposed it. They voted against it again and again, each and every time. By the way, when their former illustrious leader Sussan Ley, the member for Farrer, talked about TAFE, they said, 'Unless you actually pay for things, you don't really appreciate them.'</para>
<para>Of course, in their first budget when they were in last, they cut $80 billion on education and health expenditure. Are those the kinds of cuts you want to make? Are those the kinds of cuts the Liberal and National parties want to make? I reckon that's exactly what they want to do. When they're in opposition, they're nice and bland and vanilla, and they say, 'Trust us; we believe in Medicare; we believe in public education; we believe in public hospitals,' and when they get into power they do what they did in the 2014 budget.</para>
<para>We've got some new members here, by the way, who must have political amnesia, because they stood for political parties—the Liberal National Party and the Liberal Party in South Australia—as candidates, backing in exactly what they did in opposition in the last parliament, exactly what they did in government under Abbott and Turnbull and Morrison. Now, since they've been sitting on the opposition benches, they've voted against relief for people again and again and again. So it's a bit rich for the member for McPherson to bring this motion and for those opposite to talk about cost-of-living relief when they have opposed it. It is only Labor that stands up for Middle Australia, it's only Labor that stands up for pensioners and it's only Labor that stands up for the working people of this country.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Venning</name>
    <name.id>315434</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to speak again.</para>
<para>Leave not granted.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CAMPBELL</name>
    <name.id>312823</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Deputy Speaker Lawrence, I've got a secret to let you in on, and it's that when the coalition, those opposite, talk about cutting spending they're talking about cutting things that Australians need. The member for Blair is right. We don't know what cuts they are talking about when it comes to this budget. We don't know whether it's going to be health—they might go into the idea of axing bulk-billing again—or whether it's going to be manufacturing. We know that last time they were in government they cut the guts out of manufacturing, sent jobs offshore and booted the car industry out of this country. Is it going to be cuts to education, going back to what the coalition did in the Howard years, making sure that tertiary students were doing it even tougher? This debate, at its core, is about what the opposition would cut, because they've got a cracking track record of it.</para>
<para>Last week I was out knocking on doors. I spoke to a mum in Corinda, and she was worried about how her adult children would get into housing. I spoke to a dad in Tarragindi with a five-month-old, and he was worried about health care. I spoke to a young couple in Corinda, and they were worried about the cost of their bills. It's clear that people are doing it tough. People are doing it tough across this country, and that is why the Albanese Labor government is focused with a laser on our No. 1 priority, which is delivering cost-of-living relief. Cost-of-living pressures are real, particularly for those on low and fixed incomes. We're taking action every day on easing the cost of living for everyday Australians.</para>
<para>I think it's worth looking at the opposition's record when it comes to the economy that has such a big impact on every Australian, because the opposition left us with an inflation rate with a six in front of it. Public demand grew faster than private demand two thirds of the time under them. They went to this last election promising bigger deficits, more debt and a tax hike on every Australian to fund nuclear reactors. That's the reality. We don't have to imagine what the opposition would do if in government, because they have shown their colours time and time again. Not only do we know they have a track record of cuts, not only do they want to increase taxes for every Australian; they've also voted against cost-of-living relief measure after cost-of-living relief measure. Whether for free TAFE or for 20 per cent off student debt, the opposition has form.</para>
<para>We've delivered surpluses. We've turned those Liberal deficits into surpluses, and we've brought the budget into much better shape. The budget is over $233 billion better than what we inherited, with over $114 billion in savings found. It's the only mid-year update on record to deliver a better bottom line in every year of the forward estimates, with less debt in every year and net policy decisions that improve the bottom line.</para>
<para>Inflation has been higher for longer than we'd like, but it's substantially lower than its 2022 peak and much lower than we inherited from the coalition. There are temporary pressures such as the end of energy rebates, global volatility and the escalating situation in the Middle East. The RBA governor has been very clear. What surprised them last year was the strength of the pick up in private demand, not public spending and not fiscal policy. Private demand strengthened substantially more than expected in mid-2025. In the December quarter, private demand contributed more than three times as much to growth as public demand. When you contrast this side of the chamber with those opposite, what is clear is that we are investing in cost-of-living relief for everyday Australians and they only ever cut.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:17</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>